Sub-district (Jamoat) level support for sustainable land management [ຕາຈິກິສະຕານ]
- ການສ້າງ:
- ປັບປູງ:
- ຜູ້ສັງລວມຂໍ້ມູນ: Nandita Jain
- ບັນນາທິການ: –
- ຜູ້ທົບທວນຄືນ: David Streiff, Alexandra Gavilano, Joana Eichenberger
approaches_2446 - ຕາຈິກິສະຕານ
ເບິ່ງພາກສ່ວນ
ຂະຫຍາຍທັງໝົດ ຍຸບທັງໝົດ1. ຂໍ້ມູນທົ່ວໄປ
1.2 ລາຍລະອຽດ ການຕິດຕໍ່ ຂອງບຸກຄົນທີ່ຊັບພະຍາກອນ ແລະ ສະຖາບັນ ການມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ໃນການປະເມີນຜົນ ແລະ ເອກະສານ ຂອງວິທີທາງ
ຜູ້ຊ່ຽວຊານ ດ້ານການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ:
Mott Jessica
World Bank
ສະຫະລັດອາເມລິກາ
ຊື່ຂອງໂຄງການ ທີ່ອໍານວຍຄວາມສະດວກ ໃນການສ້າງເອກກະສານ ຫຼື ປະເມີນດ້ານແນວທາງ (ຖ້າກ່ຽວຂ້ອງ)
Pilot Program for Climate Resilience, Tajikistan (WB / PPCR)ຊື່ຂອງ ສະຖາບັນການຈັດຕັ້ງ ທີ່ອໍານວຍຄວາມສະດວກ ໃນການສ້າງເອກກະສານ ຫຼື ປະເມີນແນວທາງ (ຖ້າກ່ຽວຂ້ອງ)
World Bank (World Bank) - ສະຫະລັດອາເມລິກາ1.3 ເງື່ອນໄຂ ຂອງການນໍາໃຊ້ເອກກະສານຂໍ້ມູນ ຂອງ WOCAT
ເມື່ອໃດທີ່ໄດ້ສັງລວມຂໍ້ມູນ (ຢູ່ພາກສະໜາມ)?
20/10/2006
ຜູ້ສັງລວມ ແລະ ບັນດາຜູ້ຕອບແບບສອບຖາມ ຍອມຮັບໃນເງື່ອນໄຂ ການນໍາໃຊ້ຂໍ້ມູນເອກະສານ ທີ່ສ້າງຂື້ນ ໂດຍຜ່ານ ອົງການ WOCAT:
ແມ່ນ
2. ພັນລະນາ ແນວທາງການຄຸ້ມຄອງນໍາໃຊ້ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ
2.1 ການອະທິບາຍ ໂດຍຫຍໍ້ ຂອງວິທີທາງ
Provision of technical and financial management assistance through Jamoat (“Sub-District”) level organizations to farmers in a large small grants programme.
2.2 ການອະທິບາຍ ລາຍລະອຽດ ຂອງວິທີທາງ
ການອະທິບາຍ ລາຍລະອຽດ ຂອງວິທີທາງ:
Aims / objectives: The Tajikistan - Community Agriculture & Watershed Management Project (CAWMP), aimed to use a sub-district level organization to provide more efficient, transparent and accountable services to farmers for the project duration. CAWMP financed small grants to farmer groups for agricultural production in environmentally sustainable ways in Tajikistan’s uplands. The sub-district level support for this initial six year period, together with support from other project partners, helped (a) enable project implementation, and (b) build farmer capacity to sustain the investments after the end of six-year project, even in the absence of continued outside support.
Methods: In four project sites 39 Jamoat (“sub-district”) Development Committees (JDCs) operated as NGOs with elected officers and helped organize 43,000 households into groups to implement 4,000 rural production investments that included varied SLM technologies in 402 villages. JDCs managed $7.4 million in small grants. Use of the JDC built upon existing initiatives to strengthen local governance. The JDCs collaborated and received support from a government-appointed Project Management Unit (PMU), field-based Project Coordination Units (PCUs), and four contracted Facilitating Organizations (FOs). These partners helped train JDCs in financial, organizational, and technical aspects (e.g. fund flow, participatory planning, SLM technologies), and assisted villages to form new JDCs where none existed.
Stages of implementation: JDCs, with FOs and PCU specialists, undertook activities including: 1) preparation of participatory village-based Community Action Plans (CAPs) that included proposed rural production investments and formation of Common Interest Groups (CIGs) of households [See TAJ046}; 2) participation in sub-district and project-site/watershed level screening and approval of rural production proposals from CIGs to ensure economic, environmental and social feasibility [See TAJ045]; 3) management and disbursement of grant funds from the PMU to CIGs [See TAJ 044]; 4) overseeing formal investment agreements with participating CIGs; 5) monitoring, evaluation and reporting; and 6) liaison with other villages and relevant government agencies to facilitate permissions, resource use agreements, issuance of land use rights, etc.
Role of stakeholders: JDCs comprised elected village representatives and the government’s sub-district officials. Generally, JDC members have relatively higher levels of education and relevant knowledge and experience than the local population. A JDC chairperson and secretary were elected and a qualified accountant/bookkeeper appointed. JDCs met monthly and established committees, (e.g., gender, environment, financial management and social). CAWMP paid an honorarium for the accountant and incremental travel costs for all JDCs. For newly established JDCs, CAWMP also provided funds for office facilities, plus an honorarium for the chairperson, and an additional honorarium for another officer if one was female.
2.3 ຮູບພາບຂອງແນວທາງ
2.5 ປະເທດ / ເຂດ / ສະຖານທີ່ບ່ອນທີ່ແນວທາງໄດ້ຖືກນໍາໃຊ້
ປະເທດ:
ຕາຈິກິສະຕານ
ພາກພື້ນ / ລັດ / ແຂວງ:
Sughd, Khatlon, RSS, GBAO
ຂໍ້ມູນເພີ່ມເຕີມຂອງສະຖານທີ່:
7 districts and 39 sub-districts
ຄວາມຄິດເຫັນ:
As part of the Commnunity Agriculture and Watershed Management Project, the approach was implemented in Jirgital, Tajikibad, Vanj, Aini, Matcha, Penjikent, Danghara districts, in 4 regions. Four project sites/watersheds - Surkhob, Vanjob, Zarafshan and Toirsu - were included in the The total catchment area was 35,000km2. Total arable, farm and pasture land was approximately 319,500ha
Map
×2.6 ວັນທີເລີ່ມຕົ້ນ ແລະ ສິ້ນສຸດ ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕີບັດ ວິທີທາງ
ສະແດງປີຂອງການເລີ່ມຕົ້ນ:
2005
ປີທີ່ສີ້ນສູດ (ຖ້າຢຸດບໍ່ໄດ້ນໍາໃຊ້ ວິທີທາງ):
2012
2.7 ປະເພດຂອງແນວທາງ
- ພາຍໃຕ້ໂຄງການ / ແຜນງານ
2.8 ເປົ້າໝາຍ / ຈຸດປະສົງຫຼັກ ຂອງການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ
The Approach focused mainly on other activities than SLM (Sub-district assistance, non-government organizations, farmer groups, facilitation support, technical advice, fund transfers to farmer groups, )
Efficient and responsible sub-district institutional arrangements for a fixed-term project that are able to assist upland farmers in adopting practices to increase agricultural production in sustainable ways.
The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Use of sub-district organizations provided an efficient, transparent and accountable way of providing essential services to farmers for the period of initial investment, i.e., the six-year period of project implementation. Alternatives ways of providing this support would have had disadvantages: such support at a village level would have been too expensive and faced human capacity constraints, while using the centralized government system or relying solely on large NGOs would have been less transparent, less participatory, and less accountable to the interests of local people.
2.9 ເງື່ອນໄຂອໍານວຍ ຫຼື ຂັດຂວາງການປະຕິບັດຂອງເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ / ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີການນໍາໃຊ້ຕາມແນວທາງ
ມີຄວາມສາມາດ / ເຂັ້າເຖິງຊັບພະຍາກອນດ້ານການເງິນ ແລະ ການບໍລິການ
- ເຊື່ອງຊ້ອນ
Poor transparency and accountability in financial transactions between government and farmers in rural development. Upland farmers lacked financial capital.
Treatment through the SLM Approach: JDC support services for managing about 4000 small grants, including participatory planning and streamlined fund transfers from PMU to farmer groups through JDCs.
ການກໍ່ຕັ້ງສະຖາບັນ
- ເຊື່ອງຊ້ອນ
Limited financial and technical resources for upland agriculture given government focus on lowland crop, especially cotton, production. Remoteness restricts access to available services.
Treatment through the SLM Approach: Access to technical and financial services through establishment and capacity building of 39 JDCs in upland areas.
ກ່ຽວກັບກົດໝາຍ (ສິດນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ, ສິດນໍາໃຊ້ນໍ້າ)
- ເຊື່ອງຊ້ອນ
Slow issuance of land use rights certificates for upland family farms - poor incentives to invest household assets and adopt SLM practices. No rights allocation for horticulture, woodlots and other uses with restricted access on sloping lands.
Treatment through the SLM Approach: Legal agreements governing CAWMP permitted issuance of certificates (including for sloping lands) to project participants on the basis of adopting SLM practices.
The existing land ownership, land use rights / water rights hindered a little the approach implementation Very few Land Use Rights Certificates had been issued at start of project for arable land in upland areas. There was no provision for allocation of use rights to non-arable sloping lands suitable for horticulture, woodlots and other restricted access uses.
ຄວາມຮູ້ກ່ຽວກັບການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ, ການເຂົ້າເຖິງການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ທາງດ້ານວິຊາການ
- ເຊື່ອງຊ້ອນ
Lack of technical capacity among farmers in participatory processes and SLM technologies and methods.
Treatment through the SLM Approach: Extensive training for JDCs in order to assist farmers. Trainings for local government specialists to facilitate local approvals for CIG activities.
3. ການມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ແລະ ບົດບາດຂອງພາກສ່ວນທີ່ກ່ຽວຂ້ອງທີ່ໄດ້ມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ
3.1 ຜູ້ມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ໃນວິທີທາງ ແລະ ພາລະບົດບາດ ຂອງເຂົາເຈົ້າ
- ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນໃນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ / ຊຸມຊົນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ
JDCs registered as non-profit, non-government organisations
Most JDCs had women members, but overall levels of female participation were less than 25%. Social and cultural circumstances, especially in the more remote upland areas, place restrictions on the extent to which women can actively participate in organisations such as JDCs. Among the four project sites, there were also differences in the number of women represented in JDCs
There was some representation in JDCs of poor, vulnerable households, as well as single female-headed households
- ອົງການຈັດຕັ້ງ ທີ່ບໍ່ຂື້ນກັບລັດຖະບານ
International NGOs: Welthungerhilfe, Aga Khan Foundation/Mountain Societies Development Support Programme
- ພະນັກງານຂັ້ນສູນກາງ (ຜູ້ວາງແຜນ, ຜູ້ສ້າງນະໂຍບາຍ)
Project Management Unit, Project Coordination Units
- ອົງການຈັດຕັ້ງ ສາກົນ
UNDP-Tajikistan, FAO-Tajikistan
3.2 ການມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນໃນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ / ຊຸມຊົນທ້ອງຖິ່ນໃນໄລຍະທີ່ແຕກຕ່າງກັນຂອງແນວທາງ
ການລວບລວມ ເອົາຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ ໃນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ / ຊຸມຊົນທ້ອງຖິ່ນ | ໃຫ້ລະບຸ ຜູ້ໃດທີ່ມີສ່ວນຮ່ວມ ໃນແຕ່ລະກິດຈະກໍາ? | |
---|---|---|
ການເລີ່ມຕົ້ນ / ແຮງຈູງໃຈ | ບໍ່ມີ | |
ການວາງແຜນ | ການບໍ່ປະຕິບັດ | Local communities consulted for social assessment during project design. |
ການປະຕິບັດ | ການຮ່ວມມື | JDC members (village representatives) provided a range of services to villagers and other functions such as liaison with government for the purposes of CAWMP. |
ຕິດຕາມກວດກາ / ການປະເມີນຜົນ | ການຮ່ວມມື | JDCs and CIGs were signatories of formal agreements governing grants for rural production. JDCs released funds based on agreed benchmarks and with PCUs and FOs monitored and reported on environmental, economic and social aspects. |
Research | ບໍ່ມີ |
3.3 ແຜນວາດ (ຖ້າມີ)
ການອະທິບາຍ:
Implementation Arrangements for Community Agriculture and Watershed Management Project
ຜູ້ຂຽນ:
Project Management Unit (Dushanbe, Tajikistan)
3.4 ການຕັດສິນໃຈກ່ຽວກັບການຄັດເລືອກເຕັກໂນໂລຢີຂອງການຄຸ້ມຄອງທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ / ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ
ລະບຸ ຄົນທີ່ຕັດສິນໃຈ ກ່ຽວກັບການຄັດເລືອກຂອງ ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ / ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ຈະໄດ້ຮັບການປະຕິບັດ:
- ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນຫຼັກ, ການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ໂດຍຜູ້ຊ່ຽວຊານ ການນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ
ອະທິບາຍ:
CIG members and technical specialists made decisions on the choice of SLM technologies in any one small grant proposal. Within each JDC, the entire committee made decisions on acceptable proposals, with a technical committee often conducting the initial screening. On obtaining JDC approval, proposals were submitted for further review by a regional Watershed Devlelopment Committee
Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists. CIG members and technical specialists from the respective facilitating organisation and the project coordination unit made decisions on the method/s for implementing SLM technologies in any one proposal. However, CIGs undertook full responsibility for the implementation and management of the rural production investments.
4. ການສະໜັບສະໜູນທາງດ້ານວິຊາການ, ການສ້າງຄວາມສາມາດ, ແລະ ການຈັດການຄວາມຮູ້.
4.1 ການສ້າງຄວາມສາມາດ / ການຝຶກອົບຮົມ
ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ ຫຼື ພາກສ່ວນກ່ຽວຂ້ອງອື່ນໆ ໄດ້ຮັບການຝຶກອົບຮົມບໍ່?
ແມ່ນ
ໃຫ້ລະບຸ ຜູ້ໃດທີ່ໄດ້ຮັບການຝຶກອົບຮົມ:
- ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ
- ພະນັກງານພາກສະໜາມ / ທີ່ປຶກສາ
- JDCs
ຮູບແບບຂອງການຝຶກອົບຮົມ:
- ການເຮັດຕົວຈິງ
- ຕົວຕໍ່ຕົວ
- ເນື້ອທີ່ສວນທົດລອງ
- ກອງປະຊຸມ
ໃນຫົວຂໍ້:
Organisational Management, Book-keeping, Participatory rural appraisal, Participatory environmental planning and analysis, a range of SLM technologies, monitoring and evaluation, gender awareness.
4.2 ການບໍລິການໃຫ້ຄໍາປຶກສາ
ເຮັດຜູ້ໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນມີການເຂົ້າເຖິງການບໍລິການໃຫ້ຄໍາປຶກສາ?
ແມ່ນ
- informal information
ອະທິບາຍ / ຄວາມຄິດເຫັນ:
Informal advice and facilitation support by JDCs, in collaboration with other project partners: Key elements: Project design and procedures, Technical, financial and institutional considerations of proposed investments for grant financing, fostering increased knowledge and changes in attitudes and practices among farmers to identify advice needed, and for ongoing learning during the post project period.;
Nominal government advisory services exist at district level, and even less in sub-districts. Technical capacities for SLM are lacking. Staff are poorly paid, positions are unfilled and finances are inadequate. Little orientation toward client service and governance problems are common. Conditions unlikely to change in foreseeable future. JDCs and project partners provided informal advisory services during investment period, created demand among farmers to seek advice in post-project period.
See comments in 2.4.2.1. for information on government advisory services
4.3 ສະຖາບັນການສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ (ການພັດທະນາອົງການຈັດຕັ້ງ)
ສະຖາບັນ ໄດ້ຮັບການສ້າງຕັ້ງຂື້ນ ຫຼື ໄດ້ຮັບການສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ ໂດຍການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງບໍ່?
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
ລະບຸ ທາງສະຖາບັນ ໄດ້ສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ ໃນລະດັບໃດ (ຫຼາຍ):
- ທ້ອງຖິ່ນ
ລະບຸ ປະເພດ ຂອງສະໜັບສະໜູນ:
- ທາງດ້ານການເງິນ
- ການສ້າງຄວາມອາດສາມາດ / ການຝຶກອົບຮົມ
- ອຸປະກອນ
ໃຫ້ລາຍລະອຽດເພີ່ມເຕີມ:
Support of sub-district local institutions is the focus of the Approach.
4.4 ຕິດຕາມກວດກາ ແລະ ປະເມີນຜົນ
ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ໄດ້ມີການປະເມີນຜົນ ແລະ ຕິດຕາມບໍ?
ແມ່ນ
ຄວາມຄິດເຫັນ:
management of Approach aspects were None monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: Quality of CIG proposals and implementation, rate of fund disbursement to CIGs, timeliness of report
There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Poor initial attention to environmental aspects of SLM and other investments in CIG proposals led to increased training for JDCs, FOs, PMU, PCU and local government officials in participatory environmental analysis.
There were few changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Based on field observations and measurements in some cases, CIGs with the assistance of JDCs, FOs and project staff adjusted various SLM technologies that had been implemented as part of rural production investments during the course of implementation, e.g., composting procedures, irrigation techniques.
4.5 ການຄົ້ນຄວ້າ
ນີ້້ແມ່ນສ່ວນໜຶ່ງ ການຄົ້ນຄວ້າ ຂອງວິທີທາງບໍ່?
ແມ່ນ
- Project evaluations
ໃຫ້ຂໍ້ມູນ ເພີ່ມເຕີມ ແລະ ກໍານົດ ຜູ້ໃດເຮັດການຄົ້ນຄວ້າ:
While the JDCs did not directly carry out formal research, they participated as respondents in the project evaluations that were carried out by the NGOs, and the PMU. These evaluations included findings from a variety of stakeholder perspectives about the JDC involvement.
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: local government (district, county, municipality, village etc) (Opportunity cost of government officials’ time): 5.0%; international non-government (Estimate of co-financing ): 5.0%; government (Estimate of co-financing ): 90.0%; international (World Bank/International Development Assistance and Global Environment Facility); local community / land user(s) (Opportunity cost of land users’ time); other (Opportunity cost of JDC members’ time )
5.2 ການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ທາງດ້ານການເງິນ / ອຸປະກອນ ສະໜອງໃຫ້ແກ່ຜູ້ນໍາທີ່ດິນ
ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ດິນ ໄດ້ຮັບການສະໜັບສະໜູນ ທາງດ້ານ ການເງິນ / ອຸປະກອນ ໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີບໍ?
ບໍ່ແມ່ນ
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
Providing sub-district-level support was critical for implementing almost 4000 rural production investments that integrated SLM practices into the management of over 96,000ha.
ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດສ້າງຄວາມເຂັ້ມແຂງ ທາງສັງຄົມ ແລະ ເສດຖະກິດບໍ່?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
JDCs helped target vulnerable groups during community mobilization and preparation of CAPs. Women comprised 40% of project participants benefiting from rural production investments.
ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ວິທີທາງ ສາມາດປັບປຸງ ປະເດັນການຖືຄອງທີ່ດິນ / ສິດທິໃນການນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ ທີ່ເຊື່ອງຊ້ອນໃນການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ເຕັກໂນໂລຢີ ການຄຸ້ມຄອງ ທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງໄດ້ບໍ?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
Legal agreement for CAWMP permitted issuance of use rights certificates for sloping lands for horticulture, woodlots and other restricted access uses based on adoption of SLM practices. JDCs assisted project staff in processing certificates for participating households, linking farmers, project staff and government officials. Another project accelerated issuance of arable land certificates.
Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
JDCs existed prior to the project, and CAWMP built upon this arrangement. Institutions similar to JDCs continue to be supported in some regions of the country. However, in accordance with the CAWMP design and the initial risk assessment, land users who have received CAMWP-financed grants are not necessarily dependent on the sustainability of JDC support during the post project period. These farmers should have the capacity, incentives, and the responsibility to sustain their investments.
Did the Approach lead to improved livelihoods / human well-being?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
An overall project assessment indicates that about 80% of investments implemented with the support of JDCs and other project partners, and in conjunction with other project activities are successful.
Did the Approach help to alleviate poverty?
- ບໍ່
- ມີ, ໜ້ອຍໜຶ່ງ
- ມີ, ພໍສົມຄວນ
- ມີ, ຫຼາຍ
As part of the CAWMP, the approach contributed to increasing the proportion of people above poverty from 3% to 20% in the participating villages (to be updated with 2011 evaluation data).
6.2 ແຮງຈູງໃຈຫຼັກຂອງຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນໃນການປະຕິບັດການຄຸ້ມຄອງທີ່ດິນແບບຍືນຍົງ
- ການຜະລິດເພີ່ມຂຶ້ນ
potentially more sustainable production
- ລວມເຂົ້ານໍາກັນກັບການເຄື່ອນໄຫວ / ໂຄງການ / ກຸ່ມ / ເຄືອຂ່າຍ
availability of investment capital, technical assistance
- well-being and livelihoods improvement
opportunity to increase livelihood assets
6.3 ຄວາມຍືນຍົງຂອງກິດຈະກໍາວິທີທາງ
ຜູ້ນໍາໃຊ້ ທີ່ດິນ ສາມາດສືບຕໍ່ ການຈັດຕັ້ງປະຕິບັດ ຜ່ານວິທີທາງໄດ້ບໍ່ (ໂດຍປາດສະຈາກ ການຊ່ວຍເຫຼືອ ຈາກພາກສ່ວນພາຍນອກ)?
- ແມ່ນ
ຖ້າ ໄດ້, ອະທິບາຍເຫດຜົນ:
In accordance with the CAWMP design and the initial risk assessment, land users who have received CAMWP-financed grants are not necessarily dependent on the sustainability of JDC support during the post project period. These farmers should have the capacity, incentives, and the responsibility to sustain their investments on their own during the post-project period.
6.4 ຈຸດແຂງ / ຂໍ້ດີ ຂອງວິທີທາງ
ຈຸດແຂງ / ຂໍ້ດີ / ໂອກາດໃນການນໍາໃຊ້ທີ່ດິນ |
---|
To be added based on project evaluation due in late 2011 |
ຈຸດແຂງ / ຈຸດດີ / ໂອກາດ ຈາກທັດສະນະຂອງຜູ້ປ້ອນຂໍ້ມູນ ຫຼື ບຸກຄົນສຳຄັນ |
---|
Scale and scope of JDC mandates is effective for delivering services to upland, and often remote, farmers. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Maintain a focus on strengthening sub-district level support to farmers.) |
Sub-district level organisations can be an effective component of scaling-up strategies for SLM in a challenging physical landscape. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Scaling-up strategies will require investment in institutional arrangements.) |
Participatory processes help ensure that organisations such as JDCs can work effectively with government units to deliver technical and financial resources to farmers. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Ensure that participatory processes, including financial management mechanisms, are well integrated into SLM programmes.) |
6.5 ຈຸດອ່ອນ / ຂໍ້ເສຍຂອງແນວທາງ ແລະ ວິທີການແກ້ໄຂໃຫ້ເຂົາເຈົ້າ
ຈຸດອ່ອນ ຫຼື ຂໍ້ເສຍ ຫຼື ຄວາມສ່ຽງ ໃນມຸມມອງຂອງ ຜູ້ສັງລວມຂໍ້ມູນ ຫຼື ບັນດາຜູ້ຕອບແບບສອບຖາມ | ມີວິທີການແກ້ໄຂຄືແນວໃດ? |
---|---|
Uncertain financial sustainability of JDCs during the post-project period in the absence of donor funding. | 1. Continue to emphasize the importance of farmers having the capacity, incentives, and the responsibility to sustain their investments on their own, in the event that ongoing support from JDC is not available post-project. 2. Until more sustainable jamoat-level support system is established and proven to be effective in Tajikistan (i.e., meeting transparent, accountable, efficient, and capacity requirements), clarify fixed term nature of JDC support in order to avoid misunderstandings and unrealistic expectations. 3. Highlight JDC functions for the fixed term (6 years) under CAWMP and explore opportunities to include similar functions in current efforts of other donors to establish sub-district representative government bodies. |
7. ເອກກະສານອ້າງອີງ ແລະ ຂໍ້ມູນການເຊື່ອມໂຍງ
7.2 ເອກະສານທົ່ວໄປທີ່ສາມາດໃຊ້ໄດ້
ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:
Operational Manual for Community Mobilization, Rural Production Investments and Research and Demonstrations Grants (2008)
ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:
Operational Manuals for JDCs and CIGs in Financial Management and Procurement (2007)
ຫົວຂໍ້, ຜູ້ຂຽນ, ປີ, ISBN:
CAWMP: Project Appraisal Document (2005)
ຂໍ້ມູນການເຊື່ອມຕໍ່ ແລະ ເນື້ອໃນ
ຂະຫຍາຍທັງໝົດ ຍຸບທັງໝົດການເຊື່ອມຕໍ່
ບໍ່ມີຂໍ້ມູນການເຊື່ອມຕໍ່
ເນື້ອໃນ
ບໍ່ມີເນື້ອໃນ