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

Nom du projet qui a facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de l'Approche (si pertinent)

Book project: where the land is greener - Case Studies and Analysis of Soil and Water Conservation Initiatives Worldwide (where the land is greener)

Nom du ou des institutions qui ont facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de l'Approche (si pertinent)

G.B. Pant Institute of Himalayan Einvironment & Development (G.B. Pant Institute of Himalayan Einvironment & Development) - Inde

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

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

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

2.1 Courte description de l'Approche

Integrated watershed management as an example for landslip and stream bank stabilisation based on fostering a partnership between community institutions, line agencies, district authorities and consultants

2.2 Description détaillée de l'Approche

Description détaillée de l'Approche:

Aims / objectives: The sustainable management of mountain watersheds is a huge challenge for watershed management programmes due to the lack of collaboration between the various institutions involved. Building of synergies between these institutions is crucial for improved management. The Bagmati Integrated Watershed Management Programme (BIWMP) started in 1986, initiated, coordinated, and organised by the Department of Soil Conservation and Watershed Management with support from the European Commission. The programme aimed to help overcome natural resource degradation and thereby raise the standard of living of the rural population. The main causes of degradation and options to address the related problems were identified through participatory action research. Landslip and stream bank stabilisation was identified as one of the most promising and needed options to conserve soil and water, whilst providing direct livelihood benefits to local people, for example planting of large cardamom, later used as a cash crop, and reestablishment of damaged agricultural terrace above the landslip. The approach was to foster partnership between and among communities, district authorities, line agencies, and consultants. Key priorities were to ensure the equitable involvement of women and socially disadvantaged people and to promote local ownership, institutional capacity building, and sustainability.

Methods: The programme used participatory extension methods such as farmer-to-farmer exchange, training workshops, and onsite demonstrations, with participatory approaches to planning, implementing, and monitoring. The activities were based on villager’s priorities and were implemented by individual households, farmer groups, and village institutions. The local village development committee, local NGOs, community forest user group, and individual households worked together on landslip and stream bank stabilisation. Involving a range of stakeholders was paramount for success.

Stages of implementation: The first phase began in 1986 and focused on developing technical packages which were implemented through user groups. The second phase focused on improvements to implementation procedures, especially community organisation, extension, and income generation activities. The capacity of community groups was developed by establishing communication facilities, building up community networks, and empowering women and disadvantaged groups. BIWMP ended in 2003 with much of its success attributed to the close involvement of all the main stakeholders, and especially the local people, in all the activities. It successfully helped land users to adopt improved livelihood options.

2.3 Photos de l'approche

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

2.6 Dates de début et de fin de l'Approche

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 (poverty reduction through sustained income generation, infrastructure improvement through equitable involvement of women and the socially disadvantaged.)

To overcome the constraints to effectively implementing a watershed management programme by building synergies between diverse stakeholder institutions. In the case of landslip and stream bank stabilisation work, the specific objective was to come up with a technology that conserved soil and water whilst also providing direct livelihood benefits to local people.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Lack of institutional capacity and collaboration for managing watershed resources

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

3.1 Parties prenantes impliquées dans l'Approche et rôles

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	rapid/participatory rural appraisal
planification	interactive	rapid/participatory rural appraisal; Share information from users right from planning period.
mise en œuvre	interactive	responsible for major steps; Users were agreed to conserve soil by using SLM approaches.
suivi/ évaluation	interactive	Mainly: reporting, public meetings, measurements/observations; partly: workshop/seminars; Regular monitoring and evaluation were successfully conducted by DSCO Office for the backstopping of the activities.
Research	interactive	on-farm; This site is used as a Farmers School for extension of the technology on National and International level.

3.3 Diagramme/ organigramme (si disponible)

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 land users did not know about the technologies

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by SLM specialists with consultation of land users. As measures required technical know-how

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

Formats de la formation:

• entre agriculteurs (d'exploitants à exploitants)
• zones de démonstration
• réunions publiques

Thèmes abordés:

On soil and water conservation

4.2 Service de conseils

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

Oui

Spécifiez si le service de conseils est fourni:

• dans les champs des exploitants?

Décrivez/ commentez:

Name of method used for advisory service: Integrated Watershed Management Programme; Key elements: Participatory Rural Appraisal, Trainings, Farmer to farmer exchange, workshops, seminars, On site Demnostration; 1) Advisory service was carried out through: government's existing extension system; Extension staff: mainly government employees 2) Target groups for extension: land users; Activities: Planning,Training, Awareness about SLM approaches

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; An extension workers is able to cover the areas where activities are implemented in small scale (i.e. subwatreshed or Micro subwatershed level programme).

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
• équipement

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 measurements

technical aspects were regular monitored through observations

socio-cultural aspects were regular monitored through observations

economic / production aspects were regular monitored through observations

area treated aspects were ad hoc monitored through measurements

no. of land users involved aspects were regular monitored through observations

management of Approach aspects were regular monitored through observations

There were many changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: The approach described was designed on the basis of the results shown through monitoring and evaluating the first phase of BIWMP (1986-1992). In the second phase from 1992, more attention was focused on building up the capacity of community groups to plan, implement, and continue development activities. Capacity was built through (1) community-level training; (2) supporting the installation of com

4.5 Recherche

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

Oui

Spécifiez les thèmes:

• sociologie
• économie/ marketing
• écologie
• technologie

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

see also further reading

5.1 Budget annuel de la composante GDT de l'Approche

Si le budget annuel précis n'est pas connu, indiquez une fourchette:

• > 1 000 000

Commentez (par ex. principales sources de financement/ principaux bailleurs de fonds):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international (European Commission): 81.0%; government (national - His Majesty's Government (Nepal)): 4.0%; local community / land user(s) (Bagmati watershed): 15.0%

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)

• intrants agricoles

• matériaux de construction

Si la main d'œuvre fournie par les exploitants des terres était un intrant substantiel, elle était:

• volontaire

Commentaires:

About 75% of the labour for the landslip and stream bank stabilisation work was voluntar. The remainder was paid

5.4 Crédits

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

Non

6.1 Impacts de l'Approche

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)?

• incertain

Si non ou incertain, spécifiez et commentez:

The land users were keen on maintaining the implemented technologies due to the benefits they could get from it. There has to be a strong driving force within the land users and the community to continue this approach.

6.4 Points forts/ avantages de l'Approche

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue de l'exploitant des terres
Helped land users improve their livelihoods. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Similar approaches should be implemented by government and community programmes.)

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé
Involves all key actors in watershed management. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Institutionalise the approach.)
The approach encourages land users communities and local institutions to get involved in planning and decision making (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Involve them more in planning and decision making)
The implementation of technologies through this approach is cost-effective and socio-culturally acceptable. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Take into account local resources and knowledge)

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

Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques du point de vue de l’exploitant des terres	Comment peuvent-ils être surmontés?
No opinion.

Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé	Comment peuvent-ils être surmontés?
Some activities with high input requirements may not be spontaneously adopted by poor land users	Further research on how to reduce inputs or provide specifi c incentives for such disadvantaged groups.
The approach is 'project focussed'	Institutionalise the approach
The approach does not focus on landless families.	Implement watershed management activities that involve and benefit landless people

7.1 Méthodes/ sources d'information

7.2 Références des publications disponibles

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

Mallik, D.B. (2000) 'Working with Community'. In Jaladhar-QuarterlyBIWM (1998 to 2001) Annual Workplans for Project Years 1998 to 2002, prepared for Government of Nepal,MOFS,DSCWM and EU; Kathmandu, Nepal

Disponible à partir d'où? Coût?

BIWMPBIWMP email: biwmp@mos.com.np

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

BIWM (1998 to 2001) Annual Workplans for Project Years 1998 to 2002, prepared for Government of Nepal,MOFS,DSCWM and EU; Kathmandu, Nepal

Disponible à partir d'où? Coût?

BIWMP email: biwmp@mos.com.np