Training of Trainers through expert (MSDSP Khorog)

Facilitation of community-based pasture management initiatives (Tadjikistan)

Mountain Societies Development Support Programme - Aga Khan Foundation

Description

Initiation of community-based solutions to slow down pasture degradation, and to improve pasture use and management in three pilot Jamoats of upland Tajikistan.

Aims / objectives: During the Soviet times land users in Tajikistan were allowed to keep very little livestock individually and this was mainly in the vicinity of rural settlements. The majority of the livestock were managed by collective agricultural farms, which utilised different seasonal pastures. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the previously state-owned livestock was distributed among individual farmers, most of whom had limited knowledge and experience with pasture management (PM), and capacities to access the distant pastures used by the collective farms. As a consequence, the amount of livestock kept in the vicinity of rural settlements increased, leading to overgrazing and severe degradation of nearby pastures. In the framework of a project on sustainable land management in the Pamir-Alai region (PALM), funded by the Global Environment Facility (GEF), MSDSP facilitated the initiation of community-based solutions to the problem of pasture degradation at three pilot jamoats in Jirgital, and three in Gorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Oblast (GBAO).

Methods: 1. Awareness raising and capacity building of PM issues. 2. Integration of PM issues in village development plans. 3. Grant support and community co-financing for implementation of targeted measures. 4. Monitoring of the impacts of the implemented measures as a basis for up-scaling.

Stages of implementation: 1. National pasture management experts from the Pamir Biological Institute held a training of trainers (ToT) session for MSDSP facilitators and district specialists, who conducted follow-up training on PM at the pilot communities in 2009. 2. Pilot communities identified key problems related to PM in the process of Village Development Planning facilitated by MSDSP, and prioritised targeted measures for improved PM. 3. A set of micro-project proposals were developed based on the prioritised measures, which focused on (re-) construction of roads and bridges for improved access to pastures, and construction of stables during spring/autumn, as well as summer pastures. 4. Monitoring of the impacts of the implemented measures as a basis for up-scaling.

Role of stakeholders: Community members were engaged in identifying and implementing targeted measures for addressing pasture use and management issues. Jamoat level non-governmental organisations called Social Unions for Development of Village Organizations (SUDVOs), coordinated and supported the identification and implementation of the selected projects in several village organisations. Governmental agricultural extension agents were engaged in training, and consulted in the review process. MSDSP staff facilitated the overall process and engaged in monitoring progress with implementation. PALM project staff engaged in the review, monitoring and assessment of the impacts of the supported measures.

Lieu

Lieu: Jirgatol, Tadjikistan

Géo-référence des sites sélectionnés
  • 71.0, 38.999

Date de démarrage: 2009

Année de fin de l'Approche: sans objet

Type d'Approche
Training of Trainers through expert (MSDSP Khorog)

Objectifs de l'approche et environnement favorable

Principaux objectifs de l'Approche
The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (rehabilitation of rural infrastructure to improve access to pastures, pasture and livestock productivity, animal diseases)

The main aim of the approach was to initiate the improved use and management of pastures, by raising awareness and knowledge on issues regarding pasture degradation and sustainable pasture management, mobilising community action, and pilot-testing selected technologies and measures for improving pasture management in highly degraded areas.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: pasture degradation, overgrazing, restricted pasture area and too many cattle garzing, lack of infrastructure (bridges, roads, shelters), lack of knowledge about pasture management
Conditions favorisant la mise en oeuvre de la/(des) Technologie(s) appliquée(s) sous l'Approche
Conditions entravant la mise en oeuvre de la/(des) Technologie(s) appliquée(s) sous l'Approche
  • Disponibilité/ accès aux ressources et services financiers: communities were lacking funds for infrastructure development and could therefore not invest in the construction of roads and bridges Treatment through the SLM Approach: GEF funds were used to support communities in financing infrastructural improvements which allowed for more productive and sustainable use of available pasture resources
  • Cadre institutionnel: Lack of capacity to deal with pasture degradation problems Treatment through the SLM Approach: Engagement of village organisations, and social unions of village organisations (SUDVO) in addressing pasture management issues at six pilot jamoats
  • Cadre juridique (régime foncier, droits d'utilisation des terres et de l'eau): Limited clarity regarding responsibilities and lack of incentives for sustainable pasture management Treatment through the SLM Approach: MSDSP and PALM project members recommended the development of a pasture management law that addresses those legal constrains The existing land ownership, land use rights / water rights moderately hindered the approach implementation there is no law about pasture management in Tajikistan, therefore it was difficult to regulate the process
  • Connaissances sur la GDT, accès aux supports techniques: technical knowledge about pasture management was lacking as during Soviet times people were not allowed to keep a lot of livestock Treatment through the SLM Approach: Community members of village organisations and relevant government experts were trained in various issues of pasture management

Participation et rôles des parties prenantes impliquées dans l'Approche

Parties prenantes impliquées dans l'Approche et rôles
Quels acteurs/ organismes d'exécution ont été impliqués dans l'Approche? Spécifiez les parties prenantes Décrivez le rôle des parties prenantes
exploitants locaux des terres / communautés locales Village organisations Only 20% of the participants were women, since men are responsible for managing the livestock, while women are concerned with livestock products only Elderly members of the communities were engaged in discussions on the possible solutions
Spécialistes de la GDT/ conseillers agricoles Governmental agricultural advisors participated in the training.
gouvernement national (planificateurs, décideurs) Agrarian University in Jirgatol, Pamir Biological Institute
pilot communities
Participation des exploitants locaux des terres/ communautés locales aux différentes phases de l'Approche
aucun
passive
soutien extérieur
interactive
auto-mobilisation
initiation/ motivation
planification
Members of village organisations were involved in training and planning on pasture management, and actively participated in discussions
mise en œuvre
The village organisations developed their own project ideas and submitted those proposals to MSDSP and other funders
suivi/ évaluation
Land users were engaged in the monitoring and evaluation of the impacts of the implemented projects
Research
The Pamir-Biological Institute and the Institute of Botany under the Academy of Sciences were engaged in research and technical consultations
Diagramme/ organigramme

Prises de décision pour la sélection de la Technologie de GDT

Les décisions ont été prises par

  • les exploitants des terres seuls (auto-initiative)
  • principalement les exploitants des terres soutenus par des spécialistes de la GDT
  • tous les acteurs concernés dans le cadre d'une approche participative
  • principalement les spécialistes de la GDT, après consultation des exploitants des terres
  • les spécialistes de la GDT seuls
  • les responsables politiques/ dirigeants
  • pilot communities

Les décisions ont été prises sur la base de

  • l'évaluation de connaissances bien documentées en matière de GDT (prises de décision fondées sur des preuves tangibles)?
  • les résultats de recherches?
  • expériences et opinions personnelles (non documentées)

Soutien technique, renforcement des capacités et gestion des connaissances

Les activités ou services suivants ont fait partie de l'approche
Renforcement des capacités/ formation
La formation a été dispensée aux parties prenantes suivantes
  • exploitants des terres
  • personnels/ conseillers de terrain
Formats de la formation
  • sur le tas
  • entre agriculteurs (d'exploitants à exploitants)
  • zones de démonstration
  • réunions publiques
  • cours
Sujets abordés

Short training courses were provided for land user, field staff/agricultural advisors

Service de conseils
Le service de conseils était fourni
  • dans les champs des exploitants?
  • dans des centres permanents
  • through trained experts
Name of method used for advisory service: Engineering support and technical consultations

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities
Renforcement des institutions
Institutions ont été renforcées ou mises en place
  • non
  • oui, un peu
  • oui, modérément
  • oui, beaucoup
au niveau suivant
  • local
  • régional
  • national
Décrivez l'institution, ses rôles et responsabilités, ses membres, etc.
Type de soutien
  • financier
  • renforcement des capacités/ formation
  • équipement
Plus de détails
village organisations were trained
Suivi et évaluation
economic / production aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: changes in economic benefits for households before and after implementation of project bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: changes in vegetation coverage, edible grass species, etc. area treated aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: Established at the start of project implementation There were several changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Some areas were grazed although they should not have been, project staff then talked to the responsible people in the village to ask about the causes for this and to try and initiate changes in practice.
Recherche
La recherche a traité les sujets suivants
  • sociologie
  • économie/ marketing
  • écologie
  • technologie
  • pasture management

Aimed at problem, option and impact assessment

Research was carried out on-farm

Financement et soutien matériel externe

Budget annuel en dollars US de la composante GDT
  • < 2 000
  • 2 000-10 000
  • 10 000-100 000
  • 100 000-1 000 000
  • > 1 000 000
Precise annual budget: sans objet
Approach costs were met by the following donors: international (PALM): 70.0%; national non-government (MSDSP): 30.0%
Les services ou mesures incitatives suivantes ont été fournis aux exploitants des terres
  • Soutiens financiers/ matériels fournis aux exploitants des terres
  • Subventions pour des intrants spécifiques
  • Crédits
  • Autres incitations ou instruments
en partie financé
entièrement financé
infrastructures : routes

bridges, shelters

La main d'oeuvre fournie par les exploitants des terres était

Analyses d'impact et conclusions

Impacts de l'Approche
Non
Oui, un peu
Oui, modérément
Oui, beaucoup
Est-ce que l'Approche a aidé les exploitants des terres à mettre en œuvre et entretenir les Technologies de GDT?

Reduced pressures on pastures in the vicinity of rural settlements

Est-ce que l'Approche a autonomisé les groupes socialement et économiquement défavorisés?

Elderly herders with improved access to health facilities

Est-ce que l'Approche a amélioré les questions foncières et des droits d'utilisation qui entravent la mise en œuvre des Technologies?

talks with the government were started to make way for a law on pasture management

Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?

Strong interest by other communities but limited financial means for replication

Principale motivation des exploitants des terres pour mettre en oeuvre la GDT
  • augmenter la production
  • augmenter la rentabilité/ bénéfice, rapport coûts-bénéfices
  • réduire la dégradation des terres
  • réduire les risques de catastrophe
  • réduire la charge de travail
  • paiements/ subventions
  • règles et règlements (amendes)/ application
  • prestige, pression sociale/ cohésion sociale
  • affiliation à un mouvement/ projet/ groupe/ réseaux
  • conscience environnementale
  • coutumes et croyances, morale
  • améliorer les connaissances et compétences en GDT
  • améliorer l'esthétique
  • atténuer les conflits
  • well-being and livelihoods improvement
Durabilité des activités de l'Approche
Les exploitants des terres peuvent-ils poursuivre ce qui a été mis en oeuvre par le biais de l'Approche (sans soutien extérieur) ?
  • non
  • oui
  • incertain

The village organisations have the responsibility to teach their community members

Conclusions et enseignements tirés

Points forts: point de vue de l'exploitant des terres
Points forts: point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne-ressource clé
  • Reduction of conflicts over resource use and strengthened social capital (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: utilise the improved social capital for addressing other pressing environmental and community development issues)
  • Improved income from livestock provides a strong incentive for sustaining the established infrastructure (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: a proportion of the obtained income should be reinvested in maintenance e.g. through collection of user fees )
  • Improved environmental conditions in the vicinity of rural settlements, and reduced labour inputs into livestock breeding (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: capitalise on those environmental improvements through the development of alternative income-generating activities such as bee-keeping and eco-tourism that will limit the need for further increases in livestock numbers)
Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques: point de vue de l'exploitant des terrescomment surmonter
Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques: point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne-ressource clécomment surmonter
  • Improved access to new pastures and possible further increases in livestock numbers may lead to their degradation in the future Community members and village organisations have to make sure that the new pastures are being used in a sustainable manner e.g. through controlled grazing and pasture rotation, designation of no-grazing areas in pristine forests in the vicinity of new pastures, etc.
  • The approach contributes to improve the well-being of the medium income groups of the communities in question, as accessing distant pastures is most often not a problem for the better-off, while the poor often have only limited or no livestock use as part of the generated additional income in the community for support of poor households
  • The approach is economically beneficial but difficult to up-scale due to the high initial investment costs identify appropriate mechanisms for stimulating replication through relevant legal and policy incentives or alternative financing

Références

Compilateur
  • Mizrob Amirbekov
Editors
Examinateur
  • David Streiff
  • Alexandra Gavilano
  • Joana Eichenberger
Date de mise en oeuvre: 12 mai 2011
Dernière mise à jour: 2 novembre 2021
Personnes-ressources
Description complète dans la base de données WOCAT
Données de GDT correspondantes
La documentation a été facilitée par
Institution Projet
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International