Enfoques

Meeting the differing needs of farmers in a given lowland area: local-level agreements and conventions [Mali]

  • Creación:
  • Actualización:
  • Compilador:
  • Editor:
  • Revisor:

Processus de satisfaction des intérêts multiples des exploitants d’un bas-fond: accords et conventions au niveau local (French)

approaches_2506 - Mali

Visualizar secciones

Expandir todo
Completado: 78%

1. Información general

1.2 Detalles de contacto de las personas de referencia e instituciones involucradas en la evaluación y la documentación del Enfoque

Persona(s) de referencia clave/s

Especialista MST:
Especialista MST:

Diarra Mamadou Moustapha

mmdiarra@hotmail.com

HELVETAS - Swiss Intercooperation

Mali

Especialista MST:

Dembélé Célestin

celestin.dembele@helvetas.org

HELVETAS - Swiss Intercooperation

Mali

Nombre de la(s) institución(es) que facilitaron la documentación/ evaluación del Enfoque si fuera relevante)
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) - Alemania
Nombre de la(s) institución(es) que facilitaron la documentación/ evaluación del Enfoque si fuera relevante)
HELVETAS (Swiss Intercooperation)

1.3 Condiciones referidas al uso de datos documentados mediante WOCAT

¿Cuándo se compilaron los datos (en el campo)?

01/07/2012

El compilador y la/s persona(s) de referencia claves aceptan las condiciones acerca del uso de los datos documentados mediante WOCAT :

2. Descripción del Enfoque MST

2.1 Breve descripción del Enfoque

This practice makes it possible to bring actors with differing interests around the same table to discuss the ways in which the scheme’s facilities and lands will be accessed and exploited.

2.2 Descripción detallada del Enfoque MST

Descripción detallada del Enfoque MST:

This practice aims to establish a consensual agreement on the access to and management of schemes and developed lands among the farmers of a given site. Through the facilitation process, it is possible to transfer management responsibility and ensure the peaceful farming of schemes. The social engineering approach focuses on developing the diversifying potential of agro-sylvo-pastoral systems by involving all actors concerned, guarantees the sustainability of investments and prevents farming-related conflicts from arising on scheme sites. The establishment and support of multi-stakeholder platforms fosters a collective dynamic in hydro-agricultural schemes.The multi-stakeholder platform (MSP) brings stakeholders together and involves them in analysing the location assessment and determining any changes required to respond to environmental constraints and needs.
The approach centres on creating MSPs and then strengthening their organisational and institutional capacities to ensure that collaborative and best-fit infrastructure management is delivered by the different user groups, whose interests in the scheme’s easement area may diverge. The management standards and regulations and the roles and responsibilities of all social and user groups are determined by the actors collectively. The first stage involves initiating an internal and critical reflection and discussion process with the different scheme user groups. In the second stage, a consensual agreement is reached on accessing and managing the scheme and lands developed under it. Associations or cooperative structures are set up for each economic sector involved in the scheme’s easement area.
Workshops are prepared for drawing up agreements on the management and exploitation of resources in the scheme’s easement area. It is important to ensure information is provided in a timely manner and that it reaches the widest possible audience. Workshops for drawing up agreements on the management and exploitation of the scheme’s easement area are held, involving:a workshop of at least two days; a general meeting to open the event held in plenary (delivered in the local language); an initial round of sub-group workshops; a second round of group work mixing two or three Groups to tease out potentially conflicting interests; the provision of clear instructions in plenary prior to the group work sessions and of spatial support materials (maps and current and future occupancy charts); clarification of the rights of former occupants and the plot allocation quota for women; summarising proceedings during the general meeting. Organisational structures are formalised. The management/ development plan for the scheme is drawn up. The agreements and rules settled upon are formalised (in writing) and then deliberated by the commune council. A mid-term evaluation of the implementation of local agreements on scheme management and exploitation is carried out along with an assessment of the implementation of the management/development plan for the scheme easement area.
Farmers and village authorities participate in workshops and express their interests and they set out the traditional rules and social mechanisms that should be considered. The commune organises the workshop and participates in the diagnostic exercise by taking part in the discussions. It also deliberates the final agreements established by the actors. Service providers and technical services facilitate the process of drawing up an agreement on the access to and management of the scheme easement area and on the scheme development plan. They organise users into formal associations and support the formalisation of collaboration between the association, users and commune in terms of management delegation. The programme establishes the approach and trains service providers. It contributes to developing the visual aids required for communicating information and for spatial visualisation, and co-funds development action plans by sector.

2.5 País/ región/ lugares donde el Enfoque fue aplicado

País:

Mali

Región/ Estado/ Provincia:

Mali

Especifique más el lugar :

Yorosso, Sikasso, Kadiolo, Yanfolila, Bougouni, Kolondiéba

2.6 Fechas de inicio y conclusión del Enfoque

Indique año del inicio:

2010

Año de conclusión (si el Enfoque ya no se aplica):

2012

2.7 Tipo de Enfoque

  • proyecto/ basado en un programa

2.8 Propósitos/ objetivos principales del Enfoque

This practice aims to establish a consensual agreement on the access to and management of schemes and developed lands among the farmers of a given site. Through the facilitation process, it is possible to transfer management responsibility and ensure the peaceful farming of schemes. This practice makes it possible to bring actors with differing interests around the same table to discuss the ways in which the scheme’s facilities and lands will be accessed and exploited. The different scheme user groups discuss the delivery of the process and determine the different roles and responsibilities
The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: no consensual agreement on the access to and management of schemes and developed lands among the farmers, conflicts on land resources

2.9 Condiciones que facilitan o impiden la implementación de la/s Tecnología/s aplicadas bajo el Enfoque

entorno institucional
  • impiden

no consensual agreement on the access to and management of schemes and developed lands among the farmers
Treatment through the SLM Approach: Through the facilitation process, it is possible to transfer management responsibility and ensure the peaceful farming of schemes. Creating MSPs and then strengthening their organisational and institutional capacities to ensure that collaborative and best-fit infrastructure management is delivered by the different user groups, whose interests in the scheme’s easement area may diverge.

marco de trabajo legal (tenencia de tierra, derechos de uso de tierra y agua)

The existing land ownership, land use rights / water rights moderately hindered the approach implementation

3. Participación y roles de las partes interesadas involucradas

3.1 Partes interesadas involucradas en el Enfoque y sus roles

  • usuarios locales de tierras/ comunidades locales
  • especialistas MST/consejeros agrícolas
  • ONG
  • gobierno local
  • gobierno nacional (planificadores, autoridades)
3.2 Involucramiento de los usuarios locales de tierras/ comunidades locales en las distintas fases del Enfoque
Involucramiento de los usuarios locales de tierras/ comunidades locales Especifique quién se involucró y describa las actividades
iniciación/ motivación pasivo
planificación interactivo
implementación interactivo
monitoreo y evaluación interactivo
Research pasivo

3.4 La toma de decisiones en la selección de Tecnología(s) MST

Especifique quién decidió la selección de las Tecnología/ Tecnologías a implementarse:
  • principalmente usuarios de tierras con el apoyo de especialistas MST
Explique:

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

4. Apoyo técnico, fortalecimiento institucional y gestión del conocimiento

4.1 Construcción de capacidades / capacitación

¿Se proporcionó la capacitación a usuarios de tierras/ otras partes interesadas?

Especifique quién fue capacitado:
  • usuarios de tierras
Forma de capacitación:
  • reuniones públicas

4.2 Servicio de asesoría

¿Los usuarios de tierras tienen acceso a un servicio de asesoría?

Especifique si servicio proporcionado se realizó:
  • en centros permanentes
Describa/ comentarios:

Name of method used for advisory service: bring actors with differing interests around the same table; Key elements: different scheme user groups discuss the delivery of the process and determine the different roles and responsibilities
Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities

4.3 Fortalecimiento institucional (desarrollo institucional)

¿Se establecieron o fortalecieron instituciones mediante el Enfoque?
  • sí, moderadamente
Especifique el nivel o los niveles en los que se fortalecieron o establecieron las instituciones:
  • local
Especifique el tipo de apoyo:
  • financiero
  • construcción de capacidades/ entrenamiento
  • equipo

4.4 Monitoreo y evaluación

¿El monitoreo y la evaluación forman parte del Enfoque?

Comentarios:

bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through measurements
technical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff, land users through observations
socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff, land users through observations
management of Approach aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations
There were no changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation
There were no changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation

4.5 Investigación

¿La investigación formó parte del Enfoque?

Especifique los temas:
  • sociología
  • economía/ marketing
  • ecología
  • tecnología

5. Financiamiento y apoyo material externo

5.1 Presupuesto anual para el componente MST del Enfoque

Si no se conoce el presupuesto anual preciso, indique el rango:
  • 10,000-100,000
Comentarios (ej. fuentes principales de financiamiento/ donantes principales):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international non-government: 100.0%

5.2 Apoyo financiero/material proporcionado a los usuarios de tierras

¿Los usuarios de tierras recibieron financiamiento/ apoyo material para implementar la Tecnología/ Tecnologías? :

Si respondió sí, especifique el tipo o los tipos de apoyo, condiciones y proveedor(es) :

The programme contributes to developing the visual aids required for communicating information and for spatial visualisation, and co-funds development action plans by sector.

5.3 Subsidios para insumos específicos (incluyendo mano de obra)

Si la mano de obra de usuarios de tierras fue un insumo sustancial, ¿fue:
  • voluntario?

6. Análisis de impacto y comentarios de conclusión

6.1 Impactos del Enfoque

¿El Enfoque ayudó a los usuarios de tierras a implementar y mantener Tecnologías MST?
  • No
  • Sí, un poco
  • Sí, moderadamente
  • Sí, mucho

maintenance of soil fertility, along with the prevention of environmental degradation; this practice makes it possible to bring actors with differing interests around the same table to discuss the ways in which the scheme’s facilities and lands will be accessed and exploited; enables the relevant actors to assess the overall management of the lowland scheme in a way which takes each stakeholder into account.

¿El Enfoque empoderó a grupos en desventaja social y económica?
  • No
  • Sí, un poco
  • Sí, moderadamente
  • Sí, mucho

The commune ensures the participation of the whole population in analysing the existing situation.

¿El Enfoque mejoró cuestiones de tenencia de tierra/ derechos de usuarios que obstaculizaron la implementación de la Tecnologías MST?
  • No
  • Sí, un poco
  • Sí, moderadamente
  • Sí, mucho

The commune ensures the participation of the whole population in analysing the existing situation. Social groups begin thinking about the modes of accessing lowland plots and study the relationships between different groups; they consider practices that are detrimental to the sustainability of the scheme and those that could trigger conflict among farmers; they think about ways to prevent and manage conflicts among farmers and about the practices that need to be regulated; clarification of the rights of former occupants and the plot allocation quota for women;

Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?
  • No
  • Sí, un poco
  • Sí, moderadamente
  • Sí, mucho

This approach has been used in all 30 of the agropastoral scheme sites that the AVAL Proramme has been supporting in the Yorosso, Sikasso and Kadiolo circles. The same process has been rolled out in 14 APEL Programme sites in the Yanfolila, Bougouni and Kolondiéba circles. At the AVAL programme level, 50 associations and/or cooperatives have been set up for the 30 sites in question. It has been possible to reach more than 6,500 producers through the user organisations (rice growers, market gardeners, fishers, livestock farmers, etc.). The area of farmland developed and governed by local agreements is estimated at nearly 2,500 hectares for both programmes. The approach was developed between 2006 and 2009 and implemented from 2010 to 2012.

Did the Approach lead to improved livelihoods / human well-being?
  • No
  • Sí, un poco
  • Sí, moderadamente
  • Sí, mucho

increased participation in activities that contribute to the area’s socio-economic development; The commune ensures the participation of the whole population in analysing the existing situation. Development and strengthening of a spirit of partnership among MSP members

Did the Approach help to alleviate poverty?
  • No
  • Sí, un poco
  • Sí, moderadamente
  • Sí, mucho

6.2 Motivación principal del usuario de la tierra para implementar MST

  • producción incrementada
  • incremento de la renta(bilidad), proporción mejorada de costo-beneficio
  • well-being and livelihoods improvement

6.3 Sostenibilidad de las actividades del Enfoque

¿Pueden los usuarios de tierras sostener lo que se implementó mediante el Enfoque (sin apoyo externo)?
  • incierto
Si respondió no o incierto, especifique y comente:

Involving actors from different sectors of society can lend the project a strong dynamic. Setting up formal relationships between the commune and professional groups helps ensure the sustainability of public-private partnerships. Agreements must, however, be closely monitored; indeed, it is essential to review their implementation and functioning regularly. Agreements can be challenged and modified so that they adapt to changing contexts.

6.4 Fortalezas/ ventajas del Enfoque

Fuerzas/ ventajas/ oportunidades desde la perspectiva del compilador o de otra persona de referencia clave
The commune ensures the participation of the whole population in analysing the existing situation. Social groups begin thinking about the modes of accessing lowland plots and study the relationships between different groups; they consider practices that are detrimental to the sustainability of the scheme and those that could trigger conflict among farmers; they think about ways to prevent and manage conflicts among farmers and about the practices that need to be regulated; and so on. In this way, the instrument enables the relevant actors to assess the overall management of the lowland scheme in a way which takes each stakeholder into account.
promotion of local government and the good management of scheme easement area resources.
reduction of site-related conflicts and the setting of a benchmark for the local resolution of such issues
(How to sustain/ enhance this strength: The level to which farmers’ objectives for the scheme are satisfied engenders strong interest in the process, so the facilitator must be constantly available to listen to and deal with individual requirements and constraints.)
development and strengthening of a spirit of partnership among MSP members
increased participation in activities that contribute to the area’s socio-economic development. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Involving actors from different sectors of society can lend the project a strong dynamic. Setting up formal relationships between the commune and professional groups helps ensure the sustainability of public-private partnerships. Agreements must, however, be closely monitored; indeed, it is essential to review their implementation and functioning regularly. Agreements can be challenged and modified so that they adapt to changing contexts.)
maintenance of soil fertility, along with the prevention of environmental degradation (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: The facilitation plan must take into account local people’s agricultural calendar (June, July, August and September are not recommended for process facilitation activities). Carrying out initial processes of reflection in interest groups serves to enhance future negotiations. This
method enables the specific issues for each type of use to be clarified. The subsequent process of finding consensus is made possible through the involvement of local and traditional authorities, in addition to Moderation.)
This practice makes it possible to bring actors with differing interests around the same table to discuss the ways in which the scheme’s facilities and lands will be accessed and exploited. The different scheme user groups discuss the delivery of the process and determine the different roles and responsibilities (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: In light of the issues and sensitivities involved (land tenure, authority and governance issues, etc.), the commune must ensure that delivery is strategic and that operational duties are delegated to the MSP, which is, itself, governed by the traditional village authority. A facilitator leads the process.)

6.5 Debilidades/ desventajas del Enfoque y formas de sobreponerse a ellos

Debilidades/ desventajas/ riesgos desde la perspectiva del compilador o de otra persona de referencia clave ¿Cómo sobreponerse a ellas?
Covering the consultation and meeting costs can be an issue. However, these costs are relatively low (750,000 to 900,000 CFA francs per site (1712 Dollar)) considering the benefits.
Social divides within village communities can cause major problems. Land tenure, authority and governance issues must be considered and analysed throughout the process to ensure that the resulting propositions are relevant.

7. Referencias y vínculos

7.1 Métodos/ fuentes de información

  • visitas de campo, encuestas de campo
  • entrevistas con usuarios de tierras

7.2 Referencias a publicaciones disponibles

Título, autor, año, ISBN:

Manual of Good Practices in Small Scale Irrigation in the Sahel. Experiences from Mali. Published by GIZ in 2014

¿Dónde se halla disponible? ¿Costo?

http://star-www.giz.de/starweb/giz/pub/servlet.starweb

Título, autor, año, ISBN:

HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation/BACIL, Rapports de prestation de services et d’accompagnement [Reports on service provision and support activities] 2010, 2011, 2012

Título, autor, año, ISBN:

HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation/CADEL, Rapports de prestation de services et d’accompagnement [Reports on service provision and support activities] 2010, 2011, 2012

Vínculos y módulos

Expandir todo Colapsar todos

Módulos