1.2 Контактные данные специалистов и организаций, участвующих в описании и оценке Подхода

Название организации (-ий), содействовавших документированию/оценке Подхода (если применимо)

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) - Германия

Название организации (-ий), содействовавших документированию/оценке Подхода (если применимо)

HELVETAS (Swiss Intercooperation)

1.3 Условия, регламентирующие использование собранных ВОКАТ данных

Когда были собраны данные (на местах)?

01/07/2012

Составитель и ответственный/-ые специалист(-ы) согласны с условиями, регламентирующими использование собранных ВОКАТ данных:

Да

2.1 Краткое описание Подхода

This practice makes it possible to bring actors with differing interests around the same table to discuss the ways in which the scheme’s facilities and lands will be accessed and exploited.

2.2 Подробное описание Подхода

Подробное описание Подхода:

This practice aims to establish a consensual agreement on the access to and management of schemes and developed lands among the farmers of a given site. Through the facilitation process, it is possible to transfer management responsibility and ensure the peaceful farming of schemes. The social engineering approach focuses on developing the diversifying potential of agro-sylvo-pastoral systems by involving all actors concerned, guarantees the sustainability of investments and prevents farming-related conflicts from arising on scheme sites. The establishment and support of multi-stakeholder platforms fosters a collective dynamic in hydro-agricultural schemes.The multi-stakeholder platform (MSP) brings stakeholders together and involves them in analysing the location assessment and determining any changes required to respond to environmental constraints and needs.
The approach centres on creating MSPs and then strengthening their organisational and institutional capacities to ensure that collaborative and best-fit infrastructure management is delivered by the different user groups, whose interests in the scheme’s easement area may diverge. The management standards and regulations and the roles and responsibilities of all social and user groups are determined by the actors collectively. The first stage involves initiating an internal and critical reflection and discussion process with the different scheme user groups. In the second stage, a consensual agreement is reached on accessing and managing the scheme and lands developed under it. Associations or cooperative structures are set up for each economic sector involved in the scheme’s easement area.
Workshops are prepared for drawing up agreements on the management and exploitation of resources in the scheme’s easement area. It is important to ensure information is provided in a timely manner and that it reaches the widest possible audience. Workshops for drawing up agreements on the management and exploitation of the scheme’s easement area are held, involving:a workshop of at least two days; a general meeting to open the event held in plenary (delivered in the local language); an initial round of sub-group workshops; a second round of group work mixing two or three Groups to tease out potentially conflicting interests; the provision of clear instructions in plenary prior to the group work sessions and of spatial support materials (maps and current and future occupancy charts); clarification of the rights of former occupants and the plot allocation quota for women; summarising proceedings during the general meeting. Organisational structures are formalised. The management/ development plan for the scheme is drawn up. The agreements and rules settled upon are formalised (in writing) and then deliberated by the commune council. A mid-term evaluation of the implementation of local agreements on scheme management and exploitation is carried out along with an assessment of the implementation of the management/development plan for the scheme easement area.
Farmers and village authorities participate in workshops and express their interests and they set out the traditional rules and social mechanisms that should be considered. The commune organises the workshop and participates in the diagnostic exercise by taking part in the discussions. It also deliberates the final agreements established by the actors. Service providers and technical services facilitate the process of drawing up an agreement on the access to and management of the scheme easement area and on the scheme development plan. They organise users into formal associations and support the formalisation of collaboration between the association, users and commune in terms of management delegation. The programme establishes the approach and trains service providers. It contributes to developing the visual aids required for communicating information and for spatial visualisation, and co-funds development action plans by sector.

2.5 Страна/ регион/ место, где применялся Подход

2.6 Даты начала и окончания реализации Подхода

2.7 Тип Подхода

• в рамках проекта/ программы

2.8 Каковы цели/ задачи Подхода

This practice aims to establish a consensual agreement on the access to and management of schemes and developed lands among the farmers of a given site. Through the facilitation process, it is possible to transfer management responsibility and ensure the peaceful farming of schemes. This practice makes it possible to bring actors with differing interests around the same table to discuss the ways in which the scheme’s facilities and lands will be accessed and exploited. The different scheme user groups discuss the delivery of the process and determine the different roles and responsibilities
The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: no consensual agreement on the access to and management of schemes and developed lands among the farmers, conflicts on land resources

2.9 Условия содействующие применению Технологии/ Технологий в рамках Подхода или затрудняющие его

3.1 Заинтересованные стороны, участвующие в реализации Подхода и их роли

3.2 Участие местных землепользователей/ местных сообществ на разных стадиях реализации Подхода

	Участие местных землепользователей/ местных сообществ	Перечислите участников и опишите их вовлеченность
инициирование/ мотивация	пассивное
планирование	интерактивное
выполнение	интерактивное
мониторинг/ оценка	интерактивное
Research	пассивное

3.4 Принятие решений по выбору Технологии/ Технологий УЗП

Укажите, кто принимал решение по выбору применяемой Технологии/ Технологий:

• в основном землепользователи при поддержке специалистов по УЗП

Поясните:

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists

4.1 Повышение компетенций/ обучение

Проводилось ли обучение землепользователей/ других заинтересованных лиц?

Да

Укажите, кто проходил обучение:

• землепользователи

Тип обучения:

• общие собрания

4.2 Консультационные услуги

Есть ли у землепользователей возможность получать консультации?

Да

Укажите, где именно оказываются консультационные услуги:

• в постоянно функционирующих центрах

Описание/ комментарий:

Name of method used for advisory service: bring actors with differing interests around the same table; Key elements: different scheme user groups discuss the delivery of the process and determine the different roles and responsibilities
Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities

4.3 Институциональная (организационная) поддержка

В ходе реализации Подхода были ли организованы новые институциональные структуры или поддержаны уже существующие?

• да, умеренно

Укажите уровень, на котором структуры были укреплены или вновь созданы:

• местные

Укажите тип поддержки:

• финансовая
• повышение компетенций/ обучение
• оборудование

4.4 Мониторинг и оценка

Являются ли мониторинг и оценка частью Подхода?

Да

Комментарии:

bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through measurements
technical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff, land users through observations
socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff, land users through observations
management of Approach aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations
There were no changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation
There were no changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation

4.5 Научные исследования

Были ли научные исследования частью Подхода?

Да

Укажите темы исследований:

• социология
• экономика / маркетинг
• экология
• технология

5.1 Годовой бюджет мероприятий по УЗП в рамках Подхода

Если точный годовой бюжет неизвестен, укажите примерный диапазон затрат:

• 10000-100000

Комментарий (например, основные источники финансирования/ ключевые доноры):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international non-government: 100.0%

5.2 Финансирование и внешняя материальная поддержка, предоставляемая землепользователям

Предоставлялась ли землепользователям финансовая/ материальная поддержка для применения Технологии /Технологий?

Да

Если да, укажите тип(-ы) поддержки, кто ее предоставил и условия предоставления:

The programme contributes to developing the visual aids required for communicating information and for spatial visualisation, and co-funds development action plans by sector.

5.3 Субсидии на отдельные затраты (включая оплату труда)

Если труд землепользователя был существенным вкладом, укажите, был ли этот вклад:

• добровольный

6.1 Влияние Подхода

6.2 Основные причины, побуждающие землепользователей внедрять УЗП

6.3 Долгосрочная устойчивость мероприятий в рамках Подхода

Могут ли землепользователи самостоятельно (без внешней поддержки) продолжать применение того, что было реализовано в рамках Подхода?

• нет уверенности

Если нет или нет уверенности, объясните почему:

Involving actors from different sectors of society can lend the project a strong dynamic. Setting up formal relationships between the commune and professional groups helps ensure the sustainability of public-private partnerships. Agreements must, however, be closely monitored; indeed, it is essential to review their implementation and functioning regularly. Agreements can be challenged and modified so that they adapt to changing contexts.

6.4 Сильные стороны/ преимущества Подхода

Сильные стороны/ преимущества/ возможности по мнению составителя или других ключевых специалистов
The commune ensures the participation of the whole population in analysing the existing situation. Social groups begin thinking about the modes of accessing lowland plots and study the relationships between different groups; they consider practices that are detrimental to the sustainability of the scheme and those that could trigger conflict among farmers; they think about ways to prevent and manage conflicts among farmers and about the practices that need to be regulated; and so on. In this way, the instrument enables the relevant actors to assess the overall management of the lowland scheme in a way which takes each stakeholder into account.
promotion of local government and the good management of scheme easement area resources.
reduction of site-related conflicts and the setting of a benchmark for the local resolution of such issues (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: The level to which farmers’ objectives for the scheme are satisfied engenders strong interest in the process, so the facilitator must be constantly available to listen to and deal with individual requirements and constraints.)
development and strengthening of a spirit of partnership among MSP members
increased participation in activities that contribute to the area’s socio-economic development. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Involving actors from different sectors of society can lend the project a strong dynamic. Setting up formal relationships between the commune and professional groups helps ensure the sustainability of public-private partnerships. Agreements must, however, be closely monitored; indeed, it is essential to review their implementation and functioning regularly. Agreements can be challenged and modified so that they adapt to changing contexts.)
maintenance of soil fertility, along with the prevention of environmental degradation (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: The facilitation plan must take into account local people’s agricultural calendar (June, July, August and September are not recommended for process facilitation activities). Carrying out initial processes of reflection in interest groups serves to enhance future negotiations. This method enables the specific issues for each type of use to be clarified. The subsequent process of finding consensus is made possible through the involvement of local and traditional authorities, in addition to Moderation.)
This practice makes it possible to bring actors with differing interests around the same table to discuss the ways in which the scheme’s facilities and lands will be accessed and exploited. The different scheme user groups discuss the delivery of the process and determine the different roles and responsibilities (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: In light of the issues and sensitivities involved (land tenure, authority and governance issues, etc.), the commune must ensure that delivery is strategic and that operational duties are delegated to the MSP, which is, itself, governed by the traditional village authority. A facilitator leads the process.)

6.5 Слабые стороны/ недостатки Подхода и пути их преодоления

Слабые стороны/ недостатки/ риски по мнению составителя или ответственных специалистов	Возможные пути их преодоления/снижения?
Covering the consultation and meeting costs can be an issue. However, these costs are relatively low (750,000 to 900,000 CFA francs per site (1712 Dollar)) considering the benefits.
Social divides within village communities can cause major problems.	Land tenure, authority and governance issues must be considered and analysed throughout the process to ensure that the resulting propositions are relevant.

7.1 Методы сбора/источники информации

7.2 Ссылки на опубликованные материалы

Название, автор, год публикации, ISBN:

Manual of Good Practices in Small Scale Irrigation in the Sahel. Experiences from Mali. Published by GIZ in 2014

Где опубликовано? Стоимость?

http://star-www.giz.de/starweb/giz/pub/servlet.starweb

Название, автор, год публикации, ISBN:

HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation/BACIL, Rapports de prestation de services et d’accompagnement [Reports on service provision and support activities] 2010, 2011, 2012

Название, автор, год публикации, ISBN:

HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation/CADEL, Rapports de prestation de services et d’accompagnement [Reports on service provision and support activities] 2010, 2011, 2012