Improving terraces with farmers [Népal]
- Création :
- Mise à jour :
- Compilateur : Madhav Dhakal
- Rédacteur : –
- Examinateur : Laura Ebneter
Kisansangai gara sudhar (Nepali)
approaches_2549 - Népal
Voir les sections
Développer tout Réduire tout1. Informations générales
1.2 Coordonnées des personnes-ressources et des institutions impliquées dans l'évaluation et la documentation de l'Approche
Spécialiste GDT:
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) - Népal1.3 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
Participatory action research with multiple stakeholders for the demonstration and extension of improved rainfed hill terraces in Nepal
2.2 Description détaillée de l'Approche
Description détaillée de l'Approche:
The traditional farming practices employed on steep sloping land in Kubinde village in Nepal's midhills led to soil and water erosion and low crop and fodder yields. The People and Resource Dynamics in Mountain Watersheds of the Hindu Kush- Himalayas Project (PARDYP) started work in 2001, with a small group of farmers from this village (who were also members of the local forest user group) and the Department of Soil Conservation and Watershed Management to identify and test an integrated approach for addressing these constraints. The approach taken was an improved hill terrace for rainfed conditions consisting of structural and vegetative measures. The aim was to demonstrate and test the technologies' potential for overcoming constraints related to farming sloping agricultural land. The specific objectives were, in association with the local farmers, to design a technology that solved soi erosion problems on sloping agricultural lands whilst at the same time increasing the land's nutrient conservation and production capacity. The local line agency office of the Department of Soil Conservation and Watershed Management was involved in developing the technology to make use of their experiences and to come up with a validated technology that the department could use in its own programmes.
Before implementing the terrace improvement work in Kubinde village, a terrace improvement committee was formed made up of local farmers. The awareness activities began in January 2001. Committee members were trained on subwatershed management and were taken to the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development’s (ICIMOD) Demonstration and Training Centre at Godavari and another ICIMOD site to show them potential soil and water conservation technologies including improved terraces. After the technologies were implemented, a number of farmer exchange, interaction and monitoring programmes were held to assess the technology and to promote it. Indicators were developed for monitoring the activity.
About half of the costs were covered by the participating farmers and the rest by PARDYP. The other incentives were training and extension, allowances for participants, national expert honoraria, and training material such as audio-visual facilities. These were all provided by PARDYP with the help of the line agency.
2.3 Photos de l'approche
2.5 Pays/ région/ lieux où l'Approche a été appliquée
Pays:
Népal
Autres spécifications du lieu :
kavre Palanchok/ Kubinde village, Jhikhu Khola watershed
Map
×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
Local farmers collectively solving problems by identifying and using the most appropriate local solutions. Local farmers designing, testing, and disseminating alternative technologies adapted to local conditions. Strengthening joint learning by farmers and development actors
The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Weak institutional collaboration for addressing 1) poor soil fertility and land productivity; 2) soil and nutrient loss and excessive water runoff from sloping agricultural land; and 3) fodder scarcity. Lack of on-farm research for developing technologies that attend to farmers' needs.
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
Government incentives are lacking
Treatment through the SLM Approach: The technology is cost effective.
cadre institutionnel
- entrave
Lack of coordination among land users
Treatment through the SLM Approach: Terrace improvementuser group formed
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 ownership, there were no conflicts and hence the technology for deissmeination was well maintained.
connaissances sur la GDT, accès aux supports techniques
- entrave
It is not a priority area of line agencies
Treatment through the SLM Approach: The appraoch relies on farmer adoption
autre
- entrave
lack of awareness
Treatment through the SLM Approach: Trainings , 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
Men and women land users worked equally
- Spécialistes de la GDT/ conseillers agricoles
- enseignants/ élèves/ étudiants
- ONG
- gouvernement local
- gouvernement national (planificateurs, décideurs)
- health volunteers
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 | passive | Group discussion; organised with local forest user group; selection of members for training and tours (12 men and 11 women); formation of terrace improvement committee. |
planification | interactive | group discussion; survey , site selection , fodder / grass species selection |
mise en œuvre | auto-mobilisation | Terracing activities: measurement, soil excavation, and retaining wall construction |
suivi/ évaluation | interactive | Done in a participatory way involving individual farmers, project staff, and Department of Soil Conservation staff |
Research | passive | Assessing performance of planted grasses and advantages and disadvantages of technology |
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 package was initially offered by researchers and later modified and implemented by land users.
Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists. The landusers are more familiar with their land's capacity and charcteristics.
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, teachers, school children/students, politicians/decision makers, Health volu
Formats de la formation:
- entre agriculteurs (d'exploitants à exploitants)
- zones de démonstration
- cours
Formats de la formation:
- Audio vidual learning
Thèmes abordés:
Importance of Soil and Water conservation in local level, concept of sub watershed management, activities in other parts of a country regarding SLM, etc.
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: Demnstration/extension of improved terrace technology;
Key elements: Participatory Action Research, Trainigs and Farmer to Farmer visits, Particpatory monitoring and evaluation; 1) Advisory service was carried out through: projects own extension structure and agents, government's existing extension system; Extension staff: project employees, govt. staff and farmers. 2) Target groups for extension: land users, technicians/SLM specialists; Activities: Farmer to farmer exchange, demonstration, trainings; Invited to trainigs, field visits
Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; Various extension service agencies have secured funding for SLM programmes.
4.3 Renforcement des institutions (développement organisationnel)
Des institutions ont elles été mises en place ou renforcées par le biais de l'Approche?
- non
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: plant heigth, biomass production, usefulness of grass/fodder species
technical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: views about technology
socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations; indicators: species selection, change of agricultural practices
economic / production aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations; indicators: changes in crop yields and patterns and the value of the land
area treated aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations; indicators: survey, on-site verifications
land users involved aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations; indicators: survey, number of land users applying for SWC
management of Approach aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations; indicators: maintenance of terraces and hedgerows
There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: New ideas have been generated but strategies to implement them are yet to be in place.
There were few changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation: New varieties of grass, fruit and fodder species have been introduced
4.5 Recherche
La recherche a-t-elle fait partie intégrante de l’Approche?
Oui
Spécifiez les thèmes:
- sociologie
- écologie
- technologie
Donnez plus de détails et indiquez qui a mené ces recherches:
Sociology: Looking at scaling up process; Ecology: Looking at the impacts of the technology at subwatershed level; Technology: development process.
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
Commentez (par ex. principales sources de financement/ principaux bailleurs de fonds):
Approach costs were met by the following donors: national non-government (SDC, IDRC, ICIMOD): 65.0%; local community / land user(s) (Terrace improvement committee): 35.0%
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
Spécifiez les intrants subventionnés | Dans quelle mesure | Spécifiez les subventions |
---|---|---|
semences | entièrement financé | |
Si la main d'œuvre fournie par les exploitants des terres était un intrant substantiel, elle était:
- payée en espèces
Commentaires:
About 50% of total labour costs were met by land users.
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
Area expanded , about 100 percent of previously improved terraces was expanded. New variety of grass/ fodder species has been adopted..
Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?
- Non
- Oui, un peu
- Oui, modérément
- Oui, beaucoup
The project's aim was not to promote the approach but the technology. However, similar appraches are followed by other programs as well from before; such as the District Soil Conservation Offices.
6.2 Principale motivation des exploitants des terres pour mettre en œuvre la GDT
- augmenter la production
increased production (grain and biomass) due to moisture and nutrient conervation
- augmenter la rentabilité/ bénéfice, rapport coûts-bénéfices
Increased land prize
- réduire la charge de travail
fodder/ grass availability ( near to house)
- améliorer l'esthétique
greenary throughout the season due to fodder and grass species.
- environmental consciousness, moral, health
less soil erosion from the land
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:
More than 60% of the total improved terraces in Kubinde village were built by the land users themselves. Widespread rapid adoption did not happen in other villages due to financial and labour limitations. Land users of Kubinde village continue to maintain the improved terraces.
6.4 Points forts/ avantages de l'Approche
Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue de l'exploitant des terres |
---|
Technical knowledge and confidence increased from the training and field visits, interactions, and experience sharing (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Such activities should be continued by incorporating other new ideas) |
The approach led to the development of a team spirit among farmers (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: As above) |
Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé |
---|
The approach is based on building the capacity of farmers (both men and women) by involving multiple stakeholders in the development and adoption of the technology. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Approach should be to strengthen land users' involvement in SWC activities) |
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? |
---|---|
Due to the conflict, which was on-going at the time, follow-up after a year of implementing technology was not possible and the monitoring was not done. This resulted in the adoption of the technology by other farmers not being carried out properly with, for example, farmers not maintaining the hedgerows as recommended. Also, the new terraces were not as good as they should have been. | The technical experts need to visit the sites and identify gaps and encourage farmers to 'fill them'. For example, the benefit of hedgerow management needs to be demonstrated. |
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:
Mathema, P. (2003) Watershed Management in South Asia. Kathmandu: Government of Nepal, Department of Soil Conservation and Watershed Management
Disponible à partir d'où? Coût?
Department of soil conservation, Nepal
Liens et modules
Développer tout Réduire toutLiens
Aucun lien
Modules
Aucun module trouvé