1.2 Contact details of resource persons and institutions involved in the assessment and documentation of the Approach

Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)

Book project: where people and their land are safer - A Compendium of Good Practices in Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) (where people and their land are safer)

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

20/07/2016

The compiler and key resource person(s) accept the conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT:

Yes

1.4 Reference(s) to Questionnaire(s) on SLM Technologies

2.1 Short description of the Approach

Consultation for natural resource management involves communities, authorities and other actors in collective decision-making to protect water resources in particular, and to institutionalize the management of these.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

The management of water resources for drinking water supply in the rural area of Haiti is addressed at catchment scale, by bringing together the management entities which are closest to the infrastructure. The principle of integrated resource management is followed by involving all actors. Three pillars of action are set up: integrated management, local ownership and the so-called 'zoning approach'.

The approach is a combination of measures to drive and divert attitudes and actions in land use, and of measures for restoration and monitoring, which together lead to an ongoing mechanism of ownership for sustainable management. Driving attitudes and actions is a participatory process which enables to identify the actors, to understand the issues, to construct a vision of community-based management of resources, and to build trust. The diversion of attitudes and actions comprises a set of measures aiming at maintaining laws in force and community decisions. The local authorities are responsible for applying these measures and for negotiations with the community. In particular, a municipal decree is issued to guarantee the protection of areas upstream of the water resources in order to protect the quality of the distributed water. The measures for restoration aim at promoting the environmental quality of the catchment, and its capacity to preserve water resources, vegetation cover and soils. Finally, the monitoring includes measures to maintain the area, helps to maintain commitment from the communities and assesses the impact of the measures on the resources.

The 'zoning approach' consists of defining the areas to be protected upstream of the water resources. For these areas, different restrictions for use are determined, based on an extended and supervised consultation, with the aim to protect the quality and recharge of groundwater. Two to three zones are defined based on the negotiations, in order to protect the abstraction of water (zone 1), to protect the water quality (zone 2), and to maintain or regenerate suitable environmental conditions for groundwater recharge (zone 3).

Support is given to help local actors in implementing the different phases of the process, through training and organizing exchange meetings. The civil society (water management committee consisting of farmers and local residents), the private sector (technicians, nursery owners) and the local authorities (mayor, Councils of Administration and Municipal Sections/CASEC) jointly define the conditions and the methods for protection and control. A municipal decree formalizes the restrictions on land use, by declaring the principles of protection which are imposed or recommended, and the possible penalties in case of breach. Although the area directly surrounding the water resource is officially owned by the Haitian state, its use by farmers and the presence of vodou deities require that the negotiations on the restriction of its use and on ownership rights are conducted with caution.

The local communities participate in the measures for protection and regeneration as an in kind contribution to the project. The farmers who changed their goals receive a payment for environmental services according to the success of the implemented afforestation. This grant will be paid in several terms, from the planting of the trees to a growth stage after two years.

2.3 Photos of the Approach

2.5 Country/ region/ locations where the Approach has been applied

2.6 Dates of initiation and termination of the Approach

2.7 Type of Approach

• project/ programme based

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

The approach consists in raising awareness among the population on the threats to the availability and quality of water resources, and in provoking a response for the sustainable management of these. The initiative and decision-making should be carried by the local actors, which is why the approach is in essence participatory and inclusive. The problems include the access to the water resources, issues of land ownership, and issues of religious traditions. These pose an important potential for conflict and must be managed from the start, through principles of transparency and accountability. Therefore the stakeholders are trained to master the competences required for these negotiations.

2.9 Conditions enabling or hindering implementation of the Technology/ Technologies applied under the Approach

3.1 Stakeholders involved in the Approach and their roles

3.2 Involvement of local land users/ local communities in the different phases of the Approach

	Involvement of local land users/ local communities	Specify who was involved and describe activities
initiation/ motivation	interactive	The farmers and the communities were made aware of issues on the sustainable management of natural resources. Then they were supported in discussions on the protected areas in order to establish the arguments required for an objective negotiation with the local authorities.
planning	interactive
implementation	external support	The protection measures for the hillslopes and gullies, the barriers in zone 1 and the afforestation works were financed by the project, and implemented by the local communities and the farmers as an in kind contribution.
monitoring/ evaluation	external support	The principle of payment for ecosystem services is to pay the farmers in several shifts, in order to ensure a good growth of the replanted trees and to make the afforestation successful. The farmers receive a grant for each seedling that is grown to a non-vulnerable state.

3.4 Decision-making on the selection of SLM Technology/ Technologies

Specify who decided on the selection of the Technology/ Technologies to be implemented:

• all relevant actors, as part of a participatory approach

Explain:

The farmers decide on the species to use for the afforestation, but the sustainable land management specialists guide the farmers in identifying the conservation techniques which are most suitable for the terrain. The principle of zoning applies to the areas which were negotiated with the farmers, but the restrictions for use remain the same, <depending on/regardless of> the type of the zone.

Specify on what basis decisions were made:

• personal experience and opinions (undocumented)

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users
• field staff/ advisers

Form of training:

• on-the-job
• farmer-to-farmer
• demonstration areas
• public meetings

Subjects covered:

Soil protection techniques: construction of stone walls, terraces, vegetated barriers, contour ditches.
Forest management, environmental vulnerability, control of slash-and-burn, conflict management, monitoring methods, principles of good governance by management committees.

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Specify whether advisory service is provided:

• at permanent centres

Describe/ comments:

Support is provided by the Municipal Agricultural Agency (permanent centers) in order to enable the responsible specialist to know and support the process of land use change and the development of agricultural practices.

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• yes, greatly

Specify the level(s) at which institutions have been strengthened or established:

• local

Describe institution, roles and responsibilities, members, etc.

The Committee for Drinking Water supply and Sanitation (CAEPA), which is in charge of the local water service, is the main institutional partner. A close guidance enables to improve management skills, the representation of the population, transparency and efficiency, which will ensure the sustainability of the service.
The Councils of Administration of the Municipal Sections (CASEC) are the local elected officials, who are represented in the CAEPA. They receive training to support the CAEPA in providing the public service and in local governance.
The Municipal Technicians for Drinking Water and Sanitation (TEPAC) are sent on a temporary assignment by the Directorate of Drinking Water and Sanitation. They verify and support the quality and functionality of the service for water and sanitation in their municipalities. They are the direct partners of the CAEPA and benefit from local support to improve their capacities. In this way many activities of training and support facilitate their integration at local level, and their acceptance by the local actors.
The Municipal Agricultural Agencies (BAC) represent the Ministry of Agriculture at the local level. They make a local specialist available for the farmers to improve the production. These specialists are closely involved in the implementation of projects; they benefit from training and integrate the experience and knowledge gained in their institutions.

Specify type of support:

• capacity building/ training
• equipment

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

The monitoring of the functioning of the system covers the functionality of the water service, the protection of water resources for maintaining the required quality and flows, as well as the relationships of collaboration and information exchange between the local authorities, the technical services and the relationships with the centralized institutions. The monitoring is therefore distributed over the TEPAC, the CAEPA and the technical assistance related to the CASEC.

If yes, is this documentation intended to be used for monitoring and evaluation?

No

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Specify topics:

• sociology
• economics / marketing
• technology

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

Socio-environmental research allows to assess the feasibility of projects in the upstream part of the catchment. They increase the knowledge about local social and demographic aspects, and of the environmental conditions and the impacts of changes in the use of natural resources. This allows to identify and minimize risks of conflict or environmental damage. Economic research deepens the capacity of self-reliance of the system, and assesses in this way the potential for economic sustainability.

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

If precise annual budget is not known, indicate range:

• 10,000-100,000

Comments (e.g. main sources of funding/ major donors):

This approach is implemented in projects financed by own funds, by the Swiss Cooperation or by the Chain of Happiness.

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

Did land users receive financial/ material support for implementing the Technology/ Technologies?

Yes

If yes, specify type(s) of support, conditions, and provider(s):

Depending on the cases, intensive labor can be required to implement the physical structures to protect the catchments. A transition to more sustainable maintenance systems must be initiated to make sure that the producers benefit from these works, and will maintain the structures.
An important support for the implementation of the approach is the payment for environmental services. The land use change required for the protection of the water resources generates a change in the economic model, which pushes the farmers from a system of annual production to a system of agroforestry, of which the return is only noticed in the long term. Due to the vulnerability of the rural population of Haiti, this change is only possible if compensations allow to cover the deficits incurred in the short and intermediate term. Thus, the establishment of payments for environmental services rewards the work for afforestation depending on the survival of the seedlings in the first two years. After this period, the trees are sufficiently strong to resist the main hazards.

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• labour

• equipment

• infrastructure

If labour by land users was a substantial input, was it:

• paid in cash

Comments:

The labor by land users is considered as a local contribution (like the provision of certain local materials), and is therefore monetized to calculate a percentage of participation in the accomplishment of the protection system. Part of the labor is nevertheless paid, according to the requirements from the project.

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

No

5.5 Other incentives or instruments

Were other incentives or instruments used to promote implementation of SLM Technologies?

Yes

If yes, specify:

A municipal decree is issued in order to define the rules for protection, and as such, promotes measures for the protection of soils and water resources.

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

6.2 Main motivation of land users to implement SLM

6.3 Sustainability of Approach activities

Can the land users sustain what has been implemented through the Approach (without external support)?

• uncertain

If no or uncertain, specify and comment:

The technicians related to the CASEC cannot be paid by the state, and their role of monitoring can be threatened if they are not supported by the town council. Therefore, the role of the CAEPA remains functional depending on the success of the water service. The latter is therefore a precondition for the protection of water resources upstream in the catchment. But the farmers who implemented agroforestry systems in the protected zones have good chances to continue their activities.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Improved profitability in case of prior difficulties with rainfed crops.
Improved agricultural techniques and sustainability of the enterprises through a sustainable exploitation of the water resources.
Access to paid work.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Fostering of community processes and of collective and inclusive decision-making.
Integration of principles of good governance for the management of local water resources.
Uptake of environmental conservation practices in the local communities and potential for upscaling. Improvement of bacterial quality of the water and prevention of risks of depletion by the improvement and preservation of groundwater recharge.
Adaptation to climate change and risk prevention in case of catastrophe, by securing access to drinking water.

6.5 Weaknesses/ disadvantages of the Approach and ways of overcoming them

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the land user’s view	How can they be overcome?
Some farmers must hand over a part of their land or modify their practices, which can cause social and family conflicts.	Open discussions and transparency in the process build trust. The negotiations must take place between peers, and the project should not interfere. If the resistance is too strong, it is better not to continue.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view

How can they be overcome?

The method requires skillful coaching, and the project team must withdraw from the key stages of the discussions in the communities. These competences, which condition the success of the approach, are difficult to master. The risk of a lack of ownership is important, especially due to the upscaling of the projects in the rural zones. The people get used to the projects and consider these as external initiatives, from which they take advantage without necessarily sharing the common objectives.

Understanding the needs of the communities is essential, and supporting them in their own choices. This requires experienced human resources and a culture of joint action with the project.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.3 Links to relevant information which is available online

Title/ description:

Boire l'eau et penser à la source. Documentation of experience on the protection of water resources.

URL:

https://assets.helvetas.org/downloads/capex_hsi_protection_des_source_vlongue.pdf

Title/ description:

Boire l'eau et penser à la source. Document de capitalisation d'expérience sur la protection des sources

URL:

https://assets.helvetas.org/downloads/capex_hsi_protection_des_source_vlongue.pdf