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)

Book project: where people and their land are safer - A Compendium of Good Practices in Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) (where people and their land are safer)

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

HELVETAS (Swiss Intercooperation)

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

01/03/2014

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 purpose of the approach is to address disaster risks and climate extremes with Comprehensive Agrarian Risk Managment (GRAI, acronym in Spanish, for Gestión del Riesgo Agrícola Integral), tailored to the needs of small rural producers and including measures for prevention, mitigation, preparation and risk transference to create resilience to natural disasters.
(i) Good practices for agrarian producers were promoted, and
(ii) Risk transference financial mechanisms were identified through a form of insurance was tailored to the needs of rural producers.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

1. What are the main characteristics/ distinctive features of the approach?
The implementation of Comprehensive Agrarian Risk Management (GRAI for its acronym in Spanish) is based on two pillars:
(i) Agroclimate Risk Management (GRAC, acronym in Spanish for Gestión del Riesgo Agroclimático): to implement productive strategies according to the local context in order to reduce the risk of crop losses
(ii) Agrarian Financial Risk Management (GRAF, acronym in Spanish for Gestión del Riesgo Agrícola Financiera): to develop products and mechanisms of risk transference to compensate producers for economic loss, based on prevention, preparation and response measures.
2. What are the purposes/ objectives of the Approach?
To promote a combination of different sustainable measures and mechanisms for agrarian producers, improving the capacity of local actors (communities and municipalities) to enhance their capacity to respond to, prevent and mitigate risk.
3. What methods were used?
(i) Field practice, transfer of local capacities (GRAC) :
Support was provided to implement and disseminate goode agroecological practices with ecological products and measures that are simple and easily replicated, and which are tailored to the needs and capacities of producers and also revalue ancestral knowledge.
(ii) Financial risk transfer mechanisms (GRAF):

Pilot financial insurance mechanisms were designed and implemented for the most important crops in the area (potatoes, quinoa, grapes, peach). Producers accessed the fund by paying a prime. This provided indemnization in case they were affected or overwhelmed by a disaster. In other words, in case of a climate extreme (hail, frost, drought or excess rain), the damage to affected crops is assessed by an expert; this assessment is performned using a predefined and known methodology by a trained local expert (“Yapuchiri”) during field visits.
4. What were the stages of implementation?
The experience was carried out between February 2011 to March 2014. It began implementing pilot models and measures.
5. Which stakeholders were involved and what were their roles?
- Supramunicipal partners (associations of municipalities: Aymaras Sin Fronteras, Azanaque, Cintis, Andean Region of Cochabamba
- Jacha Suyu Pakajaqi Native Indigenous Peasant Organization and y Federations of Associations of Producer Unions of the Bolivian Altiplano.
- Partners at the national level: Ministry of Rural Development and Land (Ministerio de Desarrollo Rural y Tierras, MDRyT); -VDRA-; Agropecuarian and Climate Change Risk Management Unit (Unidad de Gestión del Riesgo Agropecuario y Cambio Climático, UGRACC) which works in the context of GRAC) and Ministry of Rural Development and Land INSA (in the context of GRAF).

6. What do the land users like or dislike about the approach?
the learning process and agricultural risk transference mechanisms tailored to the conditions and needs of small rural producers.
The combination of different mechanisms and measures to reduce and manage risk; this allows the producers to choose the most relevant measures to address their needs.

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

• recent local initiative/ innovative

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

Implement sustainable agrarian risk transfer mechanisms for agricultural producers, based on their needs for protection against climate risks and to enhance their resilience to natural disasters

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	Agrarian producers are aware, are motivated and possess knowledge required to revalue local and ancestral knowledge to manage agricultural risk.
planning	interactive	Agricultural producers interact with their matrix organization and municipal government for planning. they are supported by PROSUCO, PROFIN and HELVETAS.
implementation	interactive	Agricultural producers contribute family labor to build small facilities, such as bioinput centers.
monitoring/ evaluation	interactive	PROSUCO and PROFIN, as implementation partners, have set in place a monitoring system, with close cooperation with partner institutions and beneficiaries (parmers) to measure and document the effects.
Capitalizing from the experience	interactive	Exchange is an important aspect of the project, as well as capitalizing from and documenting the experience. This was all performed through field visits, events, fairs and publishing reading material with the help of diverse actors (INSA, associations, PROSUCO, PROFIN etc.)

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

Explain:

Agricultural producers were supported throughout the process by other leading organizations, such as "Kamayoc" from Peru, field schools from Nicaragua and project specialists, i.e. NGOs, and PROSUCO for technological innovation, and PROFIN for microfinancial services.

Specify on what basis decisions were made:

• evaluation of well-documented SLM knowledge (evidence-based decision-making)

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users
• field staff/ advisers

If relevant, specify gender, age, status, ethnicity, etc.

Producers, women and children are more vulnerable to climate extremes. They participated in training events to identify alternatives and measures that could be taken.

Form of training:

• farmer-to-farmer
• demonstration areas
• public meetings
• courses

Subjects covered:

i) Sustainable practices were taught in the non-financial component (GRAC). These practices included the manufacturing of bioinputs with ecological fertilizers, mineral soups, natural insect repellents.
ii) In the financial domain (GRAF), trainings for financial risk transfere mechanisms were provided; also, participants were briefed on the operation and advantages of the Risk Transference Fund.

Comments:

Actions should place strong emphasis on sustainability and ensuring the measures are easy to replicate because of the low cost involved in implementing them. The measures should be taught by doing. Further, local leadership should be promoted and be involve the participation of different government levels (community, municipal and national government).

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Specify whether advisory service is provided:

• on land users' fields

Describe/ comments:

In general terms, the support and assessment of good practices are passed on from producer to producer. The Yapuchiri, a producer in a leadership position, must have an important role and should exchange information with their counterparts from Peru ("Kamayoc").
PROSUCO provided farmers with support for technoloogical innovation and from PROFIN to learn about financial services.

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• yes, greatly

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

• local

Describe institution, roles and responsibilities, members, etc.

Federation of Producer Association Unions from the Altiplano (Federación de Unión de Asociaciones Productivas del Altiplano). This institution brings together potato growers from the Altiplano region and helps its member organizations to strengthen their capacities
.
The Native Indigenous Peasant Organization Jacha Suyu Pakajaqi brings together communities and promotes development in these.
Producer organizations from the CINTIS region.

Specify type of support:

• financial
• capacity building/ training

Give further details:

Capacities were developed through parthers such as PROSUCO (Acronym in Spanish for Association to Promote Sustaimnability and Shared Knowledge, Asociación Promoción de la Sustentabilidad y Conocimientos Compartidos).
Financial mechanisms were designed and adjusted in the frame of the Risk Transference Funds.

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

Financial insurance mechanisms were designed for the most common crops (potatoes, quinoa, grapes, peaches) in the frame of the Agrarian Risk Transference Funds.
When a weather extreme takes place (hail, frost or drought), a technical assessment is performed on the affected croplands. The assessment uses a predefined and familiar methodology, and is carried out by a local leader, a producer who has been properly trained to do so, the “Yapuchiri”. He performs the assessment through field visits.
Furthermore, the “Yapuchiri” monitors the operation of the transfer fund at the local level, i.e. the compensation provided according to the damage suffered. INSA (Agrarian Insurance Institute) monitors all reported events and insurance claims at the national level. All these mechanisms together ensure monitoring of the financial mechanisms at the local and national level. This aspect is in the domain of GRAF.

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

Yes

Comments:

The methodology used for assessing damage according to crop and extent of the damage can be used for monitoring.

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:

• 100,000-1,000,000

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

Value refers to the entire project to reduce climate extreme risks.

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):

Producers received basic input to execute good practices (containers and agrofilm to make biofertilizers, etc)

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• agricultural

• construction

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

• voluntary

Comments:

All of the producers manufactured biofertilizers, as per the trainings provided by the Bioinput Centers.

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:

An Agrarian Risk Transference Fund (an agricultural microinsurance) was set up as a financial mechanism aimed at producers of potatoes, grapes and peaches with resources from the Project to Reduce Climate Extremes Risks from Swiss Cooperation, implemented by Helvetas Swiss Intercooperation, with the support of PROFIN, .

Producers accessed the fund through a prime payment that allowed them to receive indemnization in case they were affected by a climate extreme (hail, drought, frost or excessive rain).

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:

Good agricultural practices are replicated using a model involving knowledge transfer from producer to producer.
The practices involved have a strong sustainability approach; they are easy to execute and have low implementation costs, thus they are easily replicated. They are taught by doing and promote local leadership. Also, they promote articulation and cooperation at different government levels (community, municipality, governorship and ministries).
It is evident that financial mechanisms require more support from specialized financial institutions with significant presence in rural areas.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
The combination of different mechanisms and measures to reduce and manage risk allow the producer to choose from a variety of measures to find those most relevant to address his needs.
Promoting and disseminating good agroecological practices that can be used for risk prevention, mitigation and adaptation, by including these in the process of agricultural production.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
The approach combines financial and non-financial mechanisms to reduce and manage risk by collaborating with diverse institutions and actors, allows establishing financial and non-financial mechanisms to replicate and develop further examples that can be valuable for INSA (Agricultural Insurance Institute).
Generate financial and non-financial mechanisms to transfer risk; this is an important reference for INSA (Agricultural Insurance Institute) to replicate other inspiring ideas that can be replicated and further developed.

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?
Financial mechanisms need specialized institutions present in rural areas.	Municipal governments must generate conditions and create alliances with financial entities to promote financial mechanisms that can be used to transfer risk.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Consolidación de la Gestión del Riesgo Agrícola Integral (GRAI), PROSUCO-PROFIN-Helvetas-COSUDE, 2014

Available from where? Costs?

http://www.rrd.com.bo/wp-content/uploads/2015/publi_fases/fase_03/19PROS.pdf

7.3 Links to relevant information which is available online

Title/ description:

programa de reducción del riesgo de desastres (PRRD), Helvetas, COSUDE Bolivia, colecion de todas las publicaciones del proyecto

URL:

http://www.rrd.com.bo

Title/ description:

PachaGrama agroclimate logbook, MDRyT and PRRD partners, 2012

URL:

http://www.rrd.com.bo/wp-content/uploads/2015/publi_fases/fase_03/07pachagrama2br.pdf