Approches

Participatory action research on drip irrigation [Népal]

  • Création :
  • Mise à jour :
  • Compilateur :
  • Rédacteur :
  • Examinateur :

approaches_2350 - Népal

État complet : 92%

1. Informations générales

1.2 Coordonnées des personnes-ressources et des institutions impliquées dans l'évaluation et la documentation de l'Approche

Personne(s) ressource(s) clé(s)

Spécialiste GDT:
Spécialiste GDT:
Nom du ou des institutions qui ont facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de l'Approche (si pertinent)
CDE Centre for Development and Environment (CDE Centre for Development and Environment) - Suisse
Nom du ou des institutions qui ont facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de l'Approche (si pertinent)
ICIMOD International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) - Népal

1.3 Conditions relatives à l'utilisation par WOCAT des données documentées

Le compilateur et la(les) personne(s) ressource(s) acceptent les conditions relatives à l'utilisation par WOCAT des données documentées:

Oui

1.4 Références au(x) questionnaire(s) sur les Technologies de GDT

2. Description de l'Approche de GDT

2.1 Courte description de l'Approche

Conducting participatory action research with farmers and line agencies for demonstrating, disseminating and scaling up drip irrigation.

2.2 Description détaillée de l'Approche

Description détaillée de l'Approche:

Most farming in the uplands of Nepal's midhills is rainfed with many fi elds remaining fallow during the dry season due to lack of irrigation water. The People and Resource Dynamics Project (PARDYP) water demand and supply survey identified scarcity of irrigation water as a major issue in Nepal's midhills. To assess the potential of drip irrigation to address this problem, the University of British Columbia (UBC) in 2000/2001, in collaboration with PARDYP, tested a low cost irrigation drip set and a more costly set in the Jhikhu Khola watershed; and PARDYP and Tribhuvan University's Institute of Engineering (Nepal) tested the low cost set with farmers at another site at Kubinde village, Kavre.
PARDYP started research on drip irrigation at an agricultural research station (the Spices Crop Development Centre at Tamaghat, Kabhrepalanchok) and brought different stakeholders, principally farmers, to the station to learn. After seeing the trials some farmers, especially those living near the research station, started testing drip irrigation on their farms. From 2001 to 2004, PARDYP subsidised 50% of the cost of the drip sets to most adopting farmers. PARDYP organised several farm visits for stakeholders to the research station and farmers’ fi elds. The number of interested farmers increased and many started testing and demonstrating the technology on their farms. PARDYP provided technical support during installation, advice about water application, and trouble shooting training to user farmers. Soon, many farmers started using drip irrigation with little or no technical support from PARDYP. Some collected quantitative and qualitative information on the performance of their systems. Results and experiences were shared regularly after cropping seasons through interaction meetings. Users’ experiences convinced many others to adopt the technology.
Interaction meetings were organised to communicate farmers’ feedback to the organisation and businesses involved in making the drip sets. Farmers from the watershed were taken to the drip set manufacturers to establish a direct link between them and to allow the project to phase out its support.
This approach emphasised on-station to on-farm research and demonstration to facilitate ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the performance of locally made drip sets.

2.3 Photos de l'approche

2.5 Pays/ région/ lieux où l'Approche a été appliquée

Pays:

Népal

Autres spécifications du lieu :

Kavrepalanchowk/ Jhikhu Khola watershed

2.6 Dates de début et de fin de l'Approche

Date (année) de fin de l'Approche (si l'Approche n'est plus appliquée):

2005

2.7 Type d'Approche

  • fondé sur un projet/ programme

2.8 Principaux objectifs de l'Approche

The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (income generating activities, vegetable farming with micro irrigation system)
To test, demonstrate, and evaluate drip irrigation systems under local conditions with multiple stakeholders. To share results and experiences with communities to scale up the technology
The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: - Lack of systematic on-farm research on drip irrigation. - Weak institutional collaboration for developing, disseminating and scaling up drip technology. - Inadequate water available for agriculture alongside strong seasonality and poor irrigation facilities

2.9 Conditions favorisant ou entravant la mise en œuvre de la(des) Technologie(s) appliquée(s) sous l'Approche

disponibilité/ accès aux ressources et services financiers
  • entrave

Insufficient government incentives
Treatment through the SLM Approach: A Cost-effective technology and implementing approach

cadre institutionnel
  • entrave

Weak institutional collaboration among line agencies
Treatment through the SLM Approach: Participatory action research with several institutions - universities, local research centres, and farmers

cadre juridique (régime foncier, droits d'utilisation des terres et de l'eau)
  • favorise

The existing land ownership, land use rights / water rights greatly helped the approach implementation: Because of private land owners there were no conflicts on land to implement the technology and for it's dissemination. and scaling up.

connaissances sur la GDT, accès aux supports techniques
  • entrave

Promotion of micro irrigation was not a priority of line agencies in the study area
Treatment through the SLM Approach: Technology implemented with multiple stakeholders' participation

autre
  • entrave

Lack of awareness on potential water-saving options
Treatment through the SLM Approach: Community-based training, discussions and field visits

3. Participation et rôles des parties prenantes impliquées dans l'Approche

3.1 Parties prenantes impliquées dans l'Approche et rôles

  • exploitants locaux des terres / communautés locales

On farm research and demonstration
men and women worked equally

  • organisations communautaires

existing groups of land users; community forest user group and terrace improvement committee

  • Spécialistes de la GDT/ conseillers agricoles

Field technicians

  • ONG

On station research

  • gouvernement national (planificateurs, décideurs)

On station research

  • organisation internationale

On station research

3.2 Participation des exploitants locaux des terres/ communautés locales aux différentes phases de l'Approche
Participation des exploitants locaux des terres/ communautés locales Spécifiez qui était impliqué et décrivez les activités
initiation/ motivation interactive A water demand and supply survey identified problem of lack of water in the dry season for irrigating crops. The concept of drip irrigation was shared at public meetings and a demonstration plot established at a local agricultural research centre. Several farmer visits organised to the research cent
planification interactive Public meetings; farmers showed interest in drip irrigation. The project supported them by transporting drip sets to the nearest roadhead and subsidising the purchase costs
mise en œuvre auto-mobilisation Farmers implemented the technology and the project provided technical support
suivi/ évaluation interactive Mainly: measurements/observations, public meetings; partly: reporting; Farmers monitored the technology with project support. Evaluation was usually done at meetings and exchange visits.
Research auto-mobilisation On-farm; The technology was tested at the local research centre during the first few years followed by on-farm research with farmers. Farmers collected and analysed quantitative and qualitative information themselves.

3.3 Diagramme/ organigramme (si disponible)

Description:

PARDYP project donors and implementing partners: SDC (Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation); IDRC (International Development Research Centre); ICIMOD

3.4 Prises de décision pour la sélection de la Technologie/ des Technologies

Indiquez qui a décidé de la sélection de la Technologie/ des Technologies à mettre en œuvre:
  • principalement les spécialistes de la GDT, après consultation des exploitants des terres
Expliquez:

The project tested drip irrigation as a promising water-efficient technology.
Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by SLM specialists with consultation of land users. It was tested first in the research station to build confidence of the project staff and surrounding villagers, and was then taken to interested farmers' fields.

4. Soutien technique, renforcement des capacités et gestion des connaissances

4.1 Renforcement des capacités/ formation

Une formation a-t-elle été dispensée aux exploitants des terres/ autres parties prenantes?

Oui

Spécifiez qui a été formé:
  • exploitants des terres
  • extensionists/trainers
Formats de la formation:
  • entre agriculteurs (d'exploitants à exploitants)
  • zones de démonstration
  • réunions publiques
Thèmes abordés:

Training programmes were organised on how to install and maintain the drip systems. Likewise farmers were trained on record keeping for water application, production, and cost-benefit analysis.

4.2 Service de conseils

Les exploitants des terres ont-ils accès à un service de conseils?

Oui

Décrivez/ commentez:

Name of method used for advisory service: Farmer to farmer dissemination; Key elements: Interactive meeting, on-station and on-farm visits, workshops; 1) Mainly: projects own extension structure and agents, Partly: non-governmental agency; Extension staff: specifically hired project employees 2) Target groups for extension: land users, technicians/SLM specialists; Activities: interactive meeting, farm visits , workshops
Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; Government , NGOs and CBOs still continuing the activities.

4.3 Renforcement des institutions (développement organisationnel)

Des institutions ont elles été mises en place ou renforcées par le biais de l'Approche?
  • oui, beaucoup
Spécifiez à quel(s) niveau(x), ces institutions ont été renforcées ou mises en place:
  • local
Précisez le type de soutien:
  • renforcement des capacités/ formation
Donnez plus de détails:

On-site training during drip installation provided to a local NGO (Ranipani Gram Sewa Kendra) with vegetable seedling support.

4.4 Suivi et évaluation

Le suivi et l'évaluation font ils partie de l'Approche? :

Oui

Commentaires:

bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations; indicators: land use change, crop rotation, soil surveys
technical aspects were regular monitored through measurements; indicators: water requirements
socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations; indicators: socioeconomic surveys
economic / production aspects were ad hoc monitored through measurements; indicators: cost-benefit production
area treated aspects were regular monitored through measurements; indicators: area under drip irrigation
land users involved aspects were regular monitored through observations; indicators: number of drip users
There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: The subsidy system was withdrawn and work with groups rather than single households was started. In addition, interaction programmes were organised at different locations in the watershed.
There were no changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation.

4.5 Recherche

La recherche a-t-elle fait partie intégrante de l’Approche?

Oui

Donnez plus de détails et indiquez qui a mené ces recherches:

Action research was carried out to compare the water requirements, the cost-benefit, and the advantages and disadvantages of traditional and drip irrigation.
Research was carried out both on station and on-farm

5. Financement et soutien matériel externe

5.1 Budget annuel de la composante GDT de l'Approche

Si le budget annuel précis n'est pas connu, indiquez une fourchette:
  • 2 000-10 000
Commentez (par ex. principales sources de financement/ principaux bailleurs de fonds):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international non-government (SDC, IDRC, ICIMOD): 50.0%; local community / land user(s) (labour): 50.0%

5.2 Soutiens financiers/ matériels fournis aux exploitants des terres

Les exploitants des terres ont-ils reçu un soutien financier/ matériel pour la mise en œuvre de la Technologie/ des Technologies?

Oui

5.3 Subventions pour des intrants spécifiques (incluant la main d'œuvre)

  • équipement
Spécifiez les intrants subventionnés Dans quelle mesure Spécifiez les subventions
machines
Si la main d'œuvre fournie par les exploitants des terres était un intrant substantiel, elle était:
  • volontaire
Commentaires:

Fifty percent subsidy on drip was provided by the project during initial stages (first two years) to a limited farmers.

5.4 Crédits

Des crédits ont-ils été alloués à travers l'Approche pour les activités de GDT?

Non

6. Analyses d'impact et conclusions

6.1 Impacts de l'Approche

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

Land users started cropping land that was previously left fallow in the dry season and increased the area under cash crops - especially vegetables. Drip irrigation used only 60% of water compared to bucket irrigation.

Na Na

Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?
  • Non
  • Oui, un peu
  • Oui, modérément
  • Oui, beaucoup

A few institutions and district level line agencies like Ranipani Gram Sewa Kendra, a local NGO, and the Divisional Irrigation Office Kabhrepalanchok started organising interactive meetings to discuss drip irrigation.

6.2 Principale motivation des exploitants des terres pour mettre en œuvre la GDT

  • augmenter la production

increased vegetable production

  • réduire la charge de travail

less time required for irrgation, fertigation

6.3 Durabilité des activités de l'Approche

Les exploitants des terres peuvent-ils poursuivre ce qui a été mis en œuvre par le biais de l'Approche (sans soutien extérieur)?
  • oui
Si oui, décrivez de quelle manière:

Most of the land users continue to use drip irrigation and are maintaining the sets. A few farmers, including women, abandoned drip after using it for some time. The women who abandoned it said they did so because of 'lack of technical knowledge', 'not enough labour' and 'too far to get water'

6.4 Points forts/ avantages de l'Approche

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue de l'exploitant des terres
Regular interaction meetings provided land users with a platform to share ideas and for non-adopters to learn about drip from users. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continue such meetings and involve more potential adopters)
Farmer-to-farmer visits were helpful to build confi dence of farmers by seeing on-site results (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continue such meetings and involve more potential adopters)
On-site training on drip installation and maintenance helped build confi dence in using drip sets (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continue such meetings and involve more potential adopters)
Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé
This approach emphasises the participation of multiple stakeholders in researching, disseminating, and scaling up the use of the technology. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Identify and involve new interested stakeholders.)
On-station and on-farm research was important to get results from different locations and under different conditions. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continue research to acquire in-depth knowledge on performance of drip irrigation under different conditions.)

6.5 Faiblesses/ inconvénients de l'Approche et moyens de les surmonter

Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé Comment peuvent-ils être surmontés?
Women drip farmers' constraints were not sufficiently addressed. Women's priorities and constraints must be better understood and addressed by programmes and projects on drip irrigation.
Many local land users remain unaware about the potential of drip irrigation technology. Make more funds available to further promote the technology.

7. Références et liens

7.1 Méthodes/ sources d'information

  • visites de terrain, enquêtes sur le terrain
  • interviews/entretiens avec les exploitants des terres

7.2 Références des publications disponibles

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

Shrestha-Malla, S. (2004). Adoption of Drip Technology and its Impact on Gender: a Case Study from Jhikhu Khola Watershed, Nepal. PARDYP/ICIMOD (unpublished)

Disponible à partir d'où? Coût?

ICIMOD

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

ICIMOD (2007) Good Practices in Watershed Management, Lessons Learned in the Mid Hills of Nepal. Kathmandu: ICIMOD

Disponible à partir d'où? Coût?

ICIMOD

Modules