1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Approach

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 17, 'label': 'Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)', 'text': 'Book project: where the land is greener - Case Studies and Analysis of Soil and Water Conservation Initiatives Worldwide (where the land is greener)', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 1194, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)', 'text': 'Institute for Soil, Climate & Water - South Africa', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 1194, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)', 'text': 'Institute for Soil, Climate & Water - South Africa', 'template': 'raw'}

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Yes

1.4 Reference(s) to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Technologies

2.1 Short description of the Approach

Learning how to use vetiver grass as a vegetative conservation barrier through instructions from a booklet and hands-on practical experience.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: The manager of the farm was given a book and video on vetiver grass by the Mazda group from UK. His objective was to teach himself to improve his conservation system. Already he had a number of consercation strategies, including terracing, minimum tillage, mulching and strip-cropping, but he felt there was a need to better his syste,. Through self-teaching he gave himself an oppurtunity to do so.
There had been some vetiver plants on the farm for 40 years, and it held the soil in place where it grew. This vetiver grew into huge clumps comprising many splits (tillers). The book demonstrated how vetiver could be dug up, split and planted in a continuous barrier hedge for soil and water conservation. In other words, the book offered the possibility of improving on what was already there.
The approach therefore was to take ideas from a book, testing those ideas and see how they worked in practice. The approach has developed further by the farmer spreading his message to neighbours, some of whom have copied the system after visiting his farm and seeing the results for themselves. While the original handbook had been aimed especially at Indian farmers, subsequent to the successful experience of this particular farmer, a locally focussed handbook has been recently prepared in English and Zulu by the South African Vetiver Network.

2.3 Photos of the Approach

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Approach has been applied

2.6 Dates of initiation and termination of the Approach

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

The Approach focused on SLM only

test and try a new method by self-teaching and gaining hands-on experience

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: lack of knowledge about alternative conservation technologies, need for a new and cheap supplement to existing forms of soil and water conservation within sugar cane, that could be tested and tried by the farmer himself without need for outside advice.

2.9 Conditions enabling or hindering implementation of the Technology/ Technologies applied under the Approach

3.1 Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles

3.2 Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach

	Involvement of local land users/ local communities	Specify who was involved and describe activities
initiation/ motivation	self-mobilization	looking for ideas
planning	self-mobilization	reading and thinking through the possibilities
implementation	self-mobilization	paying farm labourers to plant the grass
monitoring/ evaluation	self-mobilization	observation
Research	none	not applicable

3.3 Flow chart (if available)

3.4 Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology/ Technologies

Specify who decided on the selection of the Technology/ Technologies to be implemented:

• land users alone (self-initiative)

Explain:

land user driven (bottom-up). Literature

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by by land users* alone (self-initiative / bottom-up). land user driven (bottom-up).

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users

If relevant, specify gender, age, status, ethnicity, etc.

self-taught through use of World Bank's vetiver handbook

Form of training:

• self-taught, hands-on experience

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by land users through observations; indicators: vetiver performance

technical aspects were ad hoc monitored by land users through observations

economic / production aspects were ad hoc monitored by land users through observations

area treated aspects were regular monitored by land users through measurements

no. of land users involved aspects were ad hoc monitored by land users through observations

There were no changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation

There were no changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

Comments (e.g. main sources of funding/ major donors):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: other (farmer itself): 100.0%

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

Did land users receive financial/ material support for implementing the Technology/ Technologies?

No

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

If labour by land users was a substantial input, was it:

• voluntary

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

No

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

6.3 Sustainability of Approach activities

Can the land users sustain what has been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?

• yes

If yes, describe how:

Land users can continue without support and at least a modest spontaneous expansion of adoption is expected.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Neighbours can easily see and copy (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Farmer-to-farmer visits could be promoted through self-help groups and associations.)
A very cheap method of extension/knowledge transfer (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Produce and disseminate booklets and information on the internet more widely.)

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
A technical system devised from a handbook and experience rather than needing a project or intensive visits from extension agents (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Make sure such handbooks are spread and available in local languages.)

6.5 Weaknesses/ disadvantages of the Approach and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Not everyone has access to such teaching material or is literate	Spread literature and information more widley and in local languages both in written form and on the radio.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

World Bank (1990): Vetiver Grass: The Hedge against Erosion

Available from where? Costs?

World Bank, Washington D.C.