Enfoques

Improving terraces with farmers [Nepal]

Kisansangai gara sudhar (Nepali)

approaches_2549 - Nepal

Visualizar secciones

Expandir todo
Completado: 89%

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:
Nombre de la(s) institución(es) que facilitaron la documentación/ evaluación del Enfoque si fuera relevante)
ICIMOD International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) - Nepal

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 :

2. Descripción del Enfoque MST

2.1 Breve descripción del Enfoque

Participatory action research with multiple stakeholders for the demonstration and extension of improved rainfed hill terraces in Nepal

2.2 Descripción detallada del Enfoque MST

Descripción detallada del Enfoque MST:

The traditional farming practices employed on steep sloping land in Kubinde village in Nepal's midhills led to soil and water erosion and low crop and fodder yields. The People and Resource Dynamics in Mountain Watersheds of the Hindu Kush- Himalayas Project (PARDYP) started work in 2001, with a small group of farmers from this village (who were also members of the local forest user group) and the Department of Soil Conservation and Watershed Management to identify and test an integrated approach for addressing these constraints. The approach taken was an improved hill terrace for rainfed conditions consisting of structural and vegetative measures. The aim was to demonstrate and test the technologies' potential for overcoming constraints related to farming sloping agricultural land. The specific objectives were, in association with the local farmers, to design a technology that solved soi erosion problems on sloping agricultural lands whilst at the same time increasing the land's nutrient conservation and production capacity. The local line agency office of the Department of Soil Conservation and Watershed Management was involved in developing the technology to make use of their experiences and to come up with a validated technology that the department could use in its own programmes.
Before implementing the terrace improvement work in Kubinde village, a terrace improvement committee was formed made up of local farmers. The awareness activities began in January 2001. Committee members were trained on subwatershed management and were taken to the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development’s (ICIMOD) Demonstration and Training Centre at Godavari and another ICIMOD site to show them potential soil and water conservation technologies including improved terraces. After the technologies were implemented, a number of farmer exchange, interaction and monitoring programmes were held to assess the technology and to promote it. Indicators were developed for monitoring the activity.
About half of the costs were covered by the participating farmers and the rest by PARDYP. The other incentives were training and extension, allowances for participants, national expert honoraria, and training material such as audio-visual facilities. These were all provided by PARDYP with the help of the line agency.

2.3 Fotos del Enfoque

2.5 País/ región/ lugares donde el Enfoque fue aplicado

País:

Nepal

Especifique más el lugar :

kavre Palanchok/ Kubinde village, Jhikhu Khola watershed

2.6 Fechas de inicio y conclusión del Enfoque

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

2005

2.7 Tipo de Enfoque

  • proyecto/ basado en un programa

2.8 Propósitos/ objetivos principales del Enfoque

Local farmers collectively solving problems by identifying and using the most appropriate local solutions. Local farmers designing, testing, and disseminating alternative technologies adapted to local conditions. Strengthening joint learning by farmers and development actors
The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Weak institutional collaboration for addressing 1) poor soil fertility and land productivity; 2) soil and nutrient loss and excessive water runoff from sloping agricultural land; and 3) fodder scarcity. Lack of on-farm research for developing technologies that attend to farmers' needs.

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

Government incentives are lacking
Treatment through the SLM Approach: The technology is cost effective.

entorno institucional
  • impiden

Lack of coordination among land users
Treatment through the SLM Approach: Terrace improvementuser group formed

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

The existing land ownership, land use rights / water rights greatly helped the approach implementation: Because of private land ownership, there were no conflicts and hence the technology for deissmeination was well maintained.

conocimiento de MST, acceso a apoyo técnico
  • impiden

It is not a priority area of line agencies
Treatment through the SLM Approach: The appraoch relies on farmer adoption

otros
  • impiden

lack of awareness
Treatment through the SLM Approach: Trainings , discussions and field visits

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

Men and women land users worked equally

  • especialistas MST/consejeros agrícolas
  • profesores/ niños en edad escolar/ estudiantes
  • ONG
  • gobierno local
  • gobierno nacional (planificadores, autoridades)
  • health volunteers
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 Group discussion; organised with local forest user group; selection of members for training and tours (12 men and 11 women); formation of terrace improvement committee.
planificación interactivo group discussion; survey , site selection , fodder / grass species selection
implementación auto-movilización Terracing activities: measurement, soil excavation, and retaining wall construction
monitoreo y evaluación interactivo Done in a participatory way involving individual farmers, project staff, and Department of Soil Conservation staff
Research pasivo Assessing performance of planted grasses and advantages and disadvantages of technology

3.3 Flujograma (si estuviera disponible)

Descripción:

Project donors and implementing partners.

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:

The package was initially offered by researchers and later modified and implemented by land users.
Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists. The landusers are more familiar with their land's capacity and charcteristics.

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
  • extensionists/trainers, teachers, school children/students, politicians/decision makers, Health volu
Forma de capacitación:
  • de agricultor a agricultor
  • áreas de demostración
  • cursos
Forma de capacitación:
  • Audio vidual learning
Temas avanzados:

Importance of Soil and Water conservation in local level, concept of sub watershed management, activities in other parts of a country regarding SLM, etc.

4.2 Servicio de asesoría

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

Describa/ comentarios:

Name of method used for advisory service: Demnstration/extension of improved terrace technology;
Key elements: Participatory Action Research, Trainigs and Farmer to Farmer visits, Particpatory monitoring and evaluation; 1) Advisory service was carried out through: projects own extension structure and agents, government's existing extension system; Extension staff: project employees, govt. staff and farmers. 2) Target groups for extension: land users, technicians/SLM specialists; Activities: Farmer to farmer exchange, demonstration, trainings; Invited to trainigs, field visits
Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; Various extension service agencies have secured funding for SLM programmes.

4.3 Fortalecimiento institucional (desarrollo institucional)

¿Se establecieron o fortalecieron instituciones mediante el Enfoque?
  • no

4.4 Monitoreo y evaluación

¿El monitoreo y la evaluación forman parte del Enfoque?

Comentarios:

bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations; indicators: plant heigth, biomass production, usefulness of grass/fodder species
technical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: views about technology
socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations; indicators: species selection, change of agricultural practices
economic / production aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations; indicators: changes in crop yields and patterns and the value of the land
area treated aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations; indicators: survey, on-site verifications
land users involved aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations; indicators: survey, number of land users applying for SWC
management of Approach aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations; indicators: maintenance of terraces and hedgerows
There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: New ideas have been generated but strategies to implement them are yet to be in place.
There were few changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation: New varieties of grass, fruit and fodder species have been introduced

4.5 Investigación

¿La investigación formó parte del Enfoque?

Especifique los temas:
  • sociología
  • ecología
  • tecnología
Proporcione detalles adicionales e indique quién hizo la investigación:

Sociology: Looking at scaling up process; Ecology: Looking at the impacts of the technology at subwatershed level; Technology: development process.
Research was carried out 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
Comentarios (ej. fuentes principales de financiamiento/ donantes principales):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: national non-government (SDC, IDRC, ICIMOD): 65.0%; local community / land user(s) (Terrace improvement committee): 35.0%

5.2 Apoyo financiero/material proporcionado a los usuarios de tierras

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

5.3 Subsidios para insumos específicos (incluyendo mano de obra)

  • agrícola
Especifique qué insumos se subsidiaron En qué grado Especifique los subsidios
semillas totalmente financiado
Si la mano de obra de usuarios de tierras fue un insumo sustancial, ¿fue:
  • pagado en efectivo?
Comentarios:

About 50% of total labour costs were met by land users.

5.4 Crédito

¿Se proporcionó crédito bajo el Enfoque para actividades MST?

No

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

Area expanded , about 100 percent of previously improved terraces was expanded. New variety of grass/ fodder species has been adopted..

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

The project's aim was not to promote the approach but the technology. However, similar appraches are followed by other programs as well from before; such as the District Soil Conservation Offices.

6.2 Motivación principal del usuario de la tierra para implementar MST

  • producción incrementada

increased production (grain and biomass) due to moisture and nutrient conervation

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

Increased land prize

  • carga de trabajo reducida

fodder/ grass availability ( near to house)

  • mejoramiento estético

greenary throughout the season due to fodder and grass species.

  • environmental consciousness, moral, health

less soil erosion from the land

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:

More than 60% of the total improved terraces in Kubinde village were built by the land users themselves. Widespread rapid adoption did not happen in other villages due to financial and labour limitations. Land users of Kubinde village continue to maintain the improved terraces.

6.4 Fortalezas/ ventajas del Enfoque

Fuerzas/ ventajas/ oportunidades desde la perspectiva del usuario de la tierra
Technical knowledge and confidence increased from the training and field visits, interactions, and experience sharing (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Such activities should be continued by incorporating other new ideas)
The approach led to the development of a team spirit among farmers (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: As above)
Fuerzas/ ventajas/ oportunidades desde la perspectiva del compilador o de otra persona de referencia clave
The approach is based on building the capacity of farmers (both men and women) by involving multiple stakeholders in the development and adoption of the technology. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Approach should be to strengthen land users' involvement in SWC activities)

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?
Due to the conflict, which was on-going at the time, follow-up after a year of implementing technology was not possible and the monitoring was not done. This resulted in the adoption of the technology by other farmers not being carried out properly with, for example, farmers not maintaining the hedgerows as recommended. Also, the new terraces were not as good as they should have been. The technical experts need to visit the sites and identify gaps and encourage farmers to 'fill them'. For example, the benefit of hedgerow management needs to be demonstrated.

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:

Mathema, P. (2003) Watershed Management in South Asia. Kathmandu: Government of Nepal, Department of Soil Conservation and Watershed Management

¿Dónde se halla disponible? ¿Costo?

Department of soil conservation, Nepal

Vínculos y módulos

Expandir todo Colapsar todos

Módulos