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)

Rakai District - Uganda

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

Kabale District Local Government (Kabale District Local Government) - Uganda

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

02/08/2011

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

Crop rotation on a slightly sloping crop land.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: To improve the soil conditions in order to retain fertility, to allow proper plant growth by introducing nitrogen fixing and other crop varieties.

Methods: The crops are rotated on the different demarcated plots, according to their nutrient needs.ie. legumes and non legumes.

Stages of implementation: The cropland is demarcated into plots of 1 acre .They are ploughed and planted with crops, considering the past seasons varieties, which were grown considering nutrient needs.

Role of stakeholders: The stakeholders are involved right away .From the planning stages up to the implementation, consultation on advisory, and acquisition of new improved varieties. Stakeholders also do carry out routine maintenance.

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

• traditional/ indigenous

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (addition of green manure)

-To improve the soil fertility.
-To increase the agricultural production.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: -Low agricultural production .
-Loss of soil fertility/nutrients.
-Lack of sustainable land management skills.

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	The prisons' authority planned the land use change on the crop land.
planning	none
implementation	none
monitoring/ evaluation	none
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:

• land users alone (self-initiative)

Explain:

The approach was initiated by the land user ,under the institution and could take decisions by theselves without involving a wide range of stakeholders.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by by land users* alone (self-initiative / bottom-up). The land users implemented the technology as a group , under a single institution on a single cropland.

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

No

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Describe/ comments:

Name of method used for advisory service: Field experience. ; Key elements: Observations. ; Authorities of the institution had experience from demonstration and later adopted the approach.

Advisory service is inadequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; very few land users have adopted the technology.

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:

economic / production aspects were ad hoc monitored by land users through measurements; indicators: produce is recorded after harvest.

management of Approach aspects were regular monitored by land users through observations; indicators: in mates are supervised on a daily basis.

There were several changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: New improved varieties introduced , Records of rotations kept, sustainability of soil fertility maintained.

There were few changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation: During cultivation the green grass is buried in the soil.

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

No

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):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: local community / land user(s) (SLM appraoch cost was met by the institution. )

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:

• food-for-work

Comments:

Inmates worked on the institution crop land

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

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:

By monitoring the routine planning process and involving all stakeholders at all stages of implementation and to carry out monitoring and evaluation.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Ownership to the approach. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Extension of the approach. )
Availability of Manpower. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Develop a work plan. )

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Existing plan of land use change. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: periodic reviews. )
Having the land (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Ensure legal ownership. )
Tradition knowhow. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Routine practices.)

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?
Approach requires a big land.	mobilise for more land resource.
Some varieties require land that has rested for a long period.	introduction of new varieties.
Sudden change of season interferes with the plan.	Timely implementation.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information