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

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

Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (DEZA / COSUDE / DDC / SDC) - Switzerland

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

LLPPA

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: To enhance people's (community) participation in planning implimentation and evaluation of SWC technologies., Changing farmers attifued towards current ecological concept and enable them to keep there agro-ecological environment by training and awaring them to utilize appropriat SWC technology in their farm and their vicinity, By group formation, At PA level, From planning the sWC technology in an area up to maintenance and stablization.

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 Approach focused mainly on other activities than SLM (It increases soil fertility to plant forage on bund.)

Increasment of land productivity.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Scarcity of land, poorness of the country, the consequence of the approach will be seen in the future.

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
planning	self-mobilization
implementation	external support	casual labour
monitoring/ evaluation	interactive	measurements/observations;
Research	none

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 SLM specialists, following consultation with land users

Explain:

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Describe/ comments:

Name of method used for advisory service: T & U System; 1) Advisory service was carried out through: government's existing extension system, Extension staff: mainly government employees

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• no

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

bio-physical aspects were monitored through observations

technical aspects were monitored through observations

economic / production aspects were monitored through observations

area treated aspects were monitored through observations

There were many changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: As a result of monitoring and evaluation the bunds are maintainced those can't fit the technical design are re-costructed.

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

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

Yes

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• agricultural

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

• food-for-work

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

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Overcoming shortage of fuel wood and forage
Increase productivity
Decreasing the time spent for fetching water

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
To increase soil fertility (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: By increasing farmers awareness)
Reduce runoff (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: By increasing farmers awareness)
Increase forage availability (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: By increasing farmers awareness)
Increase fuel construction wood (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: By increasing farmers awareness)
Increas availability of clean water (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: By increasing farmers awareness)

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

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
Decreasing cultivated land	Creating awareness
Addressing weeds

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
No

7.1 Methods/ sources of information