ວິທີທາງ

Participatory SLM Action Planning [ບູຕານ]

  • ​ການ​ສ້າງ:
  • ​ປັບ​ປູງ:
  • ຜູ້ສັງລວມຂໍ້ມູນ:
  • ບັນນາທິການ:
  • ຜູ້ທົບທວນຄືນ:

approaches_2489 - ບູຕານ

ຄວາມສົມບູນ: 89%

1. ຂໍ້ມູນທົ່ວໄປ

1.2 ລາຍລະອຽດ ການຕິດຕໍ່ ຂອງບຸກຄົນທີ່ຊັບພະຍາກອນ ແລະ ສະຖາບັນ ການມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ໃນການປະເມີນຜົນ ແລະ ເອກະສານ ຂອງວິທີທາງ

ບຸກຄົນສຳຄັນ (ຫຼາຍຄົນ)

ຜູ້ຊ່ຽວຊານ ດ້ານການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ:
ຜູ້ຊ່ຽວຊານ ດ້ານການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ:

Wangdi Tashi

NSSC, DoA, MoAF, RGoB

ບູຕານ

ຜູ້ຊ່ຽວຊານ ດ້ານການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ:

Dorji Tshering

NSSC, DoA, MoAF, RGoB

ບູຕານ

ຊື່ຂອງ ສະຖາບັນການຈັດຕັ້ງ ທີ່ອໍານວຍຄວາມສະດວກ ໃນການສ້າງເອກກະສານ ຫຼື ປະເມີນແນວທາງ (ຖ້າກ່ຽວຂ້ອງ)
National Soil Services Centre (National Soil Services Centre) - ບູຕານ
ຊື່ຂອງ ສະຖາບັນການຈັດຕັ້ງ ທີ່ອໍານວຍຄວາມສະດວກ ໃນການສ້າງເອກກະສານ ຫຼື ປະເມີນແນວທາງ (ຖ້າກ່ຽວຂ້ອງ)
MoA (MoA) - ບູຕານ

1.3 ເງື່ອນໄຂ ຂອງການນໍາໃຊ້ເອກກະສານຂໍ້ມູນ ຂອງ WOCAT

ເມື່ອໃດທີ່ໄດ້ສັງລວມຂໍ້ມູນ (ຢູ່ພາກສະໜາມ)?

14/03/2011

ຜູ້ສັງລວມ ແລະ ບັນດາຜູ້ຕອບແບບສອບຖາມ ຍອມຮັບໃນເງື່ອນໄຂ ການນໍາໃຊ້ຂໍ້ມູນເອກະສານ ທີ່ສ້າງຂື້ນ ໂດຍຜ່ານ ອົງການ WOCAT:

ແມ່ນ

2. ພັນລະນາ ແນວທາງການຄຸ້ມຄອງນໍາໃຊ້ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ

2.1 ການອະທິບາຍ ໂດຍຫຍໍ້ ຂອງວິທີທາງ

A methodology to identify in a participatory manner at village level land-based problems, its causal factors and mitigation measures to reduce land degradation and enhance rural livelihoods

2.2 ການອະທິບາຍ ລາຍລະອຽດ ຂອງວິທີທາງ

ການອະທິບາຍ ລາຍລະອຽດ ຂອງວິທີທາງ:

Aims / objectives: Participatory SLM Action Planning (SLM AP) is a methodology that aims at prioritiz-ing possible SLM interventions to mitigate the most critical land degradation issues. Priorities are based on the identification of land-based livelihoods and livelihood resources, the key area-based problems and their causes. SLM AP is carried out in the SLMP geogs (block) at chiog (village) level, including all community households. It involves elements of PRA/PLA such as problem census, cropping calendars, history lines, natural resource mapping and builds on the in-depth knowledge and understanding of farming households of their land, their problems and opportunities. The process is highly visual to include the illiterate and very interactive by giving the communities the lead in prioritizing their problems and deciding on SLM interventions.

Methods: The SLM AP is an iterative process, starting with building and training SLM planning teams (GSPTs) at geog level, comprising of extension staff and locally recruited geog SLM planners (GSPs) and geog administration staff. The GSPTs start awareness and mobilization activities in the first year at geog council level. This is followed by a 3 day SLM AP in each and every chiog of the geog to compile a chiog SLM action plan. The village SLM APs are combined into a geog SLM AP and discussed, amended and endorsed in a public meeting by the geog council. The necessary budget is allocated by SLMP project and implementation of the planned activities takes place at chiog level.

Stages of implementation: Implementation is preceded by intensive training and capacity building of the communities in SLM activities. In the second year a new SLM AP round is made, lasting only one day, with review of the previous SLM AP at chiog level. Potential new activities are identified, based on field experiences, to complete the new SLM AP for year 2. In the final year 3, a last SLM AP round is made in all chiogs to compile chiog and ultimately a geog SLM AP.

Role of stakeholders: SLM AP is an inclusive process and gender sensitive, with focus on vulnerable households. The approach includes participatory Natural Resource mapping at chiog level and participatory Monitoring & Evaluation to track implementation progress and impact and to get feedback of the communities.

Other important information: Environmental and social screening procedures are applied to exclude any negative impact on the land or on social groups. SLM AP was piloted in 3 geogs in 3 Dzongkhags since 2006 and has been rolled out to more than 130 chiogs in 9 geogs.

2.3 ຮູບພາບຂອງແນວທາງ

2.5 ປະເທດ / ເຂດ / ສະຖານທີ່ບ່ອນທີ່ແນວທາງໄດ້ຖືກນໍາໃຊ້

ປະເທດ:

ບູຕານ

ພາກພື້ນ / ລັດ / ແຂວງ:

Chhukha, Trashigang and Zhemgang Dzongkhags

ຂໍ້ມູນເພີ່ມເຕີມຂອງສະຖານທີ່:

9 separate geogs

2.6 ວັນທີເລີ່ມຕົ້ນ ແລະ ສິ້ນສຸດ ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕີບັດ ວິທີທາງ

ສະແດງປີຂອງການເລີ່ມຕົ້ນ:

2006

ປີທີ່ສີ້ນສູດ (ຖ້າຢຸດບໍ່ໄດ້ນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ):

2012

2.7 ປະເພດຂອງແນວທາງ

  • ພາຍໃຕ້ໂຄງການ / ແຜນງານ

2.8 ເປົ້າໝາຍ / ຈຸດປະສົງຫຼັກ ຂອງການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ

The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (livelihoods, cash income, food security, capacity building, awareness raising)

- To build community capacity to assess land degradation and identify and prioritize mitigation measures
- Enhancement of rural livelihoods

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: - Lack of awareness of land degradation processes, combined with limited technical knowledge to tackle its causes.
- Planning procedures are top-down and do not incorporate land-based issues adequately and fail to build local ownership and sustainability.

2.9 ເງື່ອນໄຂອໍານວຍ ຫຼື ຂັດຂວາງການປະຕິບັດຂອງເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ / ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີການນໍາໃຊ້ຕາມແນວທາງ

ມີຄວາມສາມາດ / ເຂັ້າເຖິງຊັບພະຍາກອນດ້ານການເງິນ ແລະ ການບໍລິການ
  • ເຊື່ອງຊ້ອນ

Large amount of cash to handle at municipality level

Treatment through the SLM Approach: Training, monitoring and limitation of cash amounts

ການກໍ່ຕັ້ງສະຖາບັນ
  • ເຊື່ອງຊ້ອນ

Delays in financial releases to decentralised level because of lengthy/complicated administrative chain

Treatment through the SLM Approach: Training of key financial staff to shorten procedure and minimize frequency of budget releases

ກ່ຽວກັບກົດໝາຍ (ສິດນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ, ສິດນໍາໃຊ້ນໍ້າ)
  • ອໍານວຍ

The existing land ownership, land use rights / water rights helped a little the approach implementation: Individual land titles of households favour greatly the planning and implementation of SLM activities

  • ເຊື່ອງຊ້ອນ

Lack of efforts in implementing SLM technologies on land without ownership and living as tenants

Treatment through the SLM Approach: Awareness on the importance of proper management to prevent decline in productivity and their own livelihoods through loss of soil fertility and or loss of land physically due to landslides and mass movements.

ຄວາມຮູ້ກ່ຽວກັບການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ, ການເຂົ້າເຖິງການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ທາງດ້ານວິຊາການ
  • ເຊື່ອງຊ້ອນ

Awaraness of communities and technical confidence of teams

Treatment through the SLM Approach: Training and capacity buidling

ວຽກ, ມີກໍາລັງຄົນ
  • ເຊື່ອງຊ້ອນ

Large volume of work, especially in growing season

Treatment through the SLM Approach: Make of use of lean winter season for labour-intensive SLM interventions

ອື່ນໆ
  • ເຊື່ອງຊ້ອນ

Small land holding sizes to spare a portion for SLM technologies

Treatment through the SLM Approach: Awareness on the advantages of SLM

3. ການມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ແລະ ບົດບາດຂອງພາກສ່ວນທີ່ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງທີ່ໄດ້ມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ

3.1 ຜູ້ມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ໃນວິທີທາງ ແລະ ພາລະບົດບາດ ຂອງເຂົາເຈົ້າ

  • ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນໃນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ / ຊຸມຊົນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ

communities of all chiogs

In all villages the most vulnerable community members were identified (wealth / well-being ranking), ranked and specific effort made to include them in most interventions, where possible.

  • ຜູ້ຊ່ຽວຊານ ການນຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ / ທີ່ປຶກສາດ້ານກະສິກໍາ
  • ຄູອາຈານ / ນັກຮຽນ / ນັກສຶກສາ
  • ອໍານາດ ການປົກຄອງທ້ອງຖິ່ນ

GSPT and Dzongkhag staff (Local government)

  • ພະນັກງານຂັ້ນສູນກາງ (ຜູ້ວາງແຜນ, ຜູ້ສ້າງນະໂຍບາຍ)

RGoB, MoAF, DoA

  • ອົງການຈັດຕັ້ງ ສາກົນ

GEF, World Bank

  • monk body
3.2 ການມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນໃນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ / ຊຸມຊົນທ້ອງຖິ່ນໃນໄລຍະທີ່ແຕກຕ່າງກັນຂອງແນວທາງ
ການລວບລວມ ເອົາຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ ໃນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ / ຊຸມຊົນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ ໃຫ້ລະບຸ ຜູ້ໃດທີ່ມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ໃນແຕ່ລະກິດຈະກໍາ?
ການເລີ່ມຕົ້ນ / ແຮງຈູງໃຈ ການຮ່ວມມື National level stakeholders in consultation with district and municipality staff developed the methodology through an iterative consultation process
ການວາງແຜນ ການຮ່ວມມື Decentralised training and planning of SLM interventions at chiog level (130+ chiogs) in 9 geogs in 3 Dzongkhags
ການປະຕິບັດ ການຮ່ວມມື Range of SLM and livelihood activities at chiog level (130+ villages) during 6 year project period
ຕິດຕາມກວດກາ / ການປະເມີນຜົນ ການຮ່ວມມື Regular participatory M&E at chiog and geog level
Research ການບໍ່ປະຕິບັດ Few focused SLM related research topics commissioned to governmental research institutions

3.3 ແຜນວາດ (ຖ້າມີ)

ການອະທິບາຍ:

Overview of network of Stakeholders at chiog (village), geog and district level

ຜູ້ຂຽນ:

Hans van Noord (Schoutenkamp 43 Heteren The Netherlands)

3.4 ການຕັດສິນໃຈກ່ຽວກັບການຄັດເລືອກເຕັກໂນໂລຢີຂອງການຄຸ້ມຄອງທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ / ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ

ລະບຸ ຄົນທີ່ຕັດສິນໃຈ ກ່ຽວກັບການຄັດເລືອກຂອງ ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ / ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ຈະໄດ້ຮັບການປະຕິບັດ:
  • ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນຫຼັກ, ການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ໂດຍຜູ້ຊ່ຽວຊານ ການນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ
ອະທິບາຍ:

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by SLM specialists with consultation of land users. The SLM planning was done in a very participatory manner with the land users as they best know the problems in their land i.e. where, how, when, etc. Planning done using participatory planning tools and field visits. Based on the problems at the site (site specific problems) then SLM Specialists make problem specific recommendations of SLM technologies. The main Monitoring and Evaluation was done after every six months when comprehensive information was collected with structured questionnaires along with site visits and meeting with the communities. M&E was also done as frequently as possible even while visiting the site for other purposes during the year without compulsory group meetings.

4. ການສະໜັບສະໜູນທາງດ້ານວິຊາການ, ການສ້າງຄວາມສາມາດ, ແລະ ການຈັດການຄວາມຮູ້.

4.1 ການສ້າງຄວາມສາມາດ / ການຝຶກອົບຮົມ

ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ ຫຼື ພາກສ່ວນກ່ຽວຂ້ອງອື່ນໆ ໄດ້ຮັບການຝຶກອົບຮົມບໍ່?

ແມ່ນ

ໃຫ້ລະບຸ ຜູ້ໃດທີ່ໄດ້ຮັບການຝຶກອົບຮົມ:
  • ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ
  • ພະນັກງານພາກສະໜາມ / ທີ່ປຶກສາ
  • Project management staff
ຮູບແບບຂອງການຝຶກອົບຮົມ:
  • ການເຮັດຕົວຈິງ
  • ຕົວຕໍ່ຕົວ
  • ເນື້ອທີ່ສວນທົດລອງ
  • ກອງປະຊຸມ
  • ຫຼັກສູດ
ໃນຫົວຂໍ້:

Extensive training programmes for project management staff and field coordinators and the decentralised extension staff (forestry, livestock and agriculture) at geog level together with the geog administration staff and finally to all chiog communities (130+). Initial training was on SLM action planning and Natural Resource mapping; later on a range of technical intervention such as hedgerow establishment, check dam construction, bioengineering, afforestation, community forestry, fodder development, bamboo plantation, bench terracing etc.

4.2 ການບໍລິການໃຫ້ຄໍາປຶກສາ

ເຮັດຜູ້ໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນມີການເຂົ້າເຖິງການບໍລິການໃຫ້ຄໍາປຶກສາ?

ແມ່ນ

ລະບຸວ່າການສະໜອງ ການບໍລິການ ໃຫ້ຄໍາປຶກສາ:
  • ໃນພື້ນທີ່ຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ
ອະທິບາຍ / ຄວາມຄິດເຫັນ:

Name of method used for advisory service: SLM planning knowledge transfer; Key elements: participatory planning, capacity and skills building of RNR extension staff; Whole range of extension advisory services by all extension teams related to SLM, cash generation and group formation

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; Capacity built, awareness raised, institutions supported. Adequate human and institutional capacities and awareness have been created during the GEF/World Bank SLM Project period and the effort is still being continued. The actual implementation of the SLM technologies in the field is constrained by inadequate fund support and small land holdings.

4.3 ສະຖາບັນການສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ (ການພັດທະນາອົງການຈັດຕັ້ງ)

ສະຖາບັນ ໄດ້ຮັບການສ້າງຕັ້ງຂື້ນ ຫຼື ໄດ້ຮັບການສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ ໂດຍການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງບໍ່?
  • ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
ລະບຸ ທາງສະຖາບັນ ໄດ້ສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ ໃນລະດັບໃດ (ຫຼາຍ):
  • ທ້ອງຖິ່ນ
ລະບຸ ປະເພດ ຂອງສະໜັບສະໜູນ:
  • ການສ້າງຄວາມອາດສາມາດ / ການຝຶກອົບຮົມ
  • ອຸປະກອນ
  • curriculum development support, seeds, seedlings
ໃຫ້ລາຍລະອຽດເພີ່ມເຕີມ:

Moderate support to monk body, schools, Non-Formal Education and geog administrations

4.4 ຕິດຕາມກວດກາ ແລະ ປະເມີນຜົນ

ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ໄດ້ມີການປະເມີນຜົນ ແລະ ຕິດຕາມບໍ?

ແມ່ນ

ຄວາມຄິດເຫັນ:

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: Regular measurements and observations of acreage of improved vulnerable land through SLM interventions; annual soil erosion plot measurements

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: Regular measurements and observations of acreage of improved vulnerable land through SLM interventions; annual soil erosion plot measurements

technical aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: Regular measurements and observations of acreage and properties of specific areas of improved vulnerable land

technical aspects were regular monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: Regular measurements and observations of acreage and properties of specific areas of improved vulnerable land

socio-cultural aspects were regular monitored by project staff, land users through observations; indicators: Regular observations through participatory M&E meetings

economic / production aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: Regular observations and measurements by field extension staff (crop cut, animal production, volume of bamboo marketed; CBA study to establish economic viability

economic / production aspects were regular monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: Regular observations and measurements by field extension staff (crop cut, animal production, volume of bamboo marketed; CBA study to establish economic viability

area treated aspects were regular monitored by project staff, land users through measurements; indicators: Regular measurements of area treated: range of project indicators for vulnerable land improved

no. of land users involved aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff, government through measurements; indicators: Regular measurements of households and farmers (male/female) participating

management of Approach aspects were regular monitored by None through observations; indicators: WB, MTAC, Regular reviews with key stakeholders (Annual Review Workshops)

There were several changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Two-tier approach: combination of inclusion of all household combined with limited areal focus; vulnerable households focus; financial disbursement system; ch more cash-generating activities; more group/community focus; labour-saving machinery

There were few changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation: change of type and variety of seeds and seedlings

4.5 ການຄົ້ນຄວ້າ

ນີ້້ແມ່ນສ່ວນໜຶ່ງ ການຄົ້ນຄວ້າ ຂອງວິທີທາງບໍ່?

ແມ່ນ

ລະບຸ ຫົວຂໍ້:
  • ສັງຄົມ
  • ເສດຖະສາດ / ການຕະຫຼາດ
  • ລະບົບນິເວດ
ໃຫ້ຂໍ້ມູນ ເພີ່ມເຕີມ ແລະ ກໍານົດ ຜູ້ໃດເຮັດການຄົ້ນຄວ້າ:

Little involvement, apart from some focused research on group formation at chiog level and studies on CBA, SLM-poverty linkage, rangeland management, rural-urban transition etc.

Research was carried out both on station and on-farm

5. ການສະໜັບສະໜູນທາງດ້ານການເງິນ ແລະ ອຸປະກອນຈາກພາຍນອກ

5.1 ງົບປະມານປະຈໍາປີ ສໍາລັບວິທີທາງ ຂອງການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ

ຖ້າຫາກບໍ່ຮູ້ຈັດງົບປະມານທີ່ແນ່ນອນ ແມ່ນໃຫ້ປະມານເອົາ:
  • > 1,000,000
ຄໍາເຫັນ (ຕົວຢ່າງ: ແຫຼ່ງຂໍ້ມູນຫຼັກ ຂອງການສະໜອງທຶນ / ຜູ້ໃຫ້ທຶນທີ່ສໍາຄັນ):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international (GEF-World Bank): 70.0%; government (RGoB): 20.0%; local community / land user(s): 10.0%

5.2 ການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ທາງດ້ານການເງິນ / ອຸປະກອນ ສະໜອງໃຫ້ແກ່ຜູ້ນໍາທີ່ດິນ

ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ ໄດ້ຮັບການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ທາງດ້ານ ການເງິນ / ອຸປະກອນ ໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີບໍ?

ແມ່ນ

ຖ້າແມ່ນ, ໃຫ້ລະບຸປະເພດ (ຫຼາຍ) ຂອງການສະໜັບສະໜູນ, ເງື່ອນໄຂ ແລະ ຜູູ້ສະໜອງ (ຫຼາຍ):

Incentives for specific SLM interventions per area and through short-term input support (seeds and seedlings)

5.3 ເງິນສົມທົບສໍາລັບການນໍາໃຊ້ສະເພາະປັດໃຈຂາເຂົ້າໃນການຜະລີດກະສິກໍາ (ລວມທັງແຮງງານ)

  • ອຸປະກອນ
ໃຫ້ລະບຸໄດ້ຮັບການສະໜັບສະໜູນປັດໃຈຂາເຂົ້າຫຍັງແດ່ ທີ່ຂອບເຂດ ລະບຸ ການອຸດໜູນ
ເຄື່ອງມື ງົບປະມານບາງສ່ວນ
  • ກະສິກໍາ
ໃຫ້ລະບຸໄດ້ຮັບການສະໜັບສະໜູນປັດໃຈຂາເຂົ້າຫຍັງແດ່ ທີ່ຂອບເຂດ ລະບຸ ການອຸດໜູນ
ແນວພັນ, ແກ່ນພັນ ງົບປະມານບາງສ່ວນ
Seedlings ງົບປະມານບາງສ່ວນ
  • ການກໍ່ສ້າງ
ໃຫ້ລະບຸໄດ້ຮັບການສະໜັບສະໜູນປັດໃຈຂາເຂົ້າຫຍັງແດ່ ທີ່ຂອບເຂດ ລະບຸ ການອຸດໜູນ
for fencing and dams ງົບປະມານບາງສ່ວນ
  • ພື້ນຖານໂຄງລ່າງ
ໃຫ້ລະບຸໄດ້ຮັບການສະໜັບສະໜູນປັດໃຈຂາເຂົ້າຫຍັງແດ່ ທີ່ຂອບເຂດ ລະບຸ ການອຸດໜູນ
FYM sheds, irrigation channel renovation ງົບປະມານບາງສ່ວນ
ຄວາມຄິດເຫັນ:

Mostly voluntary and some paid in cash (for labour-intensive SLM interventions) and limited other material support such as tools and seeds and seedlings

Not financed: roads, fertilizers, schools

5.4 ສິນເຊື່ອ

ໄດ້ປ່ອຍສິນເຊື່ອ ສະໜອງໃຫ້ພາຍໃຕ້ ວິທີການສໍາລັບກິດຈະກໍາ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນນຍົງບໍ່?

ບໍ່ແມ່ນ

6. ວິເຄາະຜົນກະທົບ ແລະ ສັງລວມບັນຫາ

6.1 ຜົນກະທົບຂອງແນວທາງ

ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດຊ່ວຍຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ ໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ແລະ ບໍາລຸງຮັກສາ ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງໄດ້ບໍ?
  • ບໍ່
  • ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
  • ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
  • ມີ, ຫຼາຍ

Considerable area of vulnerable land brought under SLM, reduction of loss of land, improved yields, improved income, improved animal production, improved fodder base

ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ ທາງສັງຄົມ ແລະ ເສດຖະກິດບໍ່?
  • ບໍ່
  • ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
  • ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
  • ມີ, ຫຼາຍ

Moderate improvement of vulnerable households (poorest and single-headed households) through targeted interventions and pro-active inclusion. The labour sharing approach in implementing SLM activities greatly benefited the resource (human and capital) constrained household.

ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດປັບປຸງ ປະເດັນການຖືຄອງທີ່ດິນ / ສິດທິໃນການນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ ທີ່ເຊື່ອງຊ້ອນໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງໄດ້ບໍ?
  • ບໍ່
  • ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
  • ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
  • ມີ, ຫຼາຍ

The problem is unlikely to be overcome in the near future. Individual land titles of households favour greatly the planning and implementation of SLM activities

Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?
  • ບໍ່
  • ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
  • ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
  • ມີ, ຫຼາຍ

Other government and donor-funded projects have adopted elements of the participatory SLM action planning methodology (DANIDA, REAP)

Did the Approach lead to improved livelihoods / human well-being?
  • ບໍ່
  • ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
  • ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
  • ມີ, ຫຼາຍ

cash income, food self-sufficiency, community sense/bonding, reduced exposure to natural hazards related to land degradation/flooding

Did the Approach help to alleviate poverty?
  • ບໍ່
  • ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
  • ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
  • ມີ, ຫຼາຍ

Improvement of food self-sufficiency and cash generation opportunities

6.2 ແຮງຈູງໃຈຫຼັກຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນໃນການປະຕິບັດການຄຸ້ມຄອງທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ

  • ການຜະລິດເພີ່ມຂຶ້ນ
  • ການຫຼຸດຜ່ອນພາລະວຽກ
  • ການຊໍາລະເງິນ / ເງິນອຸດໜູນ
  • ກຽດສັກສີ, ຄວາມກົດດັນທາງສັງຄົມ / ການຕິດຕໍ່ກັນທາງສັງຄົມ
  • ລວມເຂົ້ານໍາກັນກັບການເຄື່ອນໄຫວ / ໂຄງການ / ກຸ່ມ / ເຄືອຂ່າຍ
  • ຄວາມຮັບຮູ້ ທາງສີ່ງແວດລ້ອມ
  • well-being and livelihoods improvement

6.3 ຄວາມຍືນຍົງຂອງກິດຈະກໍາວິທີທາງ

ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ ທີ່ດິນ ສາມາດສືບຕໍ່ ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ຜ່ານວິທີທາງໄດ້ບໍ່ (ໂດຍປາດສະຈາກ ການຊ່ວຍເຫຼືອ ຈາກພາກສ່ວນພາຍນອກ)?
  • ບໍ່ແນ່ນອນ
ຖ້າ ບໍ່ ຫຼື ບໍ່ແນ່ໃຈ, ໃຫ້ອະທິບາຍ ແລະ ຄໍາເຫັນ:

Rural communities will need continued support by government staff through advice, finance and other support.

6.4 ຈຸດແຂງ / ຂໍ້ດີ ຂອງວິທີທາງ

ຈຸດແຂງ / ຈຸດດີ / ໂອກາດ ຈາກທັດສະນະຂອງຜູ້ປ້ອນຂໍ້ມູນ ຫຼື ບຸກຄົນສຳຄັນ
Decentralised, village level bottom-up planning and implementation ensures capacity building, ownership and empowerment of rural land users
Participatory character gives a voice to farmers with in-depth knowledge of land-based issues and its causes and history
Inclusiveness of approach, reaching to all households
Helps to build community sense
(How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continued annual AP


Continued annual AP; add with NR mapping and ITK studies and participatory M&E
Continued annual AP; targeted focus on most vulnerable households
Additional group formation and community group support
)

6.5 ຈຸດອ່ອນ / ຂໍ້ເສຍຂອງແນວທາງ ແລະ ວິທີການແກ້ໄຂໃຫ້ເຂົາເຈົ້າ

ຈຸດອ່ອນ ຫຼື ຂໍ້ເສຍ ຫຼື ຄວາມສ່ຽງ ໃນມຸມມອງຂອງ ຜູ້ສັງລວມຂໍ້ມູນ ຫຼື ບັນດາຜູ້ຕອບແບບສອບຖາມ ມີວິທີການແກ້ໄຂຄືແນວໃດ?
Time-consuming and resource demanding
Requires large workload of both extension staff and farmers
Costly as the approach also covers actual implementation of all of planned SLM activities and reaches more than 130 villages for 3 year period
Combine and align with Five Year Plan planning procedures; mainstreaming into governmental decentralised planning procedures
Mainstreaming into regular planning and budgeting
Spread over calendar year; labour-intensive SLM activities in lean winter season.

7. ເອກກະສານອ້າງອີງ ແລະ ຂໍ້ມູນການເຊື່ອມໂຍງ

7.1 ວິທີການ / ແຫຼ່ງຂໍ້ມູນ

  • ການໄປຢ້ຽມຢາມພາກສະໜາມ, ການສໍາຫຼວດພາກສະໜາມ
  • ການສໍາພາດ ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ

7.2 ເອກະສານທົ່ວໄປທີ່ສາມາດໃຊ້ໄດ້

ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:

Working the Land - Documenting the Key Lessons of Sustainable Land Management on Steep to Very Steep Slopes in Bhutan 2011

ມີຢູ່ໃສ?ມູນຄ່າເທົ່າໃດ?

NSSC, DoA, MoAF, RGoB

ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:

Indigenous Technical Knowledge (ITK) on Soil & Soil Fertility Management 2011

ມີຢູ່ໃສ?ມູນຄ່າເທົ່າໃດ?

NSSC, DoA, MoAF, RGoB

ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:

Participatory Approaches in Sustainable Land Management – Planning, Implementation & Monitoring as Continuous Learning Processes 2011

ມີຢູ່ໃສ?ມູນຄ່າເທົ່າໃດ?

NSSC, DoA, MoAF, RGoB

ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:

National Action Plan to Combat Land Degradation 2010, 2014

ມີຢູ່ໃສ?ມູນຄ່າເທົ່າໃດ?

NSSC, DoA, MoAF, RGoB

ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:

BHUCAT, Best Practices and Guidelines from Bhutan for SLM on Steep to very Steep Slope

ມີຢູ່ໃສ?ມູນຄ່າເທົ່າໃດ?

NSSC, DoA, MoAF, RGoB

ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:

Documentary of the achievements made in SLM through SLM Project

ມີຢູ່ໃສ?ມູນຄ່າເທົ່າໃດ?

NSSC, DoA, MoAF, RGoB

ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:

Bhutan Land Cover Assessment 2010-Technical Report, NSSC, 2011

ມີຢູ່ໃສ?ມູນຄ່າເທົ່າໃດ?

NSSC, DoA, MoAF, RGoB

ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:

Soil Erosion – Measurement and analysis of soil erosion plot data, NSSC, 2010, 2011

ມີຢູ່ໃສ?ມູນຄ່າເທົ່າໃດ?

NSSC, DoA, MoAF, RGoB

ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:

Integrated Biodiversity Survey of the Lower Wangchhu Watershed, Bhutan 2010

ມີຢູ່ໃສ?ມູນຄ່າເທົ່າໃດ?

NSSC, DoA, MoAF, RGoB

ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:

Rangeland Management in Bhutan 2009

ມີຢູ່ໃສ?ມູນຄ່າເທົ່າໃດ?

NSSC, DoA, MoAF, RGoB, A consultancy report

ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:

Study on Poverty Sustainable Land Management Linkages in Bhutan-A consultancy Report-2009 2009

ມີຢູ່ໃສ?ມູນຄ່າເທົ່າໃດ?

NSSC, DoA, MoAF, RGoB, A consultancy report

ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:

Sustainable Land Management Participatory Action Planning Manual & Tool Kit 2009

ມີຢູ່ໃສ?ມູນຄ່າເທົ່າໃດ?

NSSC, DoA, MoAF, RGoB, A consultancy report

ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:

Sustainable Land Management Interventions: Cost Benefit Analysis Report 2009

ມີຢູ່ໃສ?ມູນຄ່າເທົ່າໃດ?

NSSC, DoA, MoAF, RGoB, A consultancy report

ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:

Rural Livelihoods and Peri-Urban Analysis 2008

ມີຢູ່ໃສ?ມູນຄ່າເທົ່າໃດ?

NSSC, DoA, MoAF, RGoB, A consultancy report

ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:

Review of Mainstreaming of sustainable Land Management in Government Policies and Plans in Bhutan 2008

ມີຢູ່ໃສ?ມູນຄ່າເທົ່າໃດ?

NSSC, DoA, MoAF, RGoB, A consultancy report

ຂໍ້ມູນການເຊື່ອມຕໍ່ ແລະ ເນື້ອໃນ

ຂະຫຍາຍທັງໝົດ ຍຸບທັງໝົດ

ເນື້ອໃນ