1.2 ព័ត៌មានលម្អិតពីបុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ និងស្ថាប័នដែលចូលរួមក្នុងការវាយតម្លៃ និងចងក្រងឯកសារនៃវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

ឈ្មោះអង្គភាពមួយ (ច្រើន) ដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃលើវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ (បើទាក់ទង)

CDE Centre for Development and Environment (CDE Centre for Development and Environment) - ប្រទេសស្វ៊ីស

ឈ្មោះអង្គភាពមួយ (ច្រើន) ដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃលើវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ (បើទាក់ទង)

ICIMOD International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) - ប្រទេសនេប៉ាល់

1.3 លក្ខខណ្ឌទាក់ទងទៅនឹងការប្រើប្រាស់ទិន្នន័យដែលបានចងក្រងតាមរយៈវ៉ូខេត

អ្នកចងក្រង និង(បុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ)យល់ព្រមទទួលយកនូវលក្ខខណ្ឌនានាទាក់ទងទៅនឹងការប្រើប្រាស់ទិន្នន័យដែលបានចងក្រងតាមរយៈ​ វ៉ូខេត:

បាទ/ចា៎

1.4 ការយោងមួយ (ច្រើន) ទៅលើ (កម្រង) បញ្ជីសំណួរនៃបច្ចេកទេស SLM

2.1 ពណ៌នាសង្ខេបខ្លីពីវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

Conducting participatory action research with farmers and district level line agencies for demonstrating, disseminating and scaling up SRI

2.2 ពណ៌នាលម្អិតពិវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

ពណ៌នាលម្អិតពិវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ:

Aims / objectives: PARDYP pilot tested SRI in the Spice Crop Development Centre (SCDC) at Tamaghat, Kavrepalanchok in 2002. The positive results led the technique to be tried out in 25 farmer’s fields in 2004 to evaluate whether SRI was technically feasible in the Himalayan middle mountains. Based on farmers’ interests and to promote SRI systematically, PARDYP organised interaction programmes between farmers who had and had not used SRI, village level group discussions, farmer-to-farmer visits and farmer-led on-site monitoring and evaluation in 2002, 2003 and 2004.

Methods: In 2005, the emphasis shifted to carrying out research with groups of farmers in a more systematic way and participatory rural appraisal methods and tools were used. The approach was called the SRI farmer field school (FFS) approach. Lead farmers (13 male and 6 female) were trained as SRI trainers and then facilitated village level farmer field schools for testing and promoting SRI. In 2005, SRI farmer field schools were run in 15 villages for about 100 farmers. Each school carried out hands-on training sessions to help farmers understand (1) the basic concepts of SRI and its practices, (2) methods for comparing traditional practices with SRI, and (3) how to observe, analyse and present findings more systematically. Monitoring and evaluation gathered both men’s and women’s perceptions. This also helped establish an informal farmer-learning network in the watershed. Village level discussions, farmer visits, and interaction with staff from the district agriculture offices continued. At the end of the on-farm experiments, a district level farmer’s day was organised to share the experiences gained.

Other important information: To promote wider understanding of the action research and encourage farmers to continue developing and adapting SRI, the project disseminated information about SRI through information, education and communication (IEC) materials aimed at community-level users, and a multi-media package on a CD ROM for the global audience and Nepali policy-makers and administrators. A national exchange workshop was held to share experiences from across the country on the use of SRI.

2.3 រូបភាពនៃវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

2.5 ប្រទេស/តំបន់/ទីតាំងកន្លែង ដែលវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយត្រូវបានអនុវត្តន៍

2.6 កាលបរិច្ឆេទនៃការចាប់ផ្តើម និងបញ្ចប់នៃវិធីសាស្រ្តផ្សព្វផ្សាយនេះ

2.7 ប្រភេទនៃវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

• ផ្អែកលើគម្រោង/កម្មវិធី

2.8 គោលបំណង/ទិសដៅសំខាន់នៃវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (Rice cultivation, watersaving, agronomic innovation)

- To demonstrate and evaluate the innovative SRI technique under local conditions with land users' participation. - To inform farmers about the basic concepts, associated principles, and technical know-how related to SRI. - To share knowledge gained on SRI with a wider audience. - To scale up the innovation across larger areas

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: - Lack of systematic on-farm research for developing a technology that takes into account farmers' needs. - Weak institutional collaboration for technology development, dissemination and scaling up. - Poor soil fertility, limited crop production, and poor irrigation facilities

2.9 លក្ខខណ្ឌអនុញ្ញាត ឬរារាំងការអនុវត្តន៍បច្ចេកទេសដែលស្ថិតនៅក្រោមវិធីសាស្រ្តផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

3.1 អ្នកពាក់ព័ន្ធដែលបានចូលរួមក្នុងវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ និងតួនាទីរបស់ពួកគេ

3.2 ការចូលរួមរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីក្នុងតំបន់/ សហគមន៍ក្នុងតំបន់ក្នុងដំណាក់កាលផ្សេងគ្នានៃវិធីសាស្រ្តផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

	ការចូលរួមរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីក្នុងតំបន់/សហគមន៍ក្នុងតំបន់	សូមបញ្ជាក់នរណាត្រូវបានចូលរួម ព្រមទាំងពណ៌នាសកម្មភាពទាំងនោះ
ការចាប់ផ្តើម/ការលើកទឹកចិត្ត	អសកម្ម	public meetings; First year's on-station demonstration with results shared at public meetings
ការរៀបចំផែនការ	អន្តរកម្ម	public meetings; Public meetings organised in different villages; villagers selected lead farmers for the training, and orientation meeting held to plan activities
ការអនុវត្តន៍	អន្តរកម្ម	responsibility for major steps; Farmers themselves implemented the activities; the project facilitated the research and arranged logistics
ការត្រួតពិនិត្យ និងវាយតម្លៃ	អន្តរកម្ម	Measurements, observations and reporting were carried out once a week. At the end of the project, results were evaluated through interviews using questionnaires. Public meeting organised to share results with district level stakeholders
Research	អន្តរកម្ម	On-farm and on-station research conducted; information from research station collected by technicians; farmers themselves collected information from their fields

3.3 គំនូសបំព្រួញ (ប្រសិនបើមាន)

3.4 ការសម្រេចចិត្តលើការជ្រើសរើសបច្ចេកទេស SLM

សូមបញ្ជាក់តើអ្នកណាជាអ្នកបានសម្រេចចិត្តក្នុងការជ្រើសរើសបច្ចេកទេសដើម្បីយកមកអនុវត្តន៍:

• អ្នកជំនាញឯកទេស SLM បន្ទាប់ពីបានប្រឹក្សាយោបល់ជាមួយអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី

ចូរពន្យល់:

SRI is being tested in many countries in Asia and rest of the world with proven benefits. Project staff shared SRI principles and methods with the watershed-farmers, few of them came forward and tested it to observe the performance in the local condition.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by SLM specialists with consultation of land users. It was tested first at a research station to build confidence of project staff and surrounding villagers, and was then taken to interested farmers' fields

4.1 ការកសាងសមត្ថភាព/ បណ្តុះបណ្តាល

តើវគ្គបណ្តុះបណ្តាលបានផ្តល់ឱ្យអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី/អ្នកពាក់ព័ន្ធផ្សេងៗទៀតដែរឬទេ?

បាទ/ចា៎

សូមបញ្ជាក់តើអ្នកណាត្រូវបានបណ្តុះបណ្តាល:

• អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី
• បុគ្គលិកចុះទីវាល/អ្នកផ្តល់ប្រឹក្សាយោបល់

ទម្រង់នៃការបណ្តុះបណ្តាល:

• ពីកសិករទីកសិករ
• ទីតាំងបង្ហាញ
• ការប្រជុំជាសាធារណៈ
• វគ្គបណ្តុះបណ្តាល

ប្រធានបទបណ្តុះបណ្តាល:

The principles associated with SRI, participatory research procedures, and farmers' concerns (men and women).

4.2 សេវាផ្តល់ប្រឹក្សាយោបល់

តើអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីបានទទួលនូវសេវាផ្តល់ប្រឹក្សាដែរ ឬទេ?

បាទ/ចា៎

សូមបញ្ជាក់ប្រសិនបើសេវាកម្មប្រឹក្សាយោបល់ត្រូវបានផ្តល់ឱ្យ:

• នៅលើដីរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី

ពណ៌នា/ពន្យល់:

Name of method used for advisory service: Farmer - to - Farmer Extension of SRI; Key elements: Use of local farmers as facilitators, Farmer - to - farmer visits, Public meetings , national workshop; 1) Advisory service was carried out through: projects own extension structure and agents; Extension staff: specifically hired project employees 2) Target groups for extension: land users; Activities: trainings, group discussions, farm visits

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; Large number of farmers can now implement SRI with confidence, there are 15 local trainers who can train many farmers, which insures the continuation of SRI activities .

4.3 ការពង្រឹងសមត្ថភាពស្ថាប័ន (ការអភិរឌ្ឍន៍អង្គភាព)

តើស្ថាប័នទាំងអស់ត្រូវបានបង្កើតឡើង ឬពង្រឹងសមត្ថភាពតាមរយៈវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយដែរ ឬទេ?

• ទេ

4.4 ការត្រួតពិនិត្យ និងវាយតម្លៃ

តើការត្រួតពិនិត្យ និងវាយតម្លៃគឺជាផ្នែកមួយនៃវិធីសាស្ត្រដែរឬទេ?

បាទ/ចា៎

មតិយោបល់:

bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations; indicators: soil condition and irrigation facilities

technical aspects were regular monitored through measurements; indicators: number of tillers, tiller height, climatic conditions

socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: preference for rice varieties

economic / production aspects were regular monitored through observations; indicators: grain and biomass production, cost of production

area treated aspects were ad hoc monitored through measurements; indicators: area of SRI cultivation

no. of land users involved aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations; indicators: frequency of farm visits and record keeping

management of Approach aspects were regular monitored through observations; indicators: training management by farmer field school management sub-committees

4.5 ការស្រាវជ្រាវ

តើការស្រាវជ្រាវ គឺជាផ្នែកមួយនៃវិធីសាស្រ្តដែរឬទេ?

បាទ/ចា៎

• Comparision between traditional and SRI methods

សូមផ្តល់ព័ត៌មានបន្ថែមទៀតឱ្យបានលម្អិត និងចង្អុលបង្ហាញនរណាដែលបានធ្វើការស្រាវជ្រាវ:

Participatory research at the farmer field schools was a key element of the approach. The schools compared the inputs and outputs of the traditional and SRI methods including the differences in grain and biomass production, the costs and benefits, and the advantages and disadvantages.

Research was carried out both on station and on-farm

5.1 ថវិកាប្រចាំឆ្នាំសម្រាប់ផ្សព្វផ្សាយ SLM

ប្រសិនបើចំនួនពិតប្រាកដនៃថវិកាប្រចាំឆ្នាំមិនត្រូវបានដឹងច្បាស់ សូមប្រាប់ពីចន្លោះនៃថវិកានោះ:

• 2,000-10,000

មតិយោបល់ (ឧ. ប្រភពសំខាន់នៃមូលនិធិ/ម្ចាស់ជំនួយចំបង):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international (SDC, IDRC, ICIMOD): 90.0%; other (Jhikhu Khola farmers): 10.0%

5.2 ការគាំទ្រផ្នែកហិរញ្ញវត្ថុ / សម្ភារៈដែលបានផ្តល់ទៅឱ្យអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី

តើអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីបានទទួលការគាំទ្រផ្នែកហិរញ្ញវត្ថ/សម្ភារៈសម្រាប់ការអនុវត្តន៍បច្ចេកទេសដែរឬទេ:

បាទ/ចា៎

5.3 សូមបញ្ជាក់ពីធាតុចូលត្រូវបានផ្តល់បដិភាគ (រួមទាំងកម្លាំងពលកម្ម)

• កសិកម្ម

ប្រសិនបើកម្លាំងពលកម្មធ្វើដោយអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី តើវាជាធាតុចូលដ៏សំខាន់មួយដែរ ឬទេ:

• ដោយស្ម័គ្រចិត្ត

មតិយោបល់:

Farmers worked either as a trainee or as a volunteer.

5.4 ឥណទាន

តើឥណទានដែលបានផ្តល់នៅក្រោមវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយសម្រាប់សកម្មភាព SLM នេះយ៉ាងដូចម្តេច?

ទេ

6.1 ផលប៉ះពាល់នៃវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

6.2 ការលើកទឹកចិត្តចម្បងៗរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីសម្រាប់ការអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស SLM

6.3 សកម្មភាពផ្សព្វផ្សាយដែលប្រកបដោយចីរភាព

តើអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីអាចធ្វើឱ្យមានចីរភាពនូវអ្វីដែលត្រូវបានអនុវត្តន៍តាមរយៈវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយដែរឬទេ(ដោយពុំមានការគាំទ្រពីអ្នកខាងក្រៅ)?

• បាទ/ចា៎

ប្រសិនបាទ/ច៎ា សូមរៀបរាប់ថាធ្វើយ៉ាងម៉េច:

About 35 local land users had adopted the SRI method and previous adopters were continuing to use SRI method. However, some more time may be required for its wider adoption.

6.4 ភាពខ្លាំង/ គុណសម្បត្តិនៃវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

ភាពខ្លាំង/ គុណសម្បត្តិ/ ឱកាស ទស្សនៈរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី
Through farmer-to-farmer fi eld visits, farmers had an opportunity to observe others' fi elds and see the performance of SRI in different locations and conditions. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continue such visits as farmers learn much more from farm visits and from sharing experiences with other farmers.)

ភាពខ្លាំង/ គុណសម្បត្តិ/ ឱកាស​ ទស្សនៈរបស់បុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ
Lead farmers served as key resource persons in the village-level farmer field schools. Data from test plots were analyzed by farmers on a weekly basis. This was very effective for promoting the sustainability of SRI. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Encourage district level agriculture offi ces to use the skills of lead farmers as resource persons to expand SRI in their districts.)
Action research was conducted through farmer field schools and lead farmers were trained in training of trainers programmes. These served as platforms for farmers to share their immediate concerns. Besides analysing and presenting, farmers' skills were also developed. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Implement the farmers fi eld school approach during technology implementation to build confi dence of land users and empower them in soil and water conservation.)
Participatory methods and tools were applied repeatedly. Farmer visits and village level group discussions were very effective for evaluating SRI. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Use participatory tools and methods widely during the technology implementing period)
Action research was conducted with farmer groups and individual households. The group approach was more systematic and helped to build confidence of land users in the technology (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: It should be maintained and continued on a regular basis to strengthen land users' involvement)

6.5 ភាពខ្សោយ/ គុណវិបត្តិនៃវិធីសាស្ត្រ និងរកដំណោះស្រាយ

ភាពខ្សោយ/ គុណវិបត្តិ/ ហានិភ័យ ទស្សនៈរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី	តើបច្ចេកទេសទាំងនោះបានដោះស្រាយបញ្ហាដូចម្តេច?
A long dry spell meant that the SRI observation plot could not be established near to the lead farmers' fi eld school site, and only 15 facilitators were able to establish observation plots in their villages.	This was due to natural causes (late arrival of monsoon), it can be improved easily if monsoon arrives on time.

ភាពខ្សោយ/ គុណវិបត្តិ/ ហានិភ័យក្នុងទស្សនៈរបស់បុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ	តើបច្ចេកទេសទាំងនោះបានដោះស្រាយបញ្ហាដូចម្តេច?
Agro-ecosystem analysis, as used at the farmer fi eld schools, became a time-consuming process as participants had to spend much time in preparing presentations.	Pre-planning and pre-preparation of presentation format should reduce the time length
Women's participation in the village level workshops was poor (2% at one location and 5% at another)	Encourage women to participate, and adapt programmes to suit their interests.
Due to time limits, not all SRI adopters' opinions and experiences could be covered during interaction workshops. The scattered farmer field schools (distance-wise) and the diffi cult political situation meant that exchange visits could not be organised for all schools.	Allocate enough time for such programmes

7.1 វិធីសាស្ត្រ/ ប្រភពនៃព័ត៌មាន

7.2 ឯកសារយោងដែលបានចេញផ្សាយ

ចំណងជើង អ្នកនិពន្ធ ឆ្នាំ ISBN:

Dhakal, M.P. (2005) Farmers' Evaluation of System of Rice Intensifi cation in Middle Mountains of Nepal.Cornell International Institute for Food, Agriculture, and Development (CIIFAD)ICIMOD (2007) Good Practices in Watershed Management, Lessons Learned in the Mid Hills of Nepal. KathmanduIRRI - International Rice Research Institute.

មានប្រភពមកពីណា? ថ្លៃដើមប៉ុន្មាន?

ICIMOD, SRI.URL: http://ciifad.cornell.edu/sri/countries/nepal/index.htmlICIMODwww.irri.org.

ចំណងជើង អ្នកនិពន្ធ ឆ្នាំ ISBN:

ICIMOD (2007) Good Practices in Watershed Management, Lessons Learned in the Mid Hills of Nepal. Kathmandu

មានប្រភពមកពីណា? ថ្លៃដើមប៉ុន្មាន?

ICIMOD

ចំណងជើង អ្នកនិពន្ធ ឆ្នាំ ISBN:

IRRI - International Rice Research Institute.

មានប្រភពមកពីណា? ថ្លៃដើមប៉ុន្មាន?

www.irri.org.