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

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

Safe Environment & Wildlife Africa (SEWA)

1.3 Условия, регламентирующие использование собранных ВОКАТ данных

Когда были собраны данные (на местах)?

21/10/2024

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

Да

2.1 Краткое описание Подхода

The integrated wetlands biodiversity conservation project aims to restore wetlands and associated biodiversity. The approach strengthens the resilience of neighbouring marginalized groups to climate change through developing lifelong skills and providing livelihoods support.

2.2 Подробное описание Подхода

Подробное описание Подхода:

The Integrated Wetlands Biodiversity Conservation Project aims to restore wetlands and associated biodiversity. It is a 2-year project which started in June 2023 with the support of a USD 50,000.00 grant from the Global Environment Facility Small Grants Programme, implemented by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP-GEFSGP). The approach strengthens the resilience of neighbouring community to climate change through developing lifelong skills and providing livelihood support. It targets those marginalized groups surrounding protected areas, who experience severe droughts due to high cases of human-wildlife conflicts, making them highly food insecure. The approach is simultaneously improving sustainable management and utilization of the Masibinta wetland and its catchment.

Technical activities are targeted at restoring Masibinta wetland’s ecological integrity by protecting the wetland, implementing conservation agriculture in its catchment, reforesting bare land, controlling and reshaping gullies to create small ponds, and removing a bushy invasive species (Ipomoea carnea) while making compost from its leaves and branches. The ponds increase the recharge of the wetland. This helps provide water to the community and at the same time acts as a barrier to soil erosion and epicenters for natural vegetative cover regeneration and biodiversity restoration. Land degradation neutrality is an overall goal.

Specific targets include:
(a) Protection, rehabilitation and conservation of 13 hectares of Masibinta wetlands, as well as reclamation of degraded land in and around the wetland, while increasing the capacity of the community members to conserve biodiversity.
(b) Increasing access of 387 households to adequate and clean water.
(c) Reduction of invasive species in the wetlands by 80%, and reclamation of 1000 m of gullies.
(d) Promotion of sustainable use and management of Masibinta wetland through regenerative agriculture, livelihood support and imparting lifelong skills to 50 youths (30 females and 20 males).

A variety of technical and social methods are employed:
(a) Grey and Green Infrastructure (GGI): hybrid restoration techniques that involve the combination of engineered structures and Nature-based Solutions (NbS).
(b) Regenerative agriculture: including mulching, mixed cultivation, crop rotation, agroforestry, use of organic manure in nutrition gardens, and zero tillage (“Maganko”).
(c) Incentives: monetary incentives to the community members who offer their labour.
(d) Self-mobilization.
(e) Peer-to-peer learning.
(f) Problem-solving.

The stages of implementation involved are:
(a) Baseline survey,
(b) Education and training of project support staff, stakeholders,
(c) Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL),
(d) Livelihood support,
(e) Protection of the wetland, then MEL,
(f) Borehole Drilling,
(g) Invasive species management, then MEL,
(h) Gully modification, and
(i) Evaluation and Learning.

The stakeholders involved and their roles are:
(a) Environmental Management Agency (EMA): Implement and monitor restoration activities in the wetland and assess the impact of barricading the gully on the environment.
(b) Forestry Commission (FC): Nursery establishment, management and tree planting.
(c) Agriculture and Rural Advisory Services (ARDAS): Train farmers on agroforestry, goat rearing, climate-smart agriculture, gully reclamation, and polyculture.
(d) Rural and Infrastructure Development Agency (RIDA): oversees all engineering work.
(e) Ministry of Youth Empowerment Development and Vocational Training (MYEDVT): Monitoring youth engagement and benefits.
(f) Ministry of Women Affairs Community Small and Medium Enterprises Development (MWACSMED): Tracked and monitored inclusion and entrepreneurship.
(h) United Nations Development Programme – Grant disbursement, monitoring and evaluating the implementation and sustainability of IWBCP at the national level in line with the GEFSGP expectations.

2.3 Фотографии, иллюстрирующие Подход

2.4 Видеоматериалы по применению Подхода

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 aimed at developing an environmentally responsive community, capable of managing and utilizing Masibinta Wetland most sustainably through:
(a)Increasing knowledge and skills in restoring degraded and conserving the restored land
(b)Improving perceptions on biodiversity and building best practices which promote sustainability of the natural resources capital
(c)Increasing conservation benefit sharing and improving governance of the natural 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	самоорганизация	Smallholder farmers The initiation began in October 2022 where the organized a meeting and invited SEWA. At this meeting the farmer highlighted the degradation of Masibinta wetland and how the degradation was negatively affecting their lives. The farmers gave suggestion on possible solutions to the challenges faced.
планирование	интерактивное	Smallholder farmers, youth, traditional leaders, local business community, church leaders, teachers, Rural Care Givers, Health Workers, Resources Monitors, Counsellors, People with Disability In December 2022, the farmers who initiated the Approach mobilized community members to a planning meetings, developed activities, pledged own contribution to the Approach, outlined roles of each social group in the Approach, developed ways of mobilizing locally available materials and selected management committees and local lines of communication. They also identified potential challenges and suggested ways of dealing with the challenges that could otherwise arise from the Approach
выполнение	интерактивное	The smallholder farmers, traditional leaders, local business community, youth, church leaders, teachers, Rural Care Givers, Health Workers, Resources Monitors, Counsellors, People with Disability The implementation started in July 2023 after GEFSGP had supported the Approach with a grant of $50,000.00 through the UNDP. The community members worked together and provided labour and security of materials and food during the Approach's activities. They also monitored and evaluated the Approach and provided valuable lessons. Traditional leadership provided the approach's local oversight role, whipped members into line, provided Indigenous knowledge, and guided the implementation process in accordance with the values and beliefs of the Manjolo community. Traditional leadership was key in information dissemination and resolution of issues which would otherwise affect the success of the Approach
мониторинг/ оценка	интерактивное	Small holder farmers, youth, traditional leaders, local business community, church leaders, teachers, Rural Care Givers, Health Workers, Resources Monitors, Counsellors, and People with Disability, These provided the views on how the Approach impacted their lives and also on what needed to be changed.

3.3 Схема реализации (если имеется)

3.4 Принятие решений по выбору Технологии/ Технологий УЗП

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

• все участники как часть процесса совместных действий

Поясните на чём было основано принятие решений:

• личный опыт и мнения (незадокументированные)

4.1 Повышение компетенций/ обучение

Проводилось ли обучение землепользователей/ других заинтересованных лиц?

Да

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

124 smallholder farmers (69 females, 55 males), 10 Village Heads (2 females, 11males), and 2 Ward-based Environment Monitors (all males) were capacity developed from the 32 hours structured training on land and biodiversity restoration and conservation. During the training the participants were engaged through presentations, drama, role plays, scenarios, problem-solving and field trips. The key stakeholders drawn from government line ministries, and Binga Rural District Council trained the the beneficiaries.

Тип обучения:

• в ходе работы
• обмен опытом между фермерами
• общие собрания

Рассматриваемые темы:

Biodiversity conservation, project infrastructure management, sustainable land management, agroforestry, gully reclamation, conservation farming, climate change, and environmental policies

Комментарии:

The training sessions were not enough due to limited budget. Each training was conducted conducted over for 8hrs and the participants had little time for hands-on participation.

4.2 Консультационные услуги

Есть ли у землепользователей возможность получать консультации?

Да

Укажите, где именно оказываются консультационные услуги:

• на полях землепользователей
• в постоянно функционирующих центрах

Описание/ комментарий:

The Rural & Infrastrure Development Agency , Forest Commission and Agriculture & Rural Development Advisory Services provided advisory services to land users crop fields preparation, gully reclamation, tree planting, and wetland management

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

Опишите организацию, функции и ответственность, членство и т.д.

Community Management Committee and local constitution
Supervision of the land users and enforcing constitution

Укажите тип поддержки:

• повышение компетенций/ обучение

Подробнее:

The management committee was trained once on their roles. However, more structured training would enhance their discharge of duties

4.4 Мониторинг и оценка

Являются ли мониторинг и оценка частью Подхода?

Да

Комментарии:

Continuous monitoring was carried out by the Approach support staff. Monitoring and Evaluation was done quarterly, involving all key stakeholders

Если да, будет ли данный документ использоваться для мониторинга и оценки?

Нет

4.5 Научные исследования

Были ли научные исследования частью Подхода?

Нет

5.1 Годовой бюджет мероприятий по УЗП в рамках Подхода

Укажите годовой бюджет мероприятий УЗП в рамках Подхода в долларах США :

25000,00

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

-Co-funding
-Global Environment Facility Small Grants Programme, implemented by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP_GEFSGP)

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:

Fencing materials, stationary, cement, goats, seed inputs
Provider: UNDP_GEFSGP

5.3 Субсидии на отдельные затраты (включая оплату труда)

• оборудование

• сельскохозяйственные

• инфраструктура

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

• добровольный

Комментарии:

The land user provided voluntary work during the fencing of the wetland. An additional funding of $15,000.00 for the management of the Ipomoea carnea and gully medication has been secured from he G20 Global Land Restoration Initiative. Under these activities, the land users will be provided and an incentive of $1.50 per day per individual for the provision of labour. The activities are yet to be implemented once the funds are disbursement into SEWA's bank account.

5.4 Кредитование

Предоставлялись ли в рамках Подхода кредиты на мероприятия УЗП?

Нет

5.5 Другие методы или инструменты стимулирования

Использовались ли другие методы или инструменты стимулирования для продвижения Технологий УЗП?

Да

Если да, поясните:

Monetary incentive (for activities which are yet to be done using the additional support from the G20 Global Land Restoration Initiative)

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:

In terms of human sustainability, the training that the Land Users have received, skills and knowledge that they have gained will enable them to continue with the project activities without any external support. The involvement of the Land Users in decision making structures and programmes will enable Land Users to make and implement key decisions beyond the external support. The income generating projects and the Internal Savings and Lending Schemes introduced under the Approach will ensure financial sustainability. The training of the stakeholders by the Approach provide the technical sustainability.

6.4 Сильные стороны/ преимущества Подхода

Сильные стороны/ преимущества/ возможности по мнению землепользователей
The Approach is providing women with financial independence and choices.
The Approach is empowering the marginalized community groups with climate resilient and bankable assets. For example 12 youth, 3 people with disability and 10 women have been assisted with 2 female goats, increasing conservation benefits.
The land Users view the Approach as their out of hunger and poverty

Сильные стороны/ преимущества/ возможности по мнению составителя или других ключевых специалистов
Views the Approach as sustaible and transformative development.
The Approach is viewed as practical demonstration of sustainable land management
Viewed as a sources of lessons for the partners and environmentalists

6.5 Слабые стороны/ недостатки Подхода и пути их преодоления

Слабые стороны/ недостатки/ риски по мнению землепользователей	Возможные пути их преодоления/снижения?
The Approach has a limited thrust on influencing policy and land tenure	Involving policy makers at local level
The Approach has not identified learning areas	Identify learning areas through monitoring and evaluation sessions

Слабые стороны/ недостатки/ риски по мнению составителя или ответственных специалистов	Возможные пути их преодоления/снижения?
The ponds may cause risk of drowning of children as kids love playing in water	Constructing shallow ponds

7.1 Методы сбора/источники информации

7.2 Ссылки на опубликованные материалы

Название, автор, год публикации, ISBN:

None

7.3 Ссылки на материалы, доступные онлайн

Название/ описание:

None