Approches

Facilitation of community-based pasture management initiatives [Tadjikistan]

Mountain Societies Development Support Programme - Aga Khan Foundation

approaches_2444 - Tadjikistan

État complet : 83%

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:

Pachova Nevelina

Palm

Nom du projet qui a facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de l'Approche (si pertinent)
Sustainable Land Management in the High Pamir and Pamir-Alai Mountains (PALM Project / NCCR)
Nom du projet qui a facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de l'Approche (si pertinent)
Pilot Program for Climate Resilience, Tajikistan (WB / PPCR)
Nom du ou des institutions qui ont facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de l'Approche (si pertinent)
Kyrgyzstan Mountain Societies Development Support Programme, Aga Khan Development Network (MSDSP KG) - Kirghizistan

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

2. Description de l'Approche de GDT

2.1 Courte description de l'Approche

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

2.2 Description détaillée de l'Approche

Description détaillée de l'Approche:

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.

2.3 Photos de l'approche

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

Pays:

Tadjikistan

Autres spécifications du lieu :

Jirgatol

Commentaires:

Three pilot jamoats in the Jirgital region (Jirgital, Pildon and Yangishar), and three in Gorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Oblast (GBAO), (Shitharv, Vankala and Alichur) were covered by the approach

2.6 Dates de début et de fin de l'Approche

Indiquez l'année de démarrage:

2009

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 (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

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

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
  • entrave

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)
  • entrave

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
  • entrave

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

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

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
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 aucun
planification interactive Members of village organisations were involved in training and planning on pasture management, and actively participated in discussions
mise en œuvre auto-mobilisation The village organisations developed their own project ideas and submitted those proposals to MSDSP and other funders
suivi/ évaluation interactive Land users were engaged in the monitoring and evaluation of the impacts of the implemented projects
Research interactive The Pamir-Biological Institute and the Institute of Botany under the Academy of Sciences were engaged in research and technical consultations

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

Les décisions concernant la sélection de la(des) Technologie(s) ont elles été prises:
  • pilot communities
Expliquez:

Community members were engaged in identifying and implementing targeted measures for addressing pasture use and management issues.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by pilot communities and facilitators. Community members were engaged in identifying and implementing targeted measures for addressing pasture use and management issues.

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
  • personnels/ conseillers de terrain
Formats de la formation:
  • cours
Thèmes abordés:

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

4.2 Service de conseils

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

Oui

  • through trained experts
Décrivez/ commentez:

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

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:

village organisations were trained

4.4 Suivi et évaluation

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

Oui

Commentaires:

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.

4.5 Recherche

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

Oui

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

Aimed at problem, option and impact assessment

Research was carried out 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 (PALM): 70.0%; national non-government (MSDSP): 30.0%

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?

Non

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

  • infrastructures
Spécifiez les intrants subventionnés Dans quelle mesure Spécifiez les subventions
routes en partie financé
bridges, shelters en partie financé
Si la main d'œuvre fournie par les exploitants des terres était un intrant substantiel, elle était:
  • volontaire

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

Reduced pressures on pastures in the vicinity of rural settlements

Est-ce que l'Approche a autonomisé les groupes socialement et économiquement défavorisés?
  • Non
  • Oui, un peu
  • Oui, modérément
  • Oui, beaucoup

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?
  • Non
  • Oui, un peu
  • Oui, modérément
  • Oui, beaucoup

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

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

Strong interest by other communities but limited financial means for replication

Did the Approach lead to improved livelihoods / human well-being?
  • Non
  • Oui, un peu
  • Oui, modérément
  • Oui, beaucoup

Improved access to fodder, reduced loss of livestock, etc

Did the Approach help to alleviate poverty?
  • Non
  • Oui, un peu
  • Oui, modérément
  • Oui, beaucoup

The primary beneficiaries are the groups with a medium income

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

  • augmenter la production

Increased pasture area and livestock productivity, reduced loss of livestock, reduced labour inputs

  • conscience environnementale

Increased awareness of the degradation of pastures

  • well-being and livelihoods improvement

Improved convenience, reduced conflicts over livestock tramping and grazing of croplands

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:

The village organisations have the responsibility to teach their community members

6.4 Points forts/ avantages de l'Approche

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du 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)

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?
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

7. Références et liens

7.1 Méthodes/ sources d'information

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

Modules