Esta es una versión des actualizada, inactiva de este caso. Ir a la versión actual.

Enfoques

Inactivo

Facilitation of micro-watershed management for farmers [Tayikistán]

Creación: 30/04/2011 00:00
Actualización: 06/07/2017 15:30
Compilador: Manuchehr Rakhmatdzhonov
Editor: –
Revisor: David Streiff

Фасилитасияи амалиётхои дехкон барои идораи микрохавза

approaches_2443 - Tayikistán

Visualizar secciones

Expandir todo

Completado: 94%

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:

Bronkal Daniel

daniel.bronkal@welthungerhilfe.de

Alemania

Nombre de la(s) institución(es) que facilitaron la documentación/ evaluación del Enfoque si fuera relevante)

Deutsche Welthungerhilfe (Welthungerhilfe) - Tayikistán

1.3 Condiciones referidas al uso de datos documentados mediante WOCAT

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

Sí

1.4 Referencia/s al/los Cuestionario(s) de Tecnologías MST

2. Descripción del Enfoque MST

2.1 Breve descripción del Enfoque

Relying on integrated watershed management principles, farmers were assisted by the project to implement soil and water conservation measures in a microwatershed.

2.2 Descripción detallada del Enfoque MST

Descripción detallada del Enfoque MST:

Aims / objectives: To strengthen the capacity of the community to plan and implement integrated natural resource management approaches, at micro watershed level in sustainable ways. These include; conserving soil by introducing actions to rehabilitate the eroded land, stop gully formation resulting from water run-off; enable water retention to secure soil moisture for a longer time period; mitigate effects of overstocking resulting in overgrazing; hoof erosion and soil compaction; reverse inappropriate agriculture practices towards more efficient and environmentally friendly management types; enable better employment and higher income generation to improve the livelihood standards and food security.

Methods: The project facilitated the following activities: Farmer participation, and using their initiative, community involvement in the planning, fundraising and implementation. Farmers increased their own contribution for material inputs, and a greater than 50% rate of adoption of the innovation was seen. The project also funded 'on the job' training, technical support, consultancy, and mediation of communication between parties.

Stages of implementation: 1. Awareness raising, 2. On the job training, 3. Watershed management activity planning, 4. Implementation, 5. Monitoring, 6. Evaluation, 7. Readjustment based on results, 8. Further replication in new area

Role of stakeholders: The DWHH Project had a leading role in initiation, orientation, awareness raising, mobilisation, training, consultancy, input provision and mediation of communication to land committee. Farmers have been actively participating, have provided labour input / financial contribution, provided indigenous knowledge and skills. Local authorities - providing land titles, participation in planning and decision making process Village Development Committee (VDC) - community mobilisation, information dissemination, input / finance documentation, fund raising.

Other important information: There are 5 households in the microwatershed. Almost 40 people live in all HH, all are Tajiks. Members of all households took part in discussion rounds and training. Non of HHs were strong enough to implement measures on own funds. One HH has rejected implementation of measures, due lack of capacity and lack of trust of the project's success. Women: farmers came to the discussions together with their wives, women took part in training, in implementing almost all of the adoption measures, and equally benefited from the project. However, they were not involved in decision making.

2.3 Fotos del Enfoque

Galería de medios

2.5 País/ región/ lugares donde el Enfoque fue aplicado

País:

Tayikistán

Región/ Estado/ Provincia:

Tajikistan, Khatlon

Especifique más el lugar :

Baljuvon / Khirob

2.6 Fechas de inicio y conclusión del Enfoque

Indique año del inicio:

2009

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

2011

2.7 Tipo de Enfoque

iniciativa local reciente/ innovadora

2.8 Propósitos/ objetivos principales del Enfoque

The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities ( land use change, resource conservation, capacity building, focus on low cost local material, income generation, on the job training)

To assist farmers in the planning and implementation of activities for the conservation and improvement of the local land, to enable conditions for replication of the approach/technology, and to improve food production, and in the long run provide income generation.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Lack of land tenure rights implementation. Nominal state farm reorganisation. Low agricultural production - lands depleted of nutrients, very low yields, no crop rotation, overgrazing. Soil degradation, progressing land mass transport, gully formation. Lack of technical knowledge and awareness of soil & water conservation measures. Lack of cash to invest in development of land - just limited capacity to invest but need external financial input. Conflict over land use - livestock owners are against land enclosures. Poverty - underlying cause of general lack of potential to invest in development.

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

disponibilidad/ acceso a recursos y servicios financieros

impiden

Technology implementation has required a major investment for imported materials, like a metal net for fencing or fuel. Most farmers could not afford themselves to buy costly inputs. Moreover such inputs were rarely available on the local market.

Treatment through the SLM Approach: The INGO covered the costs of 50% of each action, here mainly higher price inputs were paid off. The low-cost approach fits the financial capacity of the target group.

entorno institucional

impiden

Capacities of communities and local authorities to jointly plan and implement SLM activities at micro-watershed level was weak.

Treatment through the SLM Approach: Knowledge improved on the complex interrelations in natural ecosystems (farmers and staff of local authorities). Project cooperation was not limited to those interested, there was inclusion of gov. structures (agriculture, land committee, ecology) committ

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

facilitan

The existing land ownership, land use rights / water rights moderately helped the approach implementation: On going legislative development in land tenure and farming provides good opportunities for implementation of the approach. But, ongoing nominal farm reorganisation and corruption at the local level, together with farmers reduced awareness of their land use rights requires more effort, time and funds in the application of SLM approaches. In this situation, DWHH has a good reputation in the district administration and with locals and so this helped overcome many barriers more easily.

impiden

Implementing the land tenure law and the privatisation of state farms is still a difficult process with many inconsistencies for people claiming a land title in the area.

Treatment through the SLM Approach: There are a few instances where the project was able to support farmers in getting land-titles to degraded land plots which they then had to rehabilitate using SLM technologies.

conocimiento de MST, acceso a apoyo técnico

impiden

Treatment through the SLM Approach:

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

Village Development Committee, farmers

Men have played bigger role in the organisation of activities, in the implementation of more manual work, whereas, women took part in the lighter work and in routine maintenance.

Most of the participating households live below the poverty line.

Farmers joined under one microwatershed approach, male (wife assisted), middle age, Tajiks, rural middle class.

especialistas MST/consejeros agrícolas

Project TAJ1068 staff, and an international consultant

Deutsche Welthungerhilfe

gobierno local

Subdistrict, District Heads, Agriculture, Land committees, Forestry department

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	interactivo	farmers meeting through VDC, orientation explaining goals, objectives, advertising in the local news paper, information boards in 6 watersheds
planificación	interactivo	on site planning with farmers
implementación	interactivo	training on the job, material input and labour provision, cross visits
monitoreo y evaluación	interactivo	data input, open to monitoring, communication on ongoing activities, collaboration while monitoring and evaluation
Research	interactivo	collaboration in the test for Acacia seed germination on the plot

3.3 Flujograma (si estuviera disponible)

Descripción:

Flow chart depicts the major actors involved during implementation of the approach. The relationship between stakeholders and primary functions is described as well.

Autor:

Manuchehr Rakhmatdzhonov (16, Firdavsi Street 734003, Dushanbe)

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 por especialistas MST en consulta con usuarios de tierras

Explique:

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by SLM specialists with consultation of land users. Focused on principles of farmer participation, self motivation and self help.

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?

Sí

Especifique quién fue capacitado:

usuarios de tierras
personal de campo/ consejeros

local land and agriculture departments, village development committee

Si fuese relevante, también especifique género, edad, estatus, etnicidad, etc.

Land users: 5 men, 5 women, 30 to 50 years old, all Tajiks, all families.

Forma de capacitación:

en el contexto de trabajo
áreas de demostración
reuniones públicas

Temas avanzados:

Use of the A-frame, watershed model, tree planting in contour ditches, intercropping

4.2 Servicio de asesoría

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

Sí

Especifique si servicio proporcionado se realizó:

en los campos de los usuarios de tierras

Describa/ comentarios:

A chain of meetings with international consultants from India and Nepal: Key elements: consultation on watershed concepts and watershed choice, capacity building in strategy design , draft development plan for watershed management

The consultants were : Yashvant Tkhakur, India; Jaganat Joschi, Nepal

Advisory service is inadequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; the govenment branches need more development and organisation to become able to manage land conservation activities; an independent advisory service is not in place, the only potential still exists within the DWHH Project

4.3 Fortalecimiento institucional (desarrollo institucional)

¿Se establecieron o fortalecieron instituciones mediante el Enfoque?

sí, un poco

Especifique el nivel o los niveles en los que se fortalecieron o establecieron las instituciones:

local

Especifique el tipo de apoyo:

construcción de capacidades/ entrenamiento

Proporcione detalles adicionales:

Village development committee (VDC), use of locally available resources, focus on low cost

4.4 Monitoreo y evaluación

¿El monitoreo y la evaluación forman parte del Enfoque?

Sí

Comentarios:

area treated aspects were ad hoc monitored by land users through observations; indicators: space used for technology

economic / production aspects were regular monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: fodder produced cent/ha, vegetables

socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: labour availability, health status

technical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: tree planting

bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: soil degradation, gully formation

no. of land users involved aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: monthly trends, how hardworking they were, gender

management of Approach aspects were ad hoc monitored by land users through observations; indicators: technology adaptation based on own experience

There were no changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: None

There were few changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Change of the design - adjustment of the contour boundary based on experience on the plot; Adjusting of tree planting in contour ditches according to the topography

4.5 Investigación

¿La investigación formó parte del Enfoque?

Sí

Especifique los temas:

tecnología

Proporcione detalles adicionales e indique quién hizo la investigación:

Tests were completed on the germination of Acacia seeds in two different setups: on the demo plot of the project and on the farmers plot.

Research was carried out both on station and on-farm

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:

2,000-10,000

Comentarios (ej. fuentes principales de financiamiento/ donantes principales):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international non-government (material input: tools, fencing, planting material, diesel. etc.): 50.0%; local community / land user(s) (the rest of material input, labour, time (mainly low cost inputs)): 50.0%; other

5.2 Apoyo financiero/material proporcionado a los usuarios de tierras

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

Sí

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

50% of activities were subsidised by the DWHH Project TAJ1068

5.3 Subsidios para insumos específicos (incluyendo mano de obra)

equipo

Especifique qué insumos se subsidiaron	En qué grado	Especifique los subsidios

herramientas	parcialmente financiado	hand tools

agrícola

Especifique qué insumos se subsidiaron	En qué grado	Especifique los subsidios
semillas	parcialmente financiado

manure	parcialmente financiado

construcción

Especifique qué insumos se subsidiaron	En qué grado	Especifique los subsidios


metal net	totalmente financiado

infraestructura

Especifique qué insumos se subsidiaron	En qué grado	Especifique los subsidios

escuelas	parcialmente financiado	school, 2 rooms thermo insulated

otro

Otro (especifique)	En qué grado	Especifique los subsidios
Fuel, diesel, oil	parcialmente financiado	1/4 of the need

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

voluntario?

Comentarios:

Rennovation of the chool for the children was a strong and vital argument demanding considerable investment. This was competed with the implementation of the SLM technology, where farmers had to make a choice; either spend the available funds for the school or continue with the SLM. The project has provided partial financial and technology support to farmers which made it easy to overcome the school situation and concentrate again on SLM activities.

5.4 Crédito

¿Se proporcionó crédito bajo el Enfoque para actividades MST?

5.5 Otros incentivos o instrumentos

¿Se usaron otros incentivos o instrumentos para promover la implementación de Tecnologías MST?

Sí

Si fuera el caso, especifique :

Village development committee (VDC), use of locally available resources, focus on low cost

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

Most of the previous types of damage caused by water runoff were prevented. Trees grew in a landscape where they didn't before, due to long dry periods and high livestock pressure from grazing. There was a change in the farmer's attitudes, who prior to witnessing the technology were highly sceptical

¿El Enfoque empoderó a grupos en desventaja social y económica?

No
Sí, un poco
Sí, moderadamente
Sí, mucho

Only four families out of five in the microwatershed were able to receive the opportunity to improve their socio-economic status in the long term as a result of the project.

¿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 approach has added to the farmers self belief, ensured that they will effectively use existing land resources, and following the sustainable improvement of soil conditions, should add good potential for their own economic growth.

Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?

No
Sí, un poco
Sí, moderadamente
Sí, mucho

Farmers from the neighbouring watershed, came repeatedly to observe the plot. Three of these farmers adopted the technology themselves in the following year.

Did the Approach lead to improved livelihoods / human well-being?

No
Sí, un poco
Sí, moderadamente
Sí, mucho

Vegetables could be grown to supply more food to the family, a good amount of hay could be prepared for winter time, more benefits could be seen in the long run with extra fruits and fire wood

Did the Approach help to alleviate poverty?

No
Sí, un poco
Sí, moderadamente
Sí, mucho

This was a pilot project, and only looked at poverty alleviation on a small scale. This technology has the potential to reduce poverty in the long term on a bigger scale.

6.2 Motivación principal del usuario de la tierra para implementar MST

producción incrementada

incremento de la renta(bilidad), proporción mejorada de costo-beneficio

carga de trabajo reducida

pagos/ subsidios

conciencia medioambiental

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)?

Si respondió que sí, describa cómo:

Yes, but only those who would have enough funds to implement costliest part of technology: the perimeter fencing (metal net). Overall, most farmers will happily continue with the implementation of the technology, if the initial costs are subsidised. There are also a few new farmers who were able to replicate the technology completely by themselves.

6.4 Fortalezas/ ventajas del Enfoque

Fuerzas/ ventajas/ oportunidades desde la perspectiva del usuario de la tierra
The approach to share the implementation costs, consideration of general social needs, good project communication. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: More donor funding would be required to support more local farmers in the future. )
The approach has enabled a range of innovations that were never used before: contour lines, mulching etc.
The approach has helped to reveal the local problems related to technology implementation. It has helped participants to learn about the strength and potential of local land users in the implementation of the SLM approach and technology. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Lessons learned must be applied in the future implementation of SLM actions and replication. )

Fuerzas/ ventajas/ oportunidades desde la perspectiva del compilador o de otra persona de referencia clave
The approach enabled the use of both international and local knowledge. Attention was given to capacity building and sustaining the organisation, as well as the mobilisation structure (VDC) at the grass roots level. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: All the knowledge experience gained from the project has to be documented and disseminated for replication.)
The reputation of DWHH, and long term collaboration with the Baljuvon district administration played a very positive role in the successful implementation of the conservation approach. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Members of the local authority should be continuously involved in training, capacity building and planning measures. )

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

Debilidades/ desventajas/ riesgos desde la perspectiva del usuario de la tierra	¿Cómo sobreponerse a ellas?
Sometimes the approach enabled unproductive discussions during the planning and designing phases.	Project ambitions and objectives have to be adjusted to the local situation and farmer capacity and needs.
Farmers were facing situations where their other social and economic needs were strongly competing with the objectives of the project.	Some additional funds, may need to be provided and more awareness of the farmer's situations need to be taken into account.

Debilidades/ desventajas/ riesgos desde la perspectiva del compilador o de otra persona de referencia clave	¿Cómo sobreponerse a ellas?
The approach required a lot of funding until the majors actors were trained and had the capacity to implement the conservation measures.