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

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

ICIMOD International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD) - Непал

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

Kathmandu University (KU) - Непал

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

Local Initiatives for Biodiversity, Research, and Development (LI-BIRD) - Непал

1.3 Условия, регламентирующие использование собранных ВОКАТ данных

Когда были собраны данные (на местах)?

01/03/2013

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

Да

1.4 Ссылка (-и) на Анкету (-ы) по Технологиям УЗП

2.1 Краткое описание Подхода

Farmer to farmer dissemination of information on no-till methods for garlic cultivation technology

2.2 Подробное описание Подхода

Подробное описание Подхода:

Aims / objectives: Farmers can learn about alternative or newer methods by sharing their experiences with one another. In this approach, farmers shared information and knowledge on no-till garlic cultivation technology.

Methods: Since no-till methods are not widely known in the area, the approach aimed to increase awareness of the many features of the technique and its benefits. Through farmer-to-farmer dissemination, communities can learn about the various aspects of no-till for crop residue management, resource use, and how it can reduce labour costs. These discussions highlight the environmental and social benefits of no-till methods especially with respect to moisture retention, soil and water conservation, and climate change adaptation.
In 2009, Local Initiatives for Biodiversity, Research, and Development (LI-BIRD), piloted and validated no-till farming in Nepal as a measure for soil and water conservation through the Western Terai Landscape Complex Project (WTLCP) and the Promoting Local Innovation (PROLINNOVA) programme. The dissemination was multi-faceted and the farmers remained engaged throughout the discussions, which included both talks and group participation. Farmers’ groups, community-based organizations, biodiversity conservation groups, and development committees at the village level were given training and technical inputs. This community-level interaction encouraged farmers to discuss with one another as well as to head out to the field for demonstrations and observations. After no-till garlic cultivation was successfully piloted, it was widely adopted by farming communities and especially the indigenous Tharu communities of western Nepal.

2.3 Фотографии, иллюстрирующие Подход

2.5 Страна/ регион/ место, где применялся Подход

2.6 Даты начала и окончания реализации Подхода

2.7 Тип Подхода

• недавняя местная инициатива/ инновация

2.8 Каковы цели/ задачи Подхода

The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (agricultural and livelihood related technology)

• To disseminate information and know-how on no-till methods
• To increase awareness among the farmers on the benefits of no-till methods and crop residue management
• To increase awareness of the environmental and social benefits of no-till methods and the role that it can play in adaptation to climate change

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: • Lack of awareness about low cost soil and water conservation technologies that address farmers' needs
• Initially there was weak institutional support for organizing discussion sessions

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	самоорганизация	Community meetings organized to discuss the new technology and how it could be implemented locally
планирование	интерактивное	Interactive discussion groups and focal groups organized in the community
выполнение	самоорганизация	Individual farmers implemented the technology on their land without external support. LI-BIRD provided in-kind and technical information and support.
мониторинг/ оценка	самоорганизация	LI-BIRD monitored the implementation of the technology and helped to evaluate the outcome. They collected and analysed data in order to highlight the soil and water conservation aspects of the no-till method and disseminated this information.
Research	нет

3.3 Схема реализации (если имеется)

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

Если существенно, укажите гендерный и возрастной состав, статус, этническую принадлежность и т.д.

Land users and community mobilizers from the indigenous Tharu communities were given training on no-till method and crop residue management.

Тип обучения:

• опытные участки

Тип обучения:

• Participatory methods and approaches

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: Capacity building training; Key elements: Capacity building took place through site visits and extension materials as well as through discussions and exchanges

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:

• повышение компетенций/ обучение

• Technical support

Подробнее:

LI-BIRD supported farmers groups, biodiversity conservation and development committees, and community-based organizations by providing hands-on training and technical support.

4.4 Мониторинг и оценка

Являются ли мониторинг и оценка частью Подхода?

Да

Комментарии:

technical aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: Regular observations by technical staff from LI-BIRD jointly with representatives from biodiversity conservation and development committees, farmers groups, and community-based organizations

socio-cultural aspects were regular monitored by project staff, land users through observations; indicators: Regular observations by technical staff from LI-BIRD jointly with representatives from biodiversity conservation and development committees, farmers groups, and community-based organizations

economic / production aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations

economic / production aspects were monitored by None through measurement

There were several changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Several changes were observed. People learned both through discussions and by taking a hands-on approach. An initial attempt to replicate the method ended in failure. However, through discussions and technical inputs, the farmers were eventually able to replicate the method and it is now well understood.

5.1 Годовой бюджет мероприятий по УЗП в рамках Подхода

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

Approach costs were met by the following donors: local community / land user(s) (Mostly by the land users; capacity building activities and field demonstration costs were borne by LI-BIRD.): 100.0%

5.2 Финансирование и внешняя материальная поддержка, предоставляемая землепользователям

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

Нет

5.3 Субсидии на отдельные затраты (включая оплату труда)

• нет

5.4 Кредитование

Предоставлялись ли в рамках Подхода кредиты на мероприятия УЗП?

Нет

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?

• да

Если да, опишите как:

This technology has a high probability of being sustainable because it is cost effective and requires minimal technical input (farmers can do it on their own); moreover, it helps with soil conservation.

6.4 Сильные стороны/ преимущества Подхода

Сильные стороны/ преимущества/ возможности по мнению составителя или других ключевых специалистов
Farmers can easily learn no-till techniques through community participation. The approach is sustainable because it is easy to implement and it appeals to farmers because they appreciate it as a way of reducing labour and increasing crop yields. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continue to give some minor technical support and encouragement.)
The approach focused on building capacity by using a hands-on approach similar to how farmers traditionally transfer know-how between themselves. Farmers can adapt and modify the technology as needed to deal with changing conditions in the environment. Financial inputs by external organizations are not needed. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continue to give some minor technical support and encouragement.)

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?
Market linkages are poor and the scope to scale up is also small.	The establishment of stronger market linkages would motivate farmers to attempt commercial cultivation.

7.1 Методы сбора/источники информации