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)

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) - Italy

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

Central Asian Countries Initiative for Sustainable Land Management - Multicountry Capacity Building (CACILM - MCB) - Kyrgyzstan

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

2.1 Short description of the Approach

The training of farmers in sustainable agronomic and irrigation practices aimed at improving and increasing the productivity of soil (in the frame of CACILM).

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: Most of Uzbekistan’s irrigated lands are affected by degradation processes, the most widespread of which include: (i) resalinization, (ii) water logging and raising water tables, (iii) loss of organic matter and reduction in soil fertility. The main goal of the Farmer Field Schools (FFS) is to train farmers in the best practices of cultivating crops on salinity and water logging affected gypsum-bearing soils and the , effecient use of irrigation water to increase land productivity and crop yield. FFS in the irrigated zone of Uzbekistan were established under the framework of the FAO project “Integrated management for sustainable use of salt affected and gypsiferous soils” (2002-2004).

Methods: The project’s FFS component was implemented by the Uzgipromeliovodhoz Institute under Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources. The national consultants’ workgroup from Uzgipromeliovodhoz Institute, led by the national Project Director, organized and managed training in the FFS. FFS trainee groups comprised of farmers from the project areas who volunteered to participate. Training was conducted by the trainers using jontly elaborated training confirmed modules. The training, which was performed in the field where the farmers were introduced to sustainable agronomic practices, proved to be effective. Theoretical knowledge was taught in the machinery and tractor depots, and in rural school classrooms.
FFS also used the method of mass information transfer in order to facilitate adoptation of improved irrigation practices by a large number of farmers. This included the distribution of printed materials, highlighting the issues of rehabilitating degraded land, the preservation and increase of soil fertility, crop cultivation practices.

Stages of implementation:
I. Development of curriculum. Three-day workshop, headed by a FAO international consultant. This consultant, jointly with scientists and experts in agriculture and water resources and the leading farmers, developed the curriculum as well as approved the subject and content of the training modules.
II. Training of trainers (tutors). For three weeks, trainers underwent a Training of Trainers workshop. Candidate trainers were selected from among the project experts, local scientists, qualified farmers with higher education degrees in agriculture and working experience in this field.
III. Training of farmers. The organization of the FFS in the project areas was headed by national consultants and supported by local project experts. The farmers from the project areas were assembled into groups of 20-25 people each. Training was conducted by the FFS trainers.

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 Approach focused on SLM only
After Independence, the land tenure system in Uzbekistan changed. As a result of agricultural restructuring, shirkat farms (descendants of kolkhozes and sovkhozes) were disbanded, and the land was provided to farmers under the conditions of long-term leases. Farmers, many of them with no agricultural education or experience in irrigated agriculture, became the land users. Farmers’ Field Schools are aimed at improving the farmers’ capacity and introducing best practices in land and water use in irrigated agriculture

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: There were many reasons why training via FFS became necessary: a drop in the productivity and quality of lands, acute water shortages, ecological problems, a deficit in the capacity of farmers and the absence of extension services

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	During meetings, land users were informed of the best practices for the cultivation of agricultural crops, measures to combat soil salinity and the improvement in the productivity of irrigated lands
planning	none
implementation	interactive	Actively participated in the activities aimed at implementing the Farmers’ Field Schools program , shared their experience
monitoring/ evaluation	interactive	Identified the leaders among farmers who delivered trainings of certain modules within the groups
Research	none

3.3 Flow chart (if available)

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

Were decisions on the selection of the Technology(ies) made:

• by international and national SLM specialists

Explain:

FAO international experts proposed the FFS approach to increase farmers’ capacity and, in cooperation with the national consultants, local experts and land users, provided separate training modules, which were adapted to local conditions depending on the existing problems.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by SLM specialists with consultation of land users. During the Inception Workshop, national scientists, qualified farmers and agricultural experts led by FAO international consultants formulated the areas of activity and developed the curriculum, as well as the training modules topics.

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.

The entire population, regardless of nationality, age or social status, may receive FFS training

Form of training:

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

Subjects covered:

1.Social aspects: general evaluation of the environmental conditions & living standards of farmers.
2.Soil functions & properties. Monitoring and impact. Land legislation
3.Soil rehabilitation
4.Water management
5.Soil fertility, health & soil biological management
6.Crop management. Fundamentals of Farmer and Water Users’ Associations
7.Agricultural machinery, protection/preservation of soil

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Specify whether advisory service is provided:

• on land users' fields
• at permanent centres

Describe/ comments:

Farmer Field School; Key elements: Extension services, Practical lessons;
1. The provision of extension services to farmers through the dissemination of printed publications in the form of printed media, including brochures, leaflets, newsletters and flyers on integrated management of salinity and water logging – affected soils
2. Practical lessons in the field, participation in presenting crop productivity at the demonstration sites, group exercises on the practical application of knowledge obtained («field days»)

Advisory service is inadequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; Presently, the country lacks permanent public institutions dealing with extension in the area of soil and water conservation

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 regular monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: Project experts calculated crop budget atnd marginal income
Monitoring of changes in the soil properties aspects were regular monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: as well as the soil’s humus and nutrient content

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

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Specify topics:

• sociology

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

Sociological surveys were performed to evaluate the effectiveness of the training, demand for training, interest in learning, identification of priority rural problems, causes of limited production and living standards, as well as to develop proposals for improving the situation in the rural areas through the efforts of rural communities and farmers’ associations.

Research was carried out on-farm

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: international: 100.0%

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

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

No

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

No

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)?

• uncertain

If no or uncertain, specify and comment:

There is an option for disseminating FFS subjects (applicable training modules and materials were created, trainers remain on the sites) with little to no significant financial assistance or support from the local administration for the organization of Farmers’ Field Schools.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Regular meetings of trainee groups and training during the entire vegetation season
FFS is a farmer training form that does not require significant financial investment
FFS provides for the mass training of farmers.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
No specialized training facilities required
FFS provides an opportunity for the training of farmers at the production site, within a suitable timeframe
It is suitable, as there’s no need to leave home in order to participate in trainings; training content is delivered in a user-friendly and graphical manner
During the training in FFS, there is an opportunity to exchange experience and discuss peer-to-peer the issues and how to address them
Регулярные встречи обучающихся групп и обучение на протяжении всего сезона выращивания культур (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Распространение знаний от фермера к фермеру, чтобы обеспечить массовость и результативность)

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?
Although FFS is an informal organization, it requires the support of local authorities in terms of organization	Include organizing activities to train land users and raise awareness. Local authorities’ support is required to prepare FFS trainers Ecological NGOs should be involved; farmer-driven initiatives at the level of self-government level should be increased
At first, governmental financial support will be required

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
No discernable weaknesses	Создать службу по повышению потенциала землепользователей, в задачи которой входила бы организация мероприятий по обучению землепользователей и информированности. Нужна поддержка местных властей в подготовке инструкторов для ПФШ Привлекать к участию НПО по экологии и повышать уровень самоорганизации и фермерских инициатив
На первом этапе требуется финансовая поддержка государственных структур

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Final report of FAO/TCP/UZB/2901 project entitled “Integrated management for sustainable use of salt affected and gypsiferous soils”, 2005Final report of the World Bank project “Reconstruction of irrigation and drainage infrastructure and rehabilitation of wetlands”. Subcomponents AS-4.3 and AS-4.4 “Farmer Field Schools” and “Farmers Information Bureau and Farmers Extension Service”

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Final report of the World Bank project “Reconstruction of irrigation and drainage infrastructure and rehabilitation of wetlands”. Subcomponents AS-4.3 and AS-4.4 “Farmer Field Schools” and “Farmers Information Bureau and Farmers Extension Service”