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

Nome do projeto que facilitou a documentação/avaliação da Abordagem (se relevante)

Book project: where the land is greener - Case Studies and Analysis of Soil and Water Conservation Initiatives Worldwide (where the land is greener)

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

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

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

Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (DEZA / COSUDE / DDC / SDC) - Suíça

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

Agronomica - Reino Unido

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

Spontaneous land users' initiative to meet household needs - especially firewood and timber - through planting Grevillea robusta trees as part of an agroforestry system.

2.2 Descrição detalhada da abordagem

Descrição detalhada da abordagem:

Aims / objectives: Grevillea robusta is a well-known shade tree, used in coffee and tea plantations in East Africa since the early part of the 20th century. While it originates from Australia, it was brought over from India and Sri Lanka by European settlers. Smallholder farmers in the highlands of Kenya noted that there was little or no competition between grevillea and neighbouring crops. Indeed this is one of the reasons it was so successful as a shade tree amongst plantation crops. Responding to the local lack of timber and firewood, due to the expansion of farmland into previously forested areas, smallholders took to planting grevillea, especially as a boundary tree, from the 1970s onwards. While the immediate effect of grevillea planting was to satisfy those needs for wood, the tree also helps in various ways to conserve land and improve the soil. This too was probably a reason for its spontaneous spread.

Methods: Because planting of grevillea requires few resources other than tools, even poor land users can readily adopt the technology. Although seedlings can be bought from local Government, NGO or private nurseries, it is also possible to collect ‘wildings’ (naturally generated seedlings) and plant these at minimal cost. The management of grevillea trees, once established, is important to their performance in the field, but the skills of thinning, and pollarding (pruning side branches for use) can be easily learned from neighbours. The success of the spontaneous spread of grevillea, basically through farmer-to-farmer exchange of knowledge, demonstrates that tree planting is not something that has always to be ‘pushed’ by outside agencies. Where smallholders perceive a need for trees and tree products - and an appropriate species is available - they will respond positively. However there is still an important ‘pulling’ role to be played by the Ministry of Agriculture’s extension agents and NGOs, especially through support for tree nurseries and for training to establish private tree nurseries.

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

The Approach focused mainly on other activities than SLM (Fencing, farm boundary marking, ornamental value, fuel wood supply, building materials provision)

- improve availability of tree products (fuelwood and wood for construction). - demarcate own land easily and cheaply (after land registration). - reduce land degradation. - increase land productivity. - improve household income

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: - shortage of fuelwood and building materials, environmental degradation. - need for farm boundary marking. - lack of simple, widely applicable agroforestry recommendations

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	innovative individuals planting grevillea
Planejamento	Automobilização	informal, individual plans
Implementação	Automobilização
Monitoramento/avaliação	Passivo	ad hoc observations by MoA;
Research	Nenhum	no activities

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:

Land user-driven initiative by shortages/problems

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by by land users* alone (self-initiative / bottom-up). The land user decided on when and how to plant the trees.

4.1 Reforço das capacidades/ formação

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

Sim

Assuntos abordados:

Some demonstrations of benefits of tree planting by Government at provincial agricultural shows.

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

Descreva/comentários:

Key elements: Informal farmer-to-farmer exchange of ideas and skills. Additionally, on national tree planting days, the government hands out seedlings. Grevillea planting has been encouraged during national campaigns (involving the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, and NGOs) to encourage soil and w; 1) Advisory service was carried out through: other: individual land users 2) Advisory service was carried out through: other: individual land users

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; There is collaboration between Government extension service and KARI (Kenya Agricultural Research Institute) to further promote the technology

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:

technical aspects were ad hoc

economic / production aspects were ad hoc

area treated aspects were ad hoc monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: None

There were no changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: None

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: government (national - Sponsored national tree planting days): 10.0%; other (Individual land user): 90.0%

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)

• Agrícola

Se a mão-de-obra pelos usuários da terra foi uma entrada substancial, isso foi:

• Voluntário

Comentários:

Individual land user. However, labour input was minimal

5.4 Crédito

Foi concedido crédito segundo a abordagem para atividades de GST?

Não

6.1 Impactos da abordagem

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:

As land users developed this approach they can continue activities without support.

6.4 Pontos fortes/vantagens da abordagem

Pontos fortes/vantagens/oportunidades na visão do usuário da terra
Strong land user 'ownership' of the approach.
Adaptability, flexibilityand simplicity since it is user driven

Pontos fortes/vantagens/oportunidades na visão do/a compilador/a ou de outra pessoa capacitada
Incentives not necessary
Valuable lessons from a farmer-driven success for development agencies that promote tree planting and agroforestry systems.
Very low inputs (resources) required. However there is still an important 'pulling' role to be played by the Ministry of Agriculture's extension agents and NGOs (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: More support for individual and government tree nurseries.)
Self-driven initiative (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: MoA extension staff and land users to encourage other farmers to be self-reliant.)

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?
Lack of other stakeholders input	Encourage and inform land users on where to seek additional information consultations with SWC extensionists

Pontos fracos/vantagens/riscos na visão do/a compilador/a ou de outra pessoa capacitada	Como eles podem ser superados?
Adoption rates under such approaches depend on the number and efforts of innovators to stimulate others	SWC extensionists (Ministry and NGOs) to undertake more community mobilisation and awareness raising.
Approach is dependent on social cohesiveness for dissemination	promote more farmer interaction at community level
Poor collaboration and insitutional linkages	Encourage and create forums where stakeholders can share experiences and inform land users about where to seek additional information and assistance.

7.1 Métodos/fontes de informação

7.2 Referências às publicações disponíveis

Título, autor, ano, ISBN:

NjiruN.N et al. 1998. PRA report of Kiawanja catchmentSee 'Grevillea agroforestry system' case study (QT KEN16) for technical references

Disponível de onde? Custos?

Nembure district