ASSIGNMENT 3, RURAL DEVELOPMENT: Gender Sensitivity in Kenyan Arid Land Farming Projects

Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may have. From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs.

GET A 40% DISCOUNT ON YOU FIRST ORDER

ORDER NOW DISCOUNT CODE >>>> WELCOME40

ASSIGNMENT 3, RURAL DEVELOPMENT: Gender Sensitivity in Kenyan Arid Land Farming Projects
Background
The purpose of the assignment is to assess how the gender-sensitivity of World Bank agriculture projects has evolved, analyzing the preparation and design of projects appraised in 1995, 2003 and 2017. The three projects were implemented in the arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs) of Kenya. The gender-sensitivity of each project will be assessed by applying a checklist of questions and indicators derived from two training modules on gender in climate-smart agriculture.
Assignment Question (Put this at the head of your report and make sure you answer it!)
Does the preparation and design of farming projects in the arid and semi-arid lands of Kenya pay sufficient attention to women’s needs?
Instructions
(1) Your report should include the following headings:
Context: The Role of Women in the Farming of Kenyan ASALs
Project Objectives and Components: Continuity and Change, 1995-2017
Project Preparation: Changes in the Type and Quality of Background Analysis, 1995-2017
Project Monitoring and Evaluation: Changes in the Results Framework, Indicators and Procedures, 1995-2017
Conclusion: Does the treatment of women farmers’ needs in Kenyan ASALs now meet good practice standards?
(2) Skim the background documents, using the “Search” facility to pinpoint references to ‘gender’ and ‘women.’
(3) The ‘Context’ section should be based on the description in the three project documents and should give a sense of the challenges for farming the ASALs.
(4) In the ‘Objectives and Components’ section consider to what extent today’s principles of climate-smart agriculture for ASALs were present in each of the projects, and the implications for women’s role in these projects.
(4) The following sections should assess design and preparation against the ‘good practice’ checklists you will find in the attached files, ‘Template 1’ and ‘Template 2.’ In Template 1, pay attention to Box 18.1 (pp. 3-4), Table 18.4 (p. 32), Table 18.5 (p. 33) and Table 18.9 (p. 37). In Template 2, consider Table 2 (p. 7) and the whole of Appendix 3. To facilitate comparison of the three projects, insert a table with good practice indicators/approaches in the left-hand column, include a column for each project, and indicate by checkmarks which indicators/approaches were covered in each project.
Note: While the 1995 and 2003 projects are ASAL-specific, the 2017 project includes, but is not limited to, ASALs. In your analysis of the 2017 project, focus on aspects relevant to ASALs.
Document of The World Bank Report No. 13692-KE STAFF APPRAISAL REPORT REPUBLIC OF KENYA ARID LANDS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROJECT NOVEMBER 14, 1995 Agriculture and Environment Operations Division Eastern Africa Department Africa Region Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (As of April, 1995) Currcncv Uniit Kenya Shilling (Kshs.) US$1 0() Kshs. 45.0 SDRI.0() US$ 1.49299 WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Mctric System ABBREVIATIONS AL Arid Lands ALRMVP Arid Lands Resource Maniagement Project ASAL Arid and Semi-Arid Lands CAG Controller and Auditor General CD Community Development DRSRS Department of Rcsource Surveys and Remote Sensing DC District Commissioner DCF Drought Contingency Fund DCP District Contingency Plan DDC District Development Committee DFS District Focus Strategy DMC Drought Management Coordinator DMO Drought Monitoring Officer DMP Drought Management Project DMS Drought Management Secretariat DPC District Program Coordinator DRR Department of Relief and Rehabilitation DRRC District Relief and Rehabilitation Committee DSG District Steering Group DSU District Support Unit DWO District Works Office ECR Emergency Cereal Reserve EDRP Emergency Drought Recovery Project EWS Early Warning System FFW Food For Work GIS Geographic Information System IDA International Development Association IMS International Monetary Fund LMD Livestock Marketing Division MLRRWD Ministry of Land Reclamation, Regional and Water Development MOALDM Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock Development and Marketing MOPW Ministr of Public Works NCPB National Cereal and Produce Board NEAP National Environmental Actioni Plan NGO Non-Governmental Organization NPC National Program Coordinator NRRCC National Relief and Rehabilitation Coordination Committee NSU National Support Unit OP Office of the President PFP Policy Framework Paper PID Public Information Document PIDP Pastoralists Integrated Development Project PIP Project Implementation Plan PLA Participatory Learning for Action PS Permanent Secretary SOE Statement of Expenditure TO Training Ofl-ier W`FP World Food Program Government Fiscal Year: July I-June 30 – i – REPUBLIC OF KENYA ARID LANDS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROJECT Credit and Project Summary Borrower: Republic of Kenya Implementing Agencies: Line Ministries and Non-Governmental Agencies, under the coordination of the Department of Relief and Rehabilitation (Office of the President) and in collaboration with local communities Beneficiaries: Arid Lands Populations, Government and Non-Governmental Agencies Poverty: Program of Targeted Interventions. The three mutually reinforcing project components aim to reduce the poverty of ALs populations through benefits such as increase in on- and off-farm income generation capacity, reduction in drought inflicted losses, provision of improved basic services, and enhanced market linkages. Amount: SDR 14.8 million (US$22.0 million equivalent) Terms: Standard with 40 years maturity Commitment Charge: 0.50% on undisbursed credit balances, beginning 60 days after signing, less any waiver. Financing Plan: See Para. 3. 10 Net Present Value: US$ 10.5 million. However, this amount does not include the substantial non-quantifiable benefits expected to be generated by the project ERR: 16.9% Map: 1BRD 26479 Project ID No.: KE-PA-1331 REPUBLIC OF KENYA ARID LANDS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROJECT STAFF APPRAISAL REPORT CONTENTS CREDIT AND PROJECT SUMMARY —————————————————— 1. INTRODUCTION ————————————————————————————– 1 2. BACKGROUND—————————————————————————————-2 A. Macro Economic Environment———————————————————– ——— 2 B. Sector Background———————————————————————–2 C. The Area and People ———————————————————————————————- 3 D. Policy Environment – ——————- —- — -5 E. Institutional Setting —————————————————————————- 6—————-6 F. Past and Ongoing Programs in the Area—————————————————————— — 6 G. Lessons Learned—————————————————————————————————6 H. Project Preparation————————————————————————- — 7 I. Rationale for Bank Involvement ———————————————————————————— 7 3. THE PROJECT————————————————————— ——— 9 A. Project Objectives——————————————————————- —— —- 9 B. Project Description———————————————————————————9———– -9 C. Project Costs and Financing———————————————————————————–13 D. Project Procurement Arrangements ————————————————————————– -14 E. IDA Credit Allocation and Disbursements———–16 4. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION—————————————————————— 18 A. Organization and Management————————————————————————————18 B. Consultancies and Studies——————————————————————————————–22 C. Project Monitoring and Evaluation——————————————————————————–22 D. Auditing and Reporting Requirements —————————————————————————- 23 E. Supervision Plan—————————————————————————————— _-23 5. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION, RISKS AND SUSTAINABILITY ————————— 25 A. Justification ————————————————————————————————– 25 B. Project Impact —————————————————————————————————— 26 C. Economic and Financial Analysis———————————————————————————–31 D. Risks——————————————————————————————————————33 E. Sustainability————————————————————————- —- — 34 6. AGREEMENTS AND RECOMMENDATION————————————————– 35 A. Agreements and Assurances ————————————————————————————35 B. Recommendation———————————————————————————————————37 This report is prepared by IDA in collaboration with the Government of Kenya. The IDA team members consisted of. Satish Kumar, Christine Cornelius, Milena Hileman, John Nyaga, Mbuba Mbungu and Jan Weetjens (AF20U), Gajan Pathmanathan, Preeti Ahuja (AF2AE), M.L. Mehta, E.J Burne, George Njiru, John Kevany (Consultants) and Said Al Habsy (LEGAF). The Peer Reviewers are Harry Walters (AFTHR), Walter Lusigi (GEF) and Jerry Silverman (AFTES). S.Barghouti (AS2AG) is the Lead Advisor. W. Lusigi also reviewed the Environmental Assessment. The Sector Division Chief is Sushma Ganguly and the Department Director is James W. Adams. -2- TEXT TABLES 3.1 Project Cost Summary ………………… 15 3.2 Financing Plan ………………… 15 3.3 Project Procurement ………………… 17 3.4 Disbursement Plan ………………… 18 5.1 AL Livestock Resources ………………… 25 5.2 Drought Mortality Rates ………………… 26 5.3 Livestock Offtake Rates ………………… 27 5.4 Farmgate Prices (Per animal) ………………… 28 5.5 Sensitivity Analysis ………………… 32 ANNEXES 1. Letter of Sectoral Policy 2. Past and Ongoing Programs in the Area 3. Drought Managemen
t Component 4. Marketing and Infrastructure Component 5. Community Development 6. Project Organization and Management 7. Project Costs by Year B. Schedule of Disbursements 9. Summary of Environmental Impact Assessment 10. Project Key Indicators 11. Supervision Plan 12. Economic/Financial Analysis 13. Documents in Project File MAP IBRD No. 26479: Project Area REPUBLIC OF KENYA ARID LANDS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROJECT STAFF APPRAISAL REPORT 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 The predominantly pastoralist populations in the eight arid districts of Kenya are counted amongst the poorest and the most disadvantaged sections of society. Social welfare indicators show that in terms of access to communications, public health, nutrition and education services they receive a low fraction of services than the level available to the rest of the Kenyan population. Although the Arid Lands (ALs) are well-endowed with livestock resources, in the absence of reliable marketing outlets the full benefit of this resource accrues neither to the pastoralists nor to the consumers in the rest of the country. 1.2 Existing constraints on socio-economic development in these districts are quite forbidding: the physical environment is fragile and easily degraded; water resources are poor and variable; drought is a recurring feature decimating up to 50 percent or more of the livestock in each severe occurrence; the road network is inadequate and poorly maintained; and levels of illiteracy are high as are the child mortality rates. Experience has shown that traditional nomadic pastoralist communities like many other communities do not always adequately respond to the top-down development process; while a few formal and community-based institutions have limited capacities to combat the prevailing constraints. 1.3 Neither effective conservation of the natural resource base nor the development potential of these areas can be realized unless these constraints are addressed. Further, the development process should accommodate the shifts in priorities from development to survival in times of drought and viceversa when normalcy returns. The proposed project addresses these constraints by focusing on drought management and mitigation, further integration of the AL population into the mainstream of the country’s economy and the promotion of community-driven small-scale initiatives to address their development priorities. – 2 – 2. BACKGROUND A. MACRO ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 2.1 Kenya is a low-income country with a per capita income of $260 in 1994 (at current prices and exchange rates). About 75 percent of the country’s land area is classified as arid or semi-anrd. The economy is heavily dependent on agriculture, and in the arid lands, which comprise 60 percent of the land area of the country, livestock is the main economic activity of the largely pastoralist population. 2.2 Between 1991 and 1993, Kenya’s macroeconomic performance was poor. In April 1992 the Government agreed with the Intemational Monetary Fund (IMF) on a program of actions necessary to re-establish a sound macroeconomic framework which included deficit reduction, monetary restraint and liberalization of the foreign exchange regime. Until mid- 1993 the implementation of the actions required was unsatisfactory: though fiscal targets were basically met, monetary targets were significantly exceeded and the liberalization of the foreign exchange regime proved to be unsustainable. 2.3 However, since mid-1993 there has been a significant improvement in macroeconomic management: the monetary policy was tightened considerably; and the official and market interest rates were unified. These improvements allowed the Government to negotiate a three year Policy Framework Paper (PFP) with the Bank and the Fund supported by a one-year Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility (ESAF) arrangement with the IMF. The Government’s performance under the reform program was generally positive, but with slippages in some areas. The fiscal deficit was in line with overall targets, but weak expenditure control necessitated expenditure and revenue adjustments to keep the deficit within agreed ceilings. On the structural side, virtually all exchange controls were abolished, the exchange rate was floated, price controls lifted and the maize market liberalized ahead of schedule. On the other hand, civil service reform got off to a slow start and parastatal reform lagged significantly. The economy responded positively to these measures, with the exchange rate appreciating, reserve levels increasing, inflation declining, and a restoration of positive real growth estimated at 3 percent in 1994. The Govemment successfully completed the 1994 ESAF arrangement and has been discussing a new Policy Framework Paper (covering the period 1995 to 1997) with the Bank and the Fund. The proposed framework will seek to sustain fiscal adjustment and accelerate structural reforms, notably in the parastatal area. B. SECTOR BACKGROUND 2.4 Agriculture is the single largest sector of the Kenyan economy, accounting for about onequarter of GDP and 70 percent of employment. It makes an indirect contribution of another 30 percent of GDP through the manufacturing and service sectors. Also two-thirds of the industrial output in the country is agro-industry based. Historically, the performance of the agricultural sector in Kenya has been better than the average for sub-Saharan Africa. Growth rate was 6.2 percent in 1965 through 1973, it was 4.6 percent in 1974-80 and declined to 2.5 percent in the period between 1981 and 1987. The situation has worsened since 1988. The agricultural growth was 1.6 percent in the period 1988-92; and it was negative in 1992 and 1993. This downtum in agricultural growth resulted largely from poor rainfall, and the slow implementation of structural reforms. – 3 – 2.5 The physical challenges to increasing agricultural growth are formidable. There is very little high potential agricultural land left in the country which is not already being cropped or grazed, leaving intensification of land use as the only available option. The fragile drier areas of the country are experiencing the adverse environmental consequences of rapid population increases and the use of inappropriate technologies. Sedentarization of these lands which reduces the available land for dry season grazing has caused deepening poverty among the mainly pastoralist people of the ALs. The impact of such sedentarization is to further reduce the dry season grazing areas available to the livestock in times of drought. 2.6 Kenya’s agriculture has the potential to grow at around 4 percent per annum provided the policy and institutional inadequacies are minimized. The reform agenda should be governed by the principle of clearly defining a policy environment based on developing competitive markets for agricultural commodities. The livestock sector can play an important role in meeting Kenya’s overall growth objectives. Livestock is the primary economic activity in the arid lands and is an important activity in the remaining areas of the country. Beef provides about 65 percent of meat production in the country and small stock and camels, provide the remainder. Small stock and camels predominate in the arid lands, providing the major source of cash income to that area besides being the most important element of food of the AL populations. Livestock marketing and prices were decontrolled in 1987 but the ALs have not been able to benefit from the improved market conditions pnrmarily because of poor infrastructural linkages with the main consuming centers. 2.7 Kenya has also initiated activities to deal with the pressing environmental issues. The country is faced with the stark reality that there is a growing gap between the rapidly growing population and a fragile natural resource base which is shrinking through degradation and overuse. A National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP), which inter alia, addresses the environmental impact of poverty, agricultural intensification, exploitation of water resources, management of biological resources and bio-diversity, energy and transport initiatives and plans, industry,
mining and urbanization is now being implemented. The NEAP also addresses a number of issues facing the pastoralists in the ALs. These include, pressures placed on fragile natural resources because of sedentarization, the loss of important dry season grazing areas because of inappropriate agricultural development and settlement, the breakdown of customary controls over the use of common property resources, and constraints in the use of traditional stock routes. C. THE AREA AND PEOPLE 2.8 The ALs cover over 60 percent of Kenya’s total land area. The total population of the eight AL districts of Turkana, Marsabit, Mandera, Wajir, Samburu, Isiolo, Garissa, Tana River and the arid divisions of Baringo numbers about one million people, i.e. about 4.6 percent of the total Kenyan population. The ALs fall mainly within Kenya’s agro-ecological zones VI and VII and have the following physical characteristics. Zone VI which accounts for 22 percent of Kenya’s land area has a rainfall to evapotranspiration ratio between 15-20 percent and is classified as arid lands. Zone VII, which accounts for 41 percent of Kenya’s land area has a rainfall to evapotranspiration ratio of less than 15 percent and is classified as very arid. Zone VI areas receive between 300-500 mm rainfall annually and zone VII between 200-300 mm. The soils in ALs are highly variable, generally of light and medium texture and are shallow. In general they are subject to compaction and capping and are susceptible to erosion. Surface water resources are scarce and highly variable. These regions have a low capability of supporting vegetation. – 4 – 2.9 Pastoralism is the predominant occupation in the ALs. Pastoral communities in these districts belong to closely-knit tribal groups which have been rival herdsmen for ages. The major tribal groups are Turkanas in Turkana district; Samburus and Turkanas in Samburu district; Borans in Isiolo district; Borans, Gabra and Rendille in Marsabit; and Somalis of six main clans in Garissa, Mandera and Wajir districts. The people are predominantly semi-nomadic or nomadic pastoralists, though some sedentarization has started to occur. The ability of pastoral communities to survive through periods of drought has been highly dependent on their capacity to spread their risks, to move on to new areas of grazing as resources are depleted, and to take advantage of highly diverse dry land environments (riverine woodlands, hilltop forests, dispersed watering points, and so on). Extensive seasonal movements in response to scarcity or abundance of resources have featured prominently as part of pastoral survival strategies. 2.10 The ability of the AL populations to continue their pastoral way of life has come under increasing pressure in the last two decades, as access to the dry-season grazing areas has been lost to agriculture and settled ranching in the neighboring semi-arid lands. There are increasing trends of pastoralists sedentarizing around water points in the ALs as well. Consequently, the overall carrying capacity of the ALs has been reduced, a feature which has been exacerbated by tribal conflicts. The growing inability of these lands to sustain their human and livestock population is highlighted during recurrent droughts which decimate up to 50 percent or more of the livestock population in each severe occurrence. Pastoralists are increasingly migrating to the nearest towns during droughts in search of water and relief food. These population centers are ill-equipped to serve as drought mitigation centers or to support post-drought recovery. 2.11 Almost the entire population in the ALs can be classified as below the poverty line. For example, the ALs have fewer than 2.2 doctors and 15 nurses per 100,000 population compared with the national average of 15 and 25 respectively; about 43 percent of the primary school-age children in the ALs enroll in schools compared with the national average of 95 percent, literacy in the AL districts is estimated at below 20 percent, compared with the national average of 69 percent, and infant mortality is almost twice the national average. Further, the trends in infant and child mortality rates show little signs of improvement; education and literacy figures also show little improvement over the years. School dropout rates are high: one survey in Turkana showed that less than 10 percent of those enrolled in Standard I stayed in school until Standard 8. In terms of infrastructure the ALs are poorly served by roads and have limited access to sources of energy. The ALs have 40 km of roads per 1000 sq. km, while the average for other areas is almost 200 kmi; the AL populations consume less than onehundredth of the average per capita electrical power consumption. 2.12 The ALs contribution to the national economy is substantially below its potential. Situated farthest from the principal Govemment and commercial centers in the north and east of the country in a region of poor infrastructure, the AL populations are isolated from the social and economic mainstream of the country. Consequently, their access to markets for livestock products, the main economic assets of these populations, is poor. This situation has been further aggravated by social conflicts, which have rendered the traditional stockroutes unreliable. Thus a population of around one million people with very little linkages with the rest of the economy, faces a deteriorating natural resource base, declining food security and deepening poverty. That situation is, nevertheless, reversible. The area has considerable untapped potential arising from its rich endowment in livestock: the eight arid districts contain nearly 20 percent of country’s cattle, 30 percent of sheep, nearly 50 percent of goats and donkeys and almost the entire camel population. – 5 – D. POLICY ENVIRONMENT 2.13 The Govemment has had a well-articulated Arid and Semi-Arid Land (ASAL) policy since 1979 when an official document’ set out the ASAL policy framework for the 1980’s. The main objectives were stated as resource conservation, exploitation of productive potential, development of human resources and integration of the ASAL into the national economy. These policy objectives have been upheld and elaborated in subsequent policy documents, mainly the 1989-93 National Development Plan and a revised ASAL policy document issued in 19922. This document places substantial emphasis on drought contingency planning in order to strengthen the coping mechanisms of local communities. Guidelines for policy implementation emphasize that projects and programs will be undertaken within the District Focus Strategy; and communities and local institutions will be involved in design, preparation and implementation of the projects. 2.14 Three major concems, however, are not fully reflected in either Govemment policies or program initiatives. First, the Government has not yet enunciated a national policy on drought management for the ALs. The current policy outline does not fully address the issues faced by the pastoralist populations in these areas. The Government formulated a “drought contingency action plan” and a “food security action plan” under the Bank-financed Second Agricultural Sector Adjustment Operation (ASAO II, Cr. 2204-KE), but these drafts were neither adopted nor operationalized. Similarly, several recommendations on drought management made in the Kenya Food and Nutrition Policy Report (Report No. 8351-KE) have not been acted upon. The drought management efforts in the past have been mostly limited to the securing of food and other relief supplies from donors and their distribution to drought-affected populations. Second, there is a need to evolve specific policy initiatives for addressing issues concerning the detenrorating natural resource base in the ALs. There is a need for educating and mobilizing communities to prevent natural resource degradation. The pastoralist communities in the ALs are not adequately protected by tenurial and grazing rights. Some interventions such as the installation of large boreholes as permanent water points are known to have caused harm to the environment. Third, the
Government is implementing The Land Adjudication Act (Cap 284) in Samburu, Isiolo and Marsabit districts under which common land is adjudicated and titles given to individuals. Though the process is very slow and limited to certain areas, the impact of this land redistribution on the pastoral communities needs to be studied. In addition, a policy framework needs to be in place for appropriate program initiatives to be developed (para 3.8). 2.15 Furthermore, most of the laws relevant to the development of ALs have been in effect since colonial days. Since the development policy in Kenya has changed fundamentally between the colonial times and the present, there is every probability that such laws are not consistent with the current policy. There is therefore a need for the Government to carry out a thorough review of all laws and regulations pertaining to ALs and to assess whether such laws are adequate in implementing Govemment policy and protecting the rights of the pastoralists. Such a review should also cover the enforcement mechanism of the laws in question (para 3.8). “The Arid and Semi-Arid Lands of Kenya – A framework for Implementation, Planning and Evaluation 2 “Development Policy for the Arid and Semi-Arid Lands” – 6 – E. INSTITUTIONAL SETTING 2.16 The Ministry of Land Reclamation, Regional and Water Development (MLRRWD) and the Office of the President (OP) have the main responsibilities for policy and programs in ASALs. MLRRWD handles the policy development for ASALs, OP is in-charge of drought policy and the coordination of programs concerning drought management, relief and rehabilitation. It is also in charge of district, regional and national administration which are in charge of carrying out Government programs. Recently the Government has strengthened institutional capacity for drought and relief operations by establishing a separate Department of Relief and Rehabilitation (DRR) in the OP headed by a Permanent Secretary. The only Bank-funded project in the ALs, the Emergency Drought Recovery Project (EDRP – CR. 2460-KE) is housed in DRR. The Drought Recovery Programme is integrated into the institutional structure of the Office of the President. In the field, the program is coordinated by district program coordinators reporting to the District Commissioner (DC). 2.17 The Government of Kenya has adopted the District Focus Strategy (DFS) for implementing rural development initiatives. The DFS is intended to decentralize management responsibilities (including planning and monitoring) to the district, which is the smallest management unit within the Kenyan institutional structure containing key technical and financial mechanisms to plan and implement development activities. However, the implementation experience of several projects such as the IDAfunded Baringo sub-project of the Rural Services Design Project (Cr. 1974-KE), IFAD-financed Kwale-Kilifi District Development Project, and the Coast ASAL Development Project, shows that generally the ministries did not adequately delegate functional authority to the districts commensurate with their role envisaged under the DFS. F. PAST AND ONGOING PROGRAMS IN THE AREA 2.18 A number of multilateral and bilateral projects have been introduced in the ASALs in the last two decades. With the exception of a few, these have largely focused on the relatively better off sermiarid lands. The only major investment effort supported by IDA in the arid lands is the EDRP which is being implemented in five arid districts, namely Mandera, Marsabit, Turkana, Wajir, and Tana River. Details of these projects are summarized in Annex 2 along with constraints faced in implementation. G. LESSONS LEARNED 2.19 Both the successes and failures of the current and past development interventions in ALs, described in Annex 2, have lessons for the proposed project. The first lesson is that in these predominantly pastoralist communities, characterized by strong tribal and clan structures, sustainable development would not be possible unless the objectives addressed by the project are articulated by the community. Community ownership of the project is essential for sustainability. This will occur only if the community has an effective say in decision making. The second lesson is that project interventions should be simple enough that communities can manage them. The technologies used should be lowcost, i.e., affordable, to ensure sustainability. The third lesson is that the program should expand only as the absorptive capacities of the districts and the communities improve. The fourth lesson is that building capacities of the communities, participating NGOs and the Government’s institutional structures should receive high priority for the development interventions to succeed. Human resource development should be regarded as a key input for the community development interventions. Further, in the arid lands, often susceptible to droughts and famine, the priorities of a community can oscillate – 7 – between development and survival, the project objectives should take into account this requirement and implementation should be dynamic and flexible enough to accommodate these changes. 2.20 The project should be executed within the framework of the Govemment’s District Focus Strategy. Centralized planning and management models applied to projects in high potential areas have little chance of succeeding in these far-flung areas with poor capacities and communications. Programs in the ALs where funds from donors (UNDP, bilateral) flow directly to the project implementers in the field have performed well. The Bank/IDA funds however are channeled through the Govemment budgetary and accounting process. The lesson is that an arrangement would need to be established within these processes which is effective in securing the required incremental funds in the annual budgets in order to adapt the delivery of government services to a community based model, followed by a mechanism for planning at the community and district level and subsequent flow of funds to the implementing agencies. The time span of the project should be sufficiently long to establish durable relationships between implementers and communities by building an adapted model of delivery of services to these nomadic communities. H. PROJECT PREPARATION 2.21 The lessons learned have been applied during project preparation, in project design and the proposed implementation arrangements. Initial project preparation was undertaken by a Government inter-ministerial planning team. At appraisal, all the target districts were visited and several planning workshops held to involve field implementers in the design of the project. With regard to implementation procedures, the workshops examined the applicability of the proposed procedures in the context of existing implementation capacities in the target districts. In addition to the participants in the workshops, field agencies, some local NGOs and bilateral donor-funded initiatives in these areas were also consulted. 2.22 Attempts were also made to involve potential beneficiaries in the final project preparation exercises. The initial guidelines for community participation were developed by undertaking community-oriented planning exercises with pastoralist communities on location. Community participation has thus been fostered through following a bottom-up approach and beneficiary involvement in project design. The experience of the Drought Monitoring System under the Netherlands-supported Drought Management Project was pilot tested in a training workshop in one of the target districts and the results incorporated in the design of the drought management component. In the mid-term review of the EDRP, several beneficiary participation initiatives have been included and strengthened which would evolve into the Arid Land Resource Management Project (ALRMP) programs. Finally the project design allows for a phased approach, which would permit project implementation in two stages: launching and slow build-up of activities in stage one, followed by full deployment of activities in all the districts in stage two, incorporating the less
ons learned during a comprehensive mid-term review. This would match implementation to the capacities of implementers, and afford opportunities for applying mid-course corrections. 1. RATIONALE FOR BANK INVOLVEMENT 2.23 The project is consistent with the Bank’s Country, Sector and Environmental strategies, and supports the Country Assistance Strategy (CAS), discussed by the Board in April 1994; it is also consistent with the current 1995 CAS. The focus of the Bank’s Country Assistance Strategy is – 8 – poverty reduction through accelerated growth and employment generation. This strategy emphasizes macroeconomic stability, improved public sector efficiency and development of an export-oriented private sector, as well as strengthening the basis for equitable and sustainable development by addressing longer-term human resource issues and arresting the deterioration of Kenya’s fragile environment. The CAS seeks to advance such objectives through the country dialogue, and by supporting efforts to alleviate population pressures and develop the ASALs, as part of the country assistance program. ALRMP’s components and implementation strategy are thus im accordance with the CAS; the project specifically supports the CAS objective of strengthening the basis for equitable and environmentally sustainable economic development. With its focus on providing basic social services and environmental protection, the proposed ALRMP is a central feature of IDA’s “core” lending program. The proposed ALRMP is a Program of Targeted Interventions, aimed at assisting the pastoralists in the arid districts, who are counted among the poorest of Kenya’s population. It seeks to reduce the chronic poverty and enhance food security in these districts, at the same time strengthening and supporting local community-driven initiatives to better manage dry woodlands, critical grazing reserves and other fragile environments in these arid areas. The project design draws from the findings and recommendations of the recently finalized Kenya Poverty Assessment report, prepared by IDA in close consultation with the Government and with the support of several donors. The proposed project incorporates substantial beneficiary participation, and seeks to build capacity within local communities to take advantage of development opportunities and assigns an active collaborative role to the NGOs and other local social organizations/bodies. By emphasizing district-based initiatives, it supports decentralized planning and implementation. The proposed ALRMP is also a logical follow-up to the ongoing EDRP which has successfully initiated various environmentally sustainable drought management and mitigation activities in the ALs. These activities would be expanded and strengthened under the proposed project. Project implementation strategy and components have been designed in accordance with the Government’s stated policies on ASAL development, and proposed project initiatives would be underpinned by the ongoing implementation of the National Environment Action Plan (NEAP). -9- 3. THE PROJECT A. PROJECT OBJECTIVES 3.1 The objectives of the Project are to strengthen and support community driven initiatives to: (a) reduce the widespread poverty and enhance food security in the arid districts of Turkana, Marsabit, Mandera, Wajir, Garissa, Tana River, Isiolo, Samburu, and the arid divisions of Baringo District; and (b) conserve the natural resource base in the arid lands through: (i) improving crop and livestock resilience to drought; (ii) increasing econormic linkages with the rest of the economy; and (iii) improving basic health services, water supply and other social services. B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.2 Summary Description: The project would have three components: (a) Drought Management: This component would institutionalize at the national and district levels a structure to effectively manage all the phases of drought. These include preparedness (drought monitoring), rnitigation (drought contingency planning and rapid reaction) and recovery (continued drought relief activities). The project will build on the successful model for drought monitoring piloted under the previous project; (b) Marketing and Infrastructure: This component would address the bottlenecks that impede livestock market linkages between the ALs and the rest of the national economy; and, Community Development (CD): In order to become fully responsive to the communities’ priority needs and demands, this component would be instrumental in assisting line ministries and collaborating agencies to adapt their organization and delivery systems to the specific conditions of the ALs. 3.3 Detailed Project Description: An overview of each of the three project components is as follows: 3.4 Drought Management (US$ 10.9 million including contingencies): This component will: (a) Establish at the national and district level policy and operational responsibilities for drought management in Kenya. As a first step, the project will implement a Drought Monitoring System which has been tested successfully under EDRP. The Department for Relief and Rehabilitation will monitor through this system a representative sample of the entire and land population on a monthly basis. The objective of the monitoring system is to detect specific drought related risks and to warn decision makers at both the district and the national level as early as possible so that immediate and targeted actions can be taken by the relevant line ministries to mitigate these risks. As part of policy development, national and district level – 10 – manuals and contingency plans would be developed to enhance strategic planning for the management of drought and famine (b) Establish: (i) a Drought Contingency Fund for immediate drought interventions to finance the respective line ministries’ specific emergency activities – incremental to their routine delivery of services – to protect communities’ livelihoods and to mitigate the negative impact of risks at an early stage. An example is an emergency immunization campaign, (ii) an Emergency Cereal Reserve to maintain small stocks at the district level to be used for emergency food relief and food for work interventions to see through the initial period of drought; and (iii) there is also a need to continue drought recovery activities (especially around the urban centers) for people who have been made destitute by the 1993 drought. The specific support that should be provided to these communities will be identified by the communities themselves (with the assistance of a team of technicians of the respective line departments) through Participatory Learning for Action (PLA) exercises, resulting in community work plans (c) The project would finance other drought preparedness and mitigation interventions such as the establishment of dry season and drought grazing reserves and strategic water supplies. Communities would plan and participate in the implementation of these mitigation interventions. To facilitate the flow of goods and services, the project will also assist in the maintenance of road infrastructure through the Ministry of Public Works, with a view to establishing labor intensive road maintenance activities which can be used as food for work initiatives during periods of drought, initially as a pilot activity. 3.5 Marketing and Infrastructure (US$ 3.4 million): Under this component a community based approach will be used to determine actions which can be taken to create an improved marketing environment. These actions may include: (a) rehabilitation of stock routes, water points and other infrastructure facilities; (b) development of new and rehabilitation of existing market-related infrastructure, including animal holding grounds, animal marketing centers and slaughter houses; (c) improvement and strengthening of the Livestock Marketing Information System; and (d) development of user-related initiatives in marketing of animals. The marketing of other products such as hides and skins or gum arabic could also be included. Training and capacity building in relation to the management and operation of community facilities, the format
ion of herders associations would be an integral part of this component. 3.6 Community Development (US$ 5.9 million): This component is designed to achieve the fundamental objective of increasing the communities’ capacities to protect and develop their livelihoods by dealing with the drought cycles in an effective way. The CD Component will be implemented following a phased or pilot approach in four arid districts over a four year period initially. Provided the findings at mid-term are positive, CD would be continued for the full project term of six years and its coverage will be extended to the remaining districts. The project will be instrumental in assisting each of the line ministries involved to improve and adapt their mode of intervention and organization to the specific conditions in the ALs so as to become responsive to the communities’ specific needs and demands. Participatory Learning for Action (PLA) is the major tool to confirm the assessment of what the communities consider to be their priorities and to take into account socio economic, environmental and other differences between various areas – I 1 – in order to tailor and adapt the line ministries’ service delivery system in the entire district. PLA teams (two per district), will be constituted to carry out this exercise in selected communities (see annex 5). Practical proposals have been elaborated by each of the line ministries during project preparation (see annex 6). The line ministries will be expected to maintain or if necessary increase their funding levels to successfully adapt their service delivery to the conditions of the arid lands and to manage the drought cycle. During project implementation, each of the district line departments will continue to improve and refine its organization on the basis of local conditions and field experience. The District Steering Group (DSG) will identify which local NGOs and other local organizations can be involved as implementers and trainers. The following is a summary of delivery systems related to services already demanded by communities: (a) Animal Health and Livestock Production. The Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock Development and Marketing (MOALDM) will focus on the support of Community Animal Health Workers (CAWHs, about 100 per district) who will (a) sell basic animal drugs in their community, (b) act as the first line animal health care, and (c) serve as “contact pastoralists” for the dissemination of technical messages related to the improvement of the herders’ capacity to manage their livestock. These messages will relate to issues including disease prevention, vaccination, and husbandry practices (such as control of parasites). The CAWHs will have the possibility every month to meet with the front line staff of the departments of veterinary services and livestock production for consultation and training. (b) Crop Production Support to crop production will be provided by the existing front line extension staff (maximum 40 per district) from MOALDM. Due to the particular circumstances – agriculture in ALs is generally being practiced in small, very well defined “pockets” which can vary in size – the ratio of front line extension staff per farm families should not exceed one per two hundred. The front line staff will have regular meetings with farmers to disseminate improved know how, and will benefit from monthly training and supervision carried out respectively by the district based subject matter specialists and the district agricultural officer. (c) Water With regard to rural water supply, the focus of the Ministry of Land Reclamation, Regional and Water Development (MLRRWD) will be on improving community water supply systems and strengthening the community water users associations’ capacity to manage and maintain new and existing water points. At the district level, a tearn of trainers will train members of the users associations with regard to management skills, operational maintenance, book keeping, formulation of bylaws, environmental impact, etc. In addition, the users associations will identify Community Water Workers – pump attendants, pipe fitters, line patrollers, mechanics and electricians – to assure the maintenance of the installation. A maintenance unit will be on call at the district level to react to demands from the respective users associations to intervene for repairs surpassing the CWWs’ capacity. (d) Health The Ministry of Health’s (MOH) Primary Health Care Program is designed to assure: (a) maximum mother and child welfare through the training of Traditional Birth Attendants (TBA, 2 to 5 per community); (b) treatment of minor ailments, preventive and educational services through Community Health Workers (CHWs, 15 to 20 for a population of about 10,000 people), and; (c) treatment of ailments and Matemal and Child Healti/Family Planning services through professional outreach teams (one per district). This strategy makes it – 12 – possible to reach nomadic communities as well as settlements without any health facility. Support to TBAs and CHWs is provided by division based Nomadic Primary Health Care Teams. (e) Coordination The District Project Coordinator’s role is critical to the success of the implementation of this component: the line ministries can only successfully pursue the adaptations that should be made to their organization and delivery system if they have strong (and external) support to overcome the many difficulties en route. Although there are no hierarchical links between the Coordinator and the heads of departments of the line ministries at the district level, he/she will provide critical feed back regarding the efficiency of the respective line ministries’ field operations, and whatever guidance and support needed to implement their program. 3.7 Training: Training constitutes one of the main activities under the program. Staff of each of the respective line ministries will participate in initial training courses to master the organizational changes and adaptations to the working methodology, and will benefit from continuous refresher courses to stay up to date with the latest relevant technology. This training is crucial to allow staff to provide, each in their field of expertise, the best quality of services possible to the community members. Given the importance of the Participatory Learning for Action for the identification and planning of support and services that should be provided by the line ministries, special attention will go to the training of staff in the methodology and techniques of PLA. During project preparation, each of the line ministries has outlined the broad framework for the respective training programs. In the course of implementation, these programs will be refined and further elaborated in practical training curricula and annual training programs. These training activities will include: (a) training of planners, policy-makers, field implementers, community leaders and other community members in implementation activities; (b) development of appropriate curricula to conduct “under the tree” training courses for community members; (c) training, including orientation courses, for middle- and senior-level civil servants on drought management, livestock marketing and community development programs; and, (d) acquisition of library books, manuals, teaching aids and other educational equipment where needed. 3.8 Studies: Under the project, studies will be carried out on the degradation of the natural resource base and developing a policy and legal framework on natural resource conservation. Mainly local consultants will be hired. Subjects for studies may include: (i) regulations and practices on grazing rights; (ii) creating institutional and non-formal conflict-resolution mechanisms, (iii) testing improved desert resource management technologies; (iv) implications of sedentarization of stock routes and emergency grazing reserves (v) implications of dry season grazing areas; (vi) regime of restriction of movement of cattle from the ALs to other parts of the country: (vii) market information systems for livestock; and (viii) ways to involve the private sector in
the establishment of slaughter houses. In addition, a review of laws and regulations will be carried out pertaining to the development of ALs, including a study on the land tenure system and development of instruments to protect and enforce the tenurial rights of pastoralists in the ALs. The Government has agreed to enter into a contract with a consulting firm before Credit effectiveness to carry out these studies. The Government has furnished to IDA a Letter of – 13 – Sectoral Policy defining the Government’s position on the issues raised in this paragraph and other policy and operational issues that would affect the implementation of this project (Annex 1). C. PROJECT COSTS AND FINANCING 3.9 Estimated project costs are presented in Table 1. Project costs by year are given in Annex 7, and detailed project costs breakdowns are presented in the PIP. Physical contingencies of 5 percent have been added to selected project costs. Price contingencies corresponding to the Manufacturers Unit Value Index3 have been applied to intemationally sourced items, and the projected domestic inflation rate has been applied to locally sourced items. A constant purchasing parity exchange rate has been calculated to adjust local price contingencies to US dollars. All costs are net of duties and taxes. Table 3.1: Project Cost Summary % Total Local Foreign Total Local Foreign Total Foreign Base Exchange Costs KShs. Millions US Dollar Millions DroughtManagement 331.4 126.7 458.1 7.4 2.8 10.2 28 44 Infrastructure and 89.9 48.2 138.1 2.0 1.1 3.1 35 13 Marketing Community 197.5 52.0 249.5 4.4 1.1 5.5 21 24 Development Project Implementation 140.1 61.3 201 4 3.1 1.4 4.5 30 19 Support Total BASELINE 758.9 288.2 1047 1 16.9 6.4 23.3 28 100 COSTS Physical 14.9 11.6 26.5 0.3 0.3 0.6 44 3 Contingencies Price Contingencies 172.9 76.7 249.6 0.8 0.4 1.2 32 5 Total PROJ. COSTS 946.7 376.5 1323.2 18.0 7.1 25.1 28 108 3.10 An IDA creditofSDR14.8 million (US$22.0 million), or 88 percentofprojectcost, would support the project, while the Govemment of Kenya and beneficiaries would contribute US$3.1 million. Out of the total Govemment share of US$3.1 million, the communities will contribute US$1.1 million. Line ministries will also be expected to maintain and possibly increase their support to the arid districts to improve and adapt their delivery systems. Table 2 provides the details of the financing plan by project component. 3/ An average annual price increase of 2.2 percent from 1995 to 2003 for intemationally sourced items, domestic inflation rate of 32 percent for 1994, 8 percent for 1995, 7.5 percent for 1996 and 5 percent thereafter. – 14 – Table 3.2 Financing Plan (US$ million) Project Components IDA GOK & Beneficiaries Total Drought Management 9.9 1.0 10.9 Marketing and Infrastructure 3.1 0.3 3.4 Community Development 4.8 1.1 5.9 Project Implementation Support 4.2 0.7 4.9 TOTAL (US$ million) 22.0 3.14 25.1 D. PROJECT PROCUREMENT ARRANGEMENTS 3.11 All procurement of goods, works and services would be in accordance with World Bank Procurement Guidelines. Bank’s standard bidding documents for goods, works and consultants would be used. At negotiations agreement was reached on an initial procurement plan, including standard procurement processing time and schedules for standard bidding documents for critical contracts. (a) Civil Works All contracts estimated to cost US$250,000 or more will be by ICB and below this value will be by LCB. Civil works in each project district would cover new office buildings (estimated cost US$250,000), spot improvement to roads (US$400,000) and miscellaneous works associated wAth livestock infrastructure and drought management (US$4.9 million). These works will be carried out district-wide over the project period on the basis of annual work plans prepared by each district. For these works foreign firms will not be interested and adequate competition exists among local contractors. Ordinary road repair works each estimated to cost not more than US$50,000 will be carried out by the District Works Offices (DWOs) using the acceptable force account method and employing local labor as far as possible. For carrying out livestock infrastructure works (water pans, boreholes, fencing, civil structures at holding grounds/market yards or along stock routes) and drought management works (infrastructure for drought mitigation centers and livestock grazing reserves) the DSU will engage an appropriate district agency (DWO, District Water Engineer) who will carry out these works following force account as described for road improvement works. The aggregate of works under force account will not be more than US$500,000. (b) Goods and Equipment Procurement of goods under contracts estimated at US$100,000 equivalent or more will be done by ICB. For contracts less than US$100,000 equivalent LCB procedures will be adopted. In the first two years of the project vehicles, computers, survey equipment, radio equipment for the districts will be procured centrally by the National Support Unit (NSU) through ICB with each contract estimated to cost US$100,000 or more aggregating to US$2.5 million. Contracts below US$100,000 up to an aggregate of US$1.2 million will be procured by LCB by the districts in terms of requirements reflected in the annual work plans. Small contracts of US$20,000 equivalent or less will use local shopping procedures (a minimum of three quotations), with aggregate not to exceed US$200,000. Under ICB, domestic manufacturers of goods will be allowed a margin of preference of 15 percent or the existing rate of import duty, whichever is lower, over the CIF price of the 4/ Includes beneficiary contribution of US$1.1 million for CDP. – 15 – competing foreign bidders. Fuel, oil and lubricants covered by the O&M costs will be procured according to normal Government procedures, which are satisfactory. (c) Community Development The project envisages about 200 microprojects in the four pilot districts in four years. In addition, the Marketing component also envisages small community projects. These microprojects will be implemented following procedures described below. A microproject would normally have a maximum project contribution of US$10,000 excluding a minimum of 30 percent community share. At negotiations assurance was received that beneficiary communities will provide a minimum of 30 percent of the microproject costs. The microprojects will be executed by the line ministry, or a non-Government agency contracted to carry-out the microproject as a Collaborating Agency. Procurement procedures for the nicroprojects would be normal GOK procedures acceptable to IDA. At negotiations the Govemment furnished a statement establishing that full authority for procurement of goods and services required for community microprojects is vested in the districts. These would include shopping procedures, local competitive bidding procedures as appropriate and/or direct contracting where the first two methods are not feasible. Each microproject contract will be supported by a technical proposal, basic financial analysis and budget approved by the District Steering Group, summarized in a sanction letter to be signed by the DPC. DSU would have the responsibility to supervise implementation and report progress to the DSG. (d) Technical Assistance and Training The project would finance four major and several minor studies, meet the cost of consultants and fund training of staff and communities. Consultants will be hired following procedures set forth in the “Guidelines for the Use of Consultants by the World Bank as Executing Agency”. All terms of reference for consultants, consultant contracts for firms above US$100,000 and for individuals above US$50,000 and training proposals will be subject to IDA prior review. All contracts, regardless of contract value, for consultants to be appointed under NSU, and DSUs, will be subject to prior review by IDA. Where applicable, consultant contracts would include a training component. Table 3.3 Project Procurement (US$ million) Procurement Method Item ICB LCB LS Other Total Civil Works 5.1 0.5 5.6 (4.6) (0.4) (5.0) Vehicles an
d Equipment 2.5 1.2 0.2 3.9 (2.5) (1.2) (0.2) (3.9) Training 0.7 0.7 (0.7) (0.7) Consultancy 1.7 1.7 (1.7) (1.7) Community Development 3.7 3.7 (2.6) (2.6) Incremental Operating Costs 9.5 9.5 (8.1) (8.1) TOTAL 2.5 6.3 0.2 16.1 25.1 (2.5) (5.8) (0.2) (13.5) (22.0) NOTE: Figures in parenthesis are estimated amounts to be financed under the IDA Credit – 16 – 3.12 Procurement Review Table 3 shows procurement procedures to be adopted for the project. All bidding packages (for civil works and goods) estimated to cost US$100,000 or more would be subject to IDA prior review. Other contracts will be subject to post reviews in accordance with the provisions of Appendix I of the Bank’s procurement Guidelines. The prior review process would cover about 35 percent of the works, 70 percent of goods and 80 percent of consultant services and training. Overall IDA prior review would cover about 57 percent of IDA-financed contracts. The level of IDA prior review is lower than the expected 80 percent because of the nature of the project, i.e., small community projects and decentralizing procurement to the districts. However, it would be compensated in several ways: (i) the annual financial audit will look at procurement matters; (ii) the post-two year evaluation of CD component will include comprehensive review of the procurement implementing process; and (iii) during IDA supervision, random reviews would be conducted of procurement packages, including field visits and reviews of documentation of microprojects and other procurement packages. A list of important contracts for works, goods and consultants and their procurement schedule relative to the implementation plan is provided in the PIP. E. IDA CREDIT ALLOCATION AND DISBURSEMENTS 3.13 The Project Disbursement Plan is shown in Table 4. The fully implemented credit is expected to be disbursed over six years as shown in the disbursement schedule (Annex 8). The countrywide profile is six and a half years. The credit closing date is June 30, 2001. Table 3.4: Disbursement Plan Disbursements Amount Items (USD % Financing Million) 1. Civil Works 4.2 90% 2. Vehicles and Equipment 3.6 100% of foreign costs and 90% of local costs 3. Training and Consultants 2.2 100% 4. Community Development 2.5 70% Fund 5. Incremental Operating Costs a) Vehicle O&M 1.8 90% b) All other O&M 5.9 90% for expenditures incurred before December 31, 1997, 80% for expenditures before December 31, 1999, 75% thereafter 6. Refund of PPF 0.2 Amounts due 7. Unallocated 1.6 TOTAL 22.0 3.14 Disbursements would be made against standard IDA documentation with the following exceptions, for which certified Statements of Expenditures (SOEs) would be used: (i) contracts less than US$100,000 equivalent; (ii) all local training, and (iii) operating costs. SOE thresholds for – 17 – consultants would be US$100,000 for firms and US$50,000 for individuals. SOEs would be certified by the Finance Officer in the NSU and the External Resources Division (ERD) of the Ministry of Finance, who would confirm that these are in agreement with the books of account. These would be subject to review by IDA supervision missions and interim and annual audits (para 4.9). 3.15 In order to facilitate the availability of funds for the project when needed, a Special Account will be established in a commercial bank and operated and maintained on terms satisfactory to IDA. An initial deposit of US$1 million will be deposited by IDA into the Special Account. The Special Account will be replenished on the basis of satisfactory documentary evidence, to be provided to IDA, of eligible payments made from the account for goods and services required for the project. No limit will be set on the size of the payments to be made from the Special Account other than that imposed by the balance remaining in the account. 3.16 Flow of Funds to Districts (a) The Government will continue for ALRFMP the existing budgeting and funding arrangement established for the EDRP for transferring project funds to the districts for meeting the costs of district-based project activities. This arrangement comprises a single line budget under the OP, a single Authority to Incur Expenditure (AIE) issued in favor of the DPC in each project district, and especially enhanced district cash floats for each project district to fully meet the cash requirements of project expenditures. Funds would be allocated to line ministries and other collaborating agencies for activities at the district level based on the process of identification of community priorities, which will result in district annual work plans. At negotiations the Government confirmed that these arrangements will be applied to ALRMP and will not be altered without mutual agreement during project implementation. (b) The Government and IDA shall monitor and review the operation and effectiveness of the district payment mechanism from time to time. If the joint review concludes that the payment mechanism is not effective, the Government shall, not later than three months after being notified by IDA, introduce and implement such modification of the mechanism or of the applicable administrative and financial rules and procedures as may have been agreed upon with IDA. 3.17 Government has also given an assurance to make appropriate provisions of funds in the budget for year one of the project in terms of the agreed Annual Work Plan and to ensure that these funds are available for meeting project expenditures as soon as the project becomes effective. – 18- 4. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION A. ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT 4.1 Building on the experience acquired under the previous EDRP, the ALRMP will (a) provide a system and policy for effective drought management; and (b) strengthen the communities’ capacity to deal with further droughts. In order to assure long term sustainability, any action or intervention will be designed to be as cost effective as possible, to be community based, and to be implemented through the relevant line ministries and collaborating agencies. To be successful however, the line ministries will have to adapt their way of operating to the particularities of the Arid Lands. They will also need strong support and guidance from the National Support Unit and the District Coordinators in the Office of the President to meet this challenge. The Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock Development and Marketing, the Ministry of Land Reclamation, Regional and Water Development, and the Ministry of Health have continued, during project preparation, to refine a broad outline of the adaptations to be made to their respective ways of operating in order to become more effective in their response to the communities’ needs and demands During the respective district launching workshops, the staff of each line department will examine how the different frameworks for action can be best implemented, taking the local conditions into account. Yearly follow-up workshops will be organized in each district to critically examine and improve the effectiveness of the current way of operating. 4.2 It is ALRMP’s role to assist the line ministries in the adaptation of their mode of operation to the specific requirements and conditions of the communities in the arid lands. To assure full ownership of the communities, in any activity involving physical inputs, the principal of joint action will be upheld with the communities contributing at least a minimum of 30% of the total cost. In addition to the support with regard to organizational and technical matters, ALRMP can provide equipment to the line ministries to implement their work plans. However, ALRMP is the donor of last resort: only after having exhausted the own regular budget and any other possible source of financing (including NGOs), the line ministries can request incremental financing from ALRMP. The line ministries will be expected to maintain or if necessary increase their funding levels to adapt their service delivery to meet the conditions of the arid lands and to manage the drought cycle. 4.3 The organization and management under ALRMP is as follows: 4.4 National level (a) The National Relief and Rehabilitatio
n Coordination Committee (NRRCC) will define and enforce the drought management policy of the Government. It is constituted by the Permanent Secretaries of the MOALDM, MOH, MILRRWD, MOPW and MOE under the chairmanship of the Permanent Secretary for Relief – 19 – and Rehabilitation of the Office of the President. The NRRCC meets at least twice every year, or whenever the need may arise to provide the policy guidance to the program. (b) The Project Steering Committee (PSC) will monitor the implementation of the program on a continuous basis and will be constituted by directors (or their senior aides) of the respective line ministries. The PSC will be chaired by the Director of Programs from the Office of the President. During the working sessions, the PSC members will verify to what extent each of the line ministries’ work programs in the ALs is in line with the declared objectives. The PSC will carry out quarterly field supervision missions to supervise and encourage the line ministries’ staff at the district level, and to propose any corrective action where and when needed. The National Project Coordinator is the secretary of the PSC. (c) The National Support Unit (NSU) is responsible for (a) the coordination of the ALRMP; (b) the monthly publication of the national drought status report; (c) the support and supervision to the training initiatives at the district level; and (d) development and sustainance of drought contingency plans and response mechanisms. The NSU is headed by the National Project Coordinator, who reports to the Director of Programs in the Office of the President, and comprises a drought monitoring officer, a training officer, and a support unit (accounts officer, supplies officer, drivers, secretaries, and messenger). The professional staff in the NSU will spend most of their time in the field to assist the implementation of the program in the ALs districts. They will give guidance to the District Program Coordinators, and will support the respective line departments with the field implementation of their activities. In particular, the NSU members will assure the proper follow-up for the recommendations made by the PSC. 4.5 District level: (a) The District Steering Group (DSG) will comprise the heads of departments of each of the line ministries concerned (MOALDM, MOH, MLRRWD, MOPW and MOE), the District Program Coordinator, as well as local NGOs and at least two community leaders. The DSG will be chaired by the District Commissioner. The Program Coordinator is in charge of the secretariat. The DSG is responsible for: (a) supervising the planning of activities in each of the line departments so that work programs filly respond to communities’ needs and demands; (b) monitoring the effectiveness of implementation; (c) development of a district drought contigency plan; (d) reviewing the monthly district drought bulletin issued by the Department for Relief and Rehabilitation; and (e) decide on steps to be taken for appropriate response whithin the framework of the district drought contingency plan. The DSG will meet at least once per month. (b) The District Program Coordinator (DPC) reports to the NPC in the Office of the President and at the district level to the District Commissioner. The DPC has – 20 – two major responsibilities: (a) to provide critical feed back regarding the efficiency of the respective line ministries’ field operations, as well as guidance and support needed to plan and implement their program; and (b) the monthly publication of the drought bulletin. It is considered to be of crucial importance for the success of the program that the line ministries would have strong and continuous external support from the DPC. In each district, the DPC will be assisted by a support unit comprising a supplies assistant, an accounts assistant, and three support staff (driver, secretary, messenger). The DPC and the unit will be equipped with a 4×4 vehicle and two motorcycles. (c) The Drought Monitoring System will, as mentioned above, be part of the responsibility of the DPC. In each district a Drought Monitoring Officer will be identified, to the extent possible among the existing staff of the line ministries. He/she will report to the DPC and be responsible for the supervision of data collection, the analysis of the data, and the publication of the drought bulletin. For purposes of data collection in the field, the program will train about 50 monitors per district. These monitors are part of the communities, and work on a temporary basis (one week per month). Since they collect data in the immediate vicinity of their locality, they do not need any particular means of transportation. (d) The Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock Development and Marketing (MOALDM) will, with regard to animal health and livestock production, provide support to about 100 Community Animal Health Workers (CAHWs) per district. As mentioned above, these CAHWs will: (a) sell basic animal drugs in their community; (b) act as the first line animal health care, and; (c) serve as “contact pastoralists” for the dissemination of technical messages related to the improvement of the herders’ capacity to manage their livestock. One front line staff (about ten per district, based at the divisional level) can provide support to about ten CAHWs. In general, the front line staff will be equipped with motorcycles. However, it still needs to be specified during project implementation which means of transportation would be most suitable in those cases where motorcycles are not a practical solution. The front line staff will receive quarterly visits from the District Veterinary Officer and the District Livestock Production Officer, and will participate in three monthly training sessions. During project implementation, two major issues still need to be clarified: how to organize effective linkages with research, and how to improve and support the organization of vaccination campaigns so as to increase coverage and to make them more efficient and cost effective. (e) To improve support to crop production in the ALs, the MOALDM will improve the organization of the existing front line staff according to two scenarios: (a) the front line extension worker lives near the agricultural area (irrigation scheme or rain fed farming), providing support to the farmers within walking distance not needing any specific means of transportation, and (b) the front line staff (FLS) provide support to a number of farmers in more than one location, therefore needing a motorcycle to visit the farmers. All FLS will meet with farmers on a – 21 – fortnightly basis. The ratio of number of farm families per front line staff will vary from district to district. However, given the distances to be traveled between different areas where agriculture is being practiced, the ratio of FLS per farm families should not exceed one per 200. The actual number of existing FLS also varies considerably (depending on the importance of agriculture in the district) but never exceeds about 40. At least once per month, FLS will benefit from supervision. There will be one supervisor per five to eight FLS. At the district level, a team of SMS will be responsible for the training of FLS. Once per month, the District Agricultural Officer (DAO) will gather all FLS in a specific location for this purpose. (f) The Ministry of Land Reclamation, Regional and Water Development (MLRRWD) will have in each district a team to install new water points. This team will comprise three types of units: a drilling unit for boreholes, a pump installation unit, and a dam construction unit. These units will be equipped with a lorry for transportation of materials. The support to communities’ management and operation of the water units is assured through monthly visits from the divisional officers (about three per district). In most cases, these officers will be equipped with a motorcycle. In addition, a maintenance unit is on call at the district level to react to demands from the respective users associations to intervene for repairs surpassing the community water workers’ capacity. This maintenance unit comprises an electrician,
a plant mechanic, and a plumber and will be provided with a 4×4 vehicle equipped equipped with the necessary tools. Supervision is assured by the district training officer and the district water engineer. The district training officer will visit each of the divisional water officers at least once per month. These visits are also instrumental to upgrade the front line staffs’ skills. The district water engineer visits each of the communities at least once every quarter to check on the efficiency of the services delivered by his staff. (g) At the district level, the Ministry of Health will have a District Nomadic Primary Health Core Team of about four members. The core team is under the leadership of the district nomadic primary health care coordinator who is responsible for the supervision of field activities and the training of staff in the health centers and dispensaries. At the division level there is a health center which is headed by a clinical officer. The officer supervises, among other things, the divisional nomadic primary health care team constituted of the public health officer, and a community nurse. The members of this team are trained during a one week course as trainers of trainers (TOTs) and participate in continuing education courses about once every three months. They are responsible for the training and supervision of the Village Health Committee members, the Community Health Workers (CHWs), and the Traditional Birth Attendants (TBAs), and will, to achieve this, visit settlements without any health facilities once every month on a specified day. The team will be equipped with two motorcycles. To assure treatment of minor ailments in settlements and in nomadic communities, a district based team of five officers visit settlements without health facilities at a well defined time and place (so that nomadic people will know where and when they can meet with this team for – 22 – consultation). The team will have a van equipped to provide primary curative and preventive health care. In optimal conditions, the team can visit each settlement once every two months. 4.6 Project Phasing The Drought Management and Marketing and Infrastructure components of the project would be implemented over a six-year implementation period. The Community Development component would initially be implemented in only four districts over a four-year period. However, if the findings of the evaluation at mid-term are positive, decisions would be made to continue the component for the full project term of six years in these districts and to extend its coverage to the remaining districts. A sum of US$1.3 million has been included in the project costs for this purpose. Groundwork for project start-up will commence in the zero year (starting in early 1995) and will be mainly devoted to establishing both the institutional and organizational infrastructure as well as advance action for the procurement of vehicles and equipment. The demonstrated benefits accruing from project initiatives would encourage the conflict resolution process and form the basis for expanding project activities to the relatively insecure areas. It was agreed during negotiations that a comprehensive mid-term review would be carried out at the end of year three between September 30, 1998 and December 31, 1998, and lessons learned incorporated. A detailed list of topics to be covered at the mid-term review has been included in the PIP. Project activities in the zero year will be funded through a PPF and partly through the components of EDRP which have been aligned during its mid-term review to eventually dovetail into ALRMP. B. CONSULTANCIES AND STUDIES 4.7 The project provides for about 48 person-months of consultancies for drought management and community development, for guiding and advising on preparation of the national and district drought manuals and contingency plans and the establishment of the drought monitoring system (para 3.4) and for advising on operational issues related to community development activities. The project will also finance studies in tenurial and grazing rights of pastoralists, resource management in ALs and on marketing. C. PROJECT MONITORING AN” EVALUATION 4.8 Baseline studies will be carried out under EDRP and under the project preparation facility, which will form the basis for project evaluation. Assurance was obtained at negotiations that the design and formats of the baseline studies will be finalized in consultation with IDA. The timeframe for conducting the surveys was agreed at negotiations. Monitorable indicators have been developed during appraisal and are included in the PIP. A list of key indicators finalized during negotiations is attached (Annex 10). During implementation, an annual review workshops will be held, rotationally in each district, as a sharing, best-practice learning event. All implementers in the field, including govemment ministries, NGO functionaries, representatives of participating communities, and staff of DSU/NSU will be the participants. The workshop will review implementation of the previous year, identify constraints and issues, select best practices and set goals and Implementation methodology for the next year. An annual evaluation of the CD component will be carried out. The review at the end of year two will be comprehensive so that lessons are applied in the implementation of the -23 – component in the remaining period. An impact evaluation of the project will be carried out at rmid-term and in the terminal year of the project. The impact study will particularly focus on the benefits of improved market linkages, i.e., improved livestock take-off and farm gate prices, the reduction in drought inflicted losses, and increase in the off-farm income generation capacity. At negotiations Government assurance was obtained for conducting the impact evaluation study as proposed above. Agreement was also reached on the design and important details of the study. D. AUDITING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 4.9 The overall financial management, accounting and budgeting of the project will be the responsibility of NSU, which will co-ordinate all financial transactions including disbursement requests generated by DSUs. NSU and the districts would maintain accounts and records for project activities, including for SOEs and the Special Account, as relevant (paras. 3.13 and 3.14) in accordance with sound accounting practices satisfactory to IDA. Assurances were received during negotiations that the Government would (i) have the records and the accounts of the project, including those for the Special Account and SOEs, audited for each fiscal year by the Controller and Auditor General (CAG) or private auditors appointed by the CAG and acceptable to IDA; (ii) submit the audit reports to IDA within six months of the close of every fiscal year; (iii) ensure that the audit would comprise the auditor’s report on the project accounts comprising balance sheet (to show fixed and current assets), operating expenditure statement and statement showing sources and application of funds, the Special Account and the SOEs. The audit report will also include a statement on the adequacy of the accounting system and intemal controls. At negotiation the GOK provided assurances that (i) project audit reports will be fumished to IDA in formats generally and/or specifically agreed between GOK and IDA; and (ii) the project’s financial management and accounting system will be in place and operating before effectiveness. 4.10 Semi-annual reports, in agreed formats included in the PIP, on the progress of project components would be prepared and submitted to IDA by the NSU. A mid-term review of the progress and impact of the project interventions will be undertaken by OP and IDA not later than September 30, 1998. To facilitate this review, the NSU will prepare a project mid-term status report and furnish to IDA at least three months before the scheduled date for the midterm review. The review would form the basis for the Government/IDA to assess what corrective action may need to be taken and whether any reallocation between components is required. Six months before
the project closing date, the Borrower will prepare and make available to IDA its own implementation evaluation report on the project’s execution and initial costs and benefits, IDA’s and the Government’s performance of their respective obligations under the Credit Agreement, and the extent to which the purposes of the credit were achieved. The formats for the evaluation report have been described in the PIP. E. SUPERVISION PLAN 4.11 The project would be supervised more intensively by GOK and IDA in the first two years to guide community-oriented implementation and cooperation between various development actors in an environment where process is as important as the achievement of basic objectives. IDA supervision would require experts in institutions and community – 24 – development, drought management and livestock marketing and procurement at least twice in each of the first two years and once armually in the remaining period. In addition, a disbursement specialist would join at least three missions in the first two years and later at the time of the mid-term review. A roads engineer will be engaged in a few missions to review the spot improvement program for repairing critical district roads. The procurement and disbursement specialists participating in the missions will also provide training and orientation to the field staff. The first three missions will particularly focus on recruitment and staffing of positions in the district and national project support units, training, establishment and smooth operation of cooperation procedures, successful contracting for critical goods and consultancies for studies, and intensive on-the ground review of the community microprojects and community participation in project implementation. Review of the Government’s arrangements for the flow of funds would also receive serious attention, as would the adequacy of budgeting and timely fund availability to the districts for meeting project expenditures. A detailed supervision plan indicating approximate mission schedules, key activities to be reviewed, items of special focus, expected skills and estimated staff inputs is given in Annex 11. – 25 – 5. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION, RISKS AND SUSTAINABILITY A. JUSTIFICATION 5.1 The over-arching objective of the project is to reduce widespread poverty and enhance food security in the Arid Lands (about 75% of Kenya’s land area is classified as arid or semi-arid, with the ALs comprising 60% of the total land area of Kenya). Almost the entire population of around I million people in the ALs are below the poverty line as defined in the recently finalized Poverty Assessment report (discussed in paras. 2.8-2.12). The predominantly pastoralist populations in the arid districts, are in fact counted among the poorest and the most disadvantaged sections of society in the country. Social welfare indicators show that in terms of access to communications, public health, nutrition and education services, they receive a fraction of the services available to the rest of the Kenyan population. The project specifically supports the core objective of reducing poverty and strengthening the basis for equitable and environmentally sustainable economic development as defined in the CAS. The project is targeted to reach a highly disadvantaged group of communities living under harsh economic and agro-ecological conditions, and seeks to improve the living conditions of AL populations through: (i) enhancing resilience to droughts; (ii) increasing incomes through strengthening linkages with the rest of the economy; (iii) addressing basic needs of the communities, and especially of women and children; and (iv) the conservation of the natural resource base of the ALs. 5.2 Rising population pressures in the semi -arid lands have also increased the pressure on the AL resource base (see paras. 2.9-2.10). Consequently the traditional coping mechanisms of the AL populations are no longer adequate to allow them to recover from droughts. As a result, their dependence on primarily donor financed relief programs has grown over the years and in some parts of the ALs it has become a way of life. This is clearly not sustainable. The main aim of the drought management component of the project would be to enhance the AL population’s resilience to drought, and by formulating a detailed set of arrangements for drought warning, mitigation and recovery, aimed at reducing drought inflicted losses (see para. 3.4 & Annex 3), and reduce the need for repetitive emergency interventions. In particular, the devastating impact of the recurrent droughts will be contained through a comprehensive set of actions, such as, the institutionalization of the drought management mechanism at the national, district and local levels; strengthening of the national drought early warning system; improvement of stockroutes (holding grounds, water points, etc.) for emergency livestock evacuation; establishment and maintenance of drought grazing reserves; emergency veterinary campaigns, operation of drought related CFW/FFW projects; and, support for food aid activities. In addition, the project would strengthen and support local initiatives to better manage range lands, critical grazing reserves and other easily degradable environments in ALs and thereby help strengthen the traditional coping mechanisms of the AL communities as well (paras. 3.8; 5.14 and Annex 9). The project will also finance studies aimed at developing a policy and legal framework to address important concerns in areas such as, implications of diminishing dry season grazing regions; implications of increased sedentarization on stock routes and emergency grazing reserves; current regulations/practices on grazing rights and introduction of – 26 – appropriate reforms; and, testing desert resource management technologies e.g. sustainable water development, fodder development, grazing land management, pastoral income diversification. 5.3 The main economic asset of the ALs is livestock (Table 5.1). However, as a result of poor linkages with the rest of the economy (due mainly to inadequate infrastructure), the AL communities have been unable to realize the financial benefits from this important resource (para 2.12). The project aims to improve the linkages of the ALs with the rest of the economy. Specifically the project would help facilitate the further integration of these communities by providing marketing outlets for livestock and livestock products (para. 3.5; Annex 4). In operationalizing key stockroutes, the component will finance the rehabilitation of related infrastructure, such as, holding grounds, water points, marketing centers; the formation of usergroups for the identification of marketing obstacles and related solutions, as well as pertinent studies will also be supported under the project. Table 5.1: AL Livestock Resources | Population Herd Value (‘000) Average Drought period ($ millions) ($ millions) goats & sheep 4500 99 22 donkeys 100 5 n.a. camels 600 108 20 cattle 1400 196 29 5.4 The ALs have been a target of many development interventions as described in Annex 2. The main lesson learned from the successful initiatives is that, sustainable development would not have been possible without strong community involvement in decision making and implementation. This lesson has been the corner-stone in designing the CD component under the project. The CD component of the project would enable communities to plan and implement micro-projects that respond to their own priorities, building sustainability into the development initiatives (para. 3.6; Annex 5). These microprojects would help meet basic social needs, in particular of women and children, and also promote off/on-farm income generating activities. ALRMP’s precursor, and the only World Bank project in the area — EDRP, is having an impact in improving the management of livestock resources, animal health, drought, water resources and the environment/natural resource base, as well as, strengthening local capacities in the four arid districts where it is being implemented. B. PROJECT IMPACT 5.5 Poverty Reduction. Designed to be implemented followin
g a bottom-up, communitybased, demand-driven development approach, ALRMP’s preparation entailed joint visits, systematic client consultations, and “on-location” planning exercises with AL pastoralist communities. Hence, the project’s participatory planning approach, the identification of priority actionable areas for ameliorating the quality of life of the AL communities and the direct delivery of funds into communities, are all targeted towards reducing poverty in the ALs. The – 27 – poverty reduction strategy under the project, is aimed at galvanizing broad-based econormic growth in the region through improved management of the AL poor’s most abundant resources – livestock and labor, in conjunction with the improved management of the natural resources of the ALs (para. 5.14). The Poverty Assessment report indicates that in 1992 the poverty line in rural areas stood at Ksh. 485 per adult equivalent unit (a.e.u) per month or about US $ 10 per a.e.u., per month. The project would significantly increase the income of the largely pastoralist population through: (i) reduction in mortality rates of the livestock resources, particularly, in periods of drought; (ii) improvements in animal health leading to more rapid herd growth (improved fertility, reduced mortality); (iii) increased volume of sales due to improvements in herd growth rates (ensuring larger surplus for the markets), as well as, higher off-take rates due to improved commercial linkages with the rest of the economy; and (iv) increases in farm-gate prices due to both the improvements in quality of livestock offered by the AL pastoralists, and the reduction in transportation and other transaction costs of middle-men/traders, a portion of which would be passed on to the farm-level. The other mutually reinforcing element of the project’s poverty reduction strategy relates to the development of off-farm income generation activities, which while helping push up the standard of living in the area, would both reduce the dependence on /depletion of ALs’ natural resources, and help stabilize incomes in the drought years. 5.6 Drought Management. The main benefit of the project’s drought management activities would be the reduction of livestock losses due to the droughts which regularly devastate these areas. Livestock losses can be very severe. In the 1984 drought, approximately 33 percent of cattle, 25 percent of small ruminants (sheep/goats) and 13 percent of camels perished; in 1992 nearly 46 percent of cattle, 31 percent of sheep and 21 percent of camels were lost in the six severely affected arid districts. It is very modestly estimated that the project would help reduce livestock losses by about one-quarter of their present drought mortality rates (Table 5.2). The resultant benefits are estimated at about US$ 9 million (at current prices) in a severe drought and about US$ 6 million in a less severe drought. If however, the project results in a reduction of the drought mortality rates by one-third, the gross benefits would be equivalent to some US $ 12 million in a severe drought and US$ 8 million in a less severe drought. If on the basis of past experience it is assumed that a severe drought is experienced every 10 years and a less severe drought every five, then over a 20 year period potential benefits from improved drought management are expected to be considerable. Table 5.2: Drought Mortality Rates Without Project With Project Drought Mortality Rates Drought Mortality Rates Severe Less Severe Severe Less Severe goats/sheep 28 12 21 9 camels 17 5 13 4 cattle 40 14 30 11 5.7 In addition, improved drought management would also lead to less deterioration of the general condition of the animals which should result in better prices when they are sold. Keeping more animals alive during a drought will have substantial nutritional benefits to the – 28 – population and reduce the need for costly food imports or aid and help minimize disruption of the pastoralist economy. 5.8 Market Linkages, Animal Health & Farmgate Prices. The project would also lead to improved market linkages. Over the last ten years, on average, the livestock offtake rates for the ALs have been as follows: 7 percent of the cattle, 8 percent of the goats/sheep and about 1.5 percent of the camels from the arid lands are marketed outside the region (Table 5.3). The project aims to increase the low average annual off-take rates of AL livestock units over time by strengthening the marketing links with the rest of the economy. A robust domestic/export market for livestock products exists in Kenya, hence, the additional output would be readily absorbed. While the considerable potential for improving the current AL offiake rates may well be realized (under ALRMIP), such that the numbers of cattle marketed increases to 11 percent and small ruminants to 25 percent annually, for the purposes of assessing incremental project benefits, it is frugally estimated that at full development the project would increase annual sales of cattle and small ruminants by 20 percent each over current rates — to about 8.4 and 10 percent, respectively, and that of camels by just 10 percent p.a. (to some 2 percent). Table 5.3: Livestock Offtake Rates 3 With-out Project With Project Offtake Rates Offtake Rates sheep/goats 8.0% 9.6% camels 1.7% 1.9% cattle 7%0% 0 8.4% 5.9 It is also envisaged that the improvements in the quality of the livestock units being sold (due to increased availability of water, fodder and animal health services), and reduction in transportation and other trading costs, would directly translate into improvements in farm-gate prices under the project (Table 5.4). Again, the premiums for quality and the general reduction in transaction costs is conservatively estimated to yield a nominal 10 percent improvement in prices, over their current levels. The farmgate prices have been calculated by averaging the prices prevailing in project districts over the last two years; the prices prevailing during the severe drought of year of 1991/92 were taken as the benchmark for the reduced price levels during droughts. Given the substantial drought mitigation/management efforts under the project, it is envisaged that the slaughter rates of cattle, particularly during the less severe droughts will be reduced, as the effective activation of the emergency relief apparatus would augment the staying power of the pastoralists and their herds. It is hence assumed that the prices during the less severe droughts will stabilize at around fifty percent of the normal farmgate price levels. Overall, the value of the incremental sales (at the improved prices) under the project (during a normal year) is hence estimated at some US$5 million annually (in current prices). Due to paucity of reliable data, no serious effort was made to evaluate the project benefits deriving from increased meat, milk, skin and wool production. Nevertheless, it should be noted that in addition to the meat, milk forms a large part of the pastoralist diet and provides an important proportion of the necessary calories and proteins. Much of the incremental milk produced would be consumed locally. In addition, the improved incomes of – 29 – the arid lands populations would have a multiplier effect through increased trade with the rest of the economy. Table 5.4: Farmgate Prices (per animal) Without Project With Project Farmgate prices/unit (Ksh) Fa mgate prices/u it IKsh) Average Drought Average Less severe Severe Drought Prices Prices drought Sheep/goats 990 315 1,080 540 360 Camels 8,100 1,800 8,910 4,455 1,980 Cattle 6,300 1,575 6.930 3,465 1,755 5.10 . Community Development The CD component of the project would also lead to substantial monetary and non-monetary benefits to the beneficiaries. A key focus of CD component is to promote income-generating activities, particularly through support for offfarm microenterprises. This support would take the form of training, limited technical assistance, and seed capital. Although a precise assessment of the overall economic or financial costs and benefits arising from the component is not feasible, the project is designed to draw upon th
e least cost options for undertaking the proposed initiatives in the project area. It is anticipated that about 15 percent of the AL population will benefit from the support under the project for setting up on/off-farm microenterprises, which is envisaged to improve their gross incomes by a modest 10 percent, it is expected that at full development, some US$ 1.5 rmillion (in current prices), will be added annually to the gross earnings of the AL population. An assessment (on the basis of the experiences under EDRP and other relevant development initiatives in the ALs), of the gross annual benefits accruing from representative models of selected (potential) microprojects with moderate investments in the areas of community educational facilities and water schemes, indicates that over a twenty year period, the total quantifiable benefits from these initiatives would significantly exceed the microproject investment costs. Assuming improved employment opportunities for only about 5 percent of the young adults receiving primary education (from a total of some 1500 students per year), either through the application of the “under the tree” nomadic education models or through the improvement of the more formal educational facilities, supported under the project (three educational facilities per district were assumed), on the basis of very conservative estimates (i.e., only a fifth of their income is attributed to their education), the total annual (incremental) benefit from the gainful employment of these students amounts to about US$ 12,000 (in current prices), starting in about PYI I (by PY20 the cumulative total incremental income will amount to an estimated US$ 115,000). While US$ 12,000 is not an impressive amount per se, this income represents a per capita incremental amount of about US$ 160 p.a. for the 5 percent earning it, and helps push their earning levels over the poverty line. Likewise, financial analysis relating to the provision of two borehole type water facilities for each of the project districts indicates that, at current prices the total incremental income generated per year, from the operation of these boreholes (for 300 days per year, at the charge of Ksh. 2 /livestock unit/day for some 16,500 heads of livestock), a total annual income of US$ 216,000 may be expected at full development. 5.11 In addition, the improved educational facilities and water resources will translate into enhancing the quality of life and increasing the productivity of the local communities, as well as – 30 – improving their income base/potential. Improvements in the general health of the local population and their livestock herds due to increased access to good quality drinking water would translate into direct economic benefits, and community water schemes would lead to increased food production in home gardens (evidence of this is visible under EDRP) and substantial savings in terms of labor by reducing the time it takes to fetch water or trekking animals several kms away to water points. The project is designed to draw upon the least cost options for undertaking the proposed initiatives in the project area. The representatives of the key technical line ministries in the District Steering Group will evaluate the soundness of the technological packages being adopted The locally based Collaborating Agencies as well as the AL communities themselves, would be closely involved in the selection of altemative approaches with regard to technological processes and resources to be employed in implementing various activities under the project Furthermore, the lessons of experience and “best practices” that have evolved under the past and ongoing development interventions in the area, e.g., EDRP, the Kenya Livestock Development Project funded by the European Union and the UNDP supported Pastoralist Integrated Development Project (Annex 2), will be applied and replicated under ALRMP. The project would, wherever possible, seek to employ locally available cost effective and hitherto tested technology packages and resources, eliminating the need for costly imports or exogenous technologies involving high operating and maintenance costs. Both the design and the implementation strategy adopted for ALRMP are based on the tenets of low cost alternatives and project sustainability. All aspects of the project should lead to an overall decrease in dependence on food aid. 5.12 Nutrition, Health & other Social Service Interventions. On the basis of community preferences, microprojects to address education, nutrition, health and reproductive issues, will be undertaken. These micro-projects which would help meet basic social needs, in particular of women and children, through support for activities in the areas of curative care, communicable disease interventions, improved hygienic practices, safe motherhood, family planning, nutrition education, immunization programs, are envisaged to lead to substantial monetary and nonmonetary benefits to the communities. The enhanced training of community health workers and nomadic teachers would also lead to better nutritional and health levels and increased literacy. 5.13 Community Empowerment & Local Capacity Building. The project seeks to foster genuine local ownership of the development process in Kenya through assigning a pivotal role to the AL communities in making development decisions. Not only did the AL communities play a crucial role in the design of the project, but they will continue to be heavily involved in its implementation. AL communities (assisted by line ministries, NGOs and local self help groups, as needed) will identify, plan, implement and participate the all development activities financed under the project. Participation orientation workshops, community development, and community members’/ leaders’ training programs are an integral part of the project. 5.14 Environmental Impact The project is envisaged to have a beneficial environmental impact by seeking to contain the deterioration of the fragile ecosystem and reducing the incidence of desertification. The project will contribute significantly to improving the management of fragile environments in the ALs by strengthening the ability of the pastoral communities to plan and implement appropriate development initiatives, to control access to critical grazing reserves, and to encourage their rehabilitation. It will help formulate a set of -31- initiatives to protect the environment-friendly rights of the pastoral communities. It would also build a greater awareness of environmental management issues and enhance awareness of biodiversity concems, among the participating communities, the Govemment and collaborating agencies. In addition, improved management of the ALs would translate into direct economic gains for the local populations by way of increased fodder and fuelwood supplies in the medium term. The framework and guidelines for the proposed ALRMIP are based on the NEAP which was completed with IDA assistance in June 1994. An independent environmental analysis/ review of this category B project was conducted by consultants appointed by the Govemment. The review has determined that no negative impacts are anticipated because the project is designed to use community-based, low-cost, sustainable resource management techniques. The review also makes a number of suggestions for best practices that would have a positive impact on the environment and makes recommendations for implementing these development initiatives, e.g., not to permit settlements in the drought grazing reserves, not to make populations affected by drought develop dependency on aid. The report is summarized in Annex 9. 5.15 National Programs & Replicability. ALRMP is part of a larger National Drought Management Programme, and after several years of relatively ineffectual donor coordination in the ASALs, the Arid Lands Resource Management Project is providing the bases for effective coordination between the Bank and other multi-lateral and bilateral donors (EU, Dutch, GTZ). Not only does ALRMP fit in with Kenya’s national strategy for drought management, but it is also providing a m
odel for delivery of services to some of the poorest communities in Kenya – through community empowerment and participatory development. In particular, it is providing a model for service delivery to communities in terms of animal health. The formation of user associations to manage livestock revolving funds and water user associations should be considered replicable models or pilots, and promise to fit into overall national strategies. The project is providing leadership in these remote districts for service delivery which is participatory and community based. The experiences from project implementation can be used to modify and improve national animal health programs, particularly with a view to improved delivery of services in other sparsely populated parts of Kenya. – 32 – C. ECONOMIC AND FiNANCIAL ANALYSIS 5.16 The main quantifiable as well as non-monetizeable benefits accruing from the implementation of the various project components have been described at some length in paras. 5.5 through 5.15 , above. Since a number of project benefits elude quantification, a rigorous economic analysis for the project was not feasible. However, the basic cost! benefit analysis undertaken indicates that, even with modest assumptions about the quantifiable project benefits, the potential retums from ALRMP will be fairly substantial (Annex 12). In view of the impact of the recent price reforms in Kenya, the key distortions in the foreign exchange rate, interest rates, wage rates and product prices have been removed. Thus, economic prices are expected to be very close to financial prices. A project life of 20 years is assumed for purposes of benefit-cost streams assessment. Taxes and duties were excluded from the economic analysis. Also, price contingencies were not reflected in project costs, since the project benefits were evaluated in constant terms, over the project life. 5.17 The analysis assumes that the main benefits resulting from the project would stem from: a reduction in livestock mortality rates; a modest price increment or premium for the improved quality livestock (along with the impact of reduced transportation/ marketing costs); and, increased annual average off-take rates due to improvements in market linkages. The main quantifiable benefit from the CD component is expected to result from an improvement in the incomes of about 15 percent of the AL populations who are expected to set up microenterprises with support from the project. Project investment and recurrent costs related to each of the three components, were netted out against the benefits streams. Project Support Unit costs were also included in the analysis. Following project completion, recurrent costs were assumed to continue at levels essential for sustaining an adequate flow of services related to the activities initiated under the project. A one time replacement/ rehabilitation expenditure related to drought management equipment/ infrastructure, and for the rehabilitation/ construction of roads and replacement of construction and repair equipment was also included in the analysis. 5.18 Based on the foregoing, an ERR of 16.9 percent is calculated for the project. Results from switching value analysis for an ERR of 10 percent which is the Opportunity Cost of Capital (OCC) for Kenya, demonstrate that a significant change in benefits or costs, i.e. a 34 percent drop in total (quantifiable) benefits, or a large increase of 51 percent in costs would be required in order to reduce the ERR to 10 percent. Sensitivity Analysis shows that if benefits fall or costs increase by 25 percent, the ERR would fall to 12 percent and 13.1 percent, respectively. Altemately, if benefits increase or costs fall by 25 percent, the ERR would rise to 21.3 percent and 22.6 percent, respectively. An enormous decline of 70 percent in total benefits would be essential in order for the ERR to drop to zero percent. Conversely, an exponential increase of 200 percent in total project costs would push the ERR to zero percent. If all quantifiable benefits envisaged to accrue from the drought mitigation/ management interventions under ALRMP are excluded from the total benefits stream, the project’s ERR would decline to 10.4 percent; if instead, the benefits from the marketing and infrastructure improvements under the project are excluded, the ERR drops to 5.3 percent. The exclusion of the CD benefits reduces the ERR to 14.4 percent. No independent lag analysis of the project’s benefits stream was undertaken, as the impact of droughts on the project’s benefits stream was built into the basic economic analysis model. – 33 – Table 5.5: Sensitivity Analysis Economic Rate of Return Baseline 16.9% Benefits up 25% 21.3% Costs down 25% 22.6% Benefits down 25% 12.0% Costs up 25% 13.1% Benefits down 70% 0% Costs up 200% 0% D. RISKS 5.19 There are three main risks. First, due to the inadequacy of implementation capacity and lack of coordination at district and national levels, implementation through districts may not work effectively. This will have an impact on achieving project benefits. Delayed and/or inadequate implementation of the drought mitigation interventions will impact adversely on the immediate well being of AL communities during a drought and will make recovery more difficult. Poor implementation of the livestock marketing component will also reduce the financial benefits to the AL populations and delay and/or prevent the economic links with the rest of the economy being established. To mitigate this risk, the project aims to further adapt the institutional arrangements and capacity at the district level with the strong coordination role of the Office of the President which is currently in place under EDRP and generally functioning adequately. A related issue is that enhanced livestock marketing may be delayed due to social conflict. Efforts at conflict resolution are already being undertaken by district administrations. Furthermore, project activities would be first launched in the secure areas and non-governmental agencies currently involved in conflict resolution efforts would be involved in the process. 5.20 Second, the project would require a strong team effort to facilitate the participatory process; large geographical areas with poor means of communication would add to the risk. If the team effort is inadequate, the community development package in particular will be affected. However, the adaptation of government delivery systems to the arid lands conditions, the involvement of non-government agencies with a history of successful experience in the areas, a strong orientation and training program, and the proposed decentralized institutional arrangements would help minimize this risk. In addition, some of the proposed subcomponents will follow successful patterns established in PIDP, EDRP and development initiatives supported by bilateral and non-governmental agencies. – 34 – 5.21 Third, flow of funds has been the most intractable issue in Kenya and principally responsible for unsatisfactory project performance. This would be addressed by a combination of recent initiatives in several ongoing projects in Kenya such as providing the budget for the project under one vote of the coordinating ministry and the district funding mechanism currently in use under EDRP and the Second National Agricultural Extension Project (Credit 2199-KE). E. SUSTAINABILITY 5.22 The project is sustainable from a fiscal perspective. The Govemment is expected to contribute around US$ 2.0 million of the project costs over the 6 year implementation period, which is feasible based on current budgetary allocations (the allocation for EDRP in 1995/96 was KShs. 540 million, equivalent to about US$ 12 million, and KShs. 630 million (US$ 14 million) in 1994/95). The Ministry of Finance has included ALRMFP in the 1995/96 financial year budget through the provision of a PPF of KShs. 11.4 million or US$ 252,500. The design and implementation strategy adopted for ALRMP would lend sustainability to project investments. Drought management will become a long-term Govemment function and the drought management units will be integrated into
the regular Govemment institutional structure. After the credit closes, the impact of drought management expenditures on the Government budget would be approximately US$330,000 annually. The O&M allocation for EDRP in 1995/96 was K. Shs 32.6 million (around US $ 700,000). Communities would also have an important role in operating drought early warning systems, as well as in mitigation and recovery efforts. Livestock routes, holding grounds and market yards will be maintained by the communities and local authorities with negligible demands on the Treasury. Under the Community Development component the project would provide a one-time capital support to the community selected micro-projects. These micro-projects will be operated and maintained by the communities without any further cost to the project or later on to the Government other than followup training. Sustainability, ensured by community responsibility and commitments to operate and maintain assets, would be fundamental to the design of microprojects and also a pre-condition for funding under the ALRMP. – 35 – 6. AGREEMENTS AND RECOMMENDATION A. AGREEMENTS AND ASSURANCES 6.1 During negotiations the following assurances were obtained: (a) the National Drought Management Secretariat and the sub-units dealing with drought management in the eight District Support Units will be integrated into the regular Government institutional structure, (b) the beneficiary communities will contribute at least 30 percent of the cost of the microproject undertaken, (c) the District Works Offices will annually prepare a plan of critical spot improvements to the roads and execute it after DSG approval, and the project ftunding for these critical spot improvements will be supplemental allocation to the normal budget allocation provided by MOPW to the districts for road repair and maintenance; (d) a training plan will be prepared annually before the start of each fiscal year and furnished to IDA for approval, (e) (i) an evaluation of the impact of project interventions will be conducted at mid-term and in the final year in terms of the design of the evaluation study finalized at negotiations; (ii) an annual review of the CD component will be conducted and the review at the end of the year two will be comprehensive; and (iii) the design and format of the baseline survey will be finalized in consultation with IDA, (f) Government would (i) have the records and accounts of the project, including those for the Special Accounts and SOEs audited each fiscal year by the Controller and Auditor General or private auditors appointed by him; and (ii) submit to IDA the audit reports comprising Project Accounts, Special Account and SOEs in the agreed format within six months of the close of the fiscal year. The audit report wil1 include a statement on the adequacy of the accounting system and internal controls, (g) (i) studies for the review of laws and regulations relating to the tenunral and grazing rights of pastoralists in arid lands will be completed in the second year of the project; and (ii) a plan of action will be drawn up in consultation with IDA to implement the recommendations made under these studies in an agreed time-framre; (h) to conduct jointly with IDA a mid-term review of the project between September 30, 1998 and December 31, 1998; and – 36- (i) the Government and IDA shall monitor and review the operation and effectiveness of the district payment mechanism from time to time. If the joint review concludes that the payment mechanism is not effective, the Govermment shall, not later than three months after being notified by IDA, introduce and implement such modification of the mechanism or of the applicable administrative and financial rules and procedures as may have been agreed upon with IDA. 6.2 The following were the conditions of Board presentation: (a) the receipt of a Letter of Sectoral Policy; and (b) the receipt of overdue audits for FY93 (Project Accounts, SOE and Special Account) for the EDRP (Cr. 2460-KE) as well as audited statements of sources and application of funds for funds utilized under EDRP from the Rural Services Design (Cr. 1974-KE), Second National Extension (Cr. 2199-KE) and Animal Health Services (CR. 1758-KE) projects. 6.3 The following are the conditions of Credit effectiveness. The Government will: (a) enter into a contract, satisfactory to IDA, with a firm to carry out studies for review of laws and regulations pertaining to tenurial and grazing rights of pastoral communities; (b) fumish to IDA evidence that the following project officers, with qualifications satisfactory to IDA, have been recruited and started work: National Project Coordinator, Drought Management Coordinator (Head of DMS), Procurement Officer, Finance Officer, and at least four District Project Coordinators; (c) make appropnrate provision of funds in the budget for year one of the project in terms of the agreed Annual Work Plan and ensure that these funds are available for meeting project expenditures as soon as the project becomes effective; (d) fumish to IDA evidence that the project’s financial management and accounting system is in place and operating; (e) fumish Project Implementation Plan (PIP), satisfactory to IDA; (f) fumish terms of service including pay scales of the project staff, and (g) fumish overdue audits for FY94 (Project Accounts, SOE and Special Account) for EDRP (Cr. 2460-KE) as well as audited statements of sources and application of funds for funds utilized under EDRP from the Rural Services Design (Cr. 1974-KE), Second National Extension (Cr. 2199-KE) and Animal Health Services (Cr. 1758-KE) Projects. – 37 – B. RECOMMENDATION 6.4 Based on the above conditions and agreements, the proposed project would be suitable for an IDA Credit of SDRI4.8 million (US$22.0 million equivalent) to the Republic of Kenya, on standard IDA terms with 40 years maturity. -38- Annex 1 Page 1 of T Tedcgrazns: ‘FINANCE’.Nairobi MINISTRY OF FINANCE Office of the Miniaer Tclepbooe: Nairobi 3t88111 P.O Baz3000MQ7 When replying pleas” quaE – Ref. No …………………………… EA/FA 62/335/01 ………………………….. 4th May 19 … 95 and da. Mr. Edward V. Jaycox Vice President, Africa Region World Bank 1818E Street, N.W. Washington D.C. 20433 Dear ( A Arid Lands Rescurce Management Project – -~’ Letter of Sectoral PolicB ag \/Yfl VALLEY\” EASTERN ( r z > / [ MARSABIT / NORTH z! / ‘ (‘ I U) 4&RPAR(T 1′ WA\RR J~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FJ 9.’! 1 A ,OFOA 9FNYANG SAMBURU,W R | IOL / <- ,’VPFF I®P.MARALAL I / J W^IIA F a T~~~~ANGUSEI ( 0 F OOFPF t< d PAPEI C ~ \EASTERN r – ‘ P> ) 1 I t ‘ t A / \ N, ‘ ‘ AFCAR F ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~CIIIS ). HA- ‘> I, i_ OA’ GARISSA\ \ F*J ;F(FFr E, .e^CHAtO ITIITANA -NAfFOBl RIVER K. HOF;/PA JAr!,’OLA M tAJOYP rc t ls – ^s * AIP-PPc r nrA icLlav-r R z qX \ s A 1 Fy C 0 A S T P/~WfF I lATINAlO F] F 4’I CAPPTAL JPTF / /P\”P /\/ M%A tl R’ )ADS I r t < >+ E/.r)1 hZAt.L A RPOFT5 t \ IZA~~~~~~~~~~~~~LINDI *) I Al CFNAL AIPPC)RTS /AA F AFANFF _\IT ‘ [ NTFLIF_N1 FL)DARJES VA.o,F, r t LIF: PP _ _ S,UB UISIF SUP) 1.5) EN “- -LU.A I I tI:. C r BO90UNDt R;EF 4r=s , PP – . ; .LRSA| I s 8, – , ^ IFR NP@ T F¢tL/P EOPPODAPPFS = – ‘ = = – I|WNAIL FAYA LKArI n ~ ER71,%T 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~IDARIE ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I 2., 52 ,F’FF4A 1 \ uL>Jc The bA)FPlFdFP eS C rs S)&F FF,FFPFFO,Sl cl(-d ony other -nfQrmto,P F, !AF’AP(A ,h-,WI c,,, ff,, ,,ap d, oE /Dt /npl oo poF4 oa The World Bank pD t, F,A Group, .FY CIQdgPPelPF -F lhe fegol tOt-s of oPPt’ ter/Ptory, or ony eH,dorPA’P CF c: oCpptoP,- ‘ol s-ch bo-ndr,es AM9 JANPJAR'” 1Y95 IMAGINGr Repor t No: 1:3632’2 KE Tyje: JAR
 

Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may have. From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs.

GET A 40% DISCOUNT ON YOU FIRST ORDER

ORDER NOW DISCOUNT CODE >>>> WELCOME40

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized

ASSIGNMENT 3, RURAL DEVELOPMENT: Gender Sensitivity in Kenyan Arid Land Farming Projects

Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may have. From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs.

GET A 40% DISCOUNT ON YOU FIRST ORDER

ORDER NOW DISCOUNT CODE >>>> WELCOME40

ASSIGNMENT 3, RURAL DEVELOPMENT: Gender Sensitivity in Kenyan Arid Land Farming Projects
Background
The purpose of the assignment is to assess how the gender-sensitivity of World Bank agriculture projects has evolved, analyzing the preparation and design of projects appraised in 1995, 2003 and 2017. The three projects were implemented in the arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs) of Kenya. The gender-sensitivity of each project will be assessed by applying a checklist of questions and indicators derived from two training modules on gender in climate-smart agriculture.
Assignment Question (Put this at the head of your report and make sure you answer it!)
Does the preparation and design of farming projects in the arid and semi-arid lands of Kenya pay sufficient attention to women’s needs?
Instructions
(1) Your report should include the following headings:
Context: The Role of Women in the Farming of Kenyan ASALs
Project Objectives and Components: Continuity and Change, 1995-2017
Project Preparation: Changes in the Type and Quality of Background Analysis, 1995-2017
Project Monitoring and Evaluation: Changes in the Results Framework, Indicators and Procedures, 1995-2017
Conclusion: Does the treatment of women farmers’ needs in Kenyan ASALs now meet good practice standards?
(2) Skim the background documents, using the “Search” facility to pinpoint references to ‘gender’ and ‘women.’
(3) The ‘Context’ section should be based on the description in the three project documents and should give a sense of the challenges for farming the ASALs.
(4) In the ‘Objectives and Components’ section consider to what extent today’s principles of climate-smart agriculture for ASALs were present in each of the projects, and the implications for women’s role in these projects.
(4) The following sections should assess design and preparation against the ‘good practice’ checklists you will find in the attached files, ‘Template 1’ and ‘Template 2.’ In Template 1, pay attention to Box 18.1 (pp. 3-4), Table 18.4 (p. 32), Table 18.5 (p. 33) and Table 18.9 (p. 37). In Template 2, consider Table 2 (p. 7) and the whole of Appendix 3. To facilitate comparison of the three projects, insert a table with good practice indicators/approaches in the left-hand column, include a column for each project, and indicate by checkmarks which indicators/approaches were covered in each project.
Note: While the 1995 and 2003 projects are ASAL-specific, the 2017 project includes, but is not limited to, ASALs. In your analysis of the 2017 project, focus on aspects relevant to ASALs.
Document of The World Bank Report No. 13692-KE STAFF APPRAISAL REPORT REPUBLIC OF KENYA ARID LANDS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROJECT NOVEMBER 14, 1995 Agriculture and Environment Operations Division Eastern Africa Department Africa Region Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (As of April, 1995) Currcncv Uniit Kenya Shilling (Kshs.) US$1 0() Kshs. 45.0 SDRI.0() US$ 1.49299 WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Mctric System ABBREVIATIONS AL Arid Lands ALRMVP Arid Lands Resource Maniagement Project ASAL Arid and Semi-Arid Lands CAG Controller and Auditor General CD Community Development DRSRS Department of Rcsource Surveys and Remote Sensing DC District Commissioner DCF Drought Contingency Fund DCP District Contingency Plan DDC District Development Committee DFS District Focus Strategy DMC Drought Management Coordinator DMO Drought Monitoring Officer DMP Drought Management Project DMS Drought Management Secretariat DPC District Program Coordinator DRR Department of Relief and Rehabilitation DRRC District Relief and Rehabilitation Committee DSG District Steering Group DSU District Support Unit DWO District Works Office ECR Emergency Cereal Reserve EDRP Emergency Drought Recovery Project EWS Early Warning System FFW Food For Work GIS Geographic Information System IDA International Development Association IMS International Monetary Fund LMD Livestock Marketing Division MLRRWD Ministry of Land Reclamation, Regional and Water Development MOALDM Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock Development and Marketing MOPW Ministr of Public Works NCPB National Cereal and Produce Board NEAP National Environmental Actioni Plan NGO Non-Governmental Organization NPC National Program Coordinator NRRCC National Relief and Rehabilitation Coordination Committee NSU National Support Unit OP Office of the President PFP Policy Framework Paper PID Public Information Document PIDP Pastoralists Integrated Development Project PIP Project Implementation Plan PLA Participatory Learning for Action PS Permanent Secretary SOE Statement of Expenditure TO Training Ofl-ier W`FP World Food Program Government Fiscal Year: July I-June 30 – i – REPUBLIC OF KENYA ARID LANDS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROJECT Credit and Project Summary Borrower: Republic of Kenya Implementing Agencies: Line Ministries and Non-Governmental Agencies, under the coordination of the Department of Relief and Rehabilitation (Office of the President) and in collaboration with local communities Beneficiaries: Arid Lands Populations, Government and Non-Governmental Agencies Poverty: Program of Targeted Interventions. The three mutually reinforcing project components aim to reduce the poverty of ALs populations through benefits such as increase in on- and off-farm income generation capacity, reduction in drought inflicted losses, provision of improved basic services, and enhanced market linkages. Amount: SDR 14.8 million (US$22.0 million equivalent) Terms: Standard with 40 years maturity Commitment Charge: 0.50% on undisbursed credit balances, beginning 60 days after signing, less any waiver. Financing Plan: See Para. 3. 10 Net Present Value: US$ 10.5 million. However, this amount does not include the substantial non-quantifiable benefits expected to be generated by the project ERR: 16.9% Map: 1BRD 26479 Project ID No.: KE-PA-1331 REPUBLIC OF KENYA ARID LANDS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROJECT STAFF APPRAISAL REPORT CONTENTS CREDIT AND PROJECT SUMMARY —————————————————— 1. INTRODUCTION ————————————————————————————– 1 2. BACKGROUND—————————————————————————————-2 A. Macro Economic Environment———————————————————– ——— 2 B. Sector Background———————————————————————–2 C. The Area and People ———————————————————————————————- 3 D. Policy Environment – ——————- —- — -5 E. Institutional Setting —————————————————————————- 6—————-6 F. Past and Ongoing Programs in the Area—————————————————————— — 6 G. Lessons Learned—————————————————————————————————6 H. Project Preparation————————————————————————- — 7 I. Rationale for Bank Involvement ———————————————————————————— 7 3. THE PROJECT————————————————————— ——— 9 A. Project Objectives——————————————————————- —— —- 9 B. Project Description———————————————————————————9———– -9 C. Project Costs and Financing———————————————————————————–13 D. Project Procurement Arrangements ————————————————————————– -14 E. IDA Credit Allocation and Disbursements———–16 4. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION—————————————————————— 18 A. Organization and Management————————————————————————————18 B. Consultancies and Studies——————————————————————————————–22 C. Project Monitoring and Evaluation——————————————————————————–22 D. Auditing and Reporting Requirements —————————————————————————- 23 E. Supervision Plan—————————————————————————————— _-23 5. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION, RISKS AND SUSTAINABILITY ————————— 25 A. Justification ————————————————————————————————– 25 B. Project Impact —————————————————————————————————— 26 C. Economic and Financial Analysis———————————————————————————–31 D. Risks——————————————————————————————————————33 E. Sustainability————————————————————————- —- — 34 6. AGREEMENTS AND RECOMMENDATION————————————————– 35 A. Agreements and Assurances ————————————————————————————35 B. Recommendation———————————————————————————————————37 This report is prepared by IDA in collaboration with the Government of Kenya. The IDA team members consisted of. Satish Kumar, Christine Cornelius, Milena Hileman, John Nyaga, Mbuba Mbungu and Jan Weetjens (AF20U), Gajan Pathmanathan, Preeti Ahuja (AF2AE), M.L. Mehta, E.J Burne, George Njiru, John Kevany (Consultants) and Said Al Habsy (LEGAF). The Peer Reviewers are Harry Walters (AFTHR), Walter Lusigi (GEF) and Jerry Silverman (AFTES). S.Barghouti (AS2AG) is the Lead Advisor. W. Lusigi also reviewed the Environmental Assessment. The Sector Division Chief is Sushma Ganguly and the Department Director is James W. Adams. -2- TEXT TABLES 3.1 Project Cost Summary ………………… 15 3.2 Financing Plan ………………… 15 3.3 Project Procurement ………………… 17 3.4 Disbursement Plan ………………… 18 5.1 AL Livestock Resources ………………… 25 5.2 Drought Mortality Rates ………………… 26 5.3 Livestock Offtake Rates ………………… 27 5.4 Farmgate Prices (Per animal) ………………… 28 5.5 Sensitivity Analysis ………………… 32 ANNEXES 1. Letter of Sectoral Policy 2. Past and Ongoing Programs in the Area 3. Drought Managemen
t Component 4. Marketing and Infrastructure Component 5. Community Development 6. Project Organization and Management 7. Project Costs by Year B. Schedule of Disbursements 9. Summary of Environmental Impact Assessment 10. Project Key Indicators 11. Supervision Plan 12. Economic/Financial Analysis 13. Documents in Project File MAP IBRD No. 26479: Project Area REPUBLIC OF KENYA ARID LANDS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PROJECT STAFF APPRAISAL REPORT 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 The predominantly pastoralist populations in the eight arid districts of Kenya are counted amongst the poorest and the most disadvantaged sections of society. Social welfare indicators show that in terms of access to communications, public health, nutrition and education services they receive a low fraction of services than the level available to the rest of the Kenyan population. Although the Arid Lands (ALs) are well-endowed with livestock resources, in the absence of reliable marketing outlets the full benefit of this resource accrues neither to the pastoralists nor to the consumers in the rest of the country. 1.2 Existing constraints on socio-economic development in these districts are quite forbidding: the physical environment is fragile and easily degraded; water resources are poor and variable; drought is a recurring feature decimating up to 50 percent or more of the livestock in each severe occurrence; the road network is inadequate and poorly maintained; and levels of illiteracy are high as are the child mortality rates. Experience has shown that traditional nomadic pastoralist communities like many other communities do not always adequately respond to the top-down development process; while a few formal and community-based institutions have limited capacities to combat the prevailing constraints. 1.3 Neither effective conservation of the natural resource base nor the development potential of these areas can be realized unless these constraints are addressed. Further, the development process should accommodate the shifts in priorities from development to survival in times of drought and viceversa when normalcy returns. The proposed project addresses these constraints by focusing on drought management and mitigation, further integration of the AL population into the mainstream of the country’s economy and the promotion of community-driven small-scale initiatives to address their development priorities. – 2 – 2. BACKGROUND A. MACRO ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 2.1 Kenya is a low-income country with a per capita income of $260 in 1994 (at current prices and exchange rates). About 75 percent of the country’s land area is classified as arid or semi-anrd. The economy is heavily dependent on agriculture, and in the arid lands, which comprise 60 percent of the land area of the country, livestock is the main economic activity of the largely pastoralist population. 2.2 Between 1991 and 1993, Kenya’s macroeconomic performance was poor. In April 1992 the Government agreed with the Intemational Monetary Fund (IMF) on a program of actions necessary to re-establish a sound macroeconomic framework which included deficit reduction, monetary restraint and liberalization of the foreign exchange regime. Until mid- 1993 the implementation of the actions required was unsatisfactory: though fiscal targets were basically met, monetary targets were significantly exceeded and the liberalization of the foreign exchange regime proved to be unsustainable. 2.3 However, since mid-1993 there has been a significant improvement in macroeconomic management: the monetary policy was tightened considerably; and the official and market interest rates were unified. These improvements allowed the Government to negotiate a three year Policy Framework Paper (PFP) with the Bank and the Fund supported by a one-year Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility (ESAF) arrangement with the IMF. The Government’s performance under the reform program was generally positive, but with slippages in some areas. The fiscal deficit was in line with overall targets, but weak expenditure control necessitated expenditure and revenue adjustments to keep the deficit within agreed ceilings. On the structural side, virtually all exchange controls were abolished, the exchange rate was floated, price controls lifted and the maize market liberalized ahead of schedule. On the other hand, civil service reform got off to a slow start and parastatal reform lagged significantly. The economy responded positively to these measures, with the exchange rate appreciating, reserve levels increasing, inflation declining, and a restoration of positive real growth estimated at 3 percent in 1994. The Govemment successfully completed the 1994 ESAF arrangement and has been discussing a new Policy Framework Paper (covering the period 1995 to 1997) with the Bank and the Fund. The proposed framework will seek to sustain fiscal adjustment and accelerate structural reforms, notably in the parastatal area. B. SECTOR BACKGROUND 2.4 Agriculture is the single largest sector of the Kenyan economy, accounting for about onequarter of GDP and 70 percent of employment. It makes an indirect contribution of another 30 percent of GDP through the manufacturing and service sectors. Also two-thirds of the industrial output in the country is agro-industry based. Historically, the performance of the agricultural sector in Kenya has been better than the average for sub-Saharan Africa. Growth rate was 6.2 percent in 1965 through 1973, it was 4.6 percent in 1974-80 and declined to 2.5 percent in the period between 1981 and 1987. The situation has worsened since 1988. The agricultural growth was 1.6 percent in the period 1988-92; and it was negative in 1992 and 1993. This downtum in agricultural growth resulted largely from poor rainfall, and the slow implementation of structural reforms. – 3 – 2.5 The physical challenges to increasing agricultural growth are formidable. There is very little high potential agricultural land left in the country which is not already being cropped or grazed, leaving intensification of land use as the only available option. The fragile drier areas of the country are experiencing the adverse environmental consequences of rapid population increases and the use of inappropriate technologies. Sedentarization of these lands which reduces the available land for dry season grazing has caused deepening poverty among the mainly pastoralist people of the ALs. The impact of such sedentarization is to further reduce the dry season grazing areas available to the livestock in times of drought. 2.6 Kenya’s agriculture has the potential to grow at around 4 percent per annum provided the policy and institutional inadequacies are minimized. The reform agenda should be governed by the principle of clearly defining a policy environment based on developing competitive markets for agricultural commodities. The livestock sector can play an important role in meeting Kenya’s overall growth objectives. Livestock is the primary economic activity in the arid lands and is an important activity in the remaining areas of the country. Beef provides about 65 percent of meat production in the country and small stock and camels, provide the remainder. Small stock and camels predominate in the arid lands, providing the major source of cash income to that area besides being the most important element of food of the AL populations. Livestock marketing and prices were decontrolled in 1987 but the ALs have not been able to benefit from the improved market conditions pnrmarily because of poor infrastructural linkages with the main consuming centers. 2.7 Kenya has also initiated activities to deal with the pressing environmental issues. The country is faced with the stark reality that there is a growing gap between the rapidly growing population and a fragile natural resource base which is shrinking through degradation and overuse. A National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP), which inter alia, addresses the environmental impact of poverty, agricultural intensification, exploitation of water resources, management of biological resources and bio-diversity, energy and transport initiatives and plans, industry,
mining and urbanization is now being implemented. The NEAP also addresses a number of issues facing the pastoralists in the ALs. These include, pressures placed on fragile natural resources because of sedentarization, the loss of important dry season grazing areas because of inappropriate agricultural development and settlement, the breakdown of customary controls over the use of common property resources, and constraints in the use of traditional stock routes. C. THE AREA AND PEOPLE 2.8 The ALs cover over 60 percent of Kenya’s total land area. The total population of the eight AL districts of Turkana, Marsabit, Mandera, Wajir, Samburu, Isiolo, Garissa, Tana River and the arid divisions of Baringo numbers about one million people, i.e. about 4.6 percent of the total Kenyan population. The ALs fall mainly within Kenya’s agro-ecological zones VI and VII and have the following physical characteristics. Zone VI which accounts for 22 percent of Kenya’s land area has a rainfall to evapotranspiration ratio between 15-20 percent and is classified as arid lands. Zone VII, which accounts for 41 percent of Kenya’s land area has a rainfall to evapotranspiration ratio of less than 15 percent and is classified as very arid. Zone VI areas receive between 300-500 mm rainfall annually and zone VII between 200-300 mm. The soils in ALs are highly variable, generally of light and medium texture and are shallow. In general they are subject to compaction and capping and are susceptible to erosion. Surface water resources are scarce and highly variable. These regions have a low capability of supporting vegetation. – 4 – 2.9 Pastoralism is the predominant occupation in the ALs. Pastoral communities in these districts belong to closely-knit tribal groups which have been rival herdsmen for ages. The major tribal groups are Turkanas in Turkana district; Samburus and Turkanas in Samburu district; Borans in Isiolo district; Borans, Gabra and Rendille in Marsabit; and Somalis of six main clans in Garissa, Mandera and Wajir districts. The people are predominantly semi-nomadic or nomadic pastoralists, though some sedentarization has started to occur. The ability of pastoral communities to survive through periods of drought has been highly dependent on their capacity to spread their risks, to move on to new areas of grazing as resources are depleted, and to take advantage of highly diverse dry land environments (riverine woodlands, hilltop forests, dispersed watering points, and so on). Extensive seasonal movements in response to scarcity or abundance of resources have featured prominently as part of pastoral survival strategies. 2.10 The ability of the AL populations to continue their pastoral way of life has come under increasing pressure in the last two decades, as access to the dry-season grazing areas has been lost to agriculture and settled ranching in the neighboring semi-arid lands. There are increasing trends of pastoralists sedentarizing around water points in the ALs as well. Consequently, the overall carrying capacity of the ALs has been reduced, a feature which has been exacerbated by tribal conflicts. The growing inability of these lands to sustain their human and livestock population is highlighted during recurrent droughts which decimate up to 50 percent or more of the livestock population in each severe occurrence. Pastoralists are increasingly migrating to the nearest towns during droughts in search of water and relief food. These population centers are ill-equipped to serve as drought mitigation centers or to support post-drought recovery. 2.11 Almost the entire population in the ALs can be classified as below the poverty line. For example, the ALs have fewer than 2.2 doctors and 15 nurses per 100,000 population compared with the national average of 15 and 25 respectively; about 43 percent of the primary school-age children in the ALs enroll in schools compared with the national average of 95 percent, literacy in the AL districts is estimated at below 20 percent, compared with the national average of 69 percent, and infant mortality is almost twice the national average. Further, the trends in infant and child mortality rates show little signs of improvement; education and literacy figures also show little improvement over the years. School dropout rates are high: one survey in Turkana showed that less than 10 percent of those enrolled in Standard I stayed in school until Standard 8. In terms of infrastructure the ALs are poorly served by roads and have limited access to sources of energy. The ALs have 40 km of roads per 1000 sq. km, while the average for other areas is almost 200 kmi; the AL populations consume less than onehundredth of the average per capita electrical power consumption. 2.12 The ALs contribution to the national economy is substantially below its potential. Situated farthest from the principal Govemment and commercial centers in the north and east of the country in a region of poor infrastructure, the AL populations are isolated from the social and economic mainstream of the country. Consequently, their access to markets for livestock products, the main economic assets of these populations, is poor. This situation has been further aggravated by social conflicts, which have rendered the traditional stockroutes unreliable. Thus a population of around one million people with very little linkages with the rest of the economy, faces a deteriorating natural resource base, declining food security and deepening poverty. That situation is, nevertheless, reversible. The area has considerable untapped potential arising from its rich endowment in livestock: the eight arid districts contain nearly 20 percent of country’s cattle, 30 percent of sheep, nearly 50 percent of goats and donkeys and almost the entire camel population. – 5 – D. POLICY ENVIRONMENT 2.13 The Govemment has had a well-articulated Arid and Semi-Arid Land (ASAL) policy since 1979 when an official document’ set out the ASAL policy framework for the 1980’s. The main objectives were stated as resource conservation, exploitation of productive potential, development of human resources and integration of the ASAL into the national economy. These policy objectives have been upheld and elaborated in subsequent policy documents, mainly the 1989-93 National Development Plan and a revised ASAL policy document issued in 19922. This document places substantial emphasis on drought contingency planning in order to strengthen the coping mechanisms of local communities. Guidelines for policy implementation emphasize that projects and programs will be undertaken within the District Focus Strategy; and communities and local institutions will be involved in design, preparation and implementation of the projects. 2.14 Three major concems, however, are not fully reflected in either Govemment policies or program initiatives. First, the Government has not yet enunciated a national policy on drought management for the ALs. The current policy outline does not fully address the issues faced by the pastoralist populations in these areas. The Government formulated a “drought contingency action plan” and a “food security action plan” under the Bank-financed Second Agricultural Sector Adjustment Operation (ASAO II, Cr. 2204-KE), but these drafts were neither adopted nor operationalized. Similarly, several recommendations on drought management made in the Kenya Food and Nutrition Policy Report (Report No. 8351-KE) have not been acted upon. The drought management efforts in the past have been mostly limited to the securing of food and other relief supplies from donors and their distribution to drought-affected populations. Second, there is a need to evolve specific policy initiatives for addressing issues concerning the detenrorating natural resource base in the ALs. There is a need for educating and mobilizing communities to prevent natural resource degradation. The pastoralist communities in the ALs are not adequately protected by tenurial and grazing rights. Some interventions such as the installation of large boreholes as permanent water points are known to have caused harm to the environment. Third, the
Government is implementing The Land Adjudication Act (Cap 284) in Samburu, Isiolo and Marsabit districts under which common land is adjudicated and titles given to individuals. Though the process is very slow and limited to certain areas, the impact of this land redistribution on the pastoral communities needs to be studied. In addition, a policy framework needs to be in place for appropriate program initiatives to be developed (para 3.8). 2.15 Furthermore, most of the laws relevant to the development of ALs have been in effect since colonial days. Since the development policy in Kenya has changed fundamentally between the colonial times and the present, there is every probability that such laws are not consistent with the current policy. There is therefore a need for the Government to carry out a thorough review of all laws and regulations pertaining to ALs and to assess whether such laws are adequate in implementing Govemment policy and protecting the rights of the pastoralists. Such a review should also cover the enforcement mechanism of the laws in question (para 3.8). “The Arid and Semi-Arid Lands of Kenya – A framework for Implementation, Planning and Evaluation 2 “Development Policy for the Arid and Semi-Arid Lands” – 6 – E. INSTITUTIONAL SETTING 2.16 The Ministry of Land Reclamation, Regional and Water Development (MLRRWD) and the Office of the President (OP) have the main responsibilities for policy and programs in ASALs. MLRRWD handles the policy development for ASALs, OP is in-charge of drought policy and the coordination of programs concerning drought management, relief and rehabilitation. It is also in charge of district, regional and national administration which are in charge of carrying out Government programs. Recently the Government has strengthened institutional capacity for drought and relief operations by establishing a separate Department of Relief and Rehabilitation (DRR) in the OP headed by a Permanent Secretary. The only Bank-funded project in the ALs, the Emergency Drought Recovery Project (EDRP – CR. 2460-KE) is housed in DRR. The Drought Recovery Programme is integrated into the institutional structure of the Office of the President. In the field, the program is coordinated by district program coordinators reporting to the District Commissioner (DC). 2.17 The Government of Kenya has adopted the District Focus Strategy (DFS) for implementing rural development initiatives. The DFS is intended to decentralize management responsibilities (including planning and monitoring) to the district, which is the smallest management unit within the Kenyan institutional structure containing key technical and financial mechanisms to plan and implement development activities. However, the implementation experience of several projects such as the IDAfunded Baringo sub-project of the Rural Services Design Project (Cr. 1974-KE), IFAD-financed Kwale-Kilifi District Development Project, and the Coast ASAL Development Project, shows that generally the ministries did not adequately delegate functional authority to the districts commensurate with their role envisaged under the DFS. F. PAST AND ONGOING PROGRAMS IN THE AREA 2.18 A number of multilateral and bilateral projects have been introduced in the ASALs in the last two decades. With the exception of a few, these have largely focused on the relatively better off sermiarid lands. The only major investment effort supported by IDA in the arid lands is the EDRP which is being implemented in five arid districts, namely Mandera, Marsabit, Turkana, Wajir, and Tana River. Details of these projects are summarized in Annex 2 along with constraints faced in implementation. G. LESSONS LEARNED 2.19 Both the successes and failures of the current and past development interventions in ALs, described in Annex 2, have lessons for the proposed project. The first lesson is that in these predominantly pastoralist communities, characterized by strong tribal and clan structures, sustainable development would not be possible unless the objectives addressed by the project are articulated by the community. Community ownership of the project is essential for sustainability. This will occur only if the community has an effective say in decision making. The second lesson is that project interventions should be simple enough that communities can manage them. The technologies used should be lowcost, i.e., affordable, to ensure sustainability. The third lesson is that the program should expand only as the absorptive capacities of the districts and the communities improve. The fourth lesson is that building capacities of the communities, participating NGOs and the Government’s institutional structures should receive high priority for the development interventions to succeed. Human resource development should be regarded as a key input for the community development interventions. Further, in the arid lands, often susceptible to droughts and famine, the priorities of a community can oscillate – 7 – between development and survival, the project objectives should take into account this requirement and implementation should be dynamic and flexible enough to accommodate these changes. 2.20 The project should be executed within the framework of the Govemment’s District Focus Strategy. Centralized planning and management models applied to projects in high potential areas have little chance of succeeding in these far-flung areas with poor capacities and communications. Programs in the ALs where funds from donors (UNDP, bilateral) flow directly to the project implementers in the field have performed well. The Bank/IDA funds however are channeled through the Govemment budgetary and accounting process. The lesson is that an arrangement would need to be established within these processes which is effective in securing the required incremental funds in the annual budgets in order to adapt the delivery of government services to a community based model, followed by a mechanism for planning at the community and district level and subsequent flow of funds to the implementing agencies. The time span of the project should be sufficiently long to establish durable relationships between implementers and communities by building an adapted model of delivery of services to these nomadic communities. H. PROJECT PREPARATION 2.21 The lessons learned have been applied during project preparation, in project design and the proposed implementation arrangements. Initial project preparation was undertaken by a Government inter-ministerial planning team. At appraisal, all the target districts were visited and several planning workshops held to involve field implementers in the design of the project. With regard to implementation procedures, the workshops examined the applicability of the proposed procedures in the context of existing implementation capacities in the target districts. In addition to the participants in the workshops, field agencies, some local NGOs and bilateral donor-funded initiatives in these areas were also consulted. 2.22 Attempts were also made to involve potential beneficiaries in the final project preparation exercises. The initial guidelines for community participation were developed by undertaking community-oriented planning exercises with pastoralist communities on location. Community participation has thus been fostered through following a bottom-up approach and beneficiary involvement in project design. The experience of the Drought Monitoring System under the Netherlands-supported Drought Management Project was pilot tested in a training workshop in one of the target districts and the results incorporated in the design of the drought management component. In the mid-term review of the EDRP, several beneficiary participation initiatives have been included and strengthened which would evolve into the Arid Land Resource Management Project (ALRMP) programs. Finally the project design allows for a phased approach, which would permit project implementation in two stages: launching and slow build-up of activities in stage one, followed by full deployment of activities in all the districts in stage two, incorporating the less
ons learned during a comprehensive mid-term review. This would match implementation to the capacities of implementers, and afford opportunities for applying mid-course corrections. 1. RATIONALE FOR BANK INVOLVEMENT 2.23 The project is consistent with the Bank’s Country, Sector and Environmental strategies, and supports the Country Assistance Strategy (CAS), discussed by the Board in April 1994; it is also consistent with the current 1995 CAS. The focus of the Bank’s Country Assistance Strategy is – 8 – poverty reduction through accelerated growth and employment generation. This strategy emphasizes macroeconomic stability, improved public sector efficiency and development of an export-oriented private sector, as well as strengthening the basis for equitable and sustainable development by addressing longer-term human resource issues and arresting the deterioration of Kenya’s fragile environment. The CAS seeks to advance such objectives through the country dialogue, and by supporting efforts to alleviate population pressures and develop the ASALs, as part of the country assistance program. ALRMP’s components and implementation strategy are thus im accordance with the CAS; the project specifically supports the CAS objective of strengthening the basis for equitable and environmentally sustainable economic development. With its focus on providing basic social services and environmental protection, the proposed ALRMP is a central feature of IDA’s “core” lending program. The proposed ALRMP is a Program of Targeted Interventions, aimed at assisting the pastoralists in the arid districts, who are counted among the poorest of Kenya’s population. It seeks to reduce the chronic poverty and enhance food security in these districts, at the same time strengthening and supporting local community-driven initiatives to better manage dry woodlands, critical grazing reserves and other fragile environments in these arid areas. The project design draws from the findings and recommendations of the recently finalized Kenya Poverty Assessment report, prepared by IDA in close consultation with the Government and with the support of several donors. The proposed project incorporates substantial beneficiary participation, and seeks to build capacity within local communities to take advantage of development opportunities and assigns an active collaborative role to the NGOs and other local social organizations/bodies. By emphasizing district-based initiatives, it supports decentralized planning and implementation. The proposed ALRMP is also a logical follow-up to the ongoing EDRP which has successfully initiated various environmentally sustainable drought management and mitigation activities in the ALs. These activities would be expanded and strengthened under the proposed project. Project implementation strategy and components have been designed in accordance with the Government’s stated policies on ASAL development, and proposed project initiatives would be underpinned by the ongoing implementation of the National Environment Action Plan (NEAP). -9- 3. THE PROJECT A. PROJECT OBJECTIVES 3.1 The objectives of the Project are to strengthen and support community driven initiatives to: (a) reduce the widespread poverty and enhance food security in the arid districts of Turkana, Marsabit, Mandera, Wajir, Garissa, Tana River, Isiolo, Samburu, and the arid divisions of Baringo District; and (b) conserve the natural resource base in the arid lands through: (i) improving crop and livestock resilience to drought; (ii) increasing econormic linkages with the rest of the economy; and (iii) improving basic health services, water supply and other social services. B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.2 Summary Description: The project would have three components: (a) Drought Management: This component would institutionalize at the national and district levels a structure to effectively manage all the phases of drought. These include preparedness (drought monitoring), rnitigation (drought contingency planning and rapid reaction) and recovery (continued drought relief activities). The project will build on the successful model for drought monitoring piloted under the previous project; (b) Marketing and Infrastructure: This component would address the bottlenecks that impede livestock market linkages between the ALs and the rest of the national economy; and, Community Development (CD): In order to become fully responsive to the communities’ priority needs and demands, this component would be instrumental in assisting line ministries and collaborating agencies to adapt their organization and delivery systems to the specific conditions of the ALs. 3.3 Detailed Project Description: An overview of each of the three project components is as follows: 3.4 Drought Management (US$ 10.9 million including contingencies): This component will: (a) Establish at the national and district level policy and operational responsibilities for drought management in Kenya. As a first step, the project will implement a Drought Monitoring System which has been tested successfully under EDRP. The Department for Relief and Rehabilitation will monitor through this system a representative sample of the entire and land population on a monthly basis. The objective of the monitoring system is to detect specific drought related risks and to warn decision makers at both the district and the national level as early as possible so that immediate and targeted actions can be taken by the relevant line ministries to mitigate these risks. As part of policy development, national and district level – 10 – manuals and contingency plans would be developed to enhance strategic planning for the management of drought and famine (b) Establish: (i) a Drought Contingency Fund for immediate drought interventions to finance the respective line ministries’ specific emergency activities – incremental to their routine delivery of services – to protect communities’ livelihoods and to mitigate the negative impact of risks at an early stage. An example is an emergency immunization campaign, (ii) an Emergency Cereal Reserve to maintain small stocks at the district level to be used for emergency food relief and food for work interventions to see through the initial period of drought; and (iii) there is also a need to continue drought recovery activities (especially around the urban centers) for people who have been made destitute by the 1993 drought. The specific support that should be provided to these communities will be identified by the communities themselves (with the assistance of a team of technicians of the respective line departments) through Participatory Learning for Action (PLA) exercises, resulting in community work plans (c) The project would finance other drought preparedness and mitigation interventions such as the establishment of dry season and drought grazing reserves and strategic water supplies. Communities would plan and participate in the implementation of these mitigation interventions. To facilitate the flow of goods and services, the project will also assist in the maintenance of road infrastructure through the Ministry of Public Works, with a view to establishing labor intensive road maintenance activities which can be used as food for work initiatives during periods of drought, initially as a pilot activity. 3.5 Marketing and Infrastructure (US$ 3.4 million): Under this component a community based approach will be used to determine actions which can be taken to create an improved marketing environment. These actions may include: (a) rehabilitation of stock routes, water points and other infrastructure facilities; (b) development of new and rehabilitation of existing market-related infrastructure, including animal holding grounds, animal marketing centers and slaughter houses; (c) improvement and strengthening of the Livestock Marketing Information System; and (d) development of user-related initiatives in marketing of animals. The marketing of other products such as hides and skins or gum arabic could also be included. Training and capacity building in relation to the management and operation of community facilities, the format
ion of herders associations would be an integral part of this component. 3.6 Community Development (US$ 5.9 million): This component is designed to achieve the fundamental objective of increasing the communities’ capacities to protect and develop their livelihoods by dealing with the drought cycles in an effective way. The CD Component will be implemented following a phased or pilot approach in four arid districts over a four year period initially. Provided the findings at mid-term are positive, CD would be continued for the full project term of six years and its coverage will be extended to the remaining districts. The project will be instrumental in assisting each of the line ministries involved to improve and adapt their mode of intervention and organization to the specific conditions in the ALs so as to become responsive to the communities’ specific needs and demands. Participatory Learning for Action (PLA) is the major tool to confirm the assessment of what the communities consider to be their priorities and to take into account socio economic, environmental and other differences between various areas – I 1 – in order to tailor and adapt the line ministries’ service delivery system in the entire district. PLA teams (two per district), will be constituted to carry out this exercise in selected communities (see annex 5). Practical proposals have been elaborated by each of the line ministries during project preparation (see annex 6). The line ministries will be expected to maintain or if necessary increase their funding levels to successfully adapt their service delivery to the conditions of the arid lands and to manage the drought cycle. During project implementation, each of the district line departments will continue to improve and refine its organization on the basis of local conditions and field experience. The District Steering Group (DSG) will identify which local NGOs and other local organizations can be involved as implementers and trainers. The following is a summary of delivery systems related to services already demanded by communities: (a) Animal Health and Livestock Production. The Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock Development and Marketing (MOALDM) will focus on the support of Community Animal Health Workers (CAWHs, about 100 per district) who will (a) sell basic animal drugs in their community, (b) act as the first line animal health care, and (c) serve as “contact pastoralists” for the dissemination of technical messages related to the improvement of the herders’ capacity to manage their livestock. These messages will relate to issues including disease prevention, vaccination, and husbandry practices (such as control of parasites). The CAWHs will have the possibility every month to meet with the front line staff of the departments of veterinary services and livestock production for consultation and training. (b) Crop Production Support to crop production will be provided by the existing front line extension staff (maximum 40 per district) from MOALDM. Due to the particular circumstances – agriculture in ALs is generally being practiced in small, very well defined “pockets” which can vary in size – the ratio of front line extension staff per farm families should not exceed one per two hundred. The front line staff will have regular meetings with farmers to disseminate improved know how, and will benefit from monthly training and supervision carried out respectively by the district based subject matter specialists and the district agricultural officer. (c) Water With regard to rural water supply, the focus of the Ministry of Land Reclamation, Regional and Water Development (MLRRWD) will be on improving community water supply systems and strengthening the community water users associations’ capacity to manage and maintain new and existing water points. At the district level, a tearn of trainers will train members of the users associations with regard to management skills, operational maintenance, book keeping, formulation of bylaws, environmental impact, etc. In addition, the users associations will identify Community Water Workers – pump attendants, pipe fitters, line patrollers, mechanics and electricians – to assure the maintenance of the installation. A maintenance unit will be on call at the district level to react to demands from the respective users associations to intervene for repairs surpassing the CWWs’ capacity. (d) Health The Ministry of Health’s (MOH) Primary Health Care Program is designed to assure: (a) maximum mother and child welfare through the training of Traditional Birth Attendants (TBA, 2 to 5 per community); (b) treatment of minor ailments, preventive and educational services through Community Health Workers (CHWs, 15 to 20 for a population of about 10,000 people), and; (c) treatment of ailments and Matemal and Child Healti/Family Planning services through professional outreach teams (one per district). This strategy makes it – 12 – possible to reach nomadic communities as well as settlements without any health facility. Support to TBAs and CHWs is provided by division based Nomadic Primary Health Care Teams. (e) Coordination The District Project Coordinator’s role is critical to the success of the implementation of this component: the line ministries can only successfully pursue the adaptations that should be made to their organization and delivery system if they have strong (and external) support to overcome the many difficulties en route. Although there are no hierarchical links between the Coordinator and the heads of departments of the line ministries at the district level, he/she will provide critical feed back regarding the efficiency of the respective line ministries’ field operations, and whatever guidance and support needed to implement their program. 3.7 Training: Training constitutes one of the main activities under the program. Staff of each of the respective line ministries will participate in initial training courses to master the organizational changes and adaptations to the working methodology, and will benefit from continuous refresher courses to stay up to date with the latest relevant technology. This training is crucial to allow staff to provide, each in their field of expertise, the best quality of services possible to the community members. Given the importance of the Participatory Learning for Action for the identification and planning of support and services that should be provided by the line ministries, special attention will go to the training of staff in the methodology and techniques of PLA. During project preparation, each of the line ministries has outlined the broad framework for the respective training programs. In the course of implementation, these programs will be refined and further elaborated in practical training curricula and annual training programs. These training activities will include: (a) training of planners, policy-makers, field implementers, community leaders and other community members in implementation activities; (b) development of appropriate curricula to conduct “under the tree” training courses for community members; (c) training, including orientation courses, for middle- and senior-level civil servants on drought management, livestock marketing and community development programs; and, (d) acquisition of library books, manuals, teaching aids and other educational equipment where needed. 3.8 Studies: Under the project, studies will be carried out on the degradation of the natural resource base and developing a policy and legal framework on natural resource conservation. Mainly local consultants will be hired. Subjects for studies may include: (i) regulations and practices on grazing rights; (ii) creating institutional and non-formal conflict-resolution mechanisms, (iii) testing improved desert resource management technologies; (iv) implications of sedentarization of stock routes and emergency grazing reserves (v) implications of dry season grazing areas; (vi) regime of restriction of movement of cattle from the ALs to other parts of the country: (vii) market information systems for livestock; and (viii) ways to involve the private sector in
the establishment of slaughter houses. In addition, a review of laws and regulations will be carried out pertaining to the development of ALs, including a study on the land tenure system and development of instruments to protect and enforce the tenurial rights of pastoralists in the ALs. The Government has agreed to enter into a contract with a consulting firm before Credit effectiveness to carry out these studies. The Government has furnished to IDA a Letter of – 13 – Sectoral Policy defining the Government’s position on the issues raised in this paragraph and other policy and operational issues that would affect the implementation of this project (Annex 1). C. PROJECT COSTS AND FINANCING 3.9 Estimated project costs are presented in Table 1. Project costs by year are given in Annex 7, and detailed project costs breakdowns are presented in the PIP. Physical contingencies of 5 percent have been added to selected project costs. Price contingencies corresponding to the Manufacturers Unit Value Index3 have been applied to intemationally sourced items, and the projected domestic inflation rate has been applied to locally sourced items. A constant purchasing parity exchange rate has been calculated to adjust local price contingencies to US dollars. All costs are net of duties and taxes. Table 3.1: Project Cost Summary % Total Local Foreign Total Local Foreign Total Foreign Base Exchange Costs KShs. Millions US Dollar Millions DroughtManagement 331.4 126.7 458.1 7.4 2.8 10.2 28 44 Infrastructure and 89.9 48.2 138.1 2.0 1.1 3.1 35 13 Marketing Community 197.5 52.0 249.5 4.4 1.1 5.5 21 24 Development Project Implementation 140.1 61.3 201 4 3.1 1.4 4.5 30 19 Support Total BASELINE 758.9 288.2 1047 1 16.9 6.4 23.3 28 100 COSTS Physical 14.9 11.6 26.5 0.3 0.3 0.6 44 3 Contingencies Price Contingencies 172.9 76.7 249.6 0.8 0.4 1.2 32 5 Total PROJ. COSTS 946.7 376.5 1323.2 18.0 7.1 25.1 28 108 3.10 An IDA creditofSDR14.8 million (US$22.0 million), or 88 percentofprojectcost, would support the project, while the Govemment of Kenya and beneficiaries would contribute US$3.1 million. Out of the total Govemment share of US$3.1 million, the communities will contribute US$1.1 million. Line ministries will also be expected to maintain and possibly increase their support to the arid districts to improve and adapt their delivery systems. Table 2 provides the details of the financing plan by project component. 3/ An average annual price increase of 2.2 percent from 1995 to 2003 for intemationally sourced items, domestic inflation rate of 32 percent for 1994, 8 percent for 1995, 7.5 percent for 1996 and 5 percent thereafter. – 14 – Table 3.2 Financing Plan (US$ million) Project Components IDA GOK & Beneficiaries Total Drought Management 9.9 1.0 10.9 Marketing and Infrastructure 3.1 0.3 3.4 Community Development 4.8 1.1 5.9 Project Implementation Support 4.2 0.7 4.9 TOTAL (US$ million) 22.0 3.14 25.1 D. PROJECT PROCUREMENT ARRANGEMENTS 3.11 All procurement of goods, works and services would be in accordance with World Bank Procurement Guidelines. Bank’s standard bidding documents for goods, works and consultants would be used. At negotiations agreement was reached on an initial procurement plan, including standard procurement processing time and schedules for standard bidding documents for critical contracts. (a) Civil Works All contracts estimated to cost US$250,000 or more will be by ICB and below this value will be by LCB. Civil works in each project district would cover new office buildings (estimated cost US$250,000), spot improvement to roads (US$400,000) and miscellaneous works associated wAth livestock infrastructure and drought management (US$4.9 million). These works will be carried out district-wide over the project period on the basis of annual work plans prepared by each district. For these works foreign firms will not be interested and adequate competition exists among local contractors. Ordinary road repair works each estimated to cost not more than US$50,000 will be carried out by the District Works Offices (DWOs) using the acceptable force account method and employing local labor as far as possible. For carrying out livestock infrastructure works (water pans, boreholes, fencing, civil structures at holding grounds/market yards or along stock routes) and drought management works (infrastructure for drought mitigation centers and livestock grazing reserves) the DSU will engage an appropriate district agency (DWO, District Water Engineer) who will carry out these works following force account as described for road improvement works. The aggregate of works under force account will not be more than US$500,000. (b) Goods and Equipment Procurement of goods under contracts estimated at US$100,000 equivalent or more will be done by ICB. For contracts less than US$100,000 equivalent LCB procedures will be adopted. In the first two years of the project vehicles, computers, survey equipment, radio equipment for the districts will be procured centrally by the National Support Unit (NSU) through ICB with each contract estimated to cost US$100,000 or more aggregating to US$2.5 million. Contracts below US$100,000 up to an aggregate of US$1.2 million will be procured by LCB by the districts in terms of requirements reflected in the annual work plans. Small contracts of US$20,000 equivalent or less will use local shopping procedures (a minimum of three quotations), with aggregate not to exceed US$200,000. Under ICB, domestic manufacturers of goods will be allowed a margin of preference of 15 percent or the existing rate of import duty, whichever is lower, over the CIF price of the 4/ Includes beneficiary contribution of US$1.1 million for CDP. – 15 – competing foreign bidders. Fuel, oil and lubricants covered by the O&M costs will be procured according to normal Government procedures, which are satisfactory. (c) Community Development The project envisages about 200 microprojects in the four pilot districts in four years. In addition, the Marketing component also envisages small community projects. These microprojects will be implemented following procedures described below. A microproject would normally have a maximum project contribution of US$10,000 excluding a minimum of 30 percent community share. At negotiations assurance was received that beneficiary communities will provide a minimum of 30 percent of the microproject costs. The microprojects will be executed by the line ministry, or a non-Government agency contracted to carry-out the microproject as a Collaborating Agency. Procurement procedures for the nicroprojects would be normal GOK procedures acceptable to IDA. At negotiations the Govemment furnished a statement establishing that full authority for procurement of goods and services required for community microprojects is vested in the districts. These would include shopping procedures, local competitive bidding procedures as appropriate and/or direct contracting where the first two methods are not feasible. Each microproject contract will be supported by a technical proposal, basic financial analysis and budget approved by the District Steering Group, summarized in a sanction letter to be signed by the DPC. DSU would have the responsibility to supervise implementation and report progress to the DSG. (d) Technical Assistance and Training The project would finance four major and several minor studies, meet the cost of consultants and fund training of staff and communities. Consultants will be hired following procedures set forth in the “Guidelines for the Use of Consultants by the World Bank as Executing Agency”. All terms of reference for consultants, consultant contracts for firms above US$100,000 and for individuals above US$50,000 and training proposals will be subject to IDA prior review. All contracts, regardless of contract value, for consultants to be appointed under NSU, and DSUs, will be subject to prior review by IDA. Where applicable, consultant contracts would include a training component. Table 3.3 Project Procurement (US$ million) Procurement Method Item ICB LCB LS Other Total Civil Works 5.1 0.5 5.6 (4.6) (0.4) (5.0) Vehicles an
d Equipment 2.5 1.2 0.2 3.9 (2.5) (1.2) (0.2) (3.9) Training 0.7 0.7 (0.7) (0.7) Consultancy 1.7 1.7 (1.7) (1.7) Community Development 3.7 3.7 (2.6) (2.6) Incremental Operating Costs 9.5 9.5 (8.1) (8.1) TOTAL 2.5 6.3 0.2 16.1 25.1 (2.5) (5.8) (0.2) (13.5) (22.0) NOTE: Figures in parenthesis are estimated amounts to be financed under the IDA Credit – 16 – 3.12 Procurement Review Table 3 shows procurement procedures to be adopted for the project. All bidding packages (for civil works and goods) estimated to cost US$100,000 or more would be subject to IDA prior review. Other contracts will be subject to post reviews in accordance with the provisions of Appendix I of the Bank’s procurement Guidelines. The prior review process would cover about 35 percent of the works, 70 percent of goods and 80 percent of consultant services and training. Overall IDA prior review would cover about 57 percent of IDA-financed contracts. The level of IDA prior review is lower than the expected 80 percent because of the nature of the project, i.e., small community projects and decentralizing procurement to the districts. However, it would be compensated in several ways: (i) the annual financial audit will look at procurement matters; (ii) the post-two year evaluation of CD component will include comprehensive review of the procurement implementing process; and (iii) during IDA supervision, random reviews would be conducted of procurement packages, including field visits and reviews of documentation of microprojects and other procurement packages. A list of important contracts for works, goods and consultants and their procurement schedule relative to the implementation plan is provided in the PIP. E. IDA CREDIT ALLOCATION AND DISBURSEMENTS 3.13 The Project Disbursement Plan is shown in Table 4. The fully implemented credit is expected to be disbursed over six years as shown in the disbursement schedule (Annex 8). The countrywide profile is six and a half years. The credit closing date is June 30, 2001. Table 3.4: Disbursement Plan Disbursements Amount Items (USD % Financing Million) 1. Civil Works 4.2 90% 2. Vehicles and Equipment 3.6 100% of foreign costs and 90% of local costs 3. Training and Consultants 2.2 100% 4. Community Development 2.5 70% Fund 5. Incremental Operating Costs a) Vehicle O&M 1.8 90% b) All other O&M 5.9 90% for expenditures incurred before December 31, 1997, 80% for expenditures before December 31, 1999, 75% thereafter 6. Refund of PPF 0.2 Amounts due 7. Unallocated 1.6 TOTAL 22.0 3.14 Disbursements would be made against standard IDA documentation with the following exceptions, for which certified Statements of Expenditures (SOEs) would be used: (i) contracts less than US$100,000 equivalent; (ii) all local training, and (iii) operating costs. SOE thresholds for – 17 – consultants would be US$100,000 for firms and US$50,000 for individuals. SOEs would be certified by the Finance Officer in the NSU and the External Resources Division (ERD) of the Ministry of Finance, who would confirm that these are in agreement with the books of account. These would be subject to review by IDA supervision missions and interim and annual audits (para 4.9). 3.15 In order to facilitate the availability of funds for the project when needed, a Special Account will be established in a commercial bank and operated and maintained on terms satisfactory to IDA. An initial deposit of US$1 million will be deposited by IDA into the Special Account. The Special Account will be replenished on the basis of satisfactory documentary evidence, to be provided to IDA, of eligible payments made from the account for goods and services required for the project. No limit will be set on the size of the payments to be made from the Special Account other than that imposed by the balance remaining in the account. 3.16 Flow of Funds to Districts (a) The Government will continue for ALRFMP the existing budgeting and funding arrangement established for the EDRP for transferring project funds to the districts for meeting the costs of district-based project activities. This arrangement comprises a single line budget under the OP, a single Authority to Incur Expenditure (AIE) issued in favor of the DPC in each project district, and especially enhanced district cash floats for each project district to fully meet the cash requirements of project expenditures. Funds would be allocated to line ministries and other collaborating agencies for activities at the district level based on the process of identification of community priorities, which will result in district annual work plans. At negotiations the Government confirmed that these arrangements will be applied to ALRMP and will not be altered without mutual agreement during project implementation. (b) The Government and IDA shall monitor and review the operation and effectiveness of the district payment mechanism from time to time. If the joint review concludes that the payment mechanism is not effective, the Government shall, not later than three months after being notified by IDA, introduce and implement such modification of the mechanism or of the applicable administrative and financial rules and procedures as may have been agreed upon with IDA. 3.17 Government has also given an assurance to make appropriate provisions of funds in the budget for year one of the project in terms of the agreed Annual Work Plan and to ensure that these funds are available for meeting project expenditures as soon as the project becomes effective. – 18- 4. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION A. ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT 4.1 Building on the experience acquired under the previous EDRP, the ALRMP will (a) provide a system and policy for effective drought management; and (b) strengthen the communities’ capacity to deal with further droughts. In order to assure long term sustainability, any action or intervention will be designed to be as cost effective as possible, to be community based, and to be implemented through the relevant line ministries and collaborating agencies. To be successful however, the line ministries will have to adapt their way of operating to the particularities of the Arid Lands. They will also need strong support and guidance from the National Support Unit and the District Coordinators in the Office of the President to meet this challenge. The Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock Development and Marketing, the Ministry of Land Reclamation, Regional and Water Development, and the Ministry of Health have continued, during project preparation, to refine a broad outline of the adaptations to be made to their respective ways of operating in order to become more effective in their response to the communities’ needs and demands During the respective district launching workshops, the staff of each line department will examine how the different frameworks for action can be best implemented, taking the local conditions into account. Yearly follow-up workshops will be organized in each district to critically examine and improve the effectiveness of the current way of operating. 4.2 It is ALRMP’s role to assist the line ministries in the adaptation of their mode of operation to the specific requirements and conditions of the communities in the arid lands. To assure full ownership of the communities, in any activity involving physical inputs, the principal of joint action will be upheld with the communities contributing at least a minimum of 30% of the total cost. In addition to the support with regard to organizational and technical matters, ALRMP can provide equipment to the line ministries to implement their work plans. However, ALRMP is the donor of last resort: only after having exhausted the own regular budget and any other possible source of financing (including NGOs), the line ministries can request incremental financing from ALRMP. The line ministries will be expected to maintain or if necessary increase their funding levels to adapt their service delivery to meet the conditions of the arid lands and to manage the drought cycle. 4.3 The organization and management under ALRMP is as follows: 4.4 National level (a) The National Relief and Rehabilitatio
n Coordination Committee (NRRCC) will define and enforce the drought management policy of the Government. It is constituted by the Permanent Secretaries of the MOALDM, MOH, MILRRWD, MOPW and MOE under the chairmanship of the Permanent Secretary for Relief – 19 – and Rehabilitation of the Office of the President. The NRRCC meets at least twice every year, or whenever the need may arise to provide the policy guidance to the program. (b) The Project Steering Committee (PSC) will monitor the implementation of the program on a continuous basis and will be constituted by directors (or their senior aides) of the respective line ministries. The PSC will be chaired by the Director of Programs from the Office of the President. During the working sessions, the PSC members will verify to what extent each of the line ministries’ work programs in the ALs is in line with the declared objectives. The PSC will carry out quarterly field supervision missions to supervise and encourage the line ministries’ staff at the district level, and to propose any corrective action where and when needed. The National Project Coordinator is the secretary of the PSC. (c) The National Support Unit (NSU) is responsible for (a) the coordination of the ALRMP; (b) the monthly publication of the national drought status report; (c) the support and supervision to the training initiatives at the district level; and (d) development and sustainance of drought contingency plans and response mechanisms. The NSU is headed by the National Project Coordinator, who reports to the Director of Programs in the Office of the President, and comprises a drought monitoring officer, a training officer, and a support unit (accounts officer, supplies officer, drivers, secretaries, and messenger). The professional staff in the NSU will spend most of their time in the field to assist the implementation of the program in the ALs districts. They will give guidance to the District Program Coordinators, and will support the respective line departments with the field implementation of their activities. In particular, the NSU members will assure the proper follow-up for the recommendations made by the PSC. 4.5 District level: (a) The District Steering Group (DSG) will comprise the heads of departments of each of the line ministries concerned (MOALDM, MOH, MLRRWD, MOPW and MOE), the District Program Coordinator, as well as local NGOs and at least two community leaders. The DSG will be chaired by the District Commissioner. The Program Coordinator is in charge of the secretariat. The DSG is responsible for: (a) supervising the planning of activities in each of the line departments so that work programs filly respond to communities’ needs and demands; (b) monitoring the effectiveness of implementation; (c) development of a district drought contigency plan; (d) reviewing the monthly district drought bulletin issued by the Department for Relief and Rehabilitation; and (e) decide on steps to be taken for appropriate response whithin the framework of the district drought contingency plan. The DSG will meet at least once per month. (b) The District Program Coordinator (DPC) reports to the NPC in the Office of the President and at the district level to the District Commissioner. The DPC has – 20 – two major responsibilities: (a) to provide critical feed back regarding the efficiency of the respective line ministries’ field operations, as well as guidance and support needed to plan and implement their program; and (b) the monthly publication of the drought bulletin. It is considered to be of crucial importance for the success of the program that the line ministries would have strong and continuous external support from the DPC. In each district, the DPC will be assisted by a support unit comprising a supplies assistant, an accounts assistant, and three support staff (driver, secretary, messenger). The DPC and the unit will be equipped with a 4×4 vehicle and two motorcycles. (c) The Drought Monitoring System will, as mentioned above, be part of the responsibility of the DPC. In each district a Drought Monitoring Officer will be identified, to the extent possible among the existing staff of the line ministries. He/she will report to the DPC and be responsible for the supervision of data collection, the analysis of the data, and the publication of the drought bulletin. For purposes of data collection in the field, the program will train about 50 monitors per district. These monitors are part of the communities, and work on a temporary basis (one week per month). Since they collect data in the immediate vicinity of their locality, they do not need any particular means of transportation. (d) The Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock Development and Marketing (MOALDM) will, with regard to animal health and livestock production, provide support to about 100 Community Animal Health Workers (CAHWs) per district. As mentioned above, these CAHWs will: (a) sell basic animal drugs in their community; (b) act as the first line animal health care, and; (c) serve as “contact pastoralists” for the dissemination of technical messages related to the improvement of the herders’ capacity to manage their livestock. One front line staff (about ten per district, based at the divisional level) can provide support to about ten CAHWs. In general, the front line staff will be equipped with motorcycles. However, it still needs to be specified during project implementation which means of transportation would be most suitable in those cases where motorcycles are not a practical solution. The front line staff will receive quarterly visits from the District Veterinary Officer and the District Livestock Production Officer, and will participate in three monthly training sessions. During project implementation, two major issues still need to be clarified: how to organize effective linkages with research, and how to improve and support the organization of vaccination campaigns so as to increase coverage and to make them more efficient and cost effective. (e) To improve support to crop production in the ALs, the MOALDM will improve the organization of the existing front line staff according to two scenarios: (a) the front line extension worker lives near the agricultural area (irrigation scheme or rain fed farming), providing support to the farmers within walking distance not needing any specific means of transportation, and (b) the front line staff (FLS) provide support to a number of farmers in more than one location, therefore needing a motorcycle to visit the farmers. All FLS will meet with farmers on a – 21 – fortnightly basis. The ratio of number of farm families per front line staff will vary from district to district. However, given the distances to be traveled between different areas where agriculture is being practiced, the ratio of FLS per farm families should not exceed one per 200. The actual number of existing FLS also varies considerably (depending on the importance of agriculture in the district) but never exceeds about 40. At least once per month, FLS will benefit from supervision. There will be one supervisor per five to eight FLS. At the district level, a team of SMS will be responsible for the training of FLS. Once per month, the District Agricultural Officer (DAO) will gather all FLS in a specific location for this purpose. (f) The Ministry of Land Reclamation, Regional and Water Development (MLRRWD) will have in each district a team to install new water points. This team will comprise three types of units: a drilling unit for boreholes, a pump installation unit, and a dam construction unit. These units will be equipped with a lorry for transportation of materials. The support to communities’ management and operation of the water units is assured through monthly visits from the divisional officers (about three per district). In most cases, these officers will be equipped with a motorcycle. In addition, a maintenance unit is on call at the district level to react to demands from the respective users associations to intervene for repairs surpassing the community water workers’ capacity. This maintenance unit comprises an electrician,
a plant mechanic, and a plumber and will be provided with a 4×4 vehicle equipped equipped with the necessary tools. Supervision is assured by the district training officer and the district water engineer. The district training officer will visit each of the divisional water officers at least once per month. These visits are also instrumental to upgrade the front line staffs’ skills. The district water engineer visits each of the communities at least once every quarter to check on the efficiency of the services delivered by his staff. (g) At the district level, the Ministry of Health will have a District Nomadic Primary Health Core Team of about four members. The core team is under the leadership of the district nomadic primary health care coordinator who is responsible for the supervision of field activities and the training of staff in the health centers and dispensaries. At the division level there is a health center which is headed by a clinical officer. The officer supervises, among other things, the divisional nomadic primary health care team constituted of the public health officer, and a community nurse. The members of this team are trained during a one week course as trainers of trainers (TOTs) and participate in continuing education courses about once every three months. They are responsible for the training and supervision of the Village Health Committee members, the Community Health Workers (CHWs), and the Traditional Birth Attendants (TBAs), and will, to achieve this, visit settlements without any health facilities once every month on a specified day. The team will be equipped with two motorcycles. To assure treatment of minor ailments in settlements and in nomadic communities, a district based team of five officers visit settlements without health facilities at a well defined time and place (so that nomadic people will know where and when they can meet with this team for – 22 – consultation). The team will have a van equipped to provide primary curative and preventive health care. In optimal conditions, the team can visit each settlement once every two months. 4.6 Project Phasing The Drought Management and Marketing and Infrastructure components of the project would be implemented over a six-year implementation period. The Community Development component would initially be implemented in only four districts over a four-year period. However, if the findings of the evaluation at mid-term are positive, decisions would be made to continue the component for the full project term of six years in these districts and to extend its coverage to the remaining districts. A sum of US$1.3 million has been included in the project costs for this purpose. Groundwork for project start-up will commence in the zero year (starting in early 1995) and will be mainly devoted to establishing both the institutional and organizational infrastructure as well as advance action for the procurement of vehicles and equipment. The demonstrated benefits accruing from project initiatives would encourage the conflict resolution process and form the basis for expanding project activities to the relatively insecure areas. It was agreed during negotiations that a comprehensive mid-term review would be carried out at the end of year three between September 30, 1998 and December 31, 1998, and lessons learned incorporated. A detailed list of topics to be covered at the mid-term review has been included in the PIP. Project activities in the zero year will be funded through a PPF and partly through the components of EDRP which have been aligned during its mid-term review to eventually dovetail into ALRMP. B. CONSULTANCIES AND STUDIES 4.7 The project provides for about 48 person-months of consultancies for drought management and community development, for guiding and advising on preparation of the national and district drought manuals and contingency plans and the establishment of the drought monitoring system (para 3.4) and for advising on operational issues related to community development activities. The project will also finance studies in tenurial and grazing rights of pastoralists, resource management in ALs and on marketing. C. PROJECT MONITORING AN” EVALUATION 4.8 Baseline studies will be carried out under EDRP and under the project preparation facility, which will form the basis for project evaluation. Assurance was obtained at negotiations that the design and formats of the baseline studies will be finalized in consultation with IDA. The timeframe for conducting the surveys was agreed at negotiations. Monitorable indicators have been developed during appraisal and are included in the PIP. A list of key indicators finalized during negotiations is attached (Annex 10). During implementation, an annual review workshops will be held, rotationally in each district, as a sharing, best-practice learning event. All implementers in the field, including govemment ministries, NGO functionaries, representatives of participating communities, and staff of DSU/NSU will be the participants. The workshop will review implementation of the previous year, identify constraints and issues, select best practices and set goals and Implementation methodology for the next year. An annual evaluation of the CD component will be carried out. The review at the end of year two will be comprehensive so that lessons are applied in the implementation of the -23 – component in the remaining period. An impact evaluation of the project will be carried out at rmid-term and in the terminal year of the project. The impact study will particularly focus on the benefits of improved market linkages, i.e., improved livestock take-off and farm gate prices, the reduction in drought inflicted losses, and increase in the off-farm income generation capacity. At negotiations Government assurance was obtained for conducting the impact evaluation study as proposed above. Agreement was also reached on the design and important details of the study. D. AUDITING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 4.9 The overall financial management, accounting and budgeting of the project will be the responsibility of NSU, which will co-ordinate all financial transactions including disbursement requests generated by DSUs. NSU and the districts would maintain accounts and records for project activities, including for SOEs and the Special Account, as relevant (paras. 3.13 and 3.14) in accordance with sound accounting practices satisfactory to IDA. Assurances were received during negotiations that the Government would (i) have the records and the accounts of the project, including those for the Special Account and SOEs, audited for each fiscal year by the Controller and Auditor General (CAG) or private auditors appointed by the CAG and acceptable to IDA; (ii) submit the audit reports to IDA within six months of the close of every fiscal year; (iii) ensure that the audit would comprise the auditor’s report on the project accounts comprising balance sheet (to show fixed and current assets), operating expenditure statement and statement showing sources and application of funds, the Special Account and the SOEs. The audit report will also include a statement on the adequacy of the accounting system and intemal controls. At negotiation the GOK provided assurances that (i) project audit reports will be fumished to IDA in formats generally and/or specifically agreed between GOK and IDA; and (ii) the project’s financial management and accounting system will be in place and operating before effectiveness. 4.10 Semi-annual reports, in agreed formats included in the PIP, on the progress of project components would be prepared and submitted to IDA by the NSU. A mid-term review of the progress and impact of the project interventions will be undertaken by OP and IDA not later than September 30, 1998. To facilitate this review, the NSU will prepare a project mid-term status report and furnish to IDA at least three months before the scheduled date for the midterm review. The review would form the basis for the Government/IDA to assess what corrective action may need to be taken and whether any reallocation between components is required. Six months before
the project closing date, the Borrower will prepare and make available to IDA its own implementation evaluation report on the project’s execution and initial costs and benefits, IDA’s and the Government’s performance of their respective obligations under the Credit Agreement, and the extent to which the purposes of the credit were achieved. The formats for the evaluation report have been described in the PIP. E. SUPERVISION PLAN 4.11 The project would be supervised more intensively by GOK and IDA in the first two years to guide community-oriented implementation and cooperation between various development actors in an environment where process is as important as the achievement of basic objectives. IDA supervision would require experts in institutions and community – 24 – development, drought management and livestock marketing and procurement at least twice in each of the first two years and once armually in the remaining period. In addition, a disbursement specialist would join at least three missions in the first two years and later at the time of the mid-term review. A roads engineer will be engaged in a few missions to review the spot improvement program for repairing critical district roads. The procurement and disbursement specialists participating in the missions will also provide training and orientation to the field staff. The first three missions will particularly focus on recruitment and staffing of positions in the district and national project support units, training, establishment and smooth operation of cooperation procedures, successful contracting for critical goods and consultancies for studies, and intensive on-the ground review of the community microprojects and community participation in project implementation. Review of the Government’s arrangements for the flow of funds would also receive serious attention, as would the adequacy of budgeting and timely fund availability to the districts for meeting project expenditures. A detailed supervision plan indicating approximate mission schedules, key activities to be reviewed, items of special focus, expected skills and estimated staff inputs is given in Annex 11. – 25 – 5. PROJECT JUSTIFICATION, RISKS AND SUSTAINABILITY A. JUSTIFICATION 5.1 The over-arching objective of the project is to reduce widespread poverty and enhance food security in the Arid Lands (about 75% of Kenya’s land area is classified as arid or semi-arid, with the ALs comprising 60% of the total land area of Kenya). Almost the entire population of around I million people in the ALs are below the poverty line as defined in the recently finalized Poverty Assessment report (discussed in paras. 2.8-2.12). The predominantly pastoralist populations in the arid districts, are in fact counted among the poorest and the most disadvantaged sections of society in the country. Social welfare indicators show that in terms of access to communications, public health, nutrition and education services, they receive a fraction of the services available to the rest of the Kenyan population. The project specifically supports the core objective of reducing poverty and strengthening the basis for equitable and environmentally sustainable economic development as defined in the CAS. The project is targeted to reach a highly disadvantaged group of communities living under harsh economic and agro-ecological conditions, and seeks to improve the living conditions of AL populations through: (i) enhancing resilience to droughts; (ii) increasing incomes through strengthening linkages with the rest of the economy; (iii) addressing basic needs of the communities, and especially of women and children; and (iv) the conservation of the natural resource base of the ALs. 5.2 Rising population pressures in the semi -arid lands have also increased the pressure on the AL resource base (see paras. 2.9-2.10). Consequently the traditional coping mechanisms of the AL populations are no longer adequate to allow them to recover from droughts. As a result, their dependence on primarily donor financed relief programs has grown over the years and in some parts of the ALs it has become a way of life. This is clearly not sustainable. The main aim of the drought management component of the project would be to enhance the AL population’s resilience to drought, and by formulating a detailed set of arrangements for drought warning, mitigation and recovery, aimed at reducing drought inflicted losses (see para. 3.4 & Annex 3), and reduce the need for repetitive emergency interventions. In particular, the devastating impact of the recurrent droughts will be contained through a comprehensive set of actions, such as, the institutionalization of the drought management mechanism at the national, district and local levels; strengthening of the national drought early warning system; improvement of stockroutes (holding grounds, water points, etc.) for emergency livestock evacuation; establishment and maintenance of drought grazing reserves; emergency veterinary campaigns, operation of drought related CFW/FFW projects; and, support for food aid activities. In addition, the project would strengthen and support local initiatives to better manage range lands, critical grazing reserves and other easily degradable environments in ALs and thereby help strengthen the traditional coping mechanisms of the AL communities as well (paras. 3.8; 5.14 and Annex 9). The project will also finance studies aimed at developing a policy and legal framework to address important concerns in areas such as, implications of diminishing dry season grazing regions; implications of increased sedentarization on stock routes and emergency grazing reserves; current regulations/practices on grazing rights and introduction of – 26 – appropriate reforms; and, testing desert resource management technologies e.g. sustainable water development, fodder development, grazing land management, pastoral income diversification. 5.3 The main economic asset of the ALs is livestock (Table 5.1). However, as a result of poor linkages with the rest of the economy (due mainly to inadequate infrastructure), the AL communities have been unable to realize the financial benefits from this important resource (para 2.12). The project aims to improve the linkages of the ALs with the rest of the economy. Specifically the project would help facilitate the further integration of these communities by providing marketing outlets for livestock and livestock products (para. 3.5; Annex 4). In operationalizing key stockroutes, the component will finance the rehabilitation of related infrastructure, such as, holding grounds, water points, marketing centers; the formation of usergroups for the identification of marketing obstacles and related solutions, as well as pertinent studies will also be supported under the project. Table 5.1: AL Livestock Resources | Population Herd Value (‘000) Average Drought period ($ millions) ($ millions) goats & sheep 4500 99 22 donkeys 100 5 n.a. camels 600 108 20 cattle 1400 196 29 5.4 The ALs have been a target of many development interventions as described in Annex 2. The main lesson learned from the successful initiatives is that, sustainable development would not have been possible without strong community involvement in decision making and implementation. This lesson has been the corner-stone in designing the CD component under the project. The CD component of the project would enable communities to plan and implement micro-projects that respond to their own priorities, building sustainability into the development initiatives (para. 3.6; Annex 5). These microprojects would help meet basic social needs, in particular of women and children, and also promote off/on-farm income generating activities. ALRMP’s precursor, and the only World Bank project in the area — EDRP, is having an impact in improving the management of livestock resources, animal health, drought, water resources and the environment/natural resource base, as well as, strengthening local capacities in the four arid districts where it is being implemented. B. PROJECT IMPACT 5.5 Poverty Reduction. Designed to be implemented followin
g a bottom-up, communitybased, demand-driven development approach, ALRMP’s preparation entailed joint visits, systematic client consultations, and “on-location” planning exercises with AL pastoralist communities. Hence, the project’s participatory planning approach, the identification of priority actionable areas for ameliorating the quality of life of the AL communities and the direct delivery of funds into communities, are all targeted towards reducing poverty in the ALs. The – 27 – poverty reduction strategy under the project, is aimed at galvanizing broad-based econormic growth in the region through improved management of the AL poor’s most abundant resources – livestock and labor, in conjunction with the improved management of the natural resources of the ALs (para. 5.14). The Poverty Assessment report indicates that in 1992 the poverty line in rural areas stood at Ksh. 485 per adult equivalent unit (a.e.u) per month or about US $ 10 per a.e.u., per month. The project would significantly increase the income of the largely pastoralist population through: (i) reduction in mortality rates of the livestock resources, particularly, in periods of drought; (ii) improvements in animal health leading to more rapid herd growth (improved fertility, reduced mortality); (iii) increased volume of sales due to improvements in herd growth rates (ensuring larger surplus for the markets), as well as, higher off-take rates due to improved commercial linkages with the rest of the economy; and (iv) increases in farm-gate prices due to both the improvements in quality of livestock offered by the AL pastoralists, and the reduction in transportation and other transaction costs of middle-men/traders, a portion of which would be passed on to the farm-level. The other mutually reinforcing element of the project’s poverty reduction strategy relates to the development of off-farm income generation activities, which while helping push up the standard of living in the area, would both reduce the dependence on /depletion of ALs’ natural resources, and help stabilize incomes in the drought years. 5.6 Drought Management. The main benefit of the project’s drought management activities would be the reduction of livestock losses due to the droughts which regularly devastate these areas. Livestock losses can be very severe. In the 1984 drought, approximately 33 percent of cattle, 25 percent of small ruminants (sheep/goats) and 13 percent of camels perished; in 1992 nearly 46 percent of cattle, 31 percent of sheep and 21 percent of camels were lost in the six severely affected arid districts. It is very modestly estimated that the project would help reduce livestock losses by about one-quarter of their present drought mortality rates (Table 5.2). The resultant benefits are estimated at about US$ 9 million (at current prices) in a severe drought and about US$ 6 million in a less severe drought. If however, the project results in a reduction of the drought mortality rates by one-third, the gross benefits would be equivalent to some US $ 12 million in a severe drought and US$ 8 million in a less severe drought. If on the basis of past experience it is assumed that a severe drought is experienced every 10 years and a less severe drought every five, then over a 20 year period potential benefits from improved drought management are expected to be considerable. Table 5.2: Drought Mortality Rates Without Project With Project Drought Mortality Rates Drought Mortality Rates Severe Less Severe Severe Less Severe goats/sheep 28 12 21 9 camels 17 5 13 4 cattle 40 14 30 11 5.7 In addition, improved drought management would also lead to less deterioration of the general condition of the animals which should result in better prices when they are sold. Keeping more animals alive during a drought will have substantial nutritional benefits to the – 28 – population and reduce the need for costly food imports or aid and help minimize disruption of the pastoralist economy. 5.8 Market Linkages, Animal Health & Farmgate Prices. The project would also lead to improved market linkages. Over the last ten years, on average, the livestock offtake rates for the ALs have been as follows: 7 percent of the cattle, 8 percent of the goats/sheep and about 1.5 percent of the camels from the arid lands are marketed outside the region (Table 5.3). The project aims to increase the low average annual off-take rates of AL livestock units over time by strengthening the marketing links with the rest of the economy. A robust domestic/export market for livestock products exists in Kenya, hence, the additional output would be readily absorbed. While the considerable potential for improving the current AL offiake rates may well be realized (under ALRMIP), such that the numbers of cattle marketed increases to 11 percent and small ruminants to 25 percent annually, for the purposes of assessing incremental project benefits, it is frugally estimated that at full development the project would increase annual sales of cattle and small ruminants by 20 percent each over current rates — to about 8.4 and 10 percent, respectively, and that of camels by just 10 percent p.a. (to some 2 percent). Table 5.3: Livestock Offtake Rates 3 With-out Project With Project Offtake Rates Offtake Rates sheep/goats 8.0% 9.6% camels 1.7% 1.9% cattle 7%0% 0 8.4% 5.9 It is also envisaged that the improvements in the quality of the livestock units being sold (due to increased availability of water, fodder and animal health services), and reduction in transportation and other trading costs, would directly translate into improvements in farm-gate prices under the project (Table 5.4). Again, the premiums for quality and the general reduction in transaction costs is conservatively estimated to yield a nominal 10 percent improvement in prices, over their current levels. The farmgate prices have been calculated by averaging the prices prevailing in project districts over the last two years; the prices prevailing during the severe drought of year of 1991/92 were taken as the benchmark for the reduced price levels during droughts. Given the substantial drought mitigation/management efforts under the project, it is envisaged that the slaughter rates of cattle, particularly during the less severe droughts will be reduced, as the effective activation of the emergency relief apparatus would augment the staying power of the pastoralists and their herds. It is hence assumed that the prices during the less severe droughts will stabilize at around fifty percent of the normal farmgate price levels. Overall, the value of the incremental sales (at the improved prices) under the project (during a normal year) is hence estimated at some US$5 million annually (in current prices). Due to paucity of reliable data, no serious effort was made to evaluate the project benefits deriving from increased meat, milk, skin and wool production. Nevertheless, it should be noted that in addition to the meat, milk forms a large part of the pastoralist diet and provides an important proportion of the necessary calories and proteins. Much of the incremental milk produced would be consumed locally. In addition, the improved incomes of – 29 – the arid lands populations would have a multiplier effect through increased trade with the rest of the economy. Table 5.4: Farmgate Prices (per animal) Without Project With Project Farmgate prices/unit (Ksh) Fa mgate prices/u it IKsh) Average Drought Average Less severe Severe Drought Prices Prices drought Sheep/goats 990 315 1,080 540 360 Camels 8,100 1,800 8,910 4,455 1,980 Cattle 6,300 1,575 6.930 3,465 1,755 5.10 . Community Development The CD component of the project would also lead to substantial monetary and non-monetary benefits to the beneficiaries. A key focus of CD component is to promote income-generating activities, particularly through support for offfarm microenterprises. This support would take the form of training, limited technical assistance, and seed capital. Although a precise assessment of the overall economic or financial costs and benefits arising from the component is not feasible, the project is designed to draw upon th
e least cost options for undertaking the proposed initiatives in the project area. It is anticipated that about 15 percent of the AL population will benefit from the support under the project for setting up on/off-farm microenterprises, which is envisaged to improve their gross incomes by a modest 10 percent, it is expected that at full development, some US$ 1.5 rmillion (in current prices), will be added annually to the gross earnings of the AL population. An assessment (on the basis of the experiences under EDRP and other relevant development initiatives in the ALs), of the gross annual benefits accruing from representative models of selected (potential) microprojects with moderate investments in the areas of community educational facilities and water schemes, indicates that over a twenty year period, the total quantifiable benefits from these initiatives would significantly exceed the microproject investment costs. Assuming improved employment opportunities for only about 5 percent of the young adults receiving primary education (from a total of some 1500 students per year), either through the application of the “under the tree” nomadic education models or through the improvement of the more formal educational facilities, supported under the project (three educational facilities per district were assumed), on the basis of very conservative estimates (i.e., only a fifth of their income is attributed to their education), the total annual (incremental) benefit from the gainful employment of these students amounts to about US$ 12,000 (in current prices), starting in about PYI I (by PY20 the cumulative total incremental income will amount to an estimated US$ 115,000). While US$ 12,000 is not an impressive amount per se, this income represents a per capita incremental amount of about US$ 160 p.a. for the 5 percent earning it, and helps push their earning levels over the poverty line. Likewise, financial analysis relating to the provision of two borehole type water facilities for each of the project districts indicates that, at current prices the total incremental income generated per year, from the operation of these boreholes (for 300 days per year, at the charge of Ksh. 2 /livestock unit/day for some 16,500 heads of livestock), a total annual income of US$ 216,000 may be expected at full development. 5.11 In addition, the improved educational facilities and water resources will translate into enhancing the quality of life and increasing the productivity of the local communities, as well as – 30 – improving their income base/potential. Improvements in the general health of the local population and their livestock herds due to increased access to good quality drinking water would translate into direct economic benefits, and community water schemes would lead to increased food production in home gardens (evidence of this is visible under EDRP) and substantial savings in terms of labor by reducing the time it takes to fetch water or trekking animals several kms away to water points. The project is designed to draw upon the least cost options for undertaking the proposed initiatives in the project area. The representatives of the key technical line ministries in the District Steering Group will evaluate the soundness of the technological packages being adopted The locally based Collaborating Agencies as well as the AL communities themselves, would be closely involved in the selection of altemative approaches with regard to technological processes and resources to be employed in implementing various activities under the project Furthermore, the lessons of experience and “best practices” that have evolved under the past and ongoing development interventions in the area, e.g., EDRP, the Kenya Livestock Development Project funded by the European Union and the UNDP supported Pastoralist Integrated Development Project (Annex 2), will be applied and replicated under ALRMP. The project would, wherever possible, seek to employ locally available cost effective and hitherto tested technology packages and resources, eliminating the need for costly imports or exogenous technologies involving high operating and maintenance costs. Both the design and the implementation strategy adopted for ALRMP are based on the tenets of low cost alternatives and project sustainability. All aspects of the project should lead to an overall decrease in dependence on food aid. 5.12 Nutrition, Health & other Social Service Interventions. On the basis of community preferences, microprojects to address education, nutrition, health and reproductive issues, will be undertaken. These micro-projects which would help meet basic social needs, in particular of women and children, through support for activities in the areas of curative care, communicable disease interventions, improved hygienic practices, safe motherhood, family planning, nutrition education, immunization programs, are envisaged to lead to substantial monetary and nonmonetary benefits to the communities. The enhanced training of community health workers and nomadic teachers would also lead to better nutritional and health levels and increased literacy. 5.13 Community Empowerment & Local Capacity Building. The project seeks to foster genuine local ownership of the development process in Kenya through assigning a pivotal role to the AL communities in making development decisions. Not only did the AL communities play a crucial role in the design of the project, but they will continue to be heavily involved in its implementation. AL communities (assisted by line ministries, NGOs and local self help groups, as needed) will identify, plan, implement and participate the all development activities financed under the project. Participation orientation workshops, community development, and community members’/ leaders’ training programs are an integral part of the project. 5.14 Environmental Impact The project is envisaged to have a beneficial environmental impact by seeking to contain the deterioration of the fragile ecosystem and reducing the incidence of desertification. The project will contribute significantly to improving the management of fragile environments in the ALs by strengthening the ability of the pastoral communities to plan and implement appropriate development initiatives, to control access to critical grazing reserves, and to encourage their rehabilitation. It will help formulate a set of -31- initiatives to protect the environment-friendly rights of the pastoral communities. It would also build a greater awareness of environmental management issues and enhance awareness of biodiversity concems, among the participating communities, the Govemment and collaborating agencies. In addition, improved management of the ALs would translate into direct economic gains for the local populations by way of increased fodder and fuelwood supplies in the medium term. The framework and guidelines for the proposed ALRMIP are based on the NEAP which was completed with IDA assistance in June 1994. An independent environmental analysis/ review of this category B project was conducted by consultants appointed by the Govemment. The review has determined that no negative impacts are anticipated because the project is designed to use community-based, low-cost, sustainable resource management techniques. The review also makes a number of suggestions for best practices that would have a positive impact on the environment and makes recommendations for implementing these development initiatives, e.g., not to permit settlements in the drought grazing reserves, not to make populations affected by drought develop dependency on aid. The report is summarized in Annex 9. 5.15 National Programs & Replicability. ALRMP is part of a larger National Drought Management Programme, and after several years of relatively ineffectual donor coordination in the ASALs, the Arid Lands Resource Management Project is providing the bases for effective coordination between the Bank and other multi-lateral and bilateral donors (EU, Dutch, GTZ). Not only does ALRMP fit in with Kenya’s national strategy for drought management, but it is also providing a m
odel for delivery of services to some of the poorest communities in Kenya – through community empowerment and participatory development. In particular, it is providing a model for service delivery to communities in terms of animal health. The formation of user associations to manage livestock revolving funds and water user associations should be considered replicable models or pilots, and promise to fit into overall national strategies. The project is providing leadership in these remote districts for service delivery which is participatory and community based. The experiences from project implementation can be used to modify and improve national animal health programs, particularly with a view to improved delivery of services in other sparsely populated parts of Kenya. – 32 – C. ECONOMIC AND FiNANCIAL ANALYSIS 5.16 The main quantifiable as well as non-monetizeable benefits accruing from the implementation of the various project components have been described at some length in paras. 5.5 through 5.15 , above. Since a number of project benefits elude quantification, a rigorous economic analysis for the project was not feasible. However, the basic cost! benefit analysis undertaken indicates that, even with modest assumptions about the quantifiable project benefits, the potential retums from ALRMP will be fairly substantial (Annex 12). In view of the impact of the recent price reforms in Kenya, the key distortions in the foreign exchange rate, interest rates, wage rates and product prices have been removed. Thus, economic prices are expected to be very close to financial prices. A project life of 20 years is assumed for purposes of benefit-cost streams assessment. Taxes and duties were excluded from the economic analysis. Also, price contingencies were not reflected in project costs, since the project benefits were evaluated in constant terms, over the project life. 5.17 The analysis assumes that the main benefits resulting from the project would stem from: a reduction in livestock mortality rates; a modest price increment or premium for the improved quality livestock (along with the impact of reduced transportation/ marketing costs); and, increased annual average off-take rates due to improvements in market linkages. The main quantifiable benefit from the CD component is expected to result from an improvement in the incomes of about 15 percent of the AL populations who are expected to set up microenterprises with support from the project. Project investment and recurrent costs related to each of the three components, were netted out against the benefits streams. Project Support Unit costs were also included in the analysis. Following project completion, recurrent costs were assumed to continue at levels essential for sustaining an adequate flow of services related to the activities initiated under the project. A one time replacement/ rehabilitation expenditure related to drought management equipment/ infrastructure, and for the rehabilitation/ construction of roads and replacement of construction and repair equipment was also included in the analysis. 5.18 Based on the foregoing, an ERR of 16.9 percent is calculated for the project. Results from switching value analysis for an ERR of 10 percent which is the Opportunity Cost of Capital (OCC) for Kenya, demonstrate that a significant change in benefits or costs, i.e. a 34 percent drop in total (quantifiable) benefits, or a large increase of 51 percent in costs would be required in order to reduce the ERR to 10 percent. Sensitivity Analysis shows that if benefits fall or costs increase by 25 percent, the ERR would fall to 12 percent and 13.1 percent, respectively. Altemately, if benefits increase or costs fall by 25 percent, the ERR would rise to 21.3 percent and 22.6 percent, respectively. An enormous decline of 70 percent in total benefits would be essential in order for the ERR to drop to zero percent. Conversely, an exponential increase of 200 percent in total project costs would push the ERR to zero percent. If all quantifiable benefits envisaged to accrue from the drought mitigation/ management interventions under ALRMP are excluded from the total benefits stream, the project’s ERR would decline to 10.4 percent; if instead, the benefits from the marketing and infrastructure improvements under the project are excluded, the ERR drops to 5.3 percent. The exclusion of the CD benefits reduces the ERR to 14.4 percent. No independent lag analysis of the project’s benefits stream was undertaken, as the impact of droughts on the project’s benefits stream was built into the basic economic analysis model. – 33 – Table 5.5: Sensitivity Analysis Economic Rate of Return Baseline 16.9% Benefits up 25% 21.3% Costs down 25% 22.6% Benefits down 25% 12.0% Costs up 25% 13.1% Benefits down 70% 0% Costs up 200% 0% D. RISKS 5.19 There are three main risks. First, due to the inadequacy of implementation capacity and lack of coordination at district and national levels, implementation through districts may not work effectively. This will have an impact on achieving project benefits. Delayed and/or inadequate implementation of the drought mitigation interventions will impact adversely on the immediate well being of AL communities during a drought and will make recovery more difficult. Poor implementation of the livestock marketing component will also reduce the financial benefits to the AL populations and delay and/or prevent the economic links with the rest of the economy being established. To mitigate this risk, the project aims to further adapt the institutional arrangements and capacity at the district level with the strong coordination role of the Office of the President which is currently in place under EDRP and generally functioning adequately. A related issue is that enhanced livestock marketing may be delayed due to social conflict. Efforts at conflict resolution are already being undertaken by district administrations. Furthermore, project activities would be first launched in the secure areas and non-governmental agencies currently involved in conflict resolution efforts would be involved in the process. 5.20 Second, the project would require a strong team effort to facilitate the participatory process; large geographical areas with poor means of communication would add to the risk. If the team effort is inadequate, the community development package in particular will be affected. However, the adaptation of government delivery systems to the arid lands conditions, the involvement of non-government agencies with a history of successful experience in the areas, a strong orientation and training program, and the proposed decentralized institutional arrangements would help minimize this risk. In addition, some of the proposed subcomponents will follow successful patterns established in PIDP, EDRP and development initiatives supported by bilateral and non-governmental agencies. – 34 – 5.21 Third, flow of funds has been the most intractable issue in Kenya and principally responsible for unsatisfactory project performance. This would be addressed by a combination of recent initiatives in several ongoing projects in Kenya such as providing the budget for the project under one vote of the coordinating ministry and the district funding mechanism currently in use under EDRP and the Second National Agricultural Extension Project (Credit 2199-KE). E. SUSTAINABILITY 5.22 The project is sustainable from a fiscal perspective. The Govemment is expected to contribute around US$ 2.0 million of the project costs over the 6 year implementation period, which is feasible based on current budgetary allocations (the allocation for EDRP in 1995/96 was KShs. 540 million, equivalent to about US$ 12 million, and KShs. 630 million (US$ 14 million) in 1994/95). The Ministry of Finance has included ALRMFP in the 1995/96 financial year budget through the provision of a PPF of KShs. 11.4 million or US$ 252,500. The design and implementation strategy adopted for ALRMP would lend sustainability to project investments. Drought management will become a long-term Govemment function and the drought management units will be integrated into
the regular Govemment institutional structure. After the credit closes, the impact of drought management expenditures on the Government budget would be approximately US$330,000 annually. The O&M allocation for EDRP in 1995/96 was K. Shs 32.6 million (around US $ 700,000). Communities would also have an important role in operating drought early warning systems, as well as in mitigation and recovery efforts. Livestock routes, holding grounds and market yards will be maintained by the communities and local authorities with negligible demands on the Treasury. Under the Community Development component the project would provide a one-time capital support to the community selected micro-projects. These micro-projects will be operated and maintained by the communities without any further cost to the project or later on to the Government other than followup training. Sustainability, ensured by community responsibility and commitments to operate and maintain assets, would be fundamental to the design of microprojects and also a pre-condition for funding under the ALRMP. – 35 – 6. AGREEMENTS AND RECOMMENDATION A. AGREEMENTS AND ASSURANCES 6.1 During negotiations the following assurances were obtained: (a) the National Drought Management Secretariat and the sub-units dealing with drought management in the eight District Support Units will be integrated into the regular Government institutional structure, (b) the beneficiary communities will contribute at least 30 percent of the cost of the microproject undertaken, (c) the District Works Offices will annually prepare a plan of critical spot improvements to the roads and execute it after DSG approval, and the project ftunding for these critical spot improvements will be supplemental allocation to the normal budget allocation provided by MOPW to the districts for road repair and maintenance; (d) a training plan will be prepared annually before the start of each fiscal year and furnished to IDA for approval, (e) (i) an evaluation of the impact of project interventions will be conducted at mid-term and in the final year in terms of the design of the evaluation study finalized at negotiations; (ii) an annual review of the CD component will be conducted and the review at the end of the year two will be comprehensive; and (iii) the design and format of the baseline survey will be finalized in consultation with IDA, (f) Government would (i) have the records and accounts of the project, including those for the Special Accounts and SOEs audited each fiscal year by the Controller and Auditor General or private auditors appointed by him; and (ii) submit to IDA the audit reports comprising Project Accounts, Special Account and SOEs in the agreed format within six months of the close of the fiscal year. The audit report wil1 include a statement on the adequacy of the accounting system and internal controls, (g) (i) studies for the review of laws and regulations relating to the tenunral and grazing rights of pastoralists in arid lands will be completed in the second year of the project; and (ii) a plan of action will be drawn up in consultation with IDA to implement the recommendations made under these studies in an agreed time-framre; (h) to conduct jointly with IDA a mid-term review of the project between September 30, 1998 and December 31, 1998; and – 36- (i) the Government and IDA shall monitor and review the operation and effectiveness of the district payment mechanism from time to time. If the joint review concludes that the payment mechanism is not effective, the Govermment shall, not later than three months after being notified by IDA, introduce and implement such modification of the mechanism or of the applicable administrative and financial rules and procedures as may have been agreed upon with IDA. 6.2 The following were the conditions of Board presentation: (a) the receipt of a Letter of Sectoral Policy; and (b) the receipt of overdue audits for FY93 (Project Accounts, SOE and Special Account) for the EDRP (Cr. 2460-KE) as well as audited statements of sources and application of funds for funds utilized under EDRP from the Rural Services Design (Cr. 1974-KE), Second National Extension (Cr. 2199-KE) and Animal Health Services (CR. 1758-KE) projects. 6.3 The following are the conditions of Credit effectiveness. The Government will: (a) enter into a contract, satisfactory to IDA, with a firm to carry out studies for review of laws and regulations pertaining to tenurial and grazing rights of pastoral communities; (b) fumish to IDA evidence that the following project officers, with qualifications satisfactory to IDA, have been recruited and started work: National Project Coordinator, Drought Management Coordinator (Head of DMS), Procurement Officer, Finance Officer, and at least four District Project Coordinators; (c) make appropnrate provision of funds in the budget for year one of the project in terms of the agreed Annual Work Plan and ensure that these funds are available for meeting project expenditures as soon as the project becomes effective; (d) fumish to IDA evidence that the project’s financial management and accounting system is in place and operating; (e) fumish Project Implementation Plan (PIP), satisfactory to IDA; (f) fumish terms of service including pay scales of the project staff, and (g) fumish overdue audits for FY94 (Project Accounts, SOE and Special Account) for EDRP (Cr. 2460-KE) as well as audited statements of sources and application of funds for funds utilized under EDRP from the Rural Services Design (Cr. 1974-KE), Second National Extension (Cr. 2199-KE) and Animal Health Services (Cr. 1758-KE) Projects. – 37 – B. RECOMMENDATION 6.4 Based on the above conditions and agreements, the proposed project would be suitable for an IDA Credit of SDRI4.8 million (US$22.0 million equivalent) to the Republic of Kenya, on standard IDA terms with 40 years maturity. -38- Annex 1 Page 1 of T Tedcgrazns: ‘FINANCE’.Nairobi MINISTRY OF FINANCE Office of the Miniaer Tclepbooe: Nairobi 3t88111 P.O Baz3000MQ7 When replying pleas” quaE – Ref. No …………………………… EA/FA 62/335/01 ………………………….. 4th May 19 … 95 and da. Mr. Edward V. Jaycox Vice President, Africa Region World Bank 1818E Street, N.W. Washington D.C. 20433 Dear ( A Arid Lands Rescurce Management Project – -~’ Letter of Sectoral PolicB ag \/Yfl VALLEY\” EASTERN ( r z > / [ MARSABIT / NORTH z! / ‘ (‘ I U) 4&RPAR(T 1′ WA\RR J~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FJ 9.’! 1 A ,OFOA 9FNYANG SAMBURU,W R | IOL / <- ,’VPFF I®P.MARALAL I / J W^IIA F a T~~~~ANGUSEI ( 0 F OOFPF t< d PAPEI C ~ \EASTERN r – ‘ P> ) 1 I t ‘ t A / \ N, ‘ ‘ AFCAR F ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~CIIIS ). HA- ‘> I, i_ OA’ GARISSA\ \ F*J ;F(FFr E, .e^CHAtO ITIITANA -NAfFOBl RIVER K. HOF;/PA JAr!,’OLA M tAJOYP rc t ls – ^s * AIP-PPc r nrA icLlav-r R z qX \ s A 1 Fy C 0 A S T P/~WfF I lATINAlO F] F 4’I CAPPTAL JPTF / /P\”P /\/ M%A tl R’ )ADS I r t < >+ E/.r)1 hZAt.L A RPOFT5 t \ IZA~~~~~~~~~~~~~LINDI *) I Al CFNAL AIPPC)RTS /AA F AFANFF _\IT ‘ [ NTFLIF_N1 FL)DARJES VA.o,F, r t LIF: PP _ _ S,UB UISIF SUP) 1.5) EN “- -LU.A I I tI:. C r BO90UNDt R;EF 4r=s , PP – . ; .LRSA| I s 8, – , ^ IFR NP@ T F¢tL/P EOPPODAPPFS = – ‘ = = – I|WNAIL FAYA LKArI n ~ ER71,%T 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~IDARIE ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I 2., 52 ,F’FF4A 1 \ uL>Jc The bA)FPlFdFP eS C rs S)&F FF,FFPFFO,Sl cl(-d ony other -nfQrmto,P F, !AF’AP(A ,h-,WI c,,, ff,, ,,ap d, oE /Dt /npl oo poF4 oa The World Bank pD t, F,A Group, .FY CIQdgPPelPF -F lhe fegol tOt-s of oPPt’ ter/Ptory, or ony eH,dorPA’P CF c: oCpptoP,- ‘ol s-ch bo-ndr,es AM9 JANPJAR'” 1Y95 IMAGINGr Repor t No: 1:3632’2 KE Tyje: JAR
 

Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may have. From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs.

GET A 40% DISCOUNT ON YOU FIRST ORDER

ORDER NOW DISCOUNT CODE >>>> WELCOME40

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized