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)

Rehabilitation of Degraded Agricultural Lands in Kandy, Badulla and Nuwara Eliya Districts in the Central Highlands of Sri Lanka

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

Faculty of Agriculture, University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka (AGRI.PDN) - Sri Lanka

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

Quand les données ont-elles été compilées (sur le terrain)?

24/02/2022

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

Oui

2.1 Courte description de l'Approche

Microwatershed-based participatory land use planning is a systematic and interactive process that primarily focuses on the optimal allocation of village land resources according to needs and demands of the people while promoting sustainable land management. Key features of this approach are multi-sectoral coordination, multi-stakeholder engagement and the active participation of land users throughout the participatory land use planning process.

2.2 Description détaillée de l'Approche

Description détaillée de l'Approche:

The Sapugasulpatha/ Galayata Kandura microwatershed is located in Bandarawela Divisional Secretariat (DS), Badulla District, Sri Lanka. Unsustainable land management has led to land degradation causing associated challenges. There was a need to identify strategies for restoration of degraded lands while addressing water scarcity. In 2018, the Rehabilitation of Degraded Agricultural Lands Project (RDALP) introduced participatory land use planning (PLUP) for this microwatershed. Previously, stakeholders were dealt with individually. But the PLUP process relies on the active involvement of all stakeholders. Key is microcatchment level planning - embedded in multi-sectoral coordination and multi-stakeholder engagement.
The process is initiated by the district office of the Land Use Policy Planning Department (LUPPD). Firstly, the LUPPD identifies microwatersheds and develops land use/cover maps. It is assisted by the Bandarawela DS, which is the administrative body for lands in the area and has the capacity to coordinate all relevant stakeholders. Then, officers of the LUPPD meet with community leaders, representatives of farmer organizations and field level officers to verify the land use maps through field visits. Demarcation of individual plots on these maps is also carried out. Next, a field visit is conducted with all stakeholders to identify the status of land degradation and the current crop management practices. This is, effectively, “training of trainers”. Subsequently, the community prepares maps of land degradation and management types with the support of LUPPD.
This is followed by a participatory rural appraisal (PRA) process with all stakeholders. In the PRA, issues related to land degradation/use, ownership, conflicts and socio-economic concerns are discussed. Participants come to an initial consensus on solutions. After this, a detailed action plan is prepared and stakeholders identified. The next stage involves the development of land use plans for the entire microwatershed targeting the restoration of degraded and poorly managed lands. The land use plan covers both on-farm and off-farm land, and provides recommendations for SLM practices over the entire microwatershed: it serves as a detailed land restoration plan. Then, detailed discussions are held with specific stakeholders to prepare sector-based plans. This includes detailed plans for individual farms. As an example, officers of Tea Smallholdings Development Authority (TSHDA) provide inputs to develop detailed plans for smallholder tea cultivation - including plans for individual farmers. Subsequently, implementation is performed jointly by stakeholders. If, for example, a farm is identified for tea cultivation intercropped with export crops, officers both from TSHDA and the Department of Export Agriculture extend their support. The approach includes farmer field schools (FFS) conducted by the Department of Agrarian Development officers and project officers of RDALP. Moreover, farmers are encouraged to use social media (WhatsApp®) to share their knowledge and experiences with SLM practices. The local community is also exposed to examples of good SLM through field visits. The final step is evaluation and monitoring. This is performed by the officers of the Agrarian Service Development, RDALP, and also by individuals. A divisional agricultural committee is mandated to perform continuous monitoring of implementation. PLUP provides the stimulus for farmers to continue SLM - since practices are not enforced but identified themselves. Further, firm bonding is established between land users and other stakeholders, including government institutes, strengthening the likelihood of sustainability.

2.3 Photos de l'approche

2.4 Vidéos 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

1)Identification and mapping of degraded lands at microwatershed level.
2)Integration of multi-sectoral coordination and multi-stakeholder engagement in participatory land use planning implemented at village micro watershed level.
3)Identification of land management related issues and factors contributing to land degradation and prioritizing sustainable land use/management options through participatory approach.
4)Development and implementation of a land use plan and an action plan to restore and mitigate the degradation within the micro watershed employing PLUP approach.
5)Maintenance and promotion of ecosystem services for the sustainability of rural livelihoods.
6)Reduction of the pressure of competitive land use on natural 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	Community leaders, LUPPD, DS and RDAL Project officers. The process is initiated by the district office of LUPPD which is the responsible national level authority to prepare sustainable land use plans. The regional office identifies village level micro catchment and develop land use/cover maps. The DS serves as a body that coordinate the activity by linking relevant stakeholders.
planification	interactive	Community leaders, land users, LUPPD, DS and RDALP officers. Planning of the PLUP process is performed by these parties.
mise en œuvre	interactive	Land users, community leaders, Department of Agrarian Development, Department of Agriculture, Department of Export Agriculture, TSHDA, officers of RDALP, other officers representing different agriculture sectors and land users. Implementation of the restoration plan for individual farm is performed jointly by different stake holders. As an example if a farmers` land is identified for tea cultivation intercropped with export agricultural crops, officers both from TSHDA and Department of Export Agriculture extend their support for implementation.
suivi/ évaluation	interactive	Land users, Department of Agrarian Development, RDALP officers, individual stakeholders, Department of Agriculture, officers of Natural Resource management Centre and divisional agricultural committee. Please note that participatory monitoring mechanism was implemented.
Marketing	auto-mobilisation	Land users (farmers), private companies and intermediate sellers. Farmers have the choice of marketing their products by direct selling at the village vegetable market, through private companies those visit to the field for purchasing their products (vegetable and tea) and intermediate buyers. Moreover, farmers also have the option to come into a contract with a leading supermarket chain to sell their products if they are willing to adopt Good Agricultural Practices (GAP)

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:

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

Expliquez:

This is a participatory approach in which stakeholders make collective decisions on the selection of appropriate technologies. Multi-stakeholder engagement is a prominent characteristic.

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)?
• les résultats de recherches?
• 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?

Oui

Spécifiez qui a été formé:

• exploitants des terres
• personnels/ conseillers de terrain

Si pertinent, spécifiez le genre, l'âge, le statut, l'ethnie, etc.

Training was provided for both men and women farmers of the microwatershed

Formats de la formation:

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

Formats de la formation:

• social media (WhatsApp®) and online meetings via Zoom® platform

Thèmes abordés:

Sustainable Land Management practices, compost preparation, liquid fertilizer preparation, water harvesting techniques, soil conservation practices and pruning of fruit trees

Commentaires:

Farmers have shown a great interest on sharing knowledge and experiences through the social media

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?
• dans des centres permanents

Décrivez/ commentez:

Well organized advisory service is available in Sri Lanka which is conducted through the field officers of the Department of Agriculture, Export Agriculture, TSHDA. These officers are available at Agrarian Service Centre and Wednesdays are allocated for meeting with farmers and making field visits is a part of their job. Moreover, members of the project team RDALP also served as trainers. Importantly, community leaders and farmer organization representatives were trained as trainers to assure the sustainability.

4.3 Renforcement des institutions (développement organisationnel)

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

• oui, modérément

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

• local
• régional

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

The PLUP process strengthens the institutional coordination and their roles at village level.

Précisez le type de soutien:

• financier
• renforcement des capacités/ formation
• équipement

• infrastructure

Donnez plus de détails:

Details are provided in Table 6.3

4.4 Suivi et évaluation

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

Oui

Commentaires:

Field level government officers are entrusted with the monitoring process with the participation of land users

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:

• 10 000-100 000

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

GEF and local government institutions

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:

Financial support for soil conservation, materials for preparation of nursery sheds (4x4 feet), vegetable seeds and fruit plants for home gardening, tea seedlings for infilling and polythene for rain water harvesting ponds

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

• main d'œuvre

• équipement

• intrants agricoles

• matériaux de construction

• infrastructures

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

• volontaire

Commentaires:

Most of the time family members are engaged with field activities

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:

Land use policy and agriculture policy of Sri Lanka are overarching instruments. Moreover, regulations identified in the Soil Conservation Act of Sri Lanka promote SLM technologies.

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

Si oui, décrivez de quelle manière:

There is a greater potential for farmers to continue SLM practices since such practices are not forcefully enforced but identified by land users themselves through a participatory approach. Therefore, SLM technologies identified by farmers suit to their socio-economic capacity. Further, strong bonding is established with land users and other stakeholders such as government institutes, that will lead to the sustainability of the approach.

6.4 Points forts/ avantages de l'Approche

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue de l'exploitant des terres
Multi-sectoral coordination and multi-stakeholder engagement throughout all activities of the approach
Land users perceive a sense of ownership of the SLM practice implemented through the approach
Training programmes conducted through online platforms motivate farmers to implement SLM on their own land while improving the awareness on SLM practices
Greater potential of enhancement of the farmer income through practices such as crop diversification, intercropping etc.
Enhanced food security

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé
Field evidence suggested farmers have willingly embraced the approach to restore their degraded lands
The approach has enhanced collaborations with land users and other stakeholders
The approach has inculcated ownership of the entire process on land users

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?
Marketing of Vegetables	Though farmers has access to village vegetable market, if farmers can be incorporated to the Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) program this limitation can be overcome.
Lack of financial resources	Formally link a financial supporting institute as a key stakeholder (e.g. Banks, social protection schemes)
Lack of labor	Though land users identified less labor intensive SLM practices, the provision of necessary machinery could have substitute such practices with more appropriate ones.
Time constraints of land users to participate continuously	Use of ICT tools and scheduling meetings at convenient times for land users

Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé	Comment peuvent-ils être surmontés?
PLUP approach is a time consuming process	Simplify the PLUP process
This approach requires a large number of officers to carry out	Simplify the PLUP process
Incompatibility of micro-watershed boundaries and administrative boundaries	Use administrative boundaries in planning process
Negative attitude of some institutions and some officials towards collective effort	National level stakeholders should be made aware of the project activities and incorporate them into their plans
Some stakeholders' involvement exceeds beyond their mandate	Ensuring that each institution executes their mandate and the due respect for their intervention

7.1 Méthodes/ sources d'information

7.2 Références des publications disponibles

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

Healthy Soil Matters, The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Colombo, 2021

Disponible à partir d'où? Coût?

SriCAT website

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

Guidelines for participatory land use planning

Disponible à partir d'où? Coût?

LUPPD

7.3 Liens vers les informations pertinentes disponibles en ligne

Titre/ description:

Healthy Soil Matters, The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Colombo, 2021

URL:

https://sricat.net/index.php/en/media-gallery/documents/248-healthy-soil-matters