Vous utilisez probablement une version dépassée et inactive de ce dossier. Passez à la dernière version de ce dossier.

Approches

Inactif

Joint village land use planning [Tanzanie]

Création : 4 jan. 2018 14:55
Mise à jour : 26 fév. 2018 10:46
Compilateur : Fiona Flintan
Rédacteur : –
Examinateur : Rima Mekdaschi Studer

approaches_3336 - Tanzanie

Voir les sections

Développer tout

État complet : 92%

1. Informations générales

2. Description de l'Approche de GDT

2.1 Courte description de l'Approche

Joint village land use planning is a process facilitated by Tanzania's land policy and legislation. It supports the planning, protection and management of shared resources across village boundaries. It is an important tool towards land use planning and better rangeland management. This case study provides an example from a cluster of villages in Kiteto District, Tanzania.

2.2 Description détaillée de l'Approche

Description détaillée de l'Approche:

The Sustainable Rangeland Management Project (SRMP) is an initiative led by Tanzania’s Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries (MoLF), the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) and the National Land Use Planning Commission (NLUPC), with support from International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), Irish Aid and the International Land Coalition (ILC). A key innovation of the project has been the development of joint village land use planning (JVLUP). The JVLUP process in Kiteto District, Manyara Region began in November 2013, and included the villages of Lerug, Ngapapa, and Orkitikiti. The three villages share boundaries and grazing resources, and in order to illustrate a single shared identity across the boundaries, the name OLENGAPA was chosen - incorporating part of each village’s name.
The total area of the three villages is (approx.) 59,000 hectares. The majority of inhabitants are Maasai pastoralists with some Ndorobo hunter-gatherers, and some farmers - most of whom are seasonal migrants. Mobility is central to the survival of the pastoralists and takes place across the three villages, as well as to locations in Kilindi, Gairo, and Bagamoyo Districts.
Average annual rainfall is between 800-1,000 mm per annum. There are no perennial rivers flowing through the OLENGAPA villages. The only permanent surface water source is Orkitikiti Dam, constructed in 1954.
In order to understand the different resources such as grazing areas, water points, cropping areas, livestock routes, and cultural places, SRMP supported participatory mapping. This assisted in developing a base map for the village land use planning process: it showed which resources were shared by the villages and where they were situated.
SRMP then helped village members to agree the individual village land use maps and plans - which zoned the village land into priority land uses - as well as the joint village land use map and plan, and the joint village land use agreement (JVLUA). These specified the grazing areas, water points, livestock routes and other shared resources. Reaching agreement was a protracted negotiation process between the villages, and within villages also - between different interest groups. It involved numerous community meetings and considerable investment of resources. Finally, each Village Assembly approved the JVLUA, which allocated approx. 20,700 ha of land for shared grazing –around 40% of the total village area. By-laws for management of the resources were developed and adopted.
Following approval of the JVLUA, the three OLENGAPA Village Councils established a Joint Grazing Land Committee made up of members from all three villages. This Committee is responsible for planning, management, enforcement of by-laws applicable to the OLENGAPA, and coordination of the implementation of both the OLENGAPA land use agreements and joint land use plan. In addition, a Livestock Keepers Association was established, including 53 founding members – but with most households from the three villages being associate members. A constitution was developed for the Association, which was officially registered on 11 September 2015.
In January 2016 the Ministry of Lands approved and registered the village land boundary maps and deed plans for the three villages. The District Council has issued the village land certificates, and the next step is for Village Councils to begin issuing Certificates of Customary Rights of Occupancy (CCROs). The shared grazing area will require three group CCROs to be issued to the Livestock Keepers Association – one from each village - for the part of the grazing area that falls under its jurisdiction. Signboards and beacons marking the shared grazing area are being put in place.
In November 2017 a fourth village joined OLENGAPA, expanding the shared grazing area to 30,000 ha. The villages are now working to develop a management plan to improve rangeland productivity.

2.3 Photos de l'approche

Galerie Médias

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

Pays:

Tanzanie

Région/ Etat/ Province:

Manyara Region

Autres spécifications du lieu :

Kiteto District

Commentaires:

Kiteto District, Manyara Region, Tanzania

2.6 Dates de début et de fin de l'Approche

Indiquez l'année de démarrage:

2010

Date (année) de fin de l'Approche (si l'Approche n'est plus appliquée):

2017

2.7 Type d'Approche

fondé sur un projet/ programme

2.8 Principaux objectifs de l'Approche

To secure shared grazing areas and other rangeland resources for livestock keepers, and to improve their management.

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

normes et valeurs sociales/ culturelles/ religieuses

favorise

History of collective tenure, management and sharing of rangeland resources as part of sustainable rangeland management practices.

entrave

Marginalisation of pastoralists from decision-making processes at local and higher levels.

disponibilité/ accès aux ressources et services financiers

entrave

Village land use planning process is costly due to the requirement to include government experts in the process in order to gather required data and to authorise plans. Lack of government priority to village land use planning, so poor allocation of government funds to the process.

cadre institutionnel

favorise

Strong local government/community institutions for leading process at local albeit their capacity may require building.

collaboration/ coordination des acteurs

entrave

Poor coordination of different actors supporting VLUP in the past due to previous weakness of National Land Use Planning Commission (NLUPC). However, this is now changing as NLUPC becomes stronger and takes up coordination role.

cadre juridique (régime foncier, droits d'utilisation des terres et de l'eau)

favorise

Tanzania's legislation, if implemented well, provides an enabling environment for securing of community/village rights for both individuals and groups.

entrave

Legislation allows village land to be transferred into public land if in the "public" or "national" interest - this facility confers insecurity on village land.

cadre politique

favorise

Tanzania possesses facilitating national land use policy for the joint village land use planning approach, together with guidelines.

entrave

There are conflicting policies over land coming from different sectors including land generally, together with forests, wildlife and livestock. These cause confusion at the local level. Depending on power of actors one set of policies may be stronger than another - wildlife-related policy for example can have a lot of power because there are many strong and influential tourism and conservation bodies lobbying for stronger protection of land, with potentially negative impacts for communities who want to use that land for other purposes.

gouvernance foncière (prise de décisions, mise en œuvre et application des décisions)

favorise

Decision-making has been decentralised to the lowest levels, giving local communities considerable power to decide on the uses of their village land.

entrave

The process of village land use planning is costly due to the requirement for having local government experts involved, and the need to follow often complex procedures and steps. Many communities and even local government do not have adequate technical skills and knowledge to complete the long process, as well as not having adequate funds. This has held up the VLUP applications. Further few VLUPs move from their production stage to implementation stage including enforcement of bylaws and, for example, land management.

connaissances sur la GDT, accès aux supports techniques

favorise

Good local knowledge of rangeland management based on historical practice. Communities understand need for better rangeland management.

entrave

Lack of investment in rangeland management and the provision of technical support e.g. through government extension services. Lack of technical knowledge in rangeland rehabilitation and improving rangeland productivity at scale.

marchés (pour acheter les intrants, vendre les produits) et prix

entrave

Lack of local markets and coordinated operations for livestock production.

charge de travail, disponibilité de la main-d'œuvre

favorise

Well-structured local community bodies ready to provide manpower. Local government experts in place to support VLUP process.

entrave

Lack of knowledge, skills and capacity amongst local communities and government experts to complete JVLUP adequately, including such as resolving conflicts between different land users.

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 members (Assembly) of three villages - Orikitiki, Lerug and Ngapapa.

All village members as the Village Assembly have an opportunity to contribute to the land use planning process and to approve it.

organisations communautaires

Village Council, Village Land Use Management Committee (VLUMC), Rangeland Management Committee, Livestock Keepers Association.

Village government coordinated the planning process at local level. VLUMC develops plan. Village Council approves plans and issues CCROs. Rangeland Management Committee oversees development in rangelands. Livestock Keepers Association established made-up of all members of the villages that have livestock (nearly all village members) - they will be issued with CCROs as "owners" of the grazing land.

Spécialistes de la GDT/ conseillers agricoles

Land use planning consultants

Provision of advice to the project team, local government and villagers on the JVLUP approach.

chercheurs

International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI)

Identification of good practice in village land use planning in Tanzania and ways to adapt and incorporate good practice into joint village land use planning to improve the approach. Research on role of and impact on pastoral women. Undertaking of baseline studies.

KINNAPA Development Association (supported originally by CARE and Tanzania Natural Resource Forum).

KINNAPA is the local CSO partner working as part of the project to implement the JVLUP with local communities

gouvernement local

District Council including the PLUM (participatory land use management planning experts)

The District Council provides local government oversight of the planning process and approves the plan before submitting to national government body. The PLUM technically supports the development of the JVLUP working with the village government(s) and village committees.

gouvernement national (planificateurs, décideurs)

Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries, National Land Use Planning Commission (NLUPC), Ministry of Lands, Housing and Human Settlements Development,

Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries leading the planning process with a sectoral interest in protecting rangelands. NLUPC provides technical oversight and guidance. Ministry of Lands is the national body that approves the final plan.

organisation internationale

International Land Coalition (ILC)

ILC is the grant recipient for the funds from the donors. The project is implemented through ILC members such as ILRI. ILC coordinates its members work in Tanzania on land issues including the JVLUP through a national engagement strategy (NES). ILC also provides technical support to the process through its global/Africa programme - the ILC Rangelands Initiative. The ILC Rangelands Initiative is a platform for learning, sharing, influencing, and connecting on rangeland issues with the objective of making rangelands more secure.

Donors

IFAD and Irish Aid

Provide funds for the project. IFAD also provides technical support on land tenure issues.

Si plusieurs parties prenantes sont impliquées, indiquez l'organisme chef de file ou l'institution responsable:

The lead agency is the International Land Coalition (ILC) working through its members including ILRI. In country, the main implementer is the Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries

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	soutien extérieur	The project supported communities to initiate the first steps taken to reach agreement on the need for planning and how this would be done.
planification	interactive	Communities were centrally involved in the planning of the VLUP process, with support from local NGO and government.
mise en œuvre	interactive	Village government and community in general is responsible for the implementation of the planning process, with the support of local government.
suivi/ évaluation	soutien extérieur	The community is responsible for monitoring and evaluation, but lack skills and capacity in this regard requiring external support.
Research	soutien extérieur	Research on information required for planning processes collected and generated by communities with the assistance of technical support from local NGO, local government and researchers.

3.3 Diagramme/ organigramme (si disponible)

Description:

Steps in the Joint Village Land Use Planning Process

Auteur:

Fiona Flintan

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:

The policy and legislation lays down the steps to be followed for the VLUP/JVLUP process. However there is room to adapt these processes to local context - and here all stakeholders were involved to develop the process of JVLUP through its first piloting. This included communities, local and national government, local NGOs, researchers and development organisations.

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)?

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

government staff

Formats de la formation:

sur le tas
réunions publiques
cours

Thèmes abordés:

Land users were trained in land related and other relevant laws and the JVLUP process. Field staff/advisers were trained in land laws, the JVLUP process, gender, and conflict resolution. Local government were trained in the JVLUP process, gender and conflict resolution.

4.2 Service de conseils

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

Non

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
national

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

Local government bodies including Village Council, VLUMC (village land use management committee) and Livestock Keepers Association have all had capacity strengthened, but more is required (particularly for the latter). Capacity of the Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries and the National Land Use Planning Commission to implement JVLUP has been built.

Précisez le type de soutien:

financier
renforcement des capacités/ formation
équipement

data collected and database set up

4.4 Suivi et évaluation

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

Oui

Commentaires:

M&E has not been strong in previous phases, but now is central with baselines being carried out in all new clusters of villages where the project will work so that impact can be fully assessed.

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?

Oui

Spécifiez les thèmes:

sociologie
économie/ marketing
écologie

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

Research was carried out to identify good practice (in terms of social, economic and environmental impacts) from which the JVLUP process was developed. In future phases the full impacts of this JVLUP in terms of social, economic and ecological impact are being researched.

5. Financement et soutien matériel externe

6. Analyses d'impact et conclusions

6.1 Impacts de l'Approche

Est-ce que l'Approche a autonomisé les exploitants locaux des terres, amélioré la participation des parties prenantes?

Non
Oui, un peu
Oui, modérément
Oui, beaucoup

Local village communities now feel strongly empowered in protecting and managing their land. The process has brought different stakeholders together and strengthened commitment to make the process work.

Est-ce que l'Approche a permis la prise de décisions fondées sur des données probantes?

Non
Oui, un peu
Oui, modérément
Oui, beaucoup

The piloting of the JVLUP showed what is possible and the positive impacts realised (albeit they could have been better documented). On these results the process is being scaled-up.

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

The planning process has laid the foundations for improved rangeland management - what is now required is investment in that management.

Est-ce que l'Approche a amélioré la coordination et la mise en œuvre de la GDT selon un bon rapport coût-efficacité?

Non
Oui, un peu
Oui, modérément
Oui, beaucoup

The JVLUP established the structures for coordination of management across the village boundaries - what is now required is investment in that management. It is believed that the approach of planning across village boundaries and jointly is more cost-effective than planning separately - but the evidence of this needs to be fully documented.

Est-ce que l'Approche a mobilisé/ amélioré l'accès aux ressources financières pour la mise en œuvre de la GDT?

Non
Oui, un peu
Oui, modérément
Oui, beaucoup

By helping communities to establish a Livestock Keepers Association there is potential there for the Association to access funds for development through government structures, but this has not happened yet.

Est-ce que l'Approche a amélioré les connaissances et les capacités des exploitants des terres pour mettre en œuvre la GDT?

Non
Oui, un peu
Oui, modérément
Oui, beaucoup

Land users have greater knowledge of the potential and need for rangeland management based on a better understanding of their land and resources gained through the JVLUP process, but they still need skills and resources to put this knowledge into action.

Est-ce que l'Approche a amélioré les connaissances et les capacités des autres parties prenantes?

Non
Oui, un peu
Oui, modérément
Oui, beaucoup

National and local government have seen the potential of the JVLUP to resolve conflicts over land use, and their capacities to implement the JVLUP in this regard has been improved.

Est-ce que l'Approche a construit/ renforcé les institutions, la collaboration entre parties prenantes?

Non
Oui, un peu
Oui, modérément
Oui, beaucoup

The approach is helping build relations between the Ministry Livestock and Fisheries and the NLUPC together with NGO(s) at national level, as well as between different stakeholders involved in JVLUP at local levels.

Est-ce que l'Approche a atténué les conflits?

Non
Oui, un peu
Oui, modérément
Oui, beaucoup

Through the process of JVLUP the roots of land use conflicts come to the surface and must be resolved before agreement is reached. This may cause tensions and even conflict along the way - but the outcome should be positive.

Est-ce que l'Approche a autonomisé les groupes socialement et économiquement défavorisés?

Non
Oui, un peu
Oui, modérément
Oui, beaucoup

Pastoralists are often left out of village land use planning processes. This approach when implemented well gives greater opportunity for them to be involved. However this is still a challenge.

Est-ce que l'Approche a amélioré l'égalité entre hommes et femmes et autonomisé les femmes et les filles?

Non
Oui, un peu
Oui, modérément
Oui, beaucoup

Women can be left out of village land use planning processes. This approach when implemented well gives greater opportunity for them to be involved. However this is still a challenge.

Est-ce que l'Approche a encouragé les jeunes/ la prochaine génération d'exploitants des terres à s'engager dans la GDT?

Non
Oui, un peu
Oui, modérément
Oui, beaucoup

Youth can be left out of village land use planning processes. This approach when implemented well gives greater opportunity for them to be involved. However this is still a challenge.

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

By following the JVLUP process village land has been certified and secured, as well as the rights of access and use of livestock keepers to the grazing land.

Est-ce que l'Approche a conduit à améliorer la sécurité alimentaire et/ou la nutrition?

Non
Oui, un peu
Oui, modérément
Oui, beaucoup

This has not been specifically monitored but it assumed by having stronger security to land and resources, food security and nutrition will be improved.

Est-ce que l'Approche a amélioré l'accès aux marchés?

Non
Oui, un peu
Oui, modérément
Oui, beaucoup

This has not been specifically monitored but it assumed by having stronger security to land and resources, access to markets will be improved.

Est-ce que l'Approche a conduit à améliorer l'accès à l'eau et l'assainissement?

Non
Oui, un peu
Oui, modérément
Oui, beaucoup

In terms of water for livestock the JVLUP process has secured rights for the three villages to shared water resources.

Est-ce que l'Approche a conduit à l'utilisation/ sources d'énergie plus durables?

Non
Oui, un peu
Oui, modérément
Oui, beaucoup

Est-ce que l'Approche a amélioré la capacité des exploitants des terres à s'adapter aux changements/ extrêmes climatiques et a atténué les catastrophes liées au climat?

Non
Oui, un peu
Oui, modérément
Oui, beaucoup

By having stronger security to land and resources local land users are better placed to adapt to climate change etc.

Est-ce que l'Approche a conduit à des emplois, des opportunités de revenus?

Non
Oui, un peu
Oui, modérément
Oui, beaucoup

This has not been specifically monitored but it assumed by having stronger security to land and resources, income opportunities will be improved.

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

augmenter la production

By protecting grazing areas, there will be more secure access to resources required for livestock production.

réduire la dégradation des terres

By protecting grazing areas and improvement of rangeland management practices land degradation will be reduced.

réduire les risques de catastrophe

With more secure access to land and resources, local land users are better placed to manage their resources in order to reduce risks to disasters.

règles et règlements (amendes)/ application

By gaining protection from village certification, village land use planning and local bylaws developed as part of this, local land users are better placed to enforce rules and regulations relating to land use and to prevent encroachment/trespassing by outsiders.

prestige, pression sociale/ cohésion sociale

The JVLUP process improved the social cohesion and group identify of the three villages - expressed in the name OLENGAPA (made up of the three village names). There is a strong livestock keepers association now made up of livestock keepers from all three villages who are working more closely together.

atténuer les conflits

The JVLUP helped to resolve land use conflicts by opening up space to discuss root causes, find solutions and come to agreement between land users.

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 community requires support from local government to protect their village lands including grazing lands from outsiders wanting to settle on the land - this is a constant problem to be addressed (despite the securing of village boundaries etc.). The community also needs capacity building and resources to improve the productivity of the land including the grazing areas. If they get these supports then they can sustain what has been implemented.

6.4 Points forts/ avantages de l'Approche

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue de l'exploitant des terres
Improved the security of access and use to village land including grazing.
Brought attention to the challenges faced by land users in the area in protecting and using their village land, and the need for more investment and support for this.
Pastoralists are now more central to decision-making processes than they were before.

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé
Collaboration of different stakeholders in implementing the approach has supported a new way of working.
Capacity of different stakeholders has been built along the way through joint problem-solving and learning-by-doing.
The approach - with adaptation - has application in other contexts/countries and shows that even if a rangeland is split by administrative boundaries there is opportunity to work across those village boundaries in order to maintain the functionality of the rangeland and land use systems such as pastoralism that depend upon this.

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?
Despite village land being theoretically protected, in practice it can still be encroached upon.	Greater support provided from government to enforce protection of land.
Time-consuming process which became more expensive than anticipated resulting in some gaps in funding.	Process needs to be refined through practice, and adequate funds allocated from beginning.

Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé	Comment peuvent-ils être surmontés?
The selection of villages for JVLUP needs more care to ensure that enabling conditions for JVLUP exist.	In future selection of villages for JVLUP a set of criteria should be used that enable more enabling conditions to exist.
Information has not been methodologically collected on social, environmental and economic impacts of the approach.	In future the impacts of the approach need to be fully monitored and evaluated.
The VLUP is an expensive process to follow.	National government needs to identify ways to reduce the cost of the VLUP so that more villages can undertake it. Government needs to allocate more funds to VLUP. The VLUP is an expensive process to follow.
Need for an enabling environment.	The policy and legislation in Tanzania enables this process - it is not the case in the majority of other African countries.

7. Références et liens

7.1 Méthodes/ sources d'information

compilation à partir de rapports et d'autres documents existants

The compiler has been involved in the project/process since its inception and had access to all reports and existing documentation.

Développer tout

Voir les sections

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:

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

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

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

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

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

2. Description de l'Approche de GDT

2.1 Courte description de l'Approche

2.2 Description détaillée de l'Approche

Description détaillée de l'Approche:

2.3 Photos de l'approche

Galerie Médias

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

Pays:

Région/ Etat/ Province:

Autres spécifications du lieu :

Commentaires:

2.6 Dates de début et de fin de l'Approche

Indiquez l'année de démarrage:

Date (année) de fin de l'Approche (si l'Approche n'est plus appliquée):

2.7 Type d'Approche

2.8 Principaux objectifs de l'Approche

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

normes et valeurs sociales/ culturelles/ religieuses

disponibilité/ accès aux ressources et services financiers

cadre institutionnel

collaboration/ coordination des acteurs

cadre juridique (régime foncier, droits d'utilisation des terres et de l'eau)

cadre politique

gouvernance foncière (prise de décisions, mise en œuvre et application des décisions)

connaissances sur la GDT, accès aux supports techniques

marchés (pour acheter les intrants, vendre les produits) et prix

charge de travail, disponibilité de la main-d'œuvre

3. Participation et rôles des parties prenantes impliquées dans l'Approche

3.1 Parties prenantes impliquées dans l'Approche et rôles

Si plusieurs parties prenantes sont impliquées, indiquez l'organisme chef de file ou l'institution responsable:

3.2 Participation des exploitants locaux des terres/ communautés locales aux différentes phases de l'Approche

3.3 Diagramme/ organigramme (si disponible)

Description:

Auteur:

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:

Expliquez:

Spécifiez sur quelle base ont été prises les décisions:

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?

Spécifiez qui a été formé:

Formats de la formation:

Thèmes abordés:

4.2 Service de conseils

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

4.3 Renforcement des institutions (développement organisationnel)

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

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

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

Précisez le type de soutien:

4.4 Suivi et évaluation

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

Commentaires:

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

4.5 Recherche

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

Spécifiez les thèmes:

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

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:

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

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?

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

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

Commentaires:

5.4 Crédits

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