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)

Kathmandu University (KU) - Nepal

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

Sarada Batase Village Development Committee (Sarada Batase VDC) - Nepal

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

02/01/2013

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

Yes

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: the village always lacked drinking water. People had to waste their extra time and effort to fetch water from rivers. this approach was born of combating the difficulty, thus to provide drinking water supply to their respective houses. This was the main aim of approach.

Methods: firstly, the experts from Bagmati Watershed Project measured. Their method was to observe and calculate directly with field visits. Then, project was completed with help of villagers. The maintenance was done by villagers themselves. The sources of water are lovated at the bank of river Policing in Lalitpur district and one at river Ghatte(Ghatte Khola) of ward number 2.

Stages of implementation: There are several stages of implementation:
stage 1: Expers from Bagmati Watershed Project firstly explore and measure the sources.
stage 2: Along with villagers, experts then planned and agreed upon the technology.
stage 3: Project then build the supply with labor donation from villagers themselves.
stage 4: Training was given to the villagers through meetings
stage 5: Maintenance is done by villagers themselves.

Role of stakeholders: Stakeholders ensured availability of resources, specified resources and their allocation. They were the pillars of success of this project as project went smoothly and successfully.

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 other activities than SLM (supply of water)

To provide convenient drinking water for all houses

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Lack of proper and convenient drinking water

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
planning	interactive
implementation	external support
monitoring/ evaluation	self-mobilization
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 SLM specialists, following consultation with land users

Explain:

initial research and use of technology was all done by the project itself.

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by SLM specialists with consultation of land users. The leading role was of experts to decide or propose or explain the method to the villagers who then agreed.

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users

Form of training:

• public meetings

Subjects covered:

The main training villagers got was learning by participation.

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Describe/ comments:

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; Other projects are also contributing for supply of drinking water through new sources to unreached or insufficient supply areas.

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 ad hoc monitored by other through measurements

technical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through observations

socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through observations

area treated aspects were monitored by None through measurements

There were no changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: no change in approach.

There were no changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Specify topics:

• ecology

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

by project itself.

5.1 Annual budget for the SLM component of the Approach

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

Approach costs were met by the following donors: government (50,000): 71.45%; local government (district, county, municipality, village etc) (15,000): 21.42%; local community / land user(s) (5,000): 7.13%

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)

• infrastructure

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

• voluntary

Comments:

They provided labour service to build their own taps.

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

Yes

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:

They need economic and technical support for developing or extending major approach activities.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
The approach provided easy access to drinking water.
It reduces unnecessary labor of carrying water.
Users could now concentrate efficiently on agriculture.
The water could be used for other purpose as well cooking, cleaning, agriculture, etc.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Main advantage is that approach reduced labor and saved effort and time of land users. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: A major lesson of this approach is self dependence. To enhance the result of this approach, the villagers must have acquired some technical and management knowledge. This knowledge will be helpful to continue getting results and to extend it. it will also e helpful and motivate the start of newer approaches.)
It made villagers aware of how to use locally available resources for greater productivity.
The approach helped villagers learn to tackle challenges to manage project unitedly.

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?
Need of constant repairing of pipes
water cannot be supplied to each of the houses.	The villagers can make shifts of people going for cleaning/surveillance of the sources. The sources should cover properly.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Any technological achievement lead to conflict between those who are benefited and those not.	there should be a supreme body to manage these resources and to make regulation,rules and decision.Since this approach involves everyone, these can be conflicts and arguments frequently. Like if only one tap is available for group of houses/families, there can be conflicts. therefore, under united efforts of villagers, water use rights and regulations must e passed.
Lack of supreme body to manage the water supply system
The source was not properly covered. It was prone to pollution.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Google maps, Google

Available from where? Costs?

http://www.google.com