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

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 1173, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)', 'text': 'Agricultural Research and Extension Authority (AREA) - Yemen', 'template': 'raw'}

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

15/02/2013

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 rehabilitation of walls and outlets of the terraces and diversion construction with accessories from channels and gates are carried out by the local community in a regular way

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: Before 56 years the cultivated land were stable and sustainable as a result of application the technologies. However, in 1956 a severe flood occurred had let to washed a large area of the cultivated land and people and houses. Then the local community had decided to puts hands together and started to rebuilt all the walls and gates and outlet of the whole terraces that damages from hoods. That was because the cultivated land was the only main source of livelihood at that time. The first step made by the local community are meeting at the invitation of sensible to consult and agree on how to rebuild what has been flashed as a result of floods and determine the priority of work and methods of implementation, it was agreed that the owner where damage event happened should do not pay anything either bring drinking water to the people who attended to assist him. However, first to protect agricultural land prone to erosion In the event of second rainstorm located on the main course Flood water (riparian valley). Then be re-construction of the barrier with accessories.
Key stages
1 - The land users involved in a specific area (position) to collect stones necessary to rebuild the walls of the garrison of land and after processing quantity required by the land users are re-building walls collectively by the community of males, contributing to work both reached 12 years of age male. Were identified on Friday of each week to carry out the construction is completed collecting the required stones.
2 - Settlement of the surface of the soil and filling eroded canyons and remove sediment from agricultural land by land users
3 - grape planting trees in areas affected by erosion
4 - building barriers gradually until they reach the level of agricultural land to be irrigated from the barrier and building gates and canals by the users of the land beneficiaries of the barrier
For agricultural land away from the waterway has been rehabilitated and build by the users of the land due to lack of manpower where everyone is busy their land to address the damage that occurred, and as a result was rebuilt stone walls in places exposed to the risk of erosion and the work of the walls of the soil in places less dangerous .

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

• traditional/ indigenous

2.8 Main aims/ objectives of the Approach

The Approach focused mainly on other activities than SLM (Getting benefits from water harvesting in irrigation terraces )

Rehabilitation of terraces and protect it from water damages through or follow the indigenous knowledge that was followed to maintain the terraces. And at the same time harvesting water.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: land degradation and maintain the traditional techniques, improve agricultural production

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	none
planning	none
implementation	none
monitoring/ evaluation	none
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:

• land users alone (self-initiative)

Explain:

Exchange experiences especially of what concern of indigenous knowledge to activate them because they are practical and most the farmers familiar with them

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by by land users* alone (self-initiative / bottom-up)

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

No

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 land users through observations

technical aspects were regular monitored by land users through observations
area treated aspects were ad hoc monitored by other through observations

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

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

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

No

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: local community / land user(s) (The local community should be responsible for cost of the approaches and technology): 100.0%

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

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

No

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:

- Find easy ways to do the production process, even at the expense of resources of future generations, the most important ground water that drains a result of drilling wells for the purpose of irrigation, which led to the neglect of maintenance operations may not be great at the present time, but may increase in the future, leading to the extinction of these techniques

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
The rehabilitation of degraded agri terraces were carried out by the local farmers who constitute a teamwork (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Development of domestic legislation and to ensure the continued support of collective action)
building techniques using the resources available in the region

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Report of traditional knowledge and customs (sallam, et al, 2008)

Available from where? Costs?

Agricultural Research and Extension Authority, AREA