Esta é uma versão desatualizada e inativa deste caso. Ir para a versão atual.
Abordagens
Inativo

Sub-district (Jamoat) level support for sustainable land management [Tajiquistão]

approaches_2446 - Tajiquistão

Completude: 83%

1. 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:
Especialista em GST:

Mott Jessica

World Bank

Estados Unidos

Nome da(s) instituição(ões) que facilitou(ram) a documentação/avaliação da Abordagem (se relevante)
World Bank (World Bank) - Estados Unidos

1.3 Condições em relação ao uso da informação documentada através de WOCAT

Quando os dados foram compilados (no campo)?

20/10/2006

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

Provision of technical and financial management assistance through Jamoat (“Sub-District”) level organizations to farmers in a large small grants programme.

2.2 Descrição detalhada da abordagem

Descrição detalhada da abordagem:

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 Fotos da abordagem

2.5 País/região/locais onde a abordagem foi aplicada

País:

Tajiquistão

Região/Estado/Província:

Sughd, Khatlon, RSS, GBAO

Especificação adicional de localização:

7 districts and 39 sub-districts

Comentários:

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

2.6 Datas de início e término da abordagem

Indique o ano de início:

2005

Ano de término (caso a abordagem não seja mais aplicada):

2012

2.7 Tipo de abordagem

  • Baseado em projeto/programa

2.8 Principais metas/objetivos da abordagem

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 Condição que propiciam ou inibem a implementação de tecnologia/tecnologias aplicada(s) segundo a abordagem

Disponibilidade/acesso a recursos e serviços financeiros
  • Inibitivo

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.

Quadro institucional
  • Inibitivo

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.

Quadro jurídico (posse de terra, direitos de uso da terra e da água)
  • Inibitivo

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.

Conhecimento sobre GST, acesso a suporte técnico
  • Inibitivo

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. Participação e papel das partes interessadas envolvidas

3.1 Partes interessadas envolvidas na abordagem e seus papéis

  • Usuários de terra/comunidades locais

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

  • Organização não governamental

International NGOs: Welthungerhilfe, Aga Khan Foundation/Mountain Societies Development Support Programme

  • Governo nacional (planejadores, responsáveis pelas decisões)

Project Management Unit, Project Coordination Units

  • Organização internacional

UNDP-Tajikistan, FAO-Tajikistan

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 Nenhum
Planejamento Passivo Local communities consulted for social assessment during project design.
Implementação Participativo JDC members (village representatives) provided a range of services to villagers and other functions such as liaison with government for the purposes of CAWMP.
Monitoramento/avaliação Participativo 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 Nenhum

3.3 Fluxograma (se disponível)

Descrição:

Implementation Arrangements for Community Agriculture and Watershed Management Project

Autor:

Project Management Unit (Dushanbe, Tajikistan)

3.4 Decisão sobre a seleção de tecnologia/tecnologias de GST

Especifique quem decidiu sobre a seleção de tecnologia/tecnologias a serem implementadas:
  • Principalmente usuários da terra, apoiados por especialistas em GST
Explique:

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. 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
  • JDCs
Tipo de formação:
  • Em exercício
  • Agricultor para agricultor
  • Áreas de demonstração
  • Reuniões públicas
Assuntos abordados:

Organisational Management, Book-keeping, Participatory rural appraisal, Participatory environmental planning and analysis, a range of SLM technologies, monitoring and evaluation, gender awareness.

4.2 Serviço de consultoria

Os usuários de terra têm acesso a um serviço de consultoria?

Sim

  • informal information
Descreva/comentários:

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 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
Especifique o tipo de apoio:
  • Financeiro
  • Reforço das capacidades/ formação
  • Equipamento
Dê mais detalhes:

Support of sub-district local institutions is the focus of the Approach.

4.4 Monitoramento e avaliação

Monitoramento e avaliação são partes da abordagem?

Sim

Comentários:

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 Pesquisa

A pesquisa foi parte da abordagem?

Sim

  • Project evaluations
Dê mais detalhes e indique quem realizou a pesquisa:

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. 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:
  • > 1.000.000
Comentários (p. ex. principais fontes de recursos/principais doadores):

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 Apoio financeiro/material concedido aos usuários da terra

Os usuários da terra receberam apoio financeiro/material para a implementação de tecnologia/tecnologias?

Não

5.4 Crédito

Foi concedido crédito segundo a abordagem para atividades de GST?

Não

6. Análise de impactos e declarações finais

6.1 Impactos da abordagem

A abordagem auxiliou os usuários da terra a implementar e manter as tecnologias de GST?
  • Não
  • Sim, pouco
  • Sim, moderadamente
  • Sim, significativamente

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.

A abordagem concedeu autonomia aos grupos social e economicamente desfavorecidos?
  • Não
  • Sim, pouco
  • Sim, moderadamente
  • Sim, significativamente

JDCs helped target vulnerable groups during community mobilization and preparation of CAPs. Women comprised 40% of project participants benefiting from rural production investments.

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

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?
  • Não
  • Sim, pouco
  • Sim, moderadamente
  • Sim, significativamente

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?
  • Não
  • Sim, pouco
  • Sim, moderadamente
  • Sim, significativamente

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?
  • Não
  • Sim, pouco
  • Sim, moderadamente
  • Sim, significativamente

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 Principal motivação dos usuários da terra para implementar a GST

  • Produção aumentada

potentially more sustainable production

  • Afiliação a movimento/projeto/grupo/rede

availability of investment capital, technical assistance

  • well-being and livelihoods improvement

opportunity to increase livelihood assets

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:

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 Pontos fortes/vantagens da abordagem

Pontos fortes/vantagens/oportunidades na visão do usuário da terra
To be added based on project evaluation due in late 2011
Pontos fortes/vantagens/oportunidades na visão do/a compilador/a ou de outra pessoa capacitada
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 Pontos fracos, desvantagens da tecnologia e formas de superá-los

Pontos fracos/vantagens/riscos na visão do/a compilador/a ou de outra pessoa capacitada Como eles podem ser superados?
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. Referências e links

7.2 Referências às publicações disponíveis

Título, autor, ano, ISBN:

Operational Manual for Community Mobilization, Rural Production Investments and Research and Demonstrations Grants (2008)

Título, autor, ano, ISBN:

Operational Manuals for JDCs and CIGs in Financial Management and Procurement (2007)

Título, autor, ano, ISBN:

CAWMP: Project Appraisal Document (2005)

Módulos