1.2 ព័ត៌មានលម្អិតពីបុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ និងស្ថាប័នដែលចូលរួមក្នុងការវាយតម្លៃ និងចងក្រងឯកសារនៃបច្ចេកទេស

ឈ្មោះគម្រោងដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃលើបច្ចេកទេស (បើទាក់ទង)

Water and Land Resource Centre Project (WLRC)

1.3 លក្ខខណ្ឌទាក់ទងទៅនឹងការប្រើប្រាស់ទិន្នន័យដែលបានចងក្រងតាមរយៈ វ៉ូខេត

អ្នកចងក្រង និង(បុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ)យល់ព្រមទទួលយកនូវលក្ខខណ្ឌនានាទាក់ទងទៅនឹងការប្រើប្រាស់ទិន្នន័យដែលបានចងក្រងតាមរយៈវ៉ូខេត:

បាទ/ចា៎

1.4 សេចក្តីប្រកាសស្តីពីចីរភាពនៃការពណ៌នាពីបច្ចេកទេស

តើបច្ចេកទេសដែលបានពណ៌នានេះមានបញ្ហាដែលផ្តោតលើការធ្លាក់ចុះគុណភាពដី, បើដូច្នេះវាមិនអាចត្រូវបានប្រកាសថាជាបច្ចេកទេសនៃការគ្រប់គ្រងប្រកបដោយចីរភាពទេ?

ទេ

1.5 ការយោងទៅលើកម្រងបញ្ជីសំណួរ (មួយ ឬច្រើន) នៃវិធីសាស្ត្រផ្សព្វផ្សាយ SLM (ដែលបានចងក្រងដោយទស្សនៈពិភពលោកស្តីពីវិធីសាស្ត្រ និងបច្ចេកទេសងអភិរក្ស WOCAT)

2.1 ការពណ៌នាដោយសង្ខេបពីបច្ចេកទេស

និយមន័យបច្ចេកទេស:

Area closure on degraded lands is a land management practice used to rehabilitate and conserve the natural resource bases, and enhance its natural regeneration and restoring capacity and productive functions by excluding animal and human interferences through community consultation and collective actions.

2.2 ការពណ៌នាលម្អិតពីបច្ចេកទេស

ការពណ៌នា:

Area closure is a land management practice that helps to rehabilitate degraded lands, restore the biophysical conditions like soil, vegetation and hydrology by avoiding the interference of animals and human. Because of over grazing and erosion impact, areas delineated for closure are usually degraded shrub or pasture lands that served for grazing. First of all, implementing area closure requires continuous dialogue and discussion with community to reach consensus to close. The community wants to make sure they have benefited from the technology as the land was serving for grazing. They should take the responsibility and create sense of ownership to implement conservation measures, protect and maintain closure areas, and regulate utilization of benefits gained out of it. Questions raised from the community must be discussed thoroughly ahead of the implementation. What part of the degraded land? For what purpose the area is closed? Who are the users? Who are responsible to protect and manage the developed resourcess? How is the benefit sharing among identified users? Commonly, the shared benefits from area closures are hay for livestock through cut-and-carry system, timbers from plantations, and honey production.
Depending on the soil, rainfall and slope conditions different structural and vegetative measures are integrated to enhance the fast regeneration of plant species, restore the soil and increase water availability. It includes enrichment used to rehabilitate and increase the vegetation cover, vegetative and structural measures to retain the soil and water on its place. Structures such as hillside terrace often integrated with grass or shrub hedgerows is used to control soil erosion. In-situ water harvesting structures such as trenches or half moon or eye brow are used to harvest and infiltrate rain or runoff water to increase regeneration and survival of planted trees. Trees and/or shrub species that have high rehabilitation and multipurpose values are used as enrichment plantations. Closed areas need collective action to protect, maintain and manage the common resources. Collective user rights have to be entitled to bring equity on resource sharing and minimize social conflicts.

The purposes of area closure are: 1) rehabilitate degraded lands, 2) protect and restore the natural resource base, and 3) change into productive land and enhance economic and environmental functions of rehabilitated lands.

Implementation of area closure begins with the selection and demarcation of area through genuine participation of land users. After identifying the area to be closed, at establishment stage construction of ditches and terraces is made using stones combined with grasses or shrubs of multipurpose value such as Vetiver grass, Dinsho grass, Bana grass, susbania, etc. Depending on site conditions, enrichment tree species which have rehabilitation and soil restoration purposes are planted in the form of wood lot or scattered tree plantation. Among the common species, A. albida, A. saligna, A. decurrense, Gravilia robusta, etc. are used to rehabilitate and serve as fuel wood and timber. In moisture stress areas structures like trench, level bunds, and half moon should be constructed to increase survival rate of planted tree/shrub species whereas in areas having sufficient moisture these structures, depending on the landforms and soil drainage conditions, help to increase infiltration and recharging of ground water in downstream areas. Therefore, site selection and demarcation, construction of soil conservation and moisture conservation structures, and seedling management and plantation of multipurpose trees, shrubs and grasses are the activities accomplished at establishment stage of area closure. The required inputs are stones, seeds/seedlings, grass cuttings/splits, hand tools, and collective labor. For recurrent maintenance activities, seedlings and cuttings for re-plantation purpose or replace dead seedlings, stones to repair damage stone terraces and moisture conservation structures. Harvesting and transporting of area closure products such as grass and timber become a recurrent activity. Person days per hectare per year required for plantation (preparation of holes and planting) is 11.5, for harvesting and transporting harvested grass is 30, and for terrace construction is 26.5.

Area closure management is commonly practiced on degraded hills where soil is highly depleted, its water holding capacity is low, and vegetation is denuded. Usually degraded lands are used to serve for communal grazing system. The degree of land degradation becomes severe where there are high livestock and human population pressure. Management of closure area and the benefit sharing has to be regulated using agreed bylaws.

The living condition depends on subsistence crop-livestock mixed farming. On average households have 5-6 family size. Crop production is meant for home consumption with small surplus for local market. The services related to water supply, energy supply, and infrastructure are low. Besides it is an asset, animals often used to cope shocks during drought periods.

2.3 ​រូបភាពនៃបច្ចេកទេស

2.5 ប្រទេស/តំបន់/ទីតាំងកន្លែង ដែលបច្ចេកទេសត្រូវបានអនុវត្ត និងបានគ្រប់ដណ្តប់ដោយការវាយតម្លៃនេះ

2.6 កាលបរិច្ឆេទនៃការអនុវត្ត

ប្រសិនបើមិនច្បាស់ឆ្នាំ សូមបញ្ជាក់កាលបរិច្ឆេទដែលប្រហាក់ប្រហែល:

• តិចជាង 10ឆ្នាំមុន (ថ្មី)

2.7 ការណែនាំពីបច្ចេកទេស

សូមបញ្ជាក់តើបច្ចេកទេសត្រូវបានណែនាំឱ្យអនុវត្តដោយរបៀបណា:

• តាមរយៈគម្រោង / អន្តរាគមន៍ពីខាងក្រៅ

មតិយោបល់ (ប្រភេទនៃគម្រោង ។ល។):

Area closure as an integrated SLM technology is practiced in recent years. However, the land users have their own traditional practice by closing grass lands or shrub lands during the rainy season.

3.1 គោលបំណងចម្បង (១​ ឬច្រើន)​ នៃបច្ចេកទេសនេះ

• អភិរក្សប្រព័ន្ធអេកូឡូស៊ី

3.2 ប្រភេទដីប្រើប្រាស់មួយប្រភេទ (ច្រើនប្រភេទ) ដែលបានអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស

ដីប្រើប្រាស់ចម្រុះនៅលើដីតែមួយ:

បាទ/ចា៎

បញ្ជាក់ពីប្រភេទដីច្រើនប្រភេទ (ដីដាំដំណាំ/ដីចិញ្ចឹមសត្វ/ដីព្រៃឈើ):

• Agro-pastoralism ( រួមបញ្ចូលទាំងដំណាំ និងចិញ្ចឹមសត្វ)

មតិយោបល់:

Livestock density (if relevant):
> 100 LU /km2

Major land use problems (compiler’s opinion): Land degradation due to different forms of soil erosion and nutrient depletion, excess removal of crop residues, excessive overgrazing, shortage of pasture lands and its low productivity, excessive and inappropriate construction of traditional ditches, and increased demand of trees for the purpose of fuel wood and timber.
Major land use problems (land users’ perception): Soil erosion and soil nutrient depletion, shortage of cultivated land, shortage of grazing land and wood for fuel wood

3.4 ការផ្គត់ផ្គង់ទឹក

ការផ្គត់ផ្គង់ទឹកនៅកន្លែងអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស:

• ទឹកភ្លៀង

3.5 ក្រុម SLM ដែលបច្ចេកទេសស្ថិតនៅក្នុង

• តំបន់ទ្រនាប់ (បិទការប្រើប្រាស់ គាំទ្រដល់ការស្តារឡើងវិញ)

3.6 វិធានការ SLM ដែលបញ្ចូលនូវបច្ចេកទេស

មតិយោបល់:

Type of vegetative measures: aligned: -contour, scattered / dispersed, in blocks

3.7 កំណត់ប្រភេទនៃការធ្លាក់ចុះគុណភាពដីសំខាន់ៗដែលបច្ចេកទេសនេះបានដោះស្រាយ

មតិយោបល់:

Main causes of degradation: deforestation / removal of natural vegetation (incl. forest fires), overgrazing, population pressure, governance / institutional
Secondary causes of degradation: soil management, over-exploitation of vegetation for domestic use, Heavy / extreme rainfall (intensity/amounts), land tenure, education, access to knowledge and support services

3.8 ការពារ កាត់បន្ថយ ឬស្តារឡើងវិញនៃការធ្លាក់ចុះគុណភាពដី

បញ្ជាក់ពីគោលដៅរបស់បច្ចេកទេស ដែលផ្តោតទៅការធ្លាក់ចុះគុណភាពដី:

• ការកាត់បន្ថយការធ្លាក់ចុះគុណភាពដី
• ការជួសជុល/ ស្តារឡើងវិញនៃឱនភាពដីធ្ងន់ធ្ងរ

4.1 គំនូសបច្ចេកទេសនៃបច្ចេកទេសនេះ

4.2 ព័ត៌មានទូទៅដែលពាក់ព័ន្ធនឹងការគណនាធាតុចូល និងថ្លៃដើម

ផ្សេងៗ/ រូបិយប័ណ្ណជាតិ (បញ្ជាក់):

ETB

បើពាក់ព័ន្ធសូមកំណត់អត្រាប្តូរប្រាក់ពីដុល្លាទៅរូបិយប័ណ្ណតំបន់ (ឧ.​​ 1 ដុល្លារ​ = 79.9 រៀលនៃរូបិយប័ណ្ណប្រេស៊ីល) ៖ 1 ដុល្លារ =:

20,0

4.3 សកម្មភាពបង្កើត

	សកម្មភាព	រយៈពេល​ (រដូវកាល)
1.	Preparation of seedlings	March-May
2.	Transporting seedlings	July
3.	Transporting grass splits	July
4.	Sowing seeds on bunds	July
5.	Planting of trees and shrubs	July
6.	Planting of grass splits or cuttings	July
7.	Construction of bunds or terraces	February-April
8.	Construction of cutoff drains and ditches	Fegruary-April
9.	Construction of waterways	February-April
10.	Surveying or layout of structures	January-March
11.	Consultation of the community
12.	Establish bylaws to control free grazing
13.	Establish user groups and arrange equitable benefit sharing

4.4 ថ្លៃដើម និងធាតុចូលដែលត្រូវការសម្រាប់ការបង្កើតបច្ចេកទេស

	បញ្ជាក់ពីធាតុចូល	ឯកតា	បរិមាណ	ថ្លៃដើមក្នុងមួយឯកតា	ថ្លៃធាតុចូលសរុប	% នៃថ្លៃដើមដែលចំណាយដោយអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី
កម្លាំងពលកម្ម	labour	ha	1,0	1766,0	1766,0	80,0
សម្ភារៈ	tools	ha	1,0	300,6	300,6	50,0
សម្ភារៈដាំដុះ	seedlings	ha	1,0	405,6	405,6	100,0
សម្ភារៈដាំដុះ	seeds	ha	1,0	20,0	20,0	100,0
សម្ភារៈសាងសង់	stone	ha	1,0	1300,0	1300,0	100,0
ថ្លៃដើមសរុបក្នុងការបង្កើតបច្ចេកទេស					3792,2
ថ្លៃដើមសរុបក្នុងការបង្កើតបច្ចេកទេសគិតជាដុល្លារ					189,61

មតិយោបល់:

Duration of establishment phase: 15 month(s)

4.5 សកម្មភាពថែទាំ

	សកម្មភាព	ពេលវេលា/ ភាពញឹកញាប់
1.	Preparation of seedlings	March-May
2.	Seedling transportation	July
3.	Grass split transportation	July
4.	Planting seedlings	July
5.	Planting grass splits	July
6.	Maintenance of bunds / cutoff drains
7.	Enforcing bylaws	Throught the year
8.	Benefit sharing among user groups	Throughout the year

4.6 កំណត់ថ្លៃដើមសម្រាប់ការថែទាំ/ សកម្មភាពរបស់បច្ចេកទេស (ក្នុងរយៈពេលមួយឆ្នាំ)

	បញ្ជាក់ពីធាតុចូល	ឯកតា	បរិមាណ	ថ្លៃដើមក្នុងមួយឯកតា	ថ្លៃធាតុចូលសរុប	% នៃថ្លៃដើមដែលចំណាយដោយអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី
កម្លាំងពលកម្ម	labour	ha	1,0	624,0	624,0	29,0
សម្ភារៈដាំដុះ	seedlings	ha	1,0	250,0	250,0	100,0
ថ្លៃដើមសរុបសម្រាប់ការថែទាំដំណាំតាមបច្ចេកទេស					874,0
ថ្លៃដើមសរុបសម្រាប់ការថែទាំដំណាំតាមបច្ចេកទេសគិតជាដុល្លារ					43,7

មតិយោបល់:

Machinery/ tools: Spade, pickaxe, crowbar,

4.7 កត្តាសំខាន់បំផុតដែលមានឥទ្ធិពលដល់ការចំណាយ

ពណ៌នាពីកត្តាប៉ះពាល់ចម្បងៗទៅលើថ្លៃដើម:

The costs of area closure affected by the labour availability, regeneration capacity of trees on the degraded lands

5.1 អាកាសធាតុ

5.2 សណ្ឋានដី

5.3 ដី

5.4 ទឹកដែលអាចទាញមកប្រើប្រាស់បាន និងគុណភាពទឹក

5.5 ជីវៈចម្រុះ

5.6 លក្ខណៈនៃអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីដែលអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស

សូមបញ្ជាក់ពីលក្ខណៈពាក់ព័ន្ធផ្សេងទៀតអំពីអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី:

Land users applying the Technology are mainly common / average land users
Difference in the involvement of women and men: Women has their own role in the establishment of the rea closure by collecting stones, support construction and planting activities. In addition they will harvest and transport fodder for livestock
Population density: 200-500 persons/km2
Annual population growth: 2% - 3%
80% of the land users are average wealthy.
20% of the land users are poor.

5.7 ទំហំផ្ទៃដីជាមធ្យមនៃដីប្រើប្រាស់ដោយអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី ក្នុងការអនុវត្ត​បច្ចេកទេស

5.8 ភាពជាម្ចាស់ដី កម្មសិទ្ធប្រើប្រាស់ដី និងកម្មសិទ្ធប្រើប្រាស់ទឹក

ភាពជាម្ចាស់ដី:

• រដ្ឋ

កម្មសិទ្ធប្រើប្រាស់ទឹក:

• អាស្រ័យផលសេរី (មិនមានការកំណត់)
• ជាក្រុម (មានដែនកំណត់)

5.9 ការប្រើប្រាស់សេវាកម្ម និងហេដ្ឋារចនាសម្ព័ន្ធ

6.1 ផលប៉ះពាល់ក្នុងបរិវេណអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេសដែលកើតមាន

ផលប៉ះពាល់លើសេដ្ឋកិច្ចសង្គម

ផលិតផល

ចំណូល និងថ្លៃដើម

ផលប៉ះពាល់ទៅលើវប្បធម៌សង្គម

ផលប៉ះពាល់ទៅលើអេកូឡូស៊ី

វដ្តទឹក/លំហូរ

ដី

ជីវចម្រុះ៖ ដំណាំ, សត្វ

ការកាត់បន្ថយហានិភ័យនៃគ្រោះមហន្តរាយ និងគ្រោះអាកាសធាតុ

6.2 ផលប៉ះពាល់ក្រៅបរិវេណអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេសដែលកើតមាន

6.3 ភាពប្រឈម និងភាពរួសនៃបច្ចេកទេសទៅនឹងការប្រែប្រួលអាកាសធាតុ និងគ្រោះអាកាសធាតុ/ គ្រោះមហន្តរាយ (ដែលដឹងដោយអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី)

គ្រោះអាកាសធាតុ (មហន្តរាយ) ​

គ្រោះមហន្តរាយធម្មជាតិ

	លក្ខណៈឆ្លើយតបនៃបច្ចេកទេសទៅនឹងការប្រែប្រួលអាកាសធាតុ
ព្យុះភ្លៀងតាមតំបន់	ល្អ

គ្រោះមហន្តរាយអាកាសធាតុ

	លក្ខណៈឆ្លើយតបនៃបច្ចេកទេសទៅនឹងការប្រែប្រួលអាកាសធាតុ
រាំងស្ងួត	ល្អ

គ្រោះមហន្តរាយទឹក

	លក្ខណៈឆ្លើយតបនៃបច្ចេកទេសទៅនឹងការប្រែប្រួលអាកាសធាតុ
ទឹកជំនន់ទូទៅ (ទន្លេ)	មិនល្អ

6.4 ការវិភាគថ្លៃដើម និងអត្ថប្រយោជន៍

តើផលចំណេញ និងថ្លៃដើមត្រូវបានប្រៀបធៀបគ្នាយ៉ាងដូចម្តេច (ទស្សនៈរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី)?

តើផលចំណេញ និងការថែទាំ/ ជួសជុលត្រូវបានប្រៀបធៀបគ្នាយ៉ាងដូចម្តេច (ទស្សនៈរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី)?

មតិយោបល់:

Short term economic benefits can be attained by harvesting forage biomass for livestock while in the long term downstream agricultural productivity can be improved as they witnessed the change in stream flows to be used for irrigation. This is very much pronounced in Aba Gerima watershed where farmers in the downstream get to access more water.

6.5 ការទទួលយកបច្ចេកទេស

មតិយោបល់:

The technology is implemented in group or at community level.
The spontaneous adoption of this technology is possible without integrating plantations of improved trees/shrubs and grasses
There is a moderate trend towards spontaneous adoption of the Technology
Adoption to area closure is increasing as it provides better pasture for livestock and benefit those who do not have power or for poor community groups

6.7 ភាពខ្លាំង/ គុណសម្បត្តិ/ ឱកាសនៃបច្ចេកទេស

ភាពខ្លាំង/ គុណសម្បត្តិ/ ឱកាសនៅកន្លែងរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី
Increase in vegetation cover and biomass production for livestock feed
Increase the duration and flow of streams
Decrease erosion
Decrease transmission of animal disease often a problem during open grazing system

ភាពខ្លាំង/ គុណសម្បត្តិ/ ឱកាស​ ទស្សនៈរបស់បុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ
Increase the fodder and grass biomass production for livestock feed
Increase the regeneration of lost plant diversities
Create alternative livelihood options (off farm activities like honey production, timber, tree or fodder seed production)
Enhance the micro-climatic conditions and on-site vegetation cover, organic matter, and soil water holding capacity. In addition it improves off-site surface and subsurface water flows

6.8 ភាពខ្សោយ/ គុណវិបត្តិ/ ហានិភ័យនៃបច្ចេកទេស និងវិធីសាស្ត្រដោះស្រាយ

ភាពខ្សោយ/ គុណវិបត្តិ/ ហានិភ័យ ទស្សនៈរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី	តើបច្ចេកទេសទាំងនោះបានដោះស្រាយបញ្ហាដូចម្តេច?
Land users' perceived that implementation of the technology decreases open access to communal pasture lands to maximize their benefit	Awareness creation activities has to be provided
Shortage of labor to harvest and transport forages to feed animals	Cost effective technologies to prepare feed, handle and transport forage has to be introduced and adopted. It can be overcomed by organizing service provider groups.
The amount of pasture/fodder produced and shared among users is much less than the feed requirement of all animals hold by a household	Introduce fodder species producing high biomass and high quality fodder; decrease livestock number per household.

ភាពខ្សោយ/ គុណវិបត្តិ/ ហានិភ័យ ទស្សនៈរបស់អ្នកចងក្រងឬបុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ	តើបច្ចេកទេសទាំងនោះបានដោះស្រាយបញ្ហាដូចម្តេច?
Labor constraint for cut-and -carry for stall feeding	It can be sustained through organizing service providers groups
Stall feeding restricted the cross breeding of animals in the village easily accessible during open grazing	Artificial insemination and bull services and synchronization breeding system has to be promoted

7.1 វិធីសាស្ត្រ/ ប្រភពនៃព័ត៌មាន

7.2 ឯកសារយោងដែលបានចេញផ្សាយ

ចំណងជើង អ្នកនិពន្ធ ឆ្នាំ ISBN:

Sustaining the win-win benefits of improved grazing land management in EthiopiaPost written by Wolde Mekuria, WLE. March 30, 2015

មានប្រភពមកពីណា? ថ្លៃដើមប៉ុន្មាន?

WLE post

ចំណងជើង អ្នកនិពន្ធ ឆ្នាំ ISBN:

http://www.bioone.org/doi/pdf/10.1659/0276-4741(2005)025%5B0044%3ATROCIC%5D2.0.CO%3B2

ចំណងជើង អ្នកនិពន្ធ ឆ្នាំ ISBN:

Vegetation Improvement in Communal Closed Areas in Tigray, Ethiopia.Sarah Tewolde-Berhan 1,4, Ralph Mitlöhner 2, Bart Muys3 , and Mitiku Haile 4

ចំណងជើង អ្នកនិពន្ធ ឆ្នាំ ISBN:

Natural Regeneration Practice in Degraded High Lands of Ethiopia Through Area Enclosure Wondie Mebrat, Department of Biology, Adigrat University, Adigrat, Tigray, Ethiopia, 2015

ចំណងជើង អ្នកនិពន្ធ ឆ្នាំ ISBN:

Area Closure: Rehabilitation of Degraded Lands and Grasslands and its Multiple Benefits. WLRC Brief No. 2. June 2015

មានប្រភពមកពីណា? ថ្លៃដើមប៉ុន្មាន?

www.wlrc-eth.org