Namaste and welcome back to the video course on watershed management. In the module 1, in the second lecture, we will discuss about the watershed management and stakeholders analysis. So, in the first lecture, we were discussing about the concepts of watersheds, then watershed approach, then various necessities of watershed management, principles of watershed management and we have seen one case study also. So, in today's lecture, the topic is on watershed management and stakeholder analysis. So, the topics covered include watershed system, watershed management, objectives, components and benefits, watershed management, multiple use, multidisciplinary approach, stakeholder analysis, role of stakeholders in watershed management development plans, people's participation and finally, we will discuss a case study. Some of the important keywords related to today's lecture are watershed management objectives, development plans, multidisciplinary approach, stakeholder analysis and people participation. So, we were discussing the watershed management as the management of the area, the so called watershed in a scientific way, so in a sustainable way. So, within that context, the main goal of the watershed management is integrated approach of the total resources available in the water source, the watershed. So, the goal is the watershed system in an integrated way. So, that way, we have various objectives and then we have got various resources within the watersheds. So, like with respect to the environmental objectives, so we will be looking to the various resources, various environmental standards and the conservation goals we are setting for the watershed. And then we will be coordinating the various aspects of the watershed resources and watershed management plans. So, we will be having a coordinated framework, so that is the way which we go for the watershed approach. So, in this there will be, we will be coordinating the various natural resources and then we will be coordinating the with respect to various tools and the resources available within the watershed. So, within this perspective, we will be now looking to the various watershed management practices. So, there can be at the various watershed management practice can be at various levels. So, the watershed management can be, it we can formulate various plan for the total country or for the states consent. So, that way we can have a statewide framework. So, we can set to the various management plans, various objectives and then various necessities etcetera on a statewide framework. So, that can be put under the state rules and regulations and then whenever a development scheme, a watershed development or watershed management schemes is implemented, that guidelines can be followed. And then second can be within a regional framework. So, regional framework means that is suitable for a particular region. So, when we consider a river basin or when we consider particular district or say particular say South India, North India or say the hilly regions, so like that. So, it is a requirements say the as far as within the perspective of watershed management, the requirements may be different. So, that way we can have a regional framework for the say particular region is concerned. And then the next level can be local watershed say within the social environmental and sustainable framework. So, this say here, so this is formulated may be for a district or may be for various blocks or for various villages depending upon the needs. So, the third one is the local watershed within the social framework for that particular area is concerned. And then finally, it can be individual watersheds for the particular watershed is concerned. So, this can be this depends upon the various requirement of that particular watershed, various characteristics of the particular watershed. So, that way as far as watershed management at different levels are concerned we can have a statewide plans, we can have a regional plans or we can have a local watershed plans or we can have a plans for the particular watershed is a concerned. So, now, so within this perspective what we have discussed so far, let us see what are the important objectives of watershed management. So, some of the important objectives are listed here. So, first one is wise use of soil, water and vegetation for optimum production. So, with the minimum hazards to natural resources. So, when we have discussed the particular area that means, particular watershed. So, we have to see the aspects various aspects of the land. So, that means, we have to see the land use and then what kind of soil is available and how much water is available the quantity and quality the water available then how much is the forest cover for the particular area. So, by considering all these aspects the objective will be the optimal biomass production with the minimum hazard to the various natural resources. Then a second objective can be the industrial utilization and development of lands. So, here we conserve water so that we can have more income and then reduce the drought. So, as you can see that some of the problems concerned for a watershed is recurrence of droughts and during the rainy season recurrence of floods. So, when we look into the watershed management within a holistic approach. So, say the various utilization is concerned say if we are looking to the industrial utilization we have to develop the land in such a way that we will be getting more income and then the within the watershed we have to conserve the water and then reduce floods and droughts. And then third objective can be the prevention and retardation of floods through construction of reservoirs as I mentioned flooding can be a big problem for many of the watersheds. So, we can have various management practices like a construction of check dams, construction of levees etcetera. So, that we can reduce the flooding problem for the considered watershed. Then fourth objective can be provision of adequate water for agricultural, industrial and domestic purpose. So, we can say as far as the watershed is concerned for the total utilization of water is concerned there are various uses like domestic use, then agricultural use, industrial use etcetera. So, we have to see that optimum utilization of the available water resource. So, that can be another objective. Then some other objectives like abatement of soil, water and air pollution. So, of course, the pollution is a major problem in many areas. So, we have to see that the land is not polluted, the available water is not polluted and due to any industrialization or its effect air is not polluted. So, this can be another objective for the watershed management plants. Then some other objectives like creation of recreational facilities. So, for the particular areas concerned we can construct lakes or ponds. So, that we can have the facility of recreation and then also say the objective can be the utilization of the natural resources. So, that we can have improved agricultural practices and better production from the lands. And then finally, the overall way the final objective will be the total say the upliftments for the concerned area with respect to the flora and fauna and then of course, the people concerned. So, that will be the objective with respect to the socio-economic aspect of the watershed is concerned. So, now we have seen the various objectives of the watershed management practices. Then here in the next slide we will see the components of watershed management. So, there can be two important components as far as watershed practices are concerned. One is foundation practices and second one is improved production practices. So, say both can come together as far as watershed management practices are concerned. So, the foundation practices include the various measures which we undertake to have say better resources utilization and then optimal production as far as various the biomass and other aspects are concerned. So, as far as the foundation practices are concerned here I have listed various points. So, like engineering and biological measures for soil and water conservation, then condor farming, diversion burns, grades of agitative burns, terraces, check dumps etcetera. So, here you can see that various structures are constructed in some watersheds. So, this can be some of the foundation practices. Then water storage structures. So, just like a construction of a lake or a construction of a check dump and then nulla burns, then gully plugs, then percolation tanks etcetera. Then alternate land uses in the nonarrable lands such as afforestation and plantation of say for fodder and fewer trees are concerned. So, these are some of the foundation practices. So, when we say make plans for the watershed management. So, these foundation practices are very essential for the better utilization of the lands, better utilization of the available water and then various other resources are concerned. Then next one is the improved production practices. So, if we are having better foundation practices then based upon this we will be looking for improved production practices. So, some of the aspects as far as production practices are concerned such as in situ water conservation, then agriculture water management, then improved crop and cropping system. So, these are some of the improved production practices which we can look into the plans when we prepare the watershed management plans. So, then you can see that as far as foundation practices are concerned we have to inverse lot of money and resources to the watershed. So, we need financial support and assistance from the government whether it is state or local governments and then also the various NGO's are concerned. Then as far as the production practices are concerned this depends upon the people participation. So, you can see that say the watershed is concerned, its areas concerned there will be holding by farmers say within the watershed. So, to have better agricultural management or better production is concerned. So, people within that watershed should cooperate within the say the watershed management plans are concerned. So, the improved production practices generally depends upon the people participation. So, now we have seen the various practices various components of watershed management practices. So, now say within this perspective we will see what are the important benefits which we can get through watershed management. So, some of the important benefits are listed here say as we already discussed earlier. So, we can have better control of flood and droughts and then reduce erosion and sediment production and then maximize productivity per unit area time and water. Then increase crop intensity utilization of marginal or wastelands through alternate land use systems ensure ecological balance. Then maximize combined income stabilize income in unfavorable conditions and finally, social upliftment. So, there are number of benefits as listed here as far as watershed management practices are concerned. So, some of the important benefits is like optimal utilization of the available resources. So, that we can increase the income for the people are concerned then we can increase the forest area we can have better vegetative cover we can reduce the soil erosion and then we can have better quality of water and sufficient quantity of water. So, these are some of the important benefits as far as any watershed management plants are concerned. So, now we will see the say there can be various strategies as far as watershed management is concerned. So, two important strategies generally in coming to watershed management include preventive strategies and restorative strategies. So, these are the two important strategies when we look into watershed management practices. So, preventive strategies means preserve the existing sustainable land use strategies. So, you can see that most of the watershed is concerned as far as natural watershed is concerned say there will not be much soil erosion then the land use will be in a better way and then sufficient vegetative cover will be there. So, in the preventive strategies what we are trying to do is that none of these good aspects of the existing what is existing within the watershed we are trying to preserve those aspects for the sustainable land use and then sustainability of the total resources concerned. So, then second one is the restorative strategies. So, generally restorative strategies are designed to overcome identified problems. So, each watershed as we have seen earlier watershed can have various deterioration problems. So, its consequence also we have seen in the first lecture. So, based upon that for the particular watershed is concerned there can be a special type of or specific type of problems. So, the in the restorative strategies we are making various plans to overcome identified problems. So, for each watershed is concerned it can be either the soil pollution or water pollution or non-availability of sufficient water or the lack of sufficient forest. So, like that for the particular watershed is concerned particular problems can be there. So, in the restorative strategies what we are trying to do is we will be concentrating on that specific problems and then we will be trying to overcome those problems. So, say for example, so we can restore the availability of to restore conditions once problems occur. So, that is what we are trying in this. So, the example can be we can go for water harvesting structures. So, that there will be some better availability of water. So, that you can be restorative strategies and then when we construct various structures we can also reduce the soil erosion problems. If in the watershed soil erosion is a major problem then we can restore the soil erosion problem by constructing various structures. So, in most of the watershed management plans when we look in a holistic way this we will be implementing some preventive strategies and then we will be implementing some restorative strategies. So, depending upon the area is concerned. So, watershed management there will be most of the time there will be two strategies coming together. So, it will be routine to go for preventive strategies and then generally depending upon the area there will be some restorative strategies which you will be aiming at for the watershed management. So, generally the key to watershed management is preventive strategies the various preventive strategies which you will be setting as far as the watershed management is concerned. So, now we have seen the various strategies we are adopting for the watershed management. So, you can see that for the watershed disconsent there are various resources which will be engaging within the perspective of watershed management. So, there will be for the given resources multiple uses will be there and then multiple stakeholders will be also coming to picture. So, here in this slide you can see the watershed management within the perspective multiple uses. So, aim of multiple use is to manage natural resources with the most beneficial combination for present and future uses. So, the available resources for the present use and for the future use we put for the most beneficial combination. So, then the watershed management can be resources oriented. So, there we look for the production capabilities of various natural resources. So, it can be either land or water or other resources then this as far as multiple uses concerned it can be also area oriented. So, this depends upon the dynamics of local, regional and national demands. So, what kind of demand is there say for example, agricultural practices are concerned whether the region requires whether rice or wheat or vegetable. So, accordingly the farmers can plan the various say agriculture practices accordingly. So, now here in this slide I have put a table where the various resources are listed and then its products within the perspective multiple use are listed. So, say for example, water is concerned we use water for irrigation, municipal, industrial and recreation purposes and then timber or the forest is concerned we look for pulp production then uses for wood, fuel and then recreation purposes then forage is concerned say we will be looking within the perspective of livestock, wildlife, recreation then wildlife is concerned say it is the consumption as far as wildlife is concerned then it is recreation and other facilities. Then minerals are concerned say what type of mineral is aware within the watershed then say what kind of uses can be there depending upon say for example, stone or sand. So, various uses we can put and then accordingly we can go for the management measures as far as the watershed is concerned. So, we have seen the watershed management is concerned various uses will be there for each resources or depending upon the resource or depending upon the area. So, now when we look into watershed management practices actually it is a multidisciplinary approach. So, various discipline will be coming together so that we can have better watershed management plans. So, here some of the important aspects here I have listed. So, first one is starting from the scoping and data gathering. So, let us assume that we are going for watershed management plans for a particular watershed. So, then first one is we have to identify what are the important problems as far as that watershed is concerned. So, then accordingly according to strategies whether we have to go for restorative strategies or preventive strategies. So, then we have to define the scope as far as the watershed plans or watershed management plans are concerned. So, scope has to be defined and then accordingly we have to gather the data. So, for this we need say the experts as far as planners like a planners, scientists, then public outreach experts, stakeholders within the watershed. So, all these people have to come together to have to define better scope and then data gathering is concerned. So, then next stage as far as watershed management plan is concerned assessment. So, we have already put the scope and then we have gathered the data. So, then we have to assess which way we have to go for the various plans. So, say whether we are going for various kinds of land management plans or water resource management plans. So, accordingly we have to assess the system and then accordingly we have to make plans. So, as far as assessment is concerned. So, ecologies can come together hydrologists can come together and then with the help of engineers and economies. So, we can define appropriate plans and then we can assess the various problems or various issues are concerned. And then next stage is priorities and targets. So, you can see that for any area for as far as watershed management plan is concerned the available money to spend or the resources to be utilized will be limited. So, we have to prioritize. So, what is the first thing to be done whether it is to go for the say bringing water supply or to construct wells or to construct check dams or go for recreational facilities. So, what kind of priority? So, that depends upon the area then depends upon the needs of the people. So, here we have to prioritize and then put the targets. So, the first target, second target etcetera. So, here the first and foremost people will be the stakeholders of the watershed and then comes the officials, scientists, planners and engineers. So, then finally, by considering all these things we can develop watershed management plans. So, here we develop various plans for the watershed management. So, there we can utilize the skills of planners, then of course stakeholders, then the officials consent, then scientists, engineers. So, all these people will come together and then finally, say we can select the particular plan and then we can go for implementation. So, implementation is very important aspects. So, there we need the resources, we need the money and then the implementation is concerned the of course, people participation one of the important aspect. So, that we have already discussed in the first lecture itself. So, there the stakeholders will be coming to picture, then the regulators. So, the while implementing we have to see that it is implemented properly. So, regulators will be coming to picture, then technical support from various agencies, then experts all will come together. So, like this when we go for watershed management plans, it is say multi-disciplinary approach. So, various experts have to come together and then make appropriate plans as far as the watershed management is concerned. So, now we have seen that stakeholders are very important or the people participation is very important in the success of any of the watershed management. So, now in the next slide we will discuss about the stakeholders, what is the concept of stakeholder and then what is so called stakeholders analysis. So, stakeholders we can define as any group of people organized or unorganized who share common interest or stake in a particular issue or system. So, within the perspective of watershed management, we can see that the stakeholders mainly will be the mainly the people staying in that watershed area and then of course, the various government agencies work in that area. So, these are the stakeholders as far as a particular watershed is concerned. So, the stakeholders can be a group of people. So, it can be either organized or unorganized. Then so, the common interest is here as far as the overall development of the watershed or better management plans. So, that is the common interest and then so for the particular management plan plans are concerned people are coming together or the stakeholders are coming together. So, that we can have better watershed management plans. So, this is the concept of stakeholders. So, now as far as watershed management is concerned here we will discuss the importance of stakeholders. So, as we have already seen people participations or the stakeholders participation is very important. So, stakeholders involvement is the key aspect in the success to implement development activities. So, as far as watershed management is concerned we are looking to the development of the area in a holistic way. So, to implement the development activities stakeholders involvement is very important. Otherwise we cannot say achieve success as far as the watershed management is concerned. Then second one is involvement of stakeholders helps dot tiling of funds supply of goods and human resources required for project implementation. So, as far as implementation is concerned. So, how to get the funds and then how to utilize the funds in an effective way and then human resources are required for the implementation of the project. So, all these stakeholders involvement is very important and then third one is involvement of stakeholders leads to a confidence building process for community based projects. So, you can see that as far as watershed management is concerned it is definitely a community based project. So, the community has to get involved in the project. So, as stakeholders we have to develop their confidence. That means, this project particular project as far as watershed management plans are concerned this particular project is implemented for the betterment of the area, betterment of the society, betterment of the people. So, that way the confidence level should be increased. So, that people will be participating in the project. So, that we can succeed in the implementation and maintenance of the particular watershed management plans are concerned. So, now various scientific tools are available as far as to for the stakeholder analysis. So, before going for the preparation of watershed management plans and implementation it is better to go for a stakeholder analysis. So, that there are specific methodologies available in literature as far as stakeholder analysis is concerned. Some important aspects are listed here, but we will not go into all the discussion on the stakeholder analysis will be very limited to the people participation and their say the coming together as far as the watershed management is concerned only that way only we will be discussing here the stakeholder analysis. So, stakeholder analysis is generally used to generate knowledge about relevant actors to understand their behavior, intentions, interrelations, agendas, interest and influence and resources they bring to bear on decision making process. So, this is the main motto of the stakeholder analysis. So, stakeholder analysis generate knowledge then say the various intentions are depending upon the scope the resources should be mobilized and then to be done it properly. So, the main motto of the stakeholder analysis to generate knowledge about the relevant actors and to the to bear say to have a better decision making process. So, then stakeholder analysis can be also used as a tool for policy formulation and implementation. So, depending upon the various norms as far as watershed management is concerned we can go for the policy formulation and then how we can implement it. And then say stakeholder analysis developed to deal with the challenges of multiple objectives and interest. So, we have already seen that as far as watershed management is concerned there can be multiple objectives. So, to meet all those objectives all the interest. So, we have to analyze the roles and then the activities of various stakeholders. So, a stakeholder analysis very essential in preparation of a better watershed management practices. So, now let us see here in this slide what are the important steps as far as stakeholder analysis is concerned. So, these important steps are listed here. So, stakeholder first is we have to identify the stakeholder stakeholders within the watershed. So, that means stakeholder identification then development of relevant issues and their characterization. So, this depends upon the area depends upon the watershed and then the objectives as far as the watershed management is concerned. Then discussion with the regional and local subject matter experts. So, it can be formal discussion or a non formal interviews. So, through this we can achieve the we can have better plans we can develop a matrix as far as the various issues are concerned. Then the next step can be focused group discussion. So, the various issues like land management or water management or the other resource management we can get the experts or get the stakeholders and then we can have a group discussion and then from that group discussion depending upon need we can formulate the various steps as far as watershed management is concerned. Then next can be semi-structured interviews. So, the stakeholders and then come up with the various solutions as far as various problems are concerned. And finally, we can develop an influence interest matrix. So, depending upon the various stakeholders needs then various objective sets we can develop an influence interest matrix. So, that can give an idea for the total development plans as far as the watershed is concerned. So, now with this background as far as stakeholders analysis and then the steps for stakeholders is concerned. So, let us look into the identification of various stakeholders. So, in this slides you can see here the various levels of stakeholders are listed then examples of stakeholders are listed then the various issues are also listed. So, on international level. So, you can see that say as far as various say within the perspective watershed management or river basin scale management. So, various agencies are the stakeholders international agencies like World Bank funds or IMF funds for the various watershed management activities. So, international agencies will be coming and the many times foreign governments may give support to various agencies through NGOs or the through direct government. So, the international level the foreign governments can be a stakeholder. Then the issues to be generally they will be looking into is say maybe climatic regulations for the particular region is concerned then biodiversity conservation then aforestation etcetera. So, depending upon the area depending upon the needs. So, you know the level can be international and then the stakeholders can be international agencies or foreign governments. So, then national level is concerned of course, national governments and then of course, state governments as far as the various states are concerned and then various NGO groups can be there. So, these people can be the stakeholders. So, the like the various issues which may come as far as watershed management is concerned like forest development or timber extraction then tourism development or recreational facilities or the hydropower production or the agriculture management. So, like that the national level stakeholder identification and then issues can be there. The level can be regional. So, it can be either particular region is concerned a groups of districts or particular district is concerned. The examples of stakeholders can be forest departments regional authorities district authorities etcetera. So, here say for example, the issues can be the forest productivity soil loss and degradation. So, this can be some of the issues. Then a local stakeholders are concerned. So, the particular that is particular watershed is concerned. So, the various communities involved then various people involved within that particular area. So, then human groups are concerned or the various say user groups are concerned. So, that way say for example, the issues can be protection of the available water resource and then the same fortation of grazing as far as cattle management is concerned and then forest utilization and then cultural sites etcetera. So, these are the some of the ways where we identify the stakeholders and then the concerned levels and then various issues as far as the stakeholders are concerned. So, now, so we have seen the stakeholders issues and then we have seen the various levels of stakeholders. Then we have to identify the various issues as far as the watershed is concerned. So, we can have developmental issues and then methods. So, some of the developmental issues and methods are listed here. So, as far as the watershed development plans are concerned, we can look into cross cutting system and stakeholder interest. Then multiple uses and uses of the various resources as far as the watershed management is concerned. Then subtractability and temporal trade-offs. So, between the resources or between the areas say how that trade-offs taking place. So, and then poverty alleviation and then to improve the underrepresented people. So, this can be some of the important developmental issues as far as the stakeholder analysis concerned. Then as far as stakeholder analysis concerned, various methodologies are there. So, some of the important methodologies are listed here. We can focus on various groups like focus group discussion like peoples opinion can be sought. Then we can interact with the various groups and gives that may give data and insights. So, like the women group or the water user group or the farmers group. So, like that we can discuss the various issues with the groups. So, that methodology through the stakeholder analysis can be achieved. Then second can be semi-structured interviews. So, this can be about natural resources and then various problems and solutions which we will be looking for that particular problems. So, we can go to the particular stakeholders and then interview them and then get the ideas and then collect that those ideas and then we can get the solutions for the various problems are concerned. Then there can be depending upon the interest for various stakeholders. We can develop an influence matrix. So, as we have seen various stakeholders are there, they will have various interest. So, whenever the common interest is coming there, the stakeholders influence on various issues can be listed. So, that we can understand the relative interest and then we can have influence matrix. So, that influence of the stakeholders can be understood through this process. So, these are some of the important methodologies which we adopt as far as the stakeholder analysis concerned. So, various agencies like United States Environment Protection Agency and other agencies have developed various approaches as far as the stakeholder analysis concerned. It can be for watershed management, it can be for say to sort out the water pollution problems or groundwater pollution remediation etcetera. So, the US EPA approaches some of the approaches are listed here. So, the stakeholder as far as as per US EPA the stakeholder involvement is very essential to the development of the watershed or the the pollution abatement etcetera. So, generally as per United States Environment Protection Agency concerned they use two types of approaches. First one is traditional simulation and decision making approach. So, here this approach is based on command and control. So, the stakeholders involvement is not from the beginning. So, most of the decisions are made by the concerned agencies and then put those decisions to the people and then further get their opinion on that and then come up with finalize the plans. So, this is the first method and the second method is so called decision support system for stakeholder involvement. So, here actually this starts from the beginning. So, the stakeholders are involved from the beginning. So, this involves the stakeholders to make management decisions and guides the stakeholders through the decision making process. So, various needs of the stakeholders will be analyzed and then accordingly the plans will be made. So, definitely there will be a good say as far as the stakeholders are concerned. So, multiple options will be accessible. Say for example, US EPA has developed a system called WIRMF. So, that means, Water Shed Analysis Risk Management Framework. So, to deal with a water shed problem or water shed management problems or water pollution problems as per US EPA they are developed to this system. So, this system includes various modules like a data module, then an engineering module, then a knowledge module and this modules interact together. So, that finally, there will be a decision support system or so called DSS. So, within the framework of this DSS the stakeholders interact and then finally, a system will be developed in this second approach. So, these kinds of the decision support system it will be very useful as far as the stakeholders analysis and the stakeholders involvement as far as the particular system is concerned. So, now say for a for the stakeholders analysis a roadmap is listed here. So, just as we discussed like what US EPA use. So, the various steps include say first time organize as far as the needs and as far as the what we are looking for in the particular analysis then develop a work plan. Then next step is identify say if it is water quality issues then identify water quality issues then learn about river basins. So, particular river basins concerned study about that river basin. Then formulate the various alternatives then we do an analysis called performance analysis and finally, we can these stakeholders can come with the various concerns. So, here a particular graphical user interface is developed by this US EPA is shown here. So, various issues can be listed like this and then finally, we can involve all the stakeholders and then stakeholders opinion can be sought. So, now we have seen the stakeholder analysis in watershed management plans and then you can see that stakeholders involvement is very important in watershed management plan. So, that way as I mentioned earlier also people participation is if it is there from the beginning in the development plans and then implementation phase then people involvement will be very much there and then the system will be maintained properly and a sustainable system can be developed. So, within the perspective of people participation management is concerned the sustainability of watershed management program is not possible if the people are bypassed in planning and decision making processes. Then there is definitely there is a role project implementation agencies, but this agency should interact with the the concerned people and then the particular plan should be made and then community organizations and NGOs also can play a major role. So, this agency should make efforts to ensure that people have control over the end-year process. So, that is if you analyze the the any successful watershed management projects then we can see that when these projects are done like that then the project have been succeeded in all the sense. So, the end-year process starting from planning implementation including financial and technical monitoring and evaluation people participation is very important. So, the people participation is concerned we say we will be looking as far as the promotion of sustainable economic development for the particular areas concerned. Then optimum utilization of land, water and vegetation to mitigate the adverse effects of droughts and floods for the particular watershed is concerned. Then provide employment and local capacity building to generate income so that total employment takes place. Then restore ecological balance through community participation. So, one of the important aspect in watershed management is ecological sustainable development. So, we have to we can achieve ecological balance through people participation then improving living conditions of the poorer through a more equitable resource distribution. So, these are some of the important aspects as far as the people participation in any watershed management plans are concerned. So, within this perspective so, here say for example, say a particular a blocked diagram is put here how the various stakeholders can come together and then how the people participation is possible within a watershed management perspective is concerned. So, the watershed development committees can be formed and where various villages for the particular watershed will be interacting. And then there can be various groups like water usage group, self-help group, then human thrift and credit group so like that. And then of course, in this the project implementation authorities will be overall coordinators and then the NGOs or who are controlling the particular watershed management plans are will be coordinating these aspects. These various things various issues or various system is concerned. Then there can be community organizers and then various teams. So, all those people will be coming together as far as the the watershed management plans are concerned. So, various stakeholders come together and then we can go for a successful watershed management plan as far as watershed management plans are concerned. So, in this say as we already discussed the people can participate at various levels as listed here it can be say for the natural resource mapping to collect the various data and then social mapping. So, like the population of the area their socio-economical aspects, then will a volunteers can be there to implement the project and then you can meet with the people and a participatory appraisal can be done. We can prioritize the options and then go for the implementations. So, now say whatever we have seen is the stakeholder analysis and then people participation. So, finally, before closing this lecture we will have a brief discussion on a successful case where the people participation stakeholder analysis has been effectively utilized. So, the case study is on Jabuah watershed. So, this is Jabuah watershed is in Madhya Pradesh. So, this is the area. So, the total area is about 1800 square kilometer average rainfall in the area 750 millimeter per annum and this area is concerned before the watershed management practices were implemented in the 1990s and beginning of 2000. About 57 percent area was arable land and 16 percent notified as forest lands. So, some of the important problems found for this area is economically among most backward regions in India. Forest cover was very sparse then watershed was poor soil depth classified as drought prone area and socio-economic is concerned most of the people were below poverty line and then the areas concerned say there was used to be seasonal migration to nearby urban centers in search of jobs. So, these were some of the watershed related issues and then some of the NGOs with the help of state government and central government came together to implement the watershed management plans in 1990s and 2000s. So, the development interventions were water harvesting for supplementary reaction in the region in the watershed. Soil and water conservation activities joined forest management, then community participation and local capacity building, human empowerment and water regulations. So, these were some of the development interventions put in this watershed. Then community participation and local capacity building was very much there in this particular watershed. So, people in the above watershed involved in various development activities starting from conception, planning, financing and maintenance. Then they were very active in social mapping, resource mapping, then community organizations were available for the all the activities. Then efficient utilization of the funds available that was one of the important aspect of this project. About 10 to 15 percent is spend on only an administration, but 85 to 90 percent were used for the actual implementation of the project. So, as far as the implementation and then its effect is concerned, water regulation, forest management, various groups were formed. So, self-regulation for community-based watershed monitoring system, then local people developed a system for water management, then accounting uncertainties of rainfall and retaining the runoff from the watershed, sharing of water. So, that was according to the family size, location of fields close to source. Then water use priorities have been given say like first is domestic use or life supporting system, then for agriculture and other purposes. So, as far as forest and then grassland is concerned they develop a social fencing system. So, that overall say people participation was there in overall planning management. So, when this project was assessed in 2005, so what we observe is that about 25 to 30 percent the forest cover is improved to 25 to 30 percent, then water availability improved considerably say about 2 to 4 meter water level increase was there in selected wells. Then improved agriculture output about 30 to 100 percent in for various crops output increase was observed, then say even severe drought year drought was not affected in this area. So, finally, there was no migration and the children go to school in this particular watershed and women were very actively involved in all the projects implementation and maintenance. So, finally, overall social and economic improvement has been achieved in this particular watershed. So, some of the important lessons learned in this case study is listed here. So, this is integration of appropriate technical and management measures, then successful technical aspects as far as say prioritization is concerned or implementation is concerned and then appropriate stakeholder analysis for the particular watershed. Then people participation was very important in this particular case study and then restoration of ecological balance through community and then encourage available low cost affordable technologies for easy acceptance. So, these are some of the important lessons learned from the successful case study of Jabua watershed. So, for this lecture some of the important references used are listed here. So, finally, before closing this lecture, some of the tutorial questions. So, based upon the the lecture the topics discussed, first one is discussed the watershed management issues at different levels. Already we are discussed in detail, then illustrated watershed management as a multidisciplinary approach and third one is discussed USEP approaches of stakeholder analysis. So, this already we have discussed and then some self evaluation questions are also put here. So, first one is what are the important components of watershed management practices what are second question is what are the important benefits of watershed management. Then in stakeholder analysis discuss the developmental issues with examples, then fourth question is illustrate stakeholder analysis within the perspective of people participation. So, all these things are discussed in this lecture. Finally, some assignment questions what are the important objectives of watershed management, then discuss watershed management within the perspective of multiple uses of resources. Then third one is describe the watershed management strategies with examples. Fourth question with the help of a case study show the importance of stakeholder analysis in watershed management. Finally, one unsolved problem is also put, the question is consider a hypothetical situation of canal water supply to for a village in India or water is drawn and regulated from medium size irrigation tank to both upstream and downstream command areas draw various stakeholders formal and informal involved for it their individual interest and interest influence matrix for them. So, you can do a complete analysis a stakeholder analysis and their importance. So, formal stakeholders like government agencies, then various associations, then informal stakeholders can be farmers community group etc. So, with this second lecture on this watershed management is over. So, the various issues discussed will be further elaborated in the other lectures. Thank you very much.


team's project. Team members are Chan Lee, Becky Miller, and Mohamed.  Is that correct? Sure. Thank you, Sue. I can start. We're all in different places now. We're all two of us, our members are traveling. So I will actually, Mohamed, I will share my slides just in case your connections not good. Sorry, just give me a sec that I will share my screen. And I think, Mohamed, you can kick us off. Mohamed, are you online? Sorry, I was not sure whether he's there yet. Becky, have you received a message from Mohamed or anything? Chan, I don't see that he is logged in. Yeah, I saw him. He's been in and out. I think he said his connection was dropping. Perhaps we should just go ahead with his piece. Chan, if you'd like me to try to wing it, I can just remind me when you take over, which slide, and I'll just kind of wing it up until then, unless you'd like to. Sure, Becky, you can go ahead. I think I will start from talking about a method. Okay. All right, well, thanks for your patience, everyone. Mohamed is actually in Egypt, I believe, and I think it is understandably maybe having some connection issues. But all right, so our title is Open Access Publishing, a study of UC Berkeley faculty views and practices, and this was led by Chan Lee, our assessment librarian. And then Mohamed is the Middle East Studies Librarian, and I'm the Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences Librarian. Next slide. So as a brief outline, we're going to give you a little background. Talk about this faculty survey that was done at Berkeley. Talk about our methods for this study, our findings, some of the implications, and what might be directions for future research. Next slide. Okay, so back way back, it seems like a long time ago, but in 2018, the University of California system was announcing a major initiative to transform the scholarly publishing industry, and has really done a lot to move towards open access through different mandates and things like pursuing transformative agreements. And in October 2018, UC Berkeley Library conducted the Ithaca faculty survey, and 71% of our faculty respondents said that they would be happy to see the traditional publication model replaced by an OA publication system, and this was higher than the nationwide average for this question. So what we wanted to do was use some of these views expressed in the faculty survey towards open access and compare them to the faculty's actual open access publishing practices. Next slide. So just a little background from this Ithaca survey, again, this was in October 2018. And we did see, let's see some disciplinary differences that more faculty in the arts and humanities, especially valued no cost to publish. And it looks like more faculty in the life and health sciences valued no cost to read which, you know, we're sort of equating with open access anyone can read. So kind of looked a little bit at funding. I mean we're not going to have a chance in this brief presentation to talk about all the different things we looked at but you can refer to our report for more details. But as far as funding there was definitely a stark difference in the faculty reporting external funding in the last five years. And it's quite a bit more of the science faculty as one might probably expect reported receiving external funding and so that you know we wanted to kind of look at that because that might have implications for things like paying article processing these and things like that. Okay. Okay, so I will talk about a research method so as Becky said we're looking at the background as we know the way there's a movement there. And we've done this survey study back in 2018. And so the idea is we want to integrate that the survey data with those are their perceptions data data from our faculty we want to combine that with their actual publication behavior. We want to do a correlation analysis based on what they said in the survey, and then also let's look at their publication publishing behavior from their based on their publication data. So we basically wanted to combine the two data set one is the survey data survey responses, not not for all of the survey questions just focus on a few questions related to away. And that was that one data set. The other data set is that we look at who responded to those data surveys and look at those particular faculties their publication data from scopus. So the data would include things like number of applications the year publications, they're reported research funding and others. And also we want to look at their away publication information and that particular data came from and paywall database. And we, our study primarily focus on the go to a as this category reflects the strongest intention to publish away. And then the faculty's opinions, you know, they came from the survey. And we focused on two questions. One is about the importance ranking on no cost to read, and the other is about importance ranking on no cost to publish. So after we got all of the data, we combined it, the two data sets, we conducted correlation analysis by looking at different demographic parameters. So overall I was studying clues about 479 faculty. So those are the faculty who responded to the survey, we also got their fact, their publication data they're always data. And so in total, we look at their 4,413 published articles over a five year period from scopus and and paywall database. So this is some some of the findings the key findings that we wanted to show you today. Our first thing is that we realized there's a large open access output at Berkeley, and particularly with gold away on the rice. So if you look at the pie chart on the left. It shows all kind of away output distribution, including none away which is closed. That's the gray area as 2028 28% which means the rest 72% are different kinds of away it's just depending on how open they are. And then the gold away represents 18%. So this is really, it kind of a surprise to us, realizing that 72% of all our faculties, not all but the faculties in our research are kind of open access. And on the right chart, the line charts here, if you see the big, big orange line, those are gold away publications in terms of number, number of away articles. So those are steadily increasing over the years. 2019 actually has 20% more increase compared to 2016 data. This is also the way publication you know it's not surprised to us that there are disciplinary differences among the way output. So, like what I said earlier combining all kinds of low a like gold hybrid bronze green, they represent 72% of the total publication output, but that percentage varies from discipline to discipline. So for LA LA actually is life and health sciences publications. They not only have the highest away output percentage, which is 78% on the left. And they also actually represent the highest percentage of the total away output across all disciplines at Berkeley, and that is shown on the pie chart here. So the, the life and health sciences that represent 63, among all of the, the way articles, and ours in humanities here, it has the lowest 37% of their data, the total articles are away open access. And among all of the total their percentage even less is only 1%. The percentage that we have very limited data set for ours in humanities. So that may actually explain some of the lower number that we have, but that definitely needs more research on that. This is the correlation analysis results I won't go into detail explaining what it is but I would just want to tell you the results that finding based on the data, the analysis we did. Overall, when we map their pop, the faculty's publication data and their responses to their responses to questions on supporting away. It shows that the more gold away articles that they published, the more support they have for open access publishing, which is, you know, interesting. When asked in the survey we asked how important it is, you know, that journal makes its articles freely available on the Internet so there's no cost to read about 41% indicates it's very important. And also, the people in that group have higher, they published higher percentage of gold away articles, compared to the rest of group we indicated is less important. And we also correlate their publication data on the gold gold away to their responses on the questions about how important it is to have no, no cost to publish. So the, based on the analysis we learned that the about has, we, even though Berkeley has this substantial always output with gold away increasing, but more than half of the faculty are still concerned about publishing publication cost. So this chart shows that the more gold away the faculty publish only slightly less concerned they are about publishing cost. So the difference are quite small. The line you know it's almost flat is not really a negative correlation line here. So not it definitely means that not paying the APC cause it's kind of important to, to our faculty faculty members. And they're also their disciplinary differences that impact our faculty's publication data and their perceptions on the way publishing life and health sciences group again.  They also support open access publishing the most, and they are the least concerned about away publishing cost. On the other hand, arts and humanities, even though we have very limited publishing data on the arts and humanities faculty and go particularly around open access data. But the survey data actually shows that a lot of arts and humanities faculty, they support to go, they support open access. They are the group who has the most concerns about always publishing cost. So I think that was also interesting that we may wanted to do more research into that arts and humanities areas. And now I will hand this over to Becky. Yes, and I've been told I just have a couple minutes so going through quickly here. Our study definitely had limitations. We can't be sure what role Berkeley authors played in the journal selection and whether or not it was their funds that we're going towards the APCs. Obviously our sample was heavily biased toward the sciences because we use scopus and most of the content and scopus is sciences. And we focused on gold. Ideally, we would also look at things like hybrid articles where the authors chose to pay to pay an APC but we couldn't separate those out with on paywall. And there are other pro OA behaviors we didn't capture like posting to academic social networks and things like that. Okay, next slide. But you know many studies in our literature review we found that many studies show that support for away and away publishing are growing and our results suggest that Berkeley is above average in both with the gold away publishing increasing recent large studies using on paywall data found the total levels of away were less than 50% and we found 72% so we feel like you know Berkeley's doing a good job with this. It's probably related to our open access policy and plus a high level of research funding and the funder mandates especially in the sciences. So you know despite this above average away publishing away is still not a top priority for authors they still chose other factors as being more important to them when deciding where to publish so you know author motivations are complex. So we did find that Berkeley researchers who publish more gold a feel more positive about it so experience publishing away helps. And like others have found APC may be a barrier, and they were a concern for our authors whether or not they received funding. And so this is a place where libraries can perhaps help with dedicated APC funds and transformative agreements. Next slide. So for future research as chance suggested we would want to find other ways to assess the always scholarly output for arts and humanities and also for the social sciences. And then we would want to refresh any survey data about away attitudes a lot has changed in the last few years and a lot of, you know, more attention to away so we might expect that attitudes have changed to. And we did find that authors of funded articles still request library APC funds. So we think it would be interesting to explore authors authors practices around using their research funds for paying APCs and you know what what the disconnect might be there. And finally, you see has a lot of recent transformative publishing agreements with, you know, a lot of different publishers and so going forward we would may want to monitor what impact that has on a way levels that Berkeley. So thank you. Thank you, Chan Becky and Mohammed and I see, Mohammed has been able to check back in so let's bring make sure we bring him in during our questions and discussion.


this study examined the stability of a coal pillar roadway under the influence of intense dynamic pressure from mining activities. It was found that an unreasonably wide coal pillar can lead to severe deformation of the roadway as well as subsidence at the coal pillar side of the roof. To address this issue, a six-meter wide coal pillar was determined to be the most suitable width. Additionally, a combined support system consisting of anchor cables, grouting, and single props was developed and implemented to ensure the safety of the mining operations. This article was authored by Diqiao Wang, Filian He, Yanhao Wu, and others.