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

Nombre del proyecto que facilitó la documentación/ evaluación del Enfoque (si fuera relevante)

Sustainable Hill Cultivation Programme

1.3 Condiciones referidas al uso de datos documentados mediante WOCAT

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

01/01/2015

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

2.1 Breve descripción del Enfoque

This approach is devoted to the implementation of 'The Landscape Revitalisation Programme and integrated river basins management of the Slovak Republic' in the Sobotište village.

2.2 Descripción detallada del Enfoque MST

Descripción detallada del Enfoque MST:

Aims / objectives: The objective of the first implementation project for 2011 was to create, activate and systematically implement a minimum of 6 million m³ of water retention elements in mountain and foothill areas of forest-agricultural landscape in Slovakia. A particular aim was to create and build landscape water retention systems, terrain elements, facilities and technical solutions in forest, agricultural and urban areas in selected village locations, with the abovementioned cyclical rainwater retention capacity, which will then be operated and
maintained. Another project objective was to force and socially support the creation of employment at community and regional level. The creation of water retention elements and the implementation of revitalisation measures required the creation of a minimum of 2,500 jobs of a seasonal and temporary nature in 2011, including extending existing specialist capacities. This whould also extend the work skills and knowledge necessary for revitalisation of the landscape.
833 municipalities showed interest to participate in this project/approach, while 200 municipalities met the criteria. The project created about 3,500 seasonal jobs in 2011, particularly in regions with high unemployment.


Methods: Criteria and their significance for including villages into the first implementation project are
as follows:
1. 45% - historic or regularly repeated occurrence of flash flooding,
2. 35 % - village is situated in a location with a high potential risk of flooding, in accordance
with modelled potential for the occurrence of flooding. A map of regional and local
potential for flooding in the area of Slovakia1
is at Appendix No. 1,
3. 10% - location of a village in the upper part of river basins, so the implemented measures
will positively decrease the risk of flooding for highest possible number of villages in the
given river basins,
4. 10% - the ratio of documented unemployment is taking into account so citizens of villages
with a high ratio of documented unemployment could contribute towards revitalisation
works.

The submitted methodology of the whole flood potential of Slovakia was prepared on the basis of the work of J. Minár and Co. (2005). The mentioned work focuses upon the
presentation of methodology and results for evaluating the flood creation potential within the whole of Slovakia. It also includes a general description of the modelling of hydrological
processes. The method presented in this work is a good alternative for fast, effective and relatively financially undemanding but still sufficiently reliable analysis of flood risks of
larger areas. The actual calculation of total potential for flooding took place in the technological environment of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) in the following steps
with the stated data:

- calculation of the morphometric potential (incline, horizontal articulation of the
topography, slope length, speed of surface run-off),
- partial synthetic geological potential (infiltration and drainage properties of the soil,
retention properties of the land cover, breaking effect of land cover, size of river basin,
shape of river basin),
- overall potential of the land for the creation of flood situations (climatic and
hydrological characteristics and data).

Stages of implementation: Management of the first implementation project was carried out by the Executive Manager of the Programme of Landscape Revitalization and Integrated River Basin Management in SR in cooperation with the Government Representative for Local Government and for Integrated River Basin and Landscape Management and other interested departments of the Government Office SR.

2.3 Fotos del Enfoque

2.5 País/ región/ lugares donde el Enfoque fue aplicado

2.6 Fechas de inicio y conclusión del Enfoque

2.7 Tipo de Enfoque

• proyecto/ basado en un programa

2.8 Propósitos/ objetivos principales del Enfoque

The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities

The Sobotište of village was greatly affected in 2011 by floods from storm rainfall. Problems with floods, however, occur regularly, especially at the Teplica and the Sobotišský stream. Some problems have been recorded in farmland and meadows, in places of concentrated runoff during the storm rainfalls, long lasting rainfalls, and snow melting. Floods endanger villages and make severe damage. The goal of the approach is to eliminate damage to healt and properties.

Water retention measures are proposed in the territory of Sobotište, localities of Kubiny, Staré Hory, Javorec, Kaničkov Jarok and Padelky. It is expected that the proposed water retention measures will support the accumulation and infiltration of water into the soil and retard runoff from farmland, meadows, and pastures. With the proper function of measures the surface runoff in farmland will decrease and slow down, and community will not endanger as much as previously.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: In general, the main problems within the implementation of projects are mostly legislative regulations that hamper the SLM and the implementation of technologies. The big problem is protection zone of particular rivers connected to administrative and legislative laws and regulations. Some difficulties detected were the execution of permissions for the implementations of methods and technologies that would help to achieve the sustainable land management.
Second problem is land consolidation. The process of the land consolidation is too long to be achieved and accomplished in time. Especially if the public call of the application submission for subsidies needs the consolidation of land to be already solved.
Third, the measures cannot be more expensive than the protected object.
Four, there is lack of money for the purchasing the land in municipalities.
Five, there is very poor law enforcement and recovery of law and claims.

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

3.1 Partes interesadas involucradas en el Enfoque y sus roles

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	auto-movilización	Government
planificación	auto-movilización	Government, SLM specialist
implementación	auto-movilización	Municipalities, land users
monitoreo y evaluación	auto-movilización	Municipalities, land users
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

4.1 Construcción de capacidades / capacitación

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

No

4.2 Servicio de asesoría

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

No

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?

No

4.5 Investigación

¿La investigación formó parte del Enfoque?

Sí

Especifique los temas:

• tecnología

Proporcione detalles adicionales e indique quién hizo la investigación:

Research was carried out on-farm

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: 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? :

Sí

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

Government funds and subsidies

5.3 Subsidios para insumos específicos (incluyendo mano de obra)

• equipo

• agrícola

• construcción

5.4 Crédito

¿Se proporcionó crédito bajo el Enfoque para actividades MST?

No

7.1 Métodos/ fuentes de información