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)

Potential and limitations for improved natural resource management (NRM) in mountain communities in the Rustaq district, Afghanistan (Rustaq NRM Study)

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

Terre des Hommes (Terre des Hommes) - Switzerland

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

CDE Centre for Development and Environment (CDE Centre for Development and Environment) - Switzerland

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

17/10/2016

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

Two Watershed Associations (WSA), in Chaker and Nahristan watershed areas respectively, are registered at the national level with the Ministry of Agriculture Irrigation and Livestock (MAIL) and at the regional level with the Department of Agriculture. Both associations are strong, active, dynamic, and have the capacity to coordinate and support the Natural Resource Management Committees (NRMC) at village level.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Terre des Hommes (Tdh) has been implementing the Livelihood project (LIPT) in Rustaq district in northern Afghanistan since 2007. The overall aim of the project is to offer the rural population new and improved livelihood options, with capacity building of the rural population, to design and implement their own sustainable development options, and to enhance their resilience to cope with natural and conflict-related stress. For this purpose, capacity of supporting stakeholder institutions is strengthened (LIPT’s boundary partners) to ensure that good development is on-going. Boundary partners are trained and equipped in relevant techniques regarding sustainable natural resource management.
Two Watershed Associations (WSA) and 20 Natural Resources Management Committees (NRMC) were founded through LIPT. Two WSAs, in Chaker and Nahristan watershed areas, are registered at national level within the Ministry of Agriculture Irrigation and Livestock (MAIL), and at the regional level with the Department of Agriculture. Both associations are strong, active, dynamic, and have the capacity to coordinate and support the NRMCs at village level. Out of their newly established and registered regional offices, the WSAs coordinate the NRMCs, take over responsibilities from Tdh (e.g. the 2014 reforestation campaign) and are getting more involved in planning and monitoring of LIPT’s activities. The 20 NRMCs have "hands and eyes" on all LIPT activities implemented in their communities, and their trained extension workers render valuable services to the farmers in their villages.

Methods: Today, all NRMCs have a strong institutional set-up. Their extension workers have been trained and equipped. Members of NRMCs and WSAs have been trained on group management, planning, documentations, record keeping, IPM, reforestation management, soil protection, mulching, hedgerows and terracing, making fermenters, pruning and budding. WSAs and NRMCs gained further organizational, technical and management capacity building in both watershed areas. As one of biggest challenge at watershed level is soil erosion within hillside agriculture, LIPT III trained the NRMCs and WSAs on terracing and hedgerows to protect the soil from erosion. Furthermore, NRMCs were trained in sustainable irrigation water management, gully treatment, and surface water harvesting. There were also training courses conducted on leadership, finance, proposal writing, documentation, procurement and operations management.
Both WSAs and NRMCs started to get a real understanding of environmental issues and were then able to motivate their communities. WSAs coordinated the NRM intervention with NRMCs including reforestation, soil protection hedgerows, contour lines, terracing, establishment of public nurseries (to produce trees and be an income source for WSAs), establishment of centralized community bakeries (to reduce the demand for firewood and decrease the women’s workload in the watershed areas), irrigation infrastructure, bio-engineering and gully control (to reduce the progression of gullies on both ploughed lands and pastures), livestock value chains at regional (watershed) level, etc., while NRMCs are looking after these interventions and the mobilization of the community at the village level. Farmers and communities have adopted natural resource management practices to maintain/increase soil fertility, rangeland, water resources and forest coverage.

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 main aim of the project is to offer the rural population new and improved livelihood options and to deliver capacity building for the rural population to design and implement their own sustainable development options and enhance their resilience to cope with natural and conflict related stress.

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	none
planning	interactive
implementation	interactive
monitoring/ evaluation	interactive

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

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

• all relevant actors, as part of a participatory approach

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users
• field staff/ advisers

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Specify whether advisory service is provided:

• on land users' fields

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
• regional
• national

Describe institution, roles and responsibilities, members, etc.

LIPT III will leave behind successful and strong boundary partners in place to carry out the development options, as main boundary partners (WSAs, NRMCs, as the major boundary partners) will have a source of income for their operation and management.

Specify type of support:

• financial
• capacity building/ training
• equipment

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Specify topics:

• economics / marketing
• technology

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

On-going research, as well as multiple trials by LIPT to find the best-adapted technical solutions, to communicate and discuss them with local communities and farmers, were the key elements of this success.

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

If precise annual budget is not known, indicate range:

• 10,000-100,000

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):

Fully supported under project

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?

Yes

If yes, specify:

local institution were support with equipment

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:

To look to the capacity and institutional strengthening of the project boundary partners, LIPT III will leave behind a successful and strong boundary partner in place to carry out the development options, as main boundary partners will have source of income (nurseries, cooperative shop, etc.) for their operation and management.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
The traditional social structures and customary institutions play an important role in problem solving in everyday community life, but traditional problem solving structures may also limit the taking up of new approaches. More effective approaches are needed, for example in the field of the management of common pool resources (water, pastures, trees and shrubs). The newly established Watershed Associations demonstrate how groups addressing specific urgent tasks may be successfully established and functioning within a very short period of time.
NRM is the area where LIPT III made the most remarkable progress despite the fact that NRM was a completely new approach, and its implementation is highly demanding in terms of manpower, community awareness and mobilization. Profound changes in behaviour, motivation and mobilization both at individual and community levels made this possible. The permanent research, as well as multiple trials by LIPT to find the best-adapted technical solutions, to communicate and discuss them with local communities and farmers were the key elements of this success. WSAs and NRMCs are playing an active role in implementation of NRM intervention, even they have become more interested and active when they registered in Department of Agriculture Irrigation and Livestock at national and regional level.
Farmers adapt and replicate the innovations once they see the results, as soil erosion is the main concern in Rustaq - but nobody in watershed area was ready to protect their agriculture land by implementing barrier hedgerows. After demonstrating of hedgerow by LIPT III, farmers saw its impact on controlling of soil erosion, farmers' interest became high and they are ready to replicate it to protect their land from degradation.
All community extension workers are trained and in place, playing an essential role in supporting the boundary partners in implementing NRM activities that include community mobilization, technical design of orchards and nurseries, reforestation sites, terracing and hedgerow designs. The NRMCs, WSAs as well as individual farmers in both watershed areas increased their knowledge and gained better understanding of the importance of sustainable management, rehabilitation of farmland, pastures and their main natural resources. A high degree of motivation and mobilization of farmers, and adequate technical capacity of CEWs regarding NRM is certainly one of the main outcomes of the LIPT, and an essential step towards the fulfilment of LIPT’s mission.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view

A rewarding sign of the development of NRM awareness is how farmers took up the problem of soil erosion.100 ha of cultivable land on hillsides have been terraced since the terracing activity had been initiated in November 2013. And 155 ha of additional land are in the process of being terraced. The biggest success with terracing is that a number of farmers started replication themselves what they had seen.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information