Sensitisation of stakeholders on Farmer-managed Natural Regeneration Techology on site through a role play performed by the young farmers. (Thomas Kalyta)

FMNR implementation approach (Кения)

FMNR nyale

Описание

After consultations with local stakeholders, experts (from NEMA, ICRAF, KFS, Wildlife Kenya) and Homabay County Government representatives the FMNR approach is being introduced by World Vision through a public funded project. The aim of the approach is to promote FMNR and sustainable land and natural resource management through disseminating the basic idea of regenerating trees.

The approach follows the basic principles of the of Training Trainers ToT (transfer of technology) concept i.e. key stakeholders and agents are trained to pass their knowledge on to others. Through a multi-stakeholder inception workshop all local stakeholders learn about the FMNR technology, its advantages and impacts. Representatives of the county and the national government are invited in order to get their support. Technical experts in agriculture are represented as well.
The Kenya Forest Service (KFS) and World Vision (WV) are the main actors in sensitising the local chiefs, school head teachers, CBOs, self-help groups, farmers' associations and individual farmers about FMNR, Disaster Risk Reduction and other topics. As a result farmers, teachers, schools management committee and CBO members register for the FMNR training, which is also carried out by KFS and WV. Selected farmers (those who are early adopters) are chosen as FMNR agents.
The registered FMNR practitioners (farmers, CBO members, school children, etc.) have to set aside a plot for FMNR application. They implement the technology. Each administrative unit (ward) establishes one FMNR committee under the lead of the local chief. The FMNR committee members (agents) are responsible for further dissemination for training and monitoring of the activities and maintaining the demonstration sites. They also organise exchange visits. They regularly report back to World Vision Development Facilitators. New FMNR farmers register with the committees. Research institutions (e.g. Maseno University) conduct studies to follow-up assumptions and to document change. The Community Disaster Management group is influenced by the FMNR committee and the County administration with regard to erosion control measures and gully restoration.The implementation is jointly monitored by the key stakeholders and documented by World Vision.

Местоположение

Местоположение: Suba and Mbita Sub-Counties, Hombay County, Кения

Географическая привязка выбранных участков
  • 34.34453, -0.55986

Дата ввода в действие: 2014

Дата завершения: 2017

Тип Подхода
A typical FMNR training for practioners and FMNR agents. (Thomas Kalytta)
During the inception important stakeholders were invited to raise awareness on the FMNR technology and get their buy-in. The County Government, local chiefs, the Kenya Forest Service, many CBOs, local NGOs, school children and others were represented. A local fair was conducted where local products, improved cooking stoves, solar lamps and tree seedlings were offered. (Thomas Kalytta)

Цели подхода и благоприятные условия для его реализации

Главные цели/ задачи Подхода
The main objective of the approach is to promote FMNR and other natural resource management practices including agroforestry, crop diversification, sustainable rural energy sources and rehabilitation of highly degraded areas. It is also to utilise environmental education to advise on disaster risk reduction in order to increase the resilience of the target population against adverse effects of climate change and natural disasters.
Условия, содействующие применению Технологии/ Технологий в рамках Подхода
  • Социальные/ культурные/ религиозные нормы и ценности: enabling factors are the medicinal value of trees, herbs, the importance of places for worship and local rituals,
  • Наличие/ доступность финансовых ресурсов и услуг: natural materials can be used (wood, fruits, pods and grass) or sold, money for fire wood can be saved
  • Институциональные условия: some schools have surplus land which is ideal for FMNR and tree planting,
  • Сотрудничество/ координация действий: most partners are very supportive towards FMNR
  • Программные документы/ руководящие установки: the Kenyan Government has issued a policy that 10% of the land should be covered by forest
  • Осведомленность в области УЗП, доступность технической поддержки: the Kenyan Forest Service officers were very supportive
  • Рынки (для приобретения материалов и услуг, продажи продукции) и цены: access to local markets are an advantage to sell the farm products e.g. honey is on demand, firewood, crop harvest, inputs are not very much needed apart from standard farming tool and strong gloves
Условия, затрудняющие применение Технологии/ Технологий в рамках Подхода
  • Социальные/ культурные/ религиозные нормы и ценности: livestock and fire put the FMNR sites at risk, fire is sparked on hill tops to attract rain. Some neighbouring farmers also complain about the return of biodiversity especially of monkeys and snakes. Some people still maintain old traditions (clean agriculture) hindering women participating in meetings, from planting trees or working on trees in their homestead. These people are more resistant to new ideas and approaches.
  • Институциональные условия: sometimes even members of the school management board send their cows for grazing that hampers the FMNR attempts of the school children
  • Нормативно-правовая база (землевладение, права на земле- и водопользование): a clear legal framework is lacking, the ownership of "wasteland" needs to be clear otherwise everybody tries to make benefit out of it (over grazing, charcoal burning)
  • Управление земельными ресурсами (принятие решений, осуществление и контроль за выполнением): young farmers complain that they have not the full rights over the family land, so they can only go for FMNR if the fathers agree. As young farmers who have not yet inherited land from their fathers according to customary laws still don’t own land which they could have long term plans. This hinders them from immediate adoption of FMNR due to land ownership rights. Mostly young men are given their share of land at about 40years. Hence this delays in uptake.
  • Объем работ, доступность рабочей силы: FMNR can create more work but the longer-term benefits are obvious. However, lazy people who are not patient will not appear to training sessions because they might not have understood the benefits of the technology.

Участие и распределение ролей заинтересованных сторон

Заинтересованные стороны, участвующие в реализации Подхода, и их роли
Какие заинтересованные стороны/ организации-исполнители участвовали в реализации Подхода? Перечислите заинтересованные стороны Опишите роли заинтересованных сторон
местные землепользователи/ местные сообщества small holder farmers, registered FMNR agents, DRR committees The stakeholders were sensitised, received training, spread the message to peers and take part of the joint monitoring (agents)
организации местных сообществ CBO and self-help groups, religious leaders (Churches), local NGOs took part in the training, mobilised their members to adopt the practice, make links to other stakeholders,
эксперты по УЗП/ сельскому хозяйству agricultural extension officers (weak), Kenya Forest Service officers the KFS officers are involved in the technical training, while the farmers have to go and access the extension officers in the towns to receive their advice
ученые-исследователи Maseno University measure the tree density, the biodiversity change on the demonstration sites
учителя/ преподаватели/ школьники / студенты teachers and school children practice FMNR and other innovative technologies
общественные организации SEEK, Nature Kenya, Kenya Scouts teach the children about environment and nature
частный сектор The National Bank in Homabay has been supplying seedlings for tree planting in Homabay County. This was done in collaboration with Kenya Scouts. Now they show also interest in the FMNR technology. supplied seedlings at the initial stage, show interest in FMNR as well
местные власти local chiefs mobilise their communities
государственные власти (отвечающие за планирование или принятие решений) Homabay County Government very supportive, links to the different departments, provide match funding, take part in the joint monitoring
международные организации World Vision, ICRAF, technical advisor, linkage to donors
Участие местных землепользователей/ местных сообществ на разных стадиях реализации Подхода
нет
пассивное
внешняя поддержка
интерактивное
самоорганизация
инициирование/ мотивация
local farmers, DRR committee members and local chiefs were invited to take part in sensitisation sessions
планирование
local chiefs very active in supporting the new technology by motivation local farmers to become registered
выполнение
FMNR committees as technical support, do also monitoring and reporting
мониторинг/ оценка
done by FMNR committees, they receive data from all households jointly with other stakeholders and report back to the project management
research
done by students of the Maseno University by gathering primary data from demonstration sites very 6 months and compiling a biodiversity report
Схема реализации Подхода

1) Through a multi-stakeholder inception workshop all local stakeholders learn about the FMNR technology, its advantages and impacts.
Representatives of the county and the national government (chiefs) are invited to get their support. Technical experts are represented as well.
2) The Kenya Forest Service and World Vision are the main actors in SENSITISING the local chiefs, school head teachers, CBOs, Self-help Groups, farmer's associations and farmers on the FMNR technology, Disaster Risk Reduction and other topics.
3) As a result farmers, teachers, schools management committee and CBO members register for the FMNR TRAINING, also carried out be KFS and WV.
Selected farmers (early adopters) are chosen as FMNR agents.
4) The registered FMNR practitioners (farmers, CBO members, school children, etc.) have to set aside a plot for FMNR application. They IMPLEMENT the technology.
5) Each administrative unit (ward) establishes one FMNR committee under the lead of the local chief
6) The FMNR committee members (agents) are responsible for further dissemination of the technology, for training and monitoring of the activities and maintaining the demonstration sites. They also organised exchange visits. They report back to World Vision Development Facilitators.
7) New FMNR farmers register with the committees (MULTIPICATION).
8) Research institutions (Maseno University) conduct studies to follow-up assumptions and to document change.
9) The Community Disaster Management group is influenced by the FMNR committee and the County administration in regard to erosion control measures and gully restoration.
10) The implementation is JOINTLY MONITORED by the key stakeholders and documented by World Vision.
11) The Chief officers of the County Government conducts additional monitoring visits.

Автор: Thomas Kalytta
Принятие решений по выбору Технологии УЗП

Решения принимались

  • исключительно землепользователи (по собственной инициативе)
  • в основном землепользователи при поддержке специалистов по УЗП
  • все участники как часть процесса совместных действий
  • преимущественно специалисты по УЗП после консультаций с землепользователями
  • исключительно специалисты по УЗП
  • политики/ руководители

Принятие решений было основано на

  • анализ подробно описанного опыта и знаний по УЗП (принятие решений на основе подтвержденных фактов)
  • результаты исследований
  • личный опыт и мнения (незадокументированные)

Техническая поддержка, повышение компетенций и управление знаниями

Следующие мероприятия или работы являлись частью Подхода
Повышение компетенций/ обучение
Обучение было предоставлено следующим заинтересованным лицам
  • землепользователи
  • местный персонал/консультанты
Тип обучения
  • в ходе работы
  • обмен опытом между фермерами
  • опытные участки
  • общие собрания
  • курсы
Рассматриваемые темы

FMNR, Natural Resource Management, Disaster Risk Reduction, Conservation Agriculture etc.

Консультационные услуги
Консультационные услуги были предоставлены
  • на полях землепользователей
  • в постоянно функционирующих центрах
Done by the FMNR committees and development facilitators from KFS and WV.
Институциональная поддержка
Какие институциональные структуры были укреплены или вновь созданы
  • нет
  • да, немного
  • да, умеренно
  • да, существенно
на уровне
  • местные
  • региональный
  • национальный
Опишите организацию, функции и ответственность, членство и т.д.
schools, churches, CBOs.
Тип поддержки
  • финансовая
  • повышение компетенций/ обучение
  • оборудование
Подробнее
same as above
Мониторинг и оценка
Yes, joint monitoring and evaluation
Научные исследования
Научные исследования проводились по следующим темам
  • социология
  • экономика / маркетинг
  • экология
  • технология
  • biodiversity

Maseno University, botanic and zoological studies, see separate reports

Финансирование и внешняя материальная поддержка

Годовой бюджет мероприятий по УЗП в долларах США
  • < 2000
  • 2000-10000
  • 10000-100000
  • 100 000-1 000 000
  • > 1 000 000
Precise annual budget: 9230.0
The initiative is funded by public donors and co-funded by the county government. For the approach including awareness, campaigns, training and monitoring as well as exposure trips 9230 USD were budgeted per year.
Землепользователям были оказаны/предоставлены следующие услуги или меры стимулирования
  • Финансирование и внешняя материальная поддержка, предоставляемая землепользователям
  • Субсидии на отдельные затраты
  • Кредитование
  • Другие методы или инструменты стимулирования
Финансовая/ материальная поддержка, предоставленная землепользователям
transport to the demo sites, for local farmers and stakeholders, food during the training, materials for sensitisation, training & monitoring, accommodation only during exposure trips

Анализ влияния и заключительные положения

Влияние Подхода
Нет
Да, немного
Да, умеренно
Да, существенно
Сумел ли Подход расширить возможности местных землепользователей, повысить участие заинтересованных сторон?

As it connect the different actors and levels.

Сумел ли Подход дать возможность принимать решения на основе подтвержденных фактов?

Evidence can be easily seen by the great replication effect among the land users of the area.

Сумел ли Подход помочь землепользователям внедрить и поддерживать технологии УЗП?

Yes, because the land users have now access to local technical experts (FMNR agents) and demonstration farms.

Сумел ли Подход улучшить согласованность действий и повысить рентабельность применения практик УЗП

Yes, greatly, as FMNR committees were established which coordinate the implementation in each ward in a cost effective way.

Сумел ли Подход мобилизовать/ расширить доступ к финансовым ресурсам для применения практик УЗП?

No, the SLM itself creates sources of income but the approach doesn't mobilise funds only knowledge.

Сумел ли Подход расширить знания и возможности землепользователей в применении практик УЗП?

Yes, greatly.

Сумел ли Подход расширить знания и возможности других заинтересованных сторон?

Yes, as it brings all relevant stakeholders together especially during the initiation and monitoring.

Сумел ли Подход укрепить сотрудничество между заинтересоваными сторонами/ выстроить механизмы сотрудничества?

There is quite some exchange and strengthening among the stakeholders. Part of them are local NGOs, CBOs and churches.

Сумел ли Подход снизить остроту конфликтов?

Yes, a little, as it brings the local stakeholders together where they can talk and solve conflict e.g. between livestock keepers and farmers.

Сумел ли Подход расширить возможности социально и экономически уязвимых групп?

Yes, a little, as even farmers with very small plots can raise their voices and get ideas how to increase the productivity.

Сумел ли Подход содействать гендерному равенству и расширить права и возможности женщин и девочек?

Women are included in the discussions and training. They get empowered as the households produce fire wood which saves a lot of time for the collection. Some can also sell surplus fire wood. High yield from the farms with trees address food security. Ensuring there is food in a household is always the woman's responsibility.

Сумел ли Подход стимулировать молодежь/ будущее поколение землепользователей заниматься УЗП?

Yes, very much. During the discussions the young generation raises their voice and discuss with their fathers how to improve the land-use and productivity.

Сумел ли Подход разрешить правовые проблемы землевладения/ землепользования, препятствующие использованию технологий УЗП?

Maybe a little, as these issues can be discussed during the gatherings.

Сумел ли Подход способствовать улучшению продовольственой безопасности/ качества питания?

Since the approach led to the implementation of FMNR and FMNR increases the production and promotes diversification the land-use types.

Сумел ли Подход расширить доступ к рынкам?

Сумел ли Подход улучшить санитарные условия и доступ к водоснабжению?

Not the approach but the related technology.

Сумел ли Подход привести к более эффективному использованию электроэнергии/ возобновляемых источников энергии?

Not the approach but the related technology. The FMNR campaigns are always integrated with promotions for solar and improved cookstoves and the farmers uptake for clean energy has improved through this. It thus leads to sustainable use of energy indirectly.

Сумел ли Подход улучшить способность землепользователей адаптироваться к изменениям климата и смягчать последствия катастрофических погодных явлений?

Yes, the approach increases the knowledge of the farmers on Climate change and provides options to adapt better. They now appreciate the indeginous tree species and their value and ability to survive in changing climatic conditions.

Основные причины, побуждающие землепользователей внедрять УЗП
  • рост продуктивности
  • рост прибыли (доходности) и рентабельности
  • снижение деградации земель
  • снижение риска катастрофических погодных явлений
  • снижение объёма работ
  • материальное стимулирование/ субсидии
  • нормативно-правовое регулирование (штрафы)/ контроль
  • престиж, общественное давление/ солидарность
  • причастность к движению/ проекту/ группе/ сети
  • экологическая сознательность
  • традиции и верования, нравственные ценности
  • приобретение знаний и опыта в области УЗП
  • улучшение эстетической привлекательности
  • снижение остроты конфликтов
  • reduced soil ersosion
Долгосрочная устойчивость мероприятий в рамках Подхода
Могут ли землепользователи самостоятельно (без внешней поддержки) продолжать применение того, что было реализовано в рамках Подхода?
  • нет
  • да
  • нет уверенности

The local FMNR agents are well known in the community as environmentalists. They have demonstration sites on their farms. They took part in FMNR campaigns and training. Every visitor gets attracted by the technology. The agents introduce them. By applying the new technology their neighbours see and learn about FMNR as well. Even on other occasions in the community e.g funerals, religious meetings, ceremonies, the agents use the opportunity to reach more people with FMNR.

Заключительные положения и извлечённые уроки

Сильные стороны: по мнению землепользователей
  • Sensitisation is integrated in community meetings or gatherings which bring many people together. Some of the meetings are called by local administrators who were the first champions of FMNR so this helps in infusing the knowledge through the sessions. Implementation is mostly by seeing and doing. Many farmers are consciously or subconsciously adopting FMNR as they see the sites in their neighbourhood. As the farmers visit each other alongside other engagements, FMNR monitoring continues since the people like to share new things with their friends and what they have learned.
Сильные стороны: по мнению составителя или ответственных специалистов
  • The ToT approach by working with FMNR agents and a local FMNR committee bridges the gap brought about by the absence of agricultural extension workers - only a few farmers actually visit them in their office in town. Also the day-by-day monitoring is done b y the FMNR committee members and not by the project staff alone. A big advantage is the support of the Kenya Forest Service officers. They were ready to help with the on-site training. Crucial for the success of any approach is to involve and win over the local chiefs. They really have understood the benefits and even try to apply the technology themselves.
Слабые стороны/ недостатки/ риски: по мнению землепользователейвозможные пути преодоления
  • Lazy people who are not patient will not appear to training sessions because they might not have understood the benefits of the technology. Continuous engagements and ensuring the sites are at strategic places where all farmer can see them easily. These people can be convinced through the success of others.
  • The approach seeks the support of all levels (County and local government, CBOs, local farmers, schools etc.) so it is quite time consuming and requires skilled personal as facilitators. A donor needs to take this into account in terms of available budget and life time of the project.
Слабые стороны/ недостатки/ риски: по мнению составителя или ответственных специалистоввозможные пути преодоления
  • Some people still maintain old traditions (clean agriculture) hindering women participating in meetings, from planting trees or working on trees in their homestead. These people are more resistent to new ideas and approaches. The tradition is being demystified especially with the church leaders and with more exposure. This might change their thinking.

Справочные материалы

Составитель
  • Thomas Kalytta
Editors
  • Irene Ojuok
Рецензент
  • Alexandra Gavilano
  • Deborah Niggli
  • Hanspeter Liniger
  • Donia Mühlematter
Продолжительность применения Технологии: 21 ноября 2016 г.
Последнее обновление: 3 сентября 2018 г.
Ответственные специалисты
Полное описание в базе данных ВОКАТ
Связанные данные по УЗП
Документирование осуществлялось при участии
Организация Проект
Ключевые ссылки
  • Farmer-Managed Natural Regeneration Enhances Rural Livelihoods in Dryland West Africa, Weston, Peter, Reaksmey Hong, Carolyn Kaboré & Christian A. Kull, Environmental Management Volume 55, Issue 6, pp 1402–1417,2015, ISBN 0364-152X00267-015-0469-1: Springer, USD 35
  • Re-greening the Sahel: farmer-led innovation in Burkina Faso and Niger, Reij, C.; Tappan, G.; Smale, M., in Millions fed : proven successes in agricultural development, 2009, ISBN 9780896296619: International Food Policy Research Institute
Ссылки на материалы по теме, доступные онлайн
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International