1.2 Арга барилыг баримтжуулах болон үнэлгээ хийхэд оролцсон хүн эсвэл байгууллагын холбоо барих хаяг

Арга барилыг баримтжуулах/үнэлэх ажилд дэмжлэг үзүүлсэн байгууллага(ууд)-ын нэр (шаардлагатай бол)

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) - Итали

Арга барилыг баримтжуулах/үнэлэх ажилд дэмжлэг үзүүлсэн байгууллага(ууд)-ын нэр (шаардлагатай бол)

Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development of Kenya (MoA) - Кени

1.3 WOCAT-аар баримтжуулсан өгөгдлийг ашиглахтай холбоотой нөхцөл

Эмхэтгэгч болон гол мэдээлэгч хүн(хүмүүс) WOCAT аргачлалаар баримтжуулсан мэдээллийг ашиглахтай холбоотой нөхцлийг хүлээн зөвшөөрсөн:

Тийм

1.4 ГТМ-ийн технологийн асуулгын(д) суурь мэдээлэл(д)

2.1 Арга барилын товч тодорхойлолт

A focused approach to integrated land and water management, including soil and water conservation, where the active participation of the villagers - often organised through common interest groups - is central.

2.2 Арга барилын дэлгэрэнгүй тодорхойлолт

Арга барилын дэлгэрэнгүй тодорхойлолт:

The catchment approach promotes sustainable land management systems by conservation of a defined area (so-called micro-environments) through the active participation of the communities living there. It was launched in Kenya in 1988 to achieve greater technical and social impact - and at a more rapid pace - than the previous focus on individual farmers. This case focuses on a single catchment in a subhumid area of Central Kenya. The emphasis is on structural measures - especially fanya juu terraces - but vegetative systems are promoted also. Other activities are supported such as spring protection, improved crop and animal husbandry, agroforestry, fodder production, fish ponds and others. The specific objectives are to stimulate the implementation of a variety of SWC measures leading simultaneously to improved production. Each approach area is defined by cultural/administrative boundaries rather than strict hydrological watersheds or catchments (as its name confusingly implies).

A conservation committee is elected from amongst the focal community before problem identification begins. Technical staff from relevant government and non-government agencies (NGOs) are co-opted onto the committee. The approach then involves participatory methods of appraisal and planning of solutions. Land users, together with the co-opted subject matter specialists, pool their knowledge and resources. Common Interest Groups (CIGs) are formed, with the aim of self-help promotion of specific farm enterprises. Training is given to the members of the CIGs by the Ministry of Agriculture. The farmers carry out the majority of the work themselves: monetary or other tangible incentives are few. The end result is the micro-environment (catchment area) conserved for improved production, and left in the hands of the community to maintain and sustain.

The catchment approach was developed under the National Soil and Water Conservation Programme - supported by (Swedish) Sida - and continues to be promoted as the Focal Area Approach (FAA) under the National Agricultural and Livestock Extension Programme (NALEP), which is again supported by Sida. However, under NALEP there is less emphasis on soil and water conservation than the previous programme, and more focus on promotion of productive enterprises.

The catchment approach is linked to cultural or administrative boundaries, rather than to hydrological watersheds. This emphasis on social units and integrated land management is becoming more common worldwide. In Kenya the approach is constantly evolving and has recently been renamed the 'Focal Area Approach'.

2.3 Арга барилын зурагууд

2.5 Арга барил нэвтрүүлсэн улс орон / бүс нутаг / байршил

2.6 Арга барилыг эхлэх, дуусах огноо

2.7 Арга барилын төрөл

• төсөл / хөтөлбөр дээр үндэслэсэн

2.8 Арга барилын үндсэн зорилго, зорилтууд

The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (The approach also included other activities like energy saving technologies and Agroforestry. It also involved collaboration with othe sectors like public health, fisheries, water. Also new technologies were introduced like water prospecting.) The main aims are to contribute to increased production among farmers and pastrolist through advise on sound land husbandry, conserve agricultural lands affected by erosion, create awareness on importance of soil conservation and introduce on-farm tree planting practices.
The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: lack of tangible and assessable impact of SWC activities, technically or socially, slow implementation of SWC, underlying problems of poverty, declining soil fertility, soil erosion and fuelwood shortage.

2.9 Арга барилын хүрээнд хэрэгжсэн Технологи/Технологиудад дэмжсэн эсвэл саад учруулсан нөхцлүүд

3.1 Арга барилд оролцогч талууд болон тэдгээрийн үүргүүд

3.2 Арга барилын янз бүрийн үе шатанд орон нутгийн газар ашиглагчид / бүлэглэлүүдийг татан оролцуулах

	Орон нутгийн газар ашиглагч / орон нутгийн иргэдийн оролцоо	Хэн оролцсоныг тодорхойлж, үйл ажиллагааг тайлбарлана уу
санаачлага/идэвхжүүлэлт	интерактив	public meetings; they were involved in making decisions on boundaries.
Төлөвлөгөө	интерактив	rapid/participatory rural appraisal, public meetings, interviews/questionnaires; they were involved in providing information during the PRA and also the formulation of the community action plan
Хэрэгжилт	өөрийн хүчийг нэгтгэсэн	responsibility for major steps; they were invoved in the actual work in the farms. implemented by community members
Мониторинг/ үнэлгээ	идэвхигүй	Mainly: interviews/questionnaires; partly: reporting;
Research	үгүй	only during trainings

3.3 Диаграм (хэрэв боломжтой бол)

3.4 ГТМ-ийн технологи/технологиуд сонгох шийдвэр

Хэрэгжүүлэх Технологи/Технологиудын сонголтыг хийж шийдвэр гаргасан хүнийг тодорхойлно уу:

• ГТМ-ийн мэргэжилтнүүдийн дэмжлэгтэйгээр, голчлон газар ашиглагчид

Тайлбар:

Land user driven (bottom-up). The choice on the technology to use is made primarily by the technical specialists based on the prevalent type of erosion on each farm and farmers preference.
Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists. Land user driven (bottom-up). The method of implementation is decided based on the farmers capabilities and resources at his disposal e.g. where labour is a constraint and finances limiting, biological conservation measures would be considered more.

4.1 Чадавхи бэхжүүлэх/сургалт

Газар эзэмшигчид / бусад оролцогч талуудад сургалт явуулсан уу?

Тийм

Хэн сургалтанд хамрагдсан бэ:

• Газар ашиглагчид

• extensionists/trainers, school children/students (2), teachers (3)

Сургалтын хэлбэр:

• Ажил дээр
• фермерээс -фермер
• үзүүлэнгийн талбай
• Олон нийтийн уулзалт
• курс дамжаа

Хамрагдсан сэвдүүд:

including layout of measures; agroforestry; soil erosion and measures to control it; energy conservation; food preservation - as well as for specific farm enterprises. Carried out mainly through farm visits by Ministry of Agriculture agents.

4.2 Зөвлөх үйлчилгээ

Газар ашиглагчдад зөвлөх үйлчилгээ авах боломжтой байдаг уу?

Тийм

Зөвлөх үйлчилгээ үзүүлсэн эсэхийг тогтоо:

• Газар ашиглагчийн талбай дээр

Тодорхойлолт / тайлбар:

Name of method used for advisory service: Catchment Approach: Formation of Conservation Committees. Implementation of techniques/technologies, Training on techniques/technologies, farm visits, field demonstrations, field days.
Advisory service was carried out through: Government's existing extension system (Both generalists and SWC specialists.) Extension staff: Mainly government employees.
Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; There are extension staff posted at locational level who are well trained.

4.3 Институцийг бэхжүүлэх (байгууллагын хөгжил)

Арга барилаар дамжуулан институц байгуулагдаж эсвэл бэхжсэн үү?

• Тийм, дунд зэрэг

Байгууллагууд бэхжиж, үүсэн бий болсон түвшин(үүд)-г тодорхойлно уу:

• Орон нутгийн

Дэмжлэгийн төрлийг ялга:

• чадавхи бэхжүүлэх / сургалт

4.4 Мониторинг ба үнэлгээ

Мониторинг болон үнэлгээ нь арга барилын хэсэг үү?

Тийм

Тайлбар:

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored through observations
technical aspects were ad hoc monitored through measurements
socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations
area treated aspects were regular monitored through observations

no. of land users involved aspects were regular monitored by 0 through measurements; indicators: None

management of Approach aspects were ad hoc monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: None

There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: There have been few changes, but there is some enhanced collaboration between agencies, and - more income generating activities have been identified and implemented through common interest groups for crop production, marketing and livestock.

4.5 Судалгаа

Судалгаа арга барилын хэсэг нь байсан уу?

Тийм

Дэлгэрэнгүй мэдээллийг өгч, хэн судалгаа явуулсныг бичнэ үү:

Specific problems are researched as they arise. A strong research-extension linkage is being built up. Monitoring of the progress of the overall programme also takes place.

5.1 ГТМ-ийн Арга барилын бүрэлдэхүүн хэсгийн жилийн төсөв

Хэрэв жилийн төсөв тодорхойгүй бол хягаарыг тодруулна уу:

• < 2,000

Тайлбар (жнь: санхүүжилтийн гол эх үүсвэр / гол хандивлагчид):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international (SIDA/trainnig, transport allowances etc): 70.0%; government (national - Office, personell): 20.0%; local community / land user(s) (Labour, materials): 10.0%

5.3 Тодорхой зардлыг даахад чиглэсэн дэмжлэгт (хөдөлмөрийн хүчийг оролцуулаад)

• Тоног төхөөрөмж

• Хөдөө аж ахуй

Хэрэв газар ашиглагчийн хөдөлмөрийн хүч чухал байсан бол энэ нь аль хэлбэр байсан:

• сайн дурын

Тайлбар:

All labour is provided on a voluntary basis.

5.4 Кредит

Арга барилын хүрээнд ГТМ-ийн үйл ажиллагаанд зориулж зээлд хамрагдсан уу?

Тийм

Нөхцөл байдлын тодорхойлолт (хүүгийн хэмжээ, эргэн төлөлт гэх мэт):

This is not provided directly, though a savings and credit 'stakeholder kitty' revolving fund is being promoted and developed.

6.1 Арга барилын нөлөөллүүд

6.3 Арга барилын үйл ажиллагааны тогтвортой байдал

Газар ашиглагчид арга барилаар дамжуулан хэрэгжүүлсэн арга хэмжээг тогтвортой хадгалж чадах уу (гадны дэмжлэггүйгээр)?

• Тодорхойгүй

Хэрэв үгүй эсвэл тодорхойгүй бол дэлгэрэнгүй тайлбар өгнө үү:

Interventions are likely to continue and be maintained, but this depends on common interest groups continuing to function actively.

6.4 Арга барилын тогтвортой/давуу тал/боломжууд

Газар ашиглагчдын тодорхойлсон давуу тал/боломжууд
Much improved extension/training - research linkages have been forged (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continue focussed training/strengthen research-extension linkage.)
New and productive farm enterprises have been promoted under the catchment approach alongside better SWC (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continue to introduce/support where appropriate through Common Interest Groups.)

Эмхэтгэгч, бусад мэдээлэл өгсөн хүмүүсийн өнцгөөс тодорхойлсон давуу тал/боломжууд
Genuine community participation has been achieved under this approach (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continue with participatory training.)
There is evidence of 'ownership' by the community which implies a feeling that what has been achieved is due to communal efforts and belongs to them (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Further training is more effective when benefits are appreciated in this way.)

6.5 Арга барилын дутагдалтай/сул тал/аюул болон тэдгээрийн хэрхэн даван туулах арга замууд

Газар ашиглагч нарын тодорхойлсон сул тал/ дутагдал/ эрсдэл	Тэдгээрийг хэрхэн даван туулах вэ?
Lack of material incentives like seeds and fertilizers	Assist the farmers with the credit.

Эмхэтгэгч, бусад мэдээлэл өгсөн хүмүүсийн өнцгөөс тодорхойлсон сул тал/ дутагдал/ эрсдэл	Тэдгээрийг хэрхэн даван туулах вэ?
In many places there is a lack of availability of inputs	Provide better credit facilities for CIGs/farmers generally.
Technologies tend to be implemented uniformly, not site-specifically	SWC practices should be matched to each particular situation, eg structural measures such as fanya juu terraces should be promoted only where necessary, that is where agronomic and vegetative measures do not provide sufficient protection.
As yet uncertainty about continuation in specific areas if direct support stops after only one year	Don't abruptly terminate this support after one year: continue approach for at least two or three years in each catchment (approach area).
inadequate funding	Increase the funding.
Too small an area (of the country) is currently covered by NALEP	More staff required: more effective use of staff.

7.1 Мэдээллийн эх үүсвэр/аргууд

7.2 Холбогдох бүтээлийн ишлэл

Гарчиг, зохиогч, он, ISBN:

The catchment approach is linked to cultural or administrative boundaries, rather than to hydrological watersheds. This emphasis on social units and integrated land management is becoming more common worldwide. In Kenya the approach is constantly evolving and has recently been renamed the 'Focal Area Approach'.