Projeto Microbacias

Scaling Up Watershed Management Projects

The Experience of Southern Brazil

Graciela LitumaMaria Isabel BragaAlvaro Soler

Water Week, March 2003

Land Management Projects in Southern Brazil

Completed§ Paraná and Santa Catarina

Under Implementation§ Rio Grande do Sul § São Paulo § Second project in Paran᧠Second project in Santa Catarina

Under Preparation§ Rio de Janeiro (GEF) § Serra do Tabuleiro Park (GEF Medium Size)§ Rio Formoso Watershed (GEF Medium Size)

The Problem: Unsustainable Agriculture

Resulting in:

§ Intensification and mechanization of agricultural practices, with excessive use of fertilizers and herbicides

§ Increased deforestation

§ Soil compaction and exposure to precipitation

§ Increased erosion, silting and flooding while crop yields stagnated or declined

§ Negative impacts on fauna and flora

Evolution of a MicrowatershedManagement Strategy

Before watershed approach§ From mid-1970s, states sought for

a more sustainable agricultural development paradigm

§ In early stages, soil conservation programs centered on mechanical practices implemented in and isolated manner at individual farm level

§ However, measures focused on correcting the effects and not the causes

§ Targets achieved were impressive, but impact was limited and often unsustainable in the long term

§ Recommended practices: technically inadequate or insufficient in a number of cases; high costs

Needs identified after an evaluation of results:

§ To integrate practices at the farm level and surrounding areas

§ To demonstrate that soils must be properly managed and not only conserved

§ To address causes and not consequences of soil erosion

§ To use strategies and not only a menu of specific practices

Results of Early Stages

Search for Sustainable Solutions

Microwatershed§ Basic unit of analysis and

implementation: well identified area with clear relationships

§ Ideal unit for planning and execution of actions aimed at improving management and conservation of scarce natural resources: water, soil, and biodiversity

§ Also key for initiatives aimed at poverty reduction

Microwatershed Strategy§ Microwatershed becomes the basis for planning,

implementation and concentration of efforts

§ Projects adopt innovative and participatory processes for management of natural resources through practical and integrated actions to reduce soil erosion and water contamination, restore and protect biodiversity, and reduce poverty

Evolution of Microwatershed Strategy§ Since its inception:

ü Strategy responded to local needs to stop and reverse soildegradation, water contamination and loss of biodiversity

ü Adopted regional and local diagnosis and zoning

ü Promoted institutional innovation to foster participation of allstakeholders at the community, municipal, regional and state levels

§ Strategy evolved as a tool to also reduce rural poverty and better address ecosystem management

§ More recently, move towards integration of water and agricultural policies: upscaling microwatershed into river basin management

Objectives

Increase agricultural productivity to improvecommunity income and well being, while conservingnatural resources.

Ø Promotes modern, participatory and sustainable landuse planning processes

Ø Conserves soil and water resources, while improving income and protecting other natural resources

Ø Harmonizes water, agriculture and rural poverty policies

Ø Integrates family-communities-local, regional and state governments

Strategy Components1. Rural Extension,Training and Dissemination for key

stakeholders is the main componentü Social Role: foster and promote community organization

ü Technical Role: provide technical assistance for the preparation and implementation of Microwatershed and Individual Farm Plans

2. Participatory Microwatershed Management Plans:ü participatory socioeconomic and agroecological diagnostics;

ü participatory planning brings community together to understand problems and propose priority actions at the microwatershedand farm levels

3. Adaptive Research to support and induce a new technical strategy through technological solutions adapted to local needs and conditions

Strategy Components (2)

5. Incentive Program for Environmental, Social andEconomic Practices to induce and accelerate theadoption of new strategy and share the costs ofimplementing the microwatershed management planü Key Element: Incentives must be based on demands

from beneficiaries

6. Institutional Strengthening through introduction of planning systems, monitoring and control, and evaluation activities at the local level, municipal and state levels

LandscapeBefore and After Project

Intervention

Results on Water Resources

§ About 50% reduction in water turbidity in sample microwatersheds

§ About 40% reduction in water treatment costs in sample microwatersheds

§ Improved drinking water

§ Decreased flooding – increased retention time

§ Linkage to river basin management initiatives (project component in Santa Catarina; access to Fehidro in São Paulo)

Results on Quality of Life

§ Increased on-farm productivity (beans 50%, maize 80%, soya 20%, wheat 40%)

§ Better water quality and availability

§ Better access to markets and social services (school) due to better rural roads

§ Decrease in costs of road maintenance by more than 50%

§ Projects targeted smaller (poor) farmers

§ Better community organization, with substantial improvement in the interaction between communities and local and state governments

Pillars for Success

§ Existing technology and adaptive research to address identified problems

§ Intensive training and dissemination of new practices and participatory approach

§ Incentives to induce adoption of new practices and approach

§ Laws, regulations and enforcement provide the environment for adoption of new technologies and approach

Lessons Learned (1)

§ Intensive training in group dynamics and use of participatory methods

§ Creative, motivated and well trained extensionists(implementation-supervision)

§ Management of natural resources based in technological changes adapted to local needs and conditions (immediate benefits for farmers and local community)

§ Participatory methods for selecting municipalities, microwatershed, and activities to be undertaken: use both technical, environmental and social criteria

Lessons Learned (2)

§ Decentralized implementation with strong local participation (government, beneficiaries and private sector)

§ Appropriate technology backed up by research

§ Financial incentives to induce adoption of technology and behavioral changes

§ Robust M&E systems and strong management units in place to adjust implementation

§ Conducive legal framework, including sanctions

A State of Practice framework

(source: Advance Africa, CCAPT)

State of practice (Science based practices)

Level of evidence General applicability

Policy Principle

Strong scientific evidence

Multiple settings

Consistently replicable

Best Practice

Good Practice

Evaluations

Some settings

Promise of replicability

Medium risk

Models

Promising practices

Innovation Anecdotal evidence

Very few settings

Untested idea

Highest risk

What learning

processes?

Potential for Scaling Up

§ Use of the watershed level as the planning and implementation unit is well established, and three states have already mainstreamed the approach outside the project area

§ Starting from a simpler strategy (erosion control) and moving towards additional parameters (biodiversity conservation and poverty reduction) may be key for success, but lessons learned from early projects may allow for shortening of the overall process

§ Current M&E systems must be strengthened and improved

§ In Brazil there are efforts by several government agencies to mainstream this approach – as a result of dissemination efforts and learning initiatives among the various projects

Where Are We Today?

§ Microwatershed strategy: policy principle

§ Soil management/conservation: policy principle

§ Microwatershed management plans: best practice

§ Rural roads rehabilitation manuals: best practice

§ Learning and dissemination: best practice

§ Conservation of water resources at microwatershedlevel: best practice

§ Adaptive research: best practice

§ Incentives to induce behavioral change: best practice

Where Are We Today?

§ Conservation of biodiversity: good practice

§ Sustainable community organization: good practice

§ Linkages to other initiatives/projects: good practice

(pesticide containers; water treatment plant; solid waste; security)

§ Integration of agricultural, water, and environmental policies: promising practice

§ Monitoring and evaluation: model