Participatory community development plan: a vehicle for knowledge sharing and sustainable development

Improving the livelihoods of agro-pastoral systems in WANA region: Achievements and lessons learnedAli NEFZAOUICRP-DS Flagship Coordinator NA&WAa.nefzaoui@cgiar.org

1Pastoral & agropastoral systems in the WANADeep changes in the pastoral & agropastoral production systemsRangeland: reduction in area and productivityMechanized transportIncreasing reliance on supplemental feedFailure of most of development initiatives aiming to achieve better management of grazing lands and avoid degradation (collective land tenure status, open access)Pastoral & agropastoral systems: ChallengesFailure of top-down approaches; Slow adoption of participatory approaches (more than 3 decades);Technical options: easy to develop and implement, and are not sufficient; Policy and institutional issues are the bottle neck and are crucial for Natural resources management;Land tenure dimension: crucial (natural resources are not confined to administrative division)3

Deep changes of the pastoral & agropastoral systems4

Dismantlement of traditional institutions; Privatization of communal rangelands; Regression of animal mobility;Reliance on supplemental feed;Mechanization;Inequity between poor and rich herdersHardins tragedy of the commonsCommons are doomed to fail because of combined effects of:Demographic pressureHuman desire to maximize individual benefitsCompetition and overuse of resources (open access)Hardin State property rights or private property rights to eliminate free riders & establish incentives for users not to over-exploit resourcesThe issue of land tenure and right of useMost WANA governments view pastoral resources as state property, while the pastoral communities consider them as their territory. Poorly defined tenure rights often lead to conflicts and equity issues. Those who advocate devolution policies suggest that the success of range management depends on the extent to which pastoral communities are granted full control over access and use of the resources and on the assurance of benefiting from improvements.The issue of land tenure & right of useState ownership and state driven cooperatives: These cooperatives, prevailing in most WANA countries, co-opted the roles traditionally played by pastoral communities and institutions. They proved to be unpopular due to the separation between traditional rules and production systems, and rules governing the functioning of cooperatives and their resources. Herder-driven community cooperatives: The main benefit, compared to state-driven cooperatives, is that they offer better security of tenure to their members, in addition to new services such as health and feed provision. However, more exclusive decision-making authority on access and use of cooperative pastures is needed.The issue of land tenure & right of use (ctd.)Community-based cooperatives: These have been created to enhance the managerial role of local institutions and maintain customary access and use rules. They provide security of tenure over pastureland and mere local control over resource access and use. Co-management of community rangelands: This strategy, mainly used in Tunisia, involves placing non-privatized tribal pastureland under the control of the Forest Services to improve the range and manage its utilization. A Study case: ICARDA-IFAD partnershipProgram of agropastoral development and promotion of local initiatives at South East Tunisia PRODESUD

Agropastoral area of 4.7 million ha(90 % of communal rangelands)

Plaine PimontDjebelDaharDunes MobilesGrand Erg Oriental100 mmClimate:Rainfall : 80-175 mm/yearFrequent droughtsTwo aridity gradients: North South East West10,000 households (6.6)5000 SheepherdersSheep & goats: 554000 Camels: 29000Rangeland-based livestock is the main vehicle of the region economyProject Area/ The Gate to desert

11

An excellent traditional know-how: Water harvesting (jessours)12

Rich cultural heritage (Ksours: 110)13IFAD-ICARDA terms of partnershipDesign the PRODESUD ProjectDevelop methodologies and tools for participatory management of natural resourcesTraining & backstopping of the PRODESUD teamDesigning the ProjectNegotiation with high-ranking decision makersDeveloping the tribes map (socio-territorial units STUs)Production systems typology of the regionSelection of 4 representative tribes (STU) to test methodologies and toolsInitiate community based organizations (CBOs)

Society & territories- 37 management councils- 25 GDA

Property rights map- Private land: 327000 ha- Collective land: 3,562 million ha

Administrative division- 7 Districts - 64 Imadas

16

The tribal map of Tataouine Governorate, Southeastern Tunisia Methodologies and tools for participatory management of natural resourcesDevelop methodologies and tools for participatory management of natural resources Empower communities through the creation of community-based organizations (CBOs) Getting policymakers at the local and national level to realize that technical, policy, and institutional options (TIPOs) must be strongly linked and integrated for a successful and sustainable local development Enhance on-going research and development initiatives using community participatory tools through a sound training program targeting all stakeholders.

Participatory Community Development Plan: Methodology/ Steps and toolsStep 1. Participatory characterization of the Community (territory and users): knowledge/learning phase Step 2. Participatory diagnosis & planningStep 3. Participatory programmingStep 4. Characterization & promotion of community-based organizationsStep 5. Implementation and Monitoring and EvaluationProcess based on group animation and multi-disciplinary team work1919

Tools & methodologies to implement PA and CDP in agropastoral communities

2122The population through the participatory process determines the activities to be implemented, the amount, the location, the beneficiaries, and the implementing entity. The population contributes effectively in monitoring and endorsement of the work implemented. The power given to the community is a part of a MOU signed between the community and the Project management unit. Small businesses are currently emerging from the community (soil and water conservation, planting, nurseries, etc.), The President of the CBO is acting equal to equal with the project director, and approves and co-sign with him any deal/bargain related to their community.Innovation: Local development22Highlights of main achievementsInstitutionalization of the Community Approach (CA) and Implementation of Community Development Plans (CDPs) (outcome A successful framework for community-based participatory research in WANA/ score 8.6) 25 Agropastoral communities in IFAD-funded project in Tunisia; Agropastoral communities in IFAD-funded project in Morocco Agropastoral communities in Algeria, Syria, and JordanLegal framework of CBOsThe methodology is know recognized and used in many countries (Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, etc.)

Development Projects benefit from M&M!Barani Project, PakistanKordofan project, SudanSiliana & Zaghouan Projects, TunisiaPRODESUD, TunisiaPDPO, MoroccoPDRTT, MoroccoOued Safsaf, AlgeriaARMPII (Jordan), KARIANET/IDRCAnd many others M&M community approach and CDPs has been recognized and used by development agencies and donorsHighlights of main achievements Options for communal management of rangeland resources: How CBOs play a central role in the management of collective rangelands?What legal status and mandate of CBOs:Pastoral cooperatives in MoroccoGDA in TunisiaCommunes in AlgeriaStudy-case: Improvement and management of desert rangelands in Southeastern Tunisia (26 GDAs, 90 % of Tunisian collective rangelands)Participatory management of communal rangelands

Open grazingTwo years restingGood resilienceParticipatory management of communal rangelands20062008BiomassRUERange valueBiomassRUERange valueRest (P)80023,5452135106,7120Open (G)45013,23823611,832Biomass: DM.Kg.ha-1; RUE: Kg.mm-1; Range value: FU.ha-1.year-1Impact of two years rangeland resting (P) on biomass, rain use efficiency (RUE) and range value as compared to those of the grazed site (G) of the Chenini (Tunisia) communal rangeland (O. Belgacem et al., 2007). Evolution of diversity (Shanon index H' and Equitability E) during 2006 2008 in relation to management mode

Impact of rangeland resting on biodiversity20062008Species richness Protected area (P)Grazed area (G)Protected area (P)Grazed area (G)Total species46235222Perennial species329409Annual species14141213Perennial grasses4262Adoption of collective rangeland resting technique

Increase of collective rangeland area under rest (PRODESUD Tataouine)Increase of collective rangeland sites put under rest (PRODESUD Tataouine)

TD/UZOImpact of rangeland resting technique on pastors incomeKey learningThe success of this methodology depends on effective communication where all stakeholders are involved in negotiating and discussing community development plan on an equal basis and where indigenous and research-based knowledge and other sources of knowledge are explored, examined and used;Annual and long-term development plan approved by communities is an efficient tool to mobilize resources and ease project implementationDo not underestimate the ability of communities to identify appropriate technical solutions, to solve internal conflicts particularly relating to property rights

32Key learningThe success and the sustainability of the process depends on the promotion of elected community-based organizations (CBOs) that play a key interface role between communities and other actors (government agencies and decision makers, non government agencies, donors, and other communities).Better institutional encroachment of local institutions (representative in local and regional organizations) Favor decentralization and devolution Empower individuals and communities

33Key learningGDA: combination of tradition and modernity but inadequate legal frameworkSome empowerment indicators:Self confidence, initiative Ability to rally people and to exert leadership. Collective feelings as us and confidence in ourselves abilityAbility to raise opportunities and funding (ex: 6 GEF grants)Part of the local and regional (Governorate) decision-making process

34Urgent challengesPolicy issues: What strategy for grazing lands?Institutional issue: 3 umbrellas Need to bring all this under an unified entity (e.g. Agency to cooperate with many department) OEP : privateDGF: communalDGACTA: bothGDA legal framework: current legislation is inappropriatePASTORAL CODEUrgent challengesMultifunctionality of rangelands: Environmental services, eco-tourism, medicinal and herbal plants, etc Rangeland projects should be integrated with projects in other sectorsTo achieve greater efficiency: Human capacity development should be an integral component of any project related to rangelandsGovernance and support to CBOs and herder associationsUrgent challengesStudy conflicts and develop mechanisms for conflict resolution are crucial for successful implementation Climate change and climate variability (drought): protection of rangelands during drought years is a crucial aspectThe development of rangelands is crucial for decreasing the vulnerability of the poorest section of Tunisias population and alleviating poverty.

ICARDA is ready to collaborate

Framework:The New CGIAR Research Program (CRP) on Dryland SystemsSelection of benchmark areas & action sites Reducing vulnerability (SRT2 type)Sustainable intensification (SRT3 type)

Circles/ovals indicate roughly the 5 Target Regions.39yellow = tropical drylandspale and dark brown = non-tropical drylands with winter and summer rainfall respectively

The dry areas of the developing world occupy about 3 billion hectares (41% of the earths surface) and are home to some 2.5 billion people (more than one-third of the world population) and the majority of the worlds poor.

In these areas, agriculture and pastoralism remain the main source of rural livelihoods. They are highly vulnerable, fragile ecosystems: and economic activities are constrained by persistent water scarcity, climatic variability and frequent droughts, rapid natural resource degradation and desertification and groundwater depletion

They are furthered threatened by climate change (decline in annual precipitation and increase in mean temperatures).

Dry lands, and particularly the most marginal lands (mountains, rangelands, and marginal arable areas), have suffered from underinvestment in research and development and supporting infrastructure

To ensure the future livelihoods of dryland farming communities, it is critical to (1) manage risk more effectively in the most vulnerable systems, by building ecosystem resilience, and (2) enhance production growth in higher potential areas through both the diversification and the sustainable intensification of production systems.

Thus, the complexity of challenges facing the dry areas requires an integrated agro-ecosystems approach to research for development. CRP1.1 will not be involved in basic research on single components of crop improvement and genetics, and other fields, but will take an integrated systems approach.

CRP-DS Goal & PartnersGoal: to identify and develop resilient, diversified and more productive combinations of crop, livestock, rangeland, aquatic and agroforestry systems that increase productivity, reduce hunger and malnutrition, and improve quality of life for the rural poor. ICARDA (Lead Center) and 8 CG CentersICRISATBioversity InternationalCIATCIPICRAFILRIIWMISub-Saharan Africa Challenge Program (SSA CP)Reducing the number of sites: 3 sites 3 ALSs42

Meknes-Saiss, MoroccoB.K-S.B,TunisiaNile DeltaEgyptT-SJordan-SyriaKRBEgyptIntensive rainfedAgropastoralIntensive irrigatedBni Khdache-Sidi Bouzid Site, Tunisia (Agropastoral)43

17,920 km2 (5 Governorates);Total population: 1.525 million,AI: 0.07-0.35IPCC 4th Assessment Report on Climate Change: hotspot of CC, expected decline of 20-40% in the annual precipitation end 21st centuryResearch QuestionsAre the local institutional set ups such as GDA the best vehicles for rational and sustainable management of communal rangeland resources?Can a pastoral code be an effective way of managing common rangelands and what policies and institutional set ups are needed to implement it?What are the impacts of Government interventions for protecting natural resources (governance and gender equity)? How to improve and sustain livelihoods of farmers who face market fluctuations, CC and sustainable management of natural resources?44Communal rangeland management by the communities, Promotion of a national pastoral code, Impact assessment of soil and water harvesting work, Use of Bioeconomic and multi-agent modeling that will be used to develop future scenarios and trade-offs that help decision making and assess impacts.45Assess the impacts of NRM national programManaging water scarcity and combating land degradationManaging rangelands and biodiversity conservationCommunity- based flock & crop management Innovation platformsValue chains of cash crops and sheepDevelop and use bio-economic/ multi-agent modelsPromoting a national pastoral codeEmpower women and youth through the creation of specific CBOsIDO1ResilienceIDO2Wealth & WellbeingIDO3Food accessIDO4NRMIDO5Gender empowermentIDO6Capacity to innovateActivitiesinvolvement of women and youth in the decision process improved through the creation of at least 3 women/youth associations in the field sitetwo innovation platforms established and operational and at least two communities participatory development plans developed with all stakeholders; water and land policies analyzed and documented; value-chains for sheep, olive, figs and cactus developed with the participation of all actors and stakeholdersgrazing lands productivity is improved by 20 % in communal rangelands under rest and managed by communities; productivity of controlled flocks improved by 10 % in at least two communities; 5 % of HHs will have more secured food access10 % of poor households increased their income by 5% at field sites women and youth improved their access to resources, and consequently improved their dietary scores at field sites Private and community-based management of land, water, rangelands, and biodiversity degradation decreased by 10 %; livestock and crops productivities improved by 15 % at participating farms in field site Partners along impact pathwayDevelopment agencies

Policy makers

Line departments

Producer & marketing associations

NGOs/CSOs

Extension systems

Agribusiness

Farmers pastoralists

NARS

Advanced research centers

CG centers

Other CRPsSLOsGraph766236170608121

Feuil1Pas d'levage0.25Effectif de troupeau =25 ttes0.375labour cost60Breeding Alimentation26Transport10veterinary care3watering1Les chargesMoyenne des charges251923192019271910191319719231918193519819Les RecetteMoyenne45.37546.4589.354838709746.4527.546.4535.555555555646.4542.857142857146.456146.4531.964285714346.4565.62546.454.647887323946.4555.483870967746.4551.646.45Declared GM /UZOCalculated GM/UZO-19136819418025122772753551672748699106166110132-174684201GM/UZO (DT)UZOSur lands put in the rest13401301943115003025181407736400100355310027471209915401662820004013281204671120203160

Feuil1000

Feuil200000

Feuil30000000000000000000000

Les chargesMoyenne des chargesEleveursDT/UZO

Feuil40000000000000000000000

Les RecetteMoyenneEleveursDT/UZO

0000000000000000000000

Declared GM /UZOCalculated GM/UZOStockbreedersDT

000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

GM/UZO (DT)UZOSur lands put in the reststochbreeders

10 ttes< Classe I