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)

Working for Water (WfW) - South Africa

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

2.1 Short description of the Approach

Eradication of invasive alien plants to enhance water sustainability by increasing run-off into dams & rivers.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

Aims / objectives: Programme started in October 1995, employing previously disadvantaged unemployed people to clear invading trees in catchments and along rivers. This has been going on for approximately 4 years. The leading department is the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry but they have been in partnerships with a number of other departments e.g. Land Affairs, Agriculture, South African National Parks, Welfare etc. Labour intensive methods are used to clear trees and apply herbicides to prevent regrowth. Where in sensitive areas, rehabilitation techniques are employed e.g. sowing grass seeds and re-establishing indigenous plants. There are also some wetland rehabilitation projects across the country where engineering techniques are used to rehabilitate wetlands. The Inter-departmental approach is unique in the country, but very important as objectives span all departments. The work is done on farmland, community land, private company land and governmental land. New laws will force landowners to clear large stands of alien trees in future and this programme offers landowners a way of clearing their land before the law is enforced. The approach is to use labour intensive clearing techniques to provide jobs and also tackle an ecological problem. In so doing, the programme tackles socio-economic issues and environmental issues. The major objective is to create sustainable water supplies in a drought prone country; hence - Working for Water'- (providing work to unemployed and increasing water availability).

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 (Social development & job creation; AIDS/HIV awareness, cr??ches, secondary industries)

- To clear invasive alien plants & re-establish indigenous vegetation. - To create jobs - To find markets for wood products - To promote productive potential of land - Facilitate economic empowerment

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: Aggressively invading alien plants; wetland rehabilitation; biodiversity impacts; social development & empowerment.

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	passive	rapid/participatory rural appraisal; Land owners informed of project and project manager determines if possible to work on land
planning	interactive	rapid/participatory rural appraisal; Alien vegetation mapped at 1: 50 000, social dynamics determined, availability of funding plays a major role
implementation	external support	Mainly: casual labour; partly: responsibility for minor steps; Community supplies labour to clear trees; can be responsible to provide transport etc.
monitoring/ evaluation	passive	Local people (farmers, communities) provide valuable feedback on progress; evaluation process mostly external
Research	passive

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

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

• politicians/ leaders

Explain:

directive (top-down).

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by SLM specialists with consultation of land users. directive (top-down).

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Form of training:

• on-the-job
• courses

Subjects covered:

Alien plant awareness, water conservation awareness, all workers are given an introduction course on program principles

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

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

technical aspects were regular monitored through measurements

socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored through observations

economic / production aspects were regular monitored through measurements

area treated aspects were regular monitored through measurements

management of Approach aspects were regular monitored through measurements

There were many changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: External M & E identified many problems in implementation of approach and inefficient operations standards were developed and are being applied. More stress on productivity. More detailed and planned social awareness projects were implemented rather than ad hoc approaches.

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

Biological control research & implementation in certain areas; impact of programme on local communities; cost/benefit of clearing alien plants

Research was carried out both on station and on-farm

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 (national - Department of Water Affairs): 90.0%; international non-government (Municipalities/water board/local authori): 10.0%

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

• infrastructure

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

• paid in cash

Comments:

Wages & salaries for workers

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)?

• yes

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Sustainable water supply in drought prone areas (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Bring alien plant invasions to a sustainable/maintenance level to allow landowners minimal input to control them)
Increased biodiversity in invaded areas (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Bring alien plant invasions to a sustainable/maintenance level to allow landowners minimal input to control them)
Empowerment at local communities (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: WFW is just a kick start for the communities, once they have receive training they are empowered to seek jobs elsewhere)
Vehicle for many other departments to reach a large number of people (e.g. for HIV/AIDS awareness, rape/abuse) (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: WFW is just a kick start for the communities, once they have receive training they are empowered to seek jobs elsewhere)

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Sustainable water supply in drought prone areas (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Bring alien plant invasions to a sustainable/maintenance level to allow landowners minimal input to control them)
Increased biodiversity in invaded areas (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Bring alien plant invasions to a sustainable/maintenance level to allow landowners minimal input to control them)
Empowerment at local communities (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: WFW is just a kick start for the communities, once they have receive training they are empowered to seek jobs elsewhere)
Vehicle for many other departments to reach a large number of people (e.g. for HIV/AIDS awareness, rape/abuse) (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: WFW is just a kick start for the communities, once they have receive training they are empowered to seek jobs elsewhere)

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?
Stop or start the nature of funding - contract workers who never know if they have a job from one year to the next	Sustainable funding

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Lack of planning	Sustainable and assured funding will allow for better planning and mapping
Lack of adequate alien vegetation maps	Sustainable and assured funding will allow for better planning and mapping
Lack of national weeds policy	Need to mobilise relevant departments to start work
Lack of follow-up because of inadequate planning and mapping

7.1 Methods/ sources of information