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

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

Applying Landscape and Sustainable Land Management (L-SLM) for mitigating land degradation and contributing to poverty reduction in rural area (L-SLM Project)

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

Watershed Organisation Trust (WOTR) - India

1.3 Conditions regarding the use of data documented through WOCAT

When were the data compiled (in the field)?

18/09/2025

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

Participatory Net Planning (PNP) is a practical methodology that actively engages landowners and local stakeholders in planning and implementing measures for land use, soil conservation, water harvesting, and biomass development. It aims to regenerate ecosystems and improve the sustainability of watersheds through site-specific resource management. PNP emphasizes the conservation, productivity enhancement, and sustainable use of natural and biological resources. It involves assessing the current condition and use of land, water, and vegetation, and preparing detailed plans—with estimated costs and timelines—to achieve the desired outcomes.
In Participatory Net Planning (PNP), the term “Net” represents a complete and interconnected planning framework where every land parcel within a watershed is individually assessed and linked to the larger watershed system. It highlights a network-based approach that integrates soil, water, vegetation, and community needs, ensuring that interventions on one farm support resource conservation and productivity across neighboring and downstream lands. Overall, it signifies a holistic and coordinated system where all stakeholders and resources are planned collectively for sustainable and long-term watershed management.

2.2 Detailed description of the Approach

Detailed description of the Approach:

By design, PNP functions as a tool for mobilization, training, monitoring, and evaluation in watershed programs.
Its key objectives are:

•Building ownership and commitment among landowners and stakeholders to ensure the long-term sustainability of watershed interventions.
•Planning site-specific measures that meet local needs, improve productivity, and address resource challenges.
•Developing realistic plans with clear activities, budgets, and timelines that can be implemented effectively, minimizing gaps between planned and actual outcomes.

The PNP approach places stakeholders at the center of the process. Landowners, farmers (both men and women), or users of Common Property Resources (CPRs) are directly involved in decision-making for their land or shared resources. During PNP exercises, the planning team visits each landholding or CPR along with the concerned stakeholders to jointly survey, assess, and plan interventions.
Stakeholders share their views on current and proposed land use and the necessary soil and water conservation treatments. The team discusses best practices and scientific options for land management, explaining their benefits and suitability. The final decision on interventions rests with the stakeholder—except when proposed actions could harm neighboring lands, CPRs, or the environment. In such cases, efforts are made to reach a consensus; if not possible, treatments on that land are withheld.
Once agreement is reached, the proposed measures are documented in writing and mapped on a diagram of the land or CPR.
PNP is gender-inclusive, ensuring both men and women participate in planning and decision-making. Ideally, the farming couple or land-owning couple is present during planning, even when land is officially registered in the man’s name. For CPRs, where stakeholders include landless people, marginal farmers, livestock owners, and shepherd communities, institutions like the Village Watershed Committee (VWC), Village Development Committee (VDC), and Gram Panchayat (GP) are involved. Their role is to ensure equitable access to ressources, manage conflicts, and establish transparent and representative local institutions for sustainable management of CPRs and create assets.
The Participatory Net Plan is more than just a planning document—it serves as a blueprint for implementation. Written in the local language, it remains accessible to stakeholders for regular reference. The plan is flexible and adaptive, evolving as new information emerges or stakeholders revise their preferences. Thus, it acts as a “living document” that supports transparency, continuous monitoring, and accountability.

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 objectives of Participatory Net Planning (PNP) are:
•To build a sense of ownership and commitment among landowners and other stakeholders within a watershed, ensuring long-term sustainability of the implemented measures.
•To plan site-specific interventions, meet stakeholder needs, and enhance land and water productivity.
•To develop practical proposals with clear activities, budgets, and timelines that ensure planned measures are effectively implemented and easily scaled up.

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	Local people are involved in awareness sessions, discussions, and joint problem analysis. Villagers, farmer groups, and watershed committees participate in identifying issues, priorities, and resources.
planning	interactive	Local communities participate in mapping land, resources, and existing interventions. They jointly develop action plans, decide on resource allocation, and may plan their own initiatives (self-mobilization).
implementation	interactive	Communities implement activities like soil and water conservation structures, plantations, or crop management. Some activities may be supported by food/cash/material incentives, but local ownership is emphasized.
monitoring/ evaluation	interactive	Local groups participate in tracking progress, maintaining records, and providing feedback. Village committees and farmer groups jointly evaluate the success of interventions and suggest corrective measures.
Farmers and local knowledge	interactive	Farmers provide local knowledge, observations, and data for research purposes. They interact with external teams for documentation, experimentation, and knowledge sharing.

3.3 Flow chart (if available)

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

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

• all relevant actors, as part of a participatory approach

Explain:

The PNP approach helps identify the current land use and understand the socio-economic conditions linked to it. It aims to improve farmers’ income by suggesting better land use patterns. Technical and agricultural experts play a key role in preparing the proposed land use plan, which is then replicated with other farmers in the village. The village committee is essential for mobilizing and encouraging community participation in this process.

Specify on what basis decisions were made:

• evaluation of well-documented SLM knowledge (evidence-based decision-making)
• personal experience and opinions (undocumented)

4.1 Capacity building/ training

Was training provided to land users/ other stakeholders?

Yes

Specify who was trained:

• land users
• field staff/ advisers

Form of training:

• farmer-to-farmer
• demonstration areas
• public meetings

Subjects covered:

Assessment of current land use, classification of land types, and implementation of on-site soil conservation measures.

Comments:

A joint meeting of multiple landowners is organized to share basic information, followed by a field demonstration in one of the plots to explain the planning tool. Photos and videos of various in-situ soil conservation measures, aligned with the land use and land cover, are also presented.

4.2 Advisory service

Do land users have access to an advisory service?

Yes

Specify whether advisory service is provided:

• on land users' fields
• at permanent centres

Describe/ comments:

The service is provided under the project by the implementing agency. The landowner can develop the land according to requirements with the assistance of a land developer or consultant.

4.3 Institution strengthening (organizational development)

Have institutions been established or strengthened through the Approach?

• yes, greatly

Specify the level(s) at which institutions have been strengthened or established:

• local
• regional

Describe institution, roles and responsibilities, members, etc.

The planning tool is a socio-technical approach used for sustainable land development. Agricultural engineers, social engineers, and environmental experts from institutions can participate, along with officers from the Forest and Agricultural departments.

Specify type of support:

• financial
• capacity building/ training

4.4 Monitoring and evaluation

Is monitoring and evaluation part of the Approach?

Yes

Comments:

The overall plan is verified on a sample basis to ensure quality and alignment with ground reality.

If yes, is this documentation intended to be used for monitoring and evaluation?

Yes

Comments:

Field verification shall be conducted based on the prepared planning documents.

4.5 Research

Was research part of the Approach?

Yes

Specify topics:

• sociology
• economics / marketing
• ecology
• technology

Give further details and indicate who did the research:

Experts involved in the planning and implementation of the PNP contribute their experience. While research was not the primary focus, insights gained during community mobilization and watershed plan execution help improve the approach for smoother implementation.

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):

The total cost from planning to implementation is measured per hectare and ranges from ₹20,000 to ₹50,000 per hectare, depending on the proposed land use.

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)

• 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?

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)?

• yes

If yes, describe how:

Land users can sustain the interventions implemented through the PNP approach without external support, provided they have gained adequate knowledge, skills, and ownership during the participatory planning process. The focus on locally appropriate techniques, use of available resources, and community involvement ensures long-term sustainability.

6.4 Strengths/ advantages of the Approach

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the land user’s view
Participatory Decision-Making: Land users actively contribute ideas and decisions, ensuring the plan reflects their needs and priorities.
Improved Knowledge: Farmers gain practical knowledge about soil, land use, and conservation techniques.
Sustainable Land Management: Encourages adoption of site-specific, in-situ conservation measures that improve soil fertility and productivity.
Livelihood Opportunities: Identifies farm-based income options, such as dairy, fodder production, and agroforestry.
Resource Optimization: Promotes efficient use of local resources like stones, bushes, and organic matter.
Conflict Reduction: Helps mitigate disputes over land boundaries and reduces encroachments.
Empowerment: Strengthens community organization and gives women and marginalized groups more decision-making opportunities.
Long-Term Benefits: Supports soil moisture retention, biomass production, and water conservation, leading to resilient agriculture.

Strengths/ advantages/ opportunities in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
Effective Planning Tool: Provides a structured framework for assessing land, soil, and resources scientifically.
Community Engagement: Facilitates active participation of landowners, enhancing acceptance and ownership of interventions.
Integrated Approach: Combines technical, social, and environmental considerations for sustainable land management.
Field-Oriented Learning: Allows experts to demonstrate techniques and observe practical challenges.
Sustainability Focus: Encourages adoption of low-cost, locally suitable interventions that are maintainable without continuous external support.
Conflict Mitigation: Helps in discussing land disputes and clarifying boundaries.
Scalable & Replicable: Can be applied across multiple fields or villages for wider impact.

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: Participatory meetings and field exercises require considerable time.	Time Management: Schedule meetings and demonstrations at convenient times for farmers.
Resource Dependence: Initial implementation may need materials or guidance not readily available to all farmers.	Local Resource Use: Emphasize low-cost, locally available materials for interventions.
Knowledge Gap: Some farmers may initially struggle to understand technical aspects.	Capacity Building: Provide training and simple demonstration tools to bridge technical knowledge gaps.
Group Dynamics: Conflicts or dominant voices within the group may affect decision-making.	Facilitation: Use neutral facilitators to manage group discussions and ensure all voices are heard.
Maintenance Challenges: Sustaining interventions over time without support can be difficult for some households.	Follow-Up Support: Provide periodic guidance and monitoring to help farmers maintain interventions.

Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks in the compiler’s or other key resource person’s view	How can they be overcome?
Time-Intensive: Participatory planning and field exercises require significant time and effort.	Efficient Scheduling: Plan activities to minimize disruption to farmers’ regular work.
Dependence on Community Cooperation: Effectiveness relies on active participation and willingness of land users.	Capacity Building: Train community members to enhance understanding and technical competence.
Limited Technical Precision: Field-level decisions may sometimes compromise scientific accuracy due to local constraints.	Facilitation & Guidance: Experts guide discussions to balance local preferences with technical requirements.
Resource Limitations: Availability of tools, inputs, or skilled manpower may restrict implementation.	Resource Planning: Ensure access to necessary inputs and tools before implementation.
Monitoring Challenges: Ensuring long-term adherence to recommended interventions can be difficult.	Follow-Up Mechanisms: Establish monitoring and support systems for sustained adoption.

7.1 Methods/ sources of information

7.2 References to available publications

Title, author, year, ISBN:

Participatory Net Planning: A Practitioner's Handbook, authored by Crispino Lobo. 2010. ISBN: 978-81-86748-23-7 [Supported by: German Agency for Technical Cooperation (GTZ)]

Available from where? Costs?

https://wotr.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/WOTR-PNP-Practitioners-Handbook.pdf

7.3 Links to relevant information which is available online

Title/ description:

Participatory Net Planning (PNP)

URL:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dU9dSJUgIQM

Title/ description:

How to do Participatory Net planning

URL:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGom-qA_be4

Title/ description:

How to do Micro planning in Watershed Project

URL:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDOKQBfcg-0

Title/ description:

Rising Together: Building Resilient Communities for a Sustainable Tomorrow

URL:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gCFkwkfwdg&t=2s

Title/ description:

How to do Wealth Ranking in Watershed Project

URL:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygiAy7f7Gpc

Title/ description:

Integrated Watershed Management in Sinnar cluster, Nashik district, Maharashtra, India

URL:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HfP20wucnE&t=3s

Title/ description:

A New Beginning

URL:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBzF7DXbedM&t=2s