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

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

Asociación para la Diversificación y el Desarrollo Agricultural Comunal (ADDAC) - Никарагуа

1.3 Условия, регламентирующие использование собранных ВОКАТ данных

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

An integrated programme-based approach promoting participatory testing and extension of various SWC technologies, as well as providing institutional support.

2.2 Подробное описание Подхода

Подробное описание Подхода:

Aims / objectives: The Association for Agricultural Community Development and Diversification (ADDAC) is a non-profit NGO, founded in 1989, whose mission is to improve the living standard of poor rural families engaged in small/medium scale farming in marginal areas to the north of Nicaragua. The main purpose of ADDAC's approach is to develop and strengthen local capacity to analyse problems and find solutions for rural sustainable development. There are five main components: (1) food security and productive development, including technological improvement and diversification within traditional crop cultivation, and extension of alternative agricultural land use practices; (2) support to farmers??? organisations; (3) promotion of gender equality; (4) identification of alternatives in marketing; and (5) provision of an alternative credit system for farming. These fields of activities are based on the principles of organic agriculture and a powerful training process - using the methodology of 'popular education', which involves participatory training and extension activities.

Methods: ADDAC initiates its work in communities through PRA (Participatory Rural Appraisal) - evaluating problems and potential solutions. These serve as a base for the formulation of project proposals which are then submitted to interested financing organisations. Further steps include participatory planning, and later, evaluation, in collaboration with the land users. For execution of activities ADDAC contracts an interdisciplinary crew of specialists, which stays in the area. Twice a year a participatory reunion is organised to evaluate, and accordingly improve, the activities. Key to the approach is the formation of a grassroots organisation in each community to guarantee local management, build up alternative enterprises and promote community development. These organisations consist of representatives of local support groups, and farmers with a leading role in SWC application and extension. The organisations have various functions during the lifetime of a project: they are the counterparts of the extensionists for project execution, and later they ensure sustainability of activities. Farmers' associations are formed to improve storage and marketing of crops. Networks of local promoters exchange experience between communities and consolidate extension of alternative technologies. Demonstration farms serve as a tool for technology extension, innovation and validation.

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

Support the economical sustainability and food security of land users in the project area through increased production, diversification, soil conservation and environmental protection. - develop feasible production models, aimed at self-sufficiency and the integration of land users into an alternative internal and external market; build up alternative forms of marketing and credit systems. - community development and capacity building: build-up local farmers' organisation

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Lack of organisation and skills to analyse and overcome underlying problems of: - poverty; lack of financial resources for investments (eg in SWC). - insufficient food/poor nutrition. - soil degradation/indiscriminate burning of vegetation. - lack of appropriate technologies. - lack of access to public services and markets

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	rapid/participatory rural appraisal; participatory planning in public meetings
планирование	интерактивное	public meetings, workshops/seminars; assemblies for municipal planning (elaboration of community action plan)
выполнение	интерактивное	responsibility for major steps; execution of the action plans where each community decides
мониторинг/ оценка	интерактивное	Mainly: public meetings; partly: workshop/seminars, measurements/observations; a specialist is in charge of the continuation of activities and of the planning process with each community; annual assembly of delegates representing all communities assisted by ADDAC
Research	интерактивное	on-farm; on-farm experimentation with interested land users: assessment of different technologies (variety tests, evaluation of ecological effects, etc)

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

Тип обучения:

• обмен опытом между фермерами
• опытные участки
• общие собрания

Рассматриваемые темы:

The form of training promoted by ADDAC is called 'popular education'. It is a continuous and participatory process of mutual learning between farmers and technicians, based on a course of 'action - reassessment - action', with the aim of re-establishing indigenous knowledge, improving local self-esteem and the ability to analyse innovations, and, in the long term, to build up the capacity withi

4.2 Консультационные услуги

Есть ли у землепользователей возможность получать консультации?

Да

Укажите, где именно оказываются консультационные услуги:

• на полях землепользователей

Описание/ комментарий:

Key elements: demonstration areas, technical assistance through farm visits, farmer-to-farmer extension, local promoters organised into 'Local Support Groups', associated network.

4.3 Институциональная (организационная) поддержка

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

• да, немного

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

• местные

• building up groups (see Annexe 3)

4.4 Мониторинг и оценка

Являются ли мониторинг и оценка частью Подхода?

Да

Комментарии:

Socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: land users needs
Economic / production aspects were ad hoc monitored by 0 through observations; indicators: nutritional security, cost-benefit-ratio, deversification, organic products, certified production, production for markets
No. of land users involved aspects were regular monitored by 0 through measurements; indicators: strategic plan, progress of project
Management of Approach aspects were regular monitored by None through measurements; indicators: None
Training aspects were regular monitored by None through observations; indicators: land users trained as local promoters
There were several changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: at the beginning the approach consisted only of two components: training and research. Then it was broadened to involve extension of SWC technologies and promotion of crop diversification. Later the credit programme and the organisational component became part of the approach. The approach activities are supposed to be a continuously expanded based on the needs of the land users.

4.5 Научные исследования

Были ли научные исследования частью Подхода?

Да

Укажите темы исследований:

• технология

Напишите подробнее и назовите тех, кто выполнял исследования:

Research is carried out on demonstration farms through local promoters. Topics include on-farm testing of technologies, and adaptive trials with maize and pea varieties.

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: international non-government (-): 90.0%; national non-government (-): 10.0%

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)

• оборудование

• сельскохозяйственные

• инфраструктура

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

• добровольный

Комментарии:

land users works on their own farms at their own cost.

5.4 Кредитование

Предоставлялись ли в рамках Подхода кредиты на мероприятия УЗП?

Да

Укажите условия предоставления (процент, окупаемость и т.д.):

Interest rate charged: 1.5%; repayment conditions: Credit was provided through the programme of alternative financing by ADDAC. The 1.5% interest rate (lower than the market rate) is accessible to individuals and organised groups..

Interest was lower than market rate.

6.1 Влияние Подхода

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

6.4 Сильные стороны/ преимущества Подхода

Сильные стороны/ преимущества/ возможности по мнению составителя или других ключевых специалистов
Growing active integration of women (25% more contribution to farm income and >25% more participation in decision making in comparison with non-participants) (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Keep the gender programme as a component of the approach.)
Farmers' organisations: build up capacity for autonomous management of alternative development activities (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Integrate more farmers in the baseline organisations.)
Efficient extension method: 86% of involved land users apply more than 3 different SWC technologies promoted by the approach which contributes to sustainable development of the region (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Maintain and extend present farmer-to-farmer extension system: continue training of local promoters, network of promoters, local support group.)
Evaluation of land users' needs and involvement of new approach components according to their needs; continuous mutual learning process between land users and between land users and extensionists/specialists (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Continue the present 6-monthly evaluation procedures; implement a system of information, communication, evaluation and monitoring to analyse the impact of the approach activities.)
Increasing self-esteem of the people.

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?
Process takes long and requires high inputs of human resources and materials	In an integrated approach with strong participation of land users this problem is unavoidable; formulation of good project proposals help in finding donors to finance long-term programmes.

7.1 Методы сбора/источники информации

7.2 Ссылки на опубликованные материалы

Название, автор, год публикации, ISBN:

Rolando Bunch (1990) Dos Mazorcas de Ma??z Anon (1990) El peque?? agricultor en Honduras ADDAC (2002) Plan