1. Adapting to climate change and
disaster risk reduction through SLM
Experience from pilot project in Tajikistan
Hanspeter Liniger, Bettina Wolfgramm
WOCAT
PPCR: Pilot Program for Climate Resilience (WB)
CAMP Kuhiston

2. Not enough rainfall …
… but increased floods followed by droughts tragedy of drylands
 SLM practices need to be tolerant to climate extremes
 Adaptation to climate change!!!
Photo: H.P. Liniger

3. Watershed Management, DRR, CC adaptation
Decision support for the selection of best/ good practices
Upper zone: Grazing land and forests
Middle zone: cropland, and mixed areas
Lower zone: settlements, cropland, grazing land
 Promote productive and protective practices in 3
zones 3

4. Part I: Identification
Stakeholder Workshop 1
(2-3 days  1 day + field visit)
Methodology based on the ‚learning for sustainability‘
approach (LforS)

5. Technologies
Productive protection in extreme event
5

6. SLM & climate change adaptation (PPCR Tajikistan)
> 70 SLM documentations: 46 Technologies and 24 Approaches
>
Conducted through participation of 14 organisations:
Tajik Soil Institute, CAMP Kuhiston, Pamir Biology Institute, Ministry of Agriculture, World Bank, ADB,
CARITAS Switzerland, MSDSP, CDE, Welthungerhilfe, GIZ, UNDP, Youth Ecological Centre, CESVI
WB project English Russian
6

7. SLM knowledge
SLM technology
documented and presented in standardized WOCAT format
SLM approach
7

8. Key question: vulnerability / resilience to
climate variability … extreme events
8

9. Adaptation to climate change / extremes

10. Questionnaire: Climate Change Adaptation
https://www.wocat.net/en/methods/modules/climate-change.html 10

11. Questionnaire Watershed
Upper – Middle - Lower
11

12. Part III: Selection and decision
Stakeholder Workshop 2 (2 days  1 day)
Working through a series of steps to select good practices

13. Methodology: Part III
• Selection of options is based on
WOCAT&TajikCAT/CACAT)
database
• Scoring and decision
process is supported
by a software for multi-
objective decision
support (MODSS)
• Both tools are embedded into a
stakeholder workshop, continuing
the ‘learning for sustainability’
approach

14. Workshops and using documented SLM
• Part I – Identification:
Problems and possible solutions
• Part II – Assessment:
Document and evaluate existing solutions
(WOCAT database)
• Part III – Selection:
Select the most promising SLM
technologies and approaches
 Approach: Involvement of all stakeholders

15. Major results from DRR-DS tool:
– Key: the water cycle  on- and off-
site impacts
– High water losses in drylands
causing disasters: flood and
drought
– Discussion about investments in
upper to protect lower zones
– Productive Protection in all zones!!!
– Prevention rather than cure or
rehab
– Valuable / crucial contribution by
all stakeholders!!!
– Local solutions often available but
need up-scaling
15

16. In-/near-/off-village concept
I. In-village – targeting the most vulnerable rural families
II. Near-village – growing a productive belt around villages
III. Off-village – intensify land use in the major production
areas
16

17. WOCAT publication
10 Technology Groups No CC impact being addressed
Improved grazing land 4 Vegetation degradation
Irrigation infrastructure management 7 Water shortage
Water harvesting 3 Less frequent rainfalls
Soil productivity enhancement 7 Soil fertility decline
Cross-slope measures: 5 Heavy rainfall
onsite protection
Cross-slope measures: 4 Land slides due to extreme rainfalls
offsite protection
Agroforestry 10 Crop failure in monoculture systems
Planted and natural forest 3 Riverbank erosion
Tree belts 4 Wind erosion, change in microclimate
Indirect SLM measures 2 Desertification
Total number of WOCAT case 46 17
studies

18. Water harvesting: roof top rainwater harvesting stored
in polythene lined earth retention tank
In-Village
+ increased water availability  improved production and diversification in
kitchen gardens
+ low-cost technology
+ less money spent to buy water
- only works if there is no extreme drought
Welthungerhilfe

19. Irrigation infrastructure management:
Cascading rock irrigation channel
Channelling water-runoff from mountain top to village Near- Off- Village
and slope stabilisation with poplar trees:
+ improved water harvesting
 crop diversification downstream, crop yield, clean drinking water
+ windbreak  decreased wind erosion
+ wood production  source of secondary income
CAMP

20. The flood April 2012
Comparing: LD/SLM
Saving cow
20

21. Conclusion
• Key role SLM in DRR and CC-Adaptation
• Land and water nexus
• Linking productive (local with protective (watershed)
• Building up on existing local experiences
 combine with external knowledge
 strengthen the decision capacities
• Enhance land users knowledge and participation
• Key role of land scape approach and the village
concept
• KM DS to be build into project right from the start
• Many disasters are human made!!!

22. … join us!
The Flood
www.wocat.net
Comparing
Saving cow…
Orchards
Energy saving