1.2 ព័ត៌មានលម្អិតពីបុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ និងស្ថាប័នដែលចូលរួមក្នុងការវាយតម្លៃ និងចងក្រងឯកសារនៃបច្ចេកទេស

ឈ្មោះគម្រោងដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃលើបច្ចេកទេស (បើទាក់ទង)

Livelihood Improvement Project Takhar, Afghanistan (LIPT)

ឈ្មោះគម្រោងដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃលើបច្ចេកទេស (បើទាក់ទង)

Potential and limitations for improved natural resource management (NRM) in mountain communities in the Rustaq district, Afghanistan (Rustaq NRM Study)

ឈ្មោះអង្គភាពមួយ (ច្រើន) ដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃបច្ចេកទេស (បើទាក់ទង)

Terre des Hommes (Terre des Hommes) - ប្រទេសស្វ៊ីស

ឈ្មោះអង្គភាពមួយ (ច្រើន) ដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃបច្ចេកទេស (បើទាក់ទង)

Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (DEZA / COSUDE / DDC / SDC) - ប្រទេសស្វ៊ីស

ឈ្មោះអង្គភាពមួយ (ច្រើន) ដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃបច្ចេកទេស (បើទាក់ទង)

Bern University of Applied Sciences, School of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences (HAFL) - ប្រទេសស្វ៊ីស

ឈ្មោះអង្គភាពមួយ (ច្រើន) ដែលបានចងក្រងឯកសារ/ វាយតម្លៃបច្ចេកទេស (បើទាក់ទង)

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

1.3 លក្ខខណ្ឌទាក់ទងទៅនឹងការប្រើប្រាស់ទិន្នន័យដែលបានចងក្រងតាមរយៈ វ៉ូខេត

អ្នកចងក្រង និង(បុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ)យល់ព្រមទទួលយកនូវលក្ខខណ្ឌនានាទាក់ទងទៅនឹងការប្រើប្រាស់ទិន្នន័យដែលបានចងក្រងតាមរយៈវ៉ូខេត:

បាទ/ចា៎

1.4 សេចក្តីប្រកាសស្តីពីចីរភាពនៃការពណ៌នាពីបច្ចេកទេស

តើបច្ចេកទេសដែលបានពណ៌នានេះមានបញ្ហាដែលផ្តោតលើការធ្លាក់ចុះគុណភាពដី, បើដូច្នេះវាមិនអាចត្រូវបានប្រកាសថាជាបច្ចេកទេសនៃការគ្រប់គ្រងប្រកបដោយចីរភាពទេ?

ទេ

មតិយោបល់:

SLM practices documented in the frame of the Rustaq NRM study were established only recently (1-3 years ago). It is too early for a final judgment on the sustainability of these technologies within the human and natural environment of Chokar watershed.

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

2.1 ការពណ៌នាដោយសង្ខេបពីបច្ចេកទេស

និយមន័យបច្ចេកទេស:

Degraded pastures are restored with alfalfa through broad seeding method. The area is put under quarantine for three years to allow for the pasture to restore sufficiently.

2.2 ការពណ៌នាលម្អិតពីបច្ចេកទេស

ការពណ៌នា:

Project supported pasture rehabilitation has taken place in the villages Sari Joy, Jawaz Khana and Dashti Mirzai, located in Chokar watershed of Rustaq District in Northern Afghanistan. The Chokar watershed is a mountainous area situated between 600 - 2,500 m above sea level. The climate is semi-arid with harsh and cold weather in winter and hot and dry summers. The annual precipitation in average years is 580mm. Land degradation affects all forms of land use and includes low vegetation cover, heavy top soil erosion from water, and poor soil fertility. Unsustainable agricultural practices, over-exploitation and high pressure on the natural resources are adversely impacting on the socio-economic well-being of local communities as well as contributing to the risk for being adversely affected by drought as well as landslides and flash foods triggered by heavy rainfall. The data used for the documentation of the technology is based on field research conducted in Chokar watershed, namely in the villages: Sari Joy, Jawaz Khana and Dashti Mirzai. These villages represent the upper, the middle and the lower zone of Chokar watershed, respectively. They differ considerably in access to services and infrastructure, but in general are poorly served. The communities depend on land resources for sustaining their livelihoods. In a good year with high yields, wheat-self-sufficiency lasts about 5 months. The three villages are home to ethnic Qarluq communities. Since 2012 the Livelihood Improvement Project Takhar (LIPT) implemented by Terre des hommes (Tdh) Switzerland has initiated a range of NRM interventions.

Livestock keeping is one of the key livelihood strategies in rural Rustaq in addition to cultivation of cereals. Families rely on their livestock not only for consumption of meat from cows, goat and sheep, dairy products such as milk and sour milk, but also as means of transportation (donkeys), labour force in agriculture (oxen, donkey) and source of cash income. Every family strives to increase their household’s livestock as much as they can, which increases the pressure on the local pastures leading to extensive overgrazing. The pastures in Jawaz Khana, Dashti Mirzai and Sari Joy are characterized by poor vegetation cover, low carrying capacity and sever erosion with deep rills clearly visible on the surface. These severely degraded pastures continue to be used uncontrollably without any management schemes or regulations in place. Cropland not suitable for cultivation has been converted to pastures. The quantity and quality of livestock fodder is insufficient for all the livestock affecting poor animal health.

The village communities have recognized the poor condition of their pastures and the need to take measures to revert the situation. Pasture rehabilitation measures were introduced, which aim to restore heavily degraded pasture land with alfalfa. Initially the land user and the community agrees to leave the sown pasture under quarantine for three years. The restoration measures include: leveling the soil with a rack to soften the soil and prepare the seedbed. 3,5 kg of alfalfa is seeded on 1 jerib or 0.2 ha of pasture land using the broadcast seeding method. Fertilizer application (DAP and/or animal manure) is followed by the seeding. The area is protected from grazing during three years. During this quarantine period the alfalfa has to grow in sufficient size in order to be harvested for livestock fodder.

It has been observed that after two years in some part it is already possible to harvest the alfalfa. Improvements of the pasture are visible given the fast growth rate of the alfalfa crop. The plant grows well without irrigation, which is favorable given the shortage of irrigation water in the villages. The rehabilitated pastures will slow down the run-off, improve water infiltration and protect the pasture from erosion during heavy rain fall. The land users recognize the pasture improvements and relatively increased fodder availability. Alfalfa reseeding is done in 5-10 years and appeals to the needs of the land users, which cannot afford annual reseeding. One of the constraint remains is the quarantine period of 1-3 years, which deprives the livestock from fodder and the farmers have to find options for covering the loss.

Women are generally aware about the use of alfalfa for the production of better fodder for their livestock. Women do take part in haymaking, collecting the hay and bringing it to their homes or to the community fodder bank. Often they are helped by their children to do the work.

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។):

Livelihood Improvement Project Takhar (LIPT) supported by Swiss Development Cooperation (SDC) from 2012-17

3.1 គោលបំណងចម្បង (១​ ឬច្រើន)​ នៃបច្ចេកទេសនេះ

• ធ្វើឱ្យប្រសើរឡើងនូវផលិតកម្ម
• កាត់បន្ថយ, បង្ការ, ស្តារឡើងវិញនូវការធ្លាក់ចុះគុណភាពដី

3.2 ប្រភេទដីប្រើប្រាស់មួយប្រភេទ (ច្រើនប្រភេទ) ដែលបានអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស

មតិយោបល់:

Number of growing seasons per year: 1

3.3 បន្ទាប់ពីអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស តើដីប្រើប្រាស់មានការប្រែប្រួលដែររឺទេ?

បន្ទាប់ពីអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស តើដីប្រើប្រាស់មានការប្រែប្រួលដែររឺទេ?

• បាទ/ច៎ា (សូមបំពេញសំណួរខាងក្រោមពីស្ថានភាពដីប្រើប្រាស់មុនពេលអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស)

មតិយោបល់:

Some plots of the pastures are previous croplands, which have been strongly degraded and no longer used for crop cultivation.

3.4 ការផ្គត់ផ្គង់ទឹក

ការផ្គត់ផ្គង់ទឹកនៅកន្លែងអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស:

• ទឹកភ្លៀង និងប្រព័ន្ធស្រោចស្រព

3.5 ក្រុម SLM ដែលបច្ចេកទេសស្ថិតនៅក្នុង

• តំបន់ទ្រនាប់ (បិទការប្រើប្រាស់ គាំទ្រដល់ការស្តារឡើងវិញ)
• ធ្វើឱ្យប្រសើរឡើងគម្របដី/ ដំណាំគម្របដី

3.6 វិធានការ SLM ដែលបញ្ចូលនូវបច្ចេកទេស

3.7 កំណត់ប្រភេទនៃការធ្លាក់ចុះគុណភាពដីសំខាន់ៗដែលបច្ចេកទេសនេះបានដោះស្រាយ

3.8 ការពារ កាត់បន្ថយ ឬស្តារឡើងវិញនៃការធ្លាក់ចុះគុណភាពដី

បញ្ជាក់ពីគោលដៅរបស់បច្ចេកទេស ដែលផ្តោតទៅការធ្លាក់ចុះគុណភាពដី:

• ការកាត់បន្ថយការធ្លាក់ចុះគុណភាពដី
• ការជួសជុល/ ស្តារឡើងវិញនៃឱនភាពដីធ្ងន់ធ្ងរ

4.1 គំនូសបច្ចេកទេសនៃបច្ចេកទេសនេះ

4.2 ព័ត៌មានទូទៅដែលពាក់ព័ន្ធនឹងការគណនាធាតុចូល និងថ្លៃដើម

កំណត់របៀបនៃការគណនាថ្លៃដើម និងធាតុចូល:

• ក្នុងតំបន់អនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស

កំណត់រូបិយប័ណ្ណសម្រាប់ថ្លៃដើម:

• ដុល្លារ

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

67,0

4.3 សកម្មភាពបង្កើត

	សកម្មភាព	រយៈពេល​ (រដូវកាល)
1.	Selection of the land for rehabilitation	Fall
2.	Leveling the land with a rake	Fall
3.	Sowing alfalfa (broadcast seeding)	Spring
4.	Site under quarantine	Three years
5.	Site protection	Three years

4.4 ថ្លៃដើម និងធាតុចូលដែលត្រូវការសម្រាប់ការបង្កើតបច្ចេកទេស

	បញ្ជាក់ពីធាតុចូល	ឯកតា	បរិមាណ	ថ្លៃដើមក្នុងមួយឯកតា	ថ្លៃធាតុចូលសរុប	% នៃថ្លៃដើមដែលចំណាយដោយអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី
កម្លាំងពលកម្ម	Leveling the land	person-day	100,0	5,3	530,0	100,0
កម្លាំងពលកម្ម	Sowing alfalfa	person-day	5,0	5,3	26,5	100,0
កម្លាំងពលកម្ម	Site protection	year	1,0	447,0	447,0	100,0
សម្ភារៈ	Shovel	piece	1,0	3,8	3,8	100,0
សម្ភារៈ	Rope	meter	50,0	0,07	3,5	100,0
សម្ភារៈ	Rake	piece	1,0	3,0	3,0
សម្ភារៈដាំដុះ	Alfalfa seed		17,5	0,42	7,35
ជី និងសារធាតុពុល	DAP	kg	125,0	0,9	112,5
ជី និងសារធាតុពុល	Urea	Kg	125,0	0,45	56,25	100,0
ថ្លៃដើមសរុបក្នុងការបង្កើតបច្ចេកទេស					1189,9
ថ្លៃដើមសរុបក្នុងការបង្កើតបច្ចេកទេសគិតជាដុល្លារ					17,76

ប្រសិនបើអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីមិនមានថ្លៃដើម 100% សូមបញ្ជាក់ថានរណាដែលចំណាយថ្លៃដើមដែលនៅសល់:

Livelihood Improvement Project Takhar (LIPT) implemented by Terre des hommes (Tdh) Switzerland

មតិយោបល់:

Costs calculated for a Technology area of 1ha was only done for the purpose of the WOCAT documentation. In reality SLM plots are on average 0.2-0.4 ha or 1-2 jeribs. Costs were simply multiplied by 5. The actual costs for a 1ha plot might be slightly different.

4.5 សកម្មភាពថែទាំ

	សកម្មភាព	ពេលវេលា/ ភាពញឹកញាប់
1.	Hay making	Summer
2.	Delivery of hay to the fodder bank	Fall
3.	Protection of the pasture during quarantine	Three years

4.6 កំណត់ថ្លៃដើមសម្រាប់ការថែទាំ/ សកម្មភាពរបស់បច្ចេកទេស (ក្នុងរយៈពេលមួយឆ្នាំ)

	បញ្ជាក់ពីធាតុចូល	ឯកតា	បរិមាណ	ថ្លៃដើមក្នុងមួយឯកតា	ថ្លៃធាតុចូលសរុប	% នៃថ្លៃដើមដែលចំណាយដោយអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី
កម្លាំងពលកម្ម	Hay making	person day	35,0	5,3	185,5	100,0
កម្លាំងពលកម្ម	Delivery of the hay to the fodder bank	person day	35,0	5,3	185,5	100,0
កម្លាំងពលកម្ម	Protection during quarantine	year	2,0	447,0	894,0	100,0
សម្ភារៈ	Sickle	piece	1,0	2,25	2,25	100,0
សម្ភារៈ	Pitchfork	piece	1,0	5,3	5,3	100,0
ថ្លៃដើមសរុបសម្រាប់ការថែទាំដំណាំតាមបច្ចេកទេស					1272,55
ថ្លៃដើមសរុបសម្រាប់ការថែទាំដំណាំតាមបច្ចេកទេសគិតជាដុល្លារ					18,99

មតិយោបល់:

Costs calculated for a Technology area of 1ha was only done for the purpose of the WOCAT documentation. In reality SLM plots are on average 0.2-0.4 ha or 1-2 jeribs. Costs were simply multiplied by 5. The actual costs for a 1ha plot might be slightly different.

4.7 កត្តាសំខាន់បំផុតដែលមានឥទ្ធិពលដល់ការចំណាយ

ពណ៌នាពីកត្តាប៉ះពាល់ចម្បងៗទៅលើថ្លៃដើម:

Due to the remoteness of the villages where the technology has been implemented, all the inputs for establishment, such as agricultural equipment, plant material, fertilizers, etc., are purchased in Rustaq town. The expenses for traveling and delivering the inputs affect the establishment costs.

5.1 អាកាសធាតុ

5.2 សណ្ឋានដី

5.3 ដី

បើអាចសូមភ្ជាប់ការពណ៌នាពីដីឱ្យបានច្បាស់ ឬព័ត៌មានដែលអាចទទួលបាន ឧ. ប្រភេទដី, pH ដី/ ជាតិអាស៊ីត, សមត្ថភាពផ្លាស់ប្តូរកាចុង, វត្តមាននីត្រូសែន, ភាពប្រៃ ។ល។:

Local land users differentiate between the following soil types where the technology is implemented:
- Light soils: moderately deep; texture of topsoil medium (loamy, silty); low topsoil organic matter
- Dark soils: moderately deep; texture of topsoil medium (loamy, silty); medium topsoil organic matter

5.4 ទឹកដែលអាចទាញមកប្រើប្រាស់បាន និងគុណភាពទឹក

តើមានបញ្ហាភាពទឹកប្រៃហូរចូលមកដែរឬទេ?

ទេ

តើទឹកជំនន់កំពុងកើតមាននៅតំបន់នេះដែររឺទេ?

បាទ/ចា៎

ភាពទៀងទាត់:

ម្តងម្កាល

មតិយោបល់ និងលក្ខណៈពិសេសផ្សេងៗទៀតលើគុណភាព និងបរិមាណទឹក​ :

Floods occur mainly during the rainy seasons in spring and autumn. Availability of surface water differs for the three study villages Sari Joy, Jawaz Khana, and Dashti Mirzai. Sari Joy has sources and good surface water availability. Jawaz Khana has poor water availability as water has to be fetched from a lower laying stream. Dashti Mirzai has good water availability also from an irrigation channel.

5.5 ជីវៈចម្រុះ

5.6 លក្ខណៈនៃអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដីដែលអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស

សូមបញ្ជាក់ពីលក្ខណៈពាក់ព័ន្ធផ្សេងទៀតអំពីអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី:

The land users in the area where the Technology is applied belong to the Uzbek ethnic minority group Qarluq.
Although the men are generally the main land users, however, women and children also take active part in the related work. The functions of men and women are clearly distinguished within the Afghan society. At the same time within the family this division of work and functions also results in men and women working hand-in-hand. An improvement of the family’s livelihood situation is expected to positively affect all family members. While, it is recognized that the involvement of women is key in order to secure basic human rights for everyone, to achieve good governance, sustainable development, and to efficiently contribute to poverty reduction (SDC 2004), it is also clear that a context sensitive approach is of high importance.
Women in rural Afghanistan are involved in many production and income generating activities that contribute to the overall household income, however, very few women own resources such as land and livestock, and their income generating options are fewer in comparison to that of men.

5.7 ទំហំផ្ទៃដីជាមធ្យមនៃដីប្រើប្រាស់ដោយអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី ក្នុងការអនុវត្ត​បច្ចេកទេស

5.8 ភាពជាម្ចាស់ដី កម្មសិទ្ធប្រើប្រាស់ដី និងកម្មសិទ្ធប្រើប្រាស់ទឹក

ភាពជាម្ចាស់ដី:

• ឯកជន មិនមានកម្មសិទ្ធ

កម្មសិទ្ធិប្រើប្រាស់ដី:

• ឯកជន

កម្មសិទ្ធប្រើប្រាស់ទឹក:

• ជាក្រុម (មានដែនកំណត់)

មតិយោបល់:

Those who own land and use water for irrigation are obliged to pay for the water. The payment is made both in kind and in cash to the Mirob - the person in charge of distributing water in the community. The amount of the payment varies from village to village.

6.1 ផលប៉ះពាល់ក្នុងបរិវេណអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេសដែលកើតមាន

ផលប៉ះពាល់លើសេដ្ឋកិច្ចសង្គម

ផលិតផល

ផលប៉ះពាល់ទៅលើវប្បធម៌សង្គម

ផលប៉ះពាល់ទៅលើអេកូឡូស៊ី

វដ្តទឹក/លំហូរ

ដី

ជីវចម្រុះ៖ ដំណាំ, សត្វ

6.2 ផលប៉ះពាល់ក្រៅបរិវេណអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេសដែលកើតមាន

វាយតម្លៃផលប៉ះពាល់ក្រៅបរិវេណអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស (វាស់វែង):

These comments apply to 6.1 and 6.2:
- Socio-economic impacts: Individual SLM implementers were asked to rate the benefits from the technology. They were asked to indicate production increase of crops; fodder; animals; wood; non-wood forest products; increase in product diversity; or production area. The most important increase they rated with 3, the second most with 2, others with 1 point. Averages of the points given by all SLM implementers are reflected here.
- Similarly for the "ecological impacts" and on "off-site impacts": Individual SLM implementers were asked to rate the on-site and off-site impacts of the technology on water; soil; and vegetation. They were asked to indicate the strength of impacts with three, two or one points. Averages of the points given by all SLM implementers are reflected here.
- Socio-cultural impacts: This section is answered by the scientists, based on information collected during focus group discussions, and interviews conducted with persons from the 3 villages where the LIPT project implemented the technology.

6.3 ភាពប្រឈម និងភាពរួសនៃបច្ចេកទេសទៅនឹងការប្រែប្រួលអាកាសធាតុ និងគ្រោះអាកាសធាតុ/ គ្រោះមហន្តរាយ (ដែលដឹងដោយអ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី)

គ្រោះអាកាសធាតុ (មហន្តរាយ) ​

គ្រោះមហន្តរាយធម្មជាតិ

	លក្ខណៈឆ្លើយតបនៃបច្ចេកទេសទៅនឹងការប្រែប្រួលអាកាសធាតុ
ព្យុះភ្លៀងតាមតំបន់	ល្អណាស់

គ្រោះមហន្តរាយអាកាសធាតុ

	លក្ខណៈឆ្លើយតបនៃបច្ចេកទេសទៅនឹងការប្រែប្រួលអាកាសធាតុ
រាំងស្ងួត	ល្អ

មតិយោបល់:

SLM implementers from three villages were asked to jointly discuss and rate how much the SLM technology reduced the lands vulnerability to drought and local rainstorms. Only vulnerability to the most prevalent climate extremes (drought and local rainstorms) was discussed. SLM technologies were rated as reducing vulnerability poorly , well, or very well. The average points reflected here are from multi-criteria matrixes compiled in three villages where the SLM technology had been implemented.

6.4 ការវិភាគថ្លៃដើម និងអត្ថប្រយោជន៍

តើផលចំណេញ និងថ្លៃដើមត្រូវបានប្រៀបធៀបគ្នាយ៉ាងដូចម្តេច (ទស្សនៈរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី)?

មតិយោបល់:

SLM implementers from three villages were asked to jointly discuss and rate the SLM technologies short term (1-3 years) and long-term (10 years) return. As most of the technologies have only been implemented 1-2 years ago, it is too early to compare benefits to maintenance costs. Farmers have little experience so far on the actual benefits of the SLM technologies. The ratings are mostly based on expected benefits and not on actual benefits. During the ranking the land users also did not account for the project support they received for the establishment of the technology.

6.5 ការទទួលយកបច្ចេកទេស

• 1-10%

បើអាច សូមបញ្ជាក់ពីបរិមាណ (ចំនួនគ្រួសារ និង/ ឬតំបន់គ្របដណ្តប់):

6.1 ha

ក្នុងចំណោមគ្រួសារទាំងអស់ដែលបានអនុវត្តបច្ចេកទេស តើមានប៉ុន្មាន​គ្រួសារ​ដែល​ចង់​ធ្វើ​ដោយ​ខ្លួន​ឯង ដោយមិន​ទទួល​បាន​សម្ភារៈ​លើក​​ទឹកចិត្ត/​ប្រាក់ឧបត្ថម្ភ?​:

• 11-50%

មតិយោបល់:

Individual SLM implementers were asked whether they received support for implementing the Technology. Each indicated the type of support he received from the proposed options: "Full Support 100%, Some Support, No Support 0%". 20% implemented the Technology without receiving support.

6.6 ការបន្សុំា

តើថ្មីៗនេះ បច្ចេកទេសនេះត្រូវបានកែតម្រូវ​ដើម្បី​បន្ស៊ាំ​ទៅនឹង​ស្ថាន​ភាព​ប្រែប្រួល​ដែរ​ឬទេ?

ទេ

6.7 ភាពខ្លាំង/ គុណសម្បត្តិ/ ឱកាសនៃបច្ចេកទេស

ភាពខ្លាំង/ គុណសម្បត្តិ/ ឱកាសនៅកន្លែងរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី
The technology does not require too much labor and material inputs for establishment work.
Alfalfa grows well and it can be harvested several years in a row without reseeding. The land users expect to have sufficient supplies of fodder during winter, which is the most difficult season to prevent animal loss and shortage of fodder is one of the main reasons. Alfalfa is considered as a good fodder for the, which makes it strong.
Sowing alfalfa is a good method to make better use of bad lands or degraded cropland. Some land users plan to sow alfalfa on their lands, which are not fit for crop cultivation.

ភាពខ្លាំង/ គុណសម្បត្តិ/ ឱកាស​ ទស្សនៈរបស់បុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ
The decision to grow alfalfa on the degraded cropland and pasture land is an efficient and low-cost technology. It makes it possible to produce good fodder on the degraded land under low or no availability of irrigation water. At the same time the plant has a good feature in terms of enhancing moisture retention and halting soil erosion.
Land users learn about sustainable land management practices adapted to their local conditions and needs. The land users can collect their own seeds to use for seeding in the future.
Female members of the family help to protect the plot.

6.8 ភាពខ្សោយ/ គុណវិបត្តិ/ ហានិភ័យនៃបច្ចេកទេស និងវិធីសាស្ត្រដោះស្រាយ

ភាពខ្សោយ/ គុណវិបត្តិ/ ហានិភ័យ ទស្សនៈរបស់អ្នកប្រើប្រាស់ដី	តើបច្ចេកទេសទាំងនោះបានដោះស្រាយបញ្ហាដូចម្តេច?
Land users expressed concerns that in 5 years they have to reseed again the alfalfa and they don't have seeds for it.
Some land users' expectations were not met as they planned to sow alfalfa on bigger land, but in reality could only sow on 1-2 jeribs (0.2-0.4 ha).
Female family members take part in haymaking and delivery of the hay to their homes or to the fodder storage. This increases their daily workload.

ភាពខ្សោយ/ គុណវិបត្តិ/ ហានិភ័យ ទស្សនៈរបស់អ្នកចងក្រងឬបុគ្គលសំខាន់ៗ	តើបច្ចេកទេសទាំងនោះបានដោះស្រាយបញ្ហាដូចម្តេច?
There is no fence to protect the pasture from grazing during the quarantine period. Grazing on the pasture during quarantine may affect the quality of the pasture. The land user has to hire a guard to protect the pasture or the family members have to protect the plot.	Further awareness raising about the importance of the quarantine regime within the village community. Affordable options for area closure, at least during quarantine.
The quarantine period of 1-3 years deprives the land user of its pasture and limits fodder production significantly. Although the land users did not specifically raise their concern about the quarantine, however it presents a major disadvantage in an area where there is already a shortage of grazing land and fodder. Such situation might cause conflict over the use of pasture land in the village.
Not all land users are aware of seed collection or practice seed collection, which could be very helpful to save costs for buying alfalfa seeds. They could also sell their surplus seeds.
The use of fertilizer is perceived by the land user as an important factor for growing quality fodder. Such perception might increase the reliance of land users on applying chemical fertilizers, rather than engaging in sustainable management of the plot.

7.1 វិធីសាស្ត្រ/ ប្រភពនៃព័ត៌មាន

7.2 ឯកសារយោងដែលបានចេញផ្សាយ

ចំណងជើង អ្នកនិពន្ធ ឆ្នាំ ISBN:

Guidelines for Focus Groups Discussions

ចំណងជើង អ្នកនិពន្ធ ឆ្នាំ ISBN:

Methods section of the Rustaq NRM study