Some of the Manjolo Community women who have lost an average of 70% of their annual income due to the degradation of Masibinta Wetland are taking proactive measures to restore the resource using nature-based solutions (Kalulu Mumpande)

Integrated Wetlands Biodiversity Conservation Project (ຊິມແບບວີ)

IWBCP

ຄຳອະທິບາຍ

The integrated wetlands biodiversity conservation project aims to restore wetlands and associated biodiversity. The approach strengthens the resilience of neighbouring marginalized groups to climate change through developing lifelong skills and providing livelihoods support.

The Integrated Wetlands Biodiversity Conservation Project aims to restore wetlands and associated biodiversity. It is a 2-year project which started in June 2023 with the support of a USD 50,000.00 grant from the Global Environment Facility Small Grants Programme, implemented by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP-GEFSGP). The approach strengthens the resilience of neighbouring community to climate change through developing lifelong skills and providing livelihood support. It targets those marginalized groups surrounding protected areas, who experience severe droughts due to high cases of human-wildlife conflicts, making them highly food insecure. The approach is simultaneously improving sustainable management and utilization of the Masibinta wetland and its catchment.

Technical activities are targeted at restoring Masibinta wetland’s ecological integrity by protecting the wetland, implementing conservation agriculture in its catchment, reforesting bare land, controlling and reshaping gullies to create small ponds, and removing a bushy invasive species (Ipomoea carnea) while making compost from its leaves and branches. The ponds increase the recharge of the wetland. This helps provide water to the community and at the same time acts as a barrier to soil erosion and epicenters for natural vegetative cover regeneration and biodiversity restoration. Land degradation neutrality is an overall goal.

Specific targets include:
(a) Protection, rehabilitation and conservation of 13 hectares of Masibinta wetlands, as well as reclamation of degraded land in and around the wetland, while increasing the capacity of the community members to conserve biodiversity.
(b) Increasing access of 387 households to adequate and clean water.
(c) Reduction of invasive species in the wetlands by 80%, and reclamation of 1000 m of gullies.
(d) Promotion of sustainable use and management of Masibinta wetland through regenerative agriculture, livelihood support and imparting lifelong skills to 50 youths (30 females and 20 males).

A variety of technical and social methods are employed:
(a) Grey and Green Infrastructure (GGI): hybrid restoration techniques that involve the combination of engineered structures and Nature-based Solutions (NbS).
(b) Regenerative agriculture: including mulching, mixed cultivation, crop rotation, agroforestry, use of organic manure in nutrition gardens, and zero tillage (“Maganko”).
(c) Incentives: monetary incentives to the community members who offer their labour.
(d) Self-mobilization.
(e) Peer-to-peer learning.
(f) Problem-solving.

The stages of implementation involved are:
(a) Baseline survey,
(b) Education and training of project support staff, stakeholders,
(c) Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL),
(d) Livelihood support,
(e) Protection of the wetland, then MEL,
(f) Borehole Drilling,
(g) Invasive species management, then MEL,
(h) Gully modification, and
(i) Evaluation and Learning.

The stakeholders involved and their roles are:
(a) Environmental Management Agency (EMA): Implement and monitor restoration activities in the wetland and assess the impact of barricading the gully on the environment.
(b) Forestry Commission (FC): Nursery establishment, management and tree planting.
(c) Agriculture and Rural Advisory Services (ARDAS): Train farmers on agroforestry, goat rearing, climate-smart agriculture, gully reclamation, and polyculture.
(d) Rural and Infrastructure Development Agency (RIDA): oversees all engineering work.
(e) Ministry of Youth Empowerment Development and Vocational Training (MYEDVT): Monitoring youth engagement and benefits.
(f) Ministry of Women Affairs Community Small and Medium Enterprises Development (MWACSMED): Tracked and monitored inclusion and entrepreneurship.
(h) United Nations Development Programme – Grant disbursement, monitoring and evaluating the implementation and sustainability of IWBCP at the national level in line with the GEFSGP expectations.

ສະຖານທີ່

ສະຖານທີ່: Binga, Matebeleland North, ຊິມແບບວີ

ການຄັດເລືອກພື້ນທີ່ ທີ່ອີງໃສ່ຂໍ້ມູນທາງພູມີສາດ
  • 27.4034, -17.75937

ວັນທີເລີ່ມຕົ້ນ: 2023

ປີ​ຂອງ​ການ​ສິ້ນ​ສຸດ: 2025

ປະເພດຂອງແນວທາງ
Conservation cultivation (Mukombwe Kate)
Fencing of the wetland by land users (Vanessa Mudenda)

ເປົ້າໝາຍຂອງແນວທາງ ແລະ ການປົກປັກຮັກສາສິ່ງແວດລ້ອມ

ເປົ້າໝາຍ / ຈຸດປະສົງຫຼັກໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດແນວທາງ
The Approach aimed at developing an environmentally responsive community, capable of managing and utilizing Masibinta Wetland most sustainably through:
(a)Increasing knowledge and skills in restoring degraded and conserving the restored land
(b)Improving perceptions on biodiversity and building best practices which promote sustainability of the natural resources capital
(c)Increasing conservation benefit sharing and improving governance of the natural resources
ເງື່ອນໄຂທີ່ສະໜັບສະໜູນໃຫ້ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ບົນພື້ນຖານແນວທາງ
  • ການຮ່ວມມື / ການປະສານງານຂອງຜູ້ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງ: Collaboration between the stakeholder and the community enabled the Approach to win a Provincial Award: Excellence in Biodiversity Restoration and Social Impact.
ເງື່ອນໄຂທີ່ເຊື່ອງຊ້ອນໃຫ້ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ບົນພື້ນຖານແນວທາງ
  • ກ່ຽວກັບກົດໝາຍ (ສິດນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ, ສິດນໍາໃຊ້ນໍ້າ): Land is owned along family lines which make it difficult to restore. For example a 100-meters portion of a gully which was reclaimed was later cleared to paved a way for a garden by the family member.
  • ນະໂຍບາຍ: Lack of policy on conservation cultivation
  • ຄວາມຮູ້ກ່ຽວກັບການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ, ການເຂົ້າເຖິງການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ທາງດ້ານວິຊາການ: The stakeholders have limited knowledge on disaster risk reduction and regenerative farming
  • ຕະຫຼາດ (ໃນການຊື້ວັດຖຸດິບ, ຂາຍຜະລິດຕະພັນ) ແລະ ລາຄາ: Limited access to markets which offers competitive prices for the landers as producers.
  • ວຽກ, ມີກໍາລັງຄົນ: The work load is huge and the manpower is limited. The support staff were on a voluntary contract.

ການມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ແລະ ບົດບາດຂອງພາກສ່ວນທີ່ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງທີ່ມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ

ພາລະບົດບາດຂອງພາກສ່ວນທີ່ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງ ທີ່ມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດແນວທາງ
ແມ່ນໃຜ / ພາກສ່ວນໃດ ທີ່ເປັນເຈົ້າການ ໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີການ? ລະບຸ ພາກສ່ວນທີ່ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງ ພັນລະນາ ບົດບາດ ໜ້າທີ່ ຂອງພາກສ່ວນທີ່ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງ
ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນໃນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ / ຊຸມຊົນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ Traditional leaders and community members Community members provided labour and security of materials and food during the Approach's activities. They also monitored and evaluated the Approach and provided valuable lessons. Traditional leadership provided the approach's local oversight role, whipped members into line, provided Indigenous knowledge, and guided the implementation process in accordance with the values and beliefs of the Manjolo community. Traditional leadership was key in information dissemination and resolution of issues which would otherwise affect the success of the Approach
ຜູ້ຊ່ຽວຊານ ການນຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ / ທີ່ປຶກສາດ້ານກະສິກໍາ Agriculture & Rural Development Advisory Services (ARDAS), ZimParks, Forest Commission, Environmental Management Agency (EMA), Small to Medium Enterprises, Ministry of Youth, Social Development, Ministry of Information, Ministry of Health and Child Welfare Provided technical support, training community members, and local management committees. Supervising activities and evaluating the Approach
ອໍານາດ ການປົກຄອງທ້ອງຖິ່ນ Binga District Development Committee Monitoring and Evaluation of the Approach Providing supportive framework and ensuring that the Approach keep in line with the district's development agenda
ອົງການທີ່ເປັນຕົວແທນໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ
Environment Management Agency (EMA) and Agriculture & Rural Development Advisory Services (ARDAS)
ການລວບລວມເອົາຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນໃນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ/ຊຸມຊົນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ ໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດແນວທາງ ແຕ່ລະໄລຍະ
ບໍ່ມີ
ການບໍ່ປະຕິບັດ
ການຊ່ວຍເຫຼືອຈາກພາຍນອກ
ການຮ່ວມມື
ການນໍາໃໍຊ້ເອງ
ການເລີ່ມຕົ້ນ / ແຮງຈູງໃຈ
Smallholder farmers The initiation began in October 2022 where the organized a meeting and invited SEWA. At this meeting the farmer highlighted the degradation of Masibinta wetland and how the degradation was negatively affecting their lives. The farmers gave suggestion on possible solutions to the challenges faced.
ການວາງແຜນ
Smallholder farmers, youth, traditional leaders, local business community, church leaders, teachers, Rural Care Givers, Health Workers, Resources Monitors, Counsellors, People with Disability In December 2022, the farmers who initiated the Approach mobilized community members to a planning meetings, developed activities, pledged own contribution to the Approach, outlined roles of each social group in the Approach, developed ways of mobilizing locally available materials and selected management committees and local lines of communication. They also identified potential challenges and suggested ways of dealing with the challenges that could otherwise arise from the Approach
ການປະຕິບັດ
The smallholder farmers, traditional leaders, local business community, youth, church leaders, teachers, Rural Care Givers, Health Workers, Resources Monitors, Counsellors, People with Disability The implementation started in July 2023 after GEFSGP had supported the Approach with a grant of $50,000.00 through the UNDP. The community members worked together and provided labour and security of materials and food during the Approach's activities. They also monitored and evaluated the Approach and provided valuable lessons. Traditional leadership provided the approach's local oversight role, whipped members into line, provided Indigenous knowledge, and guided the implementation process in accordance with the values and beliefs of the Manjolo community. Traditional leadership was key in information dissemination and resolution of issues which would otherwise affect the success of the Approach
ຕິດຕາມກວດກາ / ການປະເມີນຜົນ
Small holder farmers, youth, traditional leaders, local business community, church leaders, teachers, Rural Care Givers, Health Workers, Resources Monitors, Counsellors, and People with Disability, These provided the views on how the Approach impacted their lives and also on what needed to be changed.
ແຜ່ນວາດສະແດງ

Integrated Wetland Biodiversity Conservation Project (IWBCP) Implementation framework

ຜູ້ຂຽນ: Mumpande Kalulu
ການຕັດສິນໃຈໃນການເລືອກເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ

ການຕັດສິນໃຈໂດຍ

  • ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນຜູ້ດຽວ (ການລິເລີ່ມດ້ວຍຕົນເອງ)
  • ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນຫຼັກ, ການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ໂດຍຜູ້ຊ່ຽວຊານ ການນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ
  • ພາກສ່ວນກ່ຽວຂ້ອງທັງໝົດ, ເປັນສ່ວນໜຶ່ງ ຂອງວິທີທາງແບບມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ
  • ຜູ້ຊ່ຽວຊານ ຫຼັກດ້ານການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ, ມີການຕິດຕາມປຶກສາຫາລືກັບຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ
  • ຊຽ່ວຊານ ສະເພາະດ້ານການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງຜູ້ດຽວ
  • ນັກການເມືອງ / ຜູ້ນໍາ

ການຕັດສິນໃຈບົນພື້ນຖານ

  • ປະເມີນເອກກະສານ ຄວາມຮູ້ກ່ຽວກັບ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ (ຫຼັກຖານທີ່ຊ່ວຍໃນການຕັດສິນໃຈ)
  • ຜົນທີ່ໄດ້ຮັບ ຈາກການຄົ້ນຄວ້າ
  • ປະສົບການສ່ວນບຸກຄົນ ແລະ ຄວາມຄິດເຫັນ (ທີ່ບໍ່ເປັນເອກກະສານ)

ການສະໜັບສະໜູນເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ, ການສ້າງຄວາມອາດສາມາດ ແລະ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງຄວາມຮູ້

ກິດຈະກຳ ດັ່ງລຸ່ມນີ້ ແມ່ນເປັນພາກໜຶ່ງຂອງແນວທາງ
ການສ້າງຄວາມອາດສາມາດ / ຝຶກອົບຮົມ
ໄດ້ສະໜັບສະໜູນຝຶກອົບຮົມໃຫ້ແກ່ພາກສ່ວນກ່ຽວຂ້ອງດັ່ງລຸ່ມນີ້
  • ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ
  • ພະນັກງານພາກສະໜາມ / ທີ່ປຶກສາ
ຮູບແບບການຝຶກອົບຮົມ
  • ການເຮັດຕົວຈິງ
  • ຕົວຕໍ່ຕົວ
  • ເນື້ອທີ່ສວນທົດລອງ
  • ກອງປະຊຸມ
  • ຫຼັກສູດ
ກວມເອົາຫົວຂໍ້

Biodiversity conservation, project infrastructure management, sustainable land management, agroforestry, gully reclamation, conservation farming, climate change, and environmental policies

ການບໍລິການທາງດ້ານການໃຫ້ຄໍາປຶກສາ
ໄດ້ຮັບການບໍລິການທາງດ້ານການໃຫ້ຄໍາປຶກສາ
  • ໃນພື້ນທີ່ຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ
  • ສູນຄົ້ນຄວ້າ
The Rural & Infrastrure Development Agency , Forest Commission and Agriculture & Rural Development Advisory Services provided advisory services to land users crop fields preparation, gully reclamation, tree planting, and wetland management
ຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງຂອງສະຖາບັນ
ສະຖາບັນ ໄດ້ຮັບການສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ
  • ບໍ່ມີ
  • ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
  • ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
  • ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
ໃນລະດັບດັ່ງລຸ່ມນີ້
  • ທ້ອງຖິ່ນ
  • ລະດັບພາກພື້ນ
  • ແຫ່ງຊາດ
ອະທິບາຍສະຖາບັນ, ພາລະບົດບາດແລະຄວາມຮັບຜິດຊອບ, ສະມາຊິກ, ແລະອື່ນໆ.
Community Management Committee and local constitution
Supervision of the land users and enforcing constitution
ຮູບແບບການສະໜັບສະໜູນ
  • ທາງດ້ານການເງິນ
  • ການສ້າງຄວາມອາດສາມາດ / ການຝຶກອົບຮົມ
  • ອຸປະກອນ
ລາຍລະອຽດເພີ່ມເຕີມ
The management committee was trained once on their roles. However, more structured training would enhance their discharge of duties
ການຕິດຕາມ ແລະ ປະເມີນຜົນ
Continuous monitoring was carried out by the Approach support staff. Monitoring and Evaluation was done quarterly, involving all key stakeholders

ການສະໜັບສະໜູນທາງດ້ານການເງິນ ແລະ ອຸປະກອນຈາກພາຍນອກ

ງົບປະມານປະຈຳປີ ໃນກິດຈະກຳ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ ທີ່ເປັນສະກຸນເງິນໂດລາ
  • < 2,000
  • 2,000-10,000
  • 10,000-100,000
  • 100,000-1,000,000
  • > 1,000,000
Precise annual budget: 25000.0
-Co-funding -Global Environment Facility Small Grants Programme, implemented by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP_GEFSGP)
ການບໍລິການ ຫຼື ສິ່ງກະຕຸກຊຸກຍູ້ ດັ່ງລຸ່ມນີ້ ແມ່ນໄດ້ສະໜອງໂດຍຜູ້ນຳໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນເອງ
  • ການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ທາງດ້ານການເງິນ / ອຸປະກອນ ສະໜອງໃຫ້ແກ່ຜູ້ນໍາທີ່ດິນ
  • ຫຼຸດປັດໃຈນໍາເຂົ້າ
  • ສິນເຊື່ອ
  • ສິ່ງຈູງໃຈ ຫຼື ເຄື່ອງມືອື່ນໆ
ເງິນສະໜັບສະໜູນອຸປະກອນ / ສະໜອງໃຫ້ຜູ້ຊົມໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ
Fencing materials, stationary, cement, goats, seed inputs Provider: UNDP_GEFSGP
ງົບປະມານບາງສ່ວນ
ງົບປະມານເຕັມສ່ວນ
ອຸປະກອນ: ເຄື່ອງມື

Fencing material

ກະສິກໍາ: ແນວພັນ, ແກ່ນພັນ

Fence

ແຮງງານຂອງຜູ້ນໍ້າໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ

ສີ່ງກະຕຸກຊຸກຍູ້ອື່ນໆ

Monetary incentive (for activities which are yet to be done using the additional support from the G20 Global Land Restoration Initiative)

ການວິເຄາະຜົນກະທົບ ແລະ ສະຫຼຸບລວມ

ຜົນກະທົບຂອງການນໍາໃຊ້ແນວທາງ
ບໍ່
ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
ວິທີທາງ ຊ່ວຍຊຸກຍູ້ ຜູ້ນຳໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນທ້ອງຖີ່ນ, ໃນການປັບປຸງ ການມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ຂອງຜູ້ທີ່ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງ ບໍ່?

124 land users were trained, supported with seed imputes, and goats.

ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ດັ່ງກ່າວນີ້ ສາມາດເປັນຫຼັກຖານ ທີ່ສະໜັບສະໜູນ ໃຫ້ການຕັດສິນໃຈໄດ້ບໍ່?

Decisions were made based on data gathered from community engagements, lessons learned from the before projects in the area and the surveys conducted as a baseline.

ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດຊ່ວຍຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ ໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ແລະ ບໍາລຸງຮັກສາ ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງໄດ້ບໍ?

Land users have reclaimed 100 metres of gullies, implemented conservation cultivation, used nature-based approaches to restore the wetland

ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດປັບປຸງ ການປະສານງານ ແລະ ຄ່າໃຊ້ຈ່າຍ ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ທີ່ມີປະສິດທິພາບ ຂອງການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືດຍົງໄດ້ບໍ່?

The use of Nature-based Solutions and indigenous knowledge reduced the cost of implementing the SLM as such approaches are cheaper in terms of cost. Approach improved coordination between the project management and land users through clearly defined roles and lines of communication

ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດລະດົມ ຫຼື ປັບປຸງ ການເຂົ້າເຖິງຊັບພະຍາກອນ ການເງິນ ສໍາລັບການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືດຍົງໄດ້ບໍ່?

Mobilized finances from the Global Environment Facility Small Grants Programme through the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP-GEFSGP). Finances have also been mobilized from the G20 Global Land Initiative, though yet to be disbursed into SEWA's bank account.

ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດປັບປຸງຄວາມຮູ້ ແລະ ຄວາມສາມາດຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ ໃນການປະຕິບັດ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືດຍົງໄດ້ບໍ່?

124 land users were trained on SLM and were given kowledge material such as brochures.

ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດປັບປຸງຄວາມຮູ້ ແລະ ຄວາມສາມາດ ຂອງພາກສ່ວນທີ່ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງໄດ້ບໍ່?

Not much training of stakeholders was done. However the stakeholders drew lessons from the project and shared their experience during project progress update meetings.

ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ ໃຫ້ສະຖາບັນການຈັດຕັ້ງ, ການຮ່ວມມື ລະຫວ່າງພາກສ່ວນທີ່ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງບໍ່?

Each and every stakeholder involved in the project had clearly defined roles and synergies

ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດຫຼຸດຜ່ອນ ຂໍ້ຂັດແຍ່ງໄດ້ບໍ່?

The fencing of wetland including the nutrition gardens and the development of the land users' constitution mitigated conflicts

ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ ທາງສັງຄົມ ແລະ ເສດຖະກິດບໍ່?

Assisted women, youth and people with disability with female goats. These groups were trained under the same rood

ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດຊຸກຍູ້ ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນທີ່ເປັນຊາວໜຸ່ມ / ຄົນລຸ້ນໃໝ່ ໃນການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງໄດ້ບໍ?

Financial limitation reduced the engagement of youth in Manjolo as the effective method of engaging youth in Manjolo require a reasonable budget

ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດປັບປຸງ ປະເດັນການຖືຄອງທີ່ດິນ / ສິດທິໃນການນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ ທີ່ເຊື່ອງຊ້ອນໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງໄດ້ບໍ?

The Approach has not yet tackled the issue

ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ໄດ້ປັບປຸງ ການຄໍ້າປະກັນສະບຽງອາຫານ ຫຼື ປັບປຸງໂຄສະນາການໄດ້ບໍ່?

Through crop yields, and income generation projects.

ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດປັບປຸງ ການເຂົ້າເຖິງຕະຫຼາດໄດ້ບໍ?

Local market. Land users are supply Boarding School and a hospital with green vegetables

ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ໄດ້ປັບປຸງ ການເຂົ້າເຖິງນໍ້າ ແລະ ສາຂາພິບານໄດ້ບໍ່?

Boreholes Drilling couldn't find water.

ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ໄດ້ປັບປຸງ ການນໍາໃຊ້ແຫຼ່ງພະລັງງານ ແບບຍືນຍົງຫຼາຍຂື້ນບໍ່?

The Approach did not look at energy

ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດສ້າງຄວາມອາດສາມາດໃຫ້ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ ໃນການປັບຕົວ ຕໍ່ການປ່ຽນແປງດິນຟ້າອາກາດ / ຫຼດຜ່ອນຄວາມສ່ຽງທາງໄພພິບັດໄດ້ບໍ?

Through training and livelihoods support

ສິ່ງກະຕຸກຊຸກຍູ້ໃຫ້ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ ໃນການປະຕິບັດການຄຸ້ມຄອງທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ
  • ການຜະລິດເພີ່ມຂຶ້ນ
  • ກໍາໄລເພີ່ມຂຶ້ນ (ຄວາມສາມາດ), ການປັບປຸງຄ່າໃຊ້ຈ່າຍ, ຜົນປະໂຫຍດ, ອັດຕາສ່ວນ
  • ຫຼຸດຜ່ອນດິນເຊື່ອມໂຊມ
  • ຫຼຸດຜ່ອນຄວາມສ່ຽງຂອງໄພພິບັດ
  • ການຫຼຸດຜ່ອນພາລະວຽກ
  • ການຊໍາລະເງິນ / ເງິນອຸດໜູນ
  • ກົດລະບຽບແລະລະບຽບການ (ລະອຽດ) / ການບັງຄັບໃຊ້
  • ກຽດສັກສີ, ຄວາມກົດດັນທາງສັງຄົມ / ການຕິດຕໍ່ກັນທາງສັງຄົມ
  • ລວມເຂົ້ານໍາກັນກັບການເຄື່ອນໄຫວ / ໂຄງການ / ກຸ່ມ / ເຄືອຂ່າຍ
  • ຄວາມຮັບຮູ້ ທາງສີ່ງແວດລ້ອມ
  • ພາສີ ແລະ ຄວາມເຊື່ອຖື, ສົມບັດສິນທໍາ
  • ການປັບປຸງ ຄວາມຮູ້ ແລະ ຄວາມສາມາດ ຂອງການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ
  • ການປັບປຸງຄວາມງົດງາມ
  • ການຫຼຸດຜ່ອນຂໍ້ຂັດແຍ່ງ
ຄວາມຍືນຍົງຂອງການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດກິດຈະກໍາຂອງແນວທາງ
ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ ສາມາດຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດຕາມແນວທາງໄດ້ເອງບໍ່ (ໂດຍປາດສະຈາກການສະໜັບສະໜູນຈາກພາກສ່ວນພາຍນອກ)?
  • ບໍ່ມີ
  • ແມ່ນ
  • ບໍ່ແນ່ນອນ

In terms of human sustainability, the training that the Land Users have received, skills and knowledge that they have gained will enable them to continue with the project activities without any external support. The involvement of the Land Users in decision making structures and programmes will enable Land Users to make and implement key decisions beyond the external support. The income generating projects and the Internal Savings and Lending Schemes introduced under the Approach will ensure financial sustainability. The training of the stakeholders by the Approach provide the technical sustainability.

ບົດສະຫຼຸບ ແລະ ບົດຮຽນທີ່ໄດ້ຮັບ

ຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ: ທັດສະນະມູມມອງ ຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ
  • The Approach is providing women with financial independence and choices.
  • The Approach is empowering the marginalized community groups with climate resilient and bankable assets. For example 12 youth, 3 people with disability and 10 women have been assisted with 2 female goats, increasing conservation benefits.
  • The land Users view the Approach as their out of hunger and poverty
ຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ: ທັດສະນະມຸມມອງ ຂອງຜູ້ປ້ອນຂໍ້ມູນເອງ
  • Views the Approach as sustaible and transformative development.
  • The Approach is viewed as practical demonstration of sustainable land management
  • Viewed as a sources of lessons for the partners and environmentalists
ຈຸດອ່ອນ / ຂໍ້ເສຍ / ຄວາມສ່ຽງ: ທັດສະນະມູມມອງ ຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນວິທີການແກ້ໄຂແນວໃດ
  • The Approach has a limited thrust on influencing policy and land tenure Involving policy makers at local level
  • The Approach has not identified learning areas Identify learning areas through monitoring and evaluation sessions
ຈຸດອ່ອນ / ຂໍ້ເສຍ / ຄວາມສ່ຽງ: ທັດສະນະມຸມມອງ ຂອງຜູ້ປ້ອນຂໍ້ມູນເອງວິທີການແກ້ໄຂແນວໃດ
  • The ponds may cause risk of drowning of children as kids love playing in water Constructing shallow ponds

ເອກກະສານອ້າງອີງ

ການລວບລວມ
  • Kalulu Mumpande
Editors
ການທົບທວນຄືນ
  • William Critchley
  • Joana Eichenberger
ວັນທີຂອງການປະຕິບັດ: Oct. 30, 2024
ປັບປຸງລ່າສຸດ: Nov. 22, 2024
ບຸກຄົນທີ່ສໍາຄັນ
ການບັນຍາຍລາຍລະອຽດ ໃນຖານຂໍ້ມູນ ຂອງ WOCAT
ຂໍ້ມູນການເຊື່ອມໂຍງຂໍ້ມູນການຄຸ້ມຄອງການນໍາໃຊ້ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ
ເອກກະສານ ແມ່ນໄດ້ອໍານວຍຄວາມສະດວກໂດຍ
ສະຖາບັນ ​ໂຄງ​ການ
ການອ້າງອີງທີ່ສໍາຄັນ
  • None:
ເຊື່ອມໂຍງກັບ ຂໍ້ມູນຕ່າງໆ ທີ່ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງທີ່ມີ
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International