Site+Selection+Criteria

Nile BDC Site Selection Report and proposal for discussion, February 2010 (prepared by Debbie, Seleshi, Tilahun, Alan, Matthew) During the CPWF Nile BDC inception workshop Jan 26 -28, we had a session regarding site selection. The goal being to select sites that are appropriate and useful to the overall BDC. To serve the BDC nested sites at three scales is envisioned: 1) Ethiopian Blue Nile 2) Study Landscapes 3) Action Research Sites within the Study Landscapes  From N2 proposal:  ‘Study landscapes representing dominant farming systems in the Ethiopian Highlands will be the basis for research. Action research sites (ARS) will be embedded within these study landscapes providing a nested set of sites for learning and research at a variety of physical and social scales. For this purpose, we define a landscape as a combined physical and social unit large enough to encompass the range of land uses on which local communities depend, either directly for provisioning ecosystem services (food, fiber, livestock, trees) or regulating services (watershed functions), and a range of social institutions which are directly responsible for resource management (village, Kebele Associations, Wereda, //Idir//). Embedded ARS will be large enough to encompass physical and some social landscape components relevant to RMS, while small enough to ‘walk around’, i.e. monitor, measure and understand at ground level.’ Intensive fieldwork should occur within these areas that are to be ‘space-bound’ and functional, although this does not preclude activities in other areas if needed to fulfill BDC goals: · Study Landscapes should consider political/administrative boundaries · Action Research Sites smaller, consider physical/hydrologic boundaries (10km2) The set of criteria for selecting **Study Landscapes** developed at the workshop includes: · // Represent diversity // found in the Ethiopian Blue Nile in terms of: o Agro-ecologies and livelihood strategies including important cropping systems, perennial and agropastoral systems o Water availability o Socio-economic status o RWM challenges o Market access o Diversity of actors o State of transition – desperate or blooming? · Synergy and complementarity with other initiatives, building on not duplicating · Ability to demonstrate results · Presence of partners to work with · Accessibility for at least one site to serve as CPWF show case · Containing examples of both SLM and AGP Weredas Criteria for **Action Research Sites** will include in addition: · Considering existing hydrometric network (i.e. rain gauges and flow gauges) · Easy accessibility (by vehicle) in both the dry and wet seasons __ Based on the above the following are proposed for Study Landscapes: __ Three study landscapes, differing in state of development, agro-ecology (specifically water availability), important livelihood systems and opportunities for RMS: 1. Lake Tana area in Amhara Region focusing on Gumera covering Fogera and Farta districts represents high rainfall, crop-livestock system including irrigation and wetlands, rapid positive transition trajectory. It is located in growth corridor area. Active interventions occurring including dams and new irrigation developments. It is in the area of source of Blue Nile, IWMI and partners have been working in the area. Significant issues related to wetland, ecosystem, upstream downstream and water use tradeoffs. Promising RWS in highland area include SWC interventions to increase retention of soil, maximization of soil moisture and recharge of ground water in the plains. Integration of crop and livestock system in rainfed and irrigated areas to improve productivities 2. Eastern Blue Nile in Oromia Region, focusing on Jeldu district, representing high to intermediate rainfall, rainfed mixed crop-livestock system, barley, wheat, beans and potato are dominating in the highland and teff, maize and sorghum in the lowland. It is an area of degradation hot spots; struggling, with little intervention. High potential for RWM, including interventions related to water conservation, small scale storage, and shallow ground water for increasing land productivity and enable second and third harvest of crops, agro-forestry combined with in-situ water (such as zai-pits, mulching) management to reverse land degradation, and some irrigation potential in the inland valleys. Identified as agricultural growth district for PASDEP II. The Jeldu district capital is with in less than 2 hours drive distance. It can be used as show case site, where interventions could be implemented and changes can be monitored. 3. Gidan district between Lalibela and Woldya, represents semi-arid climate, subject to intermittent drought and land degradation is common. It is a sorghum, maize, safflower, and livestock based system with very small land holdings averaging 0.6 ha/hh. Between 25 and 35 % of the youth are engaged in livestock keeping as their major occupation. Existing actors maybe few, but include CARE. Includes a small bright spot with smallscale irrigation. It is on the Woldia-Woreta main road, and on the way to the Lake Tana Study Area. Promising RWM interventions would minimize runoff (collective action for SWC), enable crops to get enough moisture during intermittent drought (tie ridges, mulching), to escape drought (early maturing varieties, supplementary irrigation), increase milk and meat production (watering points, forage banks) and increased integration of crop-livestock systems (manure management, crop residue management). Next steps: · Now until March 15 Discussion and agreement on three Study landscapes with wider group · April or May - Reconnaissance field tour with all available to identify action research sites within these study landscapes Proposed sites in the Ethiopian Blue Nile Basin