Tajikistan faces a major problem of unsustainable grazing pressure from high livestock numbers and insufficient pasture management. The country is in dire need of better pasture governance based on a solid legal basis. Therefore, GIZ Tajikistan has worked on the improvement of the legal framework and facilitated a dialogue between different stakeholders.
Additionally, and institutional analysis on pasture management in Tajikistan that outlines the institutional and legal set-up and distribution of roles and responsibilities in the pasture management sector of Tajikistan has been conducted together with other organisations to support the governance process in the future.
Further, a Pasture Management Networking Platform has been supported. The objective of the PMNP is to contribute to the sustainable management of pastures in Tajikistan. The objective is pursued through national dialogue and knowledge exchange based on practical and on-the-ground experiences of the pasture management network members.
1. Conduct an institutional analysis on pasture management in Tajikistan
2. Support a strong law on Pasture and feasible by-laws
3. Support the establishment of Pasture User Unions (PUU)*
*Pasture User Unions (PUU) are comprised of pasture users and are established at the jamoat (rural municipality) level with members from several villages. It is a formal organisation, replete with a statute and legal registration, stamp and bank account.
When improving the pasture governance the following should be considered:
Inform all stakeholders on the pasture law and support the enforcement of the by-laws;
Specify the roles and responsibilities in pasture management and ensure all stakeholders are aware of their roles and responsibilities;
Identify entry-points for future improvement of the legal framework;
Ensure good donor coordination;
Support the creation of Pasture User Unions (PUU) and Commission on Pastures (CoP);
Involving local communities in conservation process
Stakeholder consultation workshop, at Keibul
WII
Advocating for Sangai conservation during the State Board for Wildlife meeting
WII
Animal health camp organized for villagers as trust building exercise
WII
Human health camp organized for villagers as trust building exercise
WII
To garner political and local support for Sangai conservation in KLNP, advocacy was done with all stakeholders. In addition, appropriate measures are being undertaken to improve the awareness of the local people for conserving the species and promote Sangai as the mascot of sustainable development through various capacity building programmes.
1. State forest department's interest.
2. Sangai is an important cultural symbol in Manipur, and hence is considered as pride of Manipur, by local people and Government of Manipur.
3. Supportive Government of India, which provides funding and other support.
1. Multi-stakeholder dialogue builds transparency and trust.
2. Addressing livelihoods of local communities dependent on resources is indispensable .
Securing existing population in Keibul Lamjao National Park
Sangai in its habitat, the floating meadows
WII
Capacity building of frontline staff
WII
Cultural significance of Sangai
Various sources
The existing population of Sangai is being secured through integrated management plan, implemented by the Manipur Forest Department. Integrated management plan involves continuous habitat management strategies, habitat and population monitoring, enhanced patrolling strategies, genetic studies and involvement of local communities and different stakeholders at KLNP.
1. State forest department's interest.
2. Sangai is an important cultural symbol in Manipur, and hence is considered as pride of Manipur, by local people and Government of Manipur.
3. Supportive Government of India, which provides funding and other support.
1. Rigorous field work is critical for identification of habitat requirement of Sangai, and other related aspects of population management.
2. Continuous monitoring ensues long term success.
Commitment to conservation objectives through Conservation Agreements
Conservation Agreements (CAs) are binding grant contracts created and agreed upon by specific communities and the ECF. CAs set out clear, attainable and realistic conservation objectives and determine the scope of conservation measuresto be implemented within communities that demonstrate the have the organization, motivation and commitment to follow 10-year habitat management plans. Conservation objectives set by the ECF and local community use expert and local knowledge. Each agreement is tailored to the identified needs in the target community and the local landscape. These contracts bind communities to protect ecosystems but also assist traditional land users to use the land in a sustainable way.
The communities that sign Conservation Agreements have been selected to do so because they show initiative, community involvement and potential through the FPA process and establishment of a CBO. In order to ensure the sustainability of the projects, the compliance of Conservation Agreements is monitored. Each community must submit annual technical reports. In case they fail to perform the planned activities, the payments under the agreement may be suspended until they meet the requirements, or subsequently terminated if they don’t comply for more than a year.
Successful application of the FPA; communities practice using tools, models, financing
Development of a philosophy of support and education, not policing
Careful selection of communities which demonstrate the skills, organization and involvement to commence conservation measures
Providing training and education to make decisions and manage landscapes in cooperation with nature conservation ideals
Clearly defining activities being paid for creates a sense of purpose for CBOs
Assisting communities secure additional funding
Technical expertise is needed in very few cases for specific questions related to agreeing on habitat management plans.
The cost estimates were developed in cooperation with the local community representatives based on their knowledge of local markets. The final result is that a fair, full cost reimbursement is set by the conservation agreements that allows the CBOs to implement the Conservation Agreements and secure their economic sustainability over the contracted period.
Annual community reports include: a comparison of targeted and actual values for the planned measures; developments in project time frames; general financial report; information on problems and identification of possible solutions.
Each year, a sample of conservation agreements are selected for independent audit of performance by ECF or a third party. This is an opportunity to examine monitoring and reporting and a method to test performance of the conservation agreement process.
Examining connections between conservation objective and resilience/livelihoods of locals helps direct future projects.
Clear land ownership and land tenure (the right to use land) are the basic preconditions for the implementation of any habitat management measure. Land-use rights of all beneficiaries needs to be clear and secure before project initiatives commence, to avoids risk of undocumented dimensions in the planning and implementation of conservation measures. It also secures long-term interest of the land user to manage the land sustainably. The purpose of this measure is to clarify, legally regulate, obtain and hold land tenure rights needed for conservation actions and for sustainable livelihood. Land tenure rights encompasses land ownership, lease of land and/or other rights related to the use of land.
In Azerbaijan, most land is state owned. But after the breakdown of the Soviet Union land tenure rights have not been properly documented or registered. Today, traditional land-use rights are based on verbal agreements and traditions are translated into legally documented/registered leases by the CBOs representing their respective villages. Resolving uncertain land tenure is one of the major benefits the ECF is bringing to partner communities, providing them with a clear economic perspective for the future while preserving the existing community management of shared pastures and meadows.
Readiness of state property authorities to document and register the existing community land use rights
Completion of a land tenure study to understand the land tenure uncertainties and existing rights
Accurate mapping of entire conservation area and communication of these findings (maps, figures, reports) accessible to the community and authorities
Active involvement of local governments (municipality and department levels)
Voluntary involvement of local authorities, departments and administration
Proper compensation for land-use
Properly identify land-use rights and open issues including research, data collection and GIS analysis performed i) formally (municipal and regional data collection), and ii) informally (discussions with locals).
Consideration of information documentation and lack of documentation. Locals may use pasturelands/meadows in a traditional way, with little or no documentation of their user rights. In the frame of the project, the land-use needs to be considered in both formal/political contexts and informal/traditional contexts.
Communication between multiple land management bodies in Armenia (state, municipality, community, private) and land-use designations (forests, agricultural, protected areas, private land). Positive relationships and active communication with all stakeholders leads to healthy working relationships
Consideration of national and regional politics integral to securing land-use rights.
Sufficient budgeting of costs required to obtain land-use rights.
Establishment of community-based organizations (CBOs)
Establishing a community-based organization (CBO) is the step between the FPA process and signing a Conservation Agreement. CBOs are created with ECF’s guidance and are responsible for:
i) securing and implementing a Conservation Agreement
ii) the fair and equitable distribution of benefits among the community
iii) acting as the legal entity representing the community in a Conservation Agreement.
CBOs are formed under the national law that is appropriate to its purpose, country and region. If creating a CBO is not possible, an NGO can act as a CBO in the Conservation Agreement.
To establish a CBO the local community must make a long-term commitment to cooperation and take responsibility for conservation actions. In this way the CBO contributes to strengthening the social capital and increasing sustainable land-use practices. CBO’s help build community connectedness, communication and resilience related to nature conservation efforts. CBOs are encouraged to consider biodiversity as part of the local economy and work closely with ECF to agree on sustainable land-use. CBOs are encouraged to seek other sources of funding for community projects and to develop their activities as a sustainable business during the implementation period of the Conservation Agreement.
Self-organisation of communities is initiated or strengthened through the FPA
Negotiation of terms with representatives of the community to provide a clear, long-term Conservation Agreement
Dialogue, negotiation and involvement with all segments of the community: elders, decision makers, influential community members, women and youth
Identify and include all user groups within a community: herders, farmers, hunters, healers
Involvement of local authorities
Strategic engagement with institutions at regional and national levels
Lack of community level governance, lack of environmental awareness and negative wildlife interactions require education/community awareness campaigns.
Small, locally-led projects encourage community capacity building, communication and implementation of conservation strategies.
Establishment of CBOs represents FPA progress and a qualitative improvement in terms of local self-organisation.
Do not impose an organisation model on the local community; decide on a model together.
Capacity building related to management and governance of CBOs is critical to secure initial success and reduce dependence on external support.
Involvement of the CBO with acquisition and organization of baseline information on livelihood-related issues, natural resources and land-use secures relevant information and contributes to CBO’s capacity building.
Accepting community members’ views when designing project goals ensures projects serve the entire community.
Involvement of local governments link the applications of ecosystem-based management to larger themes like climate change and disaster risk reduction.
Commitment to conservation objectives through Conservation Agreements
Conservation Agreements (CAs) are binding grant contracts created and agreed upon by specific communities and the ECF. CAs set out clear, attainable and realistic conservation objectives and determine the scope of conservation measuresto be implemented within communities that demonstrate the have the organization, motivation and commitment to follow 10-year habitat management plans. Conservation objectives set by the ECF and local community use expert and local knowledge. Each agreement is tailored to the identified needs in the target community and the local landscape. These contracts bind communities to protect ecosystems but also assist traditional land users to use the land in a sustainable way.
The communities that sign Conservation Agreements have been selected to do so because they show initiative, community involvement and potential through the FPA process and establishment of a CBO. In order to ensure the sustainability of the projects, the compliance of Conservation Agreements is monitored. Each community must submit annual technical reports. In case they fail to perform the planned activities, the payments under the agreement may be suspended until they meet the requirements, or subsequently terminated if they don’t comply for more than a year.
Successful application of the FPA; communities practice using tools, models, financing
Development of a philosophy of support and education, not policing
Careful selection of communities which demonstrate the skills, organization and involvement to commence conservation measures
Providing training and education to make decisions and manage landscapes in cooperation with nature conservation ideals
Clearly defining activities being paid for creates a sense of purpose for CBOs
Assisting communities secure additional funding
Technical expertise is needed in very few cases for specific questions related to agreeing on habitat management plans.
The cost estimates were developed in cooperation with the local community representatives based on their knowledge of local markets. The final result is that a fair, full cost reimbursement is set by the conservation agreements that allows the CBOs to implement the Conservation Agreements and secure their economic sustainability over the contracted period.
Annual community reports include: a comparison of targeted and actual values for the planned measures; developments in project time frames; general financial report; information on problems and identification of possible solutions.
Each year, a sample of conservation agreements are selected for independent audit of performance by ECF or a third party. This is an opportunity to examine monitoring and reporting and a method to test performance of the conservation agreement process.
Examining connections between conservation objective and resilience/livelihoods of locals helps direct future projects.
Clear land ownership and land tenure (the right to use land) are the basic preconditions for the implementation of any habitat management measure. Land-use rights of all beneficiaries needs to be clear and secure before project initiatives commence, to avoids risk of undocumented dimensions in the planning and implementation of conservation measures. It also secures long-term interest of the land user to manage the land sustainably. The purpose of this measure is to clarify, legally regulate, obtain and hold land tenure rights needed for conservation actions and for sustainable livelihood. Land tenure rights encompasses land ownership, lease of land and/or other rights related to the use of land.
In Armenia, most land is state owned. But after the breakdown of the Soviet Union land tenure rights have not been properly documented or registered. Today, traditional land-use rights are based on verbal agreements and traditions are translated into legally documented/registered leases by the CBOs representing their respective villages. Resolving uncertain land tenure is one of the major benefits the ECF is bringing to partner communities, providing them with a clear economic perspective for the future while preserving the existing community management of shared pastures and meadows.
Readiness of state property authorities to document and register the existing community land use rights
Completion of a land tenure study to understand the land tenure uncertainties and existing rights
Accurate mapping of entire conservation area and communication of these findings (maps, figures, reports) accessible to the community and authorities
Active involvement of local governments (municipality and department levels)
Voluntary involvement of local authorities, departments and administration
Proper compensation for land-use
Properly identify land-use rights and open issues including research, data collection and GIS analysis performed i) formally (municipal and regional data collection), and ii) informally (discussions with locals).
Consideration of information documentation and lack of documentation. Locals may use pasturelands/meadows in a traditional way, with little or no documentation of their user rights. In the frame of the project, the land-use needs to be considered in both formal/political contexts and informal/traditional contexts.
Communication between multiple land management bodies in Armenia (state, municipality, community, private) and land-use designations (forests, agricultural, protected areas, private land). Positive relationships and active communication with all stakeholders leads to healthy working relationships
Consideration of national and regional politics integral to securing land-use rights.
Sufficient budgeting of costs required to obtain land-use rights.
