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

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

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) - Italy

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

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

The participation of the communities in the planning implementation and evaluation of SWC activities and provided with food for work as an insentive to encourage participation.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: The objective of the approach is to enable indiividual farmers be aware of soil erosion problem and importance of SWC to control erosion and improve soil fertility,

Methods: The method of the approach includes discussion with farmers group and general descusion with community and local administrative units, include site selection community meeting awarness creation, planning, selection of participants, implementation, planning, implementation and management of SWC technology.

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 (Foreage development, income generating planting on bunds.)

The main objectives of the approach are to reduce soil erosion, improve soil fertility and increase productivity.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Soil erosion, low soil fertility, low productivity and food insecurity.

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	Mainly:public meetings; partly: interviews/questionnaires; The involvement of land uses in public meetings is important to change their attitudes.
planning	interactive	rapid/participatory rural appraisal; In this stage the community plann SWC activities.
implementation	external support	Mainly: responsibility for major steps; partly: responsibility for minor steps; SWC activities are implemented in areas that are affected highly by erosion.
monitoring/ evaluation	interactive	Mainly: measurements/observations; partly: reporting; Monitoring omit evaluation is done on the basis of work norm and technical specification of the SWC technology.
Research	none

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:

The land users choose the proper SWC technology based on the problem identified by the planning team and the SWC specialists give explanation on the use of the technology.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by land users supported by SLM specialists. Coordination and technical support of the SWC specialist is needed.

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users

• SWC specialists (1), extensionists/trainers(2)

Form of training:

• on-the-job
• public meetings

Subjects covered:

Training on SWC techniques and management.

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Describe/ comments:

Name of method used for advisory service: Convantional; 1) Advisory service was carried out through: government's existing extension system; Extension staff: mainly government employees 2) Target groups for extension: land users; Activities: Implement SWC activities

Awarness creation is given to the land users to practice SWC technology for the control of soil erosion and generat income.

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• no

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

bio-physical aspects were regular monitored through observations

economic / production aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations

no. of land users involved aspects were regular monitored through observations

management of Approach aspects were regular monitored through observations

There were several changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Specify topics:

• technology

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

Observation and trials on technologies have enabled the project to screen best practices and management techniques.

Research was carried out on-farm

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

If precise annual budget is not known, indicate range:

• < 2,000

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

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international (WFP): 80.0%; government (national): 5.0%; local community / land user(s) (-): 15.0%

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

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

Yes

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• equipment

• agricultural

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

• food-for-work

Comments:

70% food for work and 30% self help

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

No

6.1 Impacts of the Approach

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:

They need same technical support

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Soil Erosion is controlled (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: By continious training and following)
Environment is rehabilitated
Income is generated (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: contineous technical support)

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Soil erosion is reduced, soil fertility and improvement land activity increase. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Strenathe in incentive based SWC approach, technical support.)
Addiional income is generated (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: by introducing additional improved input)
The community has gained knowledge of participatory planning (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Training the planning team and land users.)

7.1 Methods/ sources of information