1.2 Detalhes do contato das pessoas capacitadas e instituições envolvidas na avaliação e documentação da abordagem

Nome da(s) instituição(ões) que facilitou(ram) a documentação/avaliação da Abordagem (se relevante)

CAMP - Central Asian Mountain Partnership (CAMP - Central Asian Mountain Partnership) - Quirguizistão

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

O/a compilador/a e a(s) pessoa(s) capacitada(s) aceitam as condições relativas ao uso de dados documentados através da WOCAT:

Sim

1.4 Referência ao(s) questionário(s) sobre tecnologias da GST

2.1 Descrição curta da abordagem

An innovative land user, assisted by a self-help group has overcome many administrative and technical problems to establish a fruit garden on previously degraded communal grazing land.

2.2 Descrição detalhada da abordagem

Descrição detalhada da abordagem:

Aims / objectives: Although in the 1980s the soviet government supported the establishment of private gardens in specified areas, the lack of irrigation water and suitable land often restricted this process. That was the case for Khagatai village, situated on the narrow valley floor of the Varzob River, below steep loess slopes. This marginal area is used for grazing and shows severe signs of water erosion; the hillsides are considered to be of little agricultural value. In the early 1980s, widespread unemployment evidently had the effect of stimulating people to use their own initiative. In 1982, one innovative farmer started to fence-off an area of half a hectare to establish a private fruit garden on the degraded grazing land. Some say that the fencing of plots for private fruit and hay production is a traditional practice - abandoned after the 1950s - but taken up again recently to re-establish rights to individual plots. The practice is widespread in the higher villages of Varzob, where the farmer noted it and decided to set up his own plot. When it came to practical implementation, despite the land user having five sons, the labour-intensive terracing was only completed thanks to the voluntary assistance of relatives and friends, a tradition locally known as 'hashar'. At first, when his initiative began to take shape on land officially owned by a state farm, no action was taken. However, the change in land management quickly showed positive productive results, and it may have been through jealousy that the people of Khagatai village then reported the case to the authorities. The watering of the garden on the unstable loess slope in the immediate vicinity of the village, and the consequent risk of landslides, was put forward as the reason for the complaint. The authorities opened an investigation and a number of newspaper articles were written about the case.

Methods: Since independent decision making was not common in the soviet states, and rapid degradation of newly irrigated lands on the loess deposits was a big issue, the case of this fruit garden attracted a lot of attention. However, when they observed the improved state of the vegetation on the plot, the authorities finally allowed the farmer to continue. In 1993 the prohibition on private cultivation of land was lifted in order to reduce problems of food shortage caused during the civil war that followed independence. It was during this time that four other land users from Khagatai village spontaneously began to imitate this practice.

2.3 Fotos da abordagem

2.5 País/região/locais onde a abordagem foi aplicada

2.6 Datas de início e término da abordagem

2.7 Tipo de abordagem

• Tradicional/Indígena

2.8 Principais metas/objetivos da abordagem

To establish an orchard with grape vines, fruit trees and fodder crops for private use.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: The land in question is part of a communal grazing area and property rights are officially with Khagatai village (in Soviet times with a state farm). Uncontrolled grazing on communal lands has resulted in overgrazing, and thus to progressive water erosion on the steep loess deposits. No attention was paid by the local authorities to soil and water conservation measures in areas considered to be of low agricultural potential.

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

3.1 Partes interessadas envolvidas na abordagem e seus papéis

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	Automobilização	individual land user; the initiative was initiated by an individual land user
Planejamento	Automobilização	step by step
Implementação	Automobilização	land user; the project was implemented by the individual land user, relatives and neighbours participated voluntarily in terrace construction
Monitoramento/avaliação	Automobilização	by the individual land user; the project is monitored and evaluated by the individual land user
Research	Participativo	post-implementation documentation (participatory)

3.4 Decisão sobre a seleção de tecnologia/tecnologias de GST

Especifique quem decidiu sobre a seleção de tecnologia/tecnologias a serem implementadas:

• Somente usuários da terra (iniciativa própria)

Explique:

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by by land users alone (self-initiative / bottom-up)

4.1 Reforço das capacidades/ formação

Foi oferecida formação aos usuários da terra/outras partes interessadas?

Não

4.2 Serviço de consultoria

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

Sim

• through interaction of land users

Descreva/comentários:

Key elements: Observations, farmer-to-farmer exchange of ideas.

4.3 Fortalecimento da instituição (desenvolvimento organizacional)

As instituições foram fortalecidas ou estabelecidas através da abordagem?

• Não

4.4 Monitoramento e avaliação

Monitoramento e avaliação são partes da abordagem?

Sim

Comentários:

Bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored by land users through observations; indicators: growth of seedlings

Economic / production aspects were ad hoc monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: comparison of yields between different years

no. of land users involved 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 were a few changes due to the observations made by the land user: he started to apply supplementary irrigation to the tree seedlings, as well as applying manure each year.

4.5 Pesquisa

A pesquisa foi parte da abordagem?

Sim

Dê mais detalhes e indique quem realizou a pesquisa:

There had been no research until the identification and documentation of this initiative through a Tajik-Swiss project under the framework of the National Centre of Competence in Research (NCCR) North-South (coordinated by the the Centre for Development and Environment, Switzerland).

5.1 Orçamento anual para o componente de GST da abordagem

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

Approach costs were met by the following donors: other (land user/private): 100.0%

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

5.3 Subsídios para entradas específicas (incluindo mão-de-obra)

Comentários:

All the inputs were fully financed by the land user himself. This included hand tools, fruit tree seedlings, vines, manure, supplementary irrigation, water transport by donkey and by car.

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

6.1 Impactos da abordagem

6.2 Principal motivação dos usuários da terra para implementar a GST

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:

Because this approach is based on local initiatives there is no reason why it should not be sustainable. The insecure land use rights are the only potential risk to the continuation of the activities.

6.4 Pontos fortes/vantagens da abordagem

Pontos fortes/vantagens/oportunidades na visão do usuário da terra
Rehabilitation of marginal land for production and generation of additional income. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Give property rights to land users to motivate further investments in soil and water conservation/production.)

Pontos fortes/vantagens/oportunidades na visão do/a compilador/a ou de outra pessoa capacitada
Bottom-up approach: independent decision making by the individual land user based on dynamic and flexible responses as required. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Give property rights to land users to motivate further investments in soil and water conservation/production.)

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?
Current systems of land ownership, currently the land belongs to Khagatai.	Provide land ownership to the farmers.
Not all farmers can apply this technology since it is location specific.	Identify if fodder production (cut-and-carry) would be more attractive than open grazing; allocate land to the farmers.
Only families with sufficient labour resources can establish such a garden by themselves.	Incentives from the state or other organisations are needed.
Since it is an initiative of an individual land user, the SWC technology has not been documented so far, nor evaluated, and lessons learned have not been spread among the land users.	Documentation and spreading of lessons learned.