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

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

Kabale District Local Government (Kabale District Local Government) - Уганда

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

Rakai District - Уганда

1.3 Условия, регламентирующие использование собранных ВОКАТ данных

Когда были собраны данные (на местах)?

13/05/2013

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

Да

2.1 Краткое описание Подхода

Through community meetings farmers get interest of using mulching on flat area to reduce soil erosion.

2.2 Подробное описание Подхода

Подробное описание Подхода:

Aims / objectives: The main aim of this approach was to reduce soil erosion as well as increasing their products. This approach involved meetings between farmers in their communities , it involves sharing of knowledge related to mulching and the ways of maintaining it.

Methods: The criteria of developing mulching was through meetings. Key farmers organized after every two months, at every village, and disseminated information about the ways and how to maintain it.
Demonstration was also done at one farmers' garden , to show others how to make it.

Stages of implementation: In the process of implementing it, there was clearing of weed from garden, covering of soil with grass and other crop residues. In the space left from one plant to another , the farmer did some composting purposely to increase the rate of fertility, Re-mulching also done ,when cover materials decompose.

Role of stakeholders: Farmers provided the labor during implementation and maintenance process . They also were involved in decision making especially while attending meetings.

Other important information: In the process of implementing mulching , there was gender balance between men and women during decision making and provision of labor. But the high percentage were men of ages ranging from 25 years and above, with involvement of community leaders.

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 on SLM only

-To increase agricultural outputs.
-To reduce soil erosion.
-To provide and share knowledge about mulching.
-To sustain fertility in the soil.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: -Lack of cash to invest in SLM.
-Lack of technical knowledge.
-Low agricultural outputs.

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	Skilled farmers and others.
планирование	самоорганизация
выполнение	самоорганизация	Land users.
мониторинг/ оценка	самоорганизация	Land users and skilled farmers.
Research	самоорганизация	Farmers themselves.

3.4 Принятие решений по выбору Технологии/ Технологий УЗП

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

• исключительно землепользователи (по собственной инициативе)

Поясните:

In making decision on how to implement mulching was through meetings by land users . Key farmers organize meetings at village levels, and other framers picked interest. It was between men and women.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by by land users* alone (self-initiative / bottom-up). Meetings were held, and one demonstration done in one farmers' garden . Other farmers visited the one who had ever practiced it to share experiences. It was done on local basis.

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.

Aged from 20years and above female and male.

Тип обучения:

• общие собрания

Рассматриваемые темы:

All matters related to soil erosion & increase outputs.

Комментарии:

Training was provided to land users by key farmers facilitated by advisory service but there was no financial support or inputs, given to farmers.

Farmers who attended farmer field schools trained other farmers at local levels , and others picked interest from there.

4.2 Консультационные услуги

Есть ли у землепользователей возможность получать консультации?

Да

Описание/ комментарий:

Name of method used for advisory service: Training.; Key elements: meetings.

Advisory service is inadequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities

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

Укажите тип поддержки:

• повышение компетенций/ обучение

Подробнее:

Training provided to local farmers at village levels by key farmers who ever went to farmer field schools.

4.4 Мониторинг и оценка

Являются ли мониторинг и оценка частью Подхода?

Да

Комментарии:

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by land users through observations; indicators: soil erosion reduced.

socio-cultural aspects were regular monitored by land users through observations; indicators: Peoples attitude towards mulching increased.

economic / production aspects were regular monitored by land users through observations; indicators: farmers income increased due to increased output.

economic / production aspects were None monitored by land users through measurements; indicators: Both men and women involved highly.

no. of land users involved aspects were None monitored by land users through observations; indicators: None

There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Some few changes observed where by some few farmers started to adopt extension advisory service.

There were few changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Few of them now applying mulching at the same time applying composting, this was observed at Katereggas' site.

5.1 Годовой бюджет мероприятий по УЗП в рамках Подхода

Если точный годовой бюжет неизвестен, укажите примерный диапазон затрат:

• 2000-10000

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

Approach costs were met by the following donors: local community / land user(s) (6500/= used in purchase of inputs. )

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:

Yes they can because they have been doing the approach activities without any external support.

6.4 Сильные стороны/ преимущества Подхода

Сильные стороны/ преимущества/ возможности по мнению землепользователей
It provides conservation knowledge to other farmers. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Adopt technical knowledge. )
It reduces soil erosion. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: More conservation approach should be provided. )
It promoted conservation culture among farmers. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Mobilize other community members to participate. )

Сильные стороны/ преимущества/ возможности по мнению составителя или других ключевых специалистов
It promoted awareness to other farmers. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Encourage more awareness and organize farmer field schools. )
Provided conservation skill among farmers. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: More conservation meetings should be conducted. )
Sharing of views among farmers increased. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Conducting more meetings. )

6.5 Слабые стороны/ недостатки Подхода и пути их преодоления

Слабые стороны/ недостатки/ риски по мнению землепользователей	Возможные пути их преодоления/снижения?
Lacks enough inputs like hoes and pangas.	External support should be provided.
They lack enough technical personnel.	Skilled personnel should be provided.

Слабые стороны/ недостатки/ риски по мнению составителя или ответственных специалистов	Возможные пути их преодоления/снижения?
It lacks technical personnel.	Technical personnel should be provided.
The approach lacks enough credit to boost the farmers.	External support should be provided.
Experiences are not documented.	Encourage farmers to document experiences.

7.1 Методы сбора/источники информации

7.2 Ссылки на опубликованные материалы

Название, автор, год публикации, ISBN:

Rakai District statistical report 2009Rakai District development plan 2010/2013Natural environment action plan (drafted from Kagera).

Название, автор, год публикации, ISBN:

Rakai District development plan 2010/2013

Название, автор, год публикации, ISBN:

Natural environment action plan (drafted from Kagera).