Implementation completion and results report


Project Context, Development Objectives and Design



Download 1.43 Mb.
Page5/12
Date01.06.2018
Size1.43 Mb.
#52646
TypeReport
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   12

1. Project Context, Development Objectives and Design

1.1 Context at Appraisal


  1. Egypt has been described, since time immemorial, as the ‘gift of the river Nile’, and so it is not surprising that management of water resources has been central to all aspects of national strategy. Its reliance on the Nile is reflected in the fact that 90 percent of the population live on 5 percent of the land area around the stem of the Nile River and the Delta. The Nile waters are shared by nine other upper riparian nations, all with growing water demands. The country faced the strategic challenge of improving the productivity and sustainability of water use, rather than augmenting water supply. Population growth had exacerbated the problem: at project appraisal, Egypt had a per capita availability of 950 cubic meters (m3) per year of renewable freshwater resources, which was lower than the regional average of 1,200 m3 per year. This was projected to decline to 650 m3 per year by 2017.

  2. At appraisal, improving the productivity and sustainability of water use was expected to be derived from reducing losses on the mesqa and marwa (farm) level by piping open canals (both at the mesqas and marwas), diminishing surface runoff through land leveling, and reducing deep percolation through adjustments in the irrigation scheduling. In addition to water savings, increases in productivity and reductions in irrigation costs were expected (electric versus diesel fuel for pumping and labor required), as well as 2 to 3 percent of additional cropping area recovered through the filling of the old open mesqas and marwas with the new proposed piped system.

  3. Increasing the economic return per unit volume of water also created both on-farm and off-farm income and employment for the rural poor and non-poor alike. At appraisal, 70 percent of the poor lived in rural areas, with some 38 percent on landholdings of less than 1 feddan. Furthermore, because the annual Government of Egypt (GOE) expenditures on water services absorbed up to 10 percent of total public expenditures, rationalizing and reforming water management was central in any strategy aimed at accelerating the country’s economic growth. The Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation (MWRI) had taken the lead in launching this reform agenda, an Integrated Water Resources Management Action Plan was being finalized during project preparation.

  4. At appraisal, a full understanding of the performance and functioning of existing land drainage systems was expected to be achieved during mesqa-level design and implementation. The population had reported that water tables in the project area had risen and rendered the discharge capacity of drainage systems less effective. It was assumed that the anticipated effect of improved mesqa design would lead to a decrease in seepage losses and hence to lower water tables and their stabilization. However, the benefits from water table stabilization, along with the elimination of waterlogging from the life of the beneficiaries, were barely appreciated.

  5. Rationale for World Bank involvement. The World Bank’s strategy in Egypt placed emphasis on areas where the GOE commitment was strong, where the GOE-World Bank partnership had a long track record, and where donor financing catalyzed long-term reforms. The proposed project satisfied all those requirements. In particular, the project built on the World Bank’s long and successful partnership with the MWRI in the irrigation and drainage sector in Egypt and the long-term collaboration with the German Development Bank (Kreditaustalt fur Wiederaufbau, KfW) and the Netherlands Development Cooperation (NDC) in promoting a common donor vision for institutional change. The involvement of the two donors with their areas of comparative advantage supported a long-term reform process with a blend of technical assistance (TA) and investments.

1.2 Original Project Development Objectives (PDO) and Key Indicators (as approved)


  1. The objective of the project is to assist the borrower in improving the management of irrigation and drainage in the project area to increase the efficiency of irrigated agriculture water use and services. This is from the Loan Agreement and is essentially the same as in the Project Appraisal Document (PAD) where ‘overall project objective’ is used instead of ‘objective of the project’.

  2. The PAD, on page 3, presented the following selected key indicators: (a) water use volumes, system efficiencies, and water distribution equities; (b) crop yields and farmer incomes; (c) Branch Canal Water Boards (BCWBs) and mesqa water user associations (WUAs) established, with operation and maintenance (O&M) responsibilities fully transferred to mesqa WUAs and jointly assumed by BCWBs and the MWRI district-level agencies; and (d) all involved institutions/agencies actively coordinating and interacting for project planning, implementation, and management.1

1.3 Revised PDO (as approved by original approving authority) and Key Indicators, and reasons/justification


  1. The original project objectives remained unchanged throughout project implementation. However, three core sector indicators were added:

  • Area provided with improved irrigation and drainage services

  • Water users provided with new/improved irrigation and drainage services (male, female)

  • Operational WUAs created and/or strengthened




  1. The value of land (compared with non-project neighboring command area) indicator was dropped because a number of causes, such as encroachment of urban areas into agricultural land that was not project dependent, were influencing the value of the land.2

1.4 Main Beneficiaries


  1. The direct beneficiaries are the farmers and their families supplied with improved irrigation and drainage services who now receive more reliable and regular water supplies following the interventions made under the project. An estimated 476,662 water users have been provided with new/improved irrigation and drainage services by the project, of which about 20 percent are females. The project is estimated to have a total of 2,262,900 direct beneficiaries (about 5 direct beneficiaries per water user).

  2. Alexandria City residents are the indirect beneficiaries of the project-financed improvements of the Mahmoudia main canal. Dredging of the canal and rehabilitation of water control structures improved the hydraulic functioning and capacity of the canal, benefiting drinking water supplies (improved safety and reliability) to a population approaching 5 million. The city gets about 70 percent of its water supply from the Mahmoudia canal, drawing annually about 912 million m3 for drinking water and 273 million m3 for industrial usage.

  3. Other beneficiaries include populations living adjacent to the Mahmoudia and Meet Yazed main canals. Canal stabilization works as well as raising the banks in some sections resulted in considerable improvement in the conditions of the roads along the canals. Before the project, seepage through the embankments was making the roads quite unstable and they were collapsing regularly into the canals. Rehabilitation of various structures, including bridges and regulators, was also beneficial to the population and to the industries that use these roads.

1.5 Original Components (as approved)


  1. The project had five components:

(a) Improved and Integrated Water Management (US$224.9 million). This component covered the implementation of irrigation and drainage rehabilitation, improvement and modernization works and programs at all levels of the selected command areas. Subcomponents included (i) main canal system improvements; (ii) branch canal (secondary) and mesqa (tertiary) system improvements, including electrification for pumping stations wherever feasible; (iii) marwa (quaternary) and farm-level irrigation system improvements; (iv) open and subsurface drainage (SSD) network improvements; (v) main pumping station improvements; (vi) tube well irrigation and groundwater monitoring improvements; and (vii) engineering studies, designs, construction supervision, and O&M set-up.

(b) Improved On-Farm Water Management (US$4.6 million). This component covered (i) regional water and land management adaptive research programs; (ii) extensive on-farm water control and irrigated agriculture practice demonstrations; and (iii) irrigation advisory and production support services strengthening.

(c) Institutional Development and Capacity Building (US$14.3 million). A major focus of this component was the proper establishment, expansion, and scaling-up of water user organization functions at the levels of tertiary and secondary system irrigation and drainage hydraulic units throughout the selected command areas. Defined subcomponents covered (i) establishment of secondary system irrigation and drainage BCWBs and ensuring their voice in water management decision making at district and command area levels through the formation of federated water boards at the district level; (ii) establishment of mesqa WUAs and ensuring their proper representation within the BCWBs; (iii) establishment and mainstreaming of Integrated Water Management Districts (IWMDs), together with establishment of suitable joint or integrated irrigation/drainage command area management systems; (iv) execution of cadastral and water users registration surveys and preparation of corresponding databases; and (v) preparation of updated digital and hard copy maps based on IKONOS satellite images and national mapping grids.

(d) Project Management, Coordination, and Integration (US$11.0 million). This component was to support the management and coordination entities, functions, and activities needed for effective planning, implementation, and eventual commissioning of irrigation and drainage improvements on the basis of full command areas. It also promoted and facilitated, as appropriate, the integration of the various functions and contributions, both within the MWRI and between the MWRI and other involved and concerned ministries. Subcomponents covered (i) establishment and operational support for an integrated Project Management Unit (PMU), reporting to the Project Steering Committee and located within the MWRI; (ii) establishment and operational support for Regional Coordination Units (RCUs) and regional implementation teams attached to the PMU, one at each of the two project command area locations; (iii) setup and execution of monitoring and evaluation (M&E) arrangements and programs to assess project impacts and performance; and (iv) assistance with the formulation and facilitation, as needed, of liaisons and linkages at and between central and local levels that will advance the integration of improvement planning, implementation, and management, including for execution of preparatory studies for the potential Integrated Irrigation Improvement and Management Project (IIIMP) Phase II.



(e) Environmental Mainstreaming (US$5.0 million). This component focused on carrying out of an environmental management program, consisting of the following: (a) the provision of goods, training, and consultants’ services for (i) conducting public awareness and information disclosure campaigns; (ii) carrying out performance-based monitoring activities; (iii) conducting environmental studies and management plans related to rural sewage, solid waste, and pest management within the project area; and (iv) strengthening the institutional capacity of water user organizations; and (b) the carrying out of works and provision of goods required for rural sewage and solid waste management (SWM) pilots, all to support environmental mitigation measures and to empower water boards to ensure a sustainable management of water resources.

1.6 Revised Components


  1. Components were not revised during project implementation.

1.7 Other significant changes


  1. According to the PAD, the project duration (see page 35) was expected to be seven years with the closing date set for March 31, 2014. However, because of the political unrest in Egypt (January 2011 and June 2013), which affected the implementation progress of the project in various ways, the project closing date was extended to March 31, 2016.

  2. The project was restructured three times as follows: (a)Schedule 1 (withdrawal of the proceeds of the loan) was amended and all other (National Competitive Bidding) contracts to be subject to post-review by the World Bank on October 14, 2012; (b) extension of the project to March 2016 and reallocation of funds among categories and introduction of a service category on March 31, 2014, with additional changes related to the scope category 6 (‘Services’) to include ‘Consultant services, training and workshops, and operating costs’ on July 7, 2014. Improvement of the Results Framework with changes in the results indicators were made in this restructuring; and (c) further changes related to the scope of the categories on January 17, 2016.

2. Key Factors Affecting Implementation and Outcomes

2.1 Project Preparation, Design and Quality at Entry


  1. Project preparation. Project design integrated the experience and lessons learned under the Irrigation Improvement Project (IIP), the National Drainage Program, and other ongoing projects. Inequity of water supplies along the mesqas (tertiary canals) had been identified as a key problem: head end users were favored at the expense of tail-enders, who more often experienced delayed crop establishment, reduced crop development and yields, and crop failure. Farmers generally suffered because of limited water availability, as water at the branch canals (secondary canal) was often insufficient to feed all mesqas. When water was available, farmers had to bear high irrigation costs by pumping water from the mesqa canals using individual diesel pumps. Finally, inefficient drainage would result, among other things, in periodic rise of the water table, which would make working in the field particularly difficult in addition to negatively impacting yield.

  2. Design. Under the IIP, a pilot (covering 6,500 feddans) addressed the above issues and was the basis of the project design of the IIIMP. The pilot had focused on improving the efficiency and equitable distribution of water at the mesqa level, and found that the complete system from the main and branch canals had to function efficiently to deliver water to the mesqa outlets. Consequently, the IIIMP design included the structural improvements of the main (primary) and branch (secondary) canals to improve the hydraulic capacity of the system and deliver more water to the mesqas (tertiary) canals. Improved irrigation and drainage services were expected to translate in increase in yield and water productivity. Improvement of the drainage system financed under the IIIMP was expected to prevent waterlogging, with the additional benefit of making water available for downstream users. Construction of a pumping station for each mesqa (tertiary canals) and its electrification were expected to reduce pumping costs compared with use of individual diesel pumps.

  3. In addition, the IIIMP design addressed institutional arrangements both for individual mesqa operation through the WUA and the changes and strengthening of all the relevant institutions upon which the mesqa-level WUAs depended. Lastly, participation of multiple donors/institutions, for example, the World Bank, NDC, KfW, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, and U.S. Agency for International Development, during appraisal and/or implementation was important for the borrower in addressing the sectoral issues concertedly.

  4. Alignment with the World Bank Group Country Partnership Framework (CPF). With the above design, the project was well aligned with the World Bank’s Country Assistance Strategy (CAS), which emphasized environmental conservation, sustainability, and poverty alleviation by improving the irrigation infrastructure to address agricultural productivity. The CPF, covering 2015–2019, specifically has as its objective 2.4: Enhanced access to improved agriculture and irrigation services. The project was also consistent with the World Bank’s 2003 Water Resources Sector Strategy. Lastly, the project built on the World Bank’s long and successful partnership with the MWRI in the irrigation and drainage sector in Egypt.

  5. Risk assessment. A number of critical risks were identified in the PAD, with proposed mitigation measures. The major risks identified at appraisal were two: (a) the limited implementation capacity of domestic contractors, which could reduce the area improved or could result in delay and (b) the delay in design of improvement works and procurement processing. These risks were to be minimized by (a) provisioning TA and training of contractors and staff and (b) advance actions on procurement and design work using Policy and Human Resources Development grants funds. In retrospect, both risks were underestimated since, in spite of the mitigating measures adopted, they both caused delays. Similarly, provision of electrical lines for mesqa pump stations was considered a moderate risk. However, the difficulties and subsequent failure to deliver power to the individual mesqa pumping stations within the implementation period became the key reason for not achieving the target number of operational WUAs.3

  6. Quality at Entry. Some other risks were not identified in the PAD and had to be addressed later. For example, relying upon the estimates and the pilot, but without detailed surveys, feasibility studies, and engineering designs, the project had underestimated costs (by about 15 percent). These lack of detailed studies and engineering design were rectified without affecting the outcome.


Download 1.43 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   12



The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message
    Main page
Guide
Instructions
Report
Request
Review