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

Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)

Decision Support for Mainstreaming and Scaling out Sustainable Land Management (GEF-FAO / DS-SLM)

Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)

Department of Agriculture-Region VIII (DA-8) - Philippines

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

10/03/2016

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

Synergistic mix of farming ventures implemented by the farm family based on the existing environment and their resources to address food security, income instability, and sustainability.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

The objectives of the approach are the following: to improve resources allocation; to enhance biodiversity and ecological balance; to reduce production risks; and to increase cropping intensity, productivity, profitability, and economic stability. It also includes continuous food supply and higher income for land users. With Palayamanan, the farm is not just intended for rice. It is about food security, livelihood and empowering farmers to become better decision makers and resilient to climate change. It also aims to develop land users to become farmer-researchers, extension workers and entrepreneurs.

Methods: Participatory approach with the stakeholders/land users.

Implementation comprised the following stages: (1) Selection of the demonstration sites an farmer-partners; (2) Conduct participatory rapid appraisal on the sites; (3) Planning; (4) Conduct of training for the farmers (Farmers Field School) and for the Agricultural Extension Workers; (5) Establishment of the demonstration farm; (6) Monitoring and Evaluation; and (7) Human Resource Development for Farmers (to become farmer-researcher, extension worker, entrepreneur)

Stakeholders: A. Philippine Rice Research Institute (PhilRice): take the lead in the implementation of the program; facilitate the conduct of training;provide technical assistance to the program; and monitor the progress of the program.
B. Local Government Unit (Agriculture Office): provide support to the activities of the program; spearhead the dissemination and expansion of the program within their concerned municipality.
C. Farmer: participate in various activities of the program from planning to establishment; conduct on-site researches.

The approach introduced a systematized method of farm management involving technologies and practices to utilize available resources without compromising human health and environment. Some of the technologies incorporated under this approach are the following: crop rotation, aquaculture, waste recycling, diversified cropping, alternate wetting and drying, nutrient management, and integrated pest management.

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

2.7 Type of Approach

• project/ programme based

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

The objectives of the approach are the following: to improve resources allocation; to enhance biodiversity and ecological balance; to reduce production risks; to increase cropping intensity, productivity, profitability, and economic stability. It also includes continuous food supply and higher income for land users. With Palayamanan, the farm is not just intended for rice. It is about food security, livelihood and empowering farmers to become better decision makers and resilient to climate change.It also aims to develop land users to become farmer-researchers, extension workers and entrepreneurs.

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	passive	land users were informed about the program through technical briefing/consultation meetings
planning	interactive	PhilRice in consultation with the land users and LGUs
implementation	interactive	Land users have the option on what technologies they will implement with the technical assistance of PhilRice
monitoring/ evaluation	interactive	farm record keeping, testimonial during field day and Palayamanan Congress, land user as correspondent during project monitoring
research	interactive	land users developed their own on-site research; they presented the results in a research study paper contest during Palayamanan Congress

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:

• mainly land users, supported by SLM specialists

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users
• field staff/ advisers

• Agricultural Extension Workers

Form of training:

• on-the-job
• farmer-to-farmer
• demonstration areas
• public meetings

Subjects covered:

Farmers Field School (FFS) were conducted to capacitate and inform the land users on various farming technologies (i.e. fertilizer, crop, water, and pest management) and entrepreneurship. Training also incorporated topics on post harvest and farm record keeping. There were also training of trainers (TOT) for farmers on rice production and other crops.

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Specify whether advisory service is provided:

• at permanent centres

Describe/ comments:

Advisory through Radio Program, Farmers served as correspondents

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• yes, moderately

Specify the level(s) at which institutions have been strengthened or established:

• local

Describe institution, roles and responsibilities, members, etc.

The local government was not supportive in the early stage of the program but after witnessing the positive impact in the agricultural sector, they started to finance the establishment of training centers in the barangays. Agricultural technicians from the LGU were active in the sustainability of the program.

Specify type of support:

• financial
• capacity building/ training
• equipment

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

If yes, is this documentation intended to be used for monitoring and evaluation?

No

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Specify topics:

• economics / marketing
• ecology
• technology

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

Researches were conducted bu the Philippine Rice Research Institute (PHILRICE)

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

If precise annual budget is not known, indicate range:

• 2,000-10,000

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

PhilRice 50%, LGU 20%, Farmers' association 30%

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

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

Yes

If yes, specify type(s) of support, conditions, and provider(s):

Subsidies from the government were given in terms of seedlings,training, tools and equipment.

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• equipment

• agricultural

• infrastructure

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

• voluntary

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

Yes

Specify conditions (interest rate, payback, etc.):

Credit was provided in terms of agricultural inputs (seeds and fertilizers) and is paid in cash after harvest. This payment will serve as revolving fund of the farmers association.

Specify credit receivers:

Credit receivers are land users covered under the approach.

5.5 Other incentives or instruments

Were other incentives or instruments used to promote implementation of SLM Technologies?

No

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

6.2 Main motivation of land users to implement SLM

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:

The approach would continue without the support from Philippine Rice Research (PhilRice) since the technologies were successfully transferred to the land users. The land users or farmer-partners recognized the positive impact and outcome of the technologies in their own farm areas. Moreover, farmer-partners were actively involved in the dissemination on the developed location-specific technologies.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Farmers' receptiveness to the technologies under the approach.
Land users were empowered due to the participatory approach of the program.They developed location specific technologies and practices and are confident in disseminating the knowledge to fellow farmers.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Research studies conducted by the farmers.
Good monitoring activity during the implementation stage of the program.
Land users/farmer-partners were empowered since they have the option on what technologies they want to apply/used in their farm.
Strong cooperation among the implementing partners including PhilRice, LGUs, and farmer-partners in the sustainability of the approach through provision of technical assistance, construction of training centers, subsidy in agricultural inputs and other activities related to Palayamanan.

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 fully strong collaboration from other agencies	Develop convergence among concerned specialists and agencies
Sustaining the farmer’s participation/attention	Selection/Assessment for identifying the potential beneficiaries
Inability to monitor the sustainability of the project due to no funding	Institutionalize who will monitor the sustainability of the project
No approved budget for the sustainability/exit plan of the program	Institutionalize who will monitor the sustainability of the project

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

PALAYAMANAN: A RICE-BASED FARMING SYSTEMS MODEL FOR SMALL-SCALE FARMERS, RG CORALES et al, 2005

Available from where? Costs?

http://www.cabi.org/gara/FullTextPDF/2009/20093019315.pdf