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

Название проекта, содействовавшего документированию/оценке Подхода (если применимо)

Interplay among multiple uses of water reservoirs via innovative coupling of substance cycles in aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems (INNOVATE / GLUES)

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

Missenyi District Council (Missenyi District Council) - Танзания

1.3 Условия, регламентирующие использование собранных ВОКАТ данных

Когда были собраны данные (на местах)?

22/12/2015

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

Да

2.1 Краткое описание Подхода

Using integrated and collaborative approach in managing land degradation and conflicts in Savannah range land with high livestock.

2.2 Подробное описание Подхода

Подробное описание Подхода:

Aims / objectives: a) Conservation of Savannah range land guaranteed through improved rainwater harvesting, improved pasture management and improved livestock genetic potential
b) Frequent range land use conflicts are resolved and halted
c) Resource conserving and environmental sound livestock husbandry practice adopted and widely used.


Methods: Community working by various stakeholders (land users, various level extension workers, employed and elected representatives, project staffs and administrators at the local and central government) and supported by the North South Trans border project (NSTP) uncovered their setbacks through participatory dialogues events. Participatory/multi-stakeholder problem analysis/research events enabled identification of a combination of technologies needed to solve the existing problems as construction of rain water harvesting structure, pasture management (introduction of nutritious and palatable pastures) and livestock improvement through introduction of improved bulls. Joint planning events eventually resulted to development of Bubale community SLM action plan indicating activities, resources and roles. Each stakeholder absorbed the uncovered messages and integrated the ideas into responsive and complementary SLM plans. SLM plans were used to mobilize, negotiate and search for both internal and NSTP supportive resources and thus land users acquisition of the necessary technological input, equipment and financial resources. Knowledge acquisition & skill development was achieved through extension advisory services and on the job and action based training. Technology adaption and innovation was stimulated through; 1) pasture demo plots 2) incentive system 3) quick win interventions 4) and through reinforcement of rules and regulation guiding and protecting the use of the technologies.



Stages of implementation: Situational analysis; community awareness and sensitization events. Problem identifications, analysis and research: defining the root cause of land problems and appropriate technological solution using participatory dialogues. Development of the Bubale community SLM action plan: through collaborative & integrative events. Development of stakeholder plans complementary & responsive to the Bubale community SLM plans. Resource mobilization: using Bubale SLM plan and other stakeholder’s complementary plans. Implementation: collaborations between the community and other stakeholders. Supervision, operation and maintenance of completed technologies: democratic devolution of completed projects to beneficiary groups selected by empowered land users using their own forums and democratic process and subsequent training in operation and maintenance.

Role of stakeholders: Field level (sub village, village & ward): Daily supervision. Planning, review and decision making through obligatory meetings. Setting & reinforcing bylaws guiding the use and protection of technologies. Intermediate level (district level): extension services, technical expertise, and supervision and monitoring. Assist the community in interpreting the relevant policies, rules and laws guiding and protecting the use of various SLM technologies. Reporting implementation progress to the regional level & other stakeholders. Control of support funds, procurement procedures and make payments subject to approval by the community project committee. Regional level: Supervision monitoring and reporting implementation progress to the national level and were the subject matter consultants providing services upon request by the district. Policy makers (Councillors and Member of Parliament): supervision, monitoring, policies interpretation & reinforcement of rules and bylaws protecting the technologies. Central government: resolving and managing land conflicts & observing peace and tranquility.

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

The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (Pasture establishment & improvement of genetic potential )

a) Stop uncontrolled exploitation and degradation of range land through correct stocking, improved pasture management and controlled fire burning.
b) Resolve and halt conflict over the use of range land among livestock keepers and between crop and livestock keepers
c) Improve livestock production and productivity through the use of animals with high genetic potentials.
d) Ensure availability of financial resources to invest in sustainable range land management


The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: a) Overuse and degradation of range land resources through overstocking, poor pasture management and uncontrolled fire burning.
b) Conflict over the use of range land among livestock keepers and between crop and livestock keepers.
c) Low livestock production and productivity due to poor livestock practices (use of animals with low genetic potentials).
d) Lack of financial resources to invest in sustainable range land management

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	интерактивное	community land users, elected and employed representatives/leaders and civil servants/extension workers at the village and ward level. were involved in problem identification and situational analysis.
планирование	интерактивное	community land users, elected and employed representatives/leaders and civil servants/extension workers at the village and ward level Collaborative planning events of which eventually resulted to development of Bubale responsive comprehensive community SLM action plan indicating activities, resources and roles to be played by various stakeholders.
выполнение	интерактивное	community land users, elected and employed representatives/leaders and civil servants/extension workers at the village and ward level Daily supervision of construction work, contributed in terms of indigenous knowhow, cheap labour, material in kind and security and setting and reinforcing bylaws guiding implementation of technologies.
мониторинг/ оценка	интерактивное	community land users, elected and employed representatives/leaders and civil servants/extension workers at the village and ward level participated in collaborative and client interactive monitoring
Research	интерактивное	community land users, elected and employed representatives/leaders and civil servants/extension workers at the village and ward level participated in multi-stakeholder problem analysis/research events (special meetings, workshops and seminars)

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:

Technologies needed for solving the existing land problems and improvement of the situation were identified through project supported participatory problem analytical events (special meetings, workshops and seminars) where, land users in Bubale village supported by SLM specialists were able to learn and understand the real and root cause of the existing land problems and in the due course made the choice on SLM technologies.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists. Empowered community working collaboratively with SLM specialists took the leading role in deciding on the method of implementing the SLM Technology

4.1 Повышение компетенций/ обучение

Проводилось ли обучение землепользователей/ других заинтересованных лиц?

Да

Укажите, кто проходил обучение:

• землепользователи
• местный персонал/консультанты

• politicians, employed and elected leders, admintrators and other stakeholders

Тип обучения:

• в ходе работы
• опытные участки
• общие собрания

Тип обучения:

• special meetings, workshops and seminars

Рассматриваемые темы:

In-house training, action based training and learning by doing on the job these include: pasture management, hay making, use and management of improved bulls and charco dam construction and management, environmental impact assessment, law and guiding and protecting the use of particular SLM and further operation and management.

4.2 Консультационные услуги

Есть ли у землепользователей возможность получать консультации?

Да

Укажите, где именно оказываются консультационные услуги:

• на полях землепользователей

Описание/ комментарий:

Name of method used for advisory service: community participatory dialogues and analytical process ; Key elements: builds trust and understanding with land users, ensures that the viewpoint and realities of land users are accurately reflected, empower participation of the disadvantaged and promote ownership of the analytical process ; so the process was largely people centered

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; The fifth phase ruling government elected in October 2015 is committed to support land conservation. To a large extent the commonest electoral manifesto of the ruling party emphasis on the importance of land/environmental protection.

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

Подробнее:

the community project committee was supported in terms of training in supervision and client interactive monitoring. beneficiary groups were trained on project operations and maintenance.

4.4 Мониторинг и оценка

Являются ли мониторинг и оценка частью Подхода?

Да

Комментарии:

economic / production aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: Increased animal production and productivity

bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: Annual livestock water accessibility (No. of months)

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government through measurements; indicators: Annual livestock water accessibility (No. of months)

technical aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: No of livestock keepers using recommended animal husbandry practises

technical aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through measurements; indicators: No of livestock keepers using recommended animal husbandry practises

socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: Readiness to use improved bulls and correct stocking, % reduction of uncontrolled fire burning

socio-cultural aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through measurements; indicators: Readiness to use improved bulls and correct stocking, % reduction of uncontrolled fire burning

economic / production aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through measurements; indicators: Increased animal production and productivit

area treated aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: Hectare of range land well conserved

area treated aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through measurements; indicators: Hectare of range land well conserved

no. of land users involved aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: No. of livestock keepers adopting improved pasture managment and use of improved bulls, % reduction of land conflicts

no. of land users involved aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff, government, land users through measurements; indicators: No. of livestock keepers adopting improved pasture managment and use of improved bulls, % reduction of land conflicts

management of Approach aspects were regular monitored by project staff, government, land users through observations; indicators: The level of community involvement and ownership of the approach

management of Approach aspects were monitored by project staff, government, land users through measurements; indicators: The level of community involvement and ownership of the approach

There were several changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Monitoring and evaluation revealed the need to devolve supervision and management of completed project (charco dam, pasture demo and improved bulls) to beneficiary groups.

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

• problem analysis and identification

Напишите подробнее и назовите тех, кто выполнял исследования:

Technologies needed for solving the existing land problems and improvement of the situation were identified through project supported participatory and multi-stakeholder problem analysis/research events

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 (North South Trans border Project (NSTP) ): 50.0%; local government (district, county, municipality, village etc) (Missenyi District Council ): 30.0%; local community / land user(s) (Bubale Community ): 20.0%

5.2 Финансирование и внешняя материальная поддержка, предоставляемая землепользователям

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

Да

5.3 Субсидии на отдельные затраты (включая оплату труда)

• оборудование

• сельскохозяйственные

• строительные материалы

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

• добровольный

Комментарии:

Labour was largely voluntary and partly as casual. labour was substantial input in various activities including excavation of dam, land tilling, loading and unloading of construction materials.

NSTP supported fully financed inputs as kick start investment.

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:

After the kick start support by the project then operation and supervision of the charco dam, pasture demo plot & improved bulls are devolved to the group of gender balanced beneficiaries who are selected through community priority and selection. Payments of user fee and penalties for those who violate set rules and regulations enable the community to manage operational, maintenance and other costs.

6.4 Сильные стороны/ преимущества Подхода

Сильные стороны/ преимущества/ возможности по мнению землепользователей

1. Easy to access necessary external supportive resources 2. Foster complementary and collaborative working relationship with multi-stakeholders 3. Reduce land conflicts 4. Open opportunity to shift from tradition to commercial livestock keeping (e.g. through acquisition of improved bulls) 5. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Scale up use of the approach Maintain complementary and collaborative working relationship Maintain the use of technology Scale up use of the approach )

Сильные стороны/ преимущества/ возможности по мнению составителя или других ключевых специалистов

1. Is collaborative and integrative 2. Highly rely on the use of existing local institutions and forums 3. Quick win results and incentive system (e.g. pasture seeds) speed up adaption and innovation 4. Multilevel participation and collaboration 5. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Strengthen and maintain collaboration and integration Continue strengthening use and operationization of existing institutions and forums Maintain quick win interventions and incentive system Maintain multilevel participation and collaboration )

6.5 Слабые стороны/ недостатки Подхода и пути их преодоления

Слабые стороны/ недостатки/ риски по мнению землепользователей	Возможные пути их преодоления/снижения?
1. Destruction of established structures (e.g. fencing materials) by dishonest land users.	Strengthen security (e.g. community police) and law enforcement

Слабые стороны/ недостатки/ риски по мнению составителя или ответственных специалистов	Возможные пути их преодоления/снижения?
1. High initial investment cost e.g. in charco dam construction/ improved bulls. 2. Difficulties in the use and management of collective pasture demo plots	Introduce user fee and strengthen group associations and rural credit facilities & financial institutions (e.g. SACCOS) Devolve management of demo plots to beneficiary groups & provide training in supervision, operation and management of pasture demo plots.

7.1 Методы сбора/источники информации