1.2 ព័ត៌មានលម្អិតពីបុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ និងស្ថាប័នដែលចូលរួមក្នុងការវាយតម្លៃ និងចងក្រងឯកសារនៃវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

ឈ្មោះគម្រោងដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃលើវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ (បើទាក់ទង)

Sustainable Landmanagement in south-western Madagascar (SuLaMa / GLUES)

ឈ្មោះអង្គភាពមួយ (ច្រើន) ដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃលើវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ (បើទាក់ទង)

University of Greifswald (University of Greifswald) - ប្រទេសអាល្លឺម៉ង់

ឈ្មោះអង្គភាពមួយ (ច្រើន) ដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃលើវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ (បើទាក់ទង)

University of Antananarivo - ប្រទេសម៉ាដាហ្គាស្កា

ឈ្មោះអង្គភាពមួយ (ច្រើន) ដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃលើវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ (បើទាក់ទង)

Université de Tuléar - ប្រទេសម៉ាដាហ្គាស្កា

1.3 លក្ខខណ្ឌទាក់ទងទៅនឹងការប្រើប្រាស់ទិន្នន័យដែលបានចងក្រងតាមរយៈវ៉ូខេត

តើពេលណាដែលទិន្នន័យបានចងក្រង (នៅទីវាល)?

01/08/2014

អ្នកចងក្រង និង(បុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ)យល់ព្រមទទួលយកនូវលក្ខខណ្ឌនានាទាក់ទងទៅនឹងការប្រើប្រាស់ទិន្នន័យដែលបានចងក្រងតាមរយៈ​ វ៉ូខេត:

បាទ/ចា៎

2.1 ពណ៌នាសង្ខេបខ្លីពីវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

Participatory simulation to foster stakeholder dialogue in natural resource management, conciliate resource conflicts and enable participatory land use planning

2.2 ពណ៌នាលម្អិតពិវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

ពណ៌នាលម្អិតពិវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ:

Aims / objectives: Two role-playing games were designed to understand land users' livelihoods strategies in both “normal” but also in times of drought events and cattle raids. The aim was to find out how, and why, livelihood decisions differed between household types in south-western Madagascar. Under the role-playing methodology, land users actively participate through discussing livelihood strategies, negotiating interests, and planning for the future. The methodology proved to be very dynamic, interactive and useful.

Methods: The SuLaMa project is a five-year Malagasy and German research project involving an interdisciplinary team (consortium) that aimed at developing sustainable land use techniques in south-western Madagascar. To validate soft-models that fed into computer-based models on land use change in the region, four workshops were held in four villages on the Mahafaly Plateau. Two groups of land users, with twelve participants each, worked simultaneously in each village: a total number of 96 participated. The games, ‘Livelihood Game’ and ‘Livestock Game', were designed to foster both scientific knowledge production on land use systems, and dialogue with land users. The essence of the methodology is that participants assume the roles of different household types and simulate their annual livelihood activities on a village map. The four household types differed from relatively wealthy (owning cattle; a lot of land) to poor (no cattle, little land). Each household type was represented by two or three participants and roles were allocated randomly.

Stages of implementation: The 'Livelihood Game' covers a time span of four fictive years. Each round represents the household’s annual subsistence decisions. In contrast, the 'Livestock Game' covers just one year with each round encompassing one of three seasons. In the 'Livelihood Game', players have a set of activity options: for example they can locate fields on the map and choose how to cultivate them. Moreover, additional activities like livestock keeping, charcoal making, paid work, collecting/hunting or educating children are available to them. The 'Livestock Game' concentrates on grazing and animal feeding decisions. Each decision is visualized by pictured cards, tokens and symbols - and grazing areas are mapped. While this participatory simulation remains a game, it would be feasible to integrate the methodology into a land use planning process.

Role of stakeholders: Initially, the joint interdisciplinary team conducted a baseline survey using Rapid Rural Appraisal tools to gain a general understanding of local socio-ecologic systems. Following this, a quantitative household survey was carried out in several villages (665 households in total) to analyse household composition and structures. Based on the results, researchers designed the structure of the role-playing games.

Other important information: A crucial precondition was that local communities were well-informed and participation was voluntary. This was achieved by an ‘announcement tour’ where timings were adapted to social, cultural and labour schedules of the local population. The communities were invited to determine the participants according to specific criteria. Participants had to be those who practiced the typical livelihood activities of agriculture and livestock keeping, and who contributed to household decision-making. Furthermore, a balance in terms of gender, age and lineage was requested.

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 other activities than SLM (Participation, stakeholder communication, joint natural resource management, mutual learning)

The community workshops were held in order to (1) validate the researchers’ systems understanding about rural livelihoods and land use activities, and to (2) discuss land users' responses to drought events and cattle raids.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Lack of communication and negotiation between technicians, resource users and scientists. Lack of participation of rural communities in long-term planning and decision-making. Lack of regulations for the use of scarce resources.

2.9 លក្ខខណ្ឌអនុញ្ញាត ឬរារាំងការអនុវត្តន៍បច្ចេកទេសដែលស្ថិតនៅក្រោមវិធីសាស្រ្តផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

3.1 អ្នកពាក់ព័ន្ធដែលបានចូលរួមក្នុងវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ និងតួនាទីរបស់ពួកគេ

3.2 ការចូលរួមរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីក្នុងតំបន់/ សហគមន៍ក្នុងតំបន់ក្នុងដំណាក់កាលផ្សេងគ្នានៃវិធីសាស្រ្តផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

	ការចូលរួមរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីក្នុងតំបន់/សហគមន៍ក្នុងតំបន់	សូមបញ្ជាក់នរណាត្រូវបានចូលរួម ព្រមទាំងពណ៌នាសកម្មភាពទាំងនោះ
ការចាប់ផ្តើម/ការលើកទឹកចិត្ត	គ្មាន
ការរៀបចំផែនការ	គ្មាន
ការអនុវត្តន៍	អន្តរកម្ម	Villagers participated in the workshops. As compensation for their time, they received a community remuneration.
ការត្រួតពិនិត្យ និងវាយតម្លៃ	អន្តរកម្ម	After the workshops, participants were asked to give feedback on the methodology.
Research	គ្មាន

3.3 គំនូសបំព្រួញ (ប្រសិនបើមាន)

3.4 ការសម្រេចចិត្តលើការជ្រើសរើសបច្ចេកទេស SLM

សូមបញ្ជាក់តើអ្នកណាជាអ្នកបានសម្រេចចិត្តក្នុងការជ្រើសរើសបច្ចេកទេសដើម្បីយកមកអនុវត្តន៍:

• អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី ដោយមានការគាំទ្រពីអ្នកជំនាញឯកទេស SLM

ចូរពន្យល់:

During the simulations, land users decided which activities they carried out to feed their (fictive) households. A set of predetermined activities was available to them. The discussions were moderated by a facilitator.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by by SLM specialists alone (top-down). The SuLaMa research project decided to use the Role-Playing Games methodology to trigger discussion among and with land users. Within the simulation, land users strongly influenced the game process by decidion on their household activities.

4.1 ការកសាងសមត្ថភាព/ បណ្តុះបណ្តាល

តើវគ្គបណ្តុះបណ្តាលបានផ្តល់ឱ្យអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី/អ្នកពាក់ព័ន្ធផ្សេងៗទៀតដែរឬទេ?

បាទ/ចា៎

សូមបញ្ជាក់តើអ្នកណាត្រូវបានបណ្តុះបណ្តាល:

• អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី

• research assistants, WWF staff

ទម្រង់នៃការបណ្តុះបណ្តាល:

• អនុវត្តន៍ជាមួយការងារ
• ពីកសិករទីកសិករ

ទម្រង់នៃការបណ្តុះបណ្តាល:

• 'Learning by doing and failing'

ប្រធានបទបណ្តុះបណ្តាល:

Research assistants and WWF staff were trained to facilitate and document the method adequately.
During the workshop sessions, land users gained understanding of the interdependencies of land use and conservation practices and came to reflect the livelihood strategies in their villages.

4.2 សេវាផ្តល់ប្រឹក្សាយោបល់

តើអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីបានទទួលនូវសេវាផ្តល់ប្រឹក្សាដែរ ឬទេ?

បាទ/ចា៎

ពណ៌នា/ពន្យល់:

Participatory simulations, role-playing games; Key elements: Taking on another households' role, Developping livelihood strategies in different scenarios, Discussion, communication and negotiation

4.3 ការពង្រឹងសមត្ថភាពស្ថាប័ន (ការអភិរឌ្ឍន៍អង្គភាព)

តើស្ថាប័នទាំងអស់ត្រូវបានបង្កើតឡើង ឬពង្រឹងសមត្ថភាពតាមរយៈវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយដែរ ឬទេ?

• ទេ

4.4 ការត្រួតពិនិត្យ និងវាយតម្លៃ

តើការត្រួតពិនិត្យ និងវាយតម្លៃគឺជាផ្នែកមួយនៃវិធីសាស្ត្រដែរឬទេ?

បាទ/ចា៎

មតិយោបល់:

technical aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: data on land use practices were collected

socio-cultural aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: data on human well-being and social conventions (traditions, rituals) were collected

economic / production aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: data on expenses and revenues were collected

area treated aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: spatial decisions were visualised and marked on maps

no. of land users involved aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: in each of the 4 villages 24 land users took part in the workshops

management of Approach aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: qualitative and quantitative data on livelihood strategies were collected

There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: To synchronize the process in the two groups within a village, it was essential to have one observer who could move between the two groups and detect differences. For instance, it was observed that while one facilitator preferred to gather all participants around one big table, the other one arranged separate tables for each household. After the workshop sessions, observers, facilitators and documenters discussed the process and crosschecked the results of different groups. Eventually, it was agreed that it was better to have all participants around one big table. Also household assets, such as poultry or houses, were adopted in the game by the players.

4.5 ការស្រាវជ្រាវ

តើការស្រាវជ្រាវ គឺជាផ្នែកមួយនៃវិធីសាស្រ្តដែរឬទេ?

បាទ/ចា៎

• households' livelihood strategies

សូមផ្តល់ព័ត៌មានបន្ថែមទៀតឱ្យបានលម្អិត និងចង្អុលបង្ហាញនរណាដែលបានធ្វើការស្រាវជ្រាវ:

An international research consortium conducted the Role Playing Game workshops to validate human decisions in their land use models. However, the approach can be applied for various purposes.

Research was carried out on station

5.1 ថវិកាប្រចាំឆ្នាំសម្រាប់ផ្សព្វផ្សាយ SLM

ប្រសិនបើចំនួនពិតប្រាកដនៃថវិកាប្រចាំឆ្នាំមិនត្រូវបានដឹងច្បាស់ សូមប្រាប់ពីចន្លោះនៃថវិកានោះ:

• 2,000-10,000

មតិយោបល់ (ឧ. ប្រភពសំខាន់នៃមូលនិធិ/ម្ចាស់ជំនួយចំបង):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international (German Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF)): 100.0%

5.2 ការគាំទ្រផ្នែកហិរញ្ញវត្ថុ / សម្ភារៈដែលបានផ្តល់ទៅឱ្យអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី

តើអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីបានទទួលការគាំទ្រផ្នែកហិរញ្ញវត្ថ/សម្ភារៈសម្រាប់ការអនុវត្តន៍បច្ចេកទេសដែរឬទេ:

បាទ/ចា៎

5.3 សូមបញ្ជាក់ពីធាតុចូលត្រូវបានផ្តល់បដិភាគ (រួមទាំងកម្លាំងពលកម្ម)

• សម្ភារៈ

ប្រសិនបើកម្លាំងពលកម្មធ្វើដោយអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី តើវាជាធាតុចូលដ៏សំខាន់មួយដែរ ឬទេ:

• ដោយស្ម័គ្រចិត្ត

មតិយោបល់:

Participants were paid expense allowance for the workshop days.

5.4 ឥណទាន

តើឥណទានដែលបានផ្តល់នៅក្រោមវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយសម្រាប់សកម្មភាព SLM នេះយ៉ាងដូចម្តេច?

ទេ

6.1 ផលប៉ះពាល់នៃវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

6.2 ការលើកទឹកចិត្តចម្បងៗរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីសម្រាប់ការអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស SLM

6.3 សកម្មភាពផ្សព្វផ្សាយដែលប្រកបដោយចីរភាព

តើអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីអាចធ្វើឱ្យមានចីរភាពនូវអ្វីដែលត្រូវបានអនុវត្តន៍តាមរយៈវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយដែរឬទេ(ដោយពុំមានការគាំទ្រពីអ្នកខាងក្រៅ)?

• ទេ

ប្រសិន ទេ ឬមិនប្រាកដសូមបញ្ជាក់ និងពន្យល់:

As the methodology needs preparation and facilitations, some method specialists are required to accompany the process.

6.4 ភាពខ្លាំង/ គុណសម្បត្តិនៃវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ

ភាពខ្លាំង/ គុណសម្បត្តិ/ ឱកាស ទស្សនៈរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី

The participants understood and generally accepted the game rapidly. They confirmed to have recognized that it was not just a game but a simulation of reality. As all the activities referred to the people’s everyday life, no long introduction or explanation was necessary to start the game. People seemed to feel comfortable in their “roles” and spoke freely about their household decisions. They could actively take part in the game not only by answering to the questions but also by manipulating the game materials on their own. . “This game is easy, because it refers to our daily life, not to something you have created for yourself. This is the reality of our daily lives.” (Participant in Efoetse, August 2014)

ភាពខ្លាំង/ គុណសម្បត្តិ/ ឱកាស​ ទស្សនៈរបស់បុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ

The Role Playing Game became vivid and lively by using visualization and communication tools. Complex decisions on land use system could be explained with the help of pictures and symbols from people’s daily life. The tools not only helped to capture the whole systems complexity and open discussions, they also assured mutual understanding and synchronized different agents’ perception. Pictures also helped to achieve a common understanding beyond language barriers. In a region with a high illiteracy rate, these visualization tools can be regarded as measures for empowerment as no writing or reading skills are necessary to take part in the game. Thus, the method is a dynamic and interactive tool for stakeholder integration and awareness raising.

6.5 ភាពខ្សោយ/ គុណវិបត្តិនៃវិធីសាស្ត្រ និងរកដំណោះស្រាយ

ភាពខ្សោយ/ គុណវិបត្តិ/ ហានិភ័យ ទស្សនៈរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី	តើបច្ចេកទេសទាំងនោះបានដោះស្រាយបញ្ហាដូចម្តេច?
The methodology is time consuming and brings no direct or sudden benefits for land users.	The method could potentially be changed so that results are less research-oriented and more visible for the participants. Now technologies or alternative livelihood activities could be simulated during the game.

ភាពខ្សោយ/ គុណវិបត្តិ/ ហានិភ័យក្នុងទស្សនៈរបស់បុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ	តើបច្ចេកទេសទាំងនោះបានដោះស្រាយបញ្ហាដូចម្តេច?
It must be mentioned that a lot of investment and preparation is needed for conducting the workshop successfully. The Role-Playing Game not only requires very specific material and tools, but also a lot of time for development, preparation, team training, testing and on-site execution is required. If the time needed for carrying out the game cannot be planned and tested carefully in advance, it may lead to frustration and disappointment.	The benefits of this approach need to be justified and proved to donors and the extension / advisory services to convince them to invest.
Though the methodology was generally accepted and understood, it turned out to be challenging for facilitators and documenters. It requires high communication skills, empathy, and understanding for local conditions and the willingness to listen to the peasants in order to build trust among the group.	To become good facilitators, capacity building and training of extension workers or advisors is needed.
The role-playing games methodology is laborious to design and prepare, it usually needs one dedicated institution to initiate and coordinate the workshops.	The only option for continuing this methodology is if a generally-accepted and professional organisation can be found to take on the responsibility in the long term.

7.1 វិធីសាស្ត្រ/ ប្រភពនៃព័ត៌មាន

7.2 ឯកសារយោងដែលបានចេញផ្សាយ

ចំណងជើង អ្នកនិពន្ធ ឆ្នាំ ISBN:

Wesselow et al. 2015: Participatory Gaming for Sustainable Land Management in the Mahafaly Region. A Practical Guide for Researchers and Practitioners

មានប្រភពមកពីណា? ថ្លៃដើមប៉ុន្មាន?

http://www.sulama.de/files/products/WP5_Product3_Participatory_Gaming_for_SLM_eng.pdf