Partnership with beneficiary communities in project implementation [ເຄັນຢາ]
- ການສ້າງ:
- ປັບປູງ:
- ຜູ້ສັງລວມຂໍ້ມູນ: Fredrick Ochieng
- ບັນນາທິການ: Boris Orlowsky, Nicole Stolz
- ຜູ້ທົບທວນຄືນ: Renate Fleiner, Boris Orlowsky, Alexandra Gavilano
N/A
approaches_597 - ເຄັນຢາ
ເບິ່ງພາກສ່ວນ
ຂະຫຍາຍທັງໝົດ ຍຸບທັງໝົດ1. ຂໍ້ມູນທົ່ວໄປ
1.2 ລາຍລະອຽດ ການຕິດຕໍ່ ຂອງບຸກຄົນທີ່ຊັບພະຍາກອນ ແລະ ສະຖາບັນ ການມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ໃນການປະເມີນຜົນ ແລະ ເອກະສານ ຂອງວິທີທາງ
ບຸກຄົນສຳຄັນ (ຫຼາຍຄົນ)
Fredrick Ochieng:
ເຄັນຢາ
ຊື່ຂອງ ສະຖາບັນການຈັດຕັ້ງ ທີ່ອໍານວຍຄວາມສະດວກ ໃນການສ້າງເອກກະສານ ຫຼື ປະເມີນແນວທາງ (ຖ້າກ່ຽວຂ້ອງ)
CARITAS (Switzerland) - ສະວິດເຊີແລນ1.3 ເງື່ອນໄຂ ຂອງການນໍາໃຊ້ເອກກະສານຂໍ້ມູນ ຂອງ WOCAT
ເມື່ອໃດທີ່ໄດ້ສັງລວມຂໍ້ມູນ (ຢູ່ພາກສະໜາມ)?
14/10/2016
ຜູ້ສັງລວມ ແລະ ບັນດາຜູ້ຕອບແບບສອບຖາມ ຍອມຮັບໃນເງື່ອນໄຂ ການນໍາໃຊ້ຂໍ້ມູນເອກະສານ ທີ່ສ້າງຂື້ນ ໂດຍຜ່ານ ອົງການ WOCAT:
ແມ່ນ
1.4 ເອກະສານອ້າງອີງ (ຫຼາຍ) ກັບແບບສອບຖາມ (ຫຼາຍ) ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ຂອງດ້ານການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ
2. ພັນລະນາ ແນວທາງການຄຸ້ມຄອງນໍາໃຊ້ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ
2.1 ການອະທິບາຍ ໂດຍຫຍໍ້ ຂອງວິທີທາງ
The approach focuses on community engagement on a partnership basis. The model is a departure from the traditional approaches where the community mostly is reduced to being a beneficiary of project services without substantive responsibility.
2.2 ການອະທິບາຍ ລາຍລະອຽດ ຂອງວິທີທາງ
ການອະທິບາຍ ລາຍລະອຽດ ຂອງວິທີທາງ:
The Approach is hinged on community empowerment and partnership. The model is a departure from the traditional approaches where the community is reduced to a mere beneficiary of project services without substantive responsibility.
The main purpose of the approach is to enhance ownership, while fostering needed capacity for management of project outcomes. Ultimately, it is estimated that sustainability of project results is achievable with good community empowerment and meaningful participation. The approach also aims at cost effectiveness as the community is required to substantially contribute locally available materials, labour and sometimes cash.
Community mobilisation and capacity building is central to ensure that the community is prepared to undertake their roles and responsibilities. Mobilisation happens through discussions, sometimes aided by applying participatory tools and methods. Capacity building is done through workshop-type and/or on-the-job training. It is noteworthy that the communities do have indigenous knowledge and skills which are useful in processes of development at the community level. These skills and knowledge inform the project design, planning and implementation of activities. To enhance local skills, selected community members are trained as they work alongside the hired skilled artisans during the construction of the rock catchment system. The aim is to prepare and equip the locals with basic skills for operations and maintenance of the rock catchment system. Others are trained to get equipped with skills on hygiene and sanitation promotion.
The project was designed based on pre-project assessment. The assessment, besides identifying water and hygiene needs, also identified three areas/communities which had rock catchment potential - Ndikir, Manyatta Lengima and Mpagas. Initial meetings were done with support from community leaders and the local government administrators (chiefs). During the meetings the project was explained and discussed in view of the community needs and the roles for all stakeholders - Caritas Switzerland (CACH), the community, government and leaders. Agreed roles and responsibilities were drafted and formed the main part of the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between CACH and the community. The MOU was signed before the entire community for collective ownership and formalise the relationship between CACH and the project.
At the county and sub-county level, the stakeholders are provided with progress updates, engaging with government and other leaders. The local leaders were useful in helping in community mobilisation and addressing areas of concern wherever issues arose.
The approach left the community more motivated with a desire to manage the project benefits for posterity. The community has appreciated that the project ended with a number of community members having acquired basic skills for operations and maintenance. Above all, they were proud that they significantly contributed to the successful implementation of the project. Initially the community were opposed to the idea that they had to contribute so much, since before they had mostly received assistance without any requirement on their side to contribute.
2.3 ຮູບພາບຂອງແນວທາງ
ສື່ຮູບພາບ
2.4 ວີດີໂອ ຂອງວິທີທາງ
ຄວາມຄິດເຫັນ, ຄໍາອະທິບາຍຫຍໍ້:
The video is taken on an early morning shower and shows how water is collected, dammed and channelled downstream to the masonry tanks.
ວັນທີ:
08/12/2014
ສະຖານທີ່:
Ndikir village, Marsabit County, Kenya
ຊື່ຂອງຜູ້ຖ່າຍວີດີໂອ:
Fredrick Ochieng
2.5 ປະເທດ / ເຂດ / ສະຖານທີ່ບ່ອນທີ່ແນວທາງໄດ້ຖືກນໍາໃຊ້
ປະເທດ:
ເຄັນຢາ
ພາກພື້ນ / ລັດ / ແຂວງ:
Laisamis sub county, Marsabit County, Kenya
ຂໍ້ມູນເພີ່ມເຕີມຂອງສະຖານທີ່:
Implemented with three different communities in three locations, Ndikir, Manyatta Lengima and Mpagas
Map
×2.6 ວັນທີເລີ່ມຕົ້ນ ແລະ ສິ້ນສຸດ ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕີບັດ ວິທີທາງ
ສະແດງປີຂອງການເລີ່ມຕົ້ນ:
2013
ປີທີ່ສີ້ນສູດ (ຖ້າຢຸດບໍ່ໄດ້ນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ):
2015
ຄວາມຄິດເຫັນ:
The Rock catchment project was implemented from 2013 to 2015
2.7 ປະເພດຂອງແນວທາງ
- ພາຍໃຕ້ໂຄງການ / ແຜນງານ
2.8 ເປົ້າໝາຍ / ຈຸດປະສົງຫຼັກ ຂອງການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ
1. Community mobilisation
2. Active community participation and ownership of the project and outcomes
3. Sustainability of the project outcomes
4. Enhanced skills and capacity to manage the Technology
2.9 ເງື່ອນໄຂອໍານວຍ ຫຼື ຂັດຂວາງການປະຕິບັດຂອງເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ / ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີການນໍາໃຊ້ຕາມແນວທາງ
ສັງຄົມ / ວັດທະນະທໍາ / ມາດຕະຖານ ແລະ ຄຸນຄ່າທາງສາສະໜາ
- ເຊື່ອງຊ້ອນ
The community was accustomed to receiving food and non-food handouts. This culture was a major huddle in working with community where they were expected to make substantial contribution towards the project activities.
ການກໍ່ຕັ້ງສະຖາບັນ
- ອໍານວຍ
The institutional setting, especially the traditional authority of elders, was supportive during implementation. Once the elders were convinced and persuaded to make certain decisions beneficial to the project, it was always easier for the rest of the community members to rally behind.
ການຮ່ວມມື / ການປະສານງານຂອງຜູ້ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງ
- ອໍານວຍ
The Approach requires that stakeholders (other non-state actors and government) coordinate well so that approaches employed by all are complementary and all build into sustainable results. It is common however that there have been approaches that dis-empower communities. Good coordination and collaboration would enhance sharing and learning across the actors and minimise such programming pitfalls.
ກ່ຽວກັບກົດໝາຍ (ສິດນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ, ສິດນໍາໃຊ້ນໍ້າ)
- ອໍານວຍ
Land tenure in the northern Kenya is mostly communal. This was an enabling factor so that there were no complex and usual elaborate and expensive legal requirements to construct a rock catchment water system. Had land been adjudicated and subdivided for individual ownership, there would have been a need for negotiations and legal procedures to be done with those who own the land where the public asset is to be located.
3. ການມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ແລະ ບົດບາດຂອງພາກສ່ວນທີ່ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງທີ່ໄດ້ມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ
3.1 ຜູ້ມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ໃນວິທີທາງ ແລະ ພາລະບົດບາດ ຂອງເຂົາເຈົ້າ
- ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນໃນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ / ຊຸມຊົນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ
The project was implemented with participation of the communities who are the local land users
Community's role was to ensure that locally available materials were delivered on the site of construction, hygiene and sanitation promotion, unskilled labour, record keeping of all construction materials, security of workers and construction materials on site
- ຜູ້ຊ່ຽວຊານ ການນຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ / ທີ່ປຶກສາດ້ານກະສິກໍາ
Caritas had a technical team of three staff who were based within the project location in the field. This team was supported through experts in the office in the capital city Nairobi.
The technical team implemented all project activities such as community organisation/mobilisation, construction of infrastructure as well as hygiene and sanitation promotion.
- ອໍານາດ ການປົກຄອງທ້ອງຖິ່ນ
Chiefs, Members of County Assembly, Ward administrators
Opinion leaders were critical in the process of community mobilisation and following-up the commitments made by the community under the signed MoU.
- ພະນັກງານຂັ້ນສູນກາງ (ຜູ້ວາງແຜນ, ຜູ້ສ້າງນະໂຍບາຍ)
County Steering Group (CSG), sub-County Steering Group (SCSG)
Coordination with other development agencies and government departments at the County level
- ອົງການຈັດຕັ້ງ ສາກົນ
Caritas Switzerland
Overall leadership in project planning, implementation and supervision
3.2 ການມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນໃນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ / ຊຸມຊົນທ້ອງຖິ່ນໃນໄລຍະທີ່ແຕກຕ່າງກັນຂອງແນວທາງ
| ການລວບລວມ ເອົາຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ ໃນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ / ຊຸມຊົນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ | ໃຫ້ລະບຸ ຜູ້ໃດທີ່ມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ໃນແຕ່ລະກິດຈະກໍາ? | |
|---|---|---|
| ການເລີ່ມຕົ້ນ / ແຮງຈູງໃຈ | ການຮ່ວມມື | Planning for project activities was jointly planned between the community and the project staff specialists |
| ການວາງແຜນ | ການຮ່ວມມື | More technical planning was done as advised by the technical project team. Planning for day to day field activities during implementation was jointly done with the community |
| ການປະຕິບັດ | ການຮ່ວມມື | Community participation was more interactive in planning for specific project activities. However, there were specific tasks which required hired labour and by common agreement the community provided such labour for payment. |
| ຕິດຕາມກວດກາ / ການປະເມີນຜົນ | ການຮ່ວມມື | Monitoring with community was mainly done during project reflection/review meetings. Monitoring in this respect was more limited to evaluation of project activities progress and timeliness with which the activities were being achieved. |
3.3 ແຜນວາດ (ຖ້າມີ)
ການອະທິບາຍ:
The flow chart summarises the Approach's key components, activities and steps for community mobilisation, capacity building and stakeholders engagement. The stakeholders include the relevant government departments - Water, Health, Environment, Drought Management - and non-state actors in the County. There is a monthly forum known as the County Steering Group (CSG) which brings together all the heads of government departments and NGO representatives at the county level. Similar forums also take place at the sub-county level.
ຜູ້ຂຽນ:
Fredrick Ochieng
3.4 ການຕັດສິນໃຈກ່ຽວກັບການຄັດເລືອກເຕັກໂນໂລຢີຂອງການຄຸ້ມຄອງທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ / ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ
ລະບຸ ຄົນທີ່ຕັດສິນໃຈ ກ່ຽວກັບການຄັດເລືອກຂອງ ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ / ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ຈະໄດ້ຮັບການປະຕິບັດ:
- ພາກສ່ວນກ່ຽວຂ້ອງທັງໝົດ, ເປັນສ່ວນໜຶ່ງ ຂອງວິທີທາງແບບມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ
ອະທິບາຍ:
The project was designed initially without direct community involvement other than the pre-project information collected.
Specify on what basis decisions were made:
- ປະເມີນເອກກະສານ ຄວາມຮູ້ກ່ຽວກັບ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ (ຫຼັກຖານທີ່ຊ່ວຍໃນການຕັດສິນໃຈ)
- ຜົນທີ່ໄດ້ຮັບ ຈາກການຄົ້ນຄວ້າ
- ປະສົບການສ່ວນບຸກຄົນ ແລະ ຄວາມຄິດເຫັນ (ທີ່ບໍ່ເປັນເອກກະສານ)
- Government policies
4. ການສະໜັບສະໜູນທາງດ້ານວິຊາການ, ການສ້າງຄວາມສາມາດ, ແລະ ການຈັດການຄວາມຮູ້.
4.1 ການສ້າງຄວາມສາມາດ / ການຝຶກອົບຮົມ
ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ ຫຼື ພາກສ່ວນກ່ຽວຂ້ອງອື່ນໆ ໄດ້ຮັບການຝຶກອົບຮົມບໍ່?
ແມ່ນ
ໃຫ້ລະບຸ ຜູ້ໃດທີ່ໄດ້ຮັບການຝຶກອົບຮົມ:
- ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ
- ພະນັກງານພາກສະໜາມ / ທີ່ປຶກສາ
ຮູບແບບຂອງການຝຶກອົບຮົມ:
- ການເຮັດຕົວຈິງ
- ເນື້ອທີ່ສວນທົດລອງ
ໃນຫົວຂໍ້:
Basic construction skills, management of water system (rock catchment), hygiene and sanitation promotion
4.2 ການບໍລິການໃຫ້ຄໍາປຶກສາ
ເຮັດຜູ້ໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນມີການເຂົ້າເຖິງການບໍລິການໃຫ້ຄໍາປຶກສາ?
ແມ່ນ
ລະບຸວ່າການສະໜອງ ການບໍລິການ ໃຫ້ຄໍາປຶກສາ:
- ໃນພື້ນທີ່ຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ
ອະທິບາຍ / ຄວາມຄິດເຫັນ:
The community has (in theory) access to government advisory services. However, the nearest government offices are about 20-50 kilometres away without reliable means of transport. The technical staff of the county government is often unable to offer quality and effective extension work, mostly due to transport limitations but also due to low motivation. However, this gap is being bridged through the work of various NGOs operating in the region who provide advisory services in addition to other interventions such as in water, health, livelihoods, and education.
4.3 ສະຖາບັນການສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ (ການພັດທະນາອົງການຈັດຕັ້ງ)
ສະຖາບັນ ໄດ້ຮັບການສ້າງຕັ້ງຂື້ນ ຫຼື ໄດ້ຮັບການສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ ໂດຍການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງບໍ່?
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
ລະບຸ ທາງສະຖາບັນ ໄດ້ສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ ໃນລະດັບໃດ (ຫຼາຍ):
- ທ້ອງຖິ່ນ
ອະທິບາຍ ສະຖາບັນການຈັດຕັ້ງ, ພາລະບົດບາດ ແລະ ໜ້າທີ່ຮັບຜິດຊອບ, ສະມາຊິກ ແລະ ອື່ນໆ.
The Approach led to establishment of Water Management Committees. The committees have been trained and equipped to manage the systems.
ລະບຸ ປະເພດ ຂອງສະໜັບສະໜູນ:
- ທາງດ້ານການເງິນ
- ການສ້າງຄວາມອາດສາມາດ / ການຝຶກອົບຮົມ
- ອຸປະກອນ
ໃຫ້ລາຍລະອຽດເພີ່ມເຕີມ:
One key lesson from this and other projects is that one-off trainings are rarely effective even if properly done. A continuous support/follow-up is necessary to maintain the skills and knowledge acquired.
4.4 ຕິດຕາມກວດກາ ແລະ ປະເມີນຜົນ
ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ໄດ້ມີການປະເມີນຜົນ ແລະ ຕິດຕາມບໍ?
ບໍ່ແມ່ນ
4.5 ການຄົ້ນຄວ້າ
ນີ້້ແມ່ນສ່ວນໜຶ່ງ ການຄົ້ນຄວ້າ ຂອງວິທີທາງບໍ່?
ບໍ່ແມ່ນ
5. ການສະໜັບສະໜູນທາງດ້ານການເງິນ ແລະ ອຸປະກອນຈາກພາຍນອກ
5.1 ງົບປະມານປະຈໍາປີ ສໍາລັບວິທີທາງ ຂອງການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ
ຖ້າຫາກບໍ່ຮູ້ຈັດງົບປະມານທີ່ແນ່ນອນ ແມ່ນໃຫ້ປະມານເອົາ:
- 2,000-10,000
ຄໍາເຫັນ (ຕົວຢ່າງ: ແຫຼ່ງຂໍ້ມູນຫຼັກ ຂອງການສະໜອງທຶນ / ຜູ້ໃຫ້ທຶນທີ່ສໍາຄັນ):
Internal organisational funding and external donors
5.2 ການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ທາງດ້ານການເງິນ / ອຸປະກອນ ສະໜອງໃຫ້ແກ່ຜູ້ນໍາທີ່ດິນ
ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ ໄດ້ຮັບການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ທາງດ້ານ ການເງິນ / ອຸປະກອນ ໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີບໍ?
ແມ່ນ
ຖ້າແມ່ນ, ໃຫ້ລະບຸປະເພດ (ຫຼາຍ) ຂອງການສະໜັບສະໜູນ, ເງື່ອນໄຂ ແລະ ຜູູ້ສະໜອງ (ຫຼາຍ):
Caritas procured the bulk of construction materials whereas the community contributed locally available materials - sand and hardcore stones
5.3 ເງິນສົມທົບສໍາລັບການນໍາໃຊ້ສະເພາະປັດໃຈຂາເຂົ້າໃນການຜະລີດກະສິກໍາ (ລວມທັງແຮງງານ)
ຖ້າແຮງງານ ຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ ໄດ້ຮັບການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ປັດໃຈຂາເຂົ້າ, ແມ່ນບໍ່:
- ການອາສາ
ຄວາມຄິດເຫັນ:
The labour contribution was split between the organisation and the community. Caritas paid 3 USD per day whereas the standard amount per day is 5 USD. This was discussed and agreed at the inception of the project. The consideration was that those who work on site will not have any other time for other work for their household daily needs.
5.4 ສິນເຊື່ອ
ໄດ້ປ່ອຍສິນເຊື່ອ ສະໜອງໃຫ້ພາຍໃຕ້ ວິທີການສໍາລັບກິດຈະກໍາ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນນຍົງບໍ່?
ບໍ່ແມ່ນ
5.5 ສິ່ງຈູງໃຈ ຫຼື ເຄື່ອງມືອື່ນໆ
ການສົ່ງເສີມ ຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ໃນການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ ໄດ້ສະໜອງສິ່ງກະຕຸກຊຸກຍູ້ບໍ່?
ບໍ່ແມ່ນ
6. ວິເຄາະຜົນກະທົບ ແລະ ສັງລວມບັນຫາ
6.1 ຜົນກະທົບຂອງແນວທາງ
ວິທີທາງ ຊ່ວຍຊຸກຍູ້ ຜູ້ນຳໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນທ້ອງຖີ່ນ, ໃນການປັບປຸງ ການມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ຂອງຜູ້ທີ່ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງ ບໍ່?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
Community's participation was initially a new concept for the communities in this region. Through various meetings, persistency and flexibility the community participation improved and was achieved during the project period.
ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ດັ່ງກ່າວນີ້ ສາມາດເປັນຫຼັກຖານ ທີ່ສະໜັບສະໜູນ ໃຫ້ການຕັດສິນໃຈໄດ້ບໍ່?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
Due to the nature of working with the community, it was always possible to review certain elements of project activities based on learning
ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດຊ່ວຍຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ ໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ແລະ ບໍາລຸງຮັກສາ ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງໄດ້ບໍ?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
The Approach's aim was to build the required capacity of the community members to better manage the Technology well after the project ends.
ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດປັບປຸງ ການປະສານງານ ແລະ ຄ່າໃຊ້ຈ່າຍ ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ທີ່ມີປະສິດທິພາບ ຂອງການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືດຍົງໄດ້ບໍ່?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
Community's contribution in labour and locally available materials (hardcore stones and sand) significantly reduced the cost of construction. These are materials that otherwise would have been procured from far off sources at a much higher cost.
ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດລະດົມ ຫຼື ປັບປຸງ ການເຂົ້າເຖິງຊັບພະຍາກອນ ການເງິນ ສໍາລັບການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືດຍົງໄດ້ບໍ່?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
The SLM was implemented with funding support aimed for drought recovery. The country had just gone through a major drought. The Approach, however, focused more on mobilising communities towards meaningful participation by providing local available resources such as hardcore, sand, and unskilled labour.
ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດປັບປຸງຄວາມຮູ້ ແລະ ຄວາມສາມາດຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ ໃນການປະຕິບັດ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືດຍົງໄດ້ບໍ່?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
A significant element of the Approach was capacity building which was achieved through on-the-job and workshop training for the selected community members
ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດປັບປຸງຄວາມຮູ້ ແລະ ຄວາມສາມາດ ຂອງພາກສ່ວນທີ່ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງໄດ້ບໍ່?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
The project was implemented with close involvement of county government officials and other development organisations. There have been requests by other development actors in the region wanting to know more about how Caritas Switzerland succeeded in working with the communities and achieving these impressive results.
ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ ໃຫ້ສະຖາບັນການຈັດຕັ້ງ, ການຮ່ວມມື ລະຫວ່າງພາກສ່ວນທີ່ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງບໍ່?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
The project's mandate was limited to community institutions capacity building. Beyond community empowerment the Approach did not target to raise capacity of other stakeholders.
ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດຫຼຸດຜ່ອນ ຂໍ້ຂັດແຍ່ງໄດ້ບໍ່?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
The region within which the project was implemented in has resource based conflicts, mostly conflicts over water and pasture land. The Approach led to successful implementation of the Technology which reduces pressure on water resources. In addition, the management of the newly constructed water points ensures that community members benefits equally
ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ ທາງສັງຄົມ ແລະ ເສດຖະກິດບໍ່?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
Women are the main beneficiaries of the Approach. They were more active than men in offering semi-voluntary labour. Their motivation was that they bear the greater burden than men as it is their responsibility to provide household water .
ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດຊຸກຍູ້ ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນທີ່ເປັນຊາວໜຸ່ມ / ຄົນລຸ້ນໃໝ່ ໃນການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງໄດ້ບໍ?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
Youth participation was minimal due cultural barriers. Young men do not participate in most of community activities. They are expected to have minimal contact with the rest, and especially women hence most of their time they are in the bush
ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດປັບປຸງ ປະເດັນການຖືຄອງທີ່ດິນ / ສິດທິໃນການນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ ທີ່ເຊື່ອງຊ້ອນໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງໄດ້ບໍ?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
Land tenure system in the area where the Approach was implemented is communal.
ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ໄດ້ປັບປຸງ ການຄໍ້າປະກັນສະບຽງອາຫານ ຫຼື ປັບປຸງໂຄສະນາການໄດ້ບໍ່?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
It is expected that nutritional status will improve with increased access to better quality water. However, no survey was carried out to confirm this assumption.
ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດປັບປຸງ ການເຂົ້າເຖິງຕະຫຼາດໄດ້ບໍ?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
Community members who initially would spend substantial amount of time to search for water now have more time freed to engage in trade and other diversified sources of income
ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ໄດ້ປັບປຸງ ການເຂົ້າເຖິງນໍ້າ ແລະ ສາຂາພິບານໄດ້ບໍ່?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
There is improved access to water. The three benefiting communities no longer need water supply emergency. However, impact on sanitation was less than satisfactory.
ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ໄດ້ປັບປຸງ ການນໍາໃຊ້ແຫຼ່ງພະລັງງານ ແບບຍືນຍົງຫຼາຍຂື້ນບໍ່?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
The project's mandate under which the Approach was implemented was limited to water and sanitation
ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດສ້າງຄວາມອາດສາມາດໃຫ້ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ ໃນການປັບຕົວ ຕໍ່ການປ່ຽນແປງດິນຟ້າອາກາດ / ຫຼດຜ່ອນຄວາມສ່ຽງທາງໄພພິບັດໄດ້ບໍ? :
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
Increased water supply has greatly increased community's resilience to droughts. With a prudent management of water harvested, they have successfully avoided negative drought impacts.
ການນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ ໄດ້ປັບປຸງ ການຈ້າງງານ, ໂອກາດ ໃນການສ້າງລາຍຮັບບໍ່?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
There is no direct employment except that the community members can now engage more in other rewarding businesses
6.2 ແຮງຈູງໃຈຫຼັກຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນໃນການປະຕິບັດການຄຸ້ມຄອງທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ
- ຫຼຸດຜ່ອນຄວາມສ່ຽງຂອງໄພພິບັດ
Increased water supply has greatly decreased community's vulnerability to droughts.
- ການຫຼຸດຜ່ອນພາລະວຽກ
The community was highly motivated by the challenges of acute and perennial water shortages they have experienced for many years. They had a great desire to change and overcome this challenge.
- ການຫຼຸດຜ່ອນຂໍ້ຂັດແຍ່ງ
Reducing water scarcity likely leads to less conflict on water. However, no survey data is available to validate this assumption.
- improved water acess
6.3 ຄວາມຍືນຍົງຂອງກິດຈະກໍາວິທີທາງ
ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ ທີ່ດິນ ສາມາດສືບຕໍ່ ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ຜ່ານວິທີທາງໄດ້ບໍ່ (ໂດຍປາດສະຈາກ ການຊ່ວຍເຫຼືອ ຈາກພາກສ່ວນພາຍນອກ)?
- ແມ່ນ
ຖ້າ ໄດ້, ອະທິບາຍເຫດຜົນ:
The Approach greatly focused on capacity building, community empowerment and strengthened institutions. It is expected therefore that they will sustainably manage the Technologies that have been constructed.
6.4 ຈຸດແຂງ / ຂໍ້ດີ ຂອງວິທີທາງ
| ຈຸດແຂງ / ຂໍ້ດີ / ໂອກາດໃນການນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ |
|---|
| The Approach leads to greater ownership of the technology thus leading to better equipped community groups with skills for operations and maintenance. The Approach galvanises a community towards a common goal hence promotes cohesion and better organisation. |
6.5 ຈຸດອ່ອນ / ຂໍ້ເສຍຂອງແນວທາງ ແລະ ວິທີການແກ້ໄຂໃຫ້ເຂົາເຈົ້າ
| ຈຸດອ່ອນ / ຂໍ້ເສຍ / ຄວາມສ່ຽງໃນມູມມອງຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ | ມີວິທີການແກ້ໄຂຄືແນວໃດ? |
|---|---|
| It takes time to achieve the community´s buy-in so that they can adequately fulfil their obligations. This is particularly the case in a region where varied development approaches have been implemented, most of which create dependency and discouraged self-initiative. | This can be changed through long terms engagement processes with all stakeholders such as county government and NGOs to advocate for approaches that foster community empowerment. |
7. ເອກກະສານອ້າງອີງ ແລະ ຂໍ້ມູນການເຊື່ອມໂຍງ
7.1 ວິທີການ / ແຫຼ່ງຂໍ້ມູນ
- ການໄປຢ້ຽມຢາມພາກສະໜາມ, ການສໍາຫຼວດພາກສະໜາມ
Community elders, chiefs, water management committee members, and users
- ການສໍາພາດ ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ
The water management committee
- ສໍາພາດ ຊ່ຽວຊານ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ
James Ndenga, staff of Caritas Switzerland
- ການລວບລວມ ບົດລາຍງານ ແລະ ເອກະສານອື່ນໆ ທີ່ມີຢູ່ແລ້ວ
End of project report
7.2 ເອກະສານທົ່ວໄປທີ່ສາມາດໃຊ້ໄດ້
ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:
A Handbook of gravity-flow water systems for small communities; Thomas D. Jordan Junior; 1980; 978 0 94668 850 0
ມີຢູ່ໃສ?ມູນຄ່າເທົ່າໃດ?
Caritas Switzerland office, Nairobi
ຂໍ້ມູນການເຊື່ອມຕໍ່ ແລະ ເນື້ອໃນ
ຂະຫຍາຍທັງໝົດ ຍຸບທັງໝົດການເຊື່ອມຕໍ່
ບໍ່ມີຂໍ້ມູນການເຊື່ອມຕໍ່
ເນື້ອໃນ
ບໍ່ມີເນື້ອໃນ