Participatory Net Planning for Sustainable Watershed Management [Índia]
- Criação:
- Atualização:
- Compilador/a: Arun Bhagat
- Editor: –
- Revisor: Udo Höggel
Participatory Net Planning – A tool that involves stakeholders in planning, developing, and managing their land and natural resources
approaches_7651 - Índia
Veja as seções
Expandir tudo Recolher tudo1. Informação geral
1.2 Detalhes do contato das pessoas capacitadas e instituições envolvidas na avaliação e documentação da abordagem
Pessoa(s) capacitada(s)
Especialista em GST:
Kalaskar Prashant
+91 9403961586
prashant.kalaskar@wotr.org.in
Watershed Organisation Trust (WOTR), Pune
Watershed Organisation Trust (WOTR), Gitai, 1st Floor, New Nagar Road, Sangamner – 422605, Dist. Ahmednagar, Maharashtra, India
Índia
Especialista em GST:
D’Souza Marcella
+91 9422226415
marcella.dsouza@gmail.com
W-CReS (the WOTR Centre for Resilience Studies), Watershed Organisation Trust (WOTR), Pune
The Forum, 2nd Floor, Pune - Satara Rd, above Ranka Jewellers, Padmavati Nagar, Corner, Pune, Maharashtra 411009 (India)
Índia
Especialista em GST:
Especialista em GST:
Solanky Vijay
+91 8824144388
vijay.solanky@wotr.org.in
W-CReS (the WOTR Centre for Resilience Studies), Watershed Organisation Trust (WOTR), Pune
The Forum, 2nd Floor, Pune - Satara Rd, above Ranka Jewellers, Padmavati Nagar, Corner, Pune, Maharashtra 411009 (India)
Índia
Nome do projeto que facilitou a documentação/avaliação da Abordagem (se relevante)
Applying Landscape and Sustainable Land Management (L-SLM) for mitigating land degradation and contributing to poverty reduction in rural area (L-SLM Project)Nome da(s) instituição(ões) que facilitou(ram) a documentação/avaliação da Abordagem (se relevante)
Watershed Organisation Trust (WOTR) - Índia1.3 Condições em relação ao uso da informação documentada através de WOCAT
Quando os dados foram compilados (no campo)?
18/09/2025
O/a compilador/a e a(s) pessoa(s) capacitada(s) aceitam as condições relativas ao uso de dados documentados através da WOCAT:
Sim
2. Descrição da abordagem de GST
2.1 Descrição curta da abordagem
Participatory Net Planning (PNP) is a practical methodology that actively engages landowners and local stakeholders in planning and implementing measures for land use, soil conservation, water harvesting, and biomass development. It aims to regenerate ecosystems and improve the sustainability of watersheds through site-specific resource management. PNP emphasizes the conservation, productivity enhancement, and sustainable use of natural and biological resources. It involves assessing the current condition and use of land, water, and vegetation, and preparing detailed plans—with estimated costs and timelines—to achieve the desired outcomes.
In Participatory Net Planning (PNP), the term “Net” represents a complete and interconnected planning framework where every land parcel within a watershed is individually assessed and linked to the larger watershed system. It highlights a network-based approach that integrates soil, water, vegetation, and community needs, ensuring that interventions on one farm support resource conservation and productivity across neighboring and downstream lands. Overall, it signifies a holistic and coordinated system where all stakeholders and resources are planned collectively for sustainable and long-term watershed management.
2.2 Descrição detalhada da abordagem
Descrição detalhada da abordagem:
By design, PNP functions as a tool for mobilization, training, monitoring, and evaluation in watershed programs.
Its key objectives are:
•Building ownership and commitment among landowners and stakeholders to ensure the long-term sustainability of watershed interventions.
•Planning site-specific measures that meet local needs, improve productivity, and address resource challenges.
•Developing realistic plans with clear activities, budgets, and timelines that can be implemented effectively, minimizing gaps between planned and actual outcomes.
The PNP approach places stakeholders at the center of the process. Landowners, farmers (both men and women), or users of Common Property Resources (CPRs) are directly involved in decision-making for their land or shared resources. During PNP exercises, the planning team visits each landholding or CPR along with the concerned stakeholders to jointly survey, assess, and plan interventions.
Stakeholders share their views on current and proposed land use and the necessary soil and water conservation treatments. The team discusses best practices and scientific options for land management, explaining their benefits and suitability. The final decision on interventions rests with the stakeholder—except when proposed actions could harm neighboring lands, CPRs, or the environment. In such cases, efforts are made to reach a consensus; if not possible, treatments on that land are withheld.
Once agreement is reached, the proposed measures are documented in writing and mapped on a diagram of the land or CPR.
PNP is gender-inclusive, ensuring both men and women participate in planning and decision-making. Ideally, the farming couple or land-owning couple is present during planning, even when land is officially registered in the man’s name. For CPRs, where stakeholders include landless people, marginal farmers, livestock owners, and shepherd communities, institutions like the Village Watershed Committee (VWC), Village Development Committee (VDC), and Gram Panchayat (GP) are involved. Their role is to ensure equitable access to ressources, manage conflicts, and establish transparent and representative local institutions for sustainable management of CPRs and create assets.
The Participatory Net Plan is more than just a planning document—it serves as a blueprint for implementation. Written in the local language, it remains accessible to stakeholders for regular reference. The plan is flexible and adaptive, evolving as new information emerges or stakeholders revise their preferences. Thus, it acts as a “living document” that supports transparency, continuous monitoring, and accountability.
2.3 Fotos da abordagem
Galeria de Mídias
Observações gerais sobre as fotos:
The photos capture active community participation, field discussions, and collaborative decision-making between farmers and experts during the PNP process, reflecting practical learning and collective planning for sustainable land management.
2.5 País/região/locais onde a abordagem foi aplicada
País:
Índia
Região/Estado/Província:
Maharashtra
Especificação adicional de localização:
Darewadi,Post. Kauthe Malkapur, Taluka Sangamner, Dist. Ahilyanagar,
Comentários:
The Participatory Net Planning (PNP) approach was first implemented in Darewadi village, located in Kauthe Malkapur post, Sangamner taluka, Ahilyanagar district, Maharashtra, India.
Map
×2.6 Datas de início e término da abordagem
Indique o ano de início:
1995
2.7 Tipo de abordagem
- Baseado em projeto/programa
2.8 Principais metas/objetivos da abordagem
The main objectives of Participatory Net Planning (PNP) are:
•To build a sense of ownership and commitment among landowners and other stakeholders within a watershed, ensuring long-term sustainability of the implemented measures.
•To plan site-specific interventions, meet stakeholder needs, and enhance land and water productivity.
•To develop practical proposals with clear activities, budgets, and timelines that ensure planned measures are effectively implemented and easily scaled up.
2.9 Condição que propiciam ou inibem a implementação de tecnologia/tecnologias aplicada(s) segundo a abordagem
Normas e valores sociais/culturais/religiosos
- Propício
Strong local bonding, traditional mutual-help systems (e.g., shramdaan), and trust in community leadership support smooth mobilization, joint action, and quick adoption of land and water measures.
- Inibitivo
Social hierarchies, reluctance to change established practices, or participation limited to men may exclude key decision-makers, reducing inclusiveness and impact.
Disponibilidade/acesso a recursos e serviços financeiros
- Propício
Availability of subsidies, project funds, bank credit, and SHG financing allows farmers to adopt technologies like bunding, trenching, or water harvesting without major financial stress.
- Inibitivo
High upfront costs, inadequate financial literacy, and slow fund release discourage participation and may lead to incomplete works.
Quadro institucional
- Propício
Strong and well-functioning institutions (VDC, GP, watershed committees) ensure better planning, dispute resolution, and accountability, increasing project success.
- Inibitivo
Weak institutions and lack of leadership create delays, communication gaps, and poor transparency in decision-making.
Colaboração/coordenção de atores
- Propício
Active support from multiple actors — technical experts, government departments, and villagers — promotes effective knowledge exchange and faster implementation.
- Inibitivo
Misalignment in roles, unclear responsibilities, or lack of coordination slows progress and reduces effectiveness of interventions.
Quadro jurídico (posse de terra, direitos de uso da terra e da água)
- Propício
Clear land ownership provides confidence for farmers to invest in long-term land improvement practices since they benefit directly from gains.
- Inibitivo
Disputed titles, tenancy issues, or unclear CPR access rights delay planning and restrict work, especially on shared lands.
Políticas
- Propício
Supportive agricultural, watershed, and rural development policies provide strong institutional backing, technical support, and long-term vision.
- Inibitivo
Frequent changes in guidelines, budget cuts, or administrative barriers disrupt continuity in planning and execution.
Governança da terra (tomada de decisões, implementação e aplicação)
- Propício
Fair and transparent governance ensures equal benefits, compliance with planned measures, and responsible use of natural resources.
- Inibitivo
Ineffective enforcement or favoritism creates distrust, conflicts, and irregular implementation outcomes.
Conhecimento sobre GST, acesso a suporte técnico
- Propício
Farmer training, exposure visits, and expert guidance improve understanding of benefits, correct design, and maintenance of SWC structures.
- Inibitivo
Limited technical support results in poor-quality structures and reduced confidence among farmers.
Mercados (para comprar entradas, vender produtos) e preços
- Propício
Ready access to markets motivates farmers to adopt improved land use and productivity-enhancing measures since profits increase.
- Inibitivo
Price volatility and distant markets reduce economic incentives for adopting new technologies or crop diversification.
Carga de trabalho, disponibilidade de força de trabalho
- Propício
Local labor availability and farmer involvement ensure timely execution, especially before monsoon when structures are most effective.
- Inibitivo
Rural migration and labor shortages lead to delays, rushed construction, or higher labor costs.
Outro
- Propício
Climate and weather conditions:
Normal rainfall ensures proper functioning of trenches, bunds, and vegetation growth, validating the benefits of interventions.
- Inibitivo
Climate and weather conditions:
Droughts, heavy storms, or irregular monsoons cause structure damage or reduced productivity, lowering adoption enthusiasm.
Outro
- Propício
Accessibility & terrain:
Good road connectivity ensures smooth movement of tools, equipment, and produce; reduces cost and effort.
- Inibitivo
Accessibility & terrain:
Difficult terrain and remote locations increase logistics challenges, delaying technology application and maintenance.
3. Participação e papel das partes interessadas envolvidas
3.1 Partes interessadas envolvidas na abordagem e seus papéis
- Usuários de terra/comunidades locais
Farmers, landowners, women's (Self-help Group (SHG)), members, livestock owners
Main decision-makers: provide land-related information; participate in planning, implementation, maintenance, and long-term management.
- Organizações comunitárias
Village Development Committee (VDC), Village Watershed Committee (VWC), Gram Sabha, SHGs
Mobilize participation, ensure equity and conflict resolution, coordinate between community and experts, support monitoring and governance.
- Especialistas em GST/ consultor agrícola
Agricultural engineers, watershed technicians, extension workers, soil experts
Provide technical guidance for soil and water conservation measures, land classification, crop planning, and best practices during planning and execution.
- Pesquisadores
Agricultural Universities, Central Agriculture Institutes, Watershed Research Organizations
Support scientific assessment, innovations, and evaluation of interventions; document learnings for improvement and scaling up.
- Professores/alunos/estudantes
Local schools, eco-clubs
Raise awareness on conservation practices; promote environmental stewardship and behavioral change.
- Organização não governamental
e.g., WOTR (Watershed Organisation Trust) or similar implementing agencies
Lead mobilization, capacity building, technical support, process facilitation, documentation, and convergence with schemes.
- Setor privado
Input suppliers, equipment providers, contractors, Farmers Producer Organisations (FPOs)
Provide materials, machinery, and technical services; help improve market linkages for agricultural produce.
- Governo local
Gram Panchayat, Block Agriculture Office, Rural Development staff
Administrative approvals, fund management, land governance, support convergence of government programs.
- Governo nacional (planejadores, responsáveis pelas decisões)
Ministry of Rural Development, Department of Agriculture & Land Resources
Policy framework, program funding, national guidelines, evaluation, scaling successful models.
- Organização internacional
Funding and technical partners (e.g., UNCCD initiatives)
Provide funding, advanced training, exposure to global best practices, and knowledge sharing.
Caso várias partes interessadas foram envolvidas, indique a agência líder:
The main implementation agency (e.g., NGO like WOTR or a government watershed department) acts as the lead stakeholder, coordinating planning, execution, and monitoring across all actors.
3.2 Envolvimento do usuários de terra/comunidades locais nas diferentes fases da abordagem
| Envolvimento do usuários de terra/comunidades locais | Especifique quem estava envolvido e descreva as atividades | |
|---|---|---|
| Iniciação/motivação | Participativo | Local people are involved in awareness sessions, discussions, and joint problem analysis. Villagers, farmer groups, and watershed committees participate in identifying issues, priorities, and resources. |
| Planejamento | Participativo | Local communities participate in mapping land, resources, and existing interventions. They jointly develop action plans, decide on resource allocation, and may plan their own initiatives (self-mobilization). |
| Implementação | Participativo | Communities implement activities like soil and water conservation structures, plantations, or crop management. Some activities may be supported by food/cash/material incentives, but local ownership is emphasized. |
| Monitoramento/avaliação | Participativo | Local groups participate in tracking progress, maintaining records, and providing feedback. Village committees and farmer groups jointly evaluate the success of interventions and suggest corrective measures. |
| Farmers and local knowledge | Participativo | Farmers provide local knowledge, observations, and data for research purposes. They interact with external teams for documentation, experimentation, and knowledge sharing. |
3.3 Fluxograma (se disponível)
Descrição:
Flow chart:
The visual summary illustrates the key steps of the PNP approach
Community Mobilization:
Awareness meetings are organized to inform villagers about the purpose of Participatory Net Planning. Local institutions such as the Village Development Committee (VDC), Gram Panchayat (GP), and watershed committees motivate farmers and landowners to participate actively in the process.
Field Assessment:
The planning team, along with landowners and local experts, visits each plot or common property area to study land use, soil condition, slope, and water flow. Existing problems like erosion, poor drainage, or low productivity are identified and discussed on-site.
Participatory Planning:
Stakeholders, including both men and women farmers, jointly decide on the best soil and water conservation measures. Technical experts suggest suitable scientific options, and a consensus is built on feasible and sustainable interventions tailored to each landholding.
Documentation & Implementation:
The agreed plan is documented in simple local language and mapped clearly for each farm or area. Resources such as labor, machinery, and materials are mobilized, and the works are executed under close supervision of technical experts and local committees.
Monitoring & Evaluation:
The progress and quality of work are jointly monitored by the technical team, village committees, and farmers. Periodic evaluations ensure the plan stays relevant, effective, and sustainable, encouraging learning, accountability, and continuous improvement.
Autor:
Dr. Arun Bhagat
3.4 Decisão sobre a seleção de tecnologia/tecnologias de GST
Especifique quem decidiu sobre a seleção de tecnologia/tecnologias a serem implementadas:
- todos os atores relevantes, como parte de uma abordagem participativa
Explique:
The PNP approach helps identify the current land use and understand the socio-economic conditions linked to it. It aims to improve farmers’ income by suggesting better land use patterns. Technical and agricultural experts play a key role in preparing the proposed land use plan, which is then replicated with other farmers in the village. The village committee is essential for mobilizing and encouraging community participation in this process.
Especifique em que base foram tomadas as decisões:
- Avaliação de conhecimento bem documentado de GST (tomada de decisão baseada em evidências)
- Experiência pessoal e opiniões (não documentado)
4. Suporte técnico, reforço das capacidades e gestão do conhecimento
4.1 Reforço das capacidades/ formação
Foi oferecida formação aos usuários da terra/outras partes interessadas?
Sim
Especifique quem foi capacitado:
- Usuários de terra
- Equipe de campo/consultores
Tipo de formação:
- Agricultor para agricultor
- Áreas de demonstração
- Reuniões públicas
Assuntos abordados:
Assessment of current land use, classification of land types, and implementation of on-site soil conservation measures.
Comentários:
A joint meeting of multiple landowners is organized to share basic information, followed by a field demonstration in one of the plots to explain the planning tool. Photos and videos of various in-situ soil conservation measures, aligned with the land use and land cover, are also presented.
4.2 Serviço de consultoria
Os usuários de terra têm acesso a um serviço de consultoria?
Sim
Especifique se foi oferecido serviço de consultoria:
- nas áreas dos usuários da terra
- Em centros permanentes
Descreva/comentários:
The service is provided under the project by the implementing agency. The landowner can develop the land according to requirements with the assistance of a land developer or consultant.
4.3 Fortalecimento da instituição (desenvolvimento organizacional)
As instituições foram fortalecidas ou estabelecidas através da abordagem?
- Sim, significativamente
Especifique a que nível (níveis) as instituições foram fortalecidas ou estabelecidas:
- Local
- Regional
Descreva instituição, papéis e responsabilidades, membros, etc.
The planning tool is a socio-technical approach used for sustainable land development. Agricultural engineers, social engineers, and environmental experts from institutions can participate, along with officers from the Forest and Agricultural departments.
Especifique o tipo de apoio:
- Financeiro
- Reforço das capacidades/ formação
4.4 Monitoramento e avaliação
Monitoramento e avaliação são partes da abordagem?
Sim
Comentários:
The overall plan is verified on a sample basis to ensure quality and alignment with ground reality.
Caso afirmativo, esta documentação é destinada a ser utilizada para monitoramento e avaliação?
Sim
Comentários:
Field verification shall be conducted based on the prepared planning documents.
4.5 Pesquisa
A pesquisa foi parte da abordagem?
Sim
Especifique os tópicos:
- Sociologia
- Economia/Marketing
- Ecologia
- Tecnologia
Dê mais detalhes e indique quem realizou a pesquisa:
Experts involved in the planning and implementation of the PNP contribute their experience. While research was not the primary focus, insights gained during community mobilization and watershed plan execution help improve the approach for smoother implementation.
5. Financiamento e apoio material externo
5.1 Orçamento anual para o componente de GST da abordagem
Caso o orçamento exato seja desconhecido, indique a faixa:
- < 2.000
Comentários (p. ex. principais fontes de recursos/principais doadores):
The total cost from planning to implementation is measured per hectare and ranges from ₹20,000 to ₹50,000 per hectare, depending on the proposed land use.
5.2 Apoio financeiro/material concedido aos usuários da terra
Os usuários da terra receberam apoio financeiro/material para a implementação de tecnologia/tecnologias?
Sim
5.3 Subsídios para entradas específicas (incluindo mão-de-obra)
- Nenhum
Se a mão-de-obra pelos usuários da terra foi uma entrada substancial, isso foi:
- Voluntário
5.4 Crédito
Foi concedido crédito segundo a abordagem para atividades de GST?
Não
5.5 Outros incentivos ou instrumentos
Foram utilizados outros incentivos ou instrumentos para promover a implementação das tecnologias de GST?
Não
6. Análise de impactos e declarações finais
6.1 Impactos da abordagem
A abordagem concedeu autonomia aos usuários locais de terra, melhorou a participação das partes interessadas?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
PNP actively involves local land users in decision-making, joint planning, and management, increasing their sense of ownership and participation in SLM.
A abordagem propiciou a tomada de decisão baseada em evidências?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
Mapping of resources, data collection, and participatory analysis enable communities to plan interventions based on evidence.
A abordagem auxiliou os usuários da terra a implementar e manter as tecnologias de GST?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
By linking planning with resource availability and community initiatives, PNP ensures successful implementation and sustainability of SLM practices.
A abordagem melhorou a coordenação e a implementação economicamente eficiente da GST?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
Joint planning and shared responsibilities reduce duplication and optimize resource use.
A abordagem mobilizou/melhorou o acesso aos recursos financeiros para implementação da GST?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
Communities sometimes access government schemes, subsidies, or microfinance, but PNP primarily facilitates planning rather than direct funding.
A abordagem aprimorou o conhecimento e as capacidades dos usuários da terra para implementar a GST?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
Training, workshops, and on-field demonstration under PNP enhance skills and technical knowledge for SLM.
A abordagem aprimorou o conhecimento e as capacidades de outras partes interessadas?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
External agencies, NGOs, and local government staff gain insights into community priorities and resource status through PNP processes.
A abordagem construiu/fortaleceu instituições, colaboração entre partes interessadas?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
Formation of watershed committees and joint planning platforms strengthens institutional capacity and collaboration.
A abordagem atenuou conflitos?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
Participatory discussions and joint decision-making reduce disputes over land, water, and resource use.
A abordagem concedeu autonomia aos grupos social e economicamente desfavorecidos?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
Women, landless laborers, and marginalized groups are included in planning and implementation discussions.
A abordagem melhorou a igualdade de gêneros e concedeu autonomia a mulheres e meninas?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
Women’s participation in committees and field activities increases their voice in SLM decisions.
A abordagem encorajou os jovens/as próximas gerações de usuários de terra a se envolverem na GST?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
Young people are involved in field activities and awareness campaigns, though engagement varies by context.
A abordagem melhorou as questões de posse de terra/diretos do usuário que inibiam a implementação das tecnologias de GST?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
Some improvements occur through awareness and participatory planning, but structural tenure issues may persist.
A abordagem resultou em segurança alimentar aprimorada/nutrição melhorada?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
Soil and water conservation, improved cropping systems, and better land management contribute to higher productivity and food security.
A abordagem melhorou o acesso aos mercados?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
Some linkages are developed for crops or produce through collective action, though not a primary focus of PNP.
A abordagem resultou em acesso melhorado à água e ao saneamento?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
Watershed interventions and resource management improve local water availability; sanitation benefits are indirect.
A abordagem resultou em uso/fontes de energia mais sustentável?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
Limited impact through promotion of fuelwood plantations or energy-efficient practices.
A abordagem aprimorou a capacidade dos usuários da terra de adaptar-se a mudanças climáticas/extremos e atenuar os desastres relacionados com o clima?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
Improved soil and water management, vegetation cover, and participatory planning increase resilience to droughts and floods.
A abordagem resultou em emprego, oportunidades de renda?
- Não
- Sim, pouco
- Sim, moderadamente
- Sim, significativamente
Implementation of SLM activities creates temporary work and improves productivity, indirectly supporting income generation.
6.2 Principal motivação dos usuários da terra para implementar a GST
- Produção aumentada
Quality and appropriate interventions enhance soil fertility and increase productivity.
- Degradação do solo reduzida
Proper land management and increased tree cover help reduce surface runoff.
- Riscos de desastre reduzido
Proper land management helps reduce the risks of drought and flooding.
- melhoria dos conhecimentos e aptidões de GST
PNP is a participatory planning process that facilitates the exchange of ideas.
6.3 Atividades de sustentabilidade de abordagem
Os usuários da terra podem manter o que foi implementado através da abordagem (sem apoio externo)?
- Sim
Caso afirmativo, descreva como:
Land users can sustain the interventions implemented through the PNP approach without external support, provided they have gained adequate knowledge, skills, and ownership during the participatory planning process. The focus on locally appropriate techniques, use of available resources, and community involvement ensures long-term sustainability.
6.4 Pontos fortes/vantagens da abordagem
| Pontos fortes/vantagens/oportunidades na visão do usuário da terra |
|---|
| Participatory Decision-Making: Land users actively contribute ideas and decisions, ensuring the plan reflects their needs and priorities. |
| Improved Knowledge: Farmers gain practical knowledge about soil, land use, and conservation techniques. |
| Sustainable Land Management: Encourages adoption of site-specific, in-situ conservation measures that improve soil fertility and productivity. |
| Livelihood Opportunities: Identifies farm-based income options, such as dairy, fodder production, and agroforestry. |
| Resource Optimization: Promotes efficient use of local resources like stones, bushes, and organic matter. |
| Conflict Reduction: Helps mitigate disputes over land boundaries and reduces encroachments. |
| Empowerment: Strengthens community organization and gives women and marginalized groups more decision-making opportunities. |
| Long-Term Benefits: Supports soil moisture retention, biomass production, and water conservation, leading to resilient agriculture. |
| Pontos fortes/vantagens/oportunidades na visão do/a compilador/a ou de outra pessoa capacitada |
|---|
| Effective Planning Tool: Provides a structured framework for assessing land, soil, and resources scientifically. |
| Community Engagement: Facilitates active participation of landowners, enhancing acceptance and ownership of interventions. |
| Integrated Approach: Combines technical, social, and environmental considerations for sustainable land management. |
| Field-Oriented Learning: Allows experts to demonstrate techniques and observe practical challenges. |
| Sustainability Focus: Encourages adoption of low-cost, locally suitable interventions that are maintainable without continuous external support. |
| Conflict Mitigation: Helps in discussing land disputes and clarifying boundaries. |
| Scalable & Replicable: Can be applied across multiple fields or villages for wider impact. |
6.5 Pontos fracos, desvantagens da tecnologia e formas de superá-los
| Pontos fracos/desvantagens/riscos na visão do usuário da terra | Como eles podem ser superados? |
|---|---|
| Time-Consuming: Participatory meetings and field exercises require considerable time. | Time Management: Schedule meetings and demonstrations at convenient times for farmers. |
| Resource Dependence: Initial implementation may need materials or guidance not readily available to all farmers. | Local Resource Use: Emphasize low-cost, locally available materials for interventions. |
| Knowledge Gap: Some farmers may initially struggle to understand technical aspects. | Capacity Building: Provide training and simple demonstration tools to bridge technical knowledge gaps. |
| Group Dynamics: Conflicts or dominant voices within the group may affect decision-making. | Facilitation: Use neutral facilitators to manage group discussions and ensure all voices are heard. |
| Maintenance Challenges: Sustaining interventions over time without support can be difficult for some households. | Follow-Up Support: Provide periodic guidance and monitoring to help farmers maintain interventions. |
| Pontos fracos/vantagens/riscos na visão do/a compilador/a ou de outra pessoa capacitada | Como eles podem ser superados? |
|---|---|
| Time-Intensive: Participatory planning and field exercises require significant time and effort. | Efficient Scheduling: Plan activities to minimize disruption to farmers’ regular work. |
| Dependence on Community Cooperation: Effectiveness relies on active participation and willingness of land users. | Capacity Building: Train community members to enhance understanding and technical competence. |
| Limited Technical Precision: Field-level decisions may sometimes compromise scientific accuracy due to local constraints. | Facilitation & Guidance: Experts guide discussions to balance local preferences with technical requirements. |
| Resource Limitations: Availability of tools, inputs, or skilled manpower may restrict implementation. | Resource Planning: Ensure access to necessary inputs and tools before implementation. |
| Monitoring Challenges: Ensuring long-term adherence to recommended interventions can be difficult. | Follow-Up Mechanisms: Establish monitoring and support systems for sustained adoption. |
7. Referências e links
7.1 Métodos/fontes de informação
- visitas de campo, pesquisas de campo
Visited the field twice and gathered information from a community group of 7–8 people.
- entrevistas com usuários de terras
Interviews were conducted with six land users.
- entrevistas com especialistas em GST
Interviews were conducted with 4 SLM specialist/experts.
- compilação de relatórios e outra documentação existente
Information was obtained from the Participatory Net Planning (PNP) book authored by Crispino Lobo (WOTR) and from Watershed Organisation Trust (WOTR) reports and publications (https://wotr.org/publications).
7.2 Referências às publicações disponíveis
Título, autor, ano, ISBN:
Participatory Net Planning: A Practitioner's Handbook, authored by Crispino Lobo. 2010. ISBN: 978-81-86748-23-7 [Supported by: German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ)]
Disponível de onde? Custos?
https://wotr.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/WOTR-PNP-Practitioners-Handbook.pdf
7.3 Links para informação relevante que está disponível online
Título/ descrição:
Participatory Net Planning (PNP)
URL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dU9dSJUgIQM
Título/ descrição:
How to do Participatory Net planning
URL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGom-qA_be4
Título/ descrição:
How to do Micro planning in Watershed Project
URL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDOKQBfcg-0
Título/ descrição:
Rising Together: Building Resilient Communities for a Sustainable Tomorrow
URL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gCFkwkfwdg&t=2s
Título/ descrição:
How to do Wealth Ranking in Watershed Project
URL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygiAy7f7Gpc
Título/ descrição:
Integrated Watershed Management in Sinnar cluster, Nashik district, Maharashtra, India
URL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HfP20wucnE&t=3s
Título/ descrição:
A New Beginning
URL:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBzF7DXbedM&t=2s
Links e módulos
Expandir tudo Recolher tudoLinks
Não há links
Módulos
Não há módulos