Community-Based Watershed Management [Афганистан]

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

Mudiriat Aabreza Tawasut Mardum (Dari)

approaches_2612 - Афганистан

Просмотреть разделы

Развернуть все
Завершённость: 86%

1. Общая информация

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

Ответственный (-ые) специалист (-ы)

Специалист по УЗП:
Специалист по УЗП:
Специалист по УЗП:
Специалист по УЗП:

Montzieux Mathilde


Специалист по УЗП:

Hazem Zainullah


Специалист по УЗП:

Alemi Saadat


Специалист по УЗП:

Ershad Mustafa


Специалист по УЗП:

Ahmadi Reza


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

1.3 Условия, регламентирующие использование собранных ВОКАТ данных

Когда были собраны данные (на местах)?


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


1.4 Ссылка (-и) на Анкету (-ы) по Технологиям УЗП

Stone wall

Stone wall [Афганистан]

Contour stone walls constructed on moderate to steep slopes to retain water and sediments and trap snow.

  • Составитель: Aqila Haidery
Contour Trench Bund

Contour Trench Bund [Афганистан]

Contour trench bund applied on contour lines of moderate slope to trap run-off to improve infiltration and reduce flash floods.

  • Составитель: Aqila Haidery

2. Описание Подхода УЗП

2.1 Краткое описание Подхода

Sustainable implementation of watershed management through appropriate SLM technologies, formation of organizational structures and capacity building of stakeholders

2.2 Подробное описание Подхода

Подробное описание Подхода:

The overall objective of the community-based watershed management project implemented at Sar-e-Ahangaran was to reduce water induced disaster risks and improve people’s livelihoods. The project was implemented by Catholic Relief Services (CRS) with people’s support and funding assistance from USAID.

About 67 hectares of degraded land has been rehabilitated since 2009 through various soil and water conservation measures like stone walls, contour trenches and plantation of fodder species such as alfalfa. The local communities are also protecting the treated areas from grazing and shrub cutting.

With facilitation from CRS, a 15-member watershed management committee was appointed by the participating families. This was important for organizing watershed related works and for the sustainability of project interventions. Some rules for managing the selected watershed were also formulated in a participatory way. For instance, if anyone is found grazing animals at the site, he has to give one sheep to the watershed committee as a fine.
CRS has provided training and technical support to the watershed committee members and workers for project implementation and monitoring. The daily workers were selected from the local communities by the watershed committee and paid in cash as per national norms for their labor. CRS also organized awareness raising workshops regarding environmental conservation and water-shed management and the entire community including teachers and students participated in these village events.

As a result of Sar-e-Ahangaran watershed management project, the people have a more positive attitude towards natural resource management. The formation and capacity building of the watershed management committee is a step towards ensuring long-term sustainability of the project outputs and community owner-ship. The watershed committee is not yet registered with the government but for future sustainability, this will be an important activity. The Islamic Republic of Afghanistan is in the process of formulating a comprehensive community-based natural resource management strategy. Once in place, the Sar-e-Ahangaran community can take advantage of that strategy if the watershed committee is formally registered with the Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock (Bamyan).

The Community-Based Watershed Management approach is documented by Sustainable Land Management Project /HELVETAS Swiss Intercooperation which is funded by Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation with close support and cooperation of the Catholic Relief Service (CRS).

2.3 Фотографии, иллюстрирующие Подход

2.5 Страна/ регион/ место, где применялся Подход



Административная единица (Район/Область):


Более точная привязка места:

Sar-e-Ahangaran, Bamyan center

2.6 Даты начала и окончания реализации Подхода

Год начала реализации:


2.7 Тип Подхода

  • в рамках проекта/ программы

2.8 Каковы цели/ задачи Подхода

The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (Disaster Risk Reduction, Rural Livelihoods Improvement)

The overall objective of the project was to reduce watershed induced disaster risks and improve rural livelihoods through SLM technologies and community based sustainable approaches

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Lack of people’s knowledge regarding sustainable management of natural resources and disaster risk reduction, lack of knowledge, technical and organisational capacities on sustainable land management technologies for degraded lands

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

Социальные/ культурные/ религиозные нормы и ценности
  • затрудняют

People did not have a good idea about how to conserve the environment and at the same time reduce disaster risks and improve their livelihoods

Treatment through the SLM Approach: Training and education via sharing knowledge with watershed committees in Waras forming maintenance committees who should look after restrictions about grazing. Practical demonstration of potential SLM technologies

Наличие/ доступность финансовых ресурсов и услуг
  • затрудняют

People do not have financial capacities

Treatment through the SLM Approach: Project had a Cash for Work but learning approach

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

As the land is formally owned by the government, people did not invest much in sustainable practices. During project initiation, people were also sceptical and rejected the project idea as they thought that by digging trenches, the project was trying to search for gold

Treatment through the SLM Approach: Through several discussions and clarifications and by assurances from the government, people were convinced that the project had no hidden motives and gradually their trust in CRS increased

Осведомленность в области УЗП, доступность технической поддержки
  • затрудняют

Lack of knowledge about SLM measures

Treatment through the SLM Approach: Training and technical support from CRS

3. Участие и распределение ролей заинтересованных сторон

3.1 Заинтересованные стороны, участвующие в реализации Подхода и их роли

  • местные землепользователи/ местные сообщества
  • организации местных сообществ
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 CRS discussed land use problems and formulated the project. Project site was selected by the participating families and respective CDCs
планирование интерактивное CDC and watershed members were involved in the planning but not the whole community
выполнение внешняя поддержка Implementation was by the local communities with cash for work approach
мониторинг/ оценка самоорганизация Voluntary monitoring group to look after the environment. Also joint monitoring by project stakeholders
Research пассивное

3.3 Схема реализации (если имеется)


The organizational Chart of Sar-e_Ahangaran Watershed Management Committee


Catholic Relief Service (CRS)

3.4 Принятие решений по выбору Технологии/ Технологий УЗП

Укажите, кто принимал решение по выбору применяемой Технологии/ Технологий:
  • преимущественно специалисты по УЗП после консультаций с землепользователями

The area was selected by the community

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by SLM specialists with consultation of land users. However, workers were selected by the watershed committee members in consultation with their community development councils (CDCs).

4. Техническая поддержка, повышение компетенций и управление знаниями

4.1 Повышение компетенций/ обучение

Проводилось ли обучение землепользователей/ других заинтересованных лиц?


Укажите, кто проходил обучение:
  • землепользователи
  • Project field officers, Land users, CDC and Watershed Management Committee members, teacher and students, both women and men
Тип обучения:
  • в ходе работы
  • обмен опытом между фермерами
Тип обучения:
  • organizing courses
Рассматриваемые темы:

contour trench and stone wall technologies, tree planting, importance of pasture management and watershed management

4.2 Консультационные услуги

Есть ли у землепользователей возможность получать консультации?


Описание/ комментарий:

CRS provided continuous advice; Key elements: increase awareness by forming a watershed committee, technical support of the committee

Advisory service is inadequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; The government or other advisory service is still inadequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities. The government authorities visited the project only once, at the end of the project. They did not provide much support; however, as the land belongs formally to the state, they did not have any objections for applying watershed management measures.

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

CDCs and watershed management committees. Schools teachers and students also received training

4.4 Мониторинг и оценка

Являются ли мониторинг и оценка частью Подхода?



bio-physical aspects were regular monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: Water quality and quantitative measurements

technical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff, land users, other through observations; indicators: ad hoc field visits and monitoring of structural quality

socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: Hosuehold survey

economic / production aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: Household survey

area treated aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: Other areas where technology has been applied

no. of land users involved aspects were regular monitored by land users through measurements; indicators: Selecting the beneficiaries

management of Approach aspects were None monitored by land users through observations; indicators: Monitoring the community which looks after the pasture management

There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: especially with regard to organisational structure for monitoring works

4.5 Научные исследования

Были ли научные исследования частью Подхода?


  • Farm research
Напишите подробнее и назовите тех, кто выполнял исследования:

Topics included technology functions, vegetation status before and after project, monitoring of spring (located below) water quality and quantity.

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:
  • 10000-100000
Комментарий (например, основные источники финансирования/ ключевые доноры):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international non-government: 99.0%; local community / land user(s): 1.0%

5.2 Финансирование и внешняя материальная поддержка, предоставляемая землепользователям

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


5.4 Кредитование

Предоставлялись ли в рамках Подхода кредиты на мероприятия УЗП?


5.5 Другие методы или инструменты стимулирования

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


6. Анализ влияния и заключительные положения

6.1 Влияние Подхода

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

Land cover by vegetation improved significantly. Flash floods and snow avalanche problems were reduced, and the community members were more aware about the technologies and approaches for sustainable land management.

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

People got cash for work and some of the families could pay back their loans through this income.

The land belongs to the state and the water use right is as well open access and and organized manner. In this particular land land use problem or water use problems have not been seen.

Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

There were constraints from the people in the beginning. Now a similar approach with some modifications is being implemented in other watersheds as well as a result of this project.

Did the Approach lead to improved livelihoods / human well-being?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

They got more money via the cash for work; however, there is no impact for the livestock because the pasture area is big enough.

Did the Approach help to alleviate poverty?
  • Нет
  • Да, немного
  • Да, умеренно
  • Да, существенно

due to cash for work approach and increased production of wheat, potato and other agricultural products as a result of reduced flood risks

6.2 Основные причины, побуждающие землепользователей внедрять УЗП

  • рост прибыли (доходности) и рентабельности
  • нормативно-правовое регулирование (штрафы)/ контроль
  • to get employed through cash for work
  • reduce flood risks
  • Understand the importance of watershed
  • Understand the importance of NRM
  • Ownership of the project activities

6.3 Долгосрочная устойчивость мероприятий в рамках Подхода

Могут ли землепользователи самостоятельно (без внешней поддержки) продолжать применение того, что было реализовано в рамках Подхода?
  • нет уверенности
Если нет или нет уверенности, объясните почему:

but CRS continues to build capacities of watershed committees and support plantation of fodder species so that people get direct benefits and the project is sustained.

6.4 Сильные стороны/ преимущества Подхода

Сильные стороны/ преимущества/ возможности по мнению составителя или других ключевых специалистов
Less damage to some agricultural land located below the watershed sites due to flash floods
Prevention of snow slide
Increased water in the spring
Plant coverage of the area increased
Prevention from soil erosion

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?
Watershed management committee is not registered CRS should facilitate registration of the committee with the Department of Agriculture, Irrigation and Livestock in Bamyan
People are not taking care of the plantations People must understand the importance of plantations. The project should figure out the reasons why people are not interested in plantation activities and adjust approaches accordingly

7. Справочные материалы и ссылки

7.1 Методы сбора/источники информации

  • выезды на места, полевые обследования
  • опросы землепользователей