1.2 Технологийг үнэлэх, баримтжуулах ажилд хамаарах мэдээлэл өгсөн хүмүүс, байгууллагуудын холбоо барих мэдээлэл

Технологи баримтжуулах/үнэлэх ажилд дэмжлэг үзүүлсэн төслийн нэр (шаардлагатай бол)

Reabilitação de terras e gestão das áreas de pastagem nos sistemas de produção agro-pastoris dos pequenos produtores no sudoeste de Angola (RETESA)

Технологи баримтжуулах/үнэлэх ажилд дэмжлэг үзүүлсэн төслийн нэр (шаардлагатай бол)

Book project: Guidelines to Rangeland Management in Sub-Saharan Africa (Rangeland Management)

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

FAO Angola (FAO Angola) - Ангол

1.3 ВОКАТ-аар баримтжуулсан өгөгдлийг ашиглахтай холбоотой нөхцөл

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

Тийм

1.4 Технологи тогтвортой гэдгийг баталгаажуулах

Энэ технологийг газрын доройтлыг бууруулж, газрын тогтвортой менежментийг хангахад тохиромжтой гэж үзэж болох уу?

Үгүй

2.1 Технологийн товч тодорхойлолт

Технологийн тодорхойлолт:

Rehabilitation of rangelands involves selection of key pasture and fodder species, and their reintroduction into strategic areas through stakeholder participation. The technology is also supported by communal management plans, which were created to address the root causes of land degradation.

2.2 Технологийн дэлгэрэнгүй тодорхойлолт

Тодорхойлолт:

This technology was developed and implemented through the RETESA Project “Land rehabilitation and rangelands management in smallholder agropastoral production systems in south-western Angola”. RETESA is a project owned and implemented by the Ministry of Environment of the Government of Angola, with technical and methodological assistance from The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), and financed by the Global Environment Facility (GEF).
Inappropriate grazing regimes and poor livestock management by pastoral communities in SW Angola have led to degradation of rangeland and pastoral resources, with perennial grassland species and shrubs having been effectively eliminated. This is despite the fact that the pastoral communities of the area know their environment extremely well and are aware of the land degradation happening around them. Under the project they identified crucial areas for rehabilitation works, selecting mostly areas around water points that have been in use both by local and transhumant herders. Through these works, the local community sought to (a) increase ground cover to reduce sediment loads entering waterways (erosion control), (b) provide shade for livestock, (c) increase forage production and (d) introduce legumes and multipurpose forage trees in areas of high animal traffic. A total of four areas in the Bibala and Virei Municipalities were identified for the activities.
The communities were closely involved in the selection and propagation of plant species for the rehabilitation works. The project field staff also ran field palatability trials with them to confirm that the plants selected met their expectations. These participatory trials were also aimed at enhancing their understanding of livestock nutrition and how it related to animal health. Once the species were chosen, seed was collected by the communities and the Project Technicians, and was multiplied in 32 Agro-Pastoral Field School Nurseries and 2 Government funded Veterinary Research Stations. A total of 15 species were identified, with the grasses Eragrostis superba, Urochloa mosambicensis, and the trees Acacia nilotica, Faidherbia albida, Leucaena leucocephala and Moringa oleifera being the most valued by the communities as forage and multipurpose species. The trees were germinated from seed with success. However, native grass species failed to germinate by standard methods - early field trials having ruled out direct seeding methods. Thus they were multiplied by root division of plants collected from cultivated fields. This avoided removal of grass from natural areas.
As the majority of the areas selected for the rehabilitation works were focused around water points and waterways, the soils were generally alluvial, sandy loams. Precipitation is highest in the areas to the north: it ranges from 600 mm in the upper areas of the Bibala Municipality to 200 mm in the areas to the south in Virei. In general, the vegetation communities could be described as dry sclerophyll woodlands with Colophospermum mopane being the dominant tree species, with forest cover decreasing in height and density as one moves south toward drier areas.
Through close collaboration with the participant communities, three rehabilitation methods were designed and improved upon throughout the Project's duration. Method 1 was used to plant open areas within the rehabilitation zone, Method 2 was employed to introduce and protect concentrated plantings of the selected species in strategic locations within the landscape, and Method 3 was preferred for the recuperation of riparian vegetation and to reduce sediment loads in waterways. The three methods used are described in more detail in the Technical Drawings. To increase the sense of ownership and thus the sustained effectiveness of the rehabilitation works, land management plans and other supporting activities were also carried out.

2.3 Технологийн гэрэл зураг

2.5 Энэ үнэлгээнд хамрагдсан технологийг хэрэгжүүлсэн улс орон/ бүс нутаг/ байршил

2.6 Хэрэгжсэн хугацаа

Байгуулсан тодорхой оныг мэдэхгүй бол баримжаа хугацааг тодорхойл:

• <10 жилийн өмнө (саяхны)

2.7 Технологийн танилцуулга

Технологийг хэрхэн нэвтрүүлснийг тодорхойл:

• Гадны төсөл/хөтөлбөрийн дэмжлэгтэйгээр

Тайлбар (төслийн төрөл г.м.):

The proposed project: “Land rehabilitation and rangelands management in smallholders’ agropastoral production systems in southwestern Angola” (RETESA) is a joint effort by the Ministério do Ambiente (MA), Ministério da Agricultura e do Desenvolvimento Rural e das Pescas (MINANDER), Governo Provincial do Namibe, Governo Provincial do Huila, and Governo Provincial de Benguela, together with FAO and GEF. In line with the GEF-5 Land Degradation strategy, the project’s goal is to create an enhanced enabling environment in the agricultural sector and a sustained flow of agro-ecosystem services.

3.1 Технологийн үндсэн зорилго (ууд)

• үйлдвэрлэлийг сайжруулах
• газрын доройтлыг бууруулах, сэргийлэх, нөхөн сэргээх
• экосистемийг хамгаалах
• биологийн төрөл зүйлийг хамгаалах / сайжруулах
• гамшгийн эрсдлийг бууруулах
• уур амьсгалын өөрчлөлт/ экстрим байдал болон түүний нөлөөлөлд дасан зохицох
• уур амьсгалын өөрчлөлт, түүний үр нөлөөг багасгах
• үр ашигтай эдийн засгийн нөлөөг бий болгох

3.2 Технологи нэвтрүүлсэн газрын одоогийн газар ашиглалтын хэлбэр(үүд)

Тайлбар:

Number of growing seasons per year: 1
Livestock density: Official data is not available and true livestock numbers are unknown.

3.3 Технологи хэрэгжүүлснээр газар ашиглалтад өөрчлөлт гарсан уу?

Технологи хэрэгжүүлснээр газар ашиглалтад өөрчлөлт гарсан уу?

• Тийм (Технологи хэрэгжүүлэхээс өмнөх үеийн газар ашиглалтын талаархи асуулгыг бөглөнө үү)

Тайлбар:

Crop land is increasing in the area as population increases and people move towards more sedimentary livelihoods.

3.4 Усан хангамж

Технологи хэрэгжүүлсэн газрын усан хангамж:

• Байгалийн усалгаатай

3.5 Технологи ГТМ-ийн аль бүлэгт хамаарах вэ

• Бэлчээрийн мал аж ахуй ба бэлчээрийн газрын менежмент
• хөрс/ ургамлын бүрхэвч сайжруулах

3.6 Технологийг бүрдүүлэх ГТМ арга хэмжээ

Тайлбар:

The management plans created at the community and administrative level identify a number of large areas which are to serve as 'Grazing Reverses' for the dry season. Therefore, the agreements call for all livestock to abandon the area at the onset of the first rains and not return until the Pastoral Management Forum agrees to open the area for grazing. Once open, the range is available to all pastoralists, those that live in the immediate area and those moving through on their transhumance migration.

3.7 Технологид харгалзах газрын доройтлын төрөл

3.8 Газрын доройтлоос урьдчилан сэргийлэх, сааруулах ба нөхөн сэргээх

Газрын доройтолтой холбоотойгоор Технологи ямар зорилго тавьсан болохыг тодорхойл:

• Газрын доройтлыг бууруулах
• Хүчтэй доройтсон газрыг нөхөн сэргээх/ сайжруулах

4.1 Технологийн техник зураг

4.2 Материал болон зардалд хамаарах ерөнхий мэдээлэл

Үнэ өртөг, оруулсан хувь нэмрийг хэрхэн тооцсоныг тодорхойл:

• Технологийн нэгж тус бүр

Үнэ өртөгийг тооцоход ашигласан мөнгөн нэгж:

• Ам.доллар

4.3 Бий болгох үйл ажиллагаа

	Үйл ажиллагаа	Хугацаа (улирал)
1.	Meetings and field visits with participant communities to identify plant species and their uses	Best during growing season
2.	Further meetings to decide on which species are to be multiplied and arrange seed collection	Near end of growing season
3.	Seed collection and transportation	When seed is available (varies with species)
4.	Instalation of irrigation systems	Most communiites need a water extraction and distribution system to create nurseries
5.	Delivery of nursery supplies and instalation of shade cloth	Nurseries should have water access and shade
6.	Planting of seeds and care for seedlings at nursery	Formed part of Agro-Pastoral Farmer Field School activities
7.	Identification of planting areas and timing	Should be at beginning of rainy season, or when soil moisture permits
8.	Organisation of materials and tools	At least 1 week before the planting
9.	Planting day (preparation of planting holes and transplanting of seedlings)	2 days maximum was seen to be optimal
10.	Watering until the plants are established	Usually a maximum of 3 watering over 1 week after the plantings
11.	Follow up visits to make sure management agreements are being respected and plants are not being eaten by stock until they are ready	Plants should not be grazed for at least 6 months from planting time until they are well established

Тайлбар:

The activities and costs given were those needed to produce and plant 3,345 trees and grasses in the 4 rehabilitation areas. Given that 3,345 plants were produced at a cost of $3284.75, the cost per plant produced and planted in the field is $0.98. Seedlings available through local, government nurseries were $2.00 per unit, but only exotic ornamentals were available. However, it can be expected that in other contexts and locations, it would be cheaper to buy seedlings, instead of training communities and creating numerous small-scale nurseries, though clearly these communities will not ‘own’ the process as well as if they were involved from the beginning.

4.4 Бий болгоход шаардагдсан зардал, хөрөнгийн өртөг

	Зардлын нэр, төрөл	Хэмжих нэгж	Тоо хэмжээ	Нэгжийн үнэ	Зардал бүрийн нийт өртөг	Нийт дүнгээс газар ашиглагчийн төлсөн %
Хөдөлмөр эрхлэлт	Project Technicians/Drivers/Consultants, etc	Person-days	30.0	20.0	600.0
Хөдөлмөр эрхлэлт	Plant identification activities and seed collection	Person-days	10.0	6.0	60.0	100.0
Хөдөлмөр эрхлэлт	Plant nursery creation and plant production	Person-days	16.0	6.0	96.0	100.0
Хөдөлмөр эрхлэлт	Participation during planting days	Person-days	25.0	10.0	250.0	90.0
Тоног төхөөрөмж	Vehicle	Trips	10.0	40.0	400.0
Тоног төхөөрөмж	Nursery supplies (including water system which also supplies water to Farmer Field School)	Materials	1.0	800.0	800.0	10.0
Тоног төхөөрөмж	Planting supplies (shovels, hoes, wheelbarrows, etc.)	Materials	1.0	120.0	120.0
Тоног төхөөрөмж	Other improvements to water point (fencing, cement blocks, cement, hoses, etc.)	Materials	1.0	250.0	250.0
Тоног төхөөрөмж	Maps (traced onto paper from projected images for management purposes)	Materials	1.0	10.0	10.0
Тоног төхөөрөмж	Food and Refreshments	Per person	25.0	2.5	62.5
Бордоо ба биоцид	Manure (50 grams per sack, 12.500 sacks)	Kilos	625.0	0.25	156.25	100.0
Барилгын материал	Shade-cloth	m2	320.0	1.5	480.0
Технологи бий болгох нийт үнэ өртөг					3284.75
Технологи бий болгох нийт үнэ өртөг, ам.доллар					3284.75

Хэрэв газар ашиглагч нийт зардлын 100% -иас бага хэсгийг төлсөн бол хэн голлох зардлыг гаргасан бэ:

Remaining costs were provided by the RETESA Project.

Тайлбар:

Production depends on the ability of the pastoral communities to produce viable plants. If they are unable to do so, then plants can be bought from Government funded nurseries, though costs per plant will most rise though it can substitute the need for having to purchase a water supply system. The total shown here reflects a percentage (16%) of the costs of installing a water system that supplied water to the whole of the Agro-Pastoral Farmer Field School. These systems usually included a 10,000 litre water tank, a gasoline water pump, extraction pipe and parts, 100 to 200 mts of 1.5" hoses and parts and 3 kms of drip irrigation hose.

4.5 Арчилгаа/ урсгал үйл ажиллагаа

	Үйл ажиллагаа	Хугацаа/ давтамж
1.	Meetings to ensure management agreements are being respected.	Once every 3 to 6 months, especially before and after rainy season.
2.	Repairs and replacement of nursery supplies.	Once a year.
3.	Replanting of dead seedlings	Just before and during rainy season.

4.6 Арчилгаа/урсгал ажилд шаардагдсан зардал, хөрөнгийн өртөг (нэг жилд)

	Зардлын нэр, төрөл	Хэмжих нэгж	Тоо хэмжээ	Нэгжийн үнэ	Зардал бүрийн нийт өртөг	Нийт дүнгээс газар ашиглагчийн төлсөн %
Хөдөлмөр эрхлэлт	Visits to sites and tour of planting areas.	Person-days	4.0	20.0	80.0	50.0
Хөдөлмөр эрхлэлт	Driver.	Person-days	1.0	20.0	20.0
Хөдөлмөр эрхлэлт	Replanting of dead seedlings	Person-days	2.0	6.0	12.0	100.0
Хөдөлмөр эрхлэлт	Watering	Person-days	14.0	6.0	84.0	100.0
Тоног төхөөрөмж	Vehicle	Trips	1.0	40.0	40.0
Тоног төхөөрөмж	Watering cans and buckets	Materials	4.0	5.0	20.0
Технологийн арчилгаа/урсгал үйл ажиллагаанд шаардагдах нийт үнэ өртөг					256.0
Технологи арчилах ба урсгал ажлын нийт үнэ өртөг, ам.доллар					256.0

Хэрэв газар ашиглагч нийт зардлын 100% -иас бага хэсгийг төлсөн бол хэн голлох зардлыг гаргасан бэ:

The RETESA Project provided an important part of both material and technical support to the communities, though the communities also contributed substantially.

4.7 Зардалд нөлөөлж байгаа хамгийн чухал хүчин зүйл

Өртөг, зардалд нөлөөлөх гол хүчин зүйл:

The activities and costs given were those needed to produce and plant 3,345 trees and grasses in the 4 rehabilitation areas. Given that 3.345 plants were produced at a cost of $3284.75, the cost per plant produced and planted in the field is $0.98. Seedlings avaliable through local, government nurseries were $2.00 per unit, but only exotic ornamentals were avaliable. However, it can be expected that in other contexts and locations, it would be cheaper to buy seedlings instead of training communities and creating numerous small scale nurseries, though clearly these communities will not appropriate the process as well as if they were involved from the beginning.

5.1 Уур амьсгал

5.2 Гадаргын хэлбэр

Технологи дараах асуудалд хандсан эсэхийг тодорхойл:

• хамааралгүй

Гадаргын талаархи тодорхойлолт ба бусад тайлбар:

Usually the planting are undertaken along river plains and river banks, as they are the only areas that have the necessary soil moisture to ensure survival of the seedlings.

5.3 Хөрс

5.4 Усны хүртээмж ба чанар

Усны давсжилтын асуудал бий юу?

Тийм

Тодорхойлно уу:

Many bores and wells cannot be used due to Salinity problems. Before planting, it is wise to make sure soil salinity is not problematic in areas identified.

Энэ газар үерт автдаг уу?

Тийм

Тогтмол байдал:

тохиолдлын

Усны чанар, нөөцийн талаархи тайлбар ба бусад тодорхойлолт:

Water quality and quantity are major issues for the area. There are few if any reliable water sources in the area and most communities depend on wells dug in the river bottoms to supply their water.

5.5 Биологийн олон янз байдал

Биологийн олон янз байдлын талаархи тайлбар ба бусад тодорхойлолт:

The area is devoid of most wild animals due to the years of war the country experienced during the second half of the 20th century.

5.6 Технологи нэвтрүүлсэн газар ашиглагчдын тухай мэдээлэл

Газар ашиглагчдын бусад шинж чанарыг тодорхойл:

The communities are still traditional though are currently being influenced by the globalisation process.

5.7 Газар ашиглагчийн технологи нэвтрүүлсэн газрын дундаж талбайн хэмжээ

5.8 Газар эзэмшил, газар ашиглах эрх, ус ашиглах эрх

Газар өмчлөл:

• нэгдлийн/ тосгон

Газар ашиглах эрх:

• нээлттэй хүртэх (зохион байгуулалтгүй)

Ус ашиглах эрх:

• нээлттэй хүртэх (зохион байгуулалтгүй)

5.9 Дэд бүтэц, үйлчилгээний хүртээмж

6.1 Технологийн талбайд үзүүлсэн нөлөө

Нийгэм-эдийн засгийн үр нөлөө

Үйлдвэрлэл

Усны хүртээмж ба чанар

Нийгэм-соёлын үр нөлөө

Экологийн үр нөлөө

Усны эргэлт/ илүүдэл

Хөрс

Биологийн олон янз байдал: ургамал, амьтан

Уур амьсгал болон гамшгийн эрсдлийг бууруулах

6.2 Технологийн талбайн гадна үзүүлсэн үр нөлөө

6.3 Технологийн уур амьсгалын өөрчлөлт, цаг агаарын гамшигт үзэгдэлд өртөх байдал ба эмзэг байдал (газар ашиглагчийн бодлоор)

Уур амьсгалын аажим өөрчлөлт

Уур амьсгалын аажим өөрчлөлт

	Улирал	Өсөх эсвэл буурах	Технологи түүний нөлөөг хэрхэн бууруулж байна?
жилийн дундаж хур тундас		Бууралт	сайн
улирлын хур тундас	хавар	Бууралт	сайн

6.4 Өртөг ба ашгийн шинжилгээ

Бий болгох зардалтай харьцуулахад ямар ашиг өгсөн бэ (газар ашиглагчийн бодлоор)?

Арчилгаа/урсгал зардалтай харьцуулахад ямар ашиг өгсөн бэ (газар ашиглагчийн бодлоор)?

6.5 Технологи нэвтрүүлэлт

• жишээ/ туршилт

Технологи нэвтрүүлсэн хүмүүсээс хэд нь өөрийн хүчээр технологийг хэрэгжүүлсэн бэ, өөрөөр хэлбэл гадны тусламж дэмжлэг авалгүйгээр?

• 0-10%

6.6 Дасан зохицох

Бий болсон өөрчлөлтөд зохицуулан технологийг өөрчилсөн үү?

Үгүй

6.7 Технологийн давуу тал/боломжууд

Газар ашиглагчдын тодорхойлсон давуу тал/боломжууд
Communities learn about plants' role in the wider ecosystem, how to select and multiply key fruit, fodder or timber species and should see an increase in their horticultural and livestock production, leading to improved nutrition or income.
Done properly, it can be a cost-effective and reliable way to produce the plants needed within family units.

Эмхэтгэгч, бусад мэдээлэл өгсөн хүмүүсийн өнцгөөс тодорхойлсон давуу тал/боломжууд
When the plants are produced in collaboration with the local pastoral communities, the benefits are wide ranging, promoting everything from environmental awareness to technical and practical knowledge.
It remains a cost-effective way of improving key productive species and increasing community resilience.
Increasing biomass and introducing better management cycles contribute to reducing land degradation and improve nutrient and energy cycling.

6.8 Технологийн дутагдалтай/сул тал/аюул болон тэдгээрийг хэрхэн даван туулах арга зам

Газар ашиглагч нарын тодорхойлсон сул тал/ дутагдал/ эрсдэл	Тэдгээрийг хэрхэн даван туулах вэ?
Can require stable supply of water, and labour costs can increase if water sources are not easily accessible.	Locate nurseries near reliable and accessible water sources.
Can require permanent residence, so as to be able to care for plants until they are developed and placed in the ground at the proper date in the calendar (before or during rainy season).	Not easy in nomadic cultures.
Early attempts often fail to produce lasting results.	Concentrate early efforts on small experimental plots so as to fine-tune planting methods and timing.

Эмхэтгэгч, бусад мэдээлэл өгсөн хүмүүсийн өнцгөөс тодорхойлсон сул тал/ дутагдал/ эрсдэл	Тэдгээрийг хэрхэн даван туулах вэ?
The technology is usually not suitable for large areas of land (>1,000 hectares).	Compliment any rehabilitation efforts with improved management plans which are developed with stakeholder input and approval.
Plant losses are typically high, especially if rains fail to arrive, or if the year is abnormally dry.	Watch weather forecast to try and focus planting campaigns on those days with a high probability of rain.
Local species are often not valued by local officials and technicians, leading to a predominance of exotic species in rehabilitation works.	Undertake awareness and training sessions which highlight the value and uses of native species with local land users and administrative officials.

7.1 Мэдээлэл цуглуулсан арга/эх үүсвэр

7.3 Холбогдох мэдээллийн интернет холбоос

Гарчиг/ тодорхойлолт:

FAO in Action: Using indigenous knowledge to reverse land degradation in Angola.

URL:

http://www.fao.org/in-action/using-indigenous-knowledge-to-reverse-land-degradation-in-angola/en/