Подходы

Participatory Net Planning for Sustainable Watershed Management [Индия]

  • Создание:
  • Обновить:
  • Составитель:
  • Редактор: –
  • Рецензент:

Participatory Net Planning – A tool that involves stakeholders in planning, developing, and managing their land and natural resources

approaches_7651 - Индия

Просмотреть разделы

Развернуть все
Завершённость: 94%

1. Общая информация

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

Ответственный (-ые) специалист (-ы)

Специалист по УЗП:

Kalaskar Prashant

+91 9403961586

prashant.kalaskar@wotr.org.in

Watershed Organisation Trust (WOTR), Pune

Watershed Organisation Trust (WOTR), Gitai, 1st Floor, New Nagar Road, Sangamner – 422605, Dist. Ahmednagar, Maharashtra, India

Индия

Специалист по УЗП:

D’Souza Marcella

+91 9422226415

marcella.dsouza@gmail.com

W-CReS (the WOTR Centre for Resilience Studies), Watershed Organisation Trust (WOTR), Pune

The Forum, 2nd Floor, Pune - Satara Rd, above Ranka Jewellers, Padmavati Nagar, Corner, Pune, Maharashtra 411009 (India)

Индия

Специалист по УЗП:

Arun Bhagat

Специалист по УЗП:

Solanky Vijay

+91 8824144388

vijay.solanky@wotr.org.in

W-CReS (the WOTR Centre for Resilience Studies), Watershed Organisation Trust (WOTR), Pune

The Forum, 2nd Floor, Pune - Satara Rd, above Ranka Jewellers, Padmavati Nagar, Corner, Pune, Maharashtra 411009 (India)

Индия

Название проекта, содействовавшего документированию/оценке Подхода (если применимо)
Applying Landscape and Sustainable Land Management (L-SLM) for mitigating land degradation and contributing to poverty reduction in rural area (L-SLM Project)
Название организации (-ий), содействовавших документированию/оценке Подхода (если применимо)
Watershed Organisation Trust (WOTR) - Индия

1.3 Условия, регламентирующие использование собранных ВОКАТ данных

Когда были собраны данные (на местах)?

18/09/2025

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

Да

2. Описание Подхода УЗП

2.1 Краткое описание Подхода

Participatory Net Planning (PNP) is a practical methodology that actively engages landowners and local stakeholders in planning and implementing measures for land use, soil conservation, water harvesting, and biomass development. It aims to regenerate ecosystems and improve the sustainability of watersheds through site-specific resource management. PNP emphasizes the conservation, productivity enhancement, and sustainable use of natural and biological resources. It involves assessing the current condition and use of land, water, and vegetation, and preparing detailed plans—with estimated costs and timelines—to achieve the desired outcomes.
In Participatory Net Planning (PNP), the term “Net” represents a complete and interconnected planning framework where every land parcel within a watershed is individually assessed and linked to the larger watershed system. It highlights a network-based approach that integrates soil, water, vegetation, and community needs, ensuring that interventions on one farm support resource conservation and productivity across neighboring and downstream lands. Overall, it signifies a holistic and coordinated system where all stakeholders and resources are planned collectively for sustainable and long-term watershed management.

2.2 Подробное описание Подхода

Подробное описание Подхода:

By design, PNP functions as a tool for mobilization, training, monitoring, and evaluation in watershed programs.
Its key objectives are:

•Building ownership and commitment among landowners and stakeholders to ensure the long-term sustainability of watershed interventions.
•Planning site-specific measures that meet local needs, improve productivity, and address resource challenges.
•Developing realistic plans with clear activities, budgets, and timelines that can be implemented effectively, minimizing gaps between planned and actual outcomes.

The PNP approach places stakeholders at the center of the process. Landowners, farmers (both men and women), or users of Common Property Resources (CPRs) are directly involved in decision-making for their land or shared resources. During PNP exercises, the planning team visits each landholding or CPR along with the concerned stakeholders to jointly survey, assess, and plan interventions.
Stakeholders share their views on current and proposed land use and the necessary soil and water conservation treatments. The team discusses best practices and scientific options for land management, explaining their benefits and suitability. The final decision on interventions rests with the stakeholder—except when proposed actions could harm neighboring lands, CPRs, or the environment. In such cases, efforts are made to reach a consensus; if not possible, treatments on that land are withheld.
Once agreement is reached, the proposed measures are documented in writing and mapped on a diagram of the land or CPR.
PNP is gender-inclusive, ensuring both men and women participate in planning and decision-making. Ideally, the farming couple or land-owning couple is present during planning, even when land is officially registered in the man’s name. For CPRs, where stakeholders include landless people, marginal farmers, livestock owners, and shepherd communities, institutions like the Village Watershed Committee (VWC), Village Development Committee (VDC), and Gram Panchayat (GP) are involved. Their role is to ensure equitable access to ressources, manage conflicts, and establish transparent and representative local institutions for sustainable management of CPRs and create assets.
The Participatory Net Plan is more than just a planning document—it serves as a blueprint for implementation. Written in the local language, it remains accessible to stakeholders for regular reference. The plan is flexible and adaptive, evolving as new information emerges or stakeholders revise their preferences. Thus, it acts as a “living document” that supports transparency, continuous monitoring, and accountability.

2.3 Фотографии, иллюстрирующие Подход

Медиа-галерея

Общие замечания к фотографиям:

The photos capture active community participation, field discussions, and collaborative decision-making between farmers and experts during the PNP process, reflecting practical learning and collective planning for sustainable land management.

2.5 Страна/ регион/ место, где применялся Подход

Страна:

Индия

Административная единица (Район/Область):

Maharashtra

Более точная привязка места:

Darewadi,Post. Kauthe Malkapur, Taluka Sangamner, Dist. Ahilyanagar,

Комментарии:

The Participatory Net Planning (PNP) approach was first implemented in Darewadi village, located in Kauthe Malkapur post, Sangamner taluka, Ahilyanagar district, Maharashtra, India.

Предварительный просмотр карты

2.6 Даты начала и окончания реализации Подхода

Год начала реализации:

1995

2.7 Тип Подхода

  • в рамках проекта/ программы

2.8 Каковы цели/ задачи Подхода

The main objectives of Participatory Net Planning (PNP) are:
•To build a sense of ownership and commitment among landowners and other stakeholders within a watershed, ensuring long-term sustainability of the implemented measures.
•To plan site-specific interventions, meet stakeholder needs, and enhance land and water productivity.
•To develop practical proposals with clear activities, budgets, and timelines that ensure planned measures are effectively implemented and easily scaled up.

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

Социальные/ культурные/ религиозные нормы и ценности
  • содействуют

Strong local bonding, traditional mutual-help systems (e.g., shramdaan), and trust in community leadership support smooth mobilization, joint action, and quick adoption of land and water measures.

  • затрудняют

Social hierarchies, reluctance to change established practices, or participation limited to men may exclude key decision-makers, reducing inclusiveness and impact.

Наличие/ доступность финансовых ресурсов и услуг
  • содействуют

Availability of subsidies, project funds, bank credit, and SHG financing allows farmers to adopt technologies like bunding, trenching, or water harvesting without major financial stress.

  • затрудняют

High upfront costs, inadequate financial literacy, and slow fund release discourage participation and may lead to incomplete works.

Институциональные условия
  • содействуют

Strong and well-functioning institutions (VDC, GP, watershed committees) ensure better planning, dispute resolution, and accountability, increasing project success.

  • затрудняют

Weak institutions and lack of leadership create delays, communication gaps, and poor transparency in decision-making.

Сотрудничество/ координация действий
  • содействуют

Active support from multiple actors — technical experts, government departments, and villagers — promotes effective knowledge exchange and faster implementation.

  • затрудняют

Misalignment in roles, unclear responsibilities, or lack of coordination slows progress and reduces effectiveness of interventions.

Нормативно-правовая база (землевладение, права на земле- и водопользование)
  • содействуют

Clear land ownership provides confidence for farmers to invest in long-term land improvement practices since they benefit directly from gains.

  • затрудняют

Disputed titles, tenancy issues, or unclear CPR access rights delay planning and restrict work, especially on shared lands.

Программные документы/ руководящие установки
  • содействуют

Supportive agricultural, watershed, and rural development policies provide strong institutional backing, technical support, and long-term vision.

  • затрудняют

Frequent changes in guidelines, budget cuts, or administrative barriers disrupt continuity in planning and execution.

Управление земельными ресурсами (принятие решений, осуществление и контроль за выполнением)
  • содействуют

Fair and transparent governance ensures equal benefits, compliance with planned measures, and responsible use of natural resources.

  • затрудняют

Ineffective enforcement or favoritism creates distrust, conflicts, and irregular implementation outcomes.

Осведомленность в области УЗП, доступность технической поддержки
  • содействуют

Farmer training, exposure visits, and expert guidance improve understanding of benefits, correct design, and maintenance of SWC structures.

  • затрудняют

Limited technical support results in poor-quality structures and reduced confidence among farmers.

Рынки (для приобретения материалов и услуг, продажи продукции) и цены
  • содействуют

Ready access to markets motivates farmers to adopt improved land use and productivity-enhancing measures since profits increase.

  • затрудняют

Price volatility and distant markets reduce economic incentives for adopting new technologies or crop diversification.

Объем работ, доступность рабочей силы
  • содействуют

Local labor availability and farmer involvement ensure timely execution, especially before monsoon when structures are most effective.

  • затрудняют

Rural migration and labor shortages lead to delays, rushed construction, or higher labor costs.

другие
  • содействуют

Climate and weather conditions:
Normal rainfall ensures proper functioning of trenches, bunds, and vegetation growth, validating the benefits of interventions.

  • затрудняют

Climate and weather conditions:
Droughts, heavy storms, or irregular monsoons cause structure damage or reduced productivity, lowering adoption enthusiasm.

другие
  • содействуют

Accessibility & terrain:
Good road connectivity ensures smooth movement of tools, equipment, and produce; reduces cost and effort.

  • затрудняют

Accessibility & terrain:
Difficult terrain and remote locations increase logistics challenges, delaying technology application and maintenance.

3. Участие и распределение ролей заинтересованных сторон

3.1 Заинтересованные стороны, участвующие в реализации Подхода и их роли

  • местные землепользователи/ местные сообщества

Farmers, landowners, women's (Self-help Group (SHG)), members, livestock owners

Main decision-makers: provide land-related information; participate in planning, implementation, maintenance, and long-term management.

  • организации местных сообществ

Village Development Committee (VDC), Village Watershed Committee (VWC), Gram Sabha, SHGs

Mobilize participation, ensure equity and conflict resolution, coordinate between community and experts, support monitoring and governance.

  • эксперты по УЗП/ сельскому хозяйству

Agricultural engineers, watershed technicians, extension workers, soil experts

Provide technical guidance for soil and water conservation measures, land classification, crop planning, and best practices during planning and execution.

  • ученые-исследователи

Agricultural Universities, Central Agriculture Institutes, Watershed Research Organizations

Support scientific assessment, innovations, and evaluation of interventions; document learnings for improvement and scaling up.

  • учителя/ преподаватели/ школьники / студенты

Local schools, eco-clubs

Raise awareness on conservation practices; promote environmental stewardship and behavioral change.

  • общественные организации

e.g., WOTR (Watershed Organisation Trust) or similar implementing agencies

Lead mobilization, capacity building, technical support, process facilitation, documentation, and convergence with schemes.

  • частный сектор

Input suppliers, equipment providers, contractors, Farmers Producer Organisations (FPOs)

Provide materials, machinery, and technical services; help improve market linkages for agricultural produce.

  • местные власти

Gram Panchayat, Block Agriculture Office, Rural Development staff

Administrative approvals, fund management, land governance, support convergence of government programs.

  • государственные власти (отвечающие за планирование или принятие решений)

Ministry of Rural Development, Department of Agriculture & Land Resources

Policy framework, program funding, national guidelines, evaluation, scaling successful models.

  • международные организации

Funding and technical partners (e.g., UNCCD initiatives)

Provide funding, advanced training, exposure to global best practices, and knowledge sharing.

Если участвовало несколько заинтересованных сторон, назовите ведущую организацию:

The main implementation agency (e.g., NGO like WOTR or a government watershed department) acts as the lead stakeholder, coordinating planning, execution, and monitoring across all actors.

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 Local people are involved in awareness sessions, discussions, and joint problem analysis. Villagers, farmer groups, and watershed committees participate in identifying issues, priorities, and resources.
планирование интерактивное Local communities participate in mapping land, resources, and existing interventions. They jointly develop action plans, decide on resource allocation, and may plan their own initiatives (self-mobilization).
выполнение интерактивное Communities implement activities like soil and water conservation structures, plantations, or crop management. Some activities may be supported by food/cash/material incentives, but local ownership is emphasized.
мониторинг/ оценка интерактивное Local groups participate in tracking progress, maintaining records, and providing feedback. Village committees and farmer groups jointly evaluate the success of interventions and suggest corrective measures.
Farmers and local knowledge интерактивное Farmers provide local knowledge, observations, and data for research purposes. They interact with external teams for documentation, experimentation, and knowledge sharing.

3.3 Схема реализации (если имеется)

Описание:

Flow chart:
The visual summary illustrates the key steps of the PNP approach
Community Mobilization:
Awareness meetings are organized to inform villagers about the purpose of Participatory Net Planning. Local institutions such as the Village Development Committee (VDC), Gram Panchayat (GP), and watershed committees motivate farmers and landowners to participate actively in the process.

Field Assessment:
The planning team, along with landowners and local experts, visits each plot or common property area to study land use, soil condition, slope, and water flow. Existing problems like erosion, poor drainage, or low productivity are identified and discussed on-site.

Participatory Planning:
Stakeholders, including both men and women farmers, jointly decide on the best soil and water conservation measures. Technical experts suggest suitable scientific options, and a consensus is built on feasible and sustainable interventions tailored to each landholding.

Documentation & Implementation:
The agreed plan is documented in simple local language and mapped clearly for each farm or area. Resources such as labor, machinery, and materials are mobilized, and the works are executed under close supervision of technical experts and local committees.

Monitoring & Evaluation:
The progress and quality of work are jointly monitored by the technical team, village committees, and farmers. Periodic evaluations ensure the plan stays relevant, effective, and sustainable, encouraging learning, accountability, and continuous improvement.

Автор:

Dr. Arun Bhagat

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:

The PNP approach helps identify the current land use and understand the socio-economic conditions linked to it. It aims to improve farmers’ income by suggesting better land use patterns. Technical and agricultural experts play a key role in preparing the proposed land use plan, which is then replicated with other farmers in the village. The village committee is essential for mobilizing and encouraging community participation in this process.

Поясните на чём было основано принятие решений:
  • анализ подробно описанного опыта и знаний по УЗП (принятие решений на основе подтвержденных фактов)
  • личный опыт и мнения (незадокументированные)

4. Техническая поддержка, повышение компетенций и управление знаниями

4.1 Повышение компетенций/ обучение

Проводилось ли обучение землепользователей/ других заинтересованных лиц?

Да

Укажите, кто проходил обучение:
  • землепользователи
  • местный персонал/консультанты
Тип обучения:
  • обмен опытом между фермерами
  • опытные участки
  • общие собрания
Рассматриваемые темы:

Assessment of current land use, classification of land types, and implementation of on-site soil conservation measures.

Комментарии:

A joint meeting of multiple landowners is organized to share basic information, followed by a field demonstration in one of the plots to explain the planning tool. Photos and videos of various in-situ soil conservation measures, aligned with the land use and land cover, are also presented.

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 service is provided under the project by the implementing agency. The landowner can develop the land according to requirements with the assistance of a land developer or consultant.

4.3 Институциональная (организационная) поддержка

В ходе реализации Подхода были ли организованы новые институциональные структуры или поддержаны уже существующие?
  • да, существенно
Укажите уровень, на котором структуры были укреплены или вновь созданы:
  • местные
  • региональный
Опишите организацию, функции и ответственность, членство и т.д.

The planning tool is a socio-technical approach used for sustainable land development. Agricultural engineers, social engineers, and environmental experts from institutions can participate, along with officers from the Forest and Agricultural departments.

Укажите тип поддержки:
  • финансовая
  • повышение компетенций/ обучение

4.4 Мониторинг и оценка

Являются ли мониторинг и оценка частью Подхода?

Да

Комментарии:

The overall plan is verified on a sample basis to ensure quality and alignment with ground reality.

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

Да

Комментарии:

Field verification shall be conducted based on the prepared planning documents.

4.5 Научные исследования

Были ли научные исследования частью Подхода?

Да

Укажите темы исследований:
  • социология
  • экономика / маркетинг
  • экология
  • технология
Напишите подробнее и назовите тех, кто выполнял исследования:

Experts involved in the planning and implementation of the PNP contribute their experience. While research was not the primary focus, insights gained during community mobilization and watershed plan execution help improve the approach for smoother implementation.

5. Финансирование и внешняя материальная поддержка

5.1 Годовой бюджет мероприятий по УЗП в рамках Подхода

Если точный годовой бюжет неизвестен, укажите примерный диапазон затрат:
  • < 2000
Комментарий (например, основные источники финансирования/ ключевые доноры):

The total cost from planning to implementation is measured per hectare and ranges from ₹20,000 to ₹50,000 per hectare, depending on the proposed land use.

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)

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

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?

Нет

6. Анализ влияния и заключительные положения

6.1 Влияние Подхода

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

PNP actively involves local land users in decision-making, joint planning, and management, increasing their sense of ownership and participation in SLM.

Сумел ли Подход дать возможность принимать решения на основе подтвержденных фактов?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

Mapping of resources, data collection, and participatory analysis enable communities to plan interventions based on evidence.

Сумел ли Подход помочь землепользователям внедрить и поддерживать технологии УЗП?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

By linking planning with resource availability and community initiatives, PNP ensures successful implementation and sustainability of SLM practices.

Сумел ли Подход улучшить согласованность действий и повысить рентабельность применения практик УЗП:
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

Joint planning and shared responsibilities reduce duplication and optimize resource use.

Сумел ли Подход мобилизовать/ расширить доступ к финансовым ресурсам для применения практик УЗП?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

Communities sometimes access government schemes, subsidies, or microfinance, but PNP primarily facilitates planning rather than direct funding.

Сумел ли Подход расширить знания и возможности землепользователей в применении практик УЗП?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

Training, workshops, and on-field demonstration under PNP enhance skills and technical knowledge for SLM.

Сумел ли Подход расширить знания и возможности других заинтересованных сторон?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

External agencies, NGOs, and local government staff gain insights into community priorities and resource status through PNP processes.

Сумел ли Подход укрепить сотрудничество между заинтересоваными сторонами/ выстроить механизмы сотрудничества?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

Formation of watershed committees and joint planning platforms strengthens institutional capacity and collaboration.

Сумел ли Подход снизить остроту конфликтов?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

Participatory discussions and joint decision-making reduce disputes over land, water, and resource use.

Сумел ли Подход расширить возможности социально и экономически уязвимых групп?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

Women, landless laborers, and marginalized groups are included in planning and implementation discussions.

Сумел ли Подход содействать гендерному равенству и расширить права и возможности женщин и девочек?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

Women’s participation in committees and field activities increases their voice in SLM decisions.

Сумел ли Подход стимулировать молодежь/ будущее поколение землепользователей заниматься УЗП?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

Young people are involved in field activities and awareness campaigns, though engagement varies by context.

Сумел ли Подход разрешить правовые проблемы землевладения/ землепользования, препятствующие использованию технологий УЗП?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

Some improvements occur through awareness and participatory planning, but structural tenure issues may persist.

Сумел ли Подход способствовать улучшению продовольственой безопасности/ качества питания?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

Soil and water conservation, improved cropping systems, and better land management contribute to higher productivity and food security.

Сумел ли Подход расширить доступ к рынкам?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

Some linkages are developed for crops or produce through collective action, though not a primary focus of PNP.

Сумел ли Подход улучшить санитарные условия и доступ к водоснабжению?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

Watershed interventions and resource management improve local water availability; sanitation benefits are indirect.

Сумел ли Подход привести к более эффективному использованию электроэнергии/ возобновляемых источников энергии?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

Limited impact through promotion of fuelwood plantations or energy-efficient practices.

Сумел ли Подход улучшить способность землепользователей адаптироваться к изменениям климата и смягчать последствия катастрофических погодных явлений?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

Improved soil and water management, vegetation cover, and participatory planning increase resilience to droughts and floods.

Сумел ли Подход привести к созданию новых рабочих мест/ к расширению возможностей получения дохода?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

Implementation of SLM activities creates temporary work and improves productivity, indirectly supporting income generation.

6.2 Основные причины, побуждающие землепользователей внедрять УЗП

  • рост продуктивности

Quality and appropriate interventions enhance soil fertility and increase productivity.

  • снижение деградации земель

Proper land management and increased tree cover help reduce surface runoff.

  • снижение риска катастрофических погодных явлений

Proper land management helps reduce the risks of drought and flooding.

  • приобретение знаний и опыта в области УЗП

PNP is a participatory planning process that facilitates the exchange of ideas.

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:

Land users can sustain the interventions implemented through the PNP approach without external support, provided they have gained adequate knowledge, skills, and ownership during the participatory planning process. The focus on locally appropriate techniques, use of available resources, and community involvement ensures long-term sustainability.

6.4 Сильные стороны/ преимущества Подхода

Сильные стороны/ преимущества/ возможности по мнению землепользователей
Participatory Decision-Making: Land users actively contribute ideas and decisions, ensuring the plan reflects their needs and priorities.
Improved Knowledge: Farmers gain practical knowledge about soil, land use, and conservation techniques.
Sustainable Land Management: Encourages adoption of site-specific, in-situ conservation measures that improve soil fertility and productivity.
Livelihood Opportunities: Identifies farm-based income options, such as dairy, fodder production, and agroforestry.
Resource Optimization: Promotes efficient use of local resources like stones, bushes, and organic matter.
Conflict Reduction: Helps mitigate disputes over land boundaries and reduces encroachments.
Empowerment: Strengthens community organization and gives women and marginalized groups more decision-making opportunities.
Long-Term Benefits: Supports soil moisture retention, biomass production, and water conservation, leading to resilient agriculture.
Сильные стороны/ преимущества/ возможности по мнению составителя или других ключевых специалистов
Effective Planning Tool: Provides a structured framework for assessing land, soil, and resources scientifically.
Community Engagement: Facilitates active participation of landowners, enhancing acceptance and ownership of interventions.
Integrated Approach: Combines technical, social, and environmental considerations for sustainable land management.
Field-Oriented Learning: Allows experts to demonstrate techniques and observe practical challenges.
Sustainability Focus: Encourages adoption of low-cost, locally suitable interventions that are maintainable without continuous external support.
Conflict Mitigation: Helps in discussing land disputes and clarifying boundaries.
Scalable & Replicable: Can be applied across multiple fields or villages for wider impact.

6.5 Слабые стороны/ недостатки Подхода и пути их преодоления

Слабые стороны/ недостатки/ риски по мнению землепользователей Возможные пути их преодоления/снижения?
Time-Consuming: Participatory meetings and field exercises require considerable time. Time Management: Schedule meetings and demonstrations at convenient times for farmers.
Resource Dependence: Initial implementation may need materials or guidance not readily available to all farmers. Local Resource Use: Emphasize low-cost, locally available materials for interventions.
Knowledge Gap: Some farmers may initially struggle to understand technical aspects. Capacity Building: Provide training and simple demonstration tools to bridge technical knowledge gaps.
Group Dynamics: Conflicts or dominant voices within the group may affect decision-making. Facilitation: Use neutral facilitators to manage group discussions and ensure all voices are heard.
Maintenance Challenges: Sustaining interventions over time without support can be difficult for some households. Follow-Up Support: Provide periodic guidance and monitoring to help farmers maintain interventions.
Слабые стороны/ недостатки/ риски по мнению составителя или ответственных специалистов Возможные пути их преодоления/снижения?
Time-Intensive: Participatory planning and field exercises require significant time and effort. Efficient Scheduling: Plan activities to minimize disruption to farmers’ regular work.
Dependence on Community Cooperation: Effectiveness relies on active participation and willingness of land users. Capacity Building: Train community members to enhance understanding and technical competence.
Limited Technical Precision: Field-level decisions may sometimes compromise scientific accuracy due to local constraints. Facilitation & Guidance: Experts guide discussions to balance local preferences with technical requirements.
Resource Limitations: Availability of tools, inputs, or skilled manpower may restrict implementation. Resource Planning: Ensure access to necessary inputs and tools before implementation.
Monitoring Challenges: Ensuring long-term adherence to recommended interventions can be difficult. Follow-Up Mechanisms: Establish monitoring and support systems for sustained adoption.

7. Справочные материалы и ссылки

7.1 Методы сбора/источники информации

  • выезды на места, полевые обследования

Visited the field twice and gathered information from a community group of 7–8 people.

  • опросы землепользователей

Interviews were conducted with six land users.

  • опросы специалистов/экспертов по УЗП

Interviews were conducted with 4 SLM specialist/experts.

  • данные, собранные из отчетов и достоверных документов

Information was obtained from the Participatory Net Planning (PNP) book authored by Crispino Lobo (WOTR) and from Watershed Organisation Trust (WOTR) reports and publications (https://wotr.org/publications).

7.2 Ссылки на опубликованные материалы

Название, автор, год публикации, ISBN:

Participatory Net Planning: A Practitioner's Handbook, authored by Crispino Lobo. 2010. ISBN: 978-81-86748-23-7 [Supported by: German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ)]

Где опубликовано? Стоимость?

https://wotr.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/WOTR-PNP-Practitioners-Handbook.pdf

7.3 Ссылки на материалы, доступные онлайн

Название/ описание:

Participatory Net Planning (PNP)

Адрес в сети Интернет:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dU9dSJUgIQM

Название/ описание:

How to do Participatory Net planning

Адрес в сети Интернет:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGom-qA_be4

Название/ описание:

How to do Micro planning in Watershed Project

Адрес в сети Интернет:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDOKQBfcg-0

Название/ описание:

Rising Together: Building Resilient Communities for a Sustainable Tomorrow

Адрес в сети Интернет:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gCFkwkfwdg&t=2s

Название/ описание:

How to do Wealth Ranking in Watershed Project

Адрес в сети Интернет:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygiAy7f7Gpc

Название/ описание:

Integrated Watershed Management in Sinnar cluster, Nashik district, Maharashtra, India

Адрес в сети Интернет:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HfP20wucnE&t=3s

Название/ описание:

A New Beginning

Адрес в сети Интернет:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBzF7DXbedM&t=2s

Ссылки и модули

Развернуть все Свернуть все

Модули