This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Technical Paper 11
1996 FAO Investment Centre
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Table of Contents
Why New Guidelines? Objective and Organisation of the Guidelines Complementarity with Previous Investment Centre Guidelines and Papers
2 3 4
Part 1: Recent lessons and implications for planning
Irrigation in the Context of Water Resources Management Irrigation Types and the Issue of Scale Irrigation Typologies The Issue of Scale Irrigation, Food Supply and Drought Options and Alternatives for Food Supply Rainfed Production of Food as an Alternative to Irrigation New Irrigation Development Intensification of Existing Irrigation Development Low Cost Irrigation Irrigation and Protection from Drought
5 6 6 9 11 11 11 12 13 14 15
Table of Contents
Effective Implementation Implementation Capacity and External Technical Assistance Participation, Ownership and Commitment A Possible Role for Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) in Participatory Development Fiscal Sustainability The Need for Cost Recovery Cost Recovery, O&M and Water Charges Users’ Contributions to Capital Costs Water Users’ Associations Water Users’ Associations and Transfer of O&M Responsibility Conditions for Sustainability of Water Users’ Associations Social and Environmental Aspects Choice of Technology The Drainage Dilemma Implications for the Planning Process To summarise, there is growing recognition that:
15 16 17 19 20 20 21 22 24 24 25 28 29 30 31 31
Part 2: The planning process
General The Conventional Planning Process Recent Trends: The Changing Investment Environment The Changing Role of the Investment Centre
34 34 34 35
Table of Contents
Subsector Review and Strategy Formulation Objectives, Approach and Staffing Required Main Topics for a Subsector Review Existing Irrigation Development, Structure and Performance Land and Water Resources and Scope for Further Irrigation or Drainage Development Financial and Economic Viability of Irrigation Government Policies, Priorities and Plans Subsectoral Issues and Constraints Strategy Formulation Defining Strategic Options and Measures Identifying Priority Actions and Projects Building Commitment to the Strategy The Irrigation Subsector Review and Strategy Paper Conceptualising and Comparing the Investment Options Objectives General Approach to the Work and Staffing Required Activities Review of Available Database Reconnaissance Field Visits Topography, Soils and Land Capability Assessments Preliminary Estimates of Irrigation Water Requirements for Possible Crops Preliminary Assessment of Available Water Resources Preliminary Assessment of Drainage Requirements Preliminary Assessment of “Without-Project” Socio-Economic Situation
36 36 37 38 38 39 41 41 45 45 48 49 49 49 49 50 51 51 53 53 54 55 56 56
Table of Contents
Initial Environmental Evaluation Preliminary Evaluation of Institutional Capacity Comparisons of the Likely Costs and Benefits
Estimates of Project Benefits Preliminary Cost Estimates Preliminary Cost-Benefit Analysis
56 57 58
59 59 60
Initial Project Brief Achieving Consensus on Investment Concepts and Options Planning the Preferred Option Objective and Approach Activities for Planning the Preferred Option Engineering Studies Soils and Land Capability Studies Agricultural and Marketing Studies and the SEPSS Environmental Impact Assessment and Action Plans Land Tenure and Water Rights Investigations Institutional Capacity Assessment Estimation of Project Costs and Benefits
Estimates of Project Benefits Estimates of Project Costs
60 61 62 62 67 67 70 70 72 72 73 78
Economic Rate of Return Risk and Sensitivity Analysis Effect on Balance of Payments Income Distribution, Social Impact and Poverty Alleviation Fiscal Implications and Cost Recovery
79 81 82 82 82
Planning for Implementation The Project Dossier Achieving Consensus on the Project Proposal
83 84 86
Table of Contents
Annex 1: Checklist for contents of an irrigation subsector review and strategy paper
Introduction (1 to 2 pages) National Background (2 to 3 pages) The Resource Base (2 to 5 pages) The Irrigation Subsector: Present Situation (10 to 15 pages) Financial and Economic Viability of Irrigation (5 to 10 pages) Opportunities and Constraints to Irrigation Development (1 to 2 pages) Government Priorities and Plans (1 to 3 pages) Strategy for Irrigation Development (5 to 10 pages) Development Proposals (1 to 4 pages) Immediate Actions and Follow-up (1 to 3 pages) Issuaes and Risks (1 to 2 pages) Flow Charts and Logic Diagrams Maps Annexes
101 101 102 102 104 104 105 106 109 110 111 111 111 111
Annex 2: Outline of a typical project document or dossier
Summary and Conclusions (2-4 pages) Introduction (1 page) Background (3-6 pages) A. The Economy B. The Agricultural Sector
113 113 113 114 114
Rural Services. Rural Institutions. Government Subsectoral Policies and Plans F. The Economy and People D. Land Use and Land Tenure D. Description of Existing Facilities C. Support Services and Infrastructure The (Name) Irrigation Scheme: Present Status (3-6 pages) A. The Irrigation Subsector D. The Financing Institution’s Previous Operations and Experience The Project Area (3 to 6 pages) A. Present Condition of Irrigation Facilities G. Present Irrigated Agricultural Production F. Location and Natural Resources B. Income Distribution and Poverty E. Environmental Impact of the Existing Scheme 114 115 115 115 116 116 117 119 120 121 121 121 121 122 122 122 123 123 . Infrastructure and Farmers’ Organisations E. Existing Agriculture.Table of Contents vi C. Present Arrangements for O&M and Cost Recovery H. The Economy and People C. Location and Natural Resources B.
Planning Considerations The Project (Or Programme) (5-10 pages) A. Management and Coordination D.Table of Contents vii Existing Institutions and Project Implementation Capacity (3-6 pages) Project Rationale and Planning Considerations (3-6 pages) A. Risk and Sensitivity Analysis 123 124 125 125 127 128 128 131 132 133 134 138 139 139 139 141 143 143 144 145 146 . Detailed Features C. Project Rationale B. General Description B. Economic Costs and Benefits B. Impact on Individual Producers D. Project Costs G. Agricultural Production B. Impact at Project Level Social and Environmental Implications (2-4 pages) Economic Justification (3-6 pages) A. Market Prospects and Prices C. Cost Recovery and O&M E. Institutional Capacity Building F. Project Organisation. Financing Agricultural Production and Results (4-6 pages) A.
Table of Contents viii C. Activities for Completion in Project Year One D. Audit and Reporting Maps. Activities to Achieve Loan Effectiveness C. Issues B. Overall Implementation Schedule B. Procurement E. Tables and Annexes 146 146 147 147 147 148 149 149 150 150 151 152 152 Annex 3: Other documentation The Preliminary Planning Brief The Aide Mémoire Back-to-Office Reports Terms-of-Reference for Feasibility and Other Studies Interim or Initial Project Briefs 160 160 161 162 163 164 . Figures. Commitments and Suggested Conditionalities Implementation (3-6 pages) A. Fiscal Implications and Cost Recovery Issues and Suggested Conditionalities (1-2 pages) A. Effect on Balance of Payments D. Accounting. Impact on Income Distribution and Poverty Alleviation E.
Table of Contents ix References and Bibliography FAO Technical Papers FAO Investment Centre Papers 166 175 175 .
Constructive comments were made on the draft by external reviewers including: staff of the Asian Development Bank. Peris Sinnett-Jones. Any errors and omissions remain. . the responsibility of the Investment Centre. as well as Hans Wolter of the Land and Water Development Division of FAO. Romano Pantanali. Kingsley De Alwis. coordinated by Robert May. Senior Irrigation Engineer. Robert Rangeley and Tony Zagni (consultants). Peter Smith. Lucas Horst and Frans Huibers of Wageningen Agricultural University. with technical and editorial guidance from Simon Hocombe and Andrew MacMillan. University of London.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 1 Preface This Investment Centre Technical Paper was prepared by Tony Peacock (consultant). Jacques Chabloz. and James Dempster. Paolo Lucani. Michael Fitzpatrick. Michael Wales and several other staff of the Investment Centre. The Investment Centre would like to gratefully acknowledge the valuable contributions of the external reviewers. staff of the Agriculture and Natural Resources Department of the World Bank. Orla WhiteNatalizia. coordinated by Hervé Plusquellec. Jan Doorenbos. however. The paper benefited from consultations with Volker Branscheid. Senior and Principal Advisers respectively in the FAO Investment Centre Division. Alice Carloni. Janet Francis and Marilou Mechitarian formatted the final text. Linden Vincent. Laurence Smith of Wye College. African Development Bank. Random DuBois. Timothy Stephens. Brian Albinson and Donald Campbell (consultants) on behalf of the International Irrigation Management Institute.
Report of the World Bank's Portfolio Management Task Force (often referred to as the Wapenhans Report). Twenty of the projects were later subjected to impact evaluation by the Bank's Operations Evaluation Department (OED). (1994).Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 2 Introduction WHY NEW GUIDELINES? Irrigated agriculture has made a major contribution to food production and food security throughout the world: without irrigation much of the impressive growth in agricultural productivity over the last 50 years could not have been achieved.7% at appraisal. Operations Evaluation Department. a: Report No 13676. However it should be taken to include drainage as appropriate throughout. only two thirds had satisfactory outcomes. and that there is ample room for improvement. . Nevertheless it is widely accepted that the overall performance of irrigation and drainage1 investments has too often fallen short of the expectations of planners. it may also imply reclamation or water control generally. In 1992. A Review of World Bank Experience in Irrigation. the World Bank’s Portfolio Management Task Force reported2 that major problems that constrain the performance of World Bank financed investment projects in various sectors.8% at project completion audit. 1: For brevity. are: • inadequate consideration of institutional constraints and poor planning for implementation. 2: Effective Implementation: Key to Development Impact. of 208 Bank-funded irrigation projects evaluated.3% at OED impact evaluation. Washington DC. Box 1 . governments and financing institutions alike (see Box 1). and • a lack of commitment to the success of the project by governments and users. World Bank. and for these the average outcomes were 17. Even those projects rated as satisfactory indicated a substantially lower economic rate of return at evaluation (average 15%) than expected at appraisal (average 22%). The Bank concluded that the initial assessment that two thirds of its projects had satisfactory outcomes may be too sanguine. the single word "irrigation" is most often used for the rest of the text. World Bank. Washington DC (1992). and only 9.The Performance of World Bank-Financed Irrigation Investment Projects A recent World Bank review of its experience with irrigation investment projectsa found that. 14.
and poor operation and maintenance resulting from inadequate budget allocations or from rent seeking1 by the users. due to poor technical performance or reflecting inaccurate price projections by planners. Guidance covers the whole investment planning process. • unreliable water supplies. or over-irrigation. • social problems. The Guidelines are divided into two main parts. • premature degeneration of civil works and equipment. lenders and planning teams in it. from formulation of subsectoral strategies. • lower than expected output values. and the new approaches that have been developed to tackle them. The second part (yellow paper) describes the process itself. both at implementation and thereafter. the roles of the borrowers. the first part (blue paper) briefly discusses the main lessons learned in recent years and their implications for the project planning process. therefore make new guidelines essential and timely. and detailed planning of the preferred option(s). a host of other technical. including problems of organisation. Some of the material may also be useful to consulting firms and financing institutions involved in planning or appraising such projects. These findings are now considered generally valid by other international financing institutions and donors. . as well as local planning groups (LPGs) set up by governments to prepare investment proposals. and that many implementation problems can clearly be traced to deficiencies here. The World Bank Task Force stressed that the ultimate success of a project is to a significant degree determined by what happens in the “upstream” planning process. Economic rent can be earned even in the case of an activity that is socially unprofitable. and to assist practitioners to plan irrigation investment projects and programmes that will realise and sustain their full potential. trainees and consultants. waterlogging and salinity. if government subsidies relieve the farmer from the requirement to pay for part or all of the input. to conceptualisation of project options.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 3 In the case of irrigation investments these problems are manifested in poor project management. The intended users are FAO Investment Centre staff. OBJECTIVE AND ORGANISATION OF THE GUIDELINES The objective of these Guidelines is to summarise present thinking and practice. land tenure. social and economic problems. such as: • implementation delays and cost overruns. The lessons learned regarding these problems. or are accompanied by. These core problems usually give rise to. Following this introduction (white paper). equity. ie uneconomic. and the 1: Economic rent is the income earned from the use of an input (in this case water) in excess of its cost.
including both new and perennial issues in irrigation planning. 1: For example Donald Campbell. Brief descriptions of other documentation that might be required during the planning process are given in Annex 3. at the end of the document. COMPLEMENTARITY WITH PREVIOUS INVESTMENT CENTRE GUIDELINES AND PAPERS These Guidelines update the 1984 paper Identification and Preparation of Irrigation Projects produced by the FAO/World Bank Cooperative Programme. which are covered in numerous FAO. World Bank and other papers1. • Technical Paper 9: Guidelines on Sociological Analysis in Agricultural Project Design (1992). rather than the now wellestablished stock-in-trade technical aspects of irrigation planning. although if it is intended to use any part of a report in an appraisal report of a financing institution. the reader’s attention is drawn to a forthcoming Investment Centre publication Building Local Commitment During the Design of Agricultural Investment Projects: The Experience of FAO’s Investment Centre. Annex 2 provides an outline for a typical project dossier. The following Investment Centre Technical Papers complement and should be read in conjunction with these Guidelines: • Technical Paper 7: Guidelines for the Design of Agricultural Investment Projects (1993. revised 1995). . In addition. With regard to Investment Centre standards for report format. for use by a financing institution for project appraisal.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 4 activities and outputs expected. It deliberately focuses on new thinking and new approaches to the planning process. most of the purely technical content of that document remains valid and is repeated where appropriate in Annex 2 of these Guidelines. Thus Annex 1 gives a checklist for a typical report on an irrigation and drainage subsector review/strategy formulation. reference should be made to the in-house Guidelines for Report Format. World Bank Technical Paper 256. to be fully comprehensive. Design and Operation of Smallholder Irrigation in South Asia. however. The remainder of the document (white paper) presents checklists which seek. the format may instead need to conform to that of the institution concerned. • Technical Paper 8: Financial Analysis in Agricultural Project Preparation (1991). a draft of which was circulated for comment in March 1995. Relevant technical papers produced by other FAO Divisions are referred to where appropriate in the text. Numerous other sources are listed in References and Bibliography. Washington DC (1995) which addresses most of the technical and operational issues and problems arising in irrigation/drainage system design. World Bank.
in developing countries the proportion is even higher . than irrigation. and earn a higher economic rate of return from. social and environmental implications of investment in irrigation.more than 80 percent. or between countries where such competition transcends international borders. FAO.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 5 PART 1: Recent lessons and implications for planning Since the ultimate success of an investment is largely determined by the quality of the upstream process of planning. Rome (1995). . have recently made new irrigation development increasingly difficult to justify. on making better use of existing irrigation facilities and on increasing output value per unit of water used. in the World Bank Policy Paper Water Resources Management. Even so. IRRIGATION IN THE CONTEXT OF WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT In recent years. a unit of water than agriculture. More than two thirds of the water withdrawn from the earth’s rivers is used for irrigated agriculture. also that low world prices for basic food and fibre crops. Future irrigation investment must therefore focus on lower cost solutions. both for new development and rehabilitation. water issues have been the focus of increasing international concern and debate1. it is pertinent to examine recent lessons learned from experience and their implications for future planning. The main lessons are that water is an increasingly scarce resource for which there are many competing demands that are more profitable. for example. Planners should seek to establish the conditions that will promote this focus. World Bank. world food supply will depend even more on irrigation in the next century than in the present. Competition for water with other sectors is already constraining economic development in many countries. socially and economically. Cities and industries can afford to pay more for. as will conflicts between water users. UNDP and FAO). But agriculture is a relatively low-value and often highly subsidised water user. as populations expand and economies grow this competition will intensify. As a result. Hence governments and financing institutions are being forced to reconsider the economic. it is likely that in future the water sector will be less 1: The background to this is described. Washington DC (1993) and in Land and Water Bulletin 3 Water Sector Policy Review and Strategy Formulation: A General Framework (prepared jointly by the World Bank. together with typically high development costs.
The implication is that loans for irrigation development will not be made where this will prejudice other more profitable or socially desirable uses of water. including demand management. the international financing institutions increasingly require the preparation of water resources management strategies to guide the lending programme in the water sector. and in some countries water formerly used for agriculture is already being reallocated for higher-value uses. as a precondition to lending for irrigation. legal. The Guidelines therefore do not cover the principles and processes involved in water resources management strategy formulation. Rome (1995). Processes and Practices. what might be considered large-scale in some countries in Sub-Saharan Africa would be considered as only small or medium-scale in South Asia.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 6 dominated by irrigation. Definition by size presents difficulties on a global level. January 1995). FAO. Numerous typologies are commonly used. UNDP and FAO). since. It calls for new approaches. and that investment finance could be made available for its development. . many of the problems confronting publicly financed irrigation transcend scale. institutional and other policy interventions to influence the demand for water in order to improve the efficiency of its use. for example. some categorisation of irrigation may be thought desirable. Irrigation and Drainage Paper 52 Reforming Water Resources Policy: A Guide to Methods. Furthermore. These Guidelines however start from the assumption that water policy reviews have indicated that irrigation is a justifiable option within the context of a country’s overall water resources management strategy. Rome (1995). Water Report 6 Methodology for Water Policy Review and Reform (Proceedings of the Expert Consultation on Water Policy and Reform . . FAO. IRRIGATION TYPES AND THE ISSUE OF SCALE Irrigation Typologies With about 250 million hectares irrigated throughout the world in vastly different climatic and socio-political environments. and some attempts at categorisation have confused “small-scale” with “traditional” or “informal” irrigation. In countries with significant water management problems. which are well covered elsewhere1. and whether schemes are operated publicly or privately.Rome. the nature of the water source.that is to say the use of economic. The 1993 World Bank policy paper Water Resources Management crystallises much of the present thinking of governments and financing institutions with regard to the overall management of water resources. such as size. Rome (1995). Water Sector Policy Review and Strategy Formulation: A General Framework (prepared jointly by the World Bank. The need for project planning to be in strict conformity with such strategies nevertheless cannot be overemphasised. 1: See for example: Land and Water Bulletin 3. FAO.
ie by the degree of endusers’ commitment of resources to. as total inundation of the crop leads to significant yield losses. Public irrigation may range in size from schemes of hundreds of thousands of hectares. maize and especially cotton will die under these conditions1. Non-rice projects are generally found in the drier or cooler parts of the developing world. Once the crop is established rice schemes usually receive a small but continuous flow to maintain flooded conditions. field-to-field irrigation is acceptable because a down-catchment farmer will often use what an up-catchment farmer wastes. joint ventures between government and quasi-government financial institutions. whereas crops such as wheat. private irrigation can be defined as any irrigation in which farmers (or a private sector group) have the dominant financial interest or management responsibility/control. From the technical viewpoint. This definition includes for example stateowned large-scale estates (e. notably in the humid eastern side of South Asia eastward through to Japan and Indonesia. For the purpose of these Guidelines.g. rather than the usual categorisation by scale. Even this is difficult to define precisely. for sugar cane production). 1: Rice schemes nevertheless require adequate surface drainage. The design and operation of a rice-growing irrigation system is significantly different from that for other crops: rice fields are waterlogged to reduce the weeding requirements. because of their fundamentally different characteristics. Since the rice plant tolerates waterlogging and needs much more water to thrive than almost all other of the major irrigated crops. it is dominant where water is cheap and plentiful. and non-rice schemes. Irrigation systems designed for other crops do not usually suit rice very well. down to very small schemes of 10 ha or less. Nevertheless. which comprise more than half of the world’s irrigation. and vice-versa. . the system. Conversely. since the share of public versus private resources can vary widely between schemes. but in each case these are initiated and developed under public authority and control. and control over the operation of. and operated and maintained in the same way. for example. and large-scale through to small-scale smallholder irrigation schemes set up under government authority. public irrigation is defined here as any irrigation in which government has the dominant financial interest or management responsibility/control.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 7 Definition by the type or nature of the water source does not recognise the very different characteristics of major public surface water schemes based on dams in the USA. a further distinction can be made between rice schemes. and small community-managed tank irrigation schemes in Sri Lanka. irrigation could perhaps be categorised globally as either public or private.
tank irrigation systems elsewhere in South Asia. This category would include for example localised1 irrigation systems of 1-2 ha in extent. for the production of flowers. even though government may sometimes facilitate development or provide incentives. and carry the risks. financed. The features that make successful private irrigation self-sustaining should if possible be emulated in planning public irrigation investments. developed. operated and managed by individuals or privately owned companies. qanat systems in Iran. while private irrigation is demand-driven and reflects financial objectives or. These characteristics impinge on many of the basic decisions for development planning and imply fundamental influences on the investment approach. Some of these systems are hundreds of years old. As will be seen. operate and maintain. and generally for the production of basic food or fibre crops and vegetables for local markets. drip or micro-jet. vegetables or fruit. and privately owned sugar estates. families.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 8 It includes: • Farmer-managed irrigation schemes (FMIS) of a few hundred square metres to a several thousand hectares. 1: e. • in private irrigation. to larger overhead or surface irrigated schemes for the production high value field crops such as tobacco. Thus farmers must be involved in the planning decisions. implement. shallow tubewells in the Indo-Gangetic Plain. pay. Public irrigation therefore tends to be supply-driven and may incorporate political or social objectives. Examples may be found throughout the world. farmers take their own investment decisions. Afghanistan and Pakistan. or local rulers and landowners. The most important differences between public and private irrigation as defined above are that: • in public irrigation it is the government that plans. finances and implements. independently of government. with units ranging in size from a few hectares to several thousand hectares. at times.g. in which case they are often referred to as traditional irrigation. operated and maintained by individuals. from small plots of paddy in South-East Asia. the swamp and flood recession areas with partial water control in Sub-Saharan Africa. and in most cases farmers effectively receive a subsidised service. the survival strategy of the poor. contribute at least a part of the capital costs. communities. • Commercial irrigation. the planning and investment trend in publicly financed irrigation is to emulate those characteristics of private irrigation that make it generally self-sustaining. to spate irrigation systems in Southern Arabia. and accept full responsibility for operation and maintenance (O&M). .
quality construction. In theory. operation and management.are still relatively weak. it can be argued that where irrigation institutions . World Bank. public interest groups. for certain irrigation types. attract better management. financing institutions. judged in terms of sustained economic internal rate of return (ERR). generalisation should be avoided and the issue of scale should be approached considering the individual circumstances of the project and institutional capacities in the country concerned. 1: Report No 13676: A Review of World Bank Experience in Irrigation.public or private . efficient operation and adequate and timely maintenance. Thus. that have overstretched the logistical and staffing capabilities of irrigation agencies and have eventually failed. there are many examples of the development of small public irrigation systems. individual farmers. and international project planning teams such as those provided by the Investment Centre. Nevertheless. non-governmental organisations. There are numerous other arguments for and against large or small irrigation schemes: for example. Ministers). there is no evidence to suggest that small-scale irrigation is more or less likely than large-scale to achieve success. government implementing and operating agencies (senior and middle level management of line ministries) who may be subsequently responsible for project implementation. . and should therefore enjoy better prospects for sustainability. Many of the arguments are valid in some countries. Smaller schemes are more conducive to farmer management and control. implement. larger developments should encourage more Government support. operate and manage large schemes. scattered over a wide area. be easier to organise. (NGOs) and private sector companies. On the other hand. and market limitations for the crops produced often make such schemes the only viable choice. but not in others. Washington DC (1994). including water users' associations (WUAs) or other farmers' organisations. 2: The term stakeholders includes all individuals who may be positively or adversely affected by the project: government planning agencies (planning units.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 9 The Issue of Scale According to a recent World Bank review of its experience in irrigation1. As will be seen. the obvious economies of scale and multiplier effects of large schemes (see Box I-1). senior decision-makers. community-based organisations. where there is a lack of capacity to plan. attention should focus on smaller developments. Operations and Evaluation Department. there are more important issues than scale: the overwhelming experience is that what is important in predisposing irrigation to success is the extent to which it enjoys the commitment of stakeholders2 to good engineering design.
Longer period required to bring complete project into production. operating and maintaining. such as displacement of settlements or disruption of wildlife habitats. Smaller risk of irreversible adverse environmental and social impacts Against: Diseconomies of scale sometimes result in relatively longer period required to plan and implement (per ha developed). operating and maintaining.Large versus Small Irrigation Schemes Large Scale For: Engineering economies of scale usually possible. Greater regional impact of secondary benefits. Greater potential for irreversible adverse environmental and social impacts. Small Scale For: Usually less exacting technical demands for high level professional skills for planning. Greater opportunity for farmers to participate in planning. Borrowers more disposed to take the actions necessary to ensure that project succeeds.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 10 Box I-1 . Relatively simple organisation and management. implementing. financing. hence greater recurrent cost burden to government or other central authority. Easier physical planning of contiguous blocks than scattered areas. implementing. Against: Demand for high level professional skills and institutional capacity in planning. extension coverage and provision of social and economic infrastructure. Often quick yielding. . scope for farmer management limited to tertiary system. Economies of scale result in costeffective provision of extension services and social/economic infrastructure. Better adapted to supplying local markets with (high value) horticultural products without depressing prices. Fragmented distribution results in more difficult logistics for implementation. implementing. hence lower unit costs. operating and maintaining. Relatively complex organisation and management requirements.
Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 11 IRRIGATION. soil erosion and general land degradation. Rome (1987). also Technical Paper 221: Conserving Soil Moisture and Fertility in the Warm Seasonally Dry Tropics. World Bank. and perhaps should not. further area expansion of rainfed food production could increasingly involve more marginal areas. the options for meeting the consequent incremental demand for food need to be considered. . FAO. However where land resources are scarce. and the adoption of integrated pest management (IPM) and integrated plant nutrient management (IPNM) strategies. Washington DC (1993). supply can be expected to depend to an even larger extent on irrigation in the next century than it has in this. These are discussed below. or they are unlikely to be achieved because of aversion by farmers to the known risks of investing in improved inputs in marginal rainfall areas. There may be prospects for obtaining sustainable production increases under rainfed conditions through relatively simple low cost technologies: for example improved in situ water conservation techniques1. In the less well-endowed areas particularly. Hence. FOOD SUPPLY AND DROUGHT Options and Alternatives for Food Supply As populations in some developing countries continue to grow faster than increases in food production. Rome (1995). FAO. even though irrigation development cannot. before contemplating further irrigation development the potential for increased food output from rainfed areas should be considered. with a risk of increased deforestation. the potential for stabilisation or intensification of existing rainfed production by increased use of agrochemical inputs is also technically limited: either the possible gains have already been achieved. Land and Water Division. Rainfed Production of Food as an Alternative to Irrigation Although between 30 and 40 percent of the world’s food at present comes from the irrigated 20 percent of total cultivated land. Investment Centre Technical Paper 10: Agricultural Investment to Promote Improved Capture and Use of Rainfall in Dryland Farming. be relied upon to meet the entire future increase in demand for food. 1: See Soils Bulletin 57: Soil and Water Conservation in Semi Arid Areas.
also Annex 2 of Investment Centre Technical Paper 52). Indeed. . This is today’s challenge to irrigation engineers. 1: Paradoxically perhaps. since it has caused relatively strong growth in supply of rice and wheat compared with growth in demand. for the foreseeable future any expansion of irrigation for the production of basic foods will only be possible if substantial reductions in per hectare capital costs of new development can be achieved. Irrigation in Africa South of the Sahara. In this situation markets. world market prices for basic food crops have recently shown signs of recovery. In this case prices might reasonably be expected to approach the marginal cost of irrigated production. and the use of current World Bank price projections for project analyses may be inappropriate3. The situation may change in the longer term if. or explore possible future differences between forecast and actual prices through sensitivity analysis. as world population grows.for which markets and marketing are usually constraints . and new projects could be expected to cost even more per hectare than those developed in the past. unless lower cost technologies can be devised and introduced. However. and if this trend were to continue it could significantly alter the profitability of production of such crops under irrigation. the expansion of irrigation over the last 50 years has been a major factor in the decline in prices.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 12 New Irrigation Development Increased production through new irrigation development is nevertheless increasingly difficult to justify economically for the production of basic foods. will determine the pace of investment in new irrigation. because of the decline in world market prices for these crops1 and typically high per hectare capital costs (see Box I-2.rather than for basic foods. New irrigation development in these countries may therefore increasingly be justified only for the production of relatively high value crops . as much as the availability of suitable sites. Rome (1986). 3: Doubts over the use of World Bank price forecasts for food and fibre crops have often been expressed. Nevertheless. In many countries however the better irrigation sites are already developed. 2: Investment Centre Technical Paper 5. in the absence of any better alternatives. FAO. the analyst can do no more than attempt best guesses based on the Bank's forecasts. the demand for food begins to outstrip supply.
However.744 to US$4. What has caused this decline in investment? Contributing factors include the large public and foreign debt loads carried by most of the agriculturally based economies in the region. Similar trends have occurred with wheat output. the declining share of unexploited irrigation development potential in many countries in the region. and political resistance from environmental interests and those displaced or otherwise negatively affected by irrigation development.5. the main reasons for declining investment are the increasing real costs per hectare of new irrigation development and decline in world rice and wheat prices. and that the tendency is for existing irrigation systems to perform below potential.385 per ha. the unweighted average for which increased by a factor of 2. from US$1. from 3. the rate of growth of yields increased from 1.7% per annum during 1958-66 (before the spread of modern technology) to 2.2% during the period beginning in 1982. Asian Food Production in the 1990s: Irrigation Investment and Management Policy. For rice.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 13 Box I-2. representing a swing of a factor of 5 in the ratio of costs to benefits. growth in rice yield. Asian Development Bank.9% during 1974-82. it is logical to consider . By the mid-1980s it was less than 50% of the 1977-79 level. over the period. “Food Policy”. Rosegrant and Svendsen presented real capital costs for construction of new irrigation systems in five countries in South and SE Asia over the period 1966-88. The real price of rice and wheat over this period was halved. Reductions in the amounts of new investments in irrigation have been dramatic. Area expansion contributed about one-third of Asian rice output growth during 1966-74. has slowed to 1. However. a: World Bank. to 2. the primary contributor to rice output growth throughout these periods. February 1993.1% in 1974-82. and US Agency for International Development. Source: Mark W Rosegrant and Mark Svendsen (1993). Asian Food Production in the 1990s The introduction and rapid spread of high-yielding rice and wheat varieties combined with heavy investment in irrigation and rapid growth in fertiliser use in the late 1960s and the 1970s resulted in strong growth in output of these crops in Asia. but little after that. Japanese Overseas Economic Cooperation Fund. The annual growth rate in rice output therefore declined in the 1980s. Aggregate lending and assistance for irrigation in Asia in the 1970s and 1980s by four major financial institutionsa reached its peak in real terms in 1977-79. Intensification of Existing Irrigation Development Given that the cost of new irrigation development for food production is increasingly difficult to justify.9% annually since the early 1980s.
1: There are exceptions to this rule: one such system has been satisfactorily demonstrated for the irrigation of cassava in some Sahelian countries. and other similar devices. and have continued their existence in the same way. The investment emphasis in recent years has therefore shifted towards improving the latter. It is important here to note the important distinction that has been made between an endless cycle of rehabilitation. These. given that in some countries the area under traditional irrigation far exceeds the area under formal irrigation. but are in general unsuited to large scale food production1. proposed improvements should avoid inadvertent transfer of responsibility to government. of large areas of informal or traditional irrigation. . it must also be noted that the most important feature of these systems is local initiative. particularly for localised irrigation. have been developed on the initiative of farmers rather than governments. taking advantage of sunk costs to achieve incremental production at low incremental cost. Apart from traditional irrigation systems. and is often easily justified by the incremental production that can be achieved as a result. Traditional irrigation systems are often characterised by poor water control. are often nutritionally important for local communities because they are generally used for fruit and vegetable production. which involves making existing schemes work better. However. Upgrading usually calls for engineering. They make efficient use of scarce water.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 14 intensification and increased output from existing systems. other opportunities exist for low cost irrigation. the scope for obtaining increased food production from these systems could be significant. Thus. Low Cost Irrigation The above discussion focuses on irrigation development in formal systems and takes no account of the existence. including systems based on the use of clay pots for the storage and gradual release of irrigation water. by definition. The identification of opportunities for such improvements may therefore be a priority for planners. often linked to management transfer to the users (see Chapter 7). in various parts of the world. These. Sectoral loans aimed at such improvements have become an important part of the portfolios of the financing institutions. and upgrading. economic and sociological analysis to arrive at solutions. responsibility and control. and consequent low cropping intensities and yields. which is simply deferred maintenance. In many cases improved water control can be achieved at comparatively low cost.
EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION Experience to date. rural poverty and food insecurity. is undoubted. Further research is necessary. including opportunities for non-farm rural employment. aimed at developing viable technical packages that consider the recurrent drought cycle. These have limited markets and will bring primary benefits to only a few of the people normally at risk. Here the value of irrigation in “drought-proofing”. its development cost nowadays will often only be justified by high value crops. irrigation does not always provide full insurance against drought.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 15 Irrigation and Protection from Drought In many regions of the world the major river systems have their headwaters in high rainfall or snowmelt areas and flows are relatively insensitive to droughts in agricultural areas downstream. although at first sight there would appear to be no apparent alternative for improving local food security. It could therefore be argued that in these circumstances irrigated agriculture is more vulnerable to drought than some less intensive forms of agriculture. despite its superficial appeal. Policy assumptions that automatically equate irrigation development with the elimination of drought risks in such areas should be regarded with caution. well summarised in the 1992 report of the World Bank’s Portfolio Management Task Force referred to earlier. irrigation development in these areas may not be a fully effective means to combat recurrent drought. sound construction and financial viability for the users are of course equally important. built on stakeholder participation and local ownership. • commitment to the project. In other areas subject to repeated and prolonged droughts. But experience indicates that in the past irrigation professionals have often underestimated the attention which also needs to be given to implementability. Other factors. such as the Sahel. Thus. northeast Brazil or southern and eastern Africa. even where irrigation potential remains unexploited in these areas. by creating greater yield stability and outof-season food production. . This requires: • that the implementation requirements of the project are matched to local institutional capacity. In much of Sub-Saharan Africa for example rivers and dams dry out and groundwater levels drop in years of recurrent drought. quick fixes for these problems. such as good technical design. Moreover. makes it clear that a key condition for sustainable development impact from irrigation investments is implementability. There are unfortunately no easy.
” he said. which implies that planning teams should first acquire a thorough appreciation of this capacity. would like to see this changed. Well. .. When I talk about donors. Mr Jaycox said to alleviate Africa’s capacity building problems. Technical assistance can then be applied selectively. In the conventional planning process. thinking that will bridge the gap. They are undermining it faster than they are building it.expatriate management substituting for domestic management”. He said very scant attention was paid to appropriate project design. it has not and I do not think it will . there was a need to create a demand for professionalism on the continent. in effect. detailed start-up and implementation plans have generally been considered as beyond the ambit of the identification/preparation teams’ work. or at least as fast. an endemic problem in the donor community . there is no demand for it really.. rather than indiscriminately as often in the past. I. “The donors and African governments together have. undermined capacity building in Africa.. The planning process should therefore give specific attention to an analysis of institutional capacity. undermining the development capacity in Africa because most of their technical assistance was imposed. are fast destroying the development capacity of Africa due to conditionalities tied to their aid. This is in fact. Box I-3 . otherwise we are not going to succeed in the development effort in Africa.” Mr Jaycox said in Washington last week. “We design a project and then we find a big mismatch between the project design and the local capacity to carry it out. Money and technical assistance is then provided to bridge the gap.The World Bank and Capacity Building (Extract from The Financial Gazette. including the World Bank. Harare. He charged that resident expatriate technical assistance officials were systematic destructive forces. Mr Edward Jaycox. This has got to stop. “It (technical assistance) is not welcome. except on the donor side. So we throw money and technical assistance at this. 27 May 1993) International donors. Technical assistance frequently then crowds out any local capacity. and in effect substitutes for local management rather than strengthens it. for one. I am including the World Bank . If necessary the project scope and content may be reduced to match existing implementation capacity. That this was inappropriate is now clear and a new approach has been found necessary: projects should be planned to match local capacity for implementation.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 16 Implementation Capacity and External Technical Assistance The conventional identification/preparation approach of the past has often resulted in arriving at a project plan only to find a mismatch with local capacity to implement it. and to providing a detailed plan to enable the implementers to prepare themselves for carrying out the tasks expected of them. the World Bank vice-president for Africa region has said and warned that this could defeat the continent’s economic recovery programmes. bringing no sustainable improvement (see Box I-3).. for genuinely sustainable capacity to be built.
1: This is the basis of genuine demand-driven development. has seldom allowed time for genuine participation (which should go beyond mere consultation). It can often pay dividends. either by government staff or farmers. Farmers. Ownership and Commitment Successful implementation requires participation in the planning and implementation process by all stakeholders. from the poorest illiterate smallholder to the richest well-educated commercial farmer. by preparing the implementers. hydrology. Undue delays in project approval and implementation are undesirable. They have been reluctant to adopt participatory approaches with farmers.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 17 Participation. government irrigation engineers. such as aligning a canal to avoid excavation in sacred ground. usually have practical ideas of what works and what does not. perspective. This requires that the project planning process should allow time for the borrower and users to participate in. Ownership and commitment by the users are unlikely to be achieved unless they consider that the project would meet their felt needs1 and they have a stake in the equity . mainly because of a misplaced belief that farmers are unable to understand or make any contribution to technical matters. markets. and they later lose interest in the irrigation scheme.even if the prospective users promise or agree to make a contribution at some later date. in order to create a sense of ownership of. Often farmers are driven by other motives in these circumstances. On implementation. . ensuring smooth start-up. and any potential losers to have a substantive influence on decisions that affect their future. or preferably drive. Building ownership and commitment through participation has often been difficult to achieve in the past. rather than a farming or social. the planning process. soils. from their detailed local knowledge of weather patterns.that is. or because of concerns that participation might delay implementation or result in design changes that compromise the quality of the final product. carried out against tight deadlines by external planning teams. not least for the farmers. and consequent commitment to. and so on. for their part. Soliciting or orchestrating requests from farmers for government investments in irrigation is not . Experience has shown that the ultimate scheme design almost always benefits from involving the users in the planning process. The conventional sequence of identification/preparation. have usually seen irrigation only from an engineering. but taking time over stakeholders’ participation in planning does not necessarily mean delay. Communities often have strong preferences regarding the nature and location of development that would influence planning. or at least those with some experience or knowledge of irrigation. and ultimately lead to more rapid implementation and a more sustainable development impact. building farmers’ committment to change. the project. they share in or bear all of the investment costs. such as temporary wage employment on scheme construction.
. IIMI. As will be seen from Chapter 5. Projects that involve the displacement and resettlement of people can only be planned and implemented effectively if those affected are involved in the planning process and their suggestions and concerns taken fully into account. channels and ponds. The most common kinds of alterations observed were channels being relocated.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 18 Participatory or consultative planning is essential in rehabilitation projects or the upgrading of traditional farmer-managed irrigation systems. The most frequent reasons reported by farmers for making design changes related to questions of conveyance and distribution efficiencies. involving farmers in system design can also often result in significant cost savings. Other actions included redirecting project channels into drains or streams. making new channels.L. project channels being abolished or not used. in Design Issues in Farmer-Managed Irrigation Systems.. Sound engineering is essential. Sri Lanka (1990). particularly if the farmers themselves are expected to take a share in the equity by contributing to the investment costs. 27 design alterations were identified in the sample blocks. Altogether. farm boundaries and the conjunctive use of alternative water sources (in this case from natural waterways or from return flow). Often farmers relocated the construction markers when the crews had left. making new flumes. Others waited until construction was finished and the contractors had moved on before altering the structures. and channel offtakes or division points being relocated. to accommodate low water requirement crops or to continue to make use of pre-existing farmer-built structures such as small weirs. destroying project flumes and lining channels.Second Approximations: Unplanned Farmer Contributions to Irrigation Design Farmers interviewed on the Kosinggolan Scheme of the Dumoga Irrigation Project in North Sulawesi. Indonesia frequently reported that during construction they had approached construction labourers or supervisors in the field to suggest changes and were usually told that the design had been established by the government and could not be changed. Many cases involved multiple alterations which were interconnected. Yet farmers. December 1989. to take advantage of the invaluable store of cross-disciplinary knowledge that farmers possess about the existing system. Proceedings of an International Workshop of the Farmer-Managed Irrigation Systems Network held at Chiang Mai. are still usually ignored. Source: Vermillion D. and as a result schemes are often inappropriately planned (see Box I-4). streams being diverted or ponded. as a possible source of system design input. Box I-4 . Thailand. Colombo. adjusting division box gates to alter water divisions. Several cases involved relocating channels to follow farm boundaries. but it can nonetheless take account of the farmers’ experiences and preferences.
Public Intervention in Farmer-Managed Irrigation Systems. In this case what is often required is a non-governmental intermediary. irrigation services and are now expected to bear more of the costs. to identify community needs and voice them on behalf of the otherwise voiceless. non-profit making organization. They may also often assist in capacity building by training government staff in this role. generally working at the grassroots level. While non-governmental organisations vary in their ability to work with the poor and to cooperate with government agencies. farmers may still hesitate to cooperate fully with persons they regard as government agents. Participation usually also requires behavioural change in irrigation bureaucracies. 1: Some reports define all groups which operate outside the public sector as NGOs. village or district councils. However. caution is necessary to avoid any suggestion that NGOs should replace local institutions: to do so would generally be counterproductive. 2: For example. Even if such staff can be recruited.g. In the context of these Guidelines the acronym NGO is used in a narrower sense. suitably qualified and motivated NGOs may be subcontracted. Colombo (1987). especially if in the past farmers have received free. Farmers may therefore require considerable persuasion to commit themselves to participate. Some bureaucracies have successfully employed young graduates in social science to work directly with farmers to assist the latter to mobilise and organise themselves to participate in project planning and construction2. . 4: e. either by local government3 or through the farmers’ own administrative structures4. several of them have undertaken this role successfully. and until this is achieved they may not be in a position to implement participatory development. IIMI. for various reasons it is often difficult for irrigation bureaucracies to attract and retain such staff. See An Evaluation of NIA's Participatory Communal Programme.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 19 A Possible Role for Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)1 in Participatory Development Farmers may be as uninterested in participation as government irrigation bureaucracies. They may often be suspicious of government officials. though possibly unreliable. However. to provide technical assistance services to animate participation. to mean a charitable.g. water users' associations. Instead. 3: e. especially if they have been the losers as a result of incompetent or corrupt practices. the National Irrigation Administration in the Philippines.
However. Box I-5 . Clive. June 1986. without which some worthwhile projects may not have been constructed. where at the time of audit. although indirect recoveries in the form of agricultural taxes or generally negative terms of trade for the subsector have in some cases been important (see Box I-5). in order to permit longer term replication of investments. taxes. Peter Hazell and Roger Slade. Johns Hopkins University Press (1982).Cost Recovery: Setting the Appropriate Level A 1986 World Bank Operations Evaluation Department (OED) report described serious cost recovery problems on the Muda project in Malaysia. World Bank Lending Conditionality: A Review of Cost Recovery in Irrigation Projects. it was found that for every dollar of value added generated directly by the project. and a substantial sales tax collected from produce in the region. In practice few countries have ever succeeded in recovering much more than the O&M costs of public irrigation directly. partly because of the heavy burden on farmers of zakat. The prospects for raising direct cost recoveries were considered poor. It has also been argued that the complexity of some irrigation and drainage schemes justifies state intervention and subsidising of part of the investment costs. another 80 cents were generated downstream1. estimated in an FAO study to be 5-7 percent of gross farm income. the Muda farmers’ combined payment of water charges. 1: Bell. as well as the indirect return to the government resulting from controlled prices were taken into account.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 20 FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY The Need for Cost Recovery Economic efficiency and fiscal sustainability demand that the capital costs of irrigation infrastructure should eventually be recovered from the users. a religious tithe. Washington DC. . In these cases capital costs not recovered may not really be subsidies if all the secondary benefits of irrigation development are taken into account. for example. the audit report concluded that if the zakat. water charges and land taxes remained far short of meeting O&M costs. Project Evaluation in Regional Perspective. and the production tithe covered all the O&M costs plus 20 percent of capital costs (at 10 percent annual interest). In a case study of the Muda Irrigation Project in Malaysia. World Bank. Source: OED Report No 6233.
including for example local customary law. mainly because revenue from water charges (if they are collected) is often returned to the general treasury instead of being allocated to O&M.or unreliable. Nevertheless. or a fundamental belief in some countries that water should be free. among governments and financing institutions. The Role of Agriculture and its Prerequisites in Economic Development: A Vision for Foreign Development Assistance. Moreover. In: Food Policy 1994 19 (5) 469-478. O&M and Water Charges Problems with cost recovery and O&M form a vicious circle..L. for example on public schemes in Morocco. the governments of many developing countries faced fiscal crises during the 1980s that focused their attention on the shortcomings of existing policies for financing irrigation. but in these cases increased water charges have been accompanied by improved service. in which case measures should be taken to correct the situation.that of relying only on raising water charges .Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 21 Moreover. But this usually takes the form of an area or crop-based fee that provides no 1: See Vollrath T. Fiscal constraints in many developing countries simply do not permit subsidies of this kind anyway.in which case the question should be asked why it was built or what can be done to make it viable . there is an issue of equity involved in subsidising some members of society by way of artificially cheap irrigation: in principle it may be a praiseworthy social objective. If irrigators cannot pay it can only be assumed that the scheme is either unviable . . There are exceptions to this rule. It is also generally accepted that the standard tactic for dealing with poor O&M in the past . The general consensus now. There is also the difficulty of volumetric measurement. but with typically high unit costs for irrigation development. the social impact would in most cases be greater if any subsidy was spread more thinly over a higher proportion of the rural poor. The application and collection of water charges can be further complicated by various factors. particularly with regard to the O&M costs. is that users should pay all of the O&M costs and as much as possible of the capital costs. and an even greater reluctance to pay.does not usually work. Any suggestion that irrigators on a public irrigation scheme cannot afford to pay even the O&M costs needs to be examined very critically. hence greater willingness to pay on the part of the farmer. Irrigators on public schemes are commonly reluctant to pay any charges that they are not forced to: poor collections lead to poor O&M. Cost Recovery. other researchers have argued that the multiplier effects of investment in agriculture in developing countries are generally greater than those associated with investment in other sectors1. The first of these can be overcome to a certain extent by charging a “service” fee for irrigation.
to regard the scheme as government infrastructure and ultimately to show little subsequent commitment to it. which it seldom is for most surface irrigation systems involving smallholders. individual irrigators have little incentive to make more efficient use of water. There are no signs that such an approach engenders any sense of ownership or responsibility. It becomes the group’s responsibility to allocate water amongst its members and to recover the charges. this solution will depend for success entirely on the cohesion of the group involved. enhancing prospects for sustainability. It also presupposes that government is committed to recovering costs. without some form of volumetric charging. and farmers are paid in cash or food to contribute labour to the construction of the scheme. the injection of large amounts of food into an area under food-for-work programmes can sometimes depress agricultural prices and affect other farmers’ incomes. Nevertheless. Even if it were possible to charge individual farmers for water on a volumetric basis. the experience is that users’ groups are more effective collectors of fees than government agencies. Farmers are more likely to view construction simply as a source of off-farm employment. Metering of water supplied to larger groups. In these cases the construction or rehabilitation of an irrigation scheme is often seen as a welfare project rather than as an investment project. However. In effect. Users’ Contributions to Capital Costs Apart from the obvious fiscal advantage. setting an appropriate charge may present some difficulty because of local economic distortions (see Box I-5 above). and that there are no economic distortions in place that make it impossible for them to do so. and the group as a whole can then be charged. Conditions for the sustainability of users’ groups are discussed later. even if only approximate. One solution to the problem of water charges is to devolve financial autonomy for O&M to users’ groups. this is an investment in equity and hence the scheme becomes to some extent private. a contribution by users towards the capital cost of a new or rehabilitated scheme is an indication of demand and commitment. or to irrigation agencies dependent upon the users for finance. is usually more technically feasible. .Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 22 incentive for the efficient use of water and may thus contribute to wasteful usage. Yet there are many examples around the developing world where governments and donors have adopted the view that users are too poor to make any capital contribution. Moreover. For this to happen it requires that the users will be in a position to make such a contribution.
including those on traditional farmermanaged irrigation schemes . case studies have shown that requiring a capital cost contribution from farmers can result in significant overall savings if farmers themselves are involved in system design. for example. On some public systems in Morocco. among others. Where farmers are unable to gain legal or even customary title to their land they are not normally willing to invest. up to 40 percent of the initial capital costs are recovered from farmers. Thus IFAD’s current irrigation and drainage investment strategy1 requires that users should “contribute between 10-20 percent to the direct costs. Design Issues in Farmer-Managed Irrigation Systems. Other experiences from different countries are summarised in Robert Yoder and Juanita Thurston (eds).100 per hectare compared with the originally estimated US$ 7.are willing to pay up to 100 percent of the cost of their schemes.000. Unwillingness to contribute implies a lack of demand for the irrigation development proposed. unless they have confidence in long term usufructuary rights. irrigators or prospective irrigators can contribute labour. IFAD. individuals and communities have been willing and able to invest substantial amounts in cash and kind for projects that they consider are worthwhile. preferably in kind or labour”. hence a lack of commitment. IIMI. For example.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 23 Even among very poor populations. 1: Drawn from Irrigation and Drainage Cluster . Farmers will invariably seek the least cost solutions if they have to pay even a part of the costs. government commitment to the proposed investment is essential. 2: From An Evaluation of NIA’s Participatory Communal Programme : Public Intervention in FarmerManaged Irrigation Irrigation Systems. which invariably leads to unwillingness to accept O&M costs. Colombo (1990). in the IFAD/World Bank-funded Communal Irrigation Development Project in the Philippines.for which reason. and private irrigators throughout the world .Module: The Role of Water User’s Associations. not only because of the farmers’ contribution of labour and materials. and that they should “pay for the cost of irrigation equipment (cash/loans)”. Legislation may therefore be necessary in order that freehold tenure or long leases can be granted . Rome (Draft 20/10/94). IIMI. and provide locally available materials for construction. Experience suggests that this is not unreasonable. . If nothing else. Colombo (1987). actual costs were US$ 4. if the development proposed is an appropriate response to local demand for irrigation. even if only for a few hours a day. but also because of farmer-led design changes2. As mentioned. Land tenure problems can however be a constraint to users’ participation in capital costs.
or for WUAs or their apex organisations to contract out irrigation services to the private sector. It is obviously unrealistic to expect a WUA to take over full responsibility for a system that serves hundreds of thousands of hectares and which was previously operated (even if poorly) by a large irrigation agency. Attention is nowadays being focused on how to achieve this commitment. corruption (see Box I-6). such as users’ representation. either directly or indirectly through apex WUA organisations. and to what extent WUAs can be assisted to form and to manage their own affairs. which can lead to more efficient use of the resources by helping to overcome many of the problems that public irrigation systems face. Smaller schemes. on the board of a financially autonomous irrigation authority.and to ensure that users’ groups on new schemes accept full responsibility for O&M from the outset. The degree of responsibility which water users’ associations (WUAs) can be given for management of a system depends on its scale. . The objective in either case is greater user commitment.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 24 WATER USERS’ ASSOCIATIONS Water Users’ Associations and Transfer of O&M Responsibility Fiscal crises have in many cases forced governments to devolve financial and managerial responsibility for existing irrigation systems to the users . On the other hand there are other options available. inefficiency and poor O&M. might on the other hand be managed entirely by a WUA. including their main water supply infrastructure. such as inequitable water distribution.in effect to privatise them .
2: Meinzen-Dick R. It has been very difficult to control in the past because of lack of financial discipline and accountability within irrigation bureaucracies. usually the poorest and least powerful. 1992. in return for financial inducements. Financial inducements may also be used to bribe ditch-riders and other operational personnel to enhance water supplies to one farmer. or a group of farmers. incompetent contractors. Conditions for Sustainability of Water Users’ Associations Experience to date in the formation of WUAs and the transfer of irrigation O&M responsibilities to them has been uneven. particularly for the transfer of irrigation responsibilities. The System of Administrative and Political Corruption: Canal Irrigation in South India. some have died in infancy. some of which is redistributed to superior officers and politicians. and hence has an obvious bearing on sustainability. World Bank Technical Paper Number 173. at the expense of others. Sustainable Water User Associations: Lessons from a Literature Review. Meinzen-Dick et al. and the implications for constructive interaction between irrigation agencies and WUAs. Source: Wade R. the policy factors that can assist in the development of such organisations. The 1994 World Bank review of its experience in irrigation. contributes to the vicious circle of poor maintenance-poor cost recoverypoor maintenance.2 reached a number of conclusions regarding what leads to strong WUAs. and “turn a blind eye” to substandard work that saves costs for the contractor and increases his profit.. but substandard work obviously has a detrimental impact on subsequent maintenance requirements and costs. referred to earlier. Journal of Development Studies 18(3): 287-328.Corruption in Public Irrigation Schemes Social research and experience have shown that irrigation projects in some developing countries provide irrigation engineers and other operational personnel with opportunities to raise significant amounts of illicit revenue from the distribution of water and contracts. Corruption of this kind is considered to be one of the most important supply-side factors in the poor performance of public irrigation. World Bank. These were summarised as follows. and some have lived on but performed no useful function. concluded that some WUAs have been stillborn. which often means tailenders. The results of such corruption are not usually immediately apparent. 1994. Thus. et al. Paper prepared for World Bank Water Resources Seminar. Water Users Associations in World Bank-Assisted Irrigation Projects in Pakistan. Byrnes1 concluded that most WUAs in World Bank-assisted projects in Pakistan remain relatively weak. 1: Kerry J Byrnes. Washington DC. irrigation engineers will award contracts to high-priced or unqualified.. .Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 25 Box I-6 .
and interpersonal transaction costs of being involved in the WUA. It is therefore advantageous to work with existing successful organisations wherever possible. materials. cash. the organisations should be adaptable . and take on more tasks in irrigation management. As size increases. and allows them to expand in size. the benefits to farmers should outweigh the cost of membership. increased farm income. and more complex technology. The first. This implies that irrigated agriculture should be profitable enough to create a demand for water. and assets. (or “American model”) is a more specialised organisation based on hydraulic boundaries. Their expanded role in main system management can provide a greater degree of control over water supplies. low market penetration and simpler irrigation technology. and the organisations are focused on irrigation rather than multiple activities. heterogeneity is manageable (or even. multipurpose organisations and are likely to be most appropriate in socially cohesive societies with smaller land holdings. but two broad models can be identified. which is a major incentive for farmers to participate in WUAs. greater market development. or patterns of cooperation. • The range of WUAs shows great variability. with smaller base units. and WUAs should have a demonstrable effect in improving farmers’ control over water. (or “Asian model”) typically relies on direct participation of all members. Greater commercialisation allows WUAs to replace direct labour or in-kind participation of members by hiring specialists. • There is no single “optimal size” for WUAs. Whether existing or new organisations are involved in irrigation management. and higher levels of irrigation systems. However. and conflict resolution obtained through WUAs should offset the substantial time. transaction costs increase and it becomes more difficult for members to monitor each other. Such organisations are appropriate to situations of larger land holdings.improves equity. WUAs are also likely to be stronger if they are relatively homogenous in terms of members’ background. The benefits of improved water supply. • The structure and role of WUAs depend on their degree of commercialisation.to their local conditions and to changes over time. The second. it also creates a much greater need for accountability of leaders and employees to the membership. while still maintaining manageable interactions among members of base-level groups.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 26 • WUAs are stronger if they can build upon existing “social capital”. However. However. • Organised farmers in WUAs can manage more advanced technology. . Federation allows WUAs to expand and operate on a larger scale. larger WUAs can achieve economies of scale. and defining membership to include all stakeholders including tenants and women . desirable). These are often socially based. in some instances. • In any type of WUA.
of sustainable WUAs. with government continuing to act as the prime mover. • There is a changed but essential continuing role for the state in ensuring long-run sustainability of WUAs. the legal framework should be flexible enough to allow members to adapt their organisations to local circumstances. operate bank accounts and undertake other activities. State policies of administrative and financial decentralisation have provided the impetus for many management transfer programs which contract the role of the state and expand the role of WUAs. Power struggles. Developing a service orientation among agency staff and a collaborative attitude between agencies and WUAs is essential for successful joint management of irrigation systems and for management transfer programs. Not too much should be expected from them. A facilitating legal framework is critical to give WUAs the ability to deal effectively with external groups. by the users themselves. However. . However. construction. It should also balance rights with responsibilities for WUAs in order to ensure that members have sufficient incentive to participate. and occasionally providing design. Strengthening agency accountability to users through public information of irrigation plans and programs and providing financial autonomy for irrigation agencies to rely on user fees for their budgets are strong incentives for the agency to foster WUAs. particularly in programs which aim to transfer responsibilities and costs of irrigation system management from the state to users. monitoring and regulating externalities and third party effects of irrigation. especially in the short term. • A supportive policy and legal environment is crucial to the sustainability of WUAs. or financial support for major rehabilitation. Clear assignment of property rights over water and over the physical infrastructure of irrigation systems to WUAs can be a potent tool for strengthening the organisations. collusion and corruption may not always be eliminated by user participation and the creation of WUAs. Their creation requires a re-orientation of irrigation bureaucracies towards providing a service and creating an environment that facilitates the formation. Particularly important roles for the state are establishing and adjudicating water rights. they need to carry out these roles effectively so that farmers will feel it is worthwhile for WUAs to carry out their functions at lower levels. turning over management of public irrigation schemes is not merely a matter of consultation and forming WUAs.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 27 • Where agencies retain operation and maintenance responsibilities at higher levels of the system. providing technical and organisational training and support to WUAs. and should be given greater attention. maintaining a supportive legal framework.
Sri Lanka (1994). and waterlogging and induced salinisation2. Colombo. project planners and implementers have in the past often paid only lip service to the need for systematic problem identification. Despite the years of experience and the lessons learned . environmental agencies generally did not have the teeth to implement regulations. 1: Practitioners are referred to Orstrom. . and considerable time and resources will have to be invested in learning how best to approach the process in each case. R. Crafting Institutions . California (1992) which covers some practical planning principles which can be applied in most cases. And even though environmental legislation existed.Essential Tasks for Assistance. Locally Managed Irrigation Systems . ICS Press.. They include health impacts (malaria and schistosomiasis). In the past one of the reasons for this was that promoters and implementers of irrigation projects found that addressing such issues was an inconvenience. Management Transfer and Turnover Programmes. 2: According to the 1990 FAO report An International Action Programme for Water and Sustainable Agricultural Development: A Strategy for the Implementation of the Mar del Plata Action Plan of the 1990s. Also Yoder. IIMI.and despite the existence of clear operational guidelines for dealing with social and environmental issues . assessment and mitigation.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 28 Sound social engineering is as necessary as good technical engineering.Self-Governing Irrigation Systems. San Francisco. Although some would argue that on the whole the social and environmental disbenefits of irrigation are far outweighed by the benefits.governments. financing institutions. and successful transfer of responsibilities will then take place. The ease with which sustainable WUAs will form. social and financial circumstances. There is no magic solution. costed and entered into a cost benefit analysis. E. if planners wished to strengthen these agencies in parallel with the formulation of irrigation investment proposals. as well as a likely source of project delays or cancellations. 20 to 30 million hectares (or about 10 percent of the world's irrigation) is severely affected by salinity and an additional 60-80 million hectares are affected to some extent. no one set of rules can be applied. will vary according to different physical. Investment project designs which provide flexibility and a progressive or pilot-led approach to transfer are more more likely to lead to eventual success1 SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS Adverse social and environmental impacts of irrigation investments have been many and varied. it was already too late. Land acquisition and resettlement requirements have often caused delays to implementation or even cancellation of loan agreements.. there are a number of irrigation projects around the world that possibly would not have been built had the disbenefits been foreseen.
” and on broader environmental issues: “Coverage of special areas of environmental impact has been poor and is still quite weak. Irrigation engineers have in the past tended to overlook an additional need: for the technology also to be matched to the level of sophistication or operational capacity of the users. It focused on management and organisation of government institutions. Washington DC (1994). overgrazing. and never on the irrigators’ organisations themselves. The consensus now is that social and environmental impact assessment is essential. . and especially so for aquifer management.Some Social and Environmental Issues in World Bank-Financed Irrigation Project Planning The 1994 World Bank review of its irrigation experience commented as follows on the coverage of gender issues in its sector work: “Irrigation affects men and women differently.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 29 Box I-7 . occasionally on their relations with irrigators’ organisations. women almost always have primary responsibility for such household tasks as food preparation. Operations and Evaluation Department. which they usually do not. erosion. The approaches and attitudes of governments and financial institutions have changed more recently. However. soil degradation. this should then be designed to provide the optimum combination of efficiency in water use and cost effective operation and maintenance. and as important as economic analysis in the planning process. none of those (sector reports) analysed was found to have addressed the subject.” Source: Report No 13676: A Review of World Bank Experience in Irrigation. World Bank.” and on organisation and management: “Coverage of management and organisation was broad but generally superficial. an important source of environmental troubles in numerous countries. inappropriate farming. It has become increasingly obvious that the design process must start from a consideration of how the users will operate the system. This is the case for drainage. Even if they have equal roles in agriculture. CHOICE OF TECHNOLOGY Commonsense dictates that the choice of technology for irrigation should be based on its appropriateness for the cropping patterns intended and should also consider cost-effectiveness. and silting. except for the most recent studies on Mexico and India. washing and providing drinking water. and the various dimensions of catchment management: deforestation.
. has been the subject of much debate over the years. it sees the solution as the modernisation of these systems. World Bank Technical Paper 256. they however still tend to polarise into two camps. the designer must consider how the user will cultivate his land. by the extent of saline and waterlogged areas in Pakistan. Both would agree on the need to eliminate anarchy and on the importance of flexibility of operation. THE DRAINAGE DILEMMA The world is faced with a huge backlog in drainage requirements. Design and Operation of Smallholder Irrigation in South Asia (1995) by Donald Campbell. . Thus it may be that the design which involves the lowest investment cost per hectare may not be the most cost effective solution if it also involves large numbers of staff for its operation. Irrigated Rice Culture in Monsoon Asia: The Search for an Effective Water Control Technology. In the longer run poor drainage is one of the most significant causes of reduced yields and of irrigated land going out of production. or if. whether for new development or rehabilitation of existing schemes. and the implications that this may have for scheme layout. for instance. Discussion of this issue is well covered elsewhere2 and need not be continued here except to note the conclusion of the World Bank in its 1994 review of its experience in irrigation. adding automatic downstream control structures and other feedback mechanisms designed to achieve hydraulic stability.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 30 Equally important. The other accepts the reality of farmer damage in wet season drought and so favours designs based on cruder and more robust structures. in the hope of preserving the civil works from interference1.g. delivery of water to crops is foregone. a design to improve water use efficiency on a traditional irrigation system by the introduction of “modern” water control structures may not result in overall efficiency gains if the users reject the modern controls in favour of their traditional proportional dividers.. Over the last quarter of a century water usage for irrigation has more or less doubled without a comparable increase in drainage capacity. The stage has now been reached when it is necessary to correct the drainage omissions of the 1: Burns R. On the other hand. in World Bank Technical Paper 246. 2: e. The choice of technology. One sees the problem largely as overcoming the hydraulic instability of extensively-gated manually operated systems. it cannot be utilised to capacity. World Development XXI. (May 1993). While most irrigation engineers would now agree that the starting point for design must be ease of operation. that there is inconclusive evidence to favour one camp or the other. as shown. Modern Water Control in Irrigation (1994) by Plusqullec et al. the possibility of just-on-time. pp771-789. demand-based. and numerous IIMI publications. because of operational difficulty.
The issue of scale should be approached with an open mind.. Where such competing demands exist. At the same time there is a need to improve water use efficiency to reduce the drainage demands of the future. It is necessary however to consider why. there is growing recognition that: • Water is a scarce and valuable finite resource with many competing demands for its use. Washington DC (1995). The challenge is to persuade farmers to accept the importance of drainage and to take responsibility for its maintenance. Secondary drains. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PLANNING PROCESS To summarise. The main drains are therefore quickly rendered redundant. 1: Campbell D. To improve the sustainability of drainage systems. . even where provision for drainage has been made in the past. Provision of crossings. International funding is unlikely to be made available for irrigation if the use of water for this purpose prejudices other more profitable uses. This further reinforces the need to promote participation and ownership by the users. World Bank.for example the degree of users’ demand and commitment to subsequent O&M. is essential or obstruction by informal cultivator-constructed crossings will inevitably result1. it has often survived for only the first few years of a project’s life. One of the main reasons is that within a year or two of construction tertiary drains are often cultivated over by the irrigators who are theoretically responsible for them. are often also partially filled in by farmers to provide crossings or to pond water for other purposes. charges for irrigation use should at least reflect its scarcity value. which are usually the responsibility of the irrigation agency.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 31 past. channels should be limited to those which are essential. World Bank Technical Paper 256. but these should be adequately maintained and defended against encroachment. Design and Operation of Smallholder Irrigation in South Asia. In most cases of poor scheme maintenace it is the drains that are allowed to deteriorate first. each with adequate culvert capacity. in each case considering the circumstances of the country and project opportunities concerned. • There are more important issues in irrigation than that of scale .
facilitating and assisting in the planning process by complementing and supporting local preparation groups. This requires that the institutional demands of the project are matched to local institutional capacity. and less on the requirements of the lender. The implications of these lessons for the planning process are that: • Project planning needs to centre more on the borrower and the users. Increasingly therefore. Fiscal crises in many developing countries are now forcing governments to devolve responsibility for existing schemes to the users or private companies. in both strategy formulation and the planning of individual projects. there needs to be even greater insistence on international project planning teams. .Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 32 • Although world food supply will depend even more on irrigation in the next century than it has in the past. • Adverse social and environmental impacts are significant contributors to project failures. The conventional project identifiation/preparation approach of the past has militated against these requirements being met. such as those provided by the Investment Centre. • Apart from the obvious technical and financial conditions. Despite past mistakes. • Drainage should be given much more prominence than in the past. in practice this is rarely achieved. and an even greater need for participation and local ownership. The consensus now is that social and environmental impact assessment is as essential and important a tool as economic analysis in planning successful projects and programmes. and to emphasise participation and capacity-building features. and even greater reluctance to give outside teams direct responsibility for the tasks involved. This often requires institutional reorientation of irrigation bureaucracies. and to ensure that users of new schemes accept responsibilty for O&M from the outset. diverse local stakeholders. However. financing institutions. the per hectare capital costs of typical new irrigation development may be difficult to justify by the returns from basic food crops alone. planners and implementaers continue to pay only lip service to the need for impact assessment. the key condition for sustainable development impact from an irrigation investment project is its implementability. Until lower cost solutions can be found. irrigation investment to achieve incremental food production may be limited to upgrading existing formal and traditional irrigation systems. and that stakeholders are genuinely committed to the project through participation and local ownership. Whilst project planning has always been a government responsibility. the formation of users’ groups or WUAs. or demand forces the price of basic food crops up. external technical support should involve providing inputs and support to a process that is driven by the borrower and involves contributions from many. • Economic efficiency and fiscal sustainability demand that the O&M costs and at least a part of the capital costs of irrigation should be recovered from the users. governments.
• In some cases the planning process may become as important an end as the ultimate project plan. NGOs and the private sector in project implementation. rapid implementation and ultimately sustainable development impact from investments. Long-term technical assistance will be financed only as a last resort. that may not necessarily be neatly a wrapped and packaged document that can be presented as an “identification” or “preparation” report. • Due to the importance now attached to social and environmental impacts the evaluation of these must be given as much prominance as economic evaluation in the planning process. since it will be the main means of building local commitment and capacity. social or organisational issues. • Given the importance now paid to increasing implementation capacity. the planning process will continue to evolve away from conventional identification and preparation to one that is less compartmentalised.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 33 • Given this diversity of contributors. this approach should be exploited to reduce the time spent in bringing about readiness for implementation. or they may simply be required to review such papers produced by local preparation groups. . • Instead of producing comprehensive stand-alone preparation reports. and to ensure smooth start-up. Analysis and reporting are more likely to build up a dossier of reports. international project planning teams will be required to produce working papers that can be used to support a project proposal or appraisal. When successfully executed. most often linked to upgrading of schemes and facilitating greater involvement of irrigators themselves. with specialised short-term inputs that will focus more on institutional. multilateral lending for irrigation and drainage is likely to continue to favour sectoral loans for this purpose. working papers and other documentation. environmental.
sound construction. Financing institutions usually required that. as generally carried out for irrigation in the past. full engineering feasibility studies and detailed designs for at least the major components were completed before appraisal. was dictated by the project-specific nature of investments. Meanwhile. financial and economic viability. also on implementability.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 34 PART 2: The planning process GENERAL The Conventional Planning Process The conventional approach to planning irrigation investments consists of identification of project options followed by preparation of the preferred option(s). such as international consulting companies or the Investment Centre. been a sufficiently explicit aim of the conventional planning process. This in turn requires: • that the institutional requirements of the project are matched to local institutional capacity. among other things. • commitment to the project. The scope of this type of project preparation. Recent Trends: The Changing Investment Environment As indicated in Part I. have often been requested to assist with this work. it is now generally accepted that project success depends. for subsequent appraisal by the financing institution. It is normally preceded by an irrigation and drainage subsector review and the formulation of a country subsectoral strategy. built on stakeholder participation and local ownership. Although identification and preparation have always been the responsibility of the borrower. and the high cost of new irrigation development is increasingly difficult to . It is also acknowledged that building institutional capacity and stakeholders’ commitment has not. where national capacity has been inadequate external support teams. and environmental sustainability. until quite recently. in addition to the more obvious factors of good engineering design. there is increased awareness of competition in demand for scarce water resources.
Because of this change of emphasis. As a result of these changes in focus. The steps of identification and preparation have become blurred: they are being replaced by a process that is intended to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort at each successive stage. Ideally. . the comparative advantages of irrigated versus rainfed crops. the role of irrigation in food supply. so that they are ready to move quickly and effectively into implementation once financing has been approved. Projects tend to favour rehabilitation and/or modernisation of existing schemes. The Changing Role of the Investment Centre Because of these changes in approach. Investments may be made on a national or regional basis. by providing inputs and support to a process that is undertaken by the borrower. Lending has increasingly tended to take the form of sectoral loans. ownership and capacity building than they have been in the past. in a participatory process that involves all stakeholders.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 35 justify. at a pace that is matched to local capacity for implementation. In some cases the process is becoming almost as important an end as the ultimate project. and the transfer of part or all of the management responsibility to the users. given the prevailing low prices for basic food and fibre crops. including those responsible for appraisal. when its principal objectives are building local commitment and capacity. to support these objectives and to finance more efficient investments in terms of costs. these factors have led to modified approaches to lending in the subsector: most financing institutions have become more concerned with the objectives of participation. policies and legislation) are in place. Assistance increasingly tends to be provided to the borrower by more frequent. Together. Thus the process is becoming much more operationally focused. rather than by accepting direct responsibility for the tasks involved. to create preparedness in those responsible for implementation. increasing emphasis is being given to the Investment Centre’s role in facilitation. and budgets approved for the year in which operations are to start. the Investment Centre’s involvement is tending towards the provision of somewhat different services from those previously required for the conventional planning process. fundamental aspects of project planning are reviewed and approved as the work involved is completed. and the formulation of strategies for improving the performance of the subsector. to ensure that institutions (and if necessary. benefits and water use. the project planning process has also undergone change: subsector reviews are now more concerned with the place of irrigation within national water resources management strategies. staff appointed and trained. smaller and shorter missions than hitherto.
the irrigation and drainage subsector review should provide the government and potential financing institutions with recommendations for improving the performance of. SUBSECTOR REVIEW AND STRATEGY FORMULATION Objectives. Thus. some of which may be carried out as a later project activity during implementation. but also . by providing an input to screening and selection of demandbased sub-projects . It should address not only technical and economic. including prefinancing.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 36 intended to: • facilitate the building of local consensus and commitment. whereas in the past the Investment Centre’s involvement in project planning usually ended with the submission of a project preparation report. or programme of support. • assist in arranging for the necessary prerequisites. some irrelevant. as well as other quality control measures. the financing institution may require an independent appraisal of these. for project planning. Approach and Staffing Required Subsector review and strategy formulation remains the essential first step in the planning process. In sectoral investment projects or programmes. and may be carried out either as a standalone activity. or as part of a wider agricultural sector review. and profitable future investment in. • train LPGs in participatory rural appraisal and planning techniques. and others dealt with by different groups. • prepare local planning groups (LPGs) and institutions for the activities to be carried out. such as consulting firms or LPGs. An Investment Centre mission.for example. • provide ad hoc specialist technical support and guidance as required to complement the skill-mix available from LPGs. today it may extend into and beyond appraisal . may not be needed for all aspects of the process: some may be already adequately covered. through consultation. and • gear-up implementing institutions so that they are fully prepared to start project implementation once financing is approved. in which subprojects are selected and planned during loan implementation. which may also involve Investment Centre staff. workshops and participatory planning with the institution(s) and stakeholders concerned. including defining the objectives and drafting terms of reference.as the planning process continues during implementation. If a water resources policy review and strategy formulation has decided that irrigation is a justifiable option for use of available water. the irrigation subsector.
to make a brief preliminary country visit to discuss and agree with government the scope and purpose of the review/strategy formulation process and the outcome expected by potential financing institutions. If the subsector review and strategy formulation is carried out with external assistance. Such a visit should also provide an opportunity to establish the composition of an LPG. with realistic planning horizons and mechanisms for periodic updating. key issues and information gaps. It may also be appropriate for a representative of the ministry of finance to attend this meeting. such as that provided by an Investment Centre mission. It may be useful for the team leader. agronomist and sociologist. It may identify investment projects or programmes that can proceed directly to detailed planning and appraisal. concentrating on major accomplishments. working with a national team of similar composition. institutional. environmental and policy issues. . Main Topics for a Subsector Review A checklist for the contents of an Irrigation Subsector Review and Strategy Paper is given as Annex 1. economist. Regular subsequent contact between the team and government decision-makers should encourage an exchange of ideas and contribute to the quality and validity of the final subsector review and strategy report. implementation capacity. It is usually appropriate to initiate the review/strategy formulation process by holding a round-table meeting with senior representatives of the ministry or department(s) responsible for water resources and irrigation development. assess its capacity to undertake some or all of the necessary tasks. preferably at permanent secretary or director level. it will usually be done over a period of 1-2 months by a small team comprising a water resources/irrigation engineer. Budget permitting. and brief its members and prepare terms of reference and notes for their guidance. It should consolidate and expand knowledge of the subsector. rather than any new investigation. The strategy should be investment-oriented. The main items are discussed below. It should then guide irrigation policy and suggest the strategy for meeting proposed policy objectives.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 37 social. prior to the main programme of work. It will be based largely on existing information. and in this case might be compared with identification in the conventional planning process. lessons learned. it may also be desirable for an environmental specialist to participate in order to identify major sectoral environmental issues that may influence the strategy.
particularly erosion and sedimentation. . waterlogging. so far as practically possible. estimates should also adopt a basin approach. organisation and management. 1: If a water resources management strategy has not yet been prepared. be qualified by taking account of physical or economic limitations to full development. this should have taken account of competing water demands. plans for further exploitation and the opportunity cost. in terms of command area developed. it is unlikely to be possible to determine this within the time frame of a subsector review. Area estimates should. In line with recent thinking on water resources management. and if not. The opportunity cost of water should have been determined in the water resources strategy study. so that this may need to be the subject of a separate supporting study. health. if not. the reasons for this. the following should be reviewed: • the location. • Environmental impacts. water use efficiency. pollution or depletion of surface or groundwater supplies and loss of biodiversity. Structure and Performance From a desk study of available documentation and limited field visits.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 38 Existing Irrigation Development. if lower than expected. cropping intensities and patterns. • whether water supply arrangements and O&M have been satisfactory. and the respective roles played by the public and private sectors. • marketing arrangements and prices. why. • the contribution of irrigation to GDP and to agricultural output. • the social impact of existing development. and employment opportunities created or foregone. by administrative boundary and river basin. and any macro-economic distortions with specific impacts on the subsector. using generalised estimates of per hectare gross annual water requirements for typical cropping patterns applicable to the country or region. and should have provided an indication of water availability for irrigation1. in view of the complexity of the issues involved. • their development history. area utilised. • past and present performance versus technical potential. • typical capital and operating costs. and yields. salinisation. it will be necessary for the subsector review team to make its own assessment of potential and competing demands. rather than following administrative boundaries. the scope for further irrigation should be estimated. extent and nature of existing irrigation and drainage systems. with particular regard to wellbeing and associated gender issues for direct and indirect beneficiaries and oustees. Land and Water Resources and Scope for Further Irrigation or Drainage Development Assuming that a strategy for water resources management has been prepared in advance of the irrigation subsector review. This should be compared with estimates of suitable arable land resources and. • measures taken to mitigate negative impacts and their degree of success.
for comparative purposes: • the profitability to irrigators of the different types of on-farm investments.50 (October 1994) from the World Bank’s Operational Manual for further details of the Bank’s definition and its policy on this matter. a rapid financial analysis of crop production should be prepared for each of the existing categories of irrigation and main crops under each system. compared with rainfed crops. • an approximate cost-benefit analysis and indication of comparative advantage for the main crops under different types of irrigation systems. or ability to cover the costs from crop production after deduction of all variable costs. lake or similar body of water that forms a boundary between or flows through. the financing institution will generally require that appropriate agreements are reached between riparian states on the use of international water before any new project (as opposed to rehabilitation. including that for water supply to the farm. . ie with all taxes and subsidies removed. The object of this work should be to indicate. 1: An international waterway can be defined as any river. to demonstrate the typical returns to land. canal. provided this does not involve increased abstraction) can be financed. The international financing institutions generally require that the country proposing a project on an international waterway should formally notify other riparian states of its intention to do so. two or more states. and • approximate investment ceilings for future developments. in order to give such states an opportunity of consenting or objecting to the proposals1. However. to yield an acceptable internal rate of return (IRR . using border prices and any necessary shadow pricing of currency. an exception would be any tributary of an international waterway that runs exclusively in one state and the state is the lowest downstream riparian. to avoid subsequent delays in implementation or even cancellation of the project. See Operational Policy OP 7. Financial and Economic Viability of Irrigation From the available data on irrigation costs and benefits. and can include any tributary of these. which should be identified and flagged. including any in the cost of water.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 39 Particular attention should be paid at this stage to any limitations that might be imposed by international water rights issues. It is therefore as well to overcome such hurdles early on in the planning process. for typical cropping patterns. A similar analysis should be prepared in economic terms. ownership or management.likely to be a minimum of 12 percent). water and labour. In any event.
for each of the categories involved. Data requirements are: average crop yields under the various farming systems (irrigated.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 40 If time and staff resources permit. versus dam sprinkler. Economics of Irrigation: A Modular Methodology for Comparing the Benefits with the Costs. Approximations can be made. and may have a bearing on fixing the appropriate water charge where improved water use efficiency is being sought1. alternatively the agency should be requested to assemble the data in advance of the review/strategy formulation work. crops and irrigation systems can also be ranked by net margin per unit of water consumed. Background Paper prepared for the Planning and Research Unit. irrigation and production systems (eg borehole/sprinkler. versus dryland. World Bank. This may be considerably more than they are actually paying at present. particularly if they are irrigating high value crops. Washington DC. It is however unnecessary or even undesirable to spend much time and effort in collecting and preparing new data during strategy formulation. average irrigation costs. A simple spreadsheet can be used to model various crops. non-irrigated. sprinkler irrigation. particularly when considering high-value crops. Also Working Paper: Estimating the Economic Efficiency of Irrigation: The Case of Brazil. Such an analysis can help to identify any crops for which there may be comparative advantage under the various options for irrigation development.. public smallholder scheme. the opportunity should be taken here to assess the scarcity value of water to farmers. to compare the water use efficiency of different crop and irrigation options2. Ideally the review team should work with existing data which should be already available from the planning branch of the irrigation agency. FAO/World Bank Cooperative Programme. financial and economic crop prices. Eds. versus dam/surface. Ministry of Lands Agriculture and Water Development. surface irrigation. including capital and O&M costs of storage and conveyance works. private versus public) and crops can be ranked by DRC. and so on). as an input to the National Irrigation Policy (1993). 2: A good example is given in Jansen D J. distribution and in-field works. in World Bank Technical Paper No 249. Domestic resource cost coefficient (DRC) analysis has been found to be a useful tool for the above analyses. although possible market constraints should be clearly flagged. ie the price that they would be prepared to pay for water in a competitive market. large privately-owned commercial farm. . 1: See Ronald G Cummings and Vahram Nercissiantz. (1994). Le Moigne et al. By the additional input of data on average gross irrigation water requirements. Water Policy and Water Markets. average input requirements and production costs for each of the crop/farming system options. The Use of Water Pricing to Enhance Water Use Efficiency in Irrigation: Case Studies from Mexico and the United States. rather than to prepare a final economic cost-benefit analysis. Government of Zimbabwe. as the purpose is to provide a quick comparison between crop and farming system options. Rome (1989).
Would government’s objectives for. including: • government policy regarding cost recovery. and in these circumstances when family labour is short farmers may neglect irrigated plots in favour of dryland crops. Subsectoral Issues and Constraints Identification of the key subsectoral issues and constraints may best be undertaken through a round of discussions with the key individuals directly or indirectly involved in subsectoral development. where family labour shortages oblige farmers to consider agricultural activities in terms of the returns to labour rather than unit of land. to which the government is under pressure to respond by means of irrigation development. agricultural product taxes and price controls) and how effectively this is implemented. NGOs and other private sector groups. Returns to labour in dryland farming can often be greater than for irrigation. macro-economic policy and prices to the government’s subsectoral objectives should be assessed. 1: This is a common constraint in many parts of Sub-Saharan Africa for example. Priorities and Plans The review should continue with an analysis of government’s policies. The connection with.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 41 Government Policies. to expose any mis-matches between what they want from it and how the government sees it. land taxes. Also whether there are political obligations. availability of markets. These may include representatives of government departments . such as dryland farming?1. say. such as: • the compatibility of government’s present commitments and future plans for irrigation with its present macroeconomic circumstances. do small farmers really want or need irrigation for food self-sufficiency. and water pricing (see Box II-1). growth in food demand. • the opportunity cost and scarcity value of water. .as well as farmers’ organisations. The role of irrigation as seen by farmers should be examined. and importance of. environmental protection and local government . for instance to particular regions or interest groups. • the sustainability of development in the present or likely future fiscal setting. export earnings. income distribution. its approach (eg direct water charges. priorities and plans. This should establish what government sees as the main national benefits of irrigation. • water charges and cost recovery issues. employment creation. export earnings and employment creation be better met by private sector irrigation development. betterment levies. whether this be food self-sufficiency.including those responsible for social development. poverty alleviation or some other. The planning team should take care to focus on those that are relevant and not waste effort on those that are not. or could irrigation conflict with other activities. For example. which could be in the form of privatelyfinanced development by either small or large-scale commercial farmers? The issues that will arise could include those described below. but the importance of each will differ from country to country. the ability of farmers to pay. Economic and Fiscal Policy Issues.
especially for high value crops. Marketing Issues. 1: For detailed treatment of this topic see forthcoming FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper Land Consolidation in Irrigation and Drainage Projects. • provision for legal establishment of users’ groups. • regulations and controls on environmental impacts. • constraints to irrigation development posed by land fragmentation. and the willingness or ability of government to adopt new policies and introduce new legislation. especially if farmers do not pay for land on public irrigation schemes. • legal and administrative problems of land re-distribution and restitution to previous owners.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 42 • the willingness of farmers to pay (which is usually conditioned by farmers’ perceptions of service standards). Legal and Institutional Issues. equitable compensation for rights rescinded. could set a ceiling on the area of new irrigation which might feasibly be developed. and • the extent to which the country or region enjoys a comparative advantage in the production of specific irrigated commodities. • dam safety regulations and means of enforcement. • the extent to which existing economic policies discourage sustainable private or public sector irrigation development. . • how to maintain the real value of irrigation fees in the face of inflation. by both large and small-scale farmers. • the effect of all the above on users’ commitment to the proposed development and O&M. and impact on private sector investment. • whether fees should be project specific or uniform across projects. and the existing institutional capacity and legal framework for enforcement. and implications for subsequent operation and maintenance. • similar problems related to consolidation of fragmented land1. for example in Central and Eastern European countries and in others where individual tenure was not previously allowed. • whether rates should differ among users within a single irrigation project. and obstacles to land consolidation. tradeability. such as: • the domestic and export demand and market prospects for irrigated crops and the extent to which limited demand. such as: • insecurity of land tenure and the constraint that this may place on private sector investment. and • security of water rights. • equity considerations.
In a situation of separate. In practice. decentralised financially autonomous irrigation associations. and not some average. A further issue of equity arises where there is the possibility for users who have the capacity to pay more to cross-subsidise those who are less well endowed. Linking their loan repayments to a measure of inflation. higher fees should be charged to those for whom the cost of providing water is greater. and under the existing socio-political situation there would appear to be some merit in this suggestion. However. possibly subsidised.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 43 Box II-1 . in Zimbabwe it has been suggested that large-scale commercial farmers should pay more for their water than small-scale farmers in the communal lands.Fixing Appropriate Water Charges Whether it is practical to apply nationally uniform water charges depends on the financial and organisational structure that exists for the delivery of irrigation services. For example. Farmer-Financed Irrigation: The Economics of Reform. the establishment of the price system itself giving water a positive marginal cost to the users . using some mechanism such as indexation. an issue of equity arises if inflation results in "investors" in newer schemes having to pay more than those in older schemes. then it will be essential to design a pricing system which generates sufficient revenues to cover the irrigation agency’s recurrent O&M costs.may be more important than the precise level at which the price is set. fees can be either project-specific or uniform. true water pricing is seldom practised. It can be argued that each set of water users should pay the cost of providing water to them. In situations where pricing is possible. If there is no inherent reason for projectspecific fees. centralised financially autonomous irrigation agency exists. Based on Leslie Small and Ian Carruthers. The question of the “right” charge for irrigation water therefore needs to be put in perspective in formulating strategy: in reality. cost. Cambridge (1991) . if financial autonomy is a real possibility. However. Where a single. the administrative burden of collecting differential fees is usually too great to warrant such an approach. is one possibility to avoid this situation. caution is necessary to avoid creating distortions that remove incentives to efficient water use on the one hand. a single national fee structure would be incompatible with autonomy and with the different standards of service likely to be provided. Cambridge University Press. while placing barriers to increased production on the other. however. There may however be a logical basis for charging different fees to different users between or within projects if the costs of providing water to them are different. Nevertheless. the question of charging different rates among different water users does not arise. the administrative simplicity of uniform fees is an attractive option.
would improve O&M. including nomadic graziers formerly dependent on land identified for irrigation development. and implications for future development. community or social organisation. cost recovery. • whether targeting the beneficiaries or clients should be a matter of policy. decentralisation.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 44 • the existing institutional framework and its capacity for irrigation development. • the extent to which the private sector. and if so how1. and the capacity of government to oversee this. construction and O&M of works. Social and Environmental Issues. joint management etc. such as devolving financial autonomy to the existing management organisation. can assist irrigation development. the need for human resource development and training. • issues related to resource allocation. and corruption. whether this could result in greater participation of users in the planning.. the degree of participation of users’ groups. such as: • the role of democratically elected WUAs and apex organisations in conflict resolution. the role of the private sector (eg NGOs. consulting companies and contractors). and how. to adjust the government’s overall role or institutions for irrigation. • the need. • constraints to the takeover of greater responsibility for development and O&M by users’ groups. whether scheme management reorganisations. viability and sustainability. transfer to water users associations. and whether such groups have been net losers as a result of past developments. • the adequacy of coordination between the various organisations involved in irrigation development. • the extent to which government is able or committed to make any necessary legal or institutional changes. or scope. • the success or otherwise of existing management and O&M of public schemes. • the availability of trained manpower for irrigation planning and implementation and the extent to which this could constitute an overriding constraint to irrigation development. including NGOs and local consulting and contracting companies. 1: Settlement schemes for example can influence who benefits by setting criteria for settler selection. the need for institutional capacity building. and the need for rationalization or new organisation. • whether women are or will be disadvantaged by the introduction of irrigation. if so whether mitigation is possible. consultants. . • the adequacy of compensation for oustees. operation and maintenance.
It is however unnecessary or even undesirable to spend much time and effort in collecting and preparing new data during strategy formulation. financial and economic crop prices. employment generation. These may consist of improving the performance of existing irrigation development. and the options. such as charging for water at or near its scarcity value. such as improved nutrition or increased incidence of water-borne disease. pollution from saline return flows and agrochemicals. • environmental impact of past development. but this may be at the cost of technical efficiency. groundwater depletion. alternatively the agency should be requested to assemble the data in advance of the review/strategy formulation work. sprinkler irrigation. • positive and negative impacts on human health. food-for-work or self-help labour. and the success or otherwise of mitigation measures taken. Approximations can be made. physical and other. new development. average input requirements and production costs for each of the crop/farming system options. • government’s attitude towards farmers’ participation in construction. other effects on vulnerable ecosystems and biodiversity. If not. distribution and in-field works. surface irrigation. • the integration of irrigation with other farming activities. including capital and O&M costs of storage and conveyance works. • the compatibility of existing policies with social and environmental goals for future development.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 45 • equity and plot size on public smallholder schemes: smaller plot size obviously means that more households can benefit and there is more chance of including the poor. such as intensified rainfed production. waterlogging and induced salinisation. where this can be achieved economically. as the purpose is to provide a quick comparison between crop and farming system optio encouraged by financial disincentives to wasteful use. average irrigation costs. The key elements are: average crop yields under the various farming systems (irrigated. Strategy Formulation Defining Strategic Options and Measures On the basis of the review of the topics discussed above it should first be decided whether there are more cost effective alternatives than irrigation for meeting government’s objectives. particularly erosion and sedimentation. large privately-owned commercial farm. non-irrigated. In some countries significant gains can be made by . for achieving this in a sustainable way considered. and so on). public smallholder scheme. for each of the categories involved. the most appropriate type and scale of support for irrigation and drainage development should be identified. Ideally the review team should work with existing data which should be already available from the planning branch of the irrigation agency.
Where improving the performance of existing loss-making public schemes is not economically viable. rather than being treated as free-standing investment projects. or transfer of responsibility for O&M to users’ groups or financially autonomous bodies that are dependent on the users for finance1. increased budgetary allowances for O&M. For example: • Expansion through new public large-scale irrigation.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 46 simple improvements to water control on traditional irrigation systems. The options for new irrigation development could include different categories of irrigation. to be financed from government’s welfare budget. Policy and legal measures could include crop price deregulation and enforceable water charges . or irrigation agencies become financially autonomous and dependent on the users for finance. electricity distribution) 1: In many cases. this may however be difficult to justify economically in many cases. which is unlikely to be acceptable either to governments or financing institutions under the present fiscal constraints. • In potentially irrigable areas that have surplus water resources but no infrastructure. as a minimum. limiting government’s role to the provision of basic infrastructure (eg dams. The options for cost recovery range between the extremes of none at all. aim to recover all the O&M plus at least a part of the capital costs. As noted earlier. . such as improved organisation and management. roads.provided the quality of O&M service is adequate. provided these do not disrupt traditional organisation and management structures or inadvertently transfer responsibility from the farmers to a public irrigation agency. Other improvements could include institutional or fiscal measures. types of farmers and crops. consideration should be given to whether such schemes should be recognised as components of a social programme. in view of the fiscal constraints faced by most governments. based on development of surface or groundwater. to full recovery of capital and recurrent costs. The perennial problem of how to charge and collect fees will remain. main canals. Cost recovery will be a major strategic concern. for the settlement of small farmers and production of basic foods/fibres. The general consensus is that water charges should. which is likely to be possible only in certain private sector developments. but if water users’ associations assume greater responsibility for O&M. investment in system rehabilitation may be a precondition for transfer. the levels of collection and reliability of deliveries are likely to improve.
An alternative to the provision of free labour might be to employ prospective users as labour on a wage basis at the market rate. it will be important to encourage greater ownership and commitment by users through their participation in planning . . and preparing guidelines for land acquisition assessments. including: • strengthening existing legislation/regulation for environmental protection as appropriate for future irrigation development. 2: Farmers are unlikely to contribute to capital costs without security of land tenure and water rights. This might be achieved by creating an enabling environment (eg by the provision of medium term credit) which encourages large or small-scale farmers to develop irrigation at low incremental cost. It is best to approach the problems at the subsector level through appropriate policy measures. Commitment can be enhanced by allowing farmers to pay for irrigated land. for environmental assessment. legislation. but to make an agreed deduction from wages to cover the required contribution to construction costs. either on a freehold or leasehold basis. clearance. • recommendations for engineering designs to address common diseases. to expand or restore productivity on a previously irrigated or rainfed area. including training and the preparation of guidelines for categorising projects. • New drainage only. Given the seriousness with which governments and financial institutions regard potential social and environmental problems. Thus land tenure policy changes.for instance by providing labour and naturally occurring or locally available materials at their own cost2.for example. pre-planned approach to adverse impacts arising from environmentally risky projects is likely to be more effective than attempting to mitigate problems in a piecemeal fashion as they are identified or occur. and monitoring. such as improved drainage to combat malaria and schistosomiasis. Whatever form of new development is decided upon. • establishing or strengthening the agencies responsible for enforcing environmental legislation.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 47 and services. 1: This does not mean merely soliciting requests for more government investments from farmers. • preparing or strengthening legislation/regulation on involuntary resettlement and compensation. • Encouraging private sector development only. choosing the type and location of distribution works . A pre-emptive.and in construction . special attention should be given to strategic options for reducing the risk of future adverse impacts and mitigating possible effects. and encouraging demand-driven development of distribution and in-field systems by the farmers1. and provision for cadastral mapping may be required.
• Field surveys to identify the development works and complementary public investments required to promote new private sector led irrigation. budgets and. • Price liberalisation and other policy changes. especially on water rights. such as trust funds or retroactive financing by the potential lender. where necessary. • Cadastral surveys. • On-scheme trials to develop and test low-cost technologies . Possible sources of funds for pre-investment studies. • Additional legal studies. the strategy may recommend a range of other immediate actions or studies. attention may be drawn to project-specific opportunities. and the costs involved. Terms of reference. procedures for the involvement of users’ groups in operation and maintenance. detailed guidance. for long term watershed/basin management. land tenure and land reform. should be identified. • Further assessment of the needs. number of. • Further assessment of market potential for high valued irrigated agricultural products and of the prospects for meeting this potential at acceptable cost. these actions might include: • Crisis management within the sector: for example in some Central and Eastern European Countries. such as improved water supply and sanitation (for example. where short-term bridging arrangements are needed for rehabilitation and upgrading of public systems during the transition from centrally planned to market-based economies. • Pilot basin-management exercises and studies. Alternatively or in addition. . and selection criteria for sites for scheme modernization or completion.for example on improvements to traditional irrigation schemes. activity schedules. and from collective to individual land ownership. supported if necessary by specialised consultants. In addition to recommendations for the elaboration of specific irrigation or drainage projects or programmes. Identifying Priority Actions and Projects The strategy formulation process may result in identification and approximate costing of investments covering a time-slice of government’s irrigation or institutional development programme. should be prepared for the work to be carried out by LPGs. including participatory planning.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 48 • similar recommendations on other measures to improve public health on irrigation schemes. that can proceed directly to detailed planning and appraisal. to develop and test methodologies. protected wells and improved ventilated pit latrines).
if options have already been suggested as part of a subsector review and strategy formulation. including potential financing institutions. to plan next steps. The result of this consultation. which may be compared with identification in the conventional sequence. donors and possibly NGOs1. FAO Investment Centre. they should be explored further. which would take account of comments made upon the draft. Workshops as a Means of Promoting Ownership in Policy Formulation and Project Preparation. Draft. The Irrigation Subsector Review and Strategy Paper The resulting draft irrigation subsector review and strategy paper should reflect the degree of consensus so far achieved. In either case. to which all should be consequently committed. is the conceptualisation and preliminary examination of one or more investment options that conform with subsector priorities. CONCEPTUALISING AND COMPARING THE INVESTMENT OPTIONS Objectives The main objective of this part of the planning process. . Annex 1 provides a checklist for the contents of a typical irrigation subsector review and strategy paper. The draft should usually be submitted to government and the potential financing institution for discussion prior to issuing the final version. Experience has shown that this is the most crucial and sensitive stage of planning because it leads to the critical decisions on project 1: For methodologies see De Alwis K and Sonn L. and of any participatory events held during the strategy formulation process. There may nevertheless be unresolved conflicts or issues. and to promote rapid progression to the final stage of the planning process. These should preferably be presented and discussed at a workshop attended by all major stakeholders. the intention is to assist the government in selecting its preferred option. Alternatively.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 49 Building Commitment to the Strategy The output from the work carried out so far may consist of a series of brief working papers and an outline of a draft strategy. should be a convergence of views between the stakeholders on the most appropriate strategy for the sound development of the subsector. Rome (1994). which should be flagged along with possible solutions.
balancing technical. in others experienced engineering judgement may be all that is required. 1: Investment Centre Technical Paper No 6. Appendix 1 gives an indication of typical requirements for a conventional investment in a new irrigation development. Alternatively there may be a need for external support from the Investment Centre or international consultants. concept and content on which all subsequent planning work is based. • make a preliminary assessment of the available database for the project. General Approach to the Work and Staffing Required The aim should be to arrive in the shortest possible time at conclusions that will guide planning. including arrangements for field visits. wherever practicable procedures should be followed from the outset that contribute to ownership of and commitment to the ultimate project. social and environmental considerations. involvement will depend on the complexity of the investment options and the capacity of the borrower and LPGs to undertake the work within the required timeframe. As before. including local consultants or local consulting companies. carrying out the minimum amount of work necessary to underpin the recommendations but yet to ensure that they are soundly based. to: • explain the objective of this part of the planning process. in most cases it will be advantageous for the leader of the support team to make a brief preliminary visit to the country concerned in advance of the main work. identify any gaps in knowledge and possible sources of ready additional information. institutional. The Design of Agricultural Investment Projects: Lessons from Experience. FAO Rome (1989).Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 50 choice. pre-feasibility investigations may need to be performed. Analysis will be geared to arriving at selection of the best choice from a range of options. and to building local capacity for implementation and sustainability of developments. what may be expected from government. The extent of surveys. Where the work is to be carried out with external support. and the need for building consensus among all stakeholders. The work may be carried out entirely by the borrower or its LPGs. engineering and other technical investigations that may be needed at this stage will vary widely according to the type of investment that is being considered: for some project-specific investments. and which are very difficult to alter later1. . economic. • plan the work. and make arrangements for obtaining it.
Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 51 • discuss the appointment of a high-level Steering Committee or senior technocrat to oversee the planning process and provide policy guidance on how to address the key issues. It is essential that in advance of this workshop the participants are provided with a brief which summarises the options. agronomist and economist. it is often desirable to conclude the process by holding a wider workshop to achieve. It is usually appropriate to initiate the process of conceptualising and comparing the options by holding a round-table meeting with senior representatives of the ministry or department(s) responsible for water resources and irrigation development. However. once the team’s draft report has been submitted to government and the financing institution. is usually a great advantage since it encourages stakeholder commitment and should avoid any “false starts”. given the seriousness with which institutional. If it is impractical for the team to prepare this before completion of its in-country work. then the workshop may have to be held later. Appendix 1 (at the end of Part II of the Guidelines) gives an indication of typical requirements. . confirms that they are in line with subsectoral strategy. preferably at permanent secretary or director level. and gives reasoned arguments for the selection of the preferred option. consensus on the preferred option(s). The participation of the potential financing agency’s project controller or task manager. Although the process should involve close contact and continuous exchanges of ideas between the stakeholders and local team members. team members will need to have sufficient breadth of experience to consider these aspects and to identify potential hazards and constraints. Activities Review of Available Database The level of information required for the purpose of conceptualisation and comparison of options will vary widely according to the scale and nature of the development. social and environmental concerns are regarded by governments and financial institutions. Experience suggests that teams assigned to support the process of investment conceptualisation and comparison are best kept small and will probably consist of a water resources/irrigation engineer. However. especially towards the end of team’s in-country work. sound professional judgement is required to decide on the needs and to avoid unnecessary detail. or at least advance towards.
FAO. • demographic data. waterlogging. this may include some (but is unlikely to include all. farm size. pollution and human health. In the case of an existing project for rehabilitation and upgrading. • aerial photography and topographic mapping at an appropriate scale for reconnaissance purposes (see Appendix 1 for suitable scales). the scheme. • the environmental performance of the scheme. with an assessment of efficiency. • relevant time-series surface water resources data. • local and site specific climate data. • existing cropping patterns. • production support services and their performance. • groundwater and well inventories and monitoring data. together with details of: • the construction history of the scheme. • soils and irrigation suitability mapping (preferably according to internationally recognised legends and classification systems such as that adopted by the US Bureau of Reclamation1). land tenure and water rights. Cases may occasionally occur in which the lack of data makes it impossible to achieve the objective of guiding a decision on 1: See Soils Bulletin 42. Soil Survey Investigations for Irrigation. including outline or preliminary designs. present O&M arrangements. • details of existing land use. • farm income and off-farm employment data. In most cases there will be large gaps in the above. it may require specific studies and surveys to obtain it. with regard to sedimentation. preliminary cost estimates and/or basic cost estimating data for each of the options. Rome (1979). • the social history of the scheme.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 52 For new development. treatment of oustees and conflict resolution. and use within. yields and trends. • local agricultural and livestock production systems data. salinisation. and • cost recovery and O&M history. and only a part of this information is likely to be available. • water allocation to. with regard to resettlement. • existing allocation of land within the scheme. current state of the infrastructure and an indication of rehabilitation needs. • assessments of market and price prospects for the main commodities to be produced. • organisation and management structure. including crop yields (for rainfed and irrigated crops) and technologies used. copies of the original designs and layouts for the existing infrastructure would be required in addition to the above. unless in exceptional circumstances) of the following: • any pre-feasibility reports already prepared by local or international consulting firms. .
arrangements should be made to fill the gaps. there is likely to be little that the team will be able to achieve in the way of verification of previous soils and land capability assessments. to avoid unnecessary delay in eventual implementation. If suitable topographic mapping is not available. It is important to appreciate that the information gained at this stage will be no more than impressions and its value will depend heavily on the experience. it will need to be prepared so that preliminary engineering designs can be drafted in advance of final project planning and appraisal. other than to judge whether or not the work carried out to date is adequate for the purpose in terms of scale and detail. intuition and common sense of the team members: it will have to be backed up subsequently by firm data. Topography. to make the best use of the time available. . the team should prepare terms of reference for upgrading this information to the required standard. and so on. and for specialist(s) to return later to assess the new information and form an opinion on how the new information affects choices open to the government. Reconnaissance Field Visits If an external support team is assigned responsibility for conceptualising and comparing the options it is likely to need at least a week to carry out reconnaissance field visits to the project site(s) to gain first-hand impressions of physical features. problems and issues as perceived by farmers. Manual survey may also be necessary for the sites of the main structures. and possibly for a sample of the distribution and in-field system. to avoid duplication not only of their own efforts but also those of the interviewees. What is important is that the process should be kept moving forward. Depending on the magnitude of the proposed development(s). Soils and Land Capability Assessments For rehabilitation projects the topography should be shown on the layouts and designs for the main structures. operationally it is usually more practical for the various members to work independently of the others during the day’s field work. During the field visits the team should always involve government representatives and members of any LPG. However if there is a sociologist on the team it is usually appropriate for him/her to work closely with the agronomist. In this case. All but the smallest developments can usually be mapped satisfactorily from aerial photography (see Appendix 1 for scales). Provided the external team meets in the evenings for an exchange of information and ideas. the coverage and effectiveness of supporting services. If it is not. If this is not already available the team should prepare specifications for the work to be carried out.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 53 the options. but this may need to be verified. The engineer for example may be too busy with investigations to spend time listening to the agronomist carrying out interviews. either by government or by private contractors. for canal and drain alignments.
For the purpose of these preliminary estimates. judgement should be exercised to avoid duplication of effort. 2: A climatic data base. and this work should take no more than an hour or so (provided data are readily available or assumptions can be made on local planting and harvesting dates). Preliminary Estimates of Irrigation Water Requirements for Possible Crops For new irrigation developments. 1: Developed by the FAO Land and Water Development Division. presented in FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 49. Most planning teams will find this of practical use. as derived from CLIMWAT. seepage predictions. and presented in FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 46 (1992). The point to bear in mind is that the requirement at this stage is a comparison of options rather than absolute figures. For any major structures there will be a need for geological and/or geotechnical investigations for foundation design. If not already available. South Europe. these investigations will have to be provided for and completed prior to final design. slope stability analysis and availability of naturally occurring construction materials. If necessary. of 3. and any potential drainage problems associated with this.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 54 The main focus of attention for new development is likely to be the assessment of land suitability for the type of irrigation proposed. local estimates should be adopted where these are considered to be of reasonable validity.261 stations in 144 countries in Asia. However although CROPWAT is quick and easy to use. these can be verified using the FAO computer programme CROPWAT1 in conjunction with the climate database CLIMWAT2. the team should assess the climate database and local estimates of irrigation requirements for the range of possible crops and planting dates being considered. Africa. Soil surveys often tend to concentrate on pedological aspects and to ignore soil physics and the factors that influence drainage. There may also be a need for drainage studies on rehabilitation projects even where there is no evidence yet of a problem. if the drainage aspect is not yet adequately covered. in diskette form. . since upgrading could in some cases result in more water being applied than in the past. system capacity and overall peak project water requirements can probably be based on using the 80 percent probability of exceedance effective rainfall for the nearest representative rainfall station to the project area. Middle and South America. the Near East. it will need to be addressed by further studies.
or from FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 241. the engineer should define the further work required to determine the feasibility of the proposals. If not. and the existence of other irrigation or competing interests within the basin. an international financing institution will not finance a project that would prejudice other riparian states. A similar approach should be adopted for rehabilitation projects. and appropriate for the particular circumstances of the project. The availability of data on water resources will vary widely between projects and countries. . to arrive at estimates of theoretical system demand/capacity for comparison with reality. The irrigation engineer should judge whether the database is adequate and whether the methodology adopted is soundly based and applied. Otherwise. Data needs for future refinement of the estimates should be identified. as already mentioned. and will depend on the anticipated method of estimation envisaged. Preliminary Assessment of Available Water Resources After confirming at a preliminary level the gross irrigation water requirements per hectare. within or across international borders. the volume of water reliably available on an annual or seasonal basis should be determined from the available data.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 55 Conversion from net water requirements to gross should be on the basis of empirical local data for efficiency of the types of irrigation systems under consideration. so that the various technical options can be conceptualised and compared. for small projects generalised estimates of mean annual basin run-off may have to used. If the scale of the proposed development or the complexity of the basin hydrology warrants it. The required depth of analysis of time-series data will also vary according to the scale of the project(s). but in general larger projects tend to have been under consideration for a longer period of time so that the degree of sophistication of the hydrometeorlogical and hydrogeological network is usually higher than for smaller projects. with empirical forecasting methods. prior to taking the further steps of project planning and appraisal. FAO Rome (as revised 1992). Projects on international waterways require special consideration because. government or its LPGs (including consulting companies) will probably have already analysed the data to establish the availability of water for the project(s) at a given risk of failure in supply (usually 20 percent). Instead it will normally require a prospective borrower to enter into international agreements with the other riparian states for the efficient and equitable use of the entire waterway system. 1: Irrigation and Drainage Paper 24: Crop Water Requirements. and to identify system constraints.
the drainage requirements for each of the options should be compared. traditional leaders. Preliminary Assessment of “Without-Project” Socio-Economic Situation From limited field visits. and particularly how farmers who would be affected by. On the basis of these preliminary assessments. recommended in FAO/ODA Irrigation and Drainage Paper 53. which enables rapid production of a report directly from the field study. preferably using the ICID Environmental Checklist. by widening the range of initial contacts to include not just local government staff but also persons working with NGOs and religious organisations. preliminary estimates should be made of surface run-off and drainage from known rainfall data. or an alternative checklist that may be preferred by government or the financing institution1. the potential investment. situation. The approach to the screening process varies somewhat between governments and financing institutions. but that of the World Bank is typical. and from available data from existing wells and boreholes. Environmental Impact Assessment of Irrigation and Drainage Projects. From similar . politicians. For the options being considered. Initial Environmental Evaluation This part of the planning process requires screening of the possible environmental impacts of the investment options under consideration.01 requires that projects should be screened for environmental issues and assigned to one of three categories: A.in terms of rainfall. which is of particular value for scoping the subsequent EIA (if one is required) and it can also be used as a management tool for monitoring purposes at different stages of the EIA. with varying levels of detail. water table depth and the drainable surplus. The ICID checklist is also available as a WINDOWS-based software package. Should it be obvious at this stage that any of 1: The ICID checklist. or perceive. the value of such reconnaissance is greatly enhanced. members of formal and informal groups. topography and soils .Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 56 Preliminary Assessment of Drainage Requirements In view of the lessons learned. “without project”. as well as farmers and their wives. Although these reconnaissance visits may not be an effective substitute for a subsequent socio-economic and production systems survey (SEPSS). Its simple layout enables an overview of impacts to be presented clearly. . B or C (see Box II-2). The Bank’s Operational Directive (OD) 4. together with the review of the available data. drainage considerations should form an important part of the process of considering the investment options.existing schemes to that proposed. the team should gain a preliminary impression of the present. The team should use field visits and review available databases to screen the investment options. The visits. traders. is intended for non-specialists and enables otherwise timeconsuming work to be carried out in advance of expert input. should enable the team to decide on the need for further socio-economic studies and their scope and focus. an assessment should also be made of subsoil drainage.
like the preliminary evaluation of institutional capacity and the preliminary cost-benefit analysis (see below) is not to rule project proposals out of hand. It is emphasised that the purpose of the initial environmental assessment. whether they are still valid or whether there is a need for redefinition . in terms of staff. supervision reports. or that land acquisition and resettlement would be required. as a result of the screening process.or reorientation. an environmental impact assessment (EIA). and of any adaptations to investment options that would be needed to match the scale of investment to institutional capacities for implementation. these should be performed as components of the subsequent feasibility investigations for the chosen option(s). Preliminary Evaluation of Institutional Capacity A preliminary evaluation should be made of the capacity of existing institutions to undertake and sustain the specific development being considered. • The performance of the institution in being able to fulfil its objectives in a timely and efficient manner. The evaluation should establish: • The goals and objectives of the government institutions responsible for irrigation. . and so on. taking account of the new requirements of the project or project options. These assessments are to assist planners to select the better options and ultimately arrive at the best project proposals. and whether there are any significant operational problems: for example delays in decision-making. If. • The resources of the concerned institutions. the likely impacts should be clearly identified and approximate costs estimated for consideration in the comparison of the options.perhaps through new legislation .Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 57 the project options would result in quantifiable negative impacts. social impact assessment (SIA) or a Land Acquisition Assessment (LAA). One indication of capacity is precedent. imbalances and inconsistencies. etc. ie how successful institutions have been in developing. NGOs. and whether there are areas of weakness. water users’ associations (WUAs) and their apex organisations. problems over procurement of goods. which is most likely to be strongly related to 1: For previous internationally financed projects valuable information can be obtained from project or implementation completion reports. are required. Institutions to be assessed include government agencies responsible for irrigation development and environmental protection. operating and maintaining schemes in the past1. At the government level an indication of motivation and commitment will be the rate of staff turnover. late release of funds. private sector groups such as contractors and consulting companies. if they exist. physical facilities and budget.
should therefore form the basis of an assessment of the opportunities and constraints for establishing new WUAs for new or rehabilitated schemes. especially span of control and the critical responsibilities for decision-making. The state of the institution’s infrastructure and facilities might indicate the importance given to it by government: for example.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 58 their terms of service. The commitment and performance of existing WUAs. to confirm that these are likely to be attractive to. should be assessed. precedent may be the most useful indicator. or are vehicles available. such as reluctance to delegate. and adoptable by. Comparisons of the Likely Costs and Benefits The main aim at this stage is to compare the likely financial and economic performance of the available options. It is important to note that in the changing investment environment of recent years. it is equally important for the team to gain an insight into management systems and style. and to support the selection of the preferred options. in terms of their current involvement in O&M. farmers. levels of cost recovery and whether they have achieved any success in improving the lot of tailenders. the role of many irrigation institutions is in a state of flux: from being executing and O&M agencies they are now often expected to adopt a coordinating and facilitating role. Again. and how many of them are on the road or in the workshop? What is the balance between capital and operating costs. are buildings in good repair. expert advice should be sought from an institutional specialist or management consultants. staff numbers and their qualifications. who could be engaged during the subsequent final planning stage. and if there are doubts regarding the capacity of the key institutions to adapt to change and fulfil their new responsibilities. in order to detect any management constraints. the farmers attitude to change. Although structure. The assessment of ability or willingness to undergo this transformation will require subtle analytical skills. and what proportion of expenditure is made up of salaries and wages? Organisational charts can be useful in indicating the degree of complexity of the organisational structures and might give a clue to problems of management. . facilities and equipment are important. Matching project objectives with institutional capacity is a crucial element in conceptualisation. with emphasis being placed on participatory planning and implementation and management transfer. such as willingness to contribute to capital costs and acceptance of the responsibility for (and cost of) O&M. At the scheme level.
Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects
Box II-2 - Categorisation of Irrigation Projects According to the Need for Environmental Assessment The World Bank’s approach, as set out in its Operational Directive 4.01, is to categorise and act upon projects, or project components, under three headings: Category A Projects/Components. These are likely to have significant adverse impacts that may be sensitive, irreversible, and diverse. The impacts are likely to be comprehensive, broad, sectorwide, or precedent-setting. Impacts generally result from a major component of the project and affect the area as a whole or an entire sector. A full environmental impact assessment (EIA) is required. Category B Projects/Components. There may be adverse environmental impacts but these are less significant than category A impacts. Few if any impacts are irreversible. They are not as sensitive, numerous, major, or diverse as category A impacts; remedial measures can be more easily planned. Preparation of a mitigation plan suffices for many category B projects. Few category B projects would have a separate environmental report; most may be discussed in a separate chapter of the project document or feasibility study. Category C Projects/Components. Professional judgement finds the project to have negligible, insignificant, or minimal negative environmental impacts. An EA or environmental analysis is normally not required.
Estimates of Project Benefits Assessments should be made of the key parameters of yield expectations, cropping intensities, and prices for inputs and outputs, on the basis of which outline budgets for key crops and perhaps simple farm models should be prepared. Initial estimates should be made of the incremental benefits, in terms of those accruing to the farmer and the overall project, in financial and economic terms, for comparative purposes. Assumptions that a high proportion of the land will be planted to high value (ie mainly horticultural) crops should be regarded with caution and even some scepticism, because of the likely need for specialised farming skills and potentially restricted market size or difficult access. Preliminary Cost Estimates Previous estimates of capital cost should be reviewed to the extent possible with the level of detail available. The level of engineering design detail upon which these estimates will be based will vary, but in most cases estimates will be based on outline designs only, and it will be necessary to make an allowance for physical contingencies of at least 15-20 percent to allow for unforeseen costs that may be added as more detailed engineering designs are prepared.
Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects
Annual operating costs should be estimated on the basis of energy costs for water delivery, salaries and other benefits for an assumed operating staff complement, their vehicle operation costs and office running expenses. Annual maintenance costs should usually be based on a fixed percentage of the capital cost (see Annex 2 for examples). Preliminary Cost-Benefit Analysis A simple cost-benefit analysis, in financial and economic terms1, can then be carried out on each of the options. This can take either or both of the following forms: • net present value (NPV); or • internal rate of return (IRR). If the practitioner is more comfortable with this, the analysis could be performed using COSTBEN, the PC-COMPASS module for cost benefit analysis2. It should be emphasised however that a high degree of accuracy in cost-benefit analysis at this stage is unnecessary, as all that is intended is a rapid comparative analysis of the options, so that government can better decide on a preferred course of action.
Initial Project Brief
On completion of these studies the team, in liaison with any LPG, may prepare an initial project brief (IPB - see Annex 3), or sometimes a formal identification report. This will be presented in draft form to government and the financing institution and will be the basis for discussion at a consensus-seeking workshop (see below). The IPB should contain the team’s conclusions and recommendations with regard to the preferred option(s), supported by reasoned arguments and highlighting any outstanding issues. Because the intention is that the planning process should be streamlined, the main text should be very concise and should as far as possible refer to, rather than quote, previous work, such as the subsector review and strategy formulation report. It should however contain, in appendices, draft terms of reference and cost estimates for the various detailed studies and other activities that need to be carried out to complete the planning process3. It should also suggest the proposed allocation of responsibility between government, contractors (including contracted NGOs) and any external technical assistants, and
1: i.e, using border prices for inputs and outputs, deducting any subsidies or taxes, and shadow pricing local currency and - if appropriate - labour. 2: This software is available from FAO to staff and consultants of FAO and the World Bank, FAO member government institutions, other multilateral financing institutions and universities at no cost. 3: See Annex 3 for suggested contents and coverage of typical terms of reference.
Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects
provide a tentative programme, in the form of a bar chart, for achieving these tasks1. It will usually be unnecessary to prepare technical annexes for the IPB, since technical work so far will have been limited and will be superseded by more detailed investigations. However any relevant working papers can be separately bound and presented to government and the financing institution if necessary.
Achieving Consensus on Investment Concepts and Options
It is often desirable to conclude the conceptualisation process by holding a workshop, which should be attended by as many as possible of the stakeholders or their representatives, including those of the financing institution, LPGs, and, if possible, the farmers. In some cases it may also be worth inviting interested NGOs and/or representatives of private sector interests. Although it might seem preferable to hold this towards the end of the team’s in-country work, this is usually impractical for operational reasons and because in many cases the team will not yet have completely formulated its ideas. Thus the workshop is more often held sometime after completion of the in-country work, and the draft initial project brief or identification report can be used as the basis of discussion. Depending on the available budget, various members of the conceptualisation study team may attend, or they may be represented by the team leader only. The workshop should usually commence with a verbal presentation by the team to all participants, preferably supported by visual aids. The workshop may then be broken down into smaller discussion groups. The objective should be to: • seek opinions from the stakeholders, to arrive at or advance towards a consensus on the preferred project option(s); • discuss the work involved in further planning, the responsibilities for undertaking this, and to agree a timeframe for the work. On completion of the workshop, an account of the proceedings should be prepared, probably in the form of a brief aide mémoire (for guidance on content see Annex 3) agreed with the senior representative of government attending the workshop. This should highlight any remaining issues that need to be resolved, and actions required, before proceeding with further planning. The draft IPB or identification report may then if necessary be finalised taking account of the deliberations of the workshop,
1: The use of WINDOWS-based proprietary software, such as Microsoft Project greatly facilitates this and subsequent progress monitoring, although the use of squared paper and pencil may be more appropriate in some circumstances.
• institutionally workable. The outcome should be a project dossier or document that is in many respects a feasibility report: ideally it should define the project in all respects. In the conventional project approach it is usually necessary to complete all planning and much of the engineering design before appraisal. so that the task of appraisal is one of merely passing judgement on it.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 62 although this may not be strictly necessary if an aide mémoire has been produced: the object should be to move to the next stage of planning as quickly as possible. and • ready for implementation. rather than redrafting earlier work. without the need for any repetition of earlier work. This has a significant influence on the extent to which planning must be completed prior to appraisal. The purpose of this part of the process is to make the proposed project ready for appraisal by the financing institution. and not often compatible with . The project dossier should therefore demonstrate that the project is: • in conformity with the country’s subsectoral objectives and priorities. Increasingly however it is likely to comprise investment in a subsectoral programme (see Box II-3). • consistent with the felt needs of the intended users. As discussed in Part I. in the programme approach subprojects are selected and planned in detail after appraisal and loan approval. detailed planning should be put in hand. The conventional approach is rarely compatible with demand-led development. environmentally and fiscally sustainable. In this case the level of accuracy desirable in cost estimates at appraisal is important. • unlikely to result in any adverse social impacts without adequate compensation. on the basis of criteria agreed at appraisal. to avoid cost overruns in project execution which may arise as a result of insufficiently detailed designs or inadequate site exploration. • technically. • economically and financially viable. The conventional project approach is usually adopted for investments in major infrastructure development. • technically sound and the best of the available alternatives under existing technical and economic constraints. the “project” may comprise a conventional investment in a specific major item of new irrigation infrastructure. PLANNING THE PREFERRED OPTION Objective and Approach Once a recommended project option has been selected and agreed between the government and financing institution.
• fully utilise existing irrigation schemes by finishing uncompleted works. (1991).Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 63 Box II-3 . modernisation and transfer to users of 21 Irrigation Districts representing about 60 percent of total irrigated districts. repair and acquisition of maintenance equipment. In support of these investments the project also included environmental studies and actions. salinity problems and lack of maintenance. prepared with Investment Centre assistance. Source: Staff Appraisal Report: Mexico . and rehabilitating irrigated land affected by waterlogging. providing more adaptive research results. • improve water use efficiency by introducing better water management techniques. World Bank. investments and maintenance. • monitor and help prevent environmental and natural resource degradation. .Mexico: Sectoral Investment in Irrigation The World Bank-financed Irrigation and Drainage Sector Project in Mexico. institutional development assistance for CNA and User Organisations. and training of technicians and farmers in better operation and maintenance of irrigation infrastructure. upgrading deteriorated infrastructure. the conjunctive use of surface and ground water. procured competitively and implemented efficiently. and • optimise the use of land and water resources in the Irrigation Districts and Units. Agriculture Operations Division. volumetric measurement of water. • decentralise irrigation funding and management through institutional reforms that would gradually move funding of irrigation and drainage investments from a centrally managed system of government grants towards a system based on regional and local public utilities which would help to recover costs through user charges and collection instruments. totalling about US$ 1. The project was designed to be the Government’s investment programme for irrigation and drainage covering FY 1991 through 1994. completion of 23 on-going investments and construction of 3 new investments. and other studies and designs. It provided for rehabilitation. deferred maintenance of the remaining Districts. and thus help sustain the investments by the beneficiaries.2 billion. • strengthen the institutional capacity of the National Water Commission (CNA) and user organisations to implement policy programmes.Irrigation and Drainage Sector Project. is intended to help Government to: • sustain the irrigation and drainage sector through investments selected on the basis of rigorous economic and technical criteria.
but can be gradually accelerated as capacity is built through learning by doing. planning and design are carried out against tight deadlines. • A detailed implementation plan. To bring such programmes to a state of readiness for appraisal the following are necessary: • Firm evidence that there is scope. and investigation and designs for these schemes can be done on a rolling basis during loan implementation. because. The programme approach is often preferable to the conventional project approach. there are and will be many cases when there is no alternative to this approach. since this implies pre-selection by planners rather than farmers. It can be applied to both new development and rehabilitation.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 64 institutional capacity building. but is generally more suited to small-scale irrigation or to discrete command areas within larger scale schemes. as mentioned earlier. • it can also present the great advantage of minimising the delay between completing design (thus raising farmers’ expectations) and starting construction. in contradiction of the intention of demand-led development. hence greater ownership by the users and improved prospects for successful implementation and sustainability. designs and costing of a sample of typical schemes have shown them to be viable. for the following reasons: • it can allow for development to be demand-driven. which may be limited initially by institutional capacity. . The programme approach can be adopted for a wide range of irrigation and drainage investment types. demand and institutional capacity for investment in subprojects. an assumption can be made on the viability of other similar schemes. • it can allow the implementing agency to proceed with the design work at its own pace. agreed levels for farmers’ contributions to capital costs and acceptance of O&M costs. Nevertheless. These might include for example a maximum cost per hectare. Discrete developments can then be treated as subprojects within an overall investment programme. and so on (see Box II-4). absence of adverse social and environmental impacts. For this type of approach. In a programme approach it is usually inappropriate to carry out feasibility studies and detailed designs for specific schemes prior to appraisal of the overall project proposal. provided studies. minimum economic rate of return (ERR). is therefore more amenable to participatory design and construction. • A set of criteria against which subprojects can be screened during programme implementation.
and farmers are still prepared to contribute to the cost. although the project area offers numerous potential dam sites.Working Paper 2: Investigation of Water Resources Development Options in High Potential Areas of Seraye Province. embankment volume and storage capacity is estimated using formulae developed for the purpose. the estimated dam height. and prepared for appraisal by carrying out topographic surveys. Eritreaa The Highlands Horticultural Development Project in Eritrea includes a programme for the construction of a number of dams for small-scale vegetable production. and that there is a demand for the dam from the community. • Second stage screening of those sites passing the first stage. to confirm that irrigable land is available downstream within 1 km of the proposed dam. . Following detailed analysis of the costs and performance of a number of existing dams in the project area. including altimeter readings for dam height.Suggested Procedure for Screening and Appraisal of Small Dams for The Highlands Horticultural Development Project. Rome (1995). Once screening has indicated that a dam site is worthy of further consideration for development it is elevated from the status of “potential” to “promising”. FAO. Investment Centre. that the area of land to be inundated does not greatly exceed the irrigable area. a: Source: Document No 122/94 TCP-ERI 6 WP2: Eritrea: Agricultural Development Project in Seraye Province . evidenced by declared willingness to contribute towards capital cost. The information derived is then evaluated against criteria for maximum and minimum required storage ratio (ie the ratio of mean annual inflow to storage capacity) and the ratio of storage capacity to embankment volume. Provided estimated costs are below the ceiling. not all of these would justify the investment costs. estimation of the reliable annual availability of water (using standard formulae developed for the purpose) and potentially irrigable area (assuming standard cropping patterns and generalised irrigation requirements based thereon). This consists of: • First stage screening based on rapid survey using reconnaissance equipment and techniques. From this information investment costs per ha are compared with a budget investment ceiling that has been determined from cost-benefit analysis. a methodology was developed for the rapid screening of potential dam sites and subsequent appraisal of the more promising sites. investment is approved. typical yields and prices. From this. assuming the standard cropping pattern. However. detailed designs. for which potential export markets exist.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 65 Box II-4 . and “Abbey level” and rangefinder measurements for dam crest length and reservoir throwback.
Thus if an external support team is involved. local institutional capacity. prepare the economic analysis. and so on. including government irrigation agencies. its work will often begin with a round-table meeting with the senior representatives of the ministry or department(s) responsible for water resources and irrigation development. eg credit. In general. including consulting companies or the Investment Centre. If the work is broken down into a number of separate studies. shallow soils.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 66 The physical nature of the project. engineering feasibility studies. plus specialists in topics specific to the type of development being proposed. or it may be done by external support teams. such as the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). • economist/project analyst. agro-processing. The detailed planning process should continue the participatory approaches adopted during earlier work.for instance those for major structures or main canal alignments . and thereafter close contact should be maintained with all other stakeholders. with a similar period afterwards for finalising analyses and documentation. integrate the various reports and working papers. including if possible any representatives of the users and any losers. including the following: • water resources/irrigation engineer. An Investment Centre mission for a review and consolidation of planning work and preparation of a project dossier is likely to comprise four to six specialists. local consulting companies and NGOs. the team should spend about four weeks in-country. . and • institutional specialist. and draft or compile the required project dossier. Socioeconomic and Production Systems Survey (SEPSS). legislation. Provided a SEPSS and environmental/social impact assessment/mitigation plan have already been prepared as a part of the planning process. neither a sociologist nor an environmental specialist would be required unless outstanding issues still needed to be resolved at this stage. and so on. aimed at further strengthening stakeholder commitment to the project. and whether a conventional project approach or the alternative of a programme approach is adopted will influence how planning is carried out. Such a review may involve further field work to confirm earlier impressions and to visit sites of particular importance . Planning may be a single integrated operation. or operational difficulties that have been revealed by the work to date. rural infrastructure. WUAs. the Investment Centre might be required to provide a team to review the various results. or it may be broken down into several parts. • irrigation agronomist. Some or all of the work may be carried out by local planning groups.also to inspect particular problems such as areas of poor drainage. marketing.
its information needs.as should Appendix 1. whether for new development or rehabilitation. extension. which gives a suggested outline for a typical project dossier. accurate to plus or minus 15 percent. to define the physical infrastructure to be developed or type of improvements intended. manual site surveys (see Appendix 1 for indicative scales). The work involved and level of detail required for planning the preferred option will vary. repetitive works can be based on sample type designs. and one using a simple river diversion for surface irrigation of rice by small farmers. These projects are not only different physically. analysis and engineering design. but also in terms of organisation. need for credit. Such studies should include some or all of the following: • Interpretation of satellite imagery. financial and economic criteria for viability. since it further encourages stakeholder commitment. depending on the nature of the project or programme. environmental. Whether a conventional project approach or the alternative of a programme approach is adopted.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 67 As elsewhere in the planning process. can be based. • Aerial photography and mapping. It also helps to promote a sense of ownership among the stakeholders if a concluding workshop is arranged to discuss the draft project dossier. the participation of the financing institution’s project controller or task manager towards the end of the team’s in-country work is usually a great advantage. For example there are obvious differences between a project using groundwater and sprinklers for the intensive production of vegetables by commercial farmers. Activities for Planning the Preferred Option Engineering Studies Engineering studies will be necessary for most irrigation and drainage investment projects. The object of the engineering studies is to provide the necessary technical information to permit the preparation of preliminary designs upon which estimates of quantities. . The list of activities which follows should be read with that in mind . it will still be necessary before funds are finally committed to demonstrate that individual investments can satisfy the technical. markets. What will vary is the timing of the various planning activities in relation to appraisal. and what has already been achieved in terms of data collection. social. and project cost estimates. and so on. The degree of detail required will depend on the scale of the works. at which all stakeholders are given an opportunity to influence the final version.
rather than assuming one based on the area that it would be possible to irrigate if the 80 percent probability (say) flows occurred each year1. including a correlation of rainfall with run-off to extend or infill records of surface flows. see Paper No 78 in Branscheid V. • Groundwater studies to investigate water table depth. • Estimates of surface and subsurface drainage requirements. • Estimates of water demand for the existing and proposed cropping patterns. FAO. • Water quality analyses. . Water Quality for Agriculture (revised 1985). and FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 48. 1: For an example of a spreadsheet for doing this. and cropping patterns that avoid unreasonable peaks in water demand. the nature of recharge and sustainable yield of aquifers. based on a design storm of selected return period and locally obtained data on subsoil drainage and water table depth. Investment Centre. These studies may include a consideration of the possibility of designing for deficit irrigation (see Box II-5). Conversely. • Studies of present utilisation and future demand for surface and underground water and the prospects for other developments within the same catchment that could affect water availability. For small ungauged catchments a synthesis of rainfall. catchment area and assumed run-off coefficients may be acceptable. The Use of Saline Waters for Crop Production (1993). Assessment of the emergence of competing demands for water for urban and industrial uses that could influence availability for irrigation. Rome. Consideration should also be given to the possible crop sequencing and rotation that farmers might adopt. Where practicable. as is the widespread practice in Southern Africa. water availability should be simulated to provide an indication of likely availability to meet demand over the period of analysis of the project (eg 25 years). This should permit the prediction of the likely year-by-year cropping intensity.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 68 • Surface water resources studies. Irrigation Water Management Briefs: 100 Collected Papers. consideration may be given to the use of agricultural drainage water and municipal waste water for irrigation2. 3: For example the use of locally developed Et/Eo ratios and US Class A pan evaporation data. In any case it will be necessary to assess water quality and any aspects that could limit its use for irrigation. based on the use of the FAO CROPWAT and its computer database CLIMWAT or an alternative locally developed method of estimating cropwater requirements if this is appropriate3. 2: See: FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 29.
The point at which the response curve flattens out marks the beginning of diminishing marginal returns to additional water: small reductions in water supply below that required for maximum evapotranspiration therefore tend to result in only marginal reductions in yield. Supplementary topographic survey may also be required to verify original construction drawings and to provide additional technical information. other than simply “old age”. careful consideration should be given to whether such a decision could lead to greater inequity in the supply to tail-enders. before taking a decision to design for deficit irrigation. This is the time to enlist the support of farmers. However. • For schemes being considered for rehabilitation and upgrading. to obtain details of the past performance of the scheme and what brought about the need for rehabilitation. but the yield/water response curves of most field crops. Deficit irrigation can also lead to even greater economic gains than maximising yields per unit of water for a given crop: farmers are more inclined to use water more efficiently and returns can be optimized through more water-efficient cash crop selection. sources of inefficiency and the scope for efficiency gains. and maximum yield is unlikely to be the optimum yield per unit volume of water applied. Rome (1979). Planning for deficit irrigation can lead to substantial capital cost savings. a detailed diagnostic operational study to identify the present condition of the infrastructure. Furthermore deficit irrigation usually implies sophisticated water controls and accurate water management that may be inappropriate for smallholders.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 69 Box II-5 . provided the cost of developing the incremental area is low. on public schemes more people benefit when water is spread over a larger area. constraints. It is also the time to encourage demand-led investment by establishing what farmers would like to see improved and the extent to which they are willing or able to contribute to the cost of improvements. or perhaps greater than usual reluctance to pay for O&M. a: FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 33. Drought tolerance varies considerably between species and stage of growth. in any case the ratio of the value of goods produced to the amount of water consumed is increased.Water Scarcity and Deficit Irrigation FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 33a provides a detailed exposition of the relationship between water supply and yield for various crops. FAO. and this can sometimes mean the difference between viability or otherwise. for example by planting cotton rather than sugarcane or rice. The social and economic efficiency implications of deficit irrigation are obvious: commercial operators apply the concept to increase farm profit. Yield Response to Water. The modalities for achieving this will vary from case to case. with the exception of rice. have flat peaks around the maximum evapotranspiration. as peak irrigation requirements and canal discharges are reduced. but the best channel of communication with farmers is usually through an elected .
• Detailed cost estimates for the civil works and their operation and maintenance. including local consultants or consulting companies. The SEPSS is used to verify the assumptions underlying the project concept. including automatic controls if these are considered to be an appropriate technology. This time consuming activity should be carried out by the government soil survey or private contractors/consultants. arrangements should be made to upgrade this to an acceptable scale and standard (see Appendix 1). and local university groups. Specialised briefing and support for field work is often given by staff of the Investment Centre. as it affects infiltration and permeability and waterholding capacity. • Geological and/or geotechnical investigations for foundation design. as well as any perceived problems. particularly for rice. thus contributing to overirrigation. with special attention paid to drainage aspects. 1: SIMIS (Scheme Irrigation Management Information System). • Preliminary engineering designs for the scheme layout. Soils and Land Capability Studies If the available soils and land capability mapping are found to be inadequate. focusing particularly on water saving measures and ease of farmer operation and management. Agricultural and Marketing Studies and the SEPSS Depending on the nature and complexity of the proposed project and the availability of detailed information regarding the without-project situation. 2: Soils Bulletin 42: Soil Survey Investigations for Irrigation. • Preliminary engineering designs for roads and other infrastructure. priorities and areas of convergence/ divergence between government and the intended users. As in the SEPSS (see below). bearing in mind that rehabilitation might accelerate waterlogging and salinisation by making more water available. suitably experienced NGOs can be contracted to assist in the process. slope stability analysis and creep ratios. . depending on which is likely to deliver the quickest result. main structures and water supply/drainage system. • Operational hydrology studies on the proposed new or rehabilitated distribution system.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 70 committee of a water users’ association or similar body. This is usually carried out by LPGs. FAO. seepage predictions (which are of particular importance in decisions on whether or not to line canals). to establish practical operating schedules (for which the FAO SIMIS programme1 may be found useful). Rome (forthcoming). FAO Rome (1979). FAO Soils Bulletin 422 provides indicative estimates of output rates for soil survey teams. it may be necessary to organise a socio-economic and production systems survey (SEPSS). is of special importance for the estimation of irrigation scheduling and irrigation water requirements. often to considerable advantage. broken down into foreign and local costs. Soil type.
• intra-household dynamics. problems. 1: FAO Investment Centre Technical Paper 9: Sociological Analysis in Agricultural Investment Project Design. • market opportunities and the implications for potential cropping patterns. • the scope for cost recovery. from the farmers’ perspective. and alternative sources of income from offfarm employment. an indication of yields and production. farming systems and practices. FAO Rome (1992). including contributions towards capital costs and recovery of O&M costs. Techniques for carrying out the work required are suggested in Investment Centre Technical Paper No. crop varieties and yields. use of inputs. control of crops and income from their sale. irrigation O&M) that might have a bearing on the potential for management transfer to irrigators. • extent and methods of existing irrigation. constraints and means of overcoming them. and the responsibilities of husband and wife as family providers. .for example their possible contribution towards capital costs and subsequent O&M costs. an explanation for any differences. time available for crop and livestock production and other activities. as well as the demands that the project will place on them . It should assist in assessing farmers’ perceptions and likely response to the opportunities that the project is expected to offer. and availability of draught power. access to and control over land. but should in any case continue or expand upon the process of participatory appraisal and planning that may have been initiated during the engineering studies. yields and trends. in the project area. • the likely impact of the project on any of the above. farm size. • the respective roles of the public and private sectors in input supply and marketing. on-farm irrigation practices compared with expectations at initial project planning.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 71 The investigation may employ rapid rural appraisal techniques. • for farmers in development schemes similar to those proposed. if any. and the reasons for any decline in areas planted or yields obtained under irrigation. • the existence of any group activities within the area (eg for marketing and input supply. petty trading and remittances. especially the extent of farmer interest in the project and implications for project planning. • the household economy. gender relations and disaggregation of labour. past and present irrigated cropping patterns. • people’s aspirations and expectations. The investigations should be designed to establish: • present land use. labour and capital. on-farm production. 91. • any conflicting or competing demands for labour. • if irrigation already exists.
It should propose an environmental action plan (EAP) and if necessary a land acquisition plan (LAP) which will include measures such as compensation for oustees. or a consulting company. the project has been placed in environmental category “A” (according to the World Bank’s classification or the equivalent . it will normally be necessary to prepare a mitigation plan for reversible impacts. For category “B” projects. Environmental Impact Assessment and Action Plans If. proposed legal provisions and regulatory mechanisms for minimising adverse impacts. customary or otherwise. displacement of human settlements and the impact on oustees. although a separate EIA or LAA will not usually be required. The EIA/LAA may be carried out by government or its LPG. Depending on the circumstances of the project and its location. degrees of fragmentation. for land tenure and water rights should be examined in detail. it may be necessary to carry out marketing studies within the country. This should establish whether there might be any obstacles to successful implementation.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 72 Depending on the intended cropping pattern and whether the viability of the project relies on the inclusion of high value crops. This should provide data on the size and distribution of properties and farms. All identifiable costs should be itemised for inclusion in the cost stream of the proposed project. 1: eg as a result of increasing use of pesticides and fertilizers. which may include a monitoring and evaluation system. the proportion of owner and tenant-operated farms. The EIA/LAA should consider inter alia potential erosion and sedimentation hazards. which could inhibit participatory development and capital cost contributions by the users. it may be necessary to arrange for a cadastral survey to establish the existing land tenure pattern and its implications for project planning. and type of tenure. possibly based on the ICID’s environmental checklist referred to earlier. waterlogging and salinisation.see Box II-2). and provision for systematic monitoring and evaluation. such as a lack of secure tenure or water rights. Data should be interpreted in terms of farmer interest in developing irrigation. at the stage of conceptualisation. again possibly based on the ICID checklist. a full environmental impact assessment (EIA) and possibly also a land acquisition assessment (LAA) will be required. . and health aspects. Land Tenure and Water Rights Investigations The existing arrangements. or overseas if export crops are proposed. pollution1 or depletion of groundwater supplies.
Should planners have any doubts about the capacity of key institutions to fulfil their responsibilities. It is now realised that much deeper analysis is required. research and credit. organise and manage the proposed project therefore demands particularly detailed and careful study. Where customary rights exist. There may also be a corresponding need to examine and inventorise water rights. including WUAs or savings and credit clubs and/or marketing and supply cooperatives. and in framing proposals for implementation. Successes and failures and the lessons learned . it is usually best to leave decisions on redistribution to customary or traditional authorities. organisation and management. as well as local systems of village administration. this expectation ignores the influence of individual styles of management and behaviour (see Box II-6). customary or otherwise. as well as the government departments or authorities responsible for irrigation development. that could form the basis of future WUAs. . or their own ability to analyse them. Institutional capacity assessment may be carried out by government as a form of self-analysis but it is likely to benefit from an independent external review. it should be reconfirmed that this issue is not likely to prejudice the proposed project. redistribution or consolidation to facilitate irrigation development should be approached with caution. This is because although outwardly similar organisations may in the past have been assumed to behave in similar ways.should be noted. Special attention should be given to evaluating farmers’ organisations. expert advice should be sought from a management/institutions specialist. operation and maintenance. Institutional Capacity Assessment A key condition for sustainable development impact is that the implementation requirements of the project should be matched to local institutional capacity. Any other initiatives towards promoting communities’ management of their own affairs and resources should also be assessed. unless there are very good reasons to do otherwise. and the views of the present users taken fully into account. Recent thinking in management science suggests that the conventional mechanistic approach to institutional analysis may no longer be appropriate. It should cover rural institutions and support services operating in the project area. The assessment of institutional capacity to implement. and to identify those whose means of livelihood might be affected favourably or unfavourably by the investment. These should all be considered in deciding on project scope.ie which institutional arrangements are working satisfactorily and which would need improvement or reorientation under the project .Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 73 Recommendations for land titling. including extension. Although the issue of international water rights should have been dealt with in earlier consideration of the project options.
is the likely response to changes in incentives and workload that could be implied by the proposed project. the size and timing of peaks in the workload can be sensitive to guesswork about workrates. as the information could be damaging to people who offer frank assessments of current underloads. however this kind of enquiry needs caution.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 74 In assessing the capacity of an institution to take part in a proposed project or programme a number of questions need to be asked: • Are the formal aspects of the situation right . additional proposed activities can be handled by the available staff. for example.ie are legislation or administrative changes needed to enable the institution to carry out the tasks proposed. and most of the standard techniques from work study are usually impossible to apply to implementation of irrigation and drainage projects in developing countries. or to expedite execution? • Is the organisation quantitatively capable of executing what is proposed. judgements should be made on the level of technical skills: for example are the qualifications and experience of the staff adequate for the tasks assigned to them? The staffing structure can be examined by looking at the ratio of staff to clients at different levels. ie whether. assessing numerical capacity. When assessing manpower resources. but important to quantify. Estimating incremental workload from proposed additional activities can be usefully done by critical path analysis and resource scheduling methods. in terms of workloads on suitably qualified staff and availability of other resources to permit the performance of the tasks to be undertaken? • How likely is it that the perceptions and behaviour of those in and around the organisation will frustrate the proposed activity? • What effective methods can be identified to overcome negative behaviours and perceptions? The remit and formal structure of an institution. The other part of the equation. to rectify obvious configurational problems. may be assessed through interviews with senior staff and a review of written regulations and procedures. Even more difficult. at “normal” rates of working. However. using project management computer software. is more difficult. subjective estimates by those likely to be involved of the percentage of their time currently utilized will be the best available measure. This part of the assessment may also be approached by structured . and any restrictions or obligations placed on it. and the ratio of senior to supervisory to field staff. Activity sampling and short runs of diary keeping by staff may help. In many cases. but the temptations on those being analysed to manipulate the results are strong. there is the quantitative question of workload. Most of the foregoing relates to qualitative aspects of understanding particular organisations. In addition.
and if necessary to redesign working arrangements. a general mood affecting the quantity and quality of effort put into work. such as remit. and it is important to understand the relationship between national. additions and restrictions. Organisational charts can be useful in indicating the degree of complexity of the organisational structures. Features to look for might include whether lines of authority conflict with lines of consultation. vacancy and turnover rates. or actually impede it? The position of the institution within the organisational structure of the agriculture and water sectors can also be crucial . organigram. This should enable the planner to understand its likely relationship with a new project. provincial and lower-level organisational structures. with respect to other related ministries. and whether the institution has a defective configuration. • That all reasonable people share the same view of the working situation. and if it is exercised. • That the “rational actor model” of organisations is the most appropriate. what is sound managerial practice. budget. and to attempt to anticipate its reaction to possible alternative interventions. According to this. pursuing some line of action with an unambiguous intention. Box II-6 . • That there is something called leadership. not always recognized as such. Objective: To understand the way the institution currently behaves.Institutional Capacity Analysis The following are some essential considerations for institutional capacity analysis. how these are made. and so on. It is important to know who makes the ground rules and key decisions in the institution. or parastatals. organisations should behave like a very clear-headed individual. Approach: The conventional approach to institutional analysis has tended to rely strongly on defining the formal aspects. how work is orchestrated. using the best available approach. This approach has been driven by a number of assumptions. For example does the flow of funds support the degree of decentralization required.for example. etc.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 75 interviews with staff in the strata affected. . Questions of centralized versus decentralised structure often emerge. it will lead to high productivity from a given set of staff and resources. job descriptions. ie what the task is. qualifications in relation to specifications. by “motivating” staff. • That there is something called morale. focusing on perceptions of what needs are currently satisfied by their work and how far extra input of effort is seen as likely to yield relevant rewards. the central planning agency. staffing. what strategy and tactics will best achieve a given end.
In either case. etc. an organisation’s configuration . More recently. and the project is likely to involve measures for building sustainable institutional capacity. which assumes it is normally possible to work out the basic structure of a problematic situation by reason alone. while such technical assistance may successfully ease some project implementation problems. which implies that uncovering the most potent ideas about the basic structure and phenomena in a situation may require field investigation. This may be to strengthen existing resources to match the implementation requirements of the project. for investment projects to fund the temporary hiring of outsiders who had the skills needed to fill these gaps. as governed by “logic” (and some set of assumptions. ie organisational cultures are part of the situation.and their effects can be anticipated.Institutional Capacity Analysis (cont’d) The above approach is part of an orientation towards management that goes back to the early part of the 20th century. these define “reasonable” working roles and behaviour.the fit between its task load.is very important. First. the proposals will have to address the functional problems referred to above. which may compete for control of policy and other parts of the action. It accepts that organisational politics are real . the emphasis in management science has moved towards examining what managers (and other inhabitants of organisations) actually do. This is a more radical change than may appear: from the analytic approach. and which emphasises what people should do. and which may be subject to partly contradictory pressures from the external coalition.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 76 Box II-6 . the way its internal activities are orchestrated. The outcome of the assessment should be the basis of an institutional plan for the project. It was common. From this perspective. therefore. Finally. and using these data to construct the conceptual framework for the subject. In the past the implementation of a project often created demands for skills which were either in short supply in the concerned country as a whole or inaccessible to the involved institutions. such as those above). among other things. or to scale-down the project to suit realistic expectations of the implementation ability of existing institutions. Secondly. it suggests that real organisations typically behave as coalitions of individuals and interest groups. and the nature of its external coalition . the public. The synthetic approach has called into question all the assumptions listed above. Experience has shown that. to a synthetic one. regulators. it has suggested that the knowledge of the formal structure alone is not enough to indicate whether or not a particular institution will fulfil some intended function. it does not provide a ready recipe for project . ie parent bodies. it has produced very different models of leadership and motivation. it suggests that different institutions may come to very different understandings of how best to get things done. Most importantly.
because of the lack of experienced persons to assume the roles of the external technical assistance experts once they have left. such as the completion of engineering designs.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 77 success. it should be explained how it would be phased out and how the functions would be subsequently assumed by local staff. . has to be done with great care. The key to reducing dependence on technical assistance is a good training programme for national staff. If the technical assistance is not for the completion of a finite task. for candidates. The planning of a technical assistance element of a project. but one of the dilemmas is how to combine academic and on-the-job training in the most effective manner1. So as to avoid subsequent misunderstandings. as well as the minimum qualifications. 1: For guidance on this aspect. see the World Bank/USAID Irrigation Training in the Public Sector: Guidelines for Preparing Strategies and Programs. thus limiting the opportunity for side-by-side work. Training should go beyond merely equipping people to take over the role of technical assistance staff. The choice has to be made between national training and training in overseas academic institutions. Problems also arise with the selection of technical assistance staff who may not fulfil expectations. Sometimes these can be combined when. for instance. therefore. and with the understandable tensions which occur when foreigners occupy senior and well-paid posts denied to the nationals of the country. taking into account both local and international consulting firms. Many technical assistance staff find themselves so busy fulfilling their routine functions that they give insufficient attention to training the staff who should succeed them. Training arrangements must be planned to ensure maximum benefit to local counterparts and a smooth transition after the end of any technical assistance. Economic Development Institute of the World Bank. If project management and services are heavily dependent on outside technical assistance the sustainability of the project is likely to be in doubt. or when a foreign university is “twinned” with a local institution. Reference should be made to the preferred sources for the particular types of technical assistance required. Proposals for technical assistance should be based on rigorous analysis of manpower needs and skill gaps and should only be put forward as a last resort. with the full agreement of all concerned parties that recourse to outside assistance is essential. 1989. Problems also occur when their intended successors are absent on training for a large part of the assignment period of technical assistance. Washington DC. a post-graduate student at a foreign university does the field work for a thesis in his/her own country. and the planning of training components aimed at satisfying these. An important part of project design is the projection of wider manpower and skills needs. bilateral and multilateral agencies (such as FAO and other UN specialised agencies) and NGOs. terms of reference for each technical assistance assignment should spell out as precisely as possible the functions and reporting arrangements.
. to classify the items against which disbursements will be made under the project. including anticipated users’ contributions. such as: • Civil Works • Equipment • Technical Assistance • Training • Incremental Operating Costs Depending on whether it is intended to construct the civil works by direct labour/force account or by contractor. there are likely to be several categories of expenditure. this may not necessarily be essential if there is a reasonable chance that trainees will remain in the country. Sanitation and Other Social Infrastructure • Project Coordination Components should be further broken down by expenditure categories. the costs should be broken down either into plant. and all costs broken down into foreign exchange costs. which might include the provision of construction labour. or summary accounts. However. Estimates of Project Costs Cost estimates should be prepared for the various project components. farm models and estimates of the incremental benefits. materials and labour. or into quantities of the various categories of work with unit costs. Skilled and unskilled labour components should be separately identified. in terms of the users and the overall project. locally available construction materials (such as sand and stone) and/or cash. but working in the private sector or for NGOs. Estimation of Project Costs and Benefits Estimates of Project Benefits Prices of inputs and outputs should be prepared and entered into the PC-COMPASS suite of programmes to generate crop budgets. project support for training of individuals may have to be linked to their agreement to work in the sponsoring implementing agencies for a reasonable length of time after the completion of their studies. Separate tables should also show the expected sources of finance. local costs and taxes and duties. which may include: • Irrigation and Drainage Infrastructure • Institutional Support • Crop Development • Training • Research Support • Input Supplies • Road Development • Water Supply. for each objective or component of a project. Thus.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 78 If a training programme is to be effective in building institutional capacity.
and any quantifiable social . However. Residual values of project-funded assets should be taken into account as benefits. include the capital costs of the project (including physical . The life of the project is usually taken as the period corresponding with the useful life of the major investment components. Economic Analysis Economic Rate of Return There are several measures that can be used to demonstrate the economic feasibility of the project: each has its own advantages and disadvantages. usually at the end of the project life.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 79 Annual operating costs should be estimated on the basis of energy costs for water delivery. The cost streams used in the construction of the COSTAB tables referred to above should. while benefits only begin to accrue after a lapse of time. as mentioned. although in some cases . . attention here is confined to the Economic Rate of Return (ERR) which may be defined as “the rate of discount at which the total present value of costs incurred during the life of the project is equal to the total present value of benefits accruing during the same period”. 1: If the life of certain project-financed investments is less than the assumed life of the project (which is nearly always the case). Both O&M costs and operating costs should be broken down in a similar way to capital costs. They should also include the operating costs incurred by the farmers.contingencies) plus the operating. and typically ranges from around 15 to 25 years for irrigation and drainage investments.or environmental costs. including irrigation and drainage projects in particular. costs are bunched at the beginning of the project. maintenance and replacement costs1 of project works. The application of a discount factor enables these costs and benefits to be compared on a present value basis. Operating costs for participating farmers may be derived from the crop budgets and representative farm models aggregated to give the overall project estimates. salaries and other benefits for the proposed operating staff complement. taking into account differences in the timing of expenditure and income. For most investment projects. their vehicle operation and office running expenses. as well as those arising from providing services and running the organisation and management system for the project. Consequently benefits earned and costs incurred in the near future have higher values than similar benefits or costs arising several years hence.for example when equipment used in construction is transferred to another project . and costs should be entered into the PC-COSTAB module of PC-COMPASS. provision should be made for the cost of their replacement when this is needed.such as land acquisition and resettlement .a residual value may be applied earlier in the project life and attributed to project income.but not price . Estimates of annual maintenance costs should usually be based on a fixed percentage of the capital cost (see Annex 2 for details).
Direct and indirect transfers (such as taxes or subsidies) are eliminated in the calculation. To establish this value it is necessary to compare what would happen without the project with what would occur with the project. distortions (for example official minimum wages. internal transport and distribution. assessing the opportunity cost of the goods. It should be borne in mind that for non-traded goods. the present (ie pre-project) situation would persist.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 80 The benefit stream will normally consist of the value of the incremental output of the project. The market price equals the opportunity cost in a truly competitive market. In most cases it is possible to assume that. but in practice. secondly. However. the final result should be the same. which may be higher or lower than the nominal price (but may be equal to it where competitive markets exist). . derivation of economic prices requires two steps: first.) exist in some cases. making adjustments for the cost of shipping. In the case of internationally traded commodities such as fertiliser. the aim is to set prices which reflect their opportunity costs. the date of compilation of the project dossier or appraisal. For those inputs which could have a significant bearing on the viability of the project. the forecast prices should be converted to constant prices for. value-added tax etc. applying to the opportunity cost the 1: If the analyses are carried out correctly. even in the absence of any intervention. and making allowances if necessary for quality differences. All costs and benefits should be expressed in economic terms. without the project. handling. the use of conversion factors is to be preferred since it allows for differentiated treatment of different categories of traded goods1. but no better series has been developed and their use has the advantage of ensuring a measure of consistency in pricing between projects and countries. For non-traded goods. grains or oilseeds. It is then usually necessary to convert these figures to farm-gate prices by working backwards from the international forecast price. such as farm labour. a distinction must be made between traded and non-traded goods. and a decision must be taken as to whether to compensate for distortions in the pricing of foreign exchange through the use of a shadow exchange rate or through the application of conversion factors to the price of nontraded goods. In other cases however there may be historical evidence to suggest that. Before use. prices are usually derived from forecasts prepared periodically by the World Bank. which require that adjustments be made to the financial price. production would continue either to rise (as a result perhaps of spontaneous small scale irrigation development) or to fall (perhaps because of progressive increases in soil salinity in the absence of drainage). say. Nevertheless they should be interpreted with caution. The accuracy of these forecasts and the related assumptions on inflation have often been questioned on the basis of retrospective assessments of earlier forecasts. locally-made materials or many fruits and vegetables.
in turn. Risk and Sensitivity Analysis An assessment should be made of the extent to which the proposed investment implies risks for the country and for the project.the minimum ERR conventionally acceptable to many financing institutions (but one which is probably still considerably above the long-term opportunity cost of capital). land acquisition or procurement problems. or from delays in implementation due perhaps to staffing. experience has shown that the real opportunity cost is generally much closer to actual wage levels.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 81 appropriate conversion factor. should be valued at the same opportunity cost. whether paid in cash or kind or contributed free of charge by farmers. or the effects of a succession of years with lower than expected water availability. Risks may also be derived from exogenous factors such as unexpectedly large rises in input prices or falls in commodity prices. Possible sources of risk include the danger of cost over-runs stemming from inaccurate estimation of quantities in civil works construction. This may then be judged against criteria such as the opportunity cost of capital in the particular country where the project is to be implemented. As a very rough rule of thumb. However. If possible a distinction should be made between the opportunity costs of the labour of men. since in some cases this may be important. Risks should be explicitly identified and their possible impact on the economic viability of the investment and on its sustainability examined. Caution and close scrutiny are therefore indicated before assigning low opportunity costs for labour. when the total rural labour force may be occupied. women and children. Seasonality is often a key factor here: in seasons of peak activity. the opportunity cost is likely to be close to the prevailing daily wage rate. All incremental unskilled labour employed at a particular time. slowness of mastering methods of irrigated farming. It used to be customary to assume opportunity costs well below wage levels. The rate of return can be calculated using the COSTBEN module of PCCOMPASS. Guidance on appropriate conversion factors can usually be obtained from economics staff of national planning agencies or of the financing agencies. Such delays. . the project analyst might recognise that the project is in the “danger zone” if the rate arrived at is less than about 10 to 12% . may result in a slower build up of production attributable to irrigation and hence to reduced benefit streams. Unskilled labour is the most important non-traded commodity in most projects. whereas in the slack season it may fall considerably below the amount actually paid to farm workers. Reductions in benefits could also result from lower than expected yields.
Other benefits may include improved water supply and sanitation. the extent of a continuing net call . Securing beneficiaries’ participation is a fourth one. This implies estimating the foreign exchange component of both investment and operating costs. then comparing this with the foreign exchange gained by using the incremental project output either to increase exports or to substitute for imports. The discussion of the risk factors should not be limited to quantitative analysis.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 82 There are also risks that do not lend themselves to quantitative analysis. these benefits should if possible be quantified. Fiscal Implications and Cost Recovery Estimates should be made of the net cost of the project to the government fiscal balance. Social Impact and Poverty Alleviation The expected impact of the irrigation investment on the distribution of incomes and poverty alleviation in the project area should be assessed. health. If there are significant government revenues from taxes on agricultural output.for example contribution of free labour for construction. Effect on Balance of Payments Where this is relevant to the justification of the project. On the other hand the aim might be to maximise the number of beneficiaries subject only to each component exceeding a minimum ERR. these should also be quantified and taken into account.would cover the capital and operating costs of the project should be examined. If the overriding consideration in project planning is the economic return on investment. The efficiency of the public administration (unless it can be linked to a quantifiable determinant of output such as irrigation efficiency) is another. It should be shown that these impacts are consistent with the subsectoral strategy. or irrigation water charges . Availability of domestic financial resources to cover the government share of project costs is a third example. The extent to which cost recovery rates and mechanisms . Given the catalogue of irrigation projects which have gone into decline upon conclusion of the disbursement period. processing or export. The relative weight which is given to social versus economic criteria in deciding on the balance between components is often important. The case of government commitment is one. the options that spread the benefits most widely and equitably should be chosen from those showing the highest ERR. Income Distribution. Risks of an environmental nature should be addressed as part of the assessment of the project’s environmental impact. and several other examples could be quoted. drawing attention to the possible need to take corrective measures before or during project implementation. an estimate should be made of the net impact of the proposed irrigation development on the country’s balance of payments. but expand to cover the other major areas of concern. nutrition and education. If the project is intended to bring special benefits to women. trading.
should be quantified. giving their estimated duration and earliest and latest dates for achieving both project start-up and the targets for PY1. • initiating necessary institutional reforms. Further guidance on economic analysis is given in Investment Centre Technical Paper 7. the preparation of an implementation plan should enable them to gear up for a start to implementation as soon as funding has been approved. With the participation of the institutions concerned. This should contain step-by-step guidance. either from the financing institution’s project preparation facility and/or government budget. for which project management software may be used1. on all activities to be undertaken. If the practitioner is not familiar with this. including recruiting or redeploying staff with the required skills and experience. it is better to use a pencil and squared paper rather than not preparing a schedule at all: the act of committing thoughts to paper or a computer screen often surprises even the most experienced practitioner when it is discovered how many activities are involved. and training staff for new functions that they will have to perform. They may include: • preparing an annual work plan and budget for the first year of the project. and how much time is required to achieve them. • arranging staffing for project implementation. and to initiate project activities. Scheduling should preferably be based on critical path analysis. 1: Such as Microsoft Project.for example an on-going commitment to scheme O&M costs or subsidies on inputs . . it is essential to prepare a detailed implementation plan for the period leading to start-up and extending through at least Project Year 1 (PY1). All activities should be scheduled. • opening a special bank account to receive project funds for local disbursement. Many of the actions required as a condition for loan effectiveness will require administrative steps involving no significant expenditure. An assessment should then be made as to whether the government would be in a position to sustain these obligations once external funding ceases. Planning for Implementation One of the most common reasons for delays and defects in implementation is difficulty by the implementers in taking all the steps needed for loan effectiveness and disbursement. as appropriate to the level of experience and capacity of the implementing institution.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 83 on government funds . and entering this into government’s budget for the financial year. It should also clearly identify who is responsible for each activity. others may require some budget outlay. To encourage smooth and rapid progression from appraisal by the financing institution to project start-up and loan disbursements.
setting out procedures to be followed in project implementation. so that. targeting usually receives special importance and a separate chapter on the target group justifying their selection will be necessary. aerial photography and mapping. and Use of Consultants by World Bank Borrowers and by the World Bank as Executing Agency. for the implementation plan to suggest the scope and content of the annual work plan. appraisal can focus on issues remaining and need not go over old ground. once the investment proposals have been approved by government. as well as their sample bidding documents if necessary. Annex 2 provides details of the content and scope of a typical project dossier or document. for example. and allocating responsibilities to the different categories of implementer (eg the ministry of finance.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 84 • drafting and initiating the enactment of legal provisions (eg for WUAs. It is emphasised however that it will generally facilitate appraisal if the format used matches that required by the financing institution concerned. irrigation agency. engineering investigations and designs for initial construction work. 2: For this purpose. • preparing operational and accounting manuals. • carrying out topographic surveys. which are aimed deliberately at reducing poverty. • informing intended beneficiaries of the impending availability of funds for community-based or individual demand-driven developments and creating the conditions for them to generate proposals that meet their own aspirations and qualify for assistance. reference may be made to the various guidelines that may be issued from time to time by the financing institutions. and to briefly describe the laid down procurement procedures2. 1: In the case of IFAD-financed projects a cooperating institution is appointed to provide supervision. NGOs and farmers). It is often useful. • preparing procurement packages for plant and equipment. . • drafting requests for proposals/bids for external technical assistance (eg from NGOs or consultants). The Project Dossier The project dossier or document should facilitate appraisal. if government is unfamiliar with the requirements of the financing or cooperating institution1. and if necessary permits reproduction of entire sections for inclusion in the appraisal report. creation of autonomous authorities for bulk irrigation water supply). satellite imagery. The requirements will vary between financing institutions: for IFAD-funded projects. Thus the proposed content and layout should if possible be discussed with the project controller or task manager of the financing institution concerned before drafting commences. eg the World Bank’s Procurement Under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits.
• The organisational structure decided upon for O&M. • Technical assistance and training requirements. operate and maintain it. • The proposals for water charges and cost recovery mechanisms. • The implementation plan. • Details of expected supervision of implementation by the financing or cooperating institution. which is likely to repeat the arguments developed first when the investment was being conceptualised. reflecting subsectoral strategy. . 1: Practitioners are referred to Water Report 5. Irrigation Management Transfer. • Procedures and criteria for screening subprojects for selection within sectoral programmes. • Mechanisms adopted for users’ participation in design or proposals for participation in implementation. for quality control of design and construction. or to a financially autonomous irrigation authority dependent on the users for financing. The project dossier should describe: • The irrigation and drainage works and other hardware which are proposed for financing. the document should clearly demonstrate the compatibility of the proposed project with existing capacity to implement. which may include allocating or transferring responsibility to the users1. • The estimated changes in cropping patterns and yields expected as a result of the development. China in September 1994. including any special supervision requirements for subproject approvals within a programme of support. with job descriptions. • Institutional responsibilities and staffing requirements for project implementation. • Marketing possibilities and forecast prices.with particular attention to funding channels if expenditure is to be made by local or regional administrations. and the administrative mechanisms for a rolling annual expenditure plan and the flow of funds . • The suggested legislative and regulatory framework for WUAs and other management organisations proposed.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 85 The project dossier should usually contain a description of the project rationale and planning considerations. and/or participatory joint management. in view of the emphasis now placed on the requirements for implementation. • The expected phasing of this development. which contains selected papers from the International Conference on Irrigation Management Transfer held in Wuhan. This provides a useful source book on management transfer. and the rate at which these are expected to occur. published by FAO with IIMI. but modified and deepened to reflect the findings of later investigations. In particular. for project coordination and each of the project components.
with sensitivity and risk analysis. including senior representatives of the ministry or department(s) responsible for water resources and irrigation. Senior representatives of the national finance. preferably in this case at permanent secretary or director level. It is essential that the views of the users and any losers under the proposed project should be sought and expressed at the workshop. It should also highlight any outstanding issues that need to be resolved before appraisal and define the actions required to do so. • A list of suggested conditionalities for loan effectiveness. institutions should be present to inform them of the final shape and cost of the proposed investment. The final version of the project dossier should then be prepared on the basis of the consensus or conclusions reached. like all other workshops held as part of the planning process. These should either be presented separately or attached to the project document as annexes. depending on the form that best facilitates subsequent appraisal (see Annex 2 for a typical list of working papers). Achieving Consensus on the Project Proposal The project dossier or document should preferably be presented in draft form to government and the financing institution. The objective of the workshop should be to reach consensus on all aspects of the project proposal. for discussion at a concluding workshop. the LPG(s). This should. taking account of all social and environmental costs. The aide mémoire should be agreed with the senior representative of government in attendance at the workshop. be attended by concerned stakeholders or their representatives. The dossier or document should normally incorporate or be supported by the working papers that have been generated at various stages of the planning process. . and any NGOs who might be involved in implementation (eg for training WUAs). The event should also be attended by the task manager or project controller from the financing institution. an aide mémoire should be prepared which should summarise the proceedings and note any matters that still need to be clarified or corrected in the project dossier. preferably by elected representatives. and if appropriate planning.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 86 • The financial returns to farmers and economic benefit to the country. On completion of the workshop.
. If necessary generate sequences of daily. All outstanding issues resolved. On-going data collection for future updating of water availability and sediment yield.Activities to be completed and level of detail required at successive stages of the planning process Project process/subject Planning the preferred option1 2 3 4 Appraisal Loan effectiveness Conceptualising/comparing investment options 1 A. with probability analysis. Sample and test quality for use for irrigation purposes. eg under a sectoral loan. Confirm design flood(s) and carry out flood routing. power potential or other use. Hydrological Aspects of Major Works Identify main water sources. Prepare indicative basin plan for optimum water use. 1: Note that in a programme approach. Further refinement of 2 if necessary to resolve outstanding issues. Revise basin water balance or hydrological model. Review data and if necessary visit stations to assess data quality. reworking data if necessary. Simulate annual water availability over life of project using spreadsheet analysis. Analyse flows and frequency of floods. feasibility activities for subprojects may be deferred until after appraisal (see Part II. As 1. Install additional measuring devices if this will usefully add to hydrological knowledge (which it will only in certain circumstances. Recommend any necessary improvements to network or processing of data. Prepare preliminary estimate of basin water balance and round-figure estimates of area each source will irrigate. Chapter 4). Estimate sediment yields. collect available data on basin rainfall and flows. Refine estimates of sediment yield. eg for measuring annual floods). Note details of recorded floods and compare with regional envelopes. monthly and annual flows.APPENDIX 1 .
APPENDIX 1 - Activities to be completed and level of detail required at successive stages of the planning process
Project process/subject Planning the preferred option1 2 3 4 Appraisal Loan effectiveness
Conceptualising/comparing investment options 1
B. As 1, plus geophysical surveys drilling test wells, pump tests, and preparation of simple model of aquifer recharge, storage, transmissivity and yield. Design of wells, specify pumps and drilling methods. Define monitoring system. Further refinement of 2 if necessary to resolve outstanding issues.
Hydrogeological Aspects of Major Groundwater Development
Collect and study available data on groundwater occurrence and use. From desk study identify areas worthy of further exploration. Review well logs and existing yields. Sample and test water quality. Map preliminary assessment of groundwater potential.
All outstanding issues resolved. Establish groundwater monitoring programme.
1: Note that in a programme approach, eg under a sectoral loan, feasibility activities for subprojects may be deferred until after appraisal (see Part II, Chapter 4).
APPENDIX 1 - Activities to be completed and level of detail required at successive stages of the planning process
Project process/subject Planning the preferred option1 2 3 4 Appraisal Loan effectiveness
Conceptualising/comparing investment options 1
C. As 1 plus orthophoto mapping (preferably, otherwise line mapping) for the command area at 1:10,000 with 1 m contour interval, or better. 1:2,500 scale mapping with 1 m contour interval or better for main canals and major structures. As 2 plus maps of larger scales for selected structures. If necessary, additional survey of infield, to permit designs of at least the first year's work. Manual survey (at least 10% of command area) of a sample of the infield area for designing sample in-field layout and land levelling requirements.
Topography of Sites of Major Structures and Scheme Area
Obtain satellite imagery at 1:100,000 for catchment area and at 1:50,000 of command area for reconnaissance. Mapping of catchment and command areas at 1:50,000 with 10 m contour interval, or better. Uncontrolled, or better controlled, air-photo mosaics of sites of major structures and main canal alignments, at a scale of 1:10,000. Better still, orthophoto or line mapping at this scale with 2 m contour interval.
Further survey and setting out for construction purposes.
1: Note that in a programme approach, eg under a sectoral loan, feasibility activities for subprojects may be deferred until after appraisal (see Part II, Chapter 4).
APPENDIX 1 - Activities to be completed and level of detail required at successive stages of the planning process
Project process/subject Planning the preferred option1 2 3 4 Appraisal Loan effectiveness
Conceptualising/comparing investment options 1
D. As 1 plus interpretation of new air photography. Identify and quantify soils and land forms. Define crop-specific land utilization types. Soil survey at 1 observation per 25-50 ha. Consider erosion hazard, fertility, toxicity, drainage. More intensive soil survey with observation in representative areas of 1 observation per 10 ha average, to confirm boundaries, and to further investigate any drainage problems.
Land Capability for Irrigation
Review of following data: LANDSAT/SPOT imagery at 1:100,000 or larger; air photography at 1:50,000 or larger; geological and soil maps at 1:250,000 or better; and land use maps at 1:50,000 or better. Review reports and maps of soil survey institutions, universities, consultants, etc. Hence identify principal land systems.
Establish monitoring system for potential waterlogging and salinity build-up.
Interpretation of available air photographs at 1:25,000 or better. Reconnaissance soil survey at observation density of 1 sample per 100-200 ha (depending on magnitude of scheme and mapping scale) plus sampling and testing for physical and chemical properties; 10% of observations consisting of deep pitting to check drainage.
1: Note that in a programme approach, eg under a sectoral loan, feasibility activities for subprojects may be deferred until after appraisal (see Part II, Chapter 4).
Activities to be completed and level of detail required at successive stages of the planning process Project process/subject Planning the preferred option1 2 3 4 Appraisal Loan effectiveness Conceptualising/comparing investment options 1 E. 1: Note that in a programme approach. Decide on requirements for geotechnical investigations for dams. canals. other structures and canals. Chapter 4). Drilling. Further confirmatory investigation if required during detailed engineering design. Geotechnical Aspects of Major Structures From a review of available air photography and geological and topo maps. feasibility activities for subprojects may be deferred until after appraisal (see Part II. concrete aggregates etc. and prepare programme for 2. Field classification of geological formations and soil types. structures. assess areas suitable for dams. Confirm availability of borrow material. . As 3. eg under a sectoral loan. Carry out field visits to selected sites. pitting for dams. other structures and canals.APPENDIX 1 .
or flood control. construction drawings. bills of quantities. Define areas of swamp or seasonal inundation. specifications and tender documents. Carry out operational/simulation studies to optimise dam/reservoir/ scheme area. 1: Note that in a programme approach. Chapter 4). drainage. Link present or potential irrigation demands with possible water sources. Prepare feasibility level preliminary designs for the system. Prepare outline designs of the options. Arrange for tendering of works if financing institution has approved. to the level of detail that ensures that no significant changes will be necessary later. Continue with detailed designs. Refine estimates of project water requirements for the preferred option and likely cropping pattern. . Civil and Irrigation Engineering Outline main water sources and irrigable land. feasibility activities for subprojects may be deferred until after appraisal (see Part II. Prepare preliminary estimates of irrigation water requirements for possible typical cropping patterns. or operational plans for direct labour construction with farmer participation. eg under a sectoral loan.APPENDIX 1 . Detailed designs.Activities to be completed and level of detail required at successive stages of the planning process Project process/subject Planning the preferred option1 2 3 4 Appraisal Loan effectiveness Conceptualising/comparing investment options 1 F. Hence identify possible schemes for irrigation.
Chapter 4). 1: Note that in a programme approach. Civil and Irrigation Infrastructure Costs Preliminary cost estimates (including O&M) for engineering works. Refine quantities and costs in the light of further investigations and designs. onfarm development and any land acquisition.Activities to be completed and level of detail required at successive stages of the planning process Project process/subject Planning the preferred option1 2 3 4 Appraisal Loan effectiveness Conceptualising/comparing investment options 1 G. Tabulate foreign/local costs and programme of expenditure for engineering works.APPENDIX 1 . Identify scope for and nature of farmers' contribution to capital costs. land acquisition etc. feasibility activities for subprojects may be deferred until after appraisal (see Part II. eg under a sectoral loan. accurate to say 15%. . land development. Refine quantities and cost estimates. with schedule of disbursements. Arrange for farmers' contribution to be made.
storage. Preliminary recommendations on strategy for irrigated agricultural development: cropping patterns. . Carry out SEPSS if required and from this prepare recommendations on possible or likely cropping patterns. rainfed crops. and any land acquisition costs.APPENDIX 1 . Design SEPSS if considered necessary. finance. covered markets etc. seeds. Arrange for tendering for supply of plant and equipment. Preliminary cost estimates (including O&M) for any likely marketing infrastructure.. accurate to say 15%. estimates of yields with and without project. eg under a sectoral loan. needs for extension and other services.. Tabulate foreign/local costs and programme of expenditure for works. with schedule of disbursements. Prepare tender documents for plant and equipment (including marketing plant and equipment) storage facilities etc. general assumptions on crop yields. feasibility activities for subprojects may be deferred until after appraisal (see Part II. markets etc. Agricultural Development and Marketing Review general policies for irrigated crops. Jointly with engineering/hydrology study. Refine cost estimates. Refine recommendations in 2. O&M. storage facilities etc. credit and technical support. 1: Note that in a programme approach. refine estimates of crop water requirements. extension.). Chapter 4). eg storage and grading sheds. intensity. food versus industrial crops. Make more detailed agronomic recommendations and on marketing. research. if financing agency has approved. cropping intensity. Refine quantities and costs for agricultural development and marketing in the light of final planning of component. List local crops. Note development constraints (lack of water.Activities to be completed and level of detail required at successive stages of the planning process Project process/subject Planning the preferred option1 2 3 4 Appraisal Loan effectiveness Conceptualising/comparing investment options 1 H.
Incremental Agricultural Production Benefits Preliminary estimates of incremental benefits from irrigation. Further refinement if necessary or if additional data become available. eg in extension approaches. on the basis of representative models for the typical crops and cropping patterns. 1: Note that in a programme approach. and other local data collected. Assess social constraints to intensified production. refine crop selection. Chapter 4). .Activities to be completed and level of detail required at successive stages of the planning process Project process/subject Planning the preferred option1 2 3 4 Appraisal Loan effectiveness Conceptualising/comparing investment options 1 I. cropping patterns. Develop proposals for treatment of gender related constraints. and need for separate treatment of gender related constraints. feasibility activities for subprojects may be deferred until after appraisal (see Part II.APPENDIX 1 . From SEPSS. Estimate incremental benefits per household and at project level. crop and farm models. eg under a sectoral loan.
programmes and field deployment to supporting the irrigation project alternatives under consideration. 1: Note that in a programme approach. eg under a sectoral loan. Define institutional responsibilities for agricultural research. Make preliminary classification of strengths and weaknesses. Review options for improving relevance or impact of their work and possible roles for investment in achieving such improvements.APPENDIX 1 . Plan means to link their activities. Ensure key researchers or extensionists who will be involved in implementation participate in SEPSS. and to ensure adequate participation of irrigators to ensure client-oriented approach. Testing and Transfer of Agricultural Production Technology Identify institutions currently involved in research or extension related to irrigated agriculture (public. extra resources needed for them to operate as defined. technology testing and extension. Fine-tune cost estimates. Complete recruitment and first round of training/PRAs.Activities to be completed and level of detail required at successive stages of the planning process Project process/subject Planning the preferred option1 2 3 4 Appraisal Loan effectiveness Conceptualising/comparing investment options 1 J. M&E. Assess the relevance of their present organisation. Organise pre-project seminars or PRA for existing field-level extension and research staff. NGOs. Generation. Initiate monitoring and evaluation. Maintain training and re-training. farmers' organisations. Initiate recruitment of extra staff and/or pre-implementation training for new roles. Define field modus operandi of services. . Prepare tender documents for key items. Chapter 4). and estimate costs. private sector. technical assistance agencies). Define monitoring and evaluation system. feasibility activities for subprojects may be deferred until after appraisal (see Part II.
Consultations with farmers directly or through local authorities/village councils etc.APPENDIX 1 . 1: Note that in a programme approach. assist farmers with electoral formalities for WUA committee and drafting constitution. Establish demand for project or subprojects. If necessary. Participation and Water Users' Associations Involvement of stakeholders in evolution of development concepts and comparison of investment options through interviews and participative approaches/workshops. Obtain written commitment to provide construction labour and to accept O&M responsibility. from farmers' representatives to financing institution at concluding workshop. Prepare farmers for making contribution to capital costs.Activities to be completed and level of detail required at successive stages of the planning process Project process/subject Planning the preferred option1 2 3 4 Appraisal Loan effectiveness Conceptualising/comparing investment options 1 K. Assess need for/feasibility/prospects for success of WUA. preferably by example (eg demonstrations of previous farmer commitment on other demand-led development such as community contribution to school buildings). Consultation with farmers with regard to scope and layout of scheme. and SEPSS. eg under a sectoral loan. Finalisation of project planning with all stakeholders. feasibility activities for subprojects may be deferred until after appraisal (see Part II. Chapter 4). .
carry out EIA. organisation and responsibilities for environmental monitoring. If recommended by the IEE. Modify project planning necessary to accommodate recommendations.APPENDIX 1 . Environmental Impact Initial environmental evaluation (IEE) using ICID checklist to assess the need for environmental impact assessment (EIA). and prepare any necessary environmental action plans (EAPs) and resettlement action plans (RAPs).Activities to be completed and level of detail required at successive stages of the planning process Project process/subject Planning the preferred option1 2 3 4 Appraisal Loan effectiveness Conceptualising/comparing investment options 1 L. Establish environmental monitoring system. Chapter 4). Otherwise prepare mitigation plan. Specify indicators. including if required land acquisition assessment (LAA). feasibility activities for subprojects may be deferred until after appraisal (see Part II. Enact any necessary legislation to enable plans to be implemented. . Refine actions plans in the light of further information collected or received. eg under a sectoral loan. 1: Note that in a programme approach.
Specify arrangements/pricing for water charges and collection. Specify arrangements for O&M. Arrange bidding and contracts with NGOs and consultants if required. Relate to possible project(s) being identified. Decide on needs for institutional capacity assessment (ICA). capacity and funding). including legal establishment of WUAs. feasibility activities for subprojects may be deferred until after appraisal (see Part II. Implement any organisational changes necessary. Chapter 4). if appropriate. Operation and Maintenance Initial institutional evaluation (IIE).APPENDIX 1 . Institutions. Carry out ICA covering assessment of concerned departments/private sector organisations. their staffing and capacity. eg under a sectoral loan. morale. 1: Note that in a programme approach. . Cost Recovery. and contracting out to private sector. Enact any necessary legislation to enable changes to be implemented. Describe institutional framework for irrigation. Match project design to capacity to implement. establish project entity if necessary. Implement training and start-up seminars or workshops. internal culture and performance. Set up accounts and procurement arrangements. Plan any preimplementation training or seminars. allowing for proposed strengthening or adjustments. Preliminary assessment of institutional strengths and weaknesses (ability. environmental protection and.Activities to be completed and level of detail required at successive stages of the planning process Project process/subject Planning the preferred option1 2 3 4 Appraisal Loan effectiveness Conceptualising/comparing investment options 1 M. including formation of WUAs if appropriate. including TA and training needs. social welfare. Appoint key project staff. Finalise arrangements or any organisation initiatives/institutional reforms. Recommendations for project organisation and management. Prepare proposals for institutional development/strengthenin g. Organisation and Management.
Impact on income distribution and poverty alleviation. Finalise financial requirements. Effect on balance of payments and government budget. loan details and disbursement schedule. . eg under a sectoral loan. Economic Analysis Ranking of alternatives according to simple financial cost/benefit analyses using data from rapid assessments. 1: Note that in a programme approach. Chapter 4). feasibility activities for subprojects may be deferred until after appraisal (see Part II.APPENDIX 1 . Risk and sensitivity analysis. Fiscal implications and cost recovery. Estimation of economic and financial returns.Activities to be completed and level of detail required at successive stages of the planning process Project process/subject Planning the preferred option1 2 3 4 Appraisal Loan effectiveness Conceptualising/comparing investment options 1 N.
and export earnings. or to support an existing or proposed Agricultural Sector Review or Water Resources Management Strategy/Strategy Study. Origin and authorship: origin of request and reasons for review and strategy formulation. Country (Region) economy and trends: main features of economy. . Intended readership NATIONAL BACKGROUND (2 TO 3 PAGES) (OR REGIONAL BACKGROUND IF LIMITS DO NOT COINCIDE WITH NATIONAL BOUNDARIES). inflation. food supply and self-sufficiency. employment. Currency Equivalents Acronyms SUMMARY (3 to 5 pages) INTRODUCTION (1 TO 2 PAGES) Objectives of strategy formulation: including whether intended to update an existing subsector review. Users must be selective in coverage. Country (Region): location. Methodology employed: particularly the methodology employed to achieve a consensus of views with government (workshops/participatory planning/joint review). its contribution to GDP. other key geographic features. balance of trade and other macro-economic issues. GDP per caput. population and its rate of growth. agriculture and irrigation in the economy. public sector finances. and details of the review/strategy formulation team. size. balance of payments. GDP. Use of databases.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 101 ANNEX 1: Checklist for contents of an irrigation subsector review and strategy paper Note: Not everything listed below will be relevant in a given case.
taking account of demographic trends or world markets as appropriate. productivity. water use efficiency. whether man-made or natural.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 102 Demand and supply of agricultural products: estimates of future demand or markets for agricultural products versus expected supply. Land Resources: total arable land resources of the country (region). and types (eg surface/sprinkler/drip. and hazards (such as hail). eg fiscal retrenchment. available data on surface and groundwater sources. key features/objectives/targets of national plans or policy commitments. as appropriate.). export growth versus import substitution. location relative to potentially irrigable land. Existing Irrigation and Drainage: the main categories (eg public largescale/small-scale. etc. traditional water control systems etc.). on this basis categorise agro-climatic zones for which irrigation strategies should be evolved (or irrigation declared unnecessary). quality. present condition. other commodities for local consumption and export products. farmers experiences with irrigation. availability for agriculture or competition with other sectors. . market liberalisation. flood regimes. limits on external borrowing. crops grown. alerting the reader to strengths. privatisation. significant salinity or drainage problems. and levels of cost recovery on public schemes. THE IRRIGATION SUBSECTOR: PRESENT SITUATION (10 TO 15 PAGES) This key chapter should combine a minimum of essential description with a critical assessment of the performance and relevance of the subsector. and whether they offer potential for reclamation and development. history of development and areas of each category developed/cropped. responsibilities for/adequacy of O&M. THE RESOURCE BASE (2 TO 5 PAGES) Climate: highlight rainfall amount and variability versus crop requirements. Government’s overall development aims and priorities: main relevant thrusts of economic policy or recent adjustments. Consider food staples. taking account of any limitations imposed by any international water rights issues. private large-scale/small-scale. weaknesses and areas needing attention. drainage only etc. Water Resources: summarise. any seasonal temperature limitations to plant growth. concentrating on crops that might profitably be irrigated. the limitations (eg soils and topography) for irrigation suitability. production systems.
Subsectoral finances: the main sources of finance for public and private irrigation. flagging databases/findings taken into account by the team in reaching their conclusions. which should be annexed). or about to be constructed. water users’ associations. development. Socio-Economics: current socio-economic situation on existing schemes. staffing. and typical crop budgets/farm models. companies.. for growth in certain seasons of the year. livestock. The legal framework: summary of relevant legislation affecting land tenure. limitations to development imposed by physical factors such as porous soils or pumping lifts. operation or maintenance. irrigation equipment suppliers. individual entrepreneurs. budgets. water abstraction and use. or services to irrigators. anticipated social and environmental impacts. or markets. beneficiary participation and performance in public irrigation planning. role of the private and cooperative sector . Irrigation costs and benefits: typical capital and O&M costs for the various categories and types of irrigation. Institutions: describe and assess key government institutions in the subsector (responsibilities. fisheries. the types of production or crops for which irrigation is technically justified or necessary. on-going or recent studies (refer to main relevant work. legal basis on which institutional structures for irrigation are founded. cross-reference to full lists of references and bibliography. agricultural production. . track record) and their main strengths and weaknesses. scheme O&M. mixing or conflicts (if any) between irrigated agriculture and rainfed cropping. and purchase/processing/marketing of output. consulting firms and contractors) involved in planning and construction. etc. for each agroecological zone defined above. and information regarding disadvantaged groups. or to take commercial advantage of a climate which is comparatively favourable (eg for seed production or expansion of high-value horticulture in places with good market connections). including land tenure and water rights aspects. internal culture. for security/supplementary/survival purposes. adequacy of existing provisions and need for change. land holding sizes. other external technical assistance support and the degree of government dependency on this. supply of goods. Current developments: irrigation developments under construction. and the fiscal sustainability of present arrangements or levels of application or regulations. social and environmental impacts of existing irrigation to date and future implications. cost recovery and taxation regimes. either to obtain any significant output. proposed.the main actors (NGOs.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 103 interactions.
FAO. water and labour) compared with rainfed crops. Investment ceilings for future developments: for each of the main crops/typical cropping patterns. type and pace of future development. Chapter 2). compared with review team’s estimates. place irrigation in the context of overall water resources management. Rome (1986) . It may be appropriate to carry out a DRC analysis (see Part II. using typical cropping patterns. flag any key 1: For an example. Opportunities: from the previous chapters identify the potential for new irrigation or for improvements to existing irrigation. OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS TO IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT (1 TO 2 PAGES) In this chapter the physical opportunities for irrigation and drainage development should be reviewed in comparison with market opportunities or constraints. Economic analysis of irrigation investments: cost-benefit analysis in economic terms . including any in the cost of water. using border prices and any necessary shadow pricing of currency.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 104 Potential for further development: quote available statistics. with sensitivity analysis. indicating underlying assumptions in deriving overall availability of water. making clear whether they refer only to technical potential or whether some economic criteria (especially limits to costs of development or operation) have been applied. again compared with rainfed crops. the maximum justifiable investment cost per hectare to yield an assumed ERR (likely minimum 12 percent)1. conjunctive use of surface and groundwater. allocation for other sectors and re-use (cascades of tanks. Irrigation in Africa South of the Sahara. assess the value of existing development as a model for future development. for which results may be attached in an annex. the returns to the most constraining production factors (eg land. to identify the implications for the possible scale. agricultural use of urban/industrial waste water). see Annex 2 in Investment Centre Technical Paper 5. for the major representative categories and types of irrigation system. Economic analysis of crop production: similar figures but with all subsidies removed. FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC VIABILITY OF IRRIGATION (5 TO 10 PAGES) Financial analysis of crop production: for each of the main crops under the various categories of irrigation.
or commitment by farmers on public irrigation. dates.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 105 products for which there is. distilled from previous chapters. • specific facets of government policy such as: • the priority given to agricultural use of available water resources. Constraints to future development: from lessons learned. quantify future supply gaps or market dimensions for key commodities if possible. land tenure/water rights issues (including any international issues) affecting public or private irrigation/drainage. as modified (if at all) in a workshop1 attended by the stakeholders. O&M. Contents may cover: • a brief recapitulation from Chapter 2 of the main macro-economic constraints or opportunities on which the government’s development policy is founded. etc. institutional reform. targets. etc. inadequate cost recovery. • the government’s technical strategy for development (rehabilitate/exploit sunk costs/new construction. or is not. from previous policy documents/statements. giving figures. GOVERNMENT PRIORITIES AND PLANS (1 TO 3 PAGES) Main government objectives for irrigation/drainage development. • the main commodities (food/non-food) and markets (selfsufficiency/exports) which are the objectives of government irrigation development priorities or plans. lack of institutional capacity for public or private irrigation. • the promotion of participatory planning and development. • future roles of public and private sectors in irrigation/drainage development.). distinguishing cases where irrigated production would be appropriate. Chapter 2). summarise the main points that need to be taken into account in evolving any proposals for subsectoral development. 1: A workshop is often held for the purpose of reaching a consensus on the options before finalisation of the strategy paper (see Part II. These might include limitations/problems of existing development. • expected contribution of the sub-sector to social objectives or employment creation. . lack of adequate legislation. adverse social and environmental impacts. • the irrigation/drainage types or categories of producer to be favoured or the overall social/political objectives which irrigation/drainage is intended to serve. and hence its broad development goals. strengthening/forming environmental protection agency). local comparative advantage. where possible. • government’s strategy for minimising the risk/mitigating adverse social and environmental impacts (legislation.
economic. • regulation of water rights or reform of tenure arrangements for irrigated land. the most important chapter of the Paper. it is useful to set out the main sub-sectoral issues to which the strategy being proposed is intended to respond. extent/sources of external funding envisaged). political or environmental criteria will need to be considered. in order to meet the stated priority objectives. • subsectoral projects. STRATEGY FOR IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT (5 TO 10 PAGES) (PREFACE WITH “PROPOSED”. . • decentralisation of institutional responsibility. programmes or plans to which the government is committed. technology/production systems and the types of irrigator that should be favoured. and the pace of development that would fit with existing development capacity. medium and longer-term needs or objectives. cost recovery. when and by whom? Following on from the above. when and by whom?” and “What should government do about it?” Irrigation/drainage for what? Drawing on earlier background. “How. • future intentions on fiscal measures. Most of the rest of this chapter will be so specific to the country/area concerned that no detailed checklist can be offered. “POSSIBLE” OR “SOME ELEMENTS OF” ETC. • environmental protection. but now refined or modified in the light of the review/strategy formulation (in which government has fully participated through the medium of workshops and other activities). a rationale needs to be derived to justify the irrigation scale. credit or subsidies for irrigation. three general questions are likely to need addressing in almost every case: “Irrigation/drainage development for what?”. To set the scene for this.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 106 • legal or institutional changes affecting the subsector to which the government is committed. Issues will often echo those first raised at the Preliminary Brief stage (see Annex 3). However. • anticipated sources of capital and recurrent funding for the subsector (government contribution.. distinguishing if appropriate between short. How. Depending on the setting. opportunities or priorities to which irrigation or drainage development should respond. irrigators’ contribution. DEPENDING ON STATUS OF ELABORATION OF WORK). a rationale is needed to spell out the main national needs. social.
and where would the irrigators take over (“public” versus “private” is seldom an all-or-nothing destination. The principles that should orient future institutional and social arrangements for irrigation planning.for instance on food supply and demand. under-used or neglected infrastructure. In many countries a balance may need to be struck between new construction and the rehabilitation of existing facilities: illustrative summary tables of relative costs and benefits can also be given for each of these. road access.The government’s role? . and so on. farmer motivation. If strategic choices centre on production under rainfed versus irrigated conditions. A strategy will need to be included to prevent rehabilitated systems. from degenerating again.usually the limiting resource . to guide national decision-makers. First. operation and management should also be set out. or per labour day. If a public/private partnership is envisaged.per hectare developed.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 107 These two sections should be closely linked and will tend to integrate a wide variety of previous information . many gradations exist depending on how close government works come to the farmer’s plot). local or export markets. or of overcoming key sub-sectoral constraints . or under alternative systems or different scales of irrigation. They should take full account of the lessons of experience or precedent regarding the ease or difficulty of exploiting particular opportunities. comparative advantage or financial attractiveness of growing alternative commodities by different means. construction. the comparative advantage of various forms of irrigation (both nationally and versus rainfed opportunities). once repaired. The government’s future intentions. adverse social and environmental impacts.especially those relating to institutional capacity for development. indicating whether a participatory approach is appropriate. It may help to start by clarifying some principles. availability of or competition for natural resources. to what extent is it appropriate to rely on . construction of civil works and supporting public infrastructure: what irrigation/drainage works should the government design and finance under the various categories of development suggested for priority. The third question . social needs. power supplies. commitments or priorities as well as its real capacity to influence or undertake irrigation development must also be taken into account. labour demand or supply. arguments can be supported with the simple production models developed in Chapter 5 to demonstrate likely economic efficiency. what prior commitments and financial contribution should be required of each partner before development starts? Should future development strategy include improvements to power supplies or access roads? If government’s capacity to plan.needs to be a logical response to the forms of development and future organisation of irrigation advocated under the two previous headings. implement operate and maintain is limited. agro-processing. The models may also be used to compare economic returns per unit volume of water .
.”) and partly a matter of foreshadowing the issues which should be .Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 108 external technical assistance to strengthen its capacity. organisational and fiscal issues of the sub-sector.... contracted agencies. it may seem appropriate then to flag the main topics to which government should give attention . and arrangements for agro-processing and marketing. what levels of capital cost recovery should be aimed for and how should recovery be made? Third. research or training.. privatisation of the supply of production inputs and materials. production support and marketing: what should be done by the private sector. A fourth general principle to clarify is the broader guardianship of the public interest: this normally devolves to government but concerns subsectoral matters which are often inadequately attended to. suggestions here should be founded on earlier references to the main legal. strategic proposals are in line with government’s thinking.. recovering urban wastewater for agricultural use. and riparian rights.. Whether or not to go into details on specific government services in the strategy chapter is an open point. bearing in mind past success/failure of this kind of assistance. associations or individual producers. machinery services..for instance for greater participation of communities. entrepreneurs. there may be some spill-over into macro-economic questions which the government would need to attend to if subsectoral developments of the sorts indicated are to become realities. Treatment is likely to be partly reassuring (“. upgrading the quality of scheme O&M. collecting more water charges. water users’ associations or individual irrigators . or encouraging more local manufacture of irrigation equipment.eg improving extension. sorting out the credit system.how could this be made attractive to them and how should transfer from public authorities be organised? Assuming that the full cost of O&M is recovered. promoting and “nursing” WUAs. credit. system operation and maintenance: how should costs and responsibilities be divided in future between the various public and private interests involved? If changes are proposed . such as inter-sectoral and longer-term allocations of water. as opposed to government agencies? Topics to cover may include extension and research. as elucidated at the concluding workshop . The final section of the strategy chapter will often compare the strategic suggestions just given to the present policies and plans of the government.. protecting or monitoring environmental impacts. institutional. or to contract out to the private sector for these services? Second. Having clarified the principles which it is suggested should guide future strategy. sustainability (of aquifers and land use). Fifth.
institutional changes or enacting new laws. • If the team has found so few reliable data that it has been able only to make provisional strategy suggestions based on broad estimates or working hypotheses..Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 109 picked up at the end of the report (“. relationships between irrigation and rainfed farming. etc.. In this case the team’s proposals may focus on the government creating the pre-conditions in which the development of the subsector could be expected to accelerate largely on the basis of private initiatives. • It may be possible to make proposals for practical interventions which transcend individual locations and span the sub-sector. groundwater reserves. farmer attitudes and motivation.. however. imply consistent application of laws on water abstraction and strengthening of present environmental protection/enforcement capacity . • Finally... institutional performance..would. or a national campaign for improved operation and maintenance of existing facilities based perhaps on higher cost recovery. fiscal reforms. then proposals may give priority to the studies which are needed before further progress can be made .. the profitability of different forms of irrigation. for example to re-cast research and extension on irrigation to respond to an oncoming need to generate more production from a now fully-used water supply... content will depend greatly on circumstances. or perhaps suggest an investment programme of . the present condition of existing works. . market opportunities. Immediate needs may be for technical assistance funds rather than investment finance.for instance progressive rehabilitation of works serving the favoured types of producer in areas of comparative advantage. • It may be possible to pinpoint specific. credit overdues.”). existing. it may have been concluded that sub-sectoral progress is impeded mainly by macro-economic or other trans-sectoral issues. project ideas which can be taken up forthwith because they match the proposed strategy. Again. the easing of which may often have few cost implications of any sort for the government.for instance of surface water resources. for instance through making changes in macroeconomic or pricing policy. or perhaps on budgetary allocations which better reflect an important current contribution of irrigation to the national economy and development goals. extent of waterlogging. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS (1 TO 4 PAGES) Here the team should present its ideas on specific actions which the government could take in support of the strategy which has been proposed. etc.
through strengthened services. particularly if they can be used to illustrate different trade-offs between objectives . within a reasonable time. the paths which it sets out should help the government to do two things: • improve on existing subsectoral performance in the short term. and possible sources of these external ingredients. external technical assistance. Where possible and appropriate. others can be locally funded and for others the cost to the government may be political rather than monetary. location and timing. To this end the chapter should establish sequences or priorities among the various proposals given earlier. or a sectoral approach may be suggested with a view to identifying a project to finance a time-slice of government’s irrigation investment programme and to concentrate on capacity-building. and the previous chapter will probably contain a miscellany of recommendations or ideas ranging from specific physical interventions. likely needs for internal and external financing. IMMEDIATE ACTIONS AND FOLLOW-UP (1 TO 3 PAGES) A strategy formulation team is likely to have raised local expectations. scale. Some of these may require external finance or assistance.eg technical efficiency versus equity. others will be slow. and • prepare for further irrigation and drainage development over the longer term. The purpose of this chapter should be to show the government and potential financing agencies that the strategic proposals can lead. Insofar as either path requires external assistance. to action and tangible subsectoral benefits. Alternative scales or development scenarios can be discussed.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 110 Frequently there will be proposals under several of these general headings. proposals should be amplified to indicate in outline their possible components. needs and possible sources should be suggested and spelled out. Issues. may be best left until later (Chapter 11). . to studies or institutional and policy changes. followed by costs. or small/quick versus larger/slower increases in output of certain commodities. according to the strategy proposed. Overall. Some will be quick. however.
if the development strategy or options proposed by the concluding workshop are to be implemented (it may be appropriate to give preferred alternatives if the concluding workshop has not resulted in consensus). etc.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 111 ISSUES AND RISKS (1 TO 2 PAGES) The final chapter should summarise the issues and risks associated with the proposed strategy. disputed riparian rights. Existing Irrigation Database 2. how and by when decisions need to be taken. • list the main externalities or risks to which the development strategy or different options could be subject (macro-economic factors. it should always be indicated by whom. Typical Crop Budgets for Irrigated Crops 5. Hydrological Zones and Rainfall Isohyets 3. Agro-ecological Zones and Land Use 2. floods. MAPS Maps included might be: 1. Financial and Economic Viability of Irrigation BIBLIOGRAPHY . The team should: • list the major subsectoral issues requiring decisions either by the government or potential financing agencies. world market trends. Basis of Estimates of Typical Irrigation Costs 3. Groundwater Potential 4. Marketing and Prices of Agricultural Products 4. spreadsheet or data base packages) flow charts and logic diagrams can be prepared and presented to help the reader.). FLOW CHARTS AND LOGIC DIAGRAMS Using simple graphics software (such as that included in word processing. Location of Existing and Proposed/Possible Irrigation Development ANNEXES Annexes might include: 1.
FAO. However. but alternative presentations are suggested where necessary to allow for the case of subsectoral or programme investments. anticipated environmental impact and the implementation arrangements for the proposed investment. Note that the layout described is adapted to project-specific investments. 1 The main text of a final project document or dossier may have up to eleven chapters. the various annexes may not necessarily be fully consistent with each other. Depending on its complexity. read in conjunction with Investment Centre Technical Paper 7 . If appropriate. plus annexes that may be bound into the document or left as separate working papers. The annexes may have been prepared by local planning groups (LPGs). to be consulted as necessary by planning teams in the course of documenting the proposal and to give direction and purpose to the overall planning process described in Part II. may have been performed independently of other work. The inside of the front cover should usually contain details of currency equivalents. As a result. no attempt should be made to rewrite them unless this is essential for clarity or is requested by the financing institution. including university groups. Rome (1993). Some of the investigations. repetition of earlier report writing should be avoided. in view of the trend towards these.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 112 ANNEX 2: Outline of a typical project document or dossier This annex. a list of acronyms and abbreviations. . It is intended to be used as a checklist. or international consulting firms. in the interests of streamlining the planning and appraisal process. Investment Centre missions may also have been involved. nor with the main text. 1: Investment Centre Technical Paper 7: Guidelines for the Design of Agricultural Investment Projects. local consultants or consulting firms. such as engineering feasibility studies carried out by consulting companies. the main text of the project document should be no more than 60 pages long and preferably less than 50. even though every effort should have been made to achieve this. Any inconsistencies between the various annexes or working papers should therefore simply be acknowledged and explained in the main text. and any other local weights or measures that need explanation. seeks to cover the great majority of the topics likely to be dealt with in planning any irrigation or drainage investment. selected country statistics may also be given.
• the expected economic results. It should not exceed four pages or ten percent of the length of the main report. • the arrangements for fiscal sustainability. size and main components. and its relation to government policies and plans. ie whether in a national development plan. • the reasons for its selection. a well thought out and presented background chapter is essential to establish the framework for the project rationale and the planning considerations described in later chapters. It should indicate how. It should also state the origin of the project. or from previous examination of the available options. • the main issues to be resolved before appraisal. with one paragraph for each chapter of the main text. The summary should normally cover topics in the order in which they are treated in the main text of the document. The summary can usually only be written after the main report has been completed.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 113 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS (2-4 PAGES) The main report should be preceded by a summary which briefly describes: • the proposed project. • estimated costs and disbursement period. whichever is the shorter.see Annex 1) as far as possible. • any adverse social and environmental impacts. BACKGROUND (3-6 PAGES) The background chapter should refer the reader to other published reports (eg the irrigation subsector review and strategy paper . and the implications for existing institutions. • the implementation plan. when and by whom (eg LPGs. individuals and/or FAO Investment Centre missions) the project has been prepared. consulting firms. from subsectoral strategy formulation. • the proposed organisation for implementation and subsequent O&M. INTRODUCTION (1 PAGE) This chapter is administrative and should state the purpose of the report and to whom it is addressed. its location. . However. • the people who will use the project and the expected impact on their incomes.
otherwise on other available reports and data. broadly following the content of the irrigation subsector strategy paper. cropping intensities and patterns. It should briefly describe the location. organisation and management. past and present performance in terms of command area developed. Other on-going irrigation developments. From water resources investigations and water resources management strategies already defined. national dependence on particular imports and exports. C. and constraints to overall development. as well as that for the basin in which it will be situated. assuming one has been written. for example on the scale of irrigation development. exchange rate adjustments. B. and average yields achieved. . farm size and land tenure. Specific treatment of market prospects is desirable where these might have an important bearing on project planning.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 114 It usually includes the following: A. or those in the pipeline. inflation. The Economy This should describe the contribution of agriculture and irrigated agriculture to GDP. Recent changes and trends should be highlighted. adequacy of revenue to meet recurrent funding requirements. Present and future estimates of supply and demand for specific commodities and the country’s comparative advantage for their production should also be briefly mentioned. The scope for further irrigation development should then be described. balance of payment considerations. The Agricultural Sector The main characteristics of the sector should be summarised. macroeconomic distortions and other features of economic development that have a bearing on the project. should also be noted. per caput income. input availability and utilization. production. dominant farming systems. taking account of competing demands. In any case it should draw heavily on the strategy paper. The Irrigation Subsector This section should be included in the case of project-specific investments only: for subsectoral investments the irrigation subsector should be accorded a chapter in its own right. its historical development. including brief references to main forms of land use. that plan should be explained. water use for irrigation should be placed in the context of the country’s overall water availability and usage. extent and nature of existing irrigation and drainage. If the project is a part of an overall river basin plan. public investment programme. area utilised. indebtedness.
Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects
The social and environmental impacts of previous developments, including resettlement, health, erosion and sedimentation, waterlogging, salinisation, pollution or depletion of surface or groundwater supplies, and measures taken to mitigate them should also be briefly referred to. The lessons learned should be highlighted. Similarly, any other problems which have a direct bearing on the project should also be highlighted, such as cost recovery and O&M or water rights agreements for international rivers.
D. Income Distribution and Poverty
These topics should be given special mention when the project is intended to benefit a particular target group of the rural poor, and should discuss related indicators (eg access to land, water or services, nutrition, health etc.), and the factors contributing to differentiation that might have affected the decision to select the particular project or region.
E. Government Subsectoral Policies and Plans
Again drawing on the subsector review and strategy paper, government priorities and plans should be reviewed in terms of what government sees as the main national aims and benefits of irrigation - whether these be food self-sufficiency, export earnings, employment creation, income distribution, poverty alleviation or some other. Subsectoral objectives for food and fibre supply, exports, social equity, targets for rural income, nutritional goals and so on may be mentioned. In particular, government policy regarding water pricing and cost recovery, in what form (eg direct water charges, betterment levies, land taxes, agricultural product taxes and price controls) and how effectively this is implemented, should be reviewed, as should the appropriateness of environmental policy.
F. The Financing Institution’s Previous Operations and Experience
This should summarise the financing institution’s previous lending operations in the country, with particular regard to irrigation and drainage investments and the lessons learned. It should give details of the numbers and amounts of previous loans to the subsector, their completion dates and achievements in terms of new or rehabilitated hectares irrigated and numbers of users. It should also describe any problems or difficulties encountered, such as local funding constraints, lengthy procurement procedures, poor performance of contractors, poor planning, poor O&M and so on. The lessons of experience that need to be taken account of in planning future investments should be listed.
Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects
THE PROJECT AREA (3 TO 6 PAGES)
This chapter will only be required for project-specific investment in new irrigation or drainage. It should be replaced with a detailed review of the subsector in the case of subsectoral investments, or a suggested alternative Chapter 3 for project-specific investment in rehabilitation (see Chapter 3(a) below). Together with its supporting annexes and maps, this chapter should describe the features of the project area that have implications for the planning of the proposed investment. It should evaluate the development opportunities and potential as well as the limitations, focusing throughout on the investment which is being proposed. It is likely to contain the sections described below.
A. Location and Natural Resources
This section should summarise the location of the project area and its land and water resources, highlighting any physical constraints that would have to be overcome (eg soil erosion and reservoir/canal sedimentation, poor drainage). The reliability of data (eg scale of soil surveys, length of rainfall or streamflow records) should be assessed and the need for any further data collection (eg for additional surveys, tests or hydrological observations) before construction should be mentioned. Detailed technical data should be consigned to annexes. Topics to be covered should include the following: Location. The location of the project in relation to important features (the capital, provincial/state capital, administrative boundaries, major rivers, and transport connections to main markets). The project area might be a province/state, watershed, the command area of a dam, or a combination of these. The relevant features should be shown on maps. Geology, Soils and Land Capability for Irrigation. Land in the project area should be described with reference to topographic, geological, soil or land classification surveys and maps. Limiting factors should be highlighted. The degree of detail required in land evaluation surveys will vary between projects depending on the characteristics (soil variability, salinity problems, etc.) of the project lands: guidelines are available in the FAO Guidelines: Land Evaluation for Irrigated Agriculture1 (see also Appendix 1 to the main text of these Guidelines). The use of remote sensing methods and geographic information systems to evaluate the
1: FAO, Rome (1985). FAO Rome (1979).
See also FAO Soils Bulletin 42: Soil Survey Investigations for Irrigation,
Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects
resource base, monitor trends (for example in the irrigated/cropped area over a number of years) and to produce maps can also be considered1 . Climate. The purpose here is not to describe the climate in detail but to demonstrate its influence on and importance to the project concept. It should deal with the main climatic features2 affecting irrigation requirements and system design: ie rainfall (monthly, annual and its probability) temperature, sunshine hours, humidity and wind, as well as reference evapotranspiration. Data should be summarised in tables, with detailed analysis consigned to an annex. This section should summarise the agronomic justification for irrigated, as opposed to rainfed, cropping. Any serious climatic hazards (eg frosts, hail, typhoons) should be noted. Water resources. Surface and underground water resources should be described, with reference to hydrological data, geophysical studies and simulation models. Reliable long term hydrological records normally will be required if the project involves surface water diversion or storage, and these should annexed. Where hydrological records are inadequate, it may be possible to carry out a correlation of rainfall with run-off to extend or in-fill the record, by employing proprietary hydrological models. In justifying minor works a synthesis of rainfall, catchment area and assumed run-off coefficients may be acceptable. Evidence on the nature, recharge and sustainable yield of aquifers will be necessary if groundwater development is envisaged. Water quality should be examined and any aspects that could limit its use for irrigation should be highlighted. Water resources should be dealt with on a region or basin-wide basis, to demonstrate the sectoral context of the existing scheme. The present utilisation and future demand for surface and underground water, and the prospects for other developments within the same catchment that could affect water availability for the project, should also be discussed.
B. The Economy and People
The Local Economy. What can be achieved by a project is strongly influenced by the immediate local environment in which it is set. A brief overview of the economy of the project area should be presented, focusing on the importance of agriculture relative to other activities. The emphasis should be on those aspects that would influence the planning of the project: for example urban population and income growth expectations,
1: See FAO Remote Sensing Centre, Remote Sensing and its Application to Investment Project Identification and Preparation: A Study With Special Reference to the FAO Investment Centre, FAO Rome (1993). Modern computer graphics packages, such as CorelDraw, used in conjunction with flatbed or even hand scanners can be most useful. 2: Long term data for many climate stations throughout the world are available in FAO's computerised CLIMWAT database (FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 49, 1993), but these can be updated with the most recent data if necessary.
The People. The relative power of different groups and the extent of influence on individual behaviour and resource management exercised by traditional leaders should be examined. and the responsibilities of husband and wife as family providers.should be described. The household economy . The description of the socio-economic situation should give special attention to those aspects that could affect the rate at which the target population for the project will accept changes. petty trading and remittances. their types of settlement. time available for crop and livestock production and other activities . labour and capital. particularly gender relations as they influence disaggregation of labour. Intra-household dynamics should be discussed in detail. 1: For methods of Rapid Rural Appraisal see FAO Investment Centre Technical Paper No 9. For IFAD-funded projects aimed deliberately at reducing poverty. the effects of growth in the industrial sector on the demand for labour and the extent to which this affects labour availability and wage rates in rural areas. targeting usually receives special importance and a separate chapter on the target group justifying their selection will be necessary. The report should provide information on the number of people in the project area. . An explanation should be given of the way in which resources are at present managed in the project area. Special emphasis should be given to analysing income and wealth distribution and to explaining the causes of differentiation1. or the emergence of competing demands for water for urban and industrial uses that could reduce availability for irrigation. for example families in areas to be flooded by the construction of a dam. the extended family. The people of the project area should be described and their expected reaction to the project should be assessed. FAO Rome (1992). distinguishing between the roles of the household (and members within it). different ethnic groups and the community as a whole.alternative sources of income from off-farm employment. access and control over land. Sociological Analysis in Agricultural Investment Project Design. on-farm production. Any conflicting or competing demands for labour should also be identified. Special mention should be made of any cultural or political factors which could impede the acceptability of the project proposals. particularly those who could be displaced. control of crops and income from their sale. ethnic origin and their occupations.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 118 their impact on demand for basic foods or horticultural crops. Particular attention should be given to identifying any people whose way of life could be disturbed by the proposed project.
Existing Agriculture. C. or between irrigators and urban users. current farming practices. methods. as an indication of potential yields and production under the project. land tenure and the availability of labour during the various seasons of the year. Land Use and Land Tenure Land Use and Farming Systems. Areas affected should if possible be quantified. It should point to any particular areas of environmental concern. Much of the above information could come from a SEPSS. farming systems and practices. . or pricing and subsidy policies. such as waterlogging and salinity problems in irrigated areas. and conclusions drawn on their implications for project planning. The existence of irrigated experimental stations and demonstration centres in the area should be mentioned. any experience of group activities within the area (eg for marketing and input supply. Competition for natural resources. This should focus on the sustainability of land use in the project area.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 119 Factors that might affect the community’s response to the project or the strategy to be adopted should also be reviewed. farm size. The socio-economic studies that may have been conducted in the project area. as well as the extent. should be summarised. such as population growth. Sustainability of Land Use. the construction of new roads. and their programmes and results summarised. Any spontaneous development of irrigation or other local initiatives that indicate the potential for farmers’ commitment to a possible new irrigation development should be assessed. The full findings of the studies may be presented in an annex. irrigation system O&M). Of particular importance is the identification of the underlying causes of any degradation. performance and state of maintenance of any existing irrigation schemes. the economic and social cost assessed (if this is feasible) and trends identified. for instance between irrigators and pastoralists. groundwater depletion. crop varieties. that might have a bearing on the potential for future cooperation in scheme organisation and management and O&M. yields and use of inputs. their findings on people’s aspirations. This should describe present land use. pollution. should be noted and the effectiveness of any existing regulatory measures discussed. In particular. The performance of farmers in development schemes similar to those proposed should be described. especially the extent of farmer interest in the project. if this has been carried out as part of the planning process. should be rigorously analysed. climatic deterioration. excessive ground or surface water abstraction. and so on. These might include nutritional standards and food security. land tenure arrangements. erosion and sedimentation.
and the lessons learned. type of tenure. D.) in the project area should also be described and evaluated. Support Services and Farmers’ Organisations. Rural Institutions. The basis for. railways.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 120 Land Tenure. Infrastructure. Dynamic factors in the situation (trends in tenure arrangements. etc. savings and credit clubs. Availability of electricity (especially for powering pumps) should be noted. that could form the basis of future WUAs. redistribution or consolidation be necessary and practicable?). to the extent that these are relevant to the project. Attention should be given to the arrangements and their effectiveness. Any particular impact of government agricultural policies (price supports. customary or otherwise. proportion of owner and tenant-operated farms. should be highlighted. as perceived by farmers. Administration. particularly from the viewpoint of their relevance to the supply of farm inputs and the marketing of output. The extent and state of communications infrastructure (roads. The situation should be evaluated in terms of development opportunities and obstacles (eg would land titling. research and credit services. increasing fragmentation. The respective roles of the public and private sectors in input supply and marketing should be examined. for supplying inputs and marketing farm produce. Successes and failures. Marketing and Processing. including WUAs. The size and distribution of properties and farms. Note should be made of the adequacy of distribution and storage facilities. consolidation. This should briefly describe and evaluate the local activities of extension. Support Services and Infrastructure Input Supply. and their impact on the accessibility of the project area should be examined. subsidies on inputs. as well as of the presence. the system of local government administration. etc. .) should be described. capacity and current utilisation of agro-industries. taxes on products. The rules or customs for land tenure should be described. should be summarised. etc. and special institutions (such as NGOs) operating in the project area. and reliability of the figures should be given with reference to cadastral surveys and maps. Any other initiatives towards communities’ management of their own affairs and resources should also be mentioned. airports). marketing and supply cooperatives and/or local systems of village administration. degrees of fragmentation. Special attention should be given to evaluating farmers’ organisations.
distinguish between those people of the project area who are involved in irrigation on the areas to be rehabilitated and those who are not. to cater for an investment in the rehabilitation and upgrading of an existing scheme. The Economy and People This should be similar to the corresponding section in Chapter 3 above. B. Location and Natural Resources This section should be similar in content to that in Chapter 3 above.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 121 THE (NAME) IRRIGATION SCHEME: PRESENT STATUS (3-6 PAGES) (ALTERNATIVE CHAPTER 3 FOR REHABILITATION PROJECT) The following describes the typical contents of an alternative to Chapter 3 above. • intended cropping patterns and means of disposal of output (ie local markets. and thereby point the reader towards possible solutions to be taken up in the planning of the investment.) • intended and actual land tenure arrangements A brief technical description of the existing water supply. The actual sequence of subchapters will depend on the circumstances involved. rather than simply stating that these problems exist. supported by maps and figures. these should be described under a separate heading later in this chapter. if appropriate. constructed. A. It should for example explain the reasons for water shortages or poor O&M. Description of Existing Facilities This should summarise the development history of the existing system (when and by whom planned. . and compare its original objectives with reality in terms of: • intended and actual command area. to demonstrate the sectoral context of the existing scheme. • intended and actual settlement patterns and numbers of beneficiaries. Water resources should be dealt with on a region or basin-wide basis. operated and maintained). except that the description of the people should. etc. such as waterlogging and salinisation. except that if the existing scheme has resulted in any significant adverse environmental impacts. The chapter should be diagnostic in its approach. C. export. together with a description of the on-farm irrigation technology. conveyance and distribution facilities should be given.
• any conflicts or competing demands for labour. labour and capital. disaggregation of labour. should be highlighted. D. health and nutrition. FAO Rome (1992). F. now or for the proposed rehabilitation. E. Infrastructure and Farmers’ Organisations This should contain much of the information listed in the corresponding section in Chapter 3 above. on farmers’ aspirations and felt needs. control of crops and income from their sale). This may have included an examination of the impact of the project on the local economy. intra-household dynamics (gender relations. but any experience that is relevant to farmers’ participation in the scheme. 2: FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 46: CROPWAT . Present Irrigated Agricultural Production This will be one of the most important parts of a project document for a rehabilitation/upgrading proposal. Group activities for O&M should be dealt with in a later subchapter. if resources have allowed the latter to be performed. compared with the original project concept. It should cover: • on-farm irrigation practices. • problems and constraints from the farmers’ perspective. based on the use of FAO’s computer model CROPWAT2 and its computer 1: FAO's forthcoming computer model SIMIS (Scheme Irrigation Management Information System) will play an increasingly useful role in such work. • the reasons for any decline in areas planted or yields obtained. it should summarise the results of detailed surveys and diagnostic operational studies that should have been carried out on the existing system1. • past and present cropping patterns and yields and current trends. on household incomes. access and control over land.A Computer Program for Irrigation Planning and Management. It should preferably be based on detailed diagnosis from a SEPSS. especially the extent of farmer interest in the project and implications for project planning. It should examine water availability and demand for the originally intended cropping pattern. Present Condition of Irrigation Facilities This section will also be important. Depending on the scale of the project and the extent of operational data available. . and an explanation for any differences. Rural Services.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 122 The analysis will in some cases be based on a diagnosis of the existing situation carried out as part of a SEPSS. since it should review the present agricultural performance of the scheme.
focus on measures that facilitate O&M by farmers and achieve more efficient and equitable water distribution and use. • private sector organisations and NGOs. Relevant institutions are likely to include: • central government institutions. EXISTING INSTITUTIONS AND PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION CAPACITY (3-6 PAGES) This chapter should highlight any institutional gaps or shortcomings that may form a constraint to implementation. • local government institutions. in particular. Causes of decline in the operational condition of the scheme should be listed. It should lead the reader to conclusions on what must be taken into consideration in the project planning. FAO Rome (1993). Environmental Impact of the Existing Scheme Significant adverse impacts as a result of the scheme should be summarised. and practical recommendations given for making O&M self financing.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 123 database CLIMWAT1 (or an alternative locally developed method of estimating crop water requirements if this is appropriate). H. The efficiency of water use and the condition and design of the existing facilities should be described with a view to demonstrating the scope and opportunities for improvements through rehabilitation and possibly modernization. These should. and the present use of the available water. Present Arrangements for O&M and Cost Recovery The present arrangements for O&M and cost recovery should be described and their effectiveness assessed. as derived from an environmental impact assessment of the scheme which would normally have been made earlier in the planning process. • traditional authorities and farmers organisations (possibly including WUAs on existing schemes). . G. 1: FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 49: CLIMWAT for CROPWAT.
its purpose is to complete the explanation of why an irrigation or drainage investment is needed. The analysis may also have resulted in conclusions that affected the choice of project concept or scale. taking account of the requirements of the project. problems over procurement of goods. but should then explain the reasons why the particular project concept which is now being brought forward for financing was chosen. justification and feasibility of the project proposals that are to be made can be appreciated. but modified and deepened to reflect the findings of further thinking or studies. for example delays in decision-making. in terms of staff. operate and maintain the proposed project. and indicate what kind and scale of project would be best suited to the existing circumstances. It is the part of the project document which is most likely to repeat arguments developed first when the project was being conceptualised.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 124 An institutional capacity analysis. However it is not the purpose of this chapter to present the actual project proposals: that function is left to Chapter 6. PROJECT RATIONALE AND PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS (3-6 PAGES) This chapter leads to the point at which the overall needs. late release of funds. O&M and institutional capacity building which follow in Chapter 6. • The performance of the institutions in fulfilling their objectives in a timely and efficient manner. The analysis should in particular have resulted in an assessment of the capacity of the institutions concerned to implement the proposed project. and whether there are areas of weakness. and anticipation at this point should be avoided. It may briefly refer to options that were discarded or adjusted at earlier stages. and so on. whether they are still valid or whether there is a need for redefinition (eg through new legislation) or reorientation. carried out earlier in the planning process and detailed in an attached annex or working paper. As a result it should have led to recommendations to achieve sustainable improvements in existing capacity that will enable the institutions concerned to successfully implement. cost recovery. and planning the proposed investment. This should therefore lead into the project rationale and design considerations covered in the next Chapter. • The resources of the concerned institutions. define its overall objectives. and the proposals for project organisation and management. and whether there are any significant operational problems. imbalances and inconsistencies. . Based on the information already given in the background sections of the report. physical facilities and budget. should have established: • The goals and objectives of the institutions concerned.
Planning Considerations Once the conceptual case for a project has been made under the section on project rationale. construction and O&M. where the aim is build demand for subproject investments and to encourage participation in planning. expressed in terms of demonstrable willingness of the potential users to commit themselves to contributing towards the capital cost and acceptance of responsibility for O&M. focusing on the considerations which have led the concept outlined in the rationale to evolve into the project and its main components in their final proposed form. this should discuss the objectives of government’s strategy for the irrigation subsector. for example targeting small farmers in a project proposed for IFAD financing. and the constraints imposed by existing institutional capacity or fiscal arrangements. should be built into the project. • the justification for a programme approach. the process of project planning usually involves the establishment of broad objectives. Project Rationale Against the background of the previous chapter. a review of the options for achieving these objectives and a progressive narrowing down of these options. drainage) and/or location of the project. new irrigation. This leads to decisions on the strategy which. In particular. B. • the commitment and capacity of government to implement the project. but without whose influence the project might nevertheless not succeed. As indicated in Part II of the Guidelines. • the demand for the project. attention needs to be directed to defining the specific form that it should assume and to explaining this to the reader. This section on design considerations is the place to present the results of that process. design. . as a consequence. and in terms of markets for irrigated crops of sufficient value to justify the investment costs incurred by government and farmers. It may also explain how the proposed project meets the financing criteria of the financing institution. the criteria which have led to the selection of the type (eg subsectoral investment.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 125 A. it should address questions such as : • selection of the target population for the project and any special targeting measures required to ensure that the project really does benefit these people (the complex issue of how to prevent project resources bringing undue benefits to persons outside the target group. rehabilitation. needs special treatment).
Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 126 • the appropriate scale for the project: this should give special importance to an analysis of the scale and success of any precedents. In the case of repeater projects. whether WUAs should be built on existing structures. but there are many advantages in planning “soft” projects . reference should be made to the performance of previous phases.for demanddriven development . as is often the case. environmental concerns and risk exposure. to assessments of institutional capabilities and to matching the project scale with these. including traditional irrigation systems. for instance. Where flexibility is being sought. economic and financial viability. the technical and economic criteria to be used in approving releases for subprojects. • the selection of organisational arrangements for the project: for example whether to reinforce the existing entity to run the project (on financially autonomous lines). particularly the means of securing their effective participation in project management and costs through WUAs and/or apex organisations. the construction of major civil works. and the managerial and supervision arrangements. policies and institutions. If flexibility is to be attained. a very important element of the section on planning considerations should be a discussion of the possible mechanisms to be used to provide it and of the safeguards to prevent its abuse. and to say how this could be done in ways which are consistent with the funding practices of the financing agency. to create a new organisation or to privatise it. • the scope for achieving efficiency gains at low incremental cost by rehabilitating and upgrading existing irrigation systems. to accommodate capacity-building measures. the strategy for eliciting and sustaining the commitment of the intended beneficiaries to the project. • the choice of technical strategy and technology to match O&M capacity (eg upstream versus downstream control. should be foreshadowed under planning considerations. by the creation of a Development Fund.) and/or traditional water rights and methods of distribution (eg division structures that maintain traditional rights and farmers’ operational preferences). and it should be explained how the lessons learnt from their evaluation would be taken up in the planning of the later project. • the appropriate time frame for the project and phasing within this. though dealt with in detail in subsequent sections of the report. automation etc. regulatory mechanisms. traditional or other. and • the need for any ancillary adjustments in laws.so that these can readily respond to new information or opportunities that arise in the course of implementation. There is often little scope for flexibility in “hard” projects centering on. This is also the place to mention to the need to build flexibility into the project. . it should also examine the implications on project size of market possibilities.
with considerations for planning. • capacity building of irrigation subsector institutions • research and extension • project management and implementation Expenditure Categories (known as summary accounts in COSTAB terminology) are used to classify the items against which disbursements will be made under the project. • to form water users’ associations (WUAs) and to train farmers in operation and maintenance of irrigation systems and irrigated crop production. Box 2-1 . costs and how they will be financed. and its supporting annexes. and expenditure categories on the other (see Box 2-1).Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 127 THE PROJECT (OR PROGRAMME) (5-10 PAGES) The previous chapters will have set the framework of constraints and opportunities for investment. and so derived a project rationale and objectives. • farm development. their phasing.Project Objectives. defines the project works and activities.550 ha distributed among 14 existing schemes. . Thus. Components. maps and figures. such as: • • • • • Civil Works (with users’ contributions separately shown) Equipment Technical Assistance Training Incremental Operating Costs (with users contributions separately shown) Each of the above may in turn be broken down into a series of items and ultimately into a set of detailed specifications for goods and services. Components and Expenditure Categories A project normally has specific objectives that can be expressed in relatively simple terms. such as: • to restore to full productive capacity around 1. This chapter. and to identify and promote new irrigated crops. • to build the capacity of government and private institutions involved in irrigation development.550 ha of existing irrigation schemes previously operated as state farms. greenhouses and seasonal inputs. for example could include • rehabilitation of 1. for each objective or component of a project there are likely to be several categories of expenditure. • to develop irrigated crop production technologies adapted to smallholders. In describing the project it is convenient to distinguish between project objectives and their related components on the one hand. smallscale farm machinery. including equipment for surface and sprinkler irrigation.
on-farm canals. etc. The section usually contains a separate résumé for each of the project components. houses for project staff.). etc. Although the cost estimates are only presented in detail in Section F of this chapter. presents the reader with a brief overview of the proposed project or programme. canals. • On-farm works (land clearing. it often helps to note in brackets at the start of the component description its total cost and the percentage of project base cost which this represents. leaving the description of the broader (not component-specific) institutional arrangements for section C of this chapter. financing agencies prefer each component résumé to end with brief reference to the field level implementation arrangements. specifications. but lengthy descriptions. vehicles for extension staff. (workshop equipment. workshops. B. pumping stations.). which generally should be no longer than one page. General Description This section. stores. Detailed Features The aim of this section is to describe the project in more detail so that the reader acquires a fuller understanding of each of its components and the inter-relationships between them. also. The usual content is: • a brief description of the project or programme’s overall and immediate objectives. feeder roads. farm drains. The nature and scope of project actions should be described in sufficient detail for the general reader to appreciate their relevance and technical soundness. Increasingly. • costs and phasing. • Provision of equipment for operation and maintenance. quantifying the main physical items that are proposed for financing. market facilities.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 128 A. levelling. wells and pumps). • Ancillary works and buildings (offices. Component résumés might cover the following: • Main civil works (dams. agricultural machinery for hire. • organisational arrangements for implementation and subsequent O&M. power distribution lines). • a brief summary of each main component. experimental farms. packing and processing plants. warehouses. drains. grouped under expenditure categories if appropriate. • its location and size (if a project-specific investment). engineering design details and cost estimates should remain in annexes or working papers. major structures. It can often be quoted more or less intact in the Summary and Conclusions at the beginning of the Report. tubewells. .
such as research. While only a summary description is required of each component in the main text of the report. • Measures to improve the agrarian setting (changes in land tenure or ownership. ie whether project specific. which should always be consulted. All multilateral financing agencies have strict procedures to be followed in engineering studies and designs for major dams and for major resettlement of people displaced by reservoirs or other major works (see Parts I and II of the Guidelines). and at least preliminary designs and specifications should be completed to a sufficient degree of detail to demonstrate that they should not need appreciable alterations at a later design stage.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 129 • Farm equipment (the provision of farm facilities. . and to permit the significant engineering work quantities to be estimated to an accuracy of some 15% as a basis for cost estimates of the same order of accuracy. • The provision of training and expatriate technical assistance (eg consulting firms). and treatment will depend on the nature of the investments. • The credit programme required to enable the private components of the project to be financed. for subsequent management transfer. Project specific investments may be considered in three broad groups: • Important major works. Level of Detail Required. A summary of the extent of detail and degree of accuracy appropriate at each step in the design is given as Appendix 1 (at the end of Part II). specialised processing plants or main roads. working papers or separate studies. For a sectoral project the components may include some of the above as well as: • Technical assistance for diagnostic studies of existing irrigation schemes. extension and training. main canals. to which reference should be made. • Institutional development. agricultural implements and machinery. However. • Environmental studies and actions • Institutional development assistance for government institutions and WUAs. • Rehabilitation and modernization of existing irrigation schemes. resettlement and rehabilitation. • Land acquisition. or programmatic within a subsectoral project. livestock and the establishment of permanent crops). such as dams. this must normally be derived from more detailed specifications and estimates given in annexes. land settlement and land consolidation). for the main implementing institutions as well as for supporting services. the level of design required for appraisal of civil works and machinery is a matter of engineering judgement. Detailed site investigations are normally required.
and particularly in respect of those projects with borderline economic rates of return . to facilitate tendering. such as tertiary and quaternary irrigation channels and drains. in all cases. This is often the case. For these it is necessary to complete surveys and prepare detailed designs and quantity estimates for representative sample areas.it normally would be necessary to commission detailed engineering studies. etc. such as small structures. These govern subsequent selection. or where the extent of possible error is greater than that considered tolerable . and. for the area to be covered in the first year of the project.. In the absence of specific instructions from the financing agency. engineering designs should not proceed beyond the point of completing the work and studies necessary to provide an adequate basis for appraisal. Typical designs should be prepared for the main farm or land types. detailed sample topographical surveys are needed to calculate quantities. levelling and farm drains. rather than the level of engineering work that has been completed. to shorten the project cycle and provide accurate project costs”. In this case it is the clear definition of the rules and procedures for the selection process that is important at appraisal. construction and O&M is envisaged it is usually undesirable to complete investigations and cost estimates for each subproject prior to appraisal. • For minor works. Total quantities and costs for the whole component can then be derived by extrapolation. On-farm works are usually adequately designed on a “model” farm basis. farm access roads. engineering work (field investigation and detailed design) should be well advanced so that bidding documents are available about the time of Board approval. although in areas of irregular topography it may be necessary to design on the basis on large-scale sample surveys. Most financing institutions accept that preliminary design standards form a satisfactory basis for appraisal. . investigation and engineering design of subprojects that are to be carried out during the project. subsectoral investment projects often involve numerous subprojects that might be widely distributed throughout a given region or country. In this case it is usually acceptable to specify design criteria and per hectare cost ceilings. except that the World Bank requires that “by the time of appraisal/negotiation. estimates can be derived from standard type designs. If participatory planning. for example.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 130 • Relatively homogenous repetitive works. A properly designed land classification can do much to help estimate costs of land clearance. In contrast. for the main canals or storage structures of an irrigation project. Nevertheless. where the degree of accuracy of the preliminary estimates is difficult to determine because of lack of adequate engineering or survey data. Where a significant amount of land levelling is required.
Project Organisation. For short term credit. for purchase of machinery and equipment of for annual operations. staffing. that they have the powers. according to whether the loan is for fixed improvements. Should any new institution have to be created for the management of the project. details of its proposed legal status. and that there are satisfactory arrangements for coordination between (or within) entities responsible for each of the various project activities. structure. functions and powers. C. . usually in an annex. and the type of loan and purpose. A distinction should be made between long. and the proposed loan would directly finance the capital and annually recurring costs of construction equipment. In any case provision for credit should take account of the repayment capacity of the farmers in relation to the terms and conditions suggested for the loans. as well as for subsequent operations. extent to which subject to political directives. and previous response to credit facilities. it is necessary to give. how appointed. Longer term credit needs should be assessed from investment models. requirements per farm should be estimated on the basis of data presented in crop budgets and farm models. Where deficiencies in any of the foregoing respects have been noted in earlier background material. the size of loan. Management and Coordination The entity or entities which will be responsible for the various aspects of project execution should be identified. operating procedures. that they are capable of carrying them out effectively. medium and short term credit. the changes and improvements which the project would introduce to overcome them should be stated clearly and prominently. How they would carry out their responsibilities should be explained. The aim should be to show that they are the most appropriate bodies to assume the particular assignments. In some cases it may be necessary to consider reductions in project scope to conform with institutional capacities. finance and motivation to undertake their respective functions. If the entity is not a government department. particulars should be given of its legal charter (basic law) and direction (Board of Directors.) and any special provisions concerning its funding. staffing and budget. etc. the equipment should be justified and itemised. If farmers require credit for on-farm development. internal organisation.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 131 Where works are to be constructed by a government agency rather than by contractors. the requirements should be estimated. These should be in the form of a lending programme with estimates yearby-year of the numbers of loans to be made to farmers. equipment. pumps and so on.
on which to exercise these responsibilities. or hire and fire top-level staff.usually information . together with any related measures to improve the overall environment for an expanded private sector role. it may be useful to supplement the overall description of organisational arrangements with a more detailed treatment of the specific aspects which are critical for project success. This would be the case. As it is likely that the project will involve devolution of at least some responsibility for O&M to the users. staffing and annual operating budgets required for each should be defined. Proposals should be made for the formation or strengthening of all institutions involved or likely to be involved in O&M. they then implement their decisions and report back on results. to O&M plus a . for instance. D. arrangements for coordination in such areas as joint representation boards. distribute assignments between different participating entities. a government department and a credit institution). budgets. if a new system for participative planning was to be developed and introduced under the project. from full cost recovery of all capital and O&M costs (taking account of any contribution from the farmers). approve plans. The responsibilities. Often there are executive and non-executive entities at various levels . accounts or reports. with well defined targets over the disbursement period. including autonomous or semi-autonomous irrigation agencies. Estimates should be presented for water charges for a range of cost recovery scenarios. commissions and committees. particularly if these are new or changed and have not been fully addressed in the description of project components. on the other hand. or if modified organisational measures were to be incorporated in the project with the aim of improving on-farm water management in irrigation schemes.for instance national.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 132 If there is more than one entity involved in project management (such as a project authority. regional and in the field. Cost Recovery and O&M This important section should identify overall institutional responsibility for O&M in the short. advisory or coordinating bodies. The steps to be taken to privatise or divest activities previously performed by government would also be appropriately described here. Bodies in the former categories may decide or make recommendations on overall policy. medium and longer term. and those with executive powers. Executive bodies. WUAs or combinations in joint management. A distinction should be made between policy. and in field activities should be described. the extent to which this is expected and over what period of time should be clearly explained. supply the former entities with the basis . authorise major expenditures or contracts. For projects for which significant changes in organisation are required.
such as numbers of staff to be trained at certificate level in water management. E. for a project or programme extending over more than one region . As an aid to subsequent supervision and evaluation missions. The minimum qualifications for candidates should be defined as precisely as possible. Clear targets and performance indicators should be set.and the duration of training. If the technical assistance is not for the completion of a finite task. numbers expected to be involved in practising their new skills and their location. the practical experience to be acquired afterwards. training. equipment. in terms of staff recruitment. .Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 133 percentage of capital costs. Practical procedures for collection of water charges should be described.and place of use. for further example. and their expected work locations on completion of this training. vis-à-vis the cost of supply. or. scarcity value and opportunity cost of water which should have been presented in the subsector review and strategy paper. yet covers the cost of supply to the extent required by policy and induces efficient water use. since the objective is to build capacity that will continue to be available for subsequent developments once the present project is completed. and supply of office. measurable performance indicators and reporting arrangements specified. In a sectoral programme institution building often forms a component in its own right. it should be explained how it would be phased out and how the functions would be subsequently assumed by regular staff. Institutional Capacity Building This section should present proposals for building capacity to implement the project. Mechanisms by which government can replace all equipment once its useful life has expired and the project has been completed should be spelled out. it is essential that the intended use . technical assistance. the numbers of staff to study for an MSc degree. These should be crossreferenced to the considerations of water pricing. as well as for good project management. Training or re-training arrangements should be described in detail. their expected place of training . such as the completion of engineering designs. to O&M only. objectives. perhaps involving a pilot scheme initially to test the proposed system.of equipment be clearly identified. If technical assistance is proposed.which may be at home or overseas . Recommendations should then be made for setting an appropriate water charge that is affordable. Similarly the intended location of all project staff and the expected duration of their assignments should be clearly indicated. The initiation of such mechanisms should if possible be incorporated in to the project. and possibly construction. giving numbers of trainees. draft terms of reference (see Annex 3) should be given and functions.
Project Costs The importance of sound cost estimates cannot be over-emphasised: they provide the basis of determining the project’s economic and financial viability and also its funding. but usually training aimed at more general institutional strengthening also qualifies for project financing. for instance under the World Bank’s Project Preparation Facility. Estimates should include all capital costs and incremental operating costs incurred by government during the disbursement period and for the subsequent operation of the project. .ie. Costs of on-farm development may be drawn from an aggregation of representative farm models but it should be clearly indicated whether or not these include cash or non-cash contributions (eg in the form of family labour or locally available materials) by farmers. however. management and monitoring of the project. related to specific project components such as “project management”. • Technical cooperation. either foreign or national. Note that such technical assistance is often treated as a category of investment expenditure. In principle the engineering cost estimates should include all incremental goods and services required to complete the planned works. • Feasibility study and project planning costs. • Interest during construction: some financing agencies are prepared to consider as a project cost interest payable during the disbursement period of the loan. Amounts. aimed at increasing the capacity of concerned institutions to implement the project. aimed at improving staff capabilities: most frequently training is related to meeting the staffing requirements for implementing the project. This may not be the case however if capacity building becomes one of the major objectives. both overseas and local. • Engineering costs and fees that would be incurred during the disbursement period. can only be calculated once a financing plan has been finalised. • Training. Projects have long ceased to be regarded as vehicles for financing capital investments only. recurrent costs over and above the “normal” running costs of the concerned agencies . if these have been financed by reimbursable loans from the financing agency. Cost estimates for the main civil engineering works should be based on bills of quantities. rather than as a project component in its own right.incurred during the disbursement period specifically for the implementation. Most financing agencies have broadened the definition of eligible cost items to include such items as : • Incremental operating costs . Costs of major equipment items are normally based on recent quotations from potential suppliers.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 134 F. derived from preliminary designs and justified unit rates.
are appended to this Annex. from the PCCOMPASS suite of programmes. additional cost tables are required to show a cost breakdown which separates out direct support to farmers (eg. expressed in local and foreign currency. classified by component and expenditure category.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 135 • Working capital. credit. Up to five summary project cost estimate tables can usefully be included in the main report. where substantial numbers of people are displaced. Should they be included. • Land acquisition. • A project cost summary by component. • Land: the value of the farm land required for the project is normally excluded from project costs. but the amounts already invested should be noted if these are known. Examples of the above. except in cases where a significant area has to be acquired by government for project implementation purposes (eg for construction of main canals in an irrigation system or for siting of a wholesale market). • A summary breakdown of project costs. inputs) from funding for government institutions . For projects being prepared for financing by IFAD. showing the proportion of total costs attributable to each category. especially if the government has agreed to waive these. expressed in local and foreign currency equivalents. • Taxes and duties: duties and other taxes on imported goods are usually excluded from project cost estimates. to cover the projected incremental operating costs required to bring a project-funded enterprise to the point at which it reaches steady-state operation. • A project cost summary by expenditure category classified by year of disbursement. resettlement and rehabilitation costs. rates and amounts should be indicated so that appropriate adjustments can be made in the economic evaluation. for example by a new dam. • A project cost summary by expenditure category. The text of the main report conventionally refers to the total costs implied by the project proposal (ie to all incremental expenditures which should be incurred during the course of the proposed disbursement period). prepared using PC-COSTAB. Project Costs. • A project cost summary by component and year of disbursement. Items conventionally excluded from project costs are: • Sunk costs: costs which have been incurred prior to the commencement of a project (eg in constructing a dam prior to a project which wold complete the irrigation water distribution network) are conventionally excluded from project cost estimates.
the imported elements of locally-assembled pumps). • provide an estimate of the total costs of the foreign exchange component of project costs: this includes both the outlay on fully imported items and the estimated import content of goods and services paid for in local currency (eg.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 136 (vehicles. An indication should be given as to the accuracy of the cost estimates and how these have been derived. • distinguish between capital costs and those recurrent costs (eg for training) which have been treated. commonly lies between 10 and 15 percent by the time the project dossier is completed. the amounts allocated should be identifiable (eg. if the costs of any payable taxes and duties are included. as investment costs. Contingencies should be added to the base-line costs at rates specific to each category of expenditure to determine total project costs. operating costs). In the latter case. The text of this section of the document is usually “written around” the tables. for civil works. buildings. the value should be clearly identifiable. Assumptions should be explained. Estimates should all relate to the same date. a cost breakdown which allows IFAD to distinguish the percentage of the base cost which goes to targetable versus untargetable components. Under exceptional circumstances it may be greater if local conditions preclude accurate estimates. • highlight the importance of any major elements. It should : • indicate the sources (and dates) of unit costs from which the estimates are derived. • explain assumptions on physical and price contingency rates. They should not. and an analysis of the cost per farmer of each component (or the cost per household of each credit module to be taken up by farmers). Special problems arise when preparing cost estimates for projects in countries which suffer from rapid inflation and regularly devalue their currency. Here it is advisable to “freeze” all unit values in local currency at an indicated date and exchange rate. and from then on quote all values in US dollar equivalents. The rate of physical contingencies to apply varies according to the degree of confidence placed in the estimates but. Baseline costs are expressed in market prices in constant terms. as follows: • Physical contingencies are included in the project costs to allow for uncertainties and to compensate for possible inaccuracies in the estimates of work quantities. as an “unallocated” component). for the purposes of estimating project costs. be treated as a miscellaneous category of costs to cover items either overlooked by the planners. which should be specified and is usually around the time of the compilation of final project dossier or appraisal. . giving an indication of their accuracy. salaries. Nor should they be added to give a project greater flexibility. however.
stores and housing. The table should show by categories the continued cost of running. but estimates of the annual cost based on a percentage of the capital costs are sometimes appropriate. It may be desirable to comment on the government’s capacity to continue to meet the implied financial commitments. running costs of pumping plant. offices. The economics staff of financing agencies are usually in a position to provide project analysts with forecasts of inflation in borrowing countries. Annual cost estimates. both for the economic analysis of the project and also for setting water charges. probable countervailing movements of the exchange rate should be taken into account in establishing the dollar equivalent of domestic inflation. and on any steps that would be taken to improve fiscal sustainability. For projects that lead to substantial increases in recurrent costs to be borne by government. • where applicable. and the cost of operating services at the levels necessary to achieve project objectives. Typical values for developing countries are given below. however. • costs of special repairs. a table projecting operating and replacement costs after the close of the disbursement period should be prepared.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 137 • Price contingencies may also be estimated (on phased base-line costs plus physical contingencies) to demonstrate the probable escalating effect of inflation on project costs and hence the magnitude of financing required. maintaining and replacing the assets created by the project. Assumptions on price contingency rates (which may be different for foreign exchange and local costs) should be noted. such as increased cost recovery from beneficiaries or privatisation of services. Operating Costs. together with those on the assumed period between the date of the base-line cost estimates and project effectiveness. as well as standard assumptions on international rates. . that in countries which operate floating exchange policies. should include inter alia the following: • salaries and allowances of O&M staff. • running costs of O&M vehicles and plant. It should be noted. Maintenance costs should be calculated in detail wherever possible. rates of inflation tend to be matched with corresponding devaluations of the currency. In such cases. • maintenance of buildings. so as to avoid possible over-financing in dollar terms.
the proportion of incremental capital and recurrent costs which they are assumed to meet from either their own resources.to project financing may need discussion. but not the World Bank or IFAD. but using constant prices.0 2. the government.0 1. Other annual recurring costs may include the incremental annual costs of other public services. would indicate for each main expenditure category the amount proposed for financing by external financing agencies.5 3. Such a plan. underground) Buildings Electric powered pumps Diesel powered pumps Night storage reservoir Piped distribution systems Portable pipes and sprinklers Field canals and structures Land grading Fences Drains (sub-surface) Drains (open) Annual Maintenance Cost as Percentage of Initial Capital Cost 1.0 2. a proportion of local costs may also be financed. credit institutions and beneficiaries. ie similar to those used in the initial capital cost estimates. may need to be justified. implementing agencies (from their own resources). Since the final plan will be a matter for negotiation between the financing agencies and the country concerned. Financing Some financing agencies.in cash or kind . It is perhaps pertinent to point out that some financing agencies restrict financing to the direct and indirect foreign exchange component of the project.0 1. More frequently. and in any case it is the prerogative of the financing agency to determine what it will or will not finance.0 0.0 1. .0 2. G. care must be taken not to imply a commitment of the agencies to the proposal. especially for projects in countries which have a record of failure to meet counterpart funding obligations in earlier projects.5 2.0 Replacement costs are forecast for the year in which they are expected to occur. Particularly for disadvantaged groups. unofficial borrowing or from project-funded credit.0 5. eg extension services.0 1.5 1.0 6. Assurances of government capacity to meet its proposed share of project costs should be sought. Assumptions on the beneficiaries’ contribution . in the form of a table.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 138 Type of Works Diversion structure/weir Main canal (unlined) Main canal (lined) Pipelines (AC and PVC. however.5 2. expect a preliminary financing plan to be proposed by the country submitting the project before appraisal.
A. In turn. the behaviour of costs and prices. arrive at estimates of the overall impact of the project on farm development and output. sub-loan periods. and their impact on input requirements and yields. It should explain the assumptions made on the rates at which yields and cropping intensities will rise and. the landless or other disadvantaged groups). This chapter should review the market prospects for the products on which the viability of the project is most dependent and justify the price assumptions used in financial and economic analyses of the project. with particular attention being given to the technological changes which would be introduced by the project. especially for farm outputs. the terms and conditions under which loans would be made to farmers and other borrowers should be given. may respond to changes in the supply and demand situation. drawing on crop budgets and farm models. AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION AND RESULTS (4-6 PAGES) The purpose of this chapter is to describe agricultural development and production proposed under the project. Reference should be made to eligibility criteria (including any special measures for improving access of women. of the impact on the output and income of typical participants. For projects with a substantial credit element. B. The proposals should be supported by reference to research data and the actual performance of farmers. Market Prospects and Prices The financial attractiveness to farmers of the proposed developments normally depends on the relationship between the input costs and the prices for the commodities which they intend to produce. and to ceilings and conditions for financing. Each of the proposed irrigation categories or types should be briefly described. and how reimbursements would be made. Special note should be made if any of these differ significantly from standard loan terms in the country. followed by an assessment.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 139 For all projects an explanation should be given either here or in Chapter 11 as to how funds would flow and be monitored. provided that this is not masked by the presence of price controls or subsidies. Agricultural Production The chapter usually starts with a review of the cropping patterns it is assumed will be introduced. . derived from these and the models. interest rates in both nominal and real terms. and the expected results. grace periods.
is an essential element in project planning. Prices. normal input and output prices in the financial evaluation of crop budgets. which must be clearly stated. For most major traded commodities. assess the extent to which the assumed prices are likely to be sustainable and. or alternatively that the project area (or country) is competitive in serving the market vis-à-vis other potential suppliers. In many cases. if there are doubts on this. test the sensitivity of the models to price changes. roads) also needs to be examined.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 140 Markets and Marketing. no market problems exist. Financial price assumptions for the main inputs and outputs should be summarised in a text table. and of assessments of income elasticity of demand. reviews have been made by FAO. . The report should demonstrate that market openings exist or can be opened up (at the financial prices assumed) for the incremental output expected to result from the project. some specific market research may have to be carried out as part of the planning process. a careful review of market prospects and of possible means of improving these (eg lengthening of production season). It is usual to make projections of prices in constant money terms. packaging materials) and infrastructure (eg. It is conventional practice to use prevailing. eliminating the effects of inflation which are implicitly assumed to affect input and output prices equally. Farm-gate prices for farm-level analysis are usually derived from interviews with farmers or from wholesale and retail market price reports. The adequacy of back-up services (eg availability of transport. However. and reference should be made to these and their conclusions. In such situations there is no need to dwell in the report on market issues. adjusted for transport costs and traders’ margins. ITC and other agencies of the world market prospects. farm models or agribusiness enterprises. where the viability of a project depends on access to export markets or on sales of perishable commodities or of items of particularly high unit value. there would be a shortfall in production vis-à-vis demand at the assumed prices in the target market. Consequently it is important that all prices and costs refer to the same point in time. however. Growth in domestic demand can be estimated on the basis of projections of population and income. The analyst. Occasionally. A main purpose of this review is to demonstrate that. should explain the nature of any key factors affecting price formation. for highly specialised products. in the absence of the project. as is usually the situation for non-perishable staple foods in grain deficit countries.
A further summary table or tables should be given for the key results from the analysis of the annexed financial models. labour. communities. Farm models also provide the basis for estimating the likely long and short term credit needs of project participants. FAO Investment Centre Technical Paper No 8 Financial Analysis in Agricultural Project Preparation. FAO Rome (1991). there is a major discrepancy between nominal and real interest rates. Financial models should assume constant financial unit costs and prices over the period of analysis. unless there is any special reason to depart from such assumptions . and for forecasting their debt service obligations. cubic metre of water etc.. If. In practice however. or in some cases. using estimated prices justified in Chapter 9 or an attached table or annex. Particular care needs to be taken by the analyst in estimating working capital requirements and the means by which these can be financed1 . cash expenditure. an attempt being made to ensure that each model represents a typical situation in terms of farm size. . as is the case in inflationary situations. what would be the expected impact of the project on the income and welfare of typical individual producers. 1: Chapter X. Earlier sections should have indicated the nature of the constraints and needs faced by each type of producer. without and with the project. Impact on Individual Producers This section should show. or in some cases tenure status. Models should be developed for each major beneficiary type. or through household models if non-farm income is significant. Only after it is clear that all activities amongst the building blocks of models are financially viable is it justified to proceed to an analysis of a financial model of the complete farm or enterprise over time. largely through reference to farm models. if the expected output from the project would be big enough to depress product prices. The results summarised at this point should focus on the same strategy and opportunities but express the expected results in financial terms. The cost and return implications derived from the financial analysis of the crop or enterprise budgets can usefully be summarised in a short text table which may also compare financial return per unit of land.for instance.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 141 C. while at the same time also holding prices constant. and the technical strategy by which it is intended to open these opportunities to them. the opportunities for increased production. The basic models that are analysed in annexes and summarised in the main text should aim to represent average situations. it is appropriate to adopt the real rate in calculating debt service obligations.
For the specialist vegetable grower who is restricted to a small irrigated area. fluctuations in water supply should be simulated for the period of intended economic analysis. 2: FAO Investment Centre Technical Paper 6 The Design of Agricultural Investment Projects: Lessons from Experience. the FAO Investment Centre Design Study2 suggests that many cases of under-performance could have been anticipated if these analyses had been made. The mere calculation of an attractive financial rate of return on investment should not be taken to imply that the proposed technical changes would necessarily capture the interest of all farmers. FAO Rome (1989). where available data permit. For a small-scale farmer the most attractive opportunity may be to earn more per day of family labour. . Such financial examinations of risk and uncertainty are now relatively easy to run using computer programs such as the FARMOD module of PC-COMPASS. in Branscheid V. often because of variations in water availability.to be those most relevant to the people whom the project is intended to benefit. FAO Investment Centre. The analysis should always be made in those terms which are thought . Additional tests for risk and sensitivity which can be applied in financial analysis are discussed below. On the other hand for large-scale commercial farming or processing. a balanced cash flow or the financial return on equity capital may be the critical parameters. net production cost per ton. see Paper 81 A Methodology of Irrigation Water Budgeting. or of partial adoption of technology.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 142 results are likely to vary significantly from one year to another. Rome 1989. For such reasons. The variants may also be used to assess the implications for project participants of alternative pricing policies or market scenarios. rather than simply assuming that the 80 percent exceedance probability flows would be available in all years1. Irrigation Water Management Briefs: 100 Collected Papers. yield per hectare (or return per cubic metre of scarce water) may be the most important criterion to examine. so that resources can be freed for more profitable (perhaps off-farm) use. or perhaps to generate more of the family’s needs for subsistence food with less cash outlay.or ideally have been shown through diagnostic studies . concerns over the risks implied by innovation are particularly likely to affect the response to project opportunities. It is for this reason that. The purpose of these variants is to show whether or not the project’s technical strategy is robust enough to sustain project beneficiaries through misfortunes such as a series of consecutive years of unfavourable weather or a drought falling in the first year of their project participation. a series of variants on the basic financial models may need to be run to demonstrate the extent of their sensitivity to risk or changes. Some simple tests can be made on the financial results of enterprise budgets or farm models summarised earlier. Tests for Sensitivity. labour or risk. For small farmers. The overall aim of 1: For details of possible techniques. The results of any financial model must be interpreted with considerable care.
the probable effects on the depth and quality of the aquifer should be noted. Tests should therefore be made only on the parameters previously identified as being crucial to the decision-making of the operators. for instance malaria or schistosomiasis. Particular care should be taken to identify any effects on downstream fisheries. from the producer’s point of view. Clearly the entry pattern must match assumptions elsewhere on the rate at which works would be built and become operational. Short text tables should then summarise estimates of total and incremental physical quantities for inputs and outputs. equipment etc. output and input demand streams should start at zero and can be readily calculated by aggregation of one or more standard models using FARMOD. are expected to change progressively from rainfed to irrigated production. creating new employment. This chapter should therefore describe all adverse environmental impacts. for example. .. Irrigation and drainage projects usually have a substantial effect on the ecology of the area in which they are located. plus their financial values where appropriate. and raising the demand for credit. or if the existing irrigation practices are to be upgraded as new main works benefit their farms. D. The text of this final section of the chapter should indicate briefly the approach to aggregation which has been used. For groundwater irrigation schemes.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 143 such tests should be to confirm the plausibility of the planning team’s assumptions on technological change. SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS (2-4 PAGES) As a reflection of the seriousness with which environmental issues are regarded. B or C according to the World Bank or similar classification (see Box II-2 in Part II). Impact at Project Level The remainder of this chapter should briefly summarise the aggregate impact of the project over time in generating extra output. where a predictable number of farmers is assumed to move into a formerly virgin project area each year. and on the prevalence of water-borne disease. on endangered wildlife. and a forecast should be given in the report of the principal changes expected to take place. regardless of whether the project is rated as Category A. A similar aggregation approach is possible if farmers are already present on the land to be developed but. machinery. The necessary calculations can be made using the FARMOD Programme. For a new irrigation scheme. It is important to avoid over-optimism on the pace of entry. increasing demand for items such as seeds. the environmental impact of the project should be described in a separate chapter.
ECONOMIC JUSTIFICATION (3-6 PAGES) This chapter is intended to provide decision-makers in the government and potential financing agency with an appreciation of the advantages. The point must also be emphasised that economic analysis should not be used simply to provide a proof of project viability. within the same country.on the poor should be described. as measured by the rate of return on capital employed. the numbers of beneficiaries and any losers should be indicated. Action plans for mitigation. for example. Earthscan Publications. from a national point of view. Under social implications. as should estimates of the environmental costs1 for inclusion in the economic analysis of the project. Thus. The use of sensitivity analysis techniques is important in showing the nature and extent of risk to which the project is exposed and to point to possible means for improving robustness.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 144 The above information can be presented using the ICID checklist.positive or negative .and reveal any weaknesses .of the project. Reference should also be made to expected effects of the project on other factors affecting living standards. All negative impacts identified should be highlighted in the text. apart from being economically viable in their own right. especially nutrition. opportunities for producing the same level of output at a lower cost from rainfed farming. It should also illuminate the strengths . but economic soundness alone. This chapter should seek to show that. is seldom a sufficient justification for going ahead with a project. The costs of such action plans should be presented. and details given of their “with” and “without” project incomes. Economic Analysis of Environmental Impacts. the proposed irrigation or drainage investments are also justifiable in the broader context of national resource availability. Changes in access to productive resources that could have an impact . London (1994). Rather it should be used as a tool in the planning process to arrive at the option that is likely to produce the best all-round results from all the choices considered. it is not enough simply to demonstrate that an irrigation project would generate satisfactory economic rate of return if there are. education and the role of women. such as resettlement and rehabilitation plans or special designs for structures. are consistent with the economic and fiscal policies of the government concerned and compatible with the funding policies of the intended financing agency. should be briefly described. disadvantages and risks of embarking on the proposed project. 1: For guidance see Dixon J A et al. . Convention requires that considerable weight be given to demonstrating the economic viability of the proposed actions.
an explanation must be given of the assumptions underlying the forecasts of economic prices used in project evaluation. or immediate potential benefits may be foregone in the interests of long term sustainability. and the resulting incremental net balances. In the planning of any project. A. The nature of such trade-offs and the extent to which they have been captured in the analysis which follows should be explained. should be expressed in economic prices. It may be useful to include an introductory section which summarises the broad justification for the project in qualitative terms and guides the reader on the approaches adopted in analysing its expected impact. What is required is a clear and objective appraisal of all those factors that should be taken into account in arriving at well-informed decisions on the future of the project. Economic Costs and Benefits The project’s economic benefits. the cost of providing agricultural support services may rise substantially in response to a policy decision to increase the proportion of poor farmers amongst the project beneficiaries. they should also include the operating costs incurred by the farmers. consisting of the net incremental value of production attributable to the investments being financed by the project. as well as in providing services and running the project’s management system. The table constructed to calculate the economic rate of return should be given in an annex and should show the forecast streams of incremental costs and benefits. The economic benefits stream should include the value of the incremental output of the project. care should therefore be taken to avoid jargon and the use of excessively complex analytical techniques which may confuse rather than illuminate the basis for decision making. For those inputs which could have a significant bearing on the viability of the project. and it should be made clear whether distortions in the pricing of foreign exchange have been compensated for by the use of a shadow exchange rate or by the application of conversion factors to the price of non-traded goods. . maintenance and replacement costs of project works expressed in economic prices. Cost streams should include the capital costs of the project (including physical . compromises and trade-offs have to be made: for instance. as they accrue each year during the life of the project.but not price contingencies) plus the operating.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 145 In writing this chapter it is important to bear in mind that the people who have to take decisions on whether or not to fund the project may not be trained economists or technicians. The distinction must be made between traded and non-traded goods.
If. The point to illustrate here concerns the relative weight which has been given to social versus economic criteria in deciding on the balance between components. the chapter should include a review of its impact on the national balance of payments. the aim has been to maximise the number of beneficiaries subject only to each component exceeding a minimum ERR. these benefits should also be highlighted. If the project is intended to bring special benefits to women. nutrition and education. quantified. Impact on Income Distribution and Poverty Alleviation The relationship between the anticipated impacts of irrigation development on income distribution and poverty alleviation and the policies and priorities of the government and the lending agency should be discussed here. Risk and Sensitivity Analysis The report should systematically examine each major potential source of risk to which the project is exposed and explore its possible impact. the chapter should provide the reader with estimates of the without and with-project income distribution situation and any other indicators of the project’s expected impact on rural poverty. among outcomes giving a high ERR. C. . For projects aimed explicitly at alleviating poverty. Risks of an environmental nature however should be described in Chapter 8. D. If the overriding consideration in project planning has been economic return on investment it should nevertheless be shown that. this should also be explained. Thus the impact of irrigation development on the balance of payments should be mentioned only as a favourable side effect. and if possible. for countries where this would be a particularly attractive feature. It is usually sufficient simply to indicate the annual level of net receipts once the project has reached full production. These might include changes in access to drinking water. but it should be made clear that the net foreign exchange gains are not an additional benefit over and above those taken into account in the calculation of ERRs or NPVs (if these use a correct shadow price for foreign exchange). in contrast. The costs per beneficiary and the expected earnings of the beneficiaries vis-à-vis wages in other sectors would also be relevant measures. Effect on Balance of Payments To the extent that irrigation development has import substitution or export goals.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 146 B. health. the option has been chosen which is also best able to spread benefits widely and equitably. Beyond these specific analyses any more general impacts that the project may have on the poorer members of the rural population should be mentioned.
Fiscal Implications and Cost Recovery This is the place to explain assumptions on cost recovery rates and mechanisms (eg contribution of free labour for construction or irrigation water charges) and the extent to which they would cover the capital and operating costs of the project. water rights. It is equally important. action for environmental protection. land acquisition and land resettlement plans. especially if they could have a major bearing on the feasibility of the eventual project. Those concerned should be alerted to problems which . various problems or issues usually arise which need to be resolved by decisions of the government and/or the financing institution. Other issues of a similar nature which arise frequently in irrigation investment planning relate to criteria for screening and selection of subprojects. interest rates on loans to farmers. E. not to overload this section with trivial matters which can be readily resolved in the normal course of appraisal and subsequent project processing. It is most important to bring such issues out into the open as early as possible in the planning process and to encourage their rapid resolution. . To gloss over fundamental issues in the hope that they will disappear may simply raise false expectations. At the early stages of the planning process main issues frequently concern choices . with an advance payment in cash or kind to demonstrate commitment. water pricing.if not resolved in due time . an issue of the former type might concern the need to endow an agency with the necessary powers to manage the project. technology and so on which have a bearing on the project concept. however. ISSUES AND SUGGESTED CONDITIONALITIES (1-2 PAGES) A. Thus. levels of subsidy on inputs. implementing agency. compensation for oustees. pricing arrangements for farm outputs.would delay or materially influence the successful implementation of the project. Amongst the latter issues could be the requirement of the financing agency that full costs of operating and maintaining public irrigation systems be recovered from the users. issues tend to be related either to preconditions for project success or to points of possible incompatibility between the project proposals and the funding policies of the financing agency.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 147 The above should of course be consistent with statements on the project’s overall objectives made earlier under Project Rationale and Planning Considerations in Chapter 5.of scale. Issues As a project moves through the planning process to appraisal and negotiation. Later in the process.
• management and scheme ownership transfer. In reporting on issues which remain to be resolved. if appropriate. but nonetheless essential prerequisites for its success. Policy changes may be aimed at addressing specific problems (identified in the Background and Rationale chapters of the report) which would otherwise prevent the successful operation of the proposed project. through meetings between various involved parties etc. the planning team may indicate which it considers to be the most desirable solution. • the respective roles of the public and private sector in development or the provision of services. or at times predicated on.. direct terms the substance of what is at issue.for example. • the role of NGOs in relation to public sector services. In other cases policy adjustments may be of a broader sectoral or macro-economic nature and not specific to the project. For each main policy change of this sort. • indicate the process by which the issue might be resolved . • propose a timetable for arriving at decisions on the issue. . It is therefore important to explain any changes in policy which the Government is committed to introduce. fragmentation and consolidation.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 148 legislation for water users’ associations. In this case the interdependence of the project and the policy adjustments should be made explicit. • point out alternative solutions (to the extent that these exist) and outline the probable consequences of each course of action. Commitments and Suggested Conditionalities Increasingly. and means of ensuring the users’ involvement in design and construction. it is useful to : • explain in simple. it is useful to explain: • the nature of the intended reform and its objectives. • enabling legislation for the formation of water users’ associations. the introduction of changes in government policies. Policy changes of direct relevance to irrigation and drainage investments typically concern such issues as : • land tenure. • cost recovery levels and mechanisms. by collecting and analysing additional pertinent information. B. and by whom a final decision would need to be made. either before the launching of the project or during its implementation. projects are associated with.
IMPLEMENTATION (3-6 PAGES) As discussed in Part I. should be annexed to the report. From the above. for example for community animation or support to WUAs. draft legislation. is recommended for the preparation and monitoring of an overall implementation schedule. now facilitated by project management computer software. and careful thought is required in its drafting. redundancy in state enterprises. conditionalities might include: • preparation of a draft timetable for introducing new legislation or changes in administrative procedures. • appointing specified senior project staff. planning must now be increasingly focused on matching proposals for investment in irrigation and drainage with capacity for implementation. their careful consideration during project planning will assist those responsible for appraisal and implementation to approach their respective tasks in a state of readiness. • preparation of a list of qualified consultants and contractors for civil works. • the level of present commitment to the proposed change. and the organisational responsibility for bringing it about. It is a crucial part of the investment proposal. • opening of a Special Account. This should list all steps that have to . Although conditionalities are usually the prerogative of the concerned financing institution. • preparation of the necessary documentation for inclusion of the project in the government budget. A. the intended timetable. • appointment of auditors. This final chapter should provide a clear statement on how the project can be effectively implemented. Overall Implementation Schedule For most irrigation projects there is considerable interdependence between activities and components. The use of formal scheduling tools such as critical path analysis.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 149 • the measures through which the policy change would be adopted : in some cases these might simply involve changes in procedures (for example. if available. in approaches to consulting farmers on irrigation system design) while in others changes in legislation may be required. • possible side-effects of policy changes (eg. the functions of which have been privatised) and measures adopted to mitigate these. • preparation of a draft agreement with NGOs.
With the aid of the overall implementation schedule it should: • identify the tasks to be completed in order to satisfy the suggested loan conditionalities. and their listing in the project document can be of great assistance in getting the project off to a flying start. and earliest and latest start/completion dates. identify the critical activities. or at a startup workshop as soon as the loan has been negotiated. If not. training and research institutions (assistance with training and extension programmes). • define the time required to achieve these. C. • Preparation of procurement packages for project vehicles. bid evaluation and award of contracts. bid evaluation. Whenever possible they should have been defined and agreed at a workshop with the intended implementers during final planning. Activities for Completion in Project Year One This section should identify and bring to the government’s attention all the essential tasks to be undertaken during the first year of the project. place them in operational sequence. construction plant and equipment. before this chapter comes to be written. award of contracts and mobilization of staff. • identify the individuals required to perform the necessary tasks. list demands on management staff or skills in potentially short supply and note other potential constraints or risks.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 150 be taken to execute the main components of the project. contract negotiation. Activities to Achieve Loan Effectiveness This section should provide crucial information for the gearing-up process for the project implementers. • Preparation of terms of reference for technical assistance services from NGOs (for demand animation or training of WUAs). B. Invitations to bid and bidding. • hence define the earliest date for project start-up. and possibly temporary site accommodation. they should be discussed at a subsequent review of the draft project dossier. • explain the need for and approach to preparation of annual work plan and budget. These activities usually form the subject of the first annual work plan and budget. consulting companies (for engineering design work). annexing brief responsibility and job descriptions. Invitations to bid and bidding. . The following are tasks that often fall within the first project year.
• Detailed engineering designs and cost estimates for subsequent year’s construction work. World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank. These should be referred to and their applicability to the items to be procured under the project should be explained. Under prescribed conditions preference may however be permitted for local and regional manufacturers and. • Initiation of farmer training and extension programmes. where appropriate. . Whatever the expected procurement procedures they should be summarised here. an assessment of local capacity to supply different categories of goods or services. However. (1985. Procurement Most multilateral and bilateral financing institutions have their own requirements for procurement that are set out in guidelines issued for borrowers1. • Initiation of a staff training programme. if appropriate.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 151 • Initiation of information campaigns and animation procedures for demand-driven development. • Negotiation of agreements with communities on their labour or other contributions to project implementation and subsequent O&M. 1986). This should be reflected in the overall implementation schedule and phasing of the project costs. 1: See. D. the principle of competitive bidding will still apply for local purchases or the use of local contractors. local contractors. Programmatic work consisting of many small scattered subprojects is not generally attractive to international companies and does not usually require ICB. • Cadastral surveys. bid evaluation and award of contract. • Additional site investigations and topographic surveys. bidding. • Participatory planning with farmers for irrigation water delivery/distribution systems and in-field works. for example. The major financing institutions usually require that borrowers obtain goods above a certain value and contract major civil works through international competitive bidding (ICB) open to suppliers and contractors in all of their member countries. with. Sample Bidding Documents: Procurement of Goods and Procurement of Works. • Six-monthly interdepartmental review/planning workshops. An estimate should also be given of the likely time requirements to undertake the various procurement procedures for the main project items. Invitations to bid. • Preparation of bidding documents for aerial photography and mapping.
Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 152 E. 1. 9. 11. frequent cross-referencing should be made to the annexes in the main text. figures. be organised along similar lines to the main text to facilitate extraction of information. For example. MAPS. 7. 3. but 4 to 9 should also describe proposals for improvements. but the scope and content of some of them will be different. Detailed Project Cost Tables 15. 8. Annex 6 should contain a detailed diagnosis of the existing system. FIGURES. TABLES AND ANNEXES Appended to the report should be the maps. 6. A typical set of annexes for a project document covering a new irrigation investment project might be: Sociological Analysis and Definition of the Target Group Soils and Land Capability Climate and Water Resources Water Rights and Land Tenure Irrigation Agronomy (including crop water requirements) Irrigation and Drainage Engineering Marketing and Input Supply Rural Financial Services Roads and Other Infrastructure Development Institutional Capacity Assessment Organisation. Financial and Economic Analysis 14. Mitigation Plan for Category B) 13. . Implementation Plan (containing GANTT/critical path analysis charts) The list of annexes required for a rehabilitation project would be similar to those above. 10. 4. Annexes should. Accounting. 2. and analysis and design for upgrading. including details of expected improvements to operational hydrology. 5. to the extent possible. tables and annexes needed to give the detailed background to the main text and to assist the appraisal team and project implementing agencies. Annexes 1 to 9 should describe the existing situation. Audit and Reporting This section should explain the arrangements necessary for establishing and keeping project-related accounts and their annual audit. 12. Management and Institutional Development Plan Social and Environmental Impact Assessments (for Category A projects.
would cover the operation of the proposed project in detail and could include the following : 1. 5. 8. in addition to those required for background for such topics as those above. 7.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 153 The annexes required for a sectoral investment project. 4. 2. 3. Operational Regulations (including investment selection criteria) Institutional Development Plan Action Plan for Rehabilitation and Transfer of Irrigation Schemes Cost Recovery Action Plan Environmental Action Plan Investment Costs and Disbursement Schedule Bidding Packages Implementation Plan (containing GANTT/critical path analysis charts) . 6.
419.7 16.9 8. Processing and production diversification 2.0 6.0 4.2 880.4 240.8 417.160.2 2.3 118.697. Natural Resources Management 1.081.2 2.6 4.7 712.4 3.8 108.123.6 345.0 12. Technical Assistance Services 2.860.648.095.5 158.1 94. Training Subtotal Technical Assistance and Training D.0 103.7 1.1 337. SIGMA Subtotal Natural Resources Management B.6 393.803.8 5.0 2.8 2.844.1 7.7 116.3 662.352.0 4.4 13.1 853.9 1.3 239.0 1.4 94.2 274.016.2 995.2 1.297.8 167.295.7 779.233. Studies Total BASELINE COSTS Physical Contingencies Price Contingencies Tolaal PROJECT COSTS .4 6.372.2 33.697.127.0 423.694.9 4.0 31.5 14.6 4.098.8 651.0 127.3 2.0 347.3 430.5 21.5 800.7 94.972.3 221.0 6.8 2.0 433.4 1.5 1.0 1.1 560.308.6 40.409.7 316.797.5 769.8 712.7 10.2 14.765.1 400.948.646.2 975.409.7 422.470.2 937.0 401.5 5.0 1.3 2.6 347.6 1. 1. Support Services Technology Transfer Research Subtotal Support Services E.4 12.6 875. Small Irrigation Schemes 3.069.8 12.0 12. 1.100.728. Sustainable Agriculture 2.7 1.135.4 4.0 880.7 1.297.4 4. Technical Assistance and Training 1.089.6 1.844.9 39. Poverty Alleviation Activities 1.282. Institutional Strengthening 3.709.2 12.4 37.057.4 4 5 16 25 18 9 9 2 4 2 30 3 4 3 (Pesos Million) Foreign Total Local Total (US$ ‘000) Foreign % Foreign Exchange % Total Base Costs 29 14 1 44 15 6 1 7 22 3 3 3 9 6 13 19 3 2 100 3 103 A.4 3.9 323.3 262.352.0 300.7 432.2 26. Project Technical Unit F.3 100. Economic Rural Infrastructure Rural Roads Rural Marketing Infrastructure Subtotal Economic Rural Infrastructure Subtotal Poverty Alleviation Activities C.077.726.7 32.7 45.0 32.693.535.Example: Project Cost Summari by Componet Local 3.4 261.668.100.8 1.641.4 1.217.8 1.844.6 1.2 9.668.5 1.694.3 385.4 4.803.
0 522.8 394.4 927.7 1.2 523.9 341.9 137.095.7 432.1 532.4 55.7 229.8 52.954.027.492.6 4.709. Natural Resources Management 1.021.3 368.4 174.0 880.Example: Project Cost Summari and Year 1995 214.184.9 84. Sustainable Agriculture 2.8 387.4 2.7 82.3 865.4 108.937.001.2 1.5 5.5 178.437.7 13.6 254.017.406.1 7.697.9 365.5 80.6 414.4 1.1 109.0 56.9 326.5 131.100.5 2.7 2.7 3.8 769.322.663.0 28.5 168.6 31.4 765.8 330.668.844.362.7 206.3 12.5 1.9 179.972.089.9 4.0 487.7 101.6 1.4 68.0 221.6 1.0 6.3 1.381.6 390.5 7.478.9 526.0 523.297.561.0 215.6 617.3 199.9 629.0 80. Economic Rural Infrastructure Rural Roads Rural Marketing Infrastructure Subtotal Economic Rural Infrastructure Subtotal Poverty Alleviation Activities C.7 826.3 452.0 34.6 506.4 274.4 120.3 320.924.185.9 11.8 1.123.0 213.4 1. Small Irrigation Schemes 3.7 1.4 4.959.4 24.0 2.8 1.0 7.2 937.0 158.3 120.0 366.5 2.1 108.5 9.523.5 62.3 276.3 425. Project Technical Unit F.7 99.0 423.8 256.6 771.8 206. Studies Total BASELINE COSTOS Physical Contingencies Total PROJECT COSTOS Taxes Foreign Exchange .1 158.0 1.9 1.7 475.5 14.8 1.0 168.098. Processing and production diversification 2.938.7 33.4 332.6 650.933.0 2.860.7 66.7 712.0 7.8 475.6 157.2 7.2 2.9 3.7 80.0 343.9 601.4 1.0 1.2 2.563.4 90.0 274.0 555.2 119.0 46.9 1.4 62.6 1.2 8.0 33.7 13.7 981.127.7 1.4 584.1 1.6 31.3 2. Institutional Strengthening 3.158.9 62.3 133.948.081.1 62.4 305.6 865.2 461.8 135.6 846.6 875.6 229.5 7.569.0 92.2 1.049.6 161.925.4 54.7 345.2 194.1 3.4 85. Support Services Technology Transfer Research Subtotal Support Services E.372.6 90.717.1 220.8 361.0 401.791.4 25.9 80.9 242.0 1.5 2.0 80.3 210.7 31.2 126.6 158.7 408.0 1.5 800.1 2. SIGMA Subtotal Natural Resources Management B.9 3.7 837.7 144.4 204.6 167.2 164.0 7.5 187.6 2.4 1.4 2.169.8 3.5 544.7 168.828.6 1.1 183.016.409.1 644.3 3.4 155.161.6 779.1 219.3 127. Training Subtotal Technical Assistance and Training D.7 2.8 1.9 1.0 1.2 455.647.8 139.172.593.9 1.7 316.4 1.5 145.952.803.3 933.5 433.8 76.694.1 559.844.5 347.5 24.4 430.0 1.7 118.6 426.2 207.2 Base Cost (Pesos Million) 1996 1997 1998 1999 Total 1995 1996 1999 Base Cost (US$ ‘000) 1997 1998 Total 9.0 7.5 2.6 50.0 2.073. Poverty Alleviation Activities 1.726.8 72.5 366.3 62.421.497.1 174.8 32.1 400.0 80. Technical Assistance Services 2.332.4 68.3 334.646.4 619.3 251.9 215.0 612.3 561.6 31.4 154.797.2 141.295.9 798.9 47.404.0 1.4 31.8 87.6 518.104.22.168 A.0 916.352.6 303.0 561.639.2 3.2 543.1 80.3 7.6 31.967.203.8 234.277.8 144.998.5 341.5 1. Technical Assistance and Training 1.874.9 65.4 192.
4 4.693. Investment Costs A.2 37.7 1.0 1.8 30.500. pasture and livestock improvement (US$ 3.1 1.9 343. Studies G.0 800.682. Research K.0 1.2 679.4 4.2 4.0 10.525.5 10.1 1.4 28. Recurrent Costs 268.360.388.039.5 94.0 560.8 3.0 401. Staff E.512. Civil Works C.7 Mill.308.0 94. Off-farm Investment I.9 343.0 417.0 157.9 135.9 40 1 3 4 3 2 4 6 2 2 1 12 100 3 103 A.7 2. Vehicles O & M C.5 2.135.3 799.5 Mill.0 1.5 105.0 9. Equipment B.2 25.3 2.2 511.3 3.6 27.297.3 37.2 487.0 315.694.6 899.4 57.4 7 (Pesos Million) Foreign Total Local Total (US$ ‘000) Foreign % Foreign Exchange 7 14 13 3 2 6 1 13 29 88 % Total Base Costs I.694. .0 240.8 6.8 316.697.1 10.0 433.9 405.098.7 32.016.8 12 90 1 30 17 4 62.807.0 1.9 3.360. Supplies D. Vehicles H.7 4.0 315.5 22. Gasoline G.9 135.6 30.3 3.1 679.233.682.4 12.259.2 885.8 190.057.798.1 701.697.2 701.127.297.4 268.085.361.217.775.8 32. Supplies J.0 805.3 799.726.352.3 4.2 31. Training F.1 352.2 33.3 31.5 75.3 41.2 537. Operation & Maintenance O&M Works O&M Equipment Subtotal Operation & Maintenance B.4 537.2 1.Example: Project Cost Summari by Expenditure Category Local 823.352.4 1.3 3.6 7.6 18.5 30.242.7 11. Technical Assistance (external) E.5 1.372.).7 12.3 3.5 2.0 75.828.0 95.6 1.5 1.2 221.4 57.861.1 190.160.3 12.7 12.2 10.4 13.2 9.7 192.2 891.7 192.6 1.2 975.).5 22. Travel Total Recurrent Costs Total BASELINE COSTOS Physical Contingencies Price Contingencies Total PROJECT COSTOS \a Includes: improved rainfed farming and on-farm erosion control (US$ 5.0 16.775.3 385.6 40.2 487.6 1. Technical Assistance (local) D.5 1.259.5 45.4 12.213.). Other F.727.027.7 16. On-Farm Investment /a Total Investment Costs II.4 805.5 76.7 25.1 1. and forestry (US$ 2.039.2 202.9 Mill.5 79.1 4.0 355.
8 72.4 272.8 Total Investment Costs 2.2 466.1 30.663.639.0 15.5 92.6 K.7 1.0 644.8 3.6 316.144.5 Mill.4 31.6 377.185.0 10.5 7.4 107.7 15.682.0 225.0 0.3 30.2 299.0 74.492.7 O&M Equipment 5.027.569.9 194.2 455.073.4 10.4 1.1 184.6 1.1 G.3 86.0 157.098.8 94.5 45.3 511.5 7.4 1.7 168.2 28.8 19.0 6.2 397.7 179.7 80.288.967.0 75.2 24.360.8 234.647. Technical Assistance (local) 336.039. Vehicles 37.0 16.297.8 814.9 41.6 22.0 272.2 523.0 15.2 873.3 10.6 7.1 183.1 6.5 2.6 33.0 F.0 1.3 276.0 1.0 215. Staff - 43. Travel 36.0 332.2 885.372.8 2.9 343.0 837.7 1. Supplies 75.7 13.6 1.098.0 576.8 366.680.6 40.9 7.3 7.4 Total Recurrent Costs 244.828. pasture and livestock improvement (US$ 3.2 423.9 158.0 30.0 120. Civil Works 495.1 2.4 57.9 206.9 368.2 44.4 7.5 192.7 94.0 16.3 4.0 9.3 2.2 80.0 1. Research 650.7 21.4 28.2 90.5 1.4 321.172.0 167.0 68.1 59.2 5.9 137.0 62.0 1.0 111.5 92.6 1.0 2.717.0 280.727.5 32.5 355. Investment Costs A.1 168.7 66.1 19.1 227.3 7.277.6 85.8 23.4 7.9 - 107.3 135.7 561.6 B.3 59.4 537. Other 34.5 H.242.127.3 368.4 Subtotal Operation & Maintenance 125.1 6.5 227.6 254.1 189.3 291.9 42.4 233.352.).6 1.1 805.726.5 433.959.0 272.4 2.3 799.0 2.694.5 107. Supplies D.0 174.5 2.7 109.2 487.122.8 256.9 5.9 Mill.1 C.Example: Project Cost Summari and Year 1996 62.7 6.7 62.6 6.9 II.). Recurrent Costs 37.8 Total BASELINE COSTOS 2.420.6 1.0 1.0 222.214.171.124 190.4 780.3 1.1 4.6 I.520.8 3.4 184.3 74.6 29.184. Gasoline G.1 15.3 60.5 107.536.233.9 4.7 1.437.2 F. Operation & Maintenance O&M Works 17.5 1.016.388.9 19.925.0 1.253.9 76.7 88.0 899.0 7.6 7.4 509.0 0. Off-farm Investment 12.6 400.4 1.775.7 71.5 2. On-Farm Investment /a 214.0 72.3 53.0 3.8 32.1 J.5 7.512.7 43.5 701.0 800.0 4. Studies 131.9 \a Includes: improved rainfed farming and on-farm erosion control (US$ 5.7 316.8 330.9 576.4 1.2 3.0 4.8 338.0 1.9 149.).4 852.1 175.2 543.3 425.9 757.0 174.7 Foreign Exchange 206.5 76.7 33.5 95.5 144.2 25.398.027.4 150.6 76.2 141.8 601.4 13.6 7.1 Base Cost (Pesos Million) 1997 1998 1999 Total 1995 1999 Total Base Cost (US$ ‘000) 1996 1997 1998 Foreign Exchange % Amount 1995 I.874.3 1.1 190.2 1.6 240.0 466.3 3.8 2.5 30.7 68.523.603.057. Vehicles O & M C.6 151.406.7 272.0 Taxes 221.2 E.2 31.210.4 308.2 180.4 6.9 3.0 2.0 6.7 Mill.5 56.013.3 315.0 443.0 15.1 933.6 268.1 40.937.828.404.0 856.2 2.4 Physical Contingencies 101. Equipment 552.9 2.924.8 6.8 E.3 54.2 619. and forestry (US$ 2.4 2.9 15.4 3.0 591. Training 157.3 37.4 401.380.590.017.8 11.7 D.1 B.948.1 175.8 769.0 194.9 110.9 24.1 15.7 109.213.1 5.0 145.4 109.5 24.4 619.3 Total PROJECT COSTOS 3.5 69.259.998.697.0 105.0 11.2 47. .9 81.787.217.7 7.5 2.0 1. Technical Assistance (external) 17.6 43.001.9 679.2 11.8 461.3 12.7 1.6 107.3 62.3 69.5 737.0 95.8 30.0 451.7 4.1 - A.4 107.
7 Mill.3 25.5 355.694.5 701.2 B.1 1.8 221.1 4.2 140.2 8.9 12.9 25.8 135.3 53.1 C.5 75.3 387.7 53.9 Mill.1 401.6 8. on Physical Base Costs Cont.2 35.2 214.3 433.5 11.0 771.6 Physical Contingencies Local For.5 1.3 0.6 1.532.3 3.1 401.3 E.).9 63.2 86.8 G.609.2 1.1 102.9 12.4 1.3 1.7 140.5 43.2 Total 712.7 537.0 315.7 767.6 13.Example: Breakdown of Expenditure Categories.726.3 1.4 II. Total 885.4 725.7 1. Duties & Exch. Technical Assistance (external) 37.3 3.5 390.5 22.682.2 310.7 192. Equipment 3.694.7 1.0 37. Research K.4 30. Technical Assistance (local) D.3 0.2 537.6 86.697.3 1.8 176.4 A.4 \a Includes: improved rainfed farming and on-farm erosion control (US$ 5.3 4.9 48.195.4 37.9 111.7 1. Studies 94. Supplies D.5 0. Staff E.8 120.3 - 62. Local Currency For.0 113.694.3 3.4 12.6 41.6 8.768.726.3 3.867.3 35.697.4 396.2 1.5 4.514.1 1.4 1.517.2 10.2 0.1 1.7 3.3 3.8 0.).694.5 0.5 5. Supplies J.512.7 703.2 35.924.1 22.7 8.6 12.4 769.4 805.4 10.7 77.9 11.4 219. Cont. Vehicles H.4 12. and forestry (US$ 2.).5 Base Cost Local (Excl.9 139.512.213. Local (Excl. Vehicles O & M 12.6 1.2 612. pasture and livestock improvement (US$ 3. Investment Costs A.7 192.1 1.8 139.5 70.2 0. Off-farm Investment I.2 655.1 1.2 537.1 3.5 5.9 192.5 13.6 268.0 315.3 70.3 1.1 352.2 15.5 0.5 698. on Cont.7 10. Travel Total Recurrent Costs 12.0 1.9 62. On-Farm Investment /a Total Investment Costs 405.9 135.1 10.1 396.1 0.2 315.7 11.6 1.6 219.2 0. Taxes) Taxes Total Total Incl.5 Mill.694.697.5 1.5 75.7 316.7 11.727.0 805.3 3.697.2 0.7 11.3 341.213.582.2 316.5 3.5 337.4 6.2 1.7 192.7 65.8 703.1 1.5 18.3 3.1 336.6 75.2 48.2 315.3 268.0 37.0 5.5 1. Civil Works 202.5 6. Other F.5 16.3 3.6 102.6 30.8 10.0 C. Training F.1 113.6 483.391. (Excl.9 94.1 7. Exch.5 268.0 135. Recurrent Costs 12.7 102.6 11.317.3 69.1 50.682. Duties & Taxes) Taxes Physical Cont.6 31.387.2 43.2 316. Operation & Maintenance O&M Works O&M Equipment Subtotal Operation & Maintenance B.2 221.6 4.0 3. .8 168.0 39.8 18.5 701.3 762.9 483.9 11.5 355.4 41.7 192.0 126.96.36.199 Total 417.0 6.8 22.8 4.4 948.2 24.1 63.591. Duties & Taxes) Taxes For. 885.3 I. Exch.727.697.6 1. 62.0 315.2 421. Gasoline G.1 1. Plus Base Costs Price + Price Cont.4 41.4 805.
5 556.7 343.7 28.1 282.2 4.5 2.8 4.6 110.5 352.2 160.242.0 9. 2.392.8 218.2 89.Example: Breakdown of Expenditure Categories. Technical Assistance (external) 94.242.9 Mill.837.039.3 0.7 0.).3 10.029.5 343.1 4.3 B.5 C.9 128.4 1.953.259.1 4.360.2 488.841.352.003.3 4.4 1. Research K.4 0.3 3. Recurrent Costs 32.8 1.5 2. Gasoline G.039.8 122.5 240.0 9.1 425.0 95.0 G. Training F.3 89.9 542.9 160.5 79.6 1. pasture and livestock improvement (US$ 3.781.217.7 30.8 1.4 1.401.5 E.334.8 799.8 177. Exch.9 3.477.9 29.0 899.8 3.8 9.9 3.4 109.0 1.066.1 II.2 304.7 3.8 1.297.388.2 800.6 8.1 47.372.5 136.3 33.0 3. Operation & Maintenance O&M Works O&M Equipment Subtotal Operation & Maintenance B.2 4.7 447.224.0 1.4 286.352.2 854.4 22.9 32.2 1.6 679.5 21. Duties & Exch.6 560. .2 Base Cost Local (Excl.5 17.1 0.0 1.9 Physical Contingencies Local For.5 891.6 8.9 10.297.7 Mill.9 487.297.5 1.0 0.8 354.4 Total 1.0 9.5 1.3 28.2 25. Other F. Technical Assistance (local) D.5 63.4 57.2 3. Vehicles 16.9 343.2 105.4 176.9 354.).4 4.3 3.0 9.224. Cont.7 3.2 679. Total 2.9 12.352.6 29.3 4. Taxes) Taxes Total Total Incl.4 1.9 8.4 980.187.0 9.2 136.1 4.8 31. on Cont.8 1. Local (Excl.2 2.0 61.2 105.1 25.6 0.098.5 76.8 556.016.8 94.2 487. Equipment 7.775.8 1.0 7.4 39. 158.7 76.233.2 3.2 31.3 26. Exch.0 1.360.0 H.259.7 C. US$000 For.0 899.550.943.767.4 I.9 218.0 0.5 851. (Excl.2 1.3 799.3 10.0 258.7 8.0 20.3 0.5 25. and forestry (US$ 2.297.6 157.0 1.5 29.833.8 165.9 12.8 799. Duties & Taxes) Taxes For. Investment Costs A.6 10.948.511.8 122.6 25.0 989. Staff E.8 1.5 799.0 1.4 47.4 4.2 A.0 33.8 89.2 488.5 10.5 \a Includes: improved rainfed farming and on-farm erosion control (US$ 5.931.372.6 17.781.3 799.828.4 4.775. Off-farm Investment I.6 8.9 865. Plus Base Costs Price + Price Cont.3 1.6 32.0 560.8 190.9 177.1 57.2 14.039.1 30.828.5 Mill.3 258.5 29.3 40.4 20.0 95.9 787.9 1.297.8 1.074.016.6 3.352.4 190.352. Studies - 240.322. Supplies D.9 352.8 2.).6 260.388.802.4 1. on Physical Base Costs Cont.4 3.0 65.522.027. Travel Total Recurrent Costs 30.360.660.2 3.8 4.5 105.8 190.727. On-Farm Investment /a Total Investment Costs 1.2 487.3 13.1 800.8 4.0 98. Civil Works 511.4 57.5 679. Duties & Taxes) Taxes Physical Cont. Supplies J.003.3 1. Vehicles O & M 30.811.217.5 Total 1.5 158.2 800.665.8 16.4 287.7 196.057.4 4.
ephemeral document covering the main topics or issues that the forthcoming work is expected to address. it will generally be found useful to produce a preliminary planning brief (PPB) as an aid to focusing the team’s thinking on the tasks that await it. to be dealt with. institutions. The content of the PPB is likely to cover: • a brief background to the forthcoming field work. Background material.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 160 ANNEX 3: Other documentation THE PRELIMINARY PLANNING BRIEF As a prelude to the planning process and before commencing any studies or field work. including social and environmental issues. and indicates the intended outcome. potential and constraints. explains how it is proposed to tackle them. questions or issues to which the team proposes to give priority. although it may refer briefly to many topics (eg the country and sector situation. who should be stimulated to provide additional thoughts of their own and to guide the team towards relevant reference material. As such. or any second-best or fallback positions that could still be accepted if the ideal proves unattainable in practice. both inside and outside the team. a PPB may be little more than a listing of tasks which the team leader might in any case note informally before departure. policy. either as an ideal. The team leader should be both the author and the ultimate judge of what the PPB should contain. highlighting any initiatives or precedents relevant to the planning of the project: • a concise summary of the highest priority tasks or issues. needs to be highly selective and should be limited only to that which is strictly relevant. • an indication of outcomes which the team should aim for. The PPB is thus a document which the team leader uses mainly to pick the brains of others and to ensure that team members have a common starting point. and allows the sharing of ideas with others. . existing irrigation development. past project lending experience. It should relate directly to the tasks. • the team leader’s views on how these should be addressed and the implications for staffing the team. social and environmental issues. or the current status of project elaboration). committing thoughts to paper encourages more focused and deeper thinking. The PPB is a short (3-5 page). However.
1: This may be aided through bibliographic searches using FAO's AGRIS (International Information System for agricultural Sciences and Technology) or other computerised bibliographies. If resources allow. Ideally. in giving government staff advance notice of the team’s objectives and in setting up administrative and logistical arrangements. indicate the main features or outcomes as they appear at that time. field programme. plans and maps1. sufficiently far in advance of the team’s departure to allow adjustment of objectives. and explain possible follow-up actions. . THE AIDE MÉMOIRE Before leaving a country it is routine for an external planning team to prepare. and clearly stated as being subject to subsequent agreement. Such a visit can be helpful in generating up-to-date information. In these cases the PPB is likely to be a more substantive document. The PPB may also contain a list of background documentation.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 161 Draft terms-of-reference (TOR) for the work should be attached to the PPB. this should be prepared following a workshop arranged to reach consensus on the team’s findings and should reflect this consensus. In some respects it resembles the back-to-office report (see below) which Investment Centre missions issue after their return to base. in most cases it is advantageous for the team leader to make a brief visit to the concerned country prior to preparing the PPB. views presented in the aide mémoire. It will also be useful to seek comments on the PPB from the financing institution. questions or issues which next require attention. or even its composition if this is considered necessary. The PPB should be drafted as early as possible before the team commences work. The aide mémoire should briefly summarize the stage that project planning or strategy formulation has reached. and may serve as a useful basis for subsequent discussions with the government and financing institution. must be provisional. discuss and leave with its counterpart institution an aide mémoire. list the topics. and does not represent an official position of either the government or the external assistance organisation: this is inevitable for a document written under time pressure in the field and without consultation with the organisation’s management. but with two important differences: • An aide mémoire is the team’s own view. and in particular the commitment of further resources to follow-up action. so that it can be discussed with other colleagues with relevant experience or knowledge. As a result. The content of the TOR and the proposed allocation of work among team members should be fully consistent with the PPB.
these should be attached as annexes to the aide mémoire. where it went. to the extent that this is appropriate or possible. The main points to cover in an aide mémoire are likely to be: • A brief recapitulation of the team’s terms of reference. what it did and an expression of thanks for courtesies extended to the planning team. some alternative project concepts. hence should always stress the specific information which the government and its affiliates need. . should be listed. • Who the team worked with or met.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 162 • An aide mémoire is targeted only at the government. this may be a description or comparison of strategic options. by whom. BACK-TO-OFFICE REPORTS The back-to-office report (BTOR) is the vehicle through which Investment Centre teams present their broad findings to their own management and the concerned financing institution within a few days of their return to headquarters. further planning. • A listing of the main questions. Where detailed terms of reference and schedules for further work have been prepared. and serves to attract comments from a peer review. or an outline of a single possible project giving provisional costs. It is not appropriate to include much background information in an aide mémoire since this should usually be known to the government. Depending on the stage reached in subsectoral review or the planning of specific investments. organisational arrangements and likely benefits. but should be broadly similar to that of an aide mémoire. if required. The BTOR also informs other staff of work which may be relevant to their assignments. and point to required decisions or follow-up commitments on the government side. indicating the sort of outcome considered most likely to be endorsed by the prospective financing agency. by when) for the government and any other individuals or institutions with a role in. problems or issues which still have to be resolved before project planning can advance further. or contracted for. the BTOR provides the written material on which the team’s debriefing is based. • A résumé (preferably no more than three single-spaced pages) of the current status of work. The content of the BTOR will vary according to the type of assignment. While still in draft. • A clear indication of follow-up (what remains to be done. Steps to be taken to mobilize funding for follow-up work. focusing mainly on those aspects which are the responsibility of the government and. although slanted to address the information requirements of the Investment Centre management.
mapping or engineering designs which provide the detailed supporting data needed to define investment options or specific projects. If the work concerned is simply an expansion of the tasks of a local team which an external team is assisting. • summary of the team’s findings: as in the case of the aide mémoire. The degree of detail to be given in the terms-of-reference for such studies will depend. • brief national background information. main contacts. on specialised surveys. or it may summarise the justification for a specific proposed project. or by someone else for example local or international consultants or a locally-contracted university team. TERMS-OF-REFERENCE FOR FEASIBILITY AND OTHER STUDIES Institutions or individuals will often need to be contracted to work under the general guidance of government or its LDG. to place the project in context. All BTORs should also include a brief section which explains how the mission has examined and addressed the possible social and environmental impact of the project. On the other hand. much can be achieved by verbal briefing before the team leaves the country. on whether they will be done by people with whom the project planning team will work directly. BTORs should be succinct and generally not more than four pages in length. relationship to other activities. • issues still outstanding and the solutions proposed by the team. its timing and manpower requirements. noting its location. in particular. however. the terms-of-reference will become the technical specification underpinning the legal agreement.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 163 As a rule it should cover: • the purpose of the work undertaken. • the scope of follow-up work. and written instructions may be kept brief. duration. if a new group is to become involved and the individuals concerned are unfamiliar with the project or with the aims of the specific assignment. If a legally binding contract is to be made. a BTOR may not have such a restriction on its length. components and approximate costs. content should depend on the stage of strategy formulation or investment elaboration. it may cover alternatives or concepts. and need to be carefully worded. • the status of strategy formulation/project planning so far achieved and issues resolved by the team. . more comprehensive terms-of-reference will be needed. team composition. • requirements for external technical assistance during project implementation. If no other reports are to be issued by the team.
results to be generated.. • specific information to be provided or gathered. as well as indications of the length of any textual material. 1: Further guidance on preparation of terms of reference may be found in The Investment Centre and Consulting Firms: A Guideline. operational documents. therefore. or during various stages of execution of a programme of work including feasibility studies.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 164 Comprehensive terms-of-reference for further studies1 are likely to cover the following aspects: • background and objectives: the main objectives or concept of the investments or specific project being planned and principal components. the ownership of equipment after completion of the studies. • the disciplines. costed if appropriate. • contribution expected from the work to be done: how the work covered by the terms-of-reference is to contribute to the provision of base data. They may. benefits. when progress reporting is necessary. are used as a convenient form of communication at any stage of investment planning.g. training of national staff) and how they are to be approached. quantities to be estimated. be up-dated at various times. documentation. when a planning team has reached the stage of reporting on project options and issues on which feedback is required. the general means by which data should be collected and the expected level of accuracy. INTERIM OR INITIAL PROJECT BRIEFS Interim or Initial Project Briefs (IPBs). IPBs are relatively short (10 to 15 pages). • particular points to receive attention in the work (e. FAO Investment Centre. Rome (1983) . • the supporting services. format. quantification of components. They summarise the status reached and the actions to be taken or decisions to be made to complete the planning process. for example. issuesoriented. with interim review or reporting dates if appropriate. • deadlines for delivery. • the level of detail. costs to be calculated. the elaboration of project ideas. minimum qualifications or experience of key individuals to be involved. scales of final presentations. materials and facilities to be provided by the government. maps or designs. and so on. etc. costs. • manpower and other inputs or equipment to be used to complete the work. proposals to be elaborated.
although the IPB will be much briefer. rather than leaving these to the end of the stage concerned. implementation arrangements. costs. FAO Investment Centre. which principally distinguishes the project brief from other planning documents. they therefore aim more to respond to the management question “Where have you got to?”. and financial and economic returns. with the emphasis changing as work moves towards final project planning. to be interim statements. perhaps eventually becoming attachments to a final project document or dossier. and to focus on facts and issues as they are understood at the time. Project briefs should involve the planning team in just as much careful thought as a final project document.components. similarly. rather than the content. to fuller details of the project itself . Project briefs are usually aimed at keeping the responsible task managers or project controllers in the financing institution informed of progress. it should consider writing a project brief instead. and quicker to write.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 165 The content of a project brief varies according to the stage of strategy formulation or project formulation. Rome (1993). However it is the intended audience and the tone. . the IPB may be compared with the Identification Report of the conventional planning process. At such a stage it may be a more cost-effective use of reporting time. if the planning team has reached an in-between stage in its work and is thinking of issuing a “preliminary” or “interim” report. As planning is nearing completion. 1: Investment Centre Technical Paper No 7: Guidelines for the Design of Agricultural Investment Projects. but they should generally be briefer. When prepared at the stage of completion of conceptualising and comparing the investment options. when it may be inconveniently late to take account of other views. Since a degree of prior knowledge can generally be assumed. background information and scene-setting can usually be much truncated. the focus should shift from a review of options and a summary of the next steps. They are also intended to allow management to respond to the planning team’s question “Are we on the right track?”. Working papers or annexes attached to a project brief tend. which may be expanded and completed later. as suggested in Part II. As a general rule. Rather than building the logical case for a project brick-by-brick for a wide audience. A suggested format is given in Investment Centre Technical Paper No 71.
Baudelaire. Barghouti. Clive. (FAO Investment Centre Division. Paris) Branscheid. Bell. Irrigated Rice Culture in Monsoon Asia: The Search for Effective Water Control Technology. V. Structured Irrigation Systems in India. Guide to the Economic Evaluation of Irrigation Projects (Revised version) (OECD. J-P 1994. 1993. World Bank Technical Paper Number 123..100 Collected Papers. Ellen P. World Bank Technical Paper No 171. (FAO Investment Centre Division. Successful Small-Scale Irrigation in the Sahel. 1989. (Johns Hopkins University Press) Bergmann. Project Evaluation in Regional Perspective. World Development XXI (May. Paper prepared for the 1994 World Bank Water Resources Seminar. World Bank Technical Paper No 166. Shawki and Guy Le Moigne 1990. 10 Collected Papers. and Robert Nooter 1992. Kerry J. Rome) Irrigation Investment Briefs. . World Bank Technical Paper No 173. 771-789. Peter Hazell and Roger Slade 1982. Water Users’ Associations in World Bank-Assisted Irrigation Projects in Pakistan. Irrigation Planning with Environmental Considerations: A Case Study of Pakistan’s Indus Basin. Byrnes. Irrigation in Sub-Saharan Africa: The Development of Public and Private Systems. 1992. Hellmuth and Jean-Marc Boussard 1976. R. Rome) Brown. Irrigation Water Management Briefs . Masood and Gary P. 1993). Kutcher 1992.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 166 References and Bibliography Ahmad. Burns.
FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 24. World Bank Technical Paper No 256. Cook. MAINTAIN Working Paper on Irrigation No 1. De Alwis. Involuntary Resettlement in Africa: Selected Papers from a Conference on Environment and Settlement Issues in Africa. Critchley. 1988. (Wye College. Cernea. University of London/GTZ). World Bank Technical Paper No 80. World Bank Technical Paper No 110.. Dams and the Environment: Considerations in World Bank Projects. Soils Bulletin No 42 (FAO.) (FAO. Economic Analysis of Environmental Impacts. Sherman 1994. William. Design and Operation of Smallholder Irrigation in South Asia. Scura. John A. FAO 1976. London) Dixon.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 167 Campbell. (rev. (Wye College. Carpenter and Paul B. World Bank Technical Paper No 157. Richard A. Water Harvesting for Plant Production. Lee M. Rome) 1979. (FAO. Michael M. Rome Dixon. Rome) FAO (1979) . Workshops as a Means of Promoting Ownership in Policy Formulation and Project Preparation (Draft). L. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No 29. (Earthscan Publications. Soil Survey Investigations for Irrigation. Carruthers. Ian The Case for Irrigation: An Assessment of Need for and the Risk of Neglecting Sustainable Irrigation Investment. F. (Editor) 1994. Talbot and Guy Le Moigne 1990. Cynthia C. Water Quality for Agriculture. Carruthers. FAO Investment Centre. Donald 1995. Involuntary Resettlement in Development Projects: Policy Guidelines in World Bank-Financed Projects. Kingsley and Loretta Sonn 1994. Volume II: Case Studies and Conclusions for Sub-Saharan Africa. Crop Water Requirements. Ian and Jamie Morrison Maintenance in Irrigation. World Bank Technical Paper No 227. 2nd Ed.. University of London/GTZ). Rome) 1977. John A. Chris Reij and Alain Seznec 1992. A Review of Strategic Issues.
(FAO. (FAO Investment Centre. Guide for Training in the Formulation of Agricultural and Rural Investment Projects. (FAO. FAO Investment Centre Technical Paper No 9 (FAO. Rome) 1985. Rome) 1991. The Investment Centre and Consulting Firms: A Guideline. Design and Operation of Irrigation Systems for Smallholder Agriculture in South Asia. Rome) . Soil and Water Conservation in Semi-Arid Areas. Rome) 1989. Rome) 1993. Financial Analysis in Agricultural Project preparation. Rome) 1983. The Design of Agricultural Investment Projects: Lessons from Experience. (FAO. Estimating the Economic Efficiency of Irrigation: The Case of Brazil.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 168 FAO Yield Response to Water. Wastewater treatment and use in agriculture. 1992. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No 47. (FAO. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No 40. 1989. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No 46 (FAO. Sociological Analysis in Agricultural Investment Project Design. FAO Investment Centre Technical Paper No 8. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No 49. Irrigation in Africa South of the Sahara. Rome) 1986. FAO Soils Bulletin No 57. Operation and Maintenance of Irrigation Schemes. (FAO. FAO Investment Centre Technical Paper No 5. Rome) 1986. CROPWAT . Rome). Rome) 1986. Rome) 1992. (FAO. Guidelines: Land Evaluation for Irrigated Agriculture. (FAO. Rome) 1987. (rev. (FAO. Working Paper (FAO/World Bank Cooperative Programme. Rome) 1981. 1) FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No 29. Rome). Rome) 1986.A Computer Program for Irrigation Planning and Management. FAO Investment Centre Technical Paper No 6. Guidelines for Report Format. (FAO. Rome) 1989. (FAO. Rome) 1992. Investment Centre Division. FAO Investment Centre Technical Papers No 3/1 and 3/2. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No 33. Rome) 1991. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No 37. Water Harvesting. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No 48. Water Quality for Agriculture. (FAO. CLIMWAT for CROPWAT. (FAO. (FAO. Rome) 1991. (FAO. Rome) 1992. (FAO. (FAO. Arid Zone Hydrology. Organisation. The Use of Saline Waters for Crop Production.
Wuhan. (FAO. FAO Investment Centre Technical Paper No 10. Guidelines for Land-Use Planning. FAO Remote Sensing Centre Series No 65. (FAO. (FAO. Reforming Water Resources Policy. Rome) . 1995. Rome) 1995. (FAO. (FAO. Rome) FAO/ODA 1995. (FAO.3). Rome) 1995. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No 49. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No 53. Selected Papers from the International Conference on Irrigation Management Transfer. (FAO. Water Report No 5: Irrigation Management Transfer. Integrated Rural Water Management. FAO Land and Water Bulletin 3. Chile October 1992. Development and Management Service). (FAO Land and Water Development Division Water Resources. Water Report 1: Prevention of Water Pollution by Agriculture and Related Activities. (FAO. Rome) 1993. (FAO Rome) 1995. Water Report No 6: Methodology for Water Policy Review and Reform. January 1995. (FAO.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 169 FAO 1993. Rome) 1993. Remote Sensing and its Application to Investment Project Identification and Preparation. Rome) 1993. Agricultural Investment to Promote Improved Capture and use of rainfall in Dryland Farming. Water Sector Policy Review and Strategy Formulation: A General Framework. Proceedings of the Expert Consultation on Water Policy and Reform. China. CLIMWAT for CROPWAT: A Climatic Database for Irrigation Planning and Management. Building Local Commitment During the Design of Agricultural Investment Projects: The Experience of FAO’s Investment Centre (Draft) (FAO. Santiago. Provisional Text. September 1994. (FAO. Rome) 1993. Rome) FAO (1993) Water Policies and Agriculture. Rome) 1994. User’s Manual of SIMIS (Scheme Irrigation Management Information System) (Version 1. Rome) FAO/UNDP/WB 1995. (FAO. Environmental Impact Assessment of Irrigation and Drainage Projects. Proceedings of the Technical Consultation on Integrated Rural Water Management 15-19 March 1993 Rome. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No 52. Rome) 1995. Proceedings of the FAO Expert Consultation. Special chapter of The State of Food and Agriculture Report 1993.
Automation of Canal Irrigation Systems. Loan Implementation Unit. (FAO/USAID) Frederiksen. Drainage and Flood Control Projects. Harald D. External Review and Evaluation Office (IADB) International Program for Technology Research in Irrigation and Drainage and IFAD 1993.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 170 FAO/USAID 1987. Priorities for Research (UNDP. Jean 1993. An Evaluation of NIA’s Participatory Communal Programme: Public Intervention in Farmer-Managed Irrigation Systems (IIMI. World Bank Technical Paper No 128. To Identify Environmental Effects of Irrigation. Rome) International Irrigation Management Institute 1987. (Editor) 1990. Commission on Irrigation and Drainage. Drought Planning and Water Efficiency Implications in Water Resources Management. Harald D.. Evaluation Report on Rehabilitation and Consolidation of Irrigation Investments. Guidelines (IADB) Inter-American Development Bank 1991. Water Resources Management in Asia. Volume I Main Report. Smallholder Irrigation in West Africa: Opportunities and Constraints. World Bank Technical Paper No 185. The IFAD Experience with Project Design and Implementation: A Consolidated Review of 26 Closed Projects. Application of Environmental Procedures in the Agricultural Sector.P. The ICID Environmental Checklist. Jeremy Berkoff and William Barber 1993. Goussard. World Bank Technical Paper No 212. World Bank) International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage 1993. Project Management Department. Gastellu-Etchegorry J. Satellite Remote Sensing for Agricultural Projects. Expert Consultation on Irrigation Charges (2 vols). New Delhi (India) IFAD 1994. Int. (IFAD. Frederiksen. (HRS Wallingford) . 1992. Colombo) Inter-American Development Bank 1991.
San Francisco . A Guide to the Formulation of Water Resources Strategy. Walter J. World Bank Technical Paper No 249. Doris J. World Bank Technical Paper No 142. 1992. Agriculture and Water Development. Le Moigne. Jansen.S. Le Moigne. Ostrom. Le Moigne. Self-Governing Irrigation Systems. Sustainable Water Users Associations: Lessons from a Literature Review (World Bank . Meinzen-Dick. Tradable Water Rights: Experience in Reforming Water Allocation Policy. Le Moigne. Annapolis. World Bank Technical Paper No 195. December 8-10. Agency for International Development. Zimbabwe) Kiss. Guy. Ochs and Sandra Giltner (Editors) 1994. 1993. Crafting Institutions. Mei Xie and Sandra Giltner (Editors) 1994. Guy. Water Policy and Water Markets: Selected papers and Proceedings from the World Bank’s Ninth Annual Irrigation and Drainage Seminar. Guy. World Bank Technical Paper No 263. Ashok Subramanian. Technological and Institutional Innovation in Irrigation.Water Resources Seminar) Ochs. Integrated Pest Management and African Agriculture. Drainage Guidelines. Bishay 1993. Maryland. World Bank Technical Paper No 94. Loic Sadoulet. An applied study prepared for the Bureau for Asia and the Near East of the U. Shawki Barghouti and H. (Ministry of Lands. Economics of Irrigation: A Modular Methodology for Comparing the Benefits with the Costs. Ruth. Guy. Ghada Abiad-Shields and Ashok Subramanian 1994. Meyra Mendoza. Agnes and Frans Meerman 1991. Developing and Improving Irrigation and Drainage Systems: Selected Papers from World Bank Seminars.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 171 ISPAN 1994. Institute of Contemporary Studies. Walter and Bishay G. Shawki Barghouti and Lisa Garbus (Editors) 1992. William Easter. K. Elinor 1992. World Bank Technical Paper No 178. Plusquellec (Editors) 1989.
CROPWAT: A computer program for irrigation planning and management. Issues and Applications. Rome) .. (Cambridge University Press in association with the International Irrigation Management Institute. Wolter 1994. Leslie E.. 1993.. H. (FAO. Rosegrant. Mark W.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 172 Plusquellec. The Value of Performance Studies of Irrigation Projects for Lending Agencies. (World Bank) Small. Ismail and Andrew Steer (Editors) 1994. Plusquellec. (Kluwer Academic Publishers) Plusquellec. Environmentally Sustainable Development Series No. Chris. Markets in Tradeable Water Rights: Potential for Efficiency Gains in Developing Country Water Resources Allocation. September 30-1 October 1993. World Bank Technical Paper No 246. Mark W. Valuing the Environment. Colombo. Skimming the Water: Rent-seeking and the Performance of Public Irrigation Systems. (Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd) Serageldin. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No 46. H. H. (Pergamon) Rosegrant. Improving the Operation of Canal Irrigation Systems. World Resources Institute Research Report No 4. (World Bank) Reij. and Hans P. (Kluwer Academic Publishers) 1988. Repetto. Proceedings of the First Annual International Conference on Environmentally Sustainable Development. Paul Mulder and Louis Begemann 1988. Review of Irrigation System Performance with Respect to Initial Objectives. Water Harvesting for Plant Production. World Bank Technical Paper No 91. and Mark Svendsen 1993. Charles Burt and Hans W. Modern Water Control in Irrigation: Concepts. and Ian Carruthers 1991. (Sri Lanka) Smith. Binswanger 1994. Martin 1992. Farmer-Financed Irrigation: the Economics of Reform.. Asian Food Production in the 1990s: Irrigation Investment and Management Policy. Kathryn McPhail and Christian Polti Author’s First Proof 1990. 2. Robert 1986.
World Bank Technical Paper No 215. The Bankwide review of projects involving involuntary resettlement 1986-1993.L. 1994. Norman Drawing on Social Energy in Project Implementation: The Results of a Learning Process Approach to Improving Irrigation Management in Sri Lanka. Manila) Umali. Irrigation II Division South Asia Projects Department. (International Rice Research Institute. Effective Implementation: Key to Development Impact. (5). 1993. (Environment Department) 1994. Dina L. Food Policy 19.P. The Role of Agriculture and its Prerequisites for Economic Development: A Vision for Foreign Development Assistance.I. 1992. Irrigation-Induced Salinity: A Growing Problem for Development and the Environment. Bhuiyan 1994. World Bank Sourcebook on Participation. 1994. Robert 1982? The System of Administrative and Political Corruption: Canal Irrigation in South India. and S. Vollrath. Innovations Toward Improving Water-Use Efficiency of Rice. Design and Operating Guidelines for Structured Irrigation Networks. 1993. T. A review of World Bank Experience With Irrigation (Operations and Evaluation Department). Environmental Assessment Sourcebook. (Economic Development Institute of the World Bank) . Wade. 1991. Resettlement and Development. 469-478. 1 World Bank Technical Paper No 139. Uphoff. 1993. (Environment Department) World Bank/USAID 1990.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 173 Tuong. World Bank 1986. Report of the World Bank’s Portfolio Management Task Force. Conserving Soil Moisture and Fertility in the Warm Seasonally Dry Tropics. Water Resources Management. World Bank Technical Paper No 221. vol. 1994. T. World Bank Report 13676. Irrigation Training in the Public Sector: Guidelines for Preparing Strategies and Programs.
Le Moigne (1993) Using Water Efficiently: Technological Options. Ulrich Kuffner and Guy. (International Irrigation Management Institute).Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 174 Xie. Proceedings of an International Workshop of the Farmer-Managed irrigation Systems Network. Design Issues in Farmer-Managed Irrigation Systems. Locally Managed Irrigation Systems. Yoder. M. Management Transfer and Turnover Programs. Robert 1994. Essential Tasks and Implications for Assistance. (International Irrigation Management Institute). Yoder. Design Issues in Farmer-Managed Irrigation Systems. . Proceedings of an International Workshop of the Farmer-Managed Irrigation Systems Network (International Irrigation Management Institute) 1990. World Bank Technical Paper No 205. Robert and Juanita Thurston (Editors) 1990..
2. 1986 (E F) The design of agricultural investment projects lessons from experience. 1986 (E) Design and operation of the irrigation systems for smallholder agriculture in South Asia . 1986 (Multil) Irrigation in Africa south of the Sahara. (E F S) Financial analysis in agricultural project preparation. 1985 (Ar C E F S)* (Now replaced by No. .Vol.Vol. 1. 1995. 1996 (E**) Availability: April 1996 Ar Arabic CChinese EEnglish FFrench PPortuguese SSpanish Multil . 1993. Viale delle Terme di Caracalla. 1985 (E) Design and operation of the irrigation systems for smallholder agriculture in South Asia . 00100 Rome.Guidelines for Planning Irrigation and Drainage Investment Projects 175 FAO Technical Papers FAO INVESTMENT CENTRE PAPERS 1 2 3/1 3/2 4 5 6 7 7 Rev 1 8 9 10 11 Preparing agricultural investment project.Multilingual *Out of print **In preparation The FAO Technical Papers are available through the authorized FAO Sales Agents or directly from Distribution and Sales Section. FAO. (E F S) Guidelines for the design of agricultural investment projects. 1995 (E) Guidelines for planning irrigation and drainage investment projects. 1989 (E* F S*) Guidelines for the design of agricultural investment projects. 7) Using data processing tools for preparing agricultural development project. 1991 (E) Guidelines on sociological analysis in agricultural investment project design (E F) Agricultural investment to promote improved capture and use of rainfall in dryland farming. Italy. 1986 (E) The project cycle.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.