有助于对方法进行记录/评估的项目名称（如相关）The Transboundary Agro-ecosystem Management Project for the Kagera River Basin (GEF-FAO / Kagera TAMP )
有助于对方法进行记录/评估的机构名称（如相关）Kabale District Local Government (Kabale District Local Government) - 乌干达
有助于对方法进行记录/评估的机构名称（如相关）Rakai District - 乌干达
The approach involves the community and other development partners identifying opportunities, challenges and appropriate solutions through collective action.
Aims / objectives: To mobilize community members work together to find solution to community problems like environmental degradation , hunger and others with assistance of development partners.
To mobilize community resources to help in solving community problems e.g. labor, water. etc.
Methods: Community meeting between community leaders and SLM specialists.
Music , dance and drama to sensitize communities on sustainable land management.
Poster and IEC materials to sensitize farmers.
Hands on methods where farmers and other community members learnt by doing.
Stages of implementation: Initiation stage: This involved orientation meeting with community member & leaders to orient them about the project and roles of stakeholders.
Implementation stage; Each stakeholder carried out his/her role. This involved active participation /hand on of the farmers /land users.
Role of stakeholders: Community leaders ; Their role was mobilization of land users.
Farmers/land users: Participation in the implementation of the technology .Resource mobilization (local resources).
SLM Specialists (VI-Agroforestry): Provision of technical advice and information .Decision making, and making IEC materials.
The Approach focused mainly on SLM with other activities (Household income, increased production )
To mobilize land users /community members to find a solution to community problems using community resources.
To sensitize communities on sustainable land management and environmental conservation.
The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: The problems include environmental degradation caused by deforestation . Low agricultural production , inadequate wood fuel.
Inadequate resources to purchase seedlings & tools by the land users
Treatment through the SLM Approach: Local resource mobilization by land users
The existing land ownership, land use rights / water rights moderately helped the approach implementation: The individual ownership of the land moderately help the approach as it made decision making easy.
Kijonjo parish -Kasasa Sub-county Rakai district
Both men and women, also the PWDs , widows, and orphans. Poor and average income.
The international specialists (VI-Agro forestry staff) designed the approach
|启动/动机||互动||Local leaders mobilized land users. SLM Specialists sensitized land users & their leaders on SLM .|
|计划||互动||Land users were involved in information sharing. SLM Specialists provided technical guidance.|
|实施||互动||SLM Specialists gave technical advice to land users who were involved in active implementation of the project.|
|监测/评估||互动||The SLM Specialists were involved in M&E in consultation with land users.|
|Research||无||No research was conducted.|
The decision on the SLM technology choice was made by land users under the guidance of SLM specialists.
Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by mainly by SLM specialists with consultation of land users. The decision on the method of implementing the SLM technology was largely made by SLM specialists in consultation of the land users and their leaders.
- Village leaders.
The training involved both men and women of working age.
Agroforestry and its significance in conservation, Climate change , Afforestation.
Name of method used for advisory service: Extension; Key elements: Technical advice. , Community empowerment.
Advisory service is inadequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities; There is not enough advisory services to contribute to sustainable land conservation activities . There is one extension staff for each sub county who is not facilitated to visit the farmers.
technical aspects were regular monitored by project staff through measurements; indicators: Goals and objectives
economic / production aspects were regular monitored by project staff through observations; indicators: increased output and household income.
no. of land users involved aspects were ad hoc monitored by land users through observations; indicators: No. of male and female involved.
There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Yes there were few changes in the approach .e.g.. the consultations of land users in planning and monitoring of the SLM approach.
There were no changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation
Approach costs were met by the following donors: international non-government (VI-Agroforestry): 40.0%; local government (district, county, municipality, village etc) (Village councils): 5.0%; local community / land user(s) (Farmers): 55.0%
|Software activities like trainings|
Casual laborers paid in cash on a salary basis.
The SLM Specialists only financed software activities like trainings.
There was improvement in SLM like increased vegetation cover, increased afforestation, and reduction of soil erosion & deforestation.
PWDs and orphans improved availability of food and other basic needs.
The ownership /land user and water user rights had insignificant hindrance to the implementation of the technology.
Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?
Land users in Kasasa & Kakuuto sub counties , about 50% of land users in the sub counties have gradually adopted the approach.
Did the Approach lead to improved livelihoods / human well-being?
There was incomes of the people s moderate improvement in the household incomes of the people. There was also improved food security among households.
Did the Approach help to alleviate poverty?
The approach helped to reduce the poverty levels by improving the household incomes, and food among various land users.
increased production & income.
Deforestation causes shortage of fuel.
- well-being and livelihoods improvement
Improved household incomes.
Through community and farmers groups, and through community resource mobilization.
|The approach encourages involvement of farmers and other land users (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Increased involvement of farmers /land users in all stages of projects. )|
|The approach units the land user towards fighting community problems. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Deployment of more extension and advisory officers to work with land users. )|
|It enhances peoples participation. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Increased active participation of land users in all stages of the project. )|
|The approach encourages community resource mobilization. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Supplementing community resources with external support and subsidies. )|
|The approach encourages capacity building of land users. (How to sustain/ enhance this strength: Farmer field schools to enhance participatory learning that will lead to project sustainability. )|
|Inadequate external support for SLM activities.||Provide adequate external support to supplement local resources to enhance SLM activities.|
|Inadequate training and awareness of SLM activities.||More training and awareness creation on SLM activities through IEC materials like posters.|
|The approach did not involve external support & subsidies to enhance local resources.||Providing subsidies & external support to enhance local community resources.|
|The training was short and had little lasting impact to SLM land users.||Setting up farmer field schools to provide participatory learning to land users.|
|The approach dis not involve research on various aspects of the approach and technology.||Conduct research before implementation of the project.|
Rakai District Developement Plan 2010-2013 Rakai District Statistical Report 2009Natural Resources Evironmentaal Action Plan
Rakai District Statistical Report 2009
Natural Resources Environmental Action Plan