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)

Strengthening of Livelihoods through Climate Change Adaptation in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan

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

GIZ Tajikistan (GIZ Tajikistan) - Tadjikistan

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

A site affected by a debris flow was rehabilitated by joint communal work and integrated preventive measures addressing the upper catchment as well as the valley and the debris conus were implemented in collaboration of community, individual farmers, Committee of Emergency Situations and forestry enterprise.

2.2 Description détaillée de l'Approche

Description détaillée de l'Approche:

Local people in many parts of Tajikistan, among these the project region at the northern main slope of the Turkestan range, report about formerly unknown flashfloods and debris flows, even in areas where such events are not remembered. Also relief, soil and vegetation often confirm that such sites for long times had not been transformed by these forces. The occurrence of flashfloods and debris flows in formerly not affected areas, unusual seasons or an increase in frequency and destructiveness of such events can be attributed to land degradation in upper catchment areas in combination with climate change impact.

The degradation of the vegetation in upper catchments has contributed to reduced infiltration of water and high and fast surface runoff. Important elements of this degradation are overgrazing and deforestation. Overgrazing and out of season grazing cause the reduction of the protective plant cover and the multiple trails of livestock with compressed soil reduce infiltration and increase the surface runoff. Deforestation is typically related to intensive livestock grazing, in particular by goats, as intensive browsing prevents the regeneration of shrub and tree vegetation. In upper catchments affected by these processes during heavy rainfall and snow melt large amounts of water concentrate in small valleys and take with them large amounts of soil and gravel. The deforestation in valleys contributes to the intensity of such flashfloods and debris flows.

The frequency and intensity of these events is increasingly exacerbated by the impact of climate change. The already visible trends and predictions show higher levels of aridity, higher temperatures during the vegetation season, reduced overall precipitation in catchment areas – all affecting the retention potential of upper catchment areas – and more irregular rainfall patterns, reduced snow packs and accelerated snow melt as well as the loss of glaciers as buffers of water flow. These factors all contribute to a higher frequency and intensity of flashflood and debris flows and their occurrence in previously not or less affected areas.

Near the village Shamoli in Shakhriston district, as in many other locations, such a debris flow made a road impassable and has destroyed pasture lands and five hectares of arable lands belonging to several farmers with another 10 ha being at risk in case such events occur again. Local people assisted by the Committee of Emergency Situations opened and cleaned the road. The developed in collaboration with experts an integrated approach for rehabilitating the affected lands and reducing the disaster risk. The approach included the following elements:
•Blocking of gullies with planting of willows for reducing sediment load in case of future flashfloods;
•Agreement with the forestry enterprise about general regulation of grazing and tree planting (specifics to be decided by the forestry enterprise);
•Joint communal work (hashar) for cleaning affected arable lands from debris;
•Fencing of 4 ha lands in the valley leased by one farmer from the forestry enterprise for rehabilitation of protective vegetation and sustainable land use (orchard and hay making);
•Construction of reservoir for water collection from spring and use for drip irrigation of trees planted at the debris conus in the opening of the valley.

The approach brought together the Committee of Emergency Situations, the administrative communities, affected local people and the forestry enterprise. Assisted by experts provided by the project, the situation was jointly analyzed; risks identified and the integrated intervention planned. The project assisted with technical planning, construction supervision, purchase and transportation of construction materials. The community contributed about 30% of the overall costs, mainly in form of voluntary communal work, the so called hashar. One farmer leased the most critical area at the opening of the valley and took the responsibility for the maintenance of the area in exchange for the opportunity to use hay and fruits from the planted trees.

The approach is generally replicable. But in most such sites the upper catchment areas belong to different communities, often to different districts and substantial parts are located in neighboring Kyrgyzstan. Therefore addressing the degradation of these areas and a reduction of disaster risk through integrated watershed management in the entire catchments will require more collaboration across administrative boundaries and even national borders.

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

Rehabilitation of land affected by debris flow and reduction of risk of future events.

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	Local community members, asking community leadership and GIZ staff for assistance to address impact of debris flow
planification	interactive	Involvement of community members in planning
mise en œuvre		Local community members carrying out works through traditional voluntary community work ("hashar").
suivi/ évaluation		Local farmer maintaining the planted area controls condition of irrigation system and trees.
maintenance		Local farmer maintaining the planted area.

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:

• tous les acteurs concernés dans le cadre d'une approche participative

Spécifiez sur quelle base ont été prises les décisions:

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

4.1 Renforcement des capacités/ formation

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

Non

4.2 Service de conseils

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

Oui

Décrivez/ commentez:

Not of specific relevance for this approach.

4.3 Renforcement des institutions (développement organisationnel)

Des institutions ont elles été mises en place ou renforcées par le biais de l'Approche?

• oui, un peu

Spécifiez à quel(s) niveau(x), ces institutions ont été renforcées ou mises en place:

• local

Décrivez l'institution, ses rôles et responsabilités, ses membres, etc.

Existing community institutions have been strengthened through joint successful implementation of the works and the need for further collaboration.

Précisez le type de soutien:

• financier
• renforcement des capacités/ formation
• équipement

Donnez plus de détails:

Fencing, materials of irrigation system, technical advice.

4.4 Suivi et évaluation

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

Oui

Si oui, ce document est-il destiné à être utilisé pour le suivi et l'évaluation?

Non

4.5 Recherche

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

Non

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):

Government of Germany, implemented via Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ). The approach has been implemented in the frame of a much larger program and the specific budget for the SLM component of the Approach cannot be determined.

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

Si oui, spécifiez le(s) type(s) de soutien, les conditions et les fournisseurs:

Technical planning and supervision, procurement of materials and transportation funded by GIZ.

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

• aucun

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

5.5 Autres incitations ou instruments

D'autres incitations ou instruments ont-ils été utilisés pour promouvoir la mise en œuvre des Technologies de GDT?

Oui

Si oui, spécifiez:

The farmer managing the site in the valley, where trees have been planted, can use the fruits and the hay produced from the site. This is the key incentive for him to carry out all maintenance.

6.1 Impacts de l'Approche

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

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

6.4 Points forts/ avantages de l'Approche

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue de l'exploitant des terres
Rehabilitated lands and reduced risk.
Use of products from critical site, which was planted with fruit trees.

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé
Same as land users' view.
Mobilization of collaboration and joint communal work.

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?
High costs of fencing	External funding.
High costs of irrigation system	External funding.

Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé	Comment peuvent-ils être surmontés?
High costs of fencing	External funding; Cheaper temporary electric fencing; Approaches without fencing, based on agreement in the community to prevent livestock damage through herding.
High costs of irrigation system	External funding; Planting of drought resistant trees.

7.1 Méthodes/ sources d'information