1.2 ລາຍລະອຽດ ການຕິດຕໍ່ ຂອງບຸກຄົນທີ່ຊັບພະຍາກອນ ແລະ ສະຖາບັນ ການມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ໃນການປະເມີນຜົນ ແລະ ເອກະສານ ຂອງວິທີທາງ

ຊື່ຂອງ ສະຖາບັນການຈັດຕັ້ງ ທີ່ອໍານວຍຄວາມສະດວກ ໃນການສ້າງເອກກະສານ ຫຼື ປະເມີນແນວທາງ (ຖ້າກ່ຽວຂ້ອງ)

Water and Land Resource Centre (WLRC) - ອີທິໂອເປຍ

ຊື່ຂອງ ສະຖາບັນການຈັດຕັ້ງ ທີ່ອໍານວຍຄວາມສະດວກ ໃນການສ້າງເອກກະສານ ຫຼື ປະເມີນແນວທາງ (ຖ້າກ່ຽວຂ້ອງ)

BoA - Amhara national regional state agriculutral bureau (BoA/Amhara) - ອີທິໂອເປຍ

1.3 ເງື່ອນໄຂ ຂອງການນໍາໃຊ້ເອກກະສານຂໍ້ມູນ ຂອງ WOCAT

ຜູ້ສັງລວມ ແລະ ບັນດາຜູ້ຕອບແບບສອບຖາມ ຍອມຮັບໃນເງື່ອນໄຂ ການນໍາໃຊ້ຂໍ້ມູນເອກະສານ ທີ່ສ້າງຂື້ນ ໂດຍຜ່ານ ອົງການ WOCAT:

ແມ່ນ

1.4 ເອກະສານອ້າງອີງ (ຫຼາຍ) ກັບແບບສອບຖາມ (ຫຼາຍ) ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ຂອງດ້ານການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ

2.1 ການອະທິບາຍ ໂດຍຫຍໍ້ ຂອງວິທີທາງ

Community mobilization for soil and water conservation work in a watershed planning unit is an approach for collective action by organizing all active labor forces living in the kebele/peasant association into development group of 20-30 members and further divide into 1:5 work force to implement construction of soil and water conservation measures, and implementing improved crop production technologies.

2.2 ການອະທິບາຍ ລາຍລະອຽດ ຂອງວິທີທາງ

ການອະທິບາຍ ລາຍລະອຽດ ຂອງວິທີທາງ:

Aims / objectives: The objective of this approach is to facilitate and motivate active participation of capable labor forces of the community for constructing soil and water conservation at watershed level for a period of 40-60 days starting from January every year

Methods: At preparation stage, identification of total labor forces and organizing into development groups (20-30 members) and 1:5 work force (6 members) and provision of awareness creation and training activities are carried out. At implementation stage, in reference to the plan, layout of the total physical structures are marked on the ground using line level survey tools. Based on established work norm, Development agents handover the quantity of work plan to all development groups. The development group leader again redistribute the same plan to 1:5 work force proportional to the number of active forces available in it. In principle, all active work forces equally share the work plan. Still, there is division of labor within team and between men and women. Men & women have different work norms. At completion of daily plan, each development group check the quality standard and development agents again take over the constructed structures from Development groups whenever structures meet quality standard as per design and layout. At completion of all watershed development work, development agents transferred the developed watershed to watershed committee in order to handle regulatory functions.
Monitoring and evaluation at implementation stage is clearly defined where 1:5 work team report daily physical work accomplished and number of members involved to the development group while Development group consolidate reports and pass to Development agent in the kebele and again the agent report to district agriculture office, then to zone agriculture office. Simultaneously, the 1:5 groups evaluate the work accomplished within a day and handover to development group which is then consolidated and passed to Development agents once in three days. The development agents summarized and presented to the Kebele command post (KCP) every week. The woreda experts together with District/Woreda command post member assigned in each cluster kebeles further consolidate the evaluation and report to woreda rural command post (WRDCP) and then the command post reflect on the evaluation and provide feed backs weekly to respective kebeles for follow up actio

Stages of implementation: 1. Planning: consulting community for selection of priority watershed, identify labor
2. Preparatory: mobilizing available labor force, hand tools, training,
3. Implementation: constructing planned physical structures
4. Monitoring and evaluation: checking quantity and quality of work done; supervision, field days
5. Sustainability: reinforcing physical structures with biological measures, formulating and enforcing bylaws, establishing user groups

Role of stakeholders: Land user: i) 1:5 work team: is responsible to implement the soil and water conservation work; ii) Development group: lead and evaluate the volume of work divided into the work teams within the group: iii) Watershed committee: is a legitimate body to develop watershed plan with the technical assistant from development agents and experts, as well as responsible for the management and equatable distribution of benefits obtained in the developed watershed.
Development agent: responsible for planning, technical support, training, supervision
Decision makers: The rural Command post, an adhoc formed at kebele, woreda, zone and region level and responsible for the supervision, control and oversight the overall watershed development activities. Sectors such as land use and administration, road authority, water resources, women and youths offices involved as member of command post to ensure integrity of sectors in the watershed development
Research: Research Institutes involved to introduce technologies, assess and evaluate performance of the approaches and technologies applied
NGOs: involved to support trainings, ad

2.3 ຮູບພາບຂອງແນວທາງ

2.5 ປະເທດ / ເຂດ / ສະຖານທີ່ບ່ອນທີ່ແນວທາງໄດ້ຖືກນໍາໃຊ້

2.6 ວັນທີເລີ່ມຕົ້ນ ແລະ ສິ້ນສຸດ ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕີບັດ ວິທີທາງ

2.7 ປະເພດຂອງແນວທາງ

• It is a government initiative reinstitutionalized since 2010

2.8 ເປົ້າໝາຍ / ຈຸດປະສົງຫຼັກ ຂອງການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ

The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (Plantation of biological conservation measures, application of improved crop and livestock production packages, agricultural implements)

The main objectives of community mobilization is to motivate farming community to take self responsibility to do soil conservation and involve them in public soil conservation work in order to address the problem of land degradation

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: The main problems targeted to address by the approach are: growing challenges of land degradation and soil erosion; lack of commitment and ownership of soil conservation by farmers; lack of technical knowledge for implementing soil conservation

2.9 ເງື່ອນໄຂອໍານວຍ ຫຼື ຂັດຂວາງການປະຕິບັດຂອງເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ / ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີການນໍາໃຊ້ຕາມແນວທາງ

3.1 ຜູ້ມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ໃນວິທີທາງ ແລະ ພາລະບົດບາດ ຂອງເຂົາເຈົ້າ

3.2 ການມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນໃນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ / ຊຸມຊົນທ້ອງຖິ່ນໃນໄລຍະທີ່ແຕກຕ່າງກັນຂອງແນວທາງ

	ການລວບລວມ ເອົາຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ ໃນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ / ຊຸມຊົນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ	ໃຫ້ລະບຸ ຜູ້ໃດທີ່ມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ໃນແຕ່ລະກິດຈະກໍາ?
ການເລີ່ມຕົ້ນ / ແຮງຈູງໃຈ	ການບໍ່ປະຕິບັດ	The primary initiation is coming from the government to combat land degradation issue in the highlands of the country. The land users have little involvement in the initiation however kebele leaders are involved in the initial phases together with the decision makers at district level.
ການວາງແຜນ	ການບໍ່ປະຕິບັດ	The planning is from top to down. The tentative plan based on the Growth and Transformation Plan and previous achievements trickled down to region, zone and districts. The lower level check the plan within watershed contexts and submit to higher level planning units. Finally, the higher level planners/specialists develop more ambitious technology plan and later land users are consulted only for the implementation. However, land users are involved in selection of the watershed to be developped.
ການປະຕິບັດ	ການຮ່ວມມື	Land users are actively involved to construct or implement planned soil conservation works through their organizational setup (development groups and 1:5 work force). They do implementation with technical support and guidance from the development agents and agricultural experts. On the other hand, the decision makers through the rural command post supervise and monitor weekly implementation and send feedback for immediate actions.
ຕິດຕາມກວດກາ / ການປະເມີນຜົນ	ການຮ່ວມມື	Land users particularly those who are leaders of the development group and the members of the watershed committee are involved in the day to day supervision, monitoring and quality control of the implementation together with development agents. The main actors for monitoring and evaluation are the technical experts at district, zonal and regional levels as well as the command post members at kebele, district, zonal and regional levels
Research	ການຮ່ວມມື	Land users are involved in research problem identification, participatory technology selection process, and scale up of research technologies.

3.3 ແຜນວາດ (ຖ້າມີ)

3.4 ການຕັດສິນໃຈກ່ຽວກັບການຄັດເລືອກເຕັກໂນໂລຢີຂອງການຄຸ້ມຄອງທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ / ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ

ໄດ້ຕັດສິນໃຈເລືອກ ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ (ຫຼາຍ) ບໍ່?

• Mainly by SLM specialists

ອະທິບາຍ:

The planning of SLM technology made by experts and later land users are consulted through public meeting. The experts select technologies by doing analysis of the soil, land use and slope conditions of the watersheds. There is no individual based consultation or the land users do not participate in the choice of technologies.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by By SLM specialists . The land users are asked to contribute their labor for implementing the technology through their local organizations (kebele adminstration, development group, 1:5 work force). They do not decide on the method of implementation of technologies.

4.1 ການສ້າງຄວາມສາມາດ / ການຝຶກອົບຮົມ

ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ ຫຼື ພາກສ່ວນກ່ຽວຂ້ອງອື່ນໆ ໄດ້ຮັບການຝຶກອົບຮົມບໍ່?

ແມ່ນ

ໃຫ້ລະບຸ ຜູ້ໃດທີ່ໄດ້ຮັບການຝຶກອົບຮົມ:

• ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ
• ພະນັກງານພາກສະໜາມ / ທີ່ປຶກສາ

• decision makers at district and zonal levels

ຮູບແບບຂອງການຝຶກອົບຮົມ:

• ການເຮັດຕົວຈິງ
• ຕົວຕໍ່ຕົວ
• ເນື້ອທີ່ສວນທົດລອງ
• ກອງປະຊຸມ
• ຫຼັກສູດ

ໃນຫົວຂໍ້:

Land degradation problems and consequences, natural resources conservation and community mobilization for leaders of development groups and kebele leaders. The training for farmer surveyors is focused on how to measure slope, vertical interval, aligning contours for layout of soil conservation structures and waterways. The experts at different levels and field staffs get an in depth training about the selection, layout and design of soil conservation structures.

4.2 ການບໍລິການໃຫ້ຄໍາປຶກສາ

ເຮັດຜູ້ໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນມີການເຂົ້າເຖິງການບໍລິການໃຫ້ຄໍາປຶກສາ?

ແມ່ນ

ລະບຸວ່າການສະໜອງ ການບໍລິການ ໃຫ້ຄໍາປຶກສາ:

• ສູນຄົ້ນຄວ້າ

ອະທິບາຍ / ຄວາມຄິດເຫັນ:

Name of method used for advisory service: Participatory Demonstration and Training System (PADETS); Key elements: Training and awareness creation, Demonstrations in the Farmer Training Centers (FTC) and experience visits, On the job training; The method give high emphasis to training and to some extent practical demonstrations complemented with experience sharing visits. The participation of land users is not active enough, it is rather of consultative nature.

Advisory service is inadequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; It needs strongefforts to build the capacity of the community to empower them, and establish a powerful system to have continuous supply of improved agricultural technologies and value chain system that help to improve productivity per unit of land. Further more, if the newly created Watershed Users Associations function well, it would be adequate to regulate and sustain land conservation and watershed management using a community mobilization approach.

4.3 ສະຖາບັນການສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ (ການພັດທະນາອົງການຈັດຕັ້ງ)

ສະຖາບັນ ໄດ້ຮັບການສ້າງຕັ້ງຂື້ນ ຫຼື ໄດ້ຮັບການສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ ໂດຍການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງບໍ່?

• ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ

ລະບຸ ທາງສະຖາບັນ ໄດ້ສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ ໃນລະດັບໃດ (ຫຼາຍ):

• ທ້ອງຖິ່ນ

ລະບຸ ປະເພດ ຂອງສະໜັບສະໜູນ:

• ການສ້າງຄວາມອາດສາມາດ / ການຝຶກອົບຮົມ

ໃຫ້ລາຍລະອຽດເພີ່ມເຕີມ:

The local institutions like the watershed committee/watershed users association, Farmer Training Centers and Farmer-Research-Extension-Group are supported by training and experience sharing visits.

4.4 ຕິດຕາມກວດກາ ແລະ ປະເມີນຜົນ

ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ໄດ້ມີການປະເມີນຜົນ ແລະ ຕິດຕາມບໍ?

ແມ່ນ

ຄວາມຄິດເຫັນ:

bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: Area coverage, design/layout quality, land cover

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: Growth, biomass/productivity, regeneration

technical aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: Spacing, integrity of structures

socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: Conflict, user groups, benefit sharing, perceptions

economic / production aspects were regular monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: Weigth gain of animals, productivity of crops, income and livelihood

area treated aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: Area covered, type and quality of technology

area treated aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government through measurements; indicators: Area covered, type of technology

no. of land users involved aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through measurements; indicators: daily work force/attendants, gender

management of Approach aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: Role of actors, encountered problems, actions taken

There were several changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Monitoring and evaluation leads to changes in order to ensure effectiveness. It is flexible to modify some of the elements of the approach although the core steps or procedures are not changed. Limitations are observed on the technical and leadership capacities and passive participation of land users. The main role of the monitoring and evaluation is thus to identify the limitations and problems encountered so that immediate corrections can be made such as changing the ad hoc leadership, provide on the job training, motivating passive ones or sanction those who violate bylaws.

There were several changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Since the planning is not adequate enough to capture the real biophysical conditions and socio-cultural settings, the selection of SLM technologies may fail to fit selected watersheds. With the help of specialists who are monitoring and supporting on the job services, the SLM technologies are subjected to change. Close interactions and discussions may change the SLM technology plan.

4.5 ການຄົ້ນຄວ້າ

ນີ້້ແມ່ນສ່ວນໜຶ່ງ ການຄົ້ນຄວ້າ ຂອງວິທີທາງບໍ່?

ແມ່ນ

ລະບຸ ຫົວຂໍ້:

• ລະບົບນິເວດ
• ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ

ໃຫ້ຂໍ້ມູນ ເພີ່ມເຕີມ ແລະ ກໍານົດ ຜູ້ໃດເຮັດການຄົ້ນຄວ້າ:

Research is part of the approach. The SLM technologies are complemented with improved package of agricultural practices like improved crop and horticultural varieties, forage species, tree species, agricultural implements through demonstrations and scale up activities. Monitoring and evaluation of ecological and socio-economic performances and impacts of the SLM technologies and agricultural practices are the roles of research.

Research was carried out on-farm

5.1 ງົບປະມານປະຈໍາປີ ສໍາລັບວິທີທາງ ຂອງການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ

ຄໍາເຫັນ (ຕົວຢ່າງ: ແຫຼ່ງຂໍ້ມູນຫຼັກ ຂອງການສະໜອງທຶນ / ຜູ້ໃຫ້ທຶນທີ່ສໍາຄັນ):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: local government (district, county, municipality, village etc) (The government contributes to material, technical and supervision support): 36.0%; local community / land user(s) (All the labor requirement meet by the community): 64.0%

5.2 ການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ທາງດ້ານການເງິນ / ອຸປະກອນ ສະໜອງໃຫ້ແກ່ຜູ້ນໍາທີ່ດິນ

ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ ໄດ້ຮັບການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ທາງດ້ານ ການເງິນ / ອຸປະກອນ ໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີບໍ?

ແມ່ນ

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

The inputs like seedlings for biological measures planted on structural soil conservation measures, gullies and degraded lands, and gabions for constructing gully check dams are provided by the government

5.3 ເງິນສົມທົບສໍາລັບການນໍາໃຊ້ສະເພາະປັດໃຈຂາເຂົ້າໃນການຜະລີດກະສິກໍາ (ລວມທັງແຮງງານ)

• ອຸປະກອນ

• ກະສິກໍາ

• ການກໍ່ສ້າງ

ຄວາມຄິດເຫັນ:

The land users contribute voluntary labor for the construction of SLM measures through their local organizations.

5.4 ສິນເຊື່ອ

ໄດ້ປ່ອຍສິນເຊື່ອ ສະໜອງໃຫ້ພາຍໃຕ້ ວິທີການສໍາລັບກິດຈະກໍາ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນນຍົງບໍ່?

ບໍ່ແມ່ນ

6.1 ຜົນກະທົບຂອງແນວທາງ

6.2 ແຮງຈູງໃຈຫຼັກຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນໃນການປະຕິບັດການຄຸ້ມຄອງທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ

6.3 ຄວາມຍືນຍົງຂອງກິດຈະກໍາວິທີທາງ

ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ ທີ່ດິນ ສາມາດສືບຕໍ່ ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ຜ່ານວິທີທາງໄດ້ບໍ່ (ໂດຍປາດສະຈາກ ການຊ່ວຍເຫຼືອ ຈາກພາກສ່ວນພາຍນອກ)?

• ແມ່ນ

ຖ້າ ໄດ້, ອະທິບາຍເຫດຜົນ:

Experience from last three years implementation of the approach indicates that land users can moderately sustain approach activities without support. However, this can be maximized if further technical support is given for land users to continue the curent motivation and commitment; facilitate group actions through well functioning organizational setups by strengthening watershed users' associations; and empowering land users to do soil conservation by their own.

6.4 ຈຸດແຂງ / ຂໍ້ດີ ຂອງວິທີທາງ

ຈຸດແຂງ / ຂໍ້ດີ / ໂອກາດໃນການນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ

It supports forage and horticulture seedling material. Introduce benefit sharing in the form of forage legumes and grasses from area closures and gullies for those who have no access to common resources. Introduce improved agricultural production technologies like varieties, breeds, implements for plowing, harvesting and threshing. Change waste lands into productive land. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: The land users has to be motivated to establish private nursery to meet their own plantation demand. Strength scale up of technologies to wider areas. Establish farmer to farmer seed/ technology exchange. Establish and strengthen mechanization users groups or service providers. Enhance homestead development with alternative livelihood options. Change waste lands and gullies into productive land by producing fruits and timbers. )

ຈຸດແຂງ / ຈຸດດີ / ໂອກາດ ຈາກທັດສະນະຂອງຜູ້ປ້ອນຂໍ້ມູນ ຫຼື ບຸກຄົນສຳຄັນ

The approach help to further strengthen those innovative farmers and make aware of natural resources conservation. Introduce use rights on common resources after watershed development. Start to develop bylaws to control free grazing. Establish legal watershed institution - watershed users' association. Treats more degraded and erosion sensitive areas in short period. It enhances awareness and participation of political leaders/decision makers and land users on land degradation and its consequences. Enhance on-site and to some extent off-site ecological services. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Build the capacity of land users. Establish strong watershed organizations and enhance its capacity to regulate and enforce rules. Establish strong planning and regulatory functions of the government. )

6.5 ຈຸດອ່ອນ / ຂໍ້ເສຍຂອງແນວທາງ ແລະ ວິທີການແກ້ໄຂໃຫ້ເຂົາເຈົ້າ

ຈຸດອ່ອນ / ຂໍ້ເສຍ / ຄວາມສ່ຽງໃນມູມມອງຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ	ມີວິທີການແກ້ໄຂຄືແນວໃດ?
Overlapping of different agricultural activities (threshing and irrigation) during the period of SWC public work which limit land users' participation. Limitation to implement cut and carry system of grazing without intensive forage development interventions by all land users.	Context specific public SWC work need to be agreed by land users. Further discussion with community and possible options has to be taken place to implement cut and carry system of grazing in watersheds.

ຈຸດອ່ອນ ຫຼື ຂໍ້ເສຍ ຫຼື ຄວາມສ່ຽງ ໃນມຸມມອງຂອງ ຜູ້ສັງລວມຂໍ້ມູນ ຫຼື ບັນດາຜູ້ຕອບແບບສອບຖາມ

ມີວິທີການແກ້ໄຂຄືແນວໃດ?

Less involvement of land users in decision making at different stages. Technology selection process has to be supported with realistic local data related to biophysical and social conditions of watersheds. Lack strong performance/impact monitoring and evaluation of the developed watersheds after implementation. Inadequate support of watershed committee by higher level units (like courts) to enforce agreed bylaws. Inadequate economic interventions as compared to biophysical interventions.

Mechanisms like Watershed associations need to be strengthened to increase the level of participation of land users in decision making during planning. Watershed assessment data has to be used for improved planning. Establish an evaluation guideline to evaluate performance. The newly established watershed organization or association has to be considered as a legitimate body to administer and regulate the watersheds. The support of research to introduce technologies has to be strengthened and started equally with the biophysical interventions during watershed development stages.

7.1 ວິທີການ / ແຫຼ່ງຂໍ້ມູນ

7.2 ເອກະສານທົ່ວໄປທີ່ສາມາດໃຊ້ໄດ້

ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:

Abera Wondafrash, Belayneh Ayele, Getachew Engidayehu, Girmachew Siraw, Gizaw Desta, Leulsegged Kasa, Mesfin Legesse, Selamyihun Kidanu, Wale Jemberu, Yared Zegeye, Zerihun Nigussie (2012).ASSESSMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT WORKS THROUGH PUBLIC MOBILIZATION IN AMHARA NATIONAL REGIONAL STATE, ETHIOPIA

ມີຢູ່ໃສ?ມູນຄ່າເທົ່າໃດ?

Unpublished report

ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:

Annual reports of BOA in Amhara (unpublished)