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

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 1218, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)', 'text': 'Sudan University of Science and Technology (SUST) - Sudan', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 1218, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)', 'text': 'Sudan University of Science and Technology (SUST) - Sudan', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 1218, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)', 'text': 'Sudan University of Science and Technology (SUST) - Sudan', 'template': 'raw'}

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

15/05/2012

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

Construction of water spreading system on khor and wadi with machinery jointly government and farmers in dam compaction and pitching.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: The main objective of the approach is to enable domestic land users cultivating crops (sorghum mainly) on a flood plain through construction of an earthen, stone-pitched barrier across the bed of a khor (stream). This earth dam serves to divert floodwaters onto their fields downstream. The approach is fully subsidized as the government provide technician and machines for the construction. Only some voluntary contribution from the beneficiaries is needed (for stone pitching). However maintenance support by the government is not provided later on.

This case study is typical of all those in the State. All are demand-driven...In addition the government supports farmers in rural extension e.g. preparedness, awareness, organization and mobilization, and to establish farmers VDCs (Village Development Committee) to guide the community in public works. Training and capacity building sessions in cultural extension are hold to develop crop raising techniques. The aim behind this is mainly to fill the gap of people’s deficiency in storage of crops such as sorghum and millet to maintain food security in the region.


Methods: 1/ Earth dam and terraces construction for water diversion and spreading.
2/ Agronomic measures e.g. ploughing, levelling, furrowing etc. to raise the soil to its maximum capacity.
3/ Provision of certified seeds: Varieties of short mature period and of drought resistance.
4/ Provision of special hand tools for weeding to maintain soil moistures and sustain the growing of crops.
5/ Development of mixed crop systems by provision of cash crop to support the rural economy.


Stages of implementation: 1. Identify and prioritize the needs of local beneficiaries according to their land size, social and economic situation, the local soil types, the cultivated indigenous crops etc.
2. To reach mutual partnership between Government and local communities a certain number of beneficiaries of the community is dedicated to contribute to volunteer manual work.
3. Based on peoples previous natural environment experience the location of the dam is to be examined and an engineering map has to be set out. That means people’s involvement from the very beginning of the project for planning, design and implementation.
4. For construction the government provides necessary needed machines.
5. The local community should mainly ensure the maintenance and the clearing out of the land for smooth water flow.

Role of stakeholders: Division of labor between the stockholders so as to identify the role
1- Land owners: piece of land.
2- Farmers: farming activities.
3- Ministry of Agriculture (MoA): provide machinery and technical support.
4- SLM specialist: will give the technical advice.


Other important information: Floodwater now takes way to any lower area and creates a new water course.
After several years soil should be tilled by ploughing, planking and furrowing to increase water infiltration and percolation as over the years the accumulated silt turns the soils nearly impermeable.

Finally some types of soil in the Red Sea State become very fertile and rich and do not need chemical or organic fertilizers anymore.

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 focused mainly on SLM with other activities (Rehabilitation of natural resources and agriculture for improving soil conditions and fertility. )

To overcome the inability of poor farmers to invest in durable water harvesting schemes and (later; in the 1990s and onwards) to take over the implementational role from NGOs and donors. They could continue to invest but they should be stopped to be concernde with implementation as they were in the 1970s and 1980s

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Lack of water to grow crops, lack of money for farmers to invest in infrastructure.

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	self-mobilization	Demand-driven
planning	interactive	Together with specialists
implementation	interactive	Some subsidized labour and in some cases volonteer labours
monitoring/ evaluation	none	None
Research	none	Some information provided

3.3 Flow chart (if available)

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

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

• mainly land users, supported by SLM specialists

Explain:

Most of the schemes (of which Hashatribab is a good example) began as a traditional water spreading schemes. Thus the Government built upon the traditionally adopted farmer's technology and developed it my means of improved soil and crop management knowledges and capacity bulding to farmers.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by SLM specialists with consultation of land users. The machinery necessary was in the hands of the Government and the specialists knew what was possible and how it could be done. But for all the land users were consulted.
To develop the traditionally adopted technology it is in the hand of the people themselves and need to be supported by the government. Such technology men are dealing with the natural resources, preventing tree cutting, moving regularly for grazing governance to recover ranges etc. and also they need hand tools awareness techniques.

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users
• field staff/ advisers

• other related goverment Departments

If relevant, specify gender, age, status, ethnicity, etc.

on gender basis.

Form of training:

• farmer-to-farmer
• public meetings

Subjects covered:

Rural extension as community organization, public work methods, extension and awareness services

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Specify whether advisory service is provided:

• on land users' fields

Describe/ comments:

Conventional extension; Key elements: 1.Visits, 2.Training, 3.Practice and training by doing ; Cross visits are very important to improve the technical know how and to learn by experience. The practical training is very useful and effective rather to the theoretical one.

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; Yes, in terms of technical know how but not in terms of adequate resources

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• yes, a little

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

• local

• man power

Give further details:

Because the local institution was involved in negotiations with the Government and also organizing communities; mobilization and awareness. SCLUWPA activities are mainly oriented to conserve soil and vegetation. They tend to clarify land according to the amount of Khor floods into land for agriculture and the land of forests and ranges. This practice is carried on down streams of seasonal rivers while is not specifically going in plains which in need to be reclaimed to reduce sand dunes formation and desert like conditions

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

There were no changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Not relevant as no monitoring took place. Only monitoring and evaluation is carried on by SCLUWPA for its activities in earth dams' construction and terraces to speed water. Usually this takes places after and within the period of flooding in addition to sea wall, effectively these devices functioned and finally to trace the impact and the outcome.

There were no changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation: as above. In purpose of to check what have done to do some amendments.

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Specify topics:

• ecology

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

If precise annual budget is not known, indicate range:

• 2,000-10,000

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

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international (Training, capacity building and assistance of equipment.): 30.0%; government (Technical staff, equipment and agricultural inputs.): 60.0%; local community / land user(s) (Volunteer man power): 10.0%

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):

By Government either directly or from donor sources. SCLUWPA, Range and Pastures, UNDP and UNISCO supporting desertification.

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• equipment

• agricultural

• construction

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

• voluntary

Comments:

see QT

Only machinery financed for construction period and maintenance.

Labour appears in all mentioned forms above. But voluntarely and food for work is most common.

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

No

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)?

• no

If no or uncertain, specify and comment:

The land users can continue to crop and to maintain structures within their ability, but no expansion would be possible or repairs to major breakages, unless the level of surplus production will be reached.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view

1) Improve the socioeconomic situation. 2) Learning and improve their technical capacity. 3) Raising the community awareness and preparedness. 4) Encourage peoples to be involved in collective action. 5) Enhance their capacity of community effective. Management resources (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: -Building and strengthening the establishment of the community institutions i.e. from VDCs to local Community Base Organization CBos national NGos.)

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view

1/ Demand driven response to people’s needs. 2/ Reducing the direct in-field role of NGOs. 3/ Progress to create a national Ngo's. 4/ Building the community institution. 5/ Raising the self help and self reliance for sustainable management. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: 1/ Continue to listen to the people 2/ By making sure the Government continues to play that role effectively 3/Increase funding . )

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?
1) Weak economic base at rural areas. 2) Weak community innovation and involvement. 3) Illiteracy and isolated and knowledge of others experiences 4) Low level of the technology used by the people. 5) Poverty and high vulnerability to natural disasters.	- to increase land productivity. - to develop crop mixing strategy to include cash crops. - enhance and encourage agroforestry approach.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
1/ Weak of funds. 2/ Weak of monitoring and evaluation. 3/ Low of documentation and knowledge sharing. 4) Lack of research involvement. It is better to say few or adequate research activity	1/ More support. 2/ Introduce a clear, simple system. 3/ International community need to make more efforts to assist with these aspects. 4/ Both Government and NGOs need to recognise the potential role of researchers

7.1 Methods/ sources of information