Local leaders and researchers are briefing farmers about the benefit of soil erosion control by trenches and terraces. (Kagabo Desire, RAB)

Top down approach (Руанда)

Amabwiriza aturutse ibukuru

Тодорхойлолт

This is a top down approach to technology development and dissemination with limited involvement of intended beneficiaries.

Aims / objectives: The objective of the top down approach is to assign the state a crucial role to drive a designed rural development and land management master plan that needs people to implement it.

To bring farmers together to address an identified problem such as to improve the socio economic situation of rural areas, to prevent , to conserve and to rehabilitate on-site damages caused by land degradation and erosion.

Methods: The top down approach here refers to the level of farmer participation in relation to shared decision making when establishing bench terraces/soil conservation practices in Rwanda. The focus being particularly on the role of farmers in the decision making process during two major phases of the process of terrace construction including: (1) when and where to construct bench terraces in communities and the criteria for site and beneficiary selection. The level of farmer participation and decision sharing have the potential of in increasing the ownership of the of the existing or future bench terraces, hence to ensure its sustainability. Recent studies assert that most of the terraces that are constructed are supply driven and that farmers do not participate in the decisions regarding where and when to construct them. When farmers do participate, it is mostly only through some consultation and their own efforts to mobilize collective labor for the construction of the terraces.

Stages of implementation: Stage one comprises the analysis of current or initial adoption decisions of soil conservation practices, while stage two assesses farmers’ ability to continue the use of these practices. Stage three analyses future adoption proxied by farmers’ willingness to uptake more soil conservation practices.

Role of stakeholders: The state plays a prime role in bench terraces development and the role of other stakeholders (e.g. extension agents, farmer associations) is marginal. Farmer associations involvement is is limited to mobilizing labor and, sometimes, to identifying land for terracing. Extension agencies/services are involved in providing advice to individual farmers or farmers grouped in cooperatives. Community representatives, whom are members of the farmers’ cooperatives themselves, are trained to provide additional support and advice to farmers.

Other important information: This SLM approach argues for a role of the state with top-down and coercive measures in the development of soil conservation practices, particularly bench terraces. Currently there is a two pronged approach based on the realization that bench terraces are ready made constructions which require substantial financial and institutional investments. Mustering labor and resources for the construction and maintenance of bench terraces remains a key aspect of the state’s conservation drive. State-farmer relationships, therefore, continue to be essential to soil conservation efforts in Rwanda and to bench terrace construction in particular.

Байршил

Байршил: Kayonza, East, Руанда

Сонгосон байршлуудын газарзүйн холболт
  • 30.58114, -1.92585

Эхлэх огноо: 1950

Төгсөх жил: тодорхойгүй

Арга барилын төрөл
Local leaders and researchers are briefing farmers about the benefit of soil erosion control by trenches and terraces. (Kagabo Desire (RAB))
Local leaders and researchers are sensitizes farmers on soil conservation measures. (Kagabo Desire and Ngenzi Guy (RAB))

Арга барилын зорилго ба эерэг нөлөө

Арга барилын үндсэн зорилго, зорилт
The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (Increase soil fertility, good practices of land management in general)

To raise awareness to land users for a particular problem and involve them to get to the right solution

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: low agricultural production due to a poor agriculture practice and lack of technical knowledge by farmers
Тухайн Арга барилын хүрээнд нэвтрүүлсэн Технологийг хэрэгжүүлэхэд дэмжлэг болох нөхцлүүд
Тухайн Арга барилын хүрээнд нэвтрүүлсэн Технологийг хэрэгжүүлэхэд хүндрэл учруулах нөхцлүүд
  • Санхүүгийн нөөц, үйлчилгээний хүртээмж / боломж: terraces and trenches require high investment for establishment and maintenance. Treatment through the SLM Approach: the government support and other local and Internationale NGOs is highly required
  • ГТМ-ийн талаарх мэдлэг, техникийн дэмжлэг авах боломж: lack of technical knowledge and cohesion between farmers to address the main problem regarding agriculture in their location. Treatment through the SLM Approach: implementation of agricultural cooperative

Талуудын оролцоо ба үүрэг

Арга барилд оролцогч талууд болон тэдгээрийн үүрэг
Ямар оролцогч талууд / хэрэгжүүлэгч байгууллагууд арга барилд оролцож байсан бэ? Оролцогч талуудыг тодорхойлно уу Оролцогч талуудын үүргийг тайлбарлана уу
Орон нутгийн газар ашиглагч / орон нутгийн иргэд Farmers There were no limitation all farmers were involved
ГТМ-ийн мэргэжилтэн/ хөдөө аж ахуйн зөвлөх
Судлаачид
Орон нутгийн захиргаа Local leaders
Засгийн газар (шийдвэр гаргагч, төлөвлөгч) Parliament
Арга барилын янз бүрийн үе шатанд орон нутгийн газар ашиглагчид / бүлгүүдийг татан оролцуулах
үгүй
идэвхигүй
Гадаад дэмжлэг
интерактив
өөрийн хүчийг нэгтгэсэн
санаачлага/идэвхжүүлэлт
x
Төлөвлөгөө
x
Хэрэгжилт
x
Land users and local authorities work together to get to greater result.
Мониторинг/ үнэлгээ
x
Land users are in daily interaction with Sector Agronomist who is in charge of all agricultural activities in the sector.
Research
x
Арга барил хэрэгжүүлэх бүдүүвч

chart showing stages of top down approach.

Зохиогч: Kagabo Desire and Ngenzi Guy (RAB)
ГТМ-ийн технологи сонгох шийдвэр гаргах явц

Шийдвэр гаргасан этгээд

  • Газар ашиглагч дангаараа (өөрийн санаачлага)
  • ГТМ-ийн мэргэжилтнүүдийн дэмжлэгтэйгээр, голчлон газар ашиглагчид
  • оролцооны зарчмын хэсэг болох бүх холбогдох талууд
  • голдуу ГТМ-ийн мэргэжилтнүүд, газар ашиглагчидтай зөвлөлдсөний үндсэн дээр
  • ГТМ-ийн мэргэжилтэн дангаараа
  • улс төрчид / удирдагчид

Шийдвэр гаргах үндэслэл нь

  • ГТМ-ийн мэдлэгийг баримтжуулалтын үнэлгээ (нотолгоонд суурилсан шийдвэр гаргах)
  • Судалгааны үр дүн, ололтууд
  • Хувь хүний туршлага ба санал бодол (баримтжуулаагүй)

Техникийн туслалцаа, чадавхи бий болгох болон мэдлэгийн менежмент

Дараах үйл ажиллагаа эсвэл үйлчилгээ нь арга барилын нэг хэсэг болсон
Зөвлөх үйлчилгээ
Зөвлөх үйлчилгээ үзүүлсэн
  • Газар ашиглагчийн талбай дээр
  • Тогтмол төвд
Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities
Институцийг бэхжүүлэх
Институци бэхжисэн / бий болсон
  • Үгүй
  • Тийм, бага
  • Тийм, дунд зэрэг
  • Тийм, маш их
дараах түвшинд
  • Орон нутгийн
  • Бүс нутгийн
  • Үндэсний
Байгууллага, үүрэг, хариуцлага, гишүүд зэргийг тодорхойлно уу.
Дэмжлэгийн төрөл
  • Санхүүгийн
  • чадавхи бэхжүүлэх / сургалт
  • Тоног төхөөрөмж
Дэлгэрэнгүй мэдээлэл
Мониторинг ба үнэлгээ
bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored by government through observations; indicators: local leadres bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government through measurements; indicators: local agronomist technical aspects were regular monitored by government through observations; indicators: local agronomist technical aspects were regular monitored by government through measurements; indicators: local agronomist socio-cultural aspects were None monitored by government through observations; indicators: local leaders area treated aspects were None monitored by government through observations; indicators: local agronomist area treated aspects were None monitored by government through measurements; indicators: all person of 18 years and above are involved no. of land users involved aspects were None monitored by government through observations; indicators: None no. of land users involved aspects were None monitored by government through measurements; indicators: None management of Approach aspects were None monitored by government through observations; indicators: None There were no changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: None There were no changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation: None

Санхүүжилт болон хөндлөнгийн материаллаг дэмжлэг

ГТМ-ийн бүрэлдэхүүн хэсгийн жилийн төсөв ам.доллараар
  • < 2,000
  • 2,000-10,000
  • 10,000-100,000
  • 100,000-1,000,000
  • > 1,000,000
Precise annual budget: тодорхойгүй
Approach costs were met by the following donors: government (planing): 20.0%; local government (district, county, municipality, village etc) (sensitization and follow up): 25.0%; local community / land user(s) (implimentation): 55.0%
Газар ашиглагч нарт дараах урамшуулал, үйлчилгээг үзүүлсэн
  • Газар ашиглагчдад санхүүгийн / материаллаг дэмжлэг үзүүлсэн
  • Тодорхой хөрөнгө оруулалтанд нөхөн олговор олгох
  • Кредит
  • Бусад урамшуулал, хэрэгсэл
Газар ашиглагчдад санхүүгийн болон материаллаг дэмжлэг үзүүлэх
inputs (seeds, fertilizers, etc..) provided by the Government
хэсэгчлэн санхүүждэг
Бүрэн санхүүждэг
Хөдөө аж ахуй: Үр, үрсэлгээ

x
material

x

Газар ашиглагчаас гаргасан хөдөлмөр хүчний зардал

Нөлөөллийн дүн шинжилгээ ба дүгнэлт

Арга барилын үр нөлөө
Үгүй
Тийм, бага зэрэг
Тийм, зарим
Тийм, их
Арга барил нь ГТМ-ийн технологийг хэрэгжүүлж, хадгалахад газар ашиглагчдад тусласан уу?

the approach helped in the implementation of technologies which improved crop production and soil conservation.

x
Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?

some project introduced new technology (e.g. one cow per family) with the help of local leaders

x
Газар ашиглагчид ГТМ хэрэгжүүлэх болсон үндсэн шалтгаан
Арга барилын хүрээнд хэрэгжүүлсэн үйл ажиллагааны тогтвортой байдал
Газар ашиглагчид арга барилаар дамжуулан хэрэгжүүлсэн арга хэмжээг тогтвортой үргэлжлүүлж чадах уу (гадны дэмжлэггүйгээр)?

Дүгнэлт, сургамж

Давуу тал: газар ашиглагчийн бодлоор
  • It help farmers to work together for a common issue. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: continuous sensitization )
Давуу тал: эмхэтгэгч эсвэл бусад мэдээлэл өгсөн хүмүүсийн бодлоор
  • Improvement of livelihoods (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: continuous sensitization)
  • farmers are getting benefits, as it has a direct impact in increasing the soil productivity and improve workability of the land (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: continuous sensitization )
  • the approach helped to establish SLM measures which reduced soil erosion and improve soil quality (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: continuous sensitization)
Сул тал/ дутагдал / эрсдэл: газар ашиглагчийн бодлоордаван туулах боломжууд
  • lack of strong link in the farmers association and cooperatives continuous sensitization
Сул тал/ дутагдал / эрсдэл: эмхэтгэгч эсвэл бусад мэдээлэл өгсөн хүмүүсийн бодлоордаван туулах боломжууд
  • High costs: farmers depend on external support from the government, they are not willing to invest their labour without payments. To make the working time as short as possible for the community work so that farmer can plan other income activities after this.
  • lack of land users participation in the design and planing involve all stakeholders

Суурь мэдээлэлүүд

Эмхэтгэгч
  • Desire Kagabo
Хянан тохиолдуулагчид
Хянагч
  • David Streiff
  • Joana Eichenberger
Баримтжуулсан огноо: 13 12-р сар 2012
Сүүлийн шинэчлэл: 13 7-р сар 2022
Мэдээлэл өгсөн хүн
WOCAT мэдээллийн сан дахь бүрэн тодорхойлолт
Холбогдох ГТМ мэдээлэл
Баримтжуулалтыг зохион байгуулсан
Байгууллага Төсөл
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International