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

{'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 1038, 'label': 'Name of project which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)', 'text': 'Integrated Health and Habitat Improvement in Rasht Valley, Tajikistan', 'template': 'raw'} {'additional_translations': {}, 'value': 1212, 'label': 'Name of the institution(s) which facilitated the documentation/ evaluation of the Approach (if relevant)', 'text': 'Aga Khan Foundation (AKF) - Switzerland', 'template': 'raw'}

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

25/07/2017

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

Participatory Land Use Planning and Assessment is an inter disciplinary approach to the land use with combination of the modern tools and community knowledge to identify land degradations with its intensity and trends and through this approach design intervention directed toward land degradation prevention. This approach also compiles different tools including PRA and soil assessment and LADA techniques in a participatory manner. The approach address issues with all categories of land use including crop and pasture land, forest and even settlement with regards to natural disaster consideration for construction.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

As a precondition to the development of evidence- and needs-based plans, Participatory Land Use Planning and Assessment (PLUPA) will be conducted, with participation of local specialists, to assess sub-watershed natural and human-induced hazards and natural resource conditions, and IHA results will be presented to community and local government stakeholders to foster ownership. The outcome will improve community involvement in development by enhancing the ability to conduct local development planning and implementation.
Attention will be given to promoting the role of women in local development.
The PLUPA will employ terrestrial inspection of the land using simplified tools based on the WOCAT questionnaire for the land management technologies. The field-based assessment will include physical inspection of the land use and collecting necessary data like GPS points and information on target watershed (e.g. availability of pastureland, natural hazards, public and private infrastructure). The remote sensing component will be used for analyzing images and identification of trend analysis as well erosion on soil, land degradation.
Communities (via CSOs) and local governments are involved in conducting PLUPA, and will drive and own the result for development of their plan at watershed level. They will also be core stakeholders in the prioritization of water, health, and NRM interventions as per watershed management plan, and will be partners and contributors (including financially) in construction and management of new infrastructure post-project. This fosters commitment and ownership, promoting development that is accountable, participatory, inclusive, transparent, and efficient.

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 main goal of the approach is to bring together stakeholders to use simplified methods on soil assessment and raise awareness on the importance of soil health for production. Based on that approach communities will design action for better management of their land and soil conservaiton

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	external support	land users of different categories, including pasture users, forest user etc,. come together to discuss the future land use perspective and decide on organizing themselves in better management of their land resources
planning	interactive	all stakeholders involved and support different perspective of land use categories and jointly plan for the future land use
implementation	external support	all stakeholders, involved in different land use categories negotiate and agree on terms and condition with regards complement the different land use importance.
monitoring/ evaluation	passive	all stakeholders are passive in following the progress and results from land use intervention.

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:

the approach is introduced in the framework of the projects and only SLM specialists consult on the tools and approach how to plan

Specify on what basis decisions were made:

• evaluation of well-documented SLM knowledge (evidence-based decision-making)

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users
• field staff/ advisers

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

training on soil assessment, land management and participatory land use planning and assessment

Form of training:

• on-the-job
• public meetings

Subjects covered:

land degradation, soil assessment, land management

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

No

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

Describe institution, roles and responsibilities, members, etc.

land use committee under the village organization as small entity dealing with land issues in the community only

Specify type of support:

• capacity building/ training

Give further details:

land management, land degradation prevention

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

No

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

5.2 Financial/ material support provided to land users

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

No

5.3 Subsidies for specific inputs (including labour)

• none

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

• voluntary

5.4 Credit

Was credit provided under the Approach for SLM activities?

No

5.5 Other incentives or instruments

Were other incentives or instruments used to promote implementation of SLM Technologies?

Yes

If yes, specify:

some funding was made available for implementation of action prioritized in the land use planning

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)?

• uncertain

If no or uncertain, specify and comment:

community are only focused to get maximum economic benefit from land and therefore do not pay enough attention to support ecosystem services or environmental aspect of land conservation

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
participatory
simply approach applied by community members themselve

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
provides visions, empowers land users to negotiate interventions among them, also raise awareness on the sustainability aspects of land use and provides more aspects on land conservation techniques for land term land use

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?
time consuming, required a lot of facilitation	more awareness on communities knowledge about long term land use benefits. strengthen local legal framework to sustain and promote the planing process

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
SLM knowledge and capacity	trainings for the local institutes involved in land use planing and management

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Participatory Land Use Planning, 2011

Available from where? Costs?

Free of charge, from SLM compiler