WAT-A-GAME for participatory NRM planning: Fogera case study

264 views
215 views

Published on

Sustainable Land & Watershed Management Interventions and Impact Workshop. Hilton Hotel, Addis Ababa, May 10, 2013.

Published in: Technology, Real Estate
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
264
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Represent the chosen landscape on a game board: e.g. a watershed (can be done in a number of ways) Represent natural and artificial features: land use, land cover and other resources (river, roads, etc)
  • Identify actions to be ‘played’ by the actors For each action describe resource flows: Inputs = water, soil and labour Outputs = water, sediment, money Actors choose which actions they want to ‘play’, e.g. what crops they want to grow on a land plot, how much labour they want to invest, where they want their livestock to graze Pebbles are used to represent money, livestock, soil, family members and are moved around the game board as the game is played. These are calibrated to replicate natural processes. Actors can ‘play’ multiple actions but these can be restricted according to rules described on role card
  • WAT-A-GAME for participatory NRM planning: Fogera case study

    1. 1. WAT-A-GAME for participatory NRM planning:Fogera case studyBeth Cullen (ILRI)With input from Mulugeta Lemineh, Zelalem Lemma & Emeline Hassenforder10th May 2013Sustainable Land & Watershed ManagementInterventions and Impact WorkshopHilton Hotel, Addis Ababa
    2. 2. • Introduction to WAT-A-GAME• Game design- Game board- Role cards- Action cards• Overview of NBDC baseline research findings• Fogera case study- Objectives- Process• Initial outcomes• Ongoing activities• Future effortsOutline of presentation
    3. 3. Introduction to WAT-A-GAMEWAT-A-GAME: open toolkit (www.watagame.info)Developed by IRSTEA and CIRAD, research institutes based in FranceWAT-A-GAME creates a dynamic model of a given landscape and representsrelationships between resources and actors. The model can be used tosimulate various strategies and the resulting impacts on households andsurrounding ecosystem.The tool can be adapted to individual cases, a range of land and watermanagement issues and different scales. New policies can also be invented andtested. WAG has been designed to be used by a range of stakeholders, includingfarmers, scientists, experts, administrators and policy makers.
    4. 4. Game BoardLand plotGrazing areaForest areaHighlandMidlandLowlandWetland areaRoad
    5. 5. 5Role Card
    6. 6. 6Action CardCerealsWater & moneyrequirementsMoney return1 soil unit outputremoves 1 moneyand 1 livestockRULE : If water and money input is not met, return is 0season locationCarrying capacity
    7. 7. Game design continued…• Participants play several ‘rounds’ of the game e.g. wet season, dryseason to portray the dynamic nature of resource use.• Each round can be calibrated to represent certain length of time e.g.five years, one decade, etc.• At end of each roundparticipants collectivelyassess consequences oftheir actions e.g.sedimentation, watershortage for irrigation.• This prompts discussionand reflection.
    8. 8. 8So how does WAT-A-GAME fit within theNile Basin Development Challenge (NBDC) project?
    9. 9. Overview of NBDC...Nile Basin Development Challenge aims to improve resilience of rurallivelihoods in the Ethiopian highlands through an integrated landscapeapproach to rainwater management.Research is focused on three study sites: Fogera in Amhara region, Digaand Jeldu in Oromiya region.Base-line research conducted at the start of the project identified thefollowing issues, how to:•Improve cross-sector collaboration and coordination•Tailor SWC interventions to socio-economic/ecological conditions•Foster bottom-up planning/community participation•Enhance follow-up and monitoring of SWC interventionsCould participatory tools like WAT-A-GAME assist NRM planningand implementation processes?
    10. 10. WAT-A-GAME was piloted with members of the NBDC initiatedInnovation Platform (IP) in Fogera.Innovation platforms bring together different stakeholders to exchangeknowledge and develop joint action to test solutions to commonproblems.IP participants: Government line departments (Admin, Agriculture,Natural Resource, Water, Women, Cooperatives, Land Use, Livestock),Adet Agricultural Research Center, Andassa Livestock Research Center,Ethio-Wetlands and Natural Resources Association (NGO), communityrepresentativesFogera case study
    11. 11. NBDC researchers worked with WAT-A-GAME designers to model theFogera catchment and simulate key RWM issues identified by stakeholdersincluding: water availability, run-off, soil erosion and the impact of differentland-use practicesThe aim was to use the model to:• Improve stakeholder understanding about natural resource challengesand the needs/priorities of different social actors• Nurture critical discussion, about linkages betweenupstream/midstream/downstream actors and potential conflictsassociated with the use and management of natural resources,• Facilitate collective exploration of alternative strategies which couldlead to more sustainable and effective NRM interventionsFogera case study continued…
    12. 12. WAT-A-GAME: not just about the tool,process is important too...
    13. 13. Presentation of WAT-A-GAME by facilitators
    14. 14. Participants play WAT-A-GAME in 2 groupsFarmers Decision makers
    15. 15. Groups identify and prioritize main NRM challenges
    16. 16. Groups identify practices required to address these challenges
    17. 17. Groups analyze feasibility of practices-e.g. resources required, timing, scale.
    18. 18. Groups merge practices to form strategies-spacial and temporal
    19. 19. Groups evaluate strategies-knowledge, labour and money
    20. 20. Groups present their strategies to one another
    21. 21. Joint reflection about process, lessons learned & ways forward
    22. 22. Second workshop to create a merged strategy
    23. 23. Analysis of potential challenges to implementation & solutions
    24. 24. Workshop OutcomesUnrestricted grazing chosen as focal issue due to the impact on naturalresources and SWC interventions in FogeraDiscussion led to increased understanding of different priorities and perspectivesheld by farmers and decision makers and the impact on interventions.Relates to Innovation Platform activities.
    25. 25. IP interventionsActors Main issue Related issueIP membersUnrestrictedgrazingLand degradationCommunityRestrictinggrazingShortage ofgrazing/fodderWaterscarcitySeasonal watershortagesSoilconservationOrganization ofcampaign workFodder development chosen for pilot interventions asa way of addressing the issues of unrestricted grazing,taking into account both farmer and decision makerconcerns.
    26. 26. Agreement between decision makers and community members about restrictinggrazing, but different views about how this should be done.Farmers are concerned about a number of issues:•HH without livestock unable to collect dung for fuel if livestock are restricted•Inability for livestock to breed without AI services•Insufficient fodder production to meet livestock needs, particularly for those with lessland•Greater burden of labour on women with cut and carry system•Limited access to communal areas for funerals/wedding etc due to enclosuresRange of interventions needed over longer time frame to address these issues.IP interventionscontinued…
    27. 27. Workshop Outcomes•Decision makers acknowledged that they often struggle to address variationswithin the woreda.•Use of WAT-A-GAME helped stakeholders to develop a joint strategy,addressing a common issue, tailored to different socio-economic and biophysicalniches•Recognition that NRM challenges are more severe in certain parts of thelandscape so burden of implementation is heavier on some farmers than others•Discussion about long term versus short term impacts and the incentives orsupport required to implement longer term interventions•Dialogue about how the strategy developed during the workshop couldpotentially be implemented
    28. 28. 15Ongoing activities•1st workshop (Dec 2012) aimed to develop strategies which capture thepriorities, knowledge and perspectives of farmers and decision makers, andanalyze the commonalities and differences.•2nd workshop (March 2013) reviewed the strategies developed during thefirst workshop and created a merged strategy. Potential challenges toimplementation were discussed and ideas for solutions were generated•3rd workshop (September 2013) will test the merged strategy using WAT-A-GAME to analyze the potential impact on the landscape and different typesof farmers. Roles and responsibilities of actors will be discussed to take thestrategies into action
    29. 29. Future efforts•Link WAT-A-GAME to biophysical modeling processes e.g. SWAT to runpotential scenarios for discussion with stakeholders•Asses the use of WAT-A-GAME as a decision support tool with stakeholdersand explore ways of making it more user friendly•Link WAT-A-GAME with other piloted processes and tools as part of anintegrated package that can be used to assist future NRM planning andimplementation efforts•Present the findings of WAT-A-GAME and other NBDC research outputs topolicy makers
    30. 30. 30Thank you

    ×