Water Efficiency Improvement in Drought-Affected Provinces Project (RRP VIE 49404)

Subproject Report: Than Son-Phuoc Nhon Subproject

Viet Nam: Water Efficiency Improvement in

Drought-Affected Provinces Project

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

List of Tables List of Figures List of Abbreviations

I. BACKGROUND 1

II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2

A. Concept 2 B. Hydrology 2 C. Cropping Patterns, Command Area and Soils 6 D. System Feasibility Design 7 E. Detailed Design Requirement 10 F. Drainage Design Requirements 10 G. System Operation Considerations 10

III. COST ESTIMATES 11

IV. PROJECT IMPACT 13

A. Socio-economic Status of Beneficiaries 13 B. Socio-economic Survey Results 15 C. Gender Considerations 18 D. Environmental 19 E. Resettlement 21 F. Economic 22

LIST OF TABLES

Number Title Page

1 Details of Tan My Headwork 3 2 Proposed Cropping Pattern for Ninh Thuan Subprojects 3 3 Soils Types and Land Utilization Suitability 7 4 Proposed Irrigated Area and Pipe Density 8 5 Summary of Piped Subsystem Designs 9 6 Pipe Diameters and Lengths 9 7 Summary Costs - Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon Subproject 12 8 Ethnic Minority Composition in Subproject Districts 13 9 Incidence of Poverty in Subproject Districts, 2016 13 10 Population and Areas in Participating Districts 14 11 Cropping Patterns in Subproject Districts 14 12 Subproject Commune Socio-economic Statistics 15 13 Composition of Survey Sample and Household Size 16 14 Estimate of Resettlement Costs for Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon 22 15 Economic Assessment of Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon Subproject 24

LIST OF FIGURES

Number Title Page

1 Mean and Reliable Rainfall Recorded at Phan Rang 4 2 Isohyetal Map of Mean Annual Rainfall - Ninh Thuan 4 3 Summary Water Balance Using IWRP Factors 6

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ADB Asian Development Bank CPMU Central Project Management Unit CPO Central Project Office CRW crop water requirement DARD Department of Agriculture and Rural Development DD detailed design EMP environmental management plan ESS Environment Safeguard Specialist FS feasibility study FSC feasibility study cost GAP Gender Action Plan GRP glass fiber reinforced plastic HDPE high density polyethylene HIV/AIDS Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immune Deficiency

Syndrome HVC high-value crop IEE initial environmental examination IWR irrigation water requirement LD linked document LOS level of service LURC Land User Rights Certificate LUTS land utilization types MARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development NDS National Design Specialist PPMU Provincial Project Management Unit PVC polyvinyl chloride ROW right of way RRP Report and Recommendations of the President S2 moderate S3 poor SPB Social Policy Bank SPS Safeguard Policy Statement UIC unit investment cost UXO unexploded ordinance WEIDAP Water Efficiency Improvement in Drought-Affected Provinces Project WU Women’s Union

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

l (liter) m(meter) mm (millimeter)

– – –

metric system unit of volume equal to 1 cubic decimetre (dm3) Base unit of length unit of length in the metric system

m2 (square meter) – A system of units used to measure areas m3 (Volume) ha (hectare)

– –

A system of units used to measure the spaces that an object or substance occupies. Unit of area equal to 100 ares (10,000 m2) or 1 square hectometre (hm2) and primarily used in the measurement of land as a metric replacement for the imperial acre.

Kg (kilogram) Km (kilometer)

– –

A decimal unit of weight based on the gram Unit of length in the metric system, equal to one thousand metres

THANH SON–PHUOC NHON SUBPROJECT

I. BACKGROUND

1. Ninh Thuận is Viet Nam's most arid province, with some areas in the province receiving less than 800 mm rainfall per year. The province was declared one of the worst-affected provinces during the recent drought experienced between 2012-2016 and both national and provincial resources were channeled into its agricultural sector to assist farmers in dealing with the extended period of water deficit. While rainfall in late 2016 and early 2017 was plentiful, the area has yet to fully recover from the impact of the extended drought with many of the perennial crops dying not only during the drought period but also during the heavy wet season of 2016-17 that followed. Vulnerability to climate fluctuation has had a significant impact upon economic activity that is dominated by agriculture (largely rice) but also with significant income derived from vegetables, perennial tree crops (grapes and Vietnamese apples), salt production and fisheries, all dependent upon water resources in the province. The province boasts 80 reservoirs with 2,710 kilometer (km) of irrigation canals that are managed by the irrigation management company in Phan Rang (provincial capital). The area irrigated by these hydraulic works is 59,000 ha while the non-irrigated area is only 46,500 hectare (ha), emphasizing the importance of water in the province to its leading sector.

2. The climate provides excellent growing conditions for certain crops requiring high levels of sunshine and low relative humidity (that limit fungal infestations) on growing crops. However, exploitation of these conditions is incumbent upon the provision of water. The government has ambitious plans for the development of its water resources extending from large reservoirs high in the catchments to the west, delivering to coastal areas where agricultural pursuits dominate (along with the consuming population). Recently, the government committed to building a 2,000 milimeter (mm) diameter pipeline from Tan My to deliver 6.5 cubic meter per second (m3/s) to the coastal area where further irrigation facilities are planned (also to be expanded as the Cai River Reservoir is completed).

3. The Tan My diversion weir on the Cai River is 95% complete, and the steel pipeline that offtakes on the right bank runs for 3.1 km before crossing the river by the recently completed pipe aqueduct at KM 3.1. The steel pipe then skirts around the base of the mountain, passing through the Cho Mo Reservoir command canal system for 16.5 km until it reaches the upstream part of the subproject’s command area at KM 19.6. The pipeline then continues through the Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon subproject command area, to a branch at KM 31.1. The northern branch will continue another 3.3 km and discharge into the Ba Rau reservoir. The southern branch will head south for 9.5 km where it enters the command area of the proposed second subproject (Nhon Hai-Thanh Hai) described separately.1 To date, about 8 km of steel pipeline has been constructed. It is expected to be completed, at least to the branch at KM 31.1, in 2018. The Song Cai Reservoir is scheduled for completion in 2020 but has not been included in the water balance for either of the two subprojects.

4. At full development, the complete system is expected to support about 12,300 ha of irrigated agriculture,2 with water being an allocation to the two Water Efficiency Improvement in Drought-Affected Provinces Project (WEIDAP) subprojects, to supplement supplies to existing

1 Subproject Report: Nhon Hai-Thanh Hai Subproject (accessible in (accessible from the list of linked documents in

RRP Appendix 2). 2 Supported existing/ new irrigated areas are: (i) Cho Mo reservoir system 1,200 ha, (ii) Tan Lap upstream 3,100 ha,

(iii) WEIDAP SP1 Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon 3,700 ha, (iv) WEIDAP SP2 Nhon Hai-Thanh Hai 1,000 ha, (v) Ba Rau reservoir 300 ha, and (vi) Trau river reservoir 3,000 ha.

2

systems, Cho Mo, Ba Rau and Tran river, and replenishing the supply in the Ong Kinh Reservoir in the tail of the system. Allocations are also made for a power station, aquaculture, domestic and industrial use. The area of new irrigation development is estimated at about 6,800 ha. However, prior to construction of the Cai River Reservoir, dry season flows will constrain areas to be irrigated. Following discussions between Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD), Asian Development Bank (ADB) and provincial stakeholders, the net irrigation area to be developed under WEIDAP will be 1,800 ha for Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon, and 1,000 ha for Nhon Hai-Thanh Hai subprojects respectively.

5. The subproject will comprise buried high-density polyethylene (HDPE) (or possibly polyvinyl chloride [PVC]) pipelines off-taking from the main steel pipeline, with each off-taking pipeline commanding a gross area of between about 200 and 400 ha. These off-taking pipelines will be aligned in their command areas to provide a uniform level of service (LOS), following the design criteria adopted for WEIDAP, with 60 mm diameter hydrants at 50-100 m intervals commanding areas either side of the pipeline, with no field being more than 500 m from a hydrant. Hydrant flows shall all be about 5 liter/second (l/s). The soils in the proposed subproject area are classified as moderately (S2) and poorly (S3) suited to irrigated cropping, and the piped irrigation developments in this subproject will prioritize soils of the S2 category.

II.PROJECT DESCRIPTION

A. Concept

6. The subproject will enable the transformation of dry land, currently most of which is not being cropped and comprises patchily grassed, thorny shrubs and cacti. Much of the land is currently used for grazing of cattle and small ruminants (goats and sheep), but in the recent past, it supported maize and vegetable cropping by small holders when water was available. Unreliable water supplies led to some farmers abandoning crop agriculture, but “with the project,” many are expected to return to the area and resume farming. In addition, commercial farming is expected to be attracted to the area given the more reliable water supplies, with private sector companies buying-up land from smallholders to amalgamate larger contiguous plots. Several commercial farms are anticipated, each about 50 ha in size, under the concept of High Tech Agricultural Production Zones. With reliable water supplies, the range of crops that can be grown include grapes, Vietnamese apple, vegetables, maize and grass (fodder).

7. The larger scale commercial farm(s) are likely invested in high efficient irrigation equipment, drip for grape and perhaps sprinklers for vegetables. Smallholders may have capital constraints but are expected to adopt drag hose and basin/furrow irrigation techniques. Pressures at hydrants may be sufficient for hose irrigation, but on-farm pumping would be required for sprinklers and/ or drip systems.

B. Hydrology

8. Prior to construction of the Song Cai Reservoir with a planned storage of 10.3 million m3, there is likely to be insufficient dry season flow in the river to meet all the demands of the integrated scheme, in drought years, see water balance calculations. This may translate into difficulty in sustaining environmental flows during the months of April and May when irrigation crop water demand is at its highest. After completion of the reservoir, scheduled for 2020, dry season releases are expected to average about 15 m3/s, and 11 m3/s for the whole year and there will be no shortage. The design capacity of the Tan My main supply pipeline, at head, is 6.5 m3/s, with flows provisionally allocated as follows:

3

• WEIDAP subprojects: 2.7 m3/s; • Supplementary supply to existing reservoir schemes, Cho Mo, Ba Rau and Tran

River: 1.5 m3/s; and • Power station, urban and industrial use supply: at least 1 m3/s.

1. General

9. The two WEIDAP subprojects in this province lie within the larger (6,800 ha) Tan My irrigation system situated on the left bank of the Cai (Kinh Dinh) River in south central Ninh Thuan Province. The system is fed from the Tan My weir located about 40 km north west of Phan Rang-Thap Cham, the provincial capital. Details of the headworks are given in Table 1.

Table 1: Details of Tan My Headwork

Headworks Catchment

Area Catchment

Rainfall Catchment Runoff Weir Crest Level Available Storage

(km2) (mm) (m3/s) (mm) (masl) (mm3)

Tan My 805 1,314 23.8 935 99.50 0

Source: Technical Design Report of Tan My weir, 2017

10. An under-construction steel pipeline feeds the irrigation area from the Tan My weir. Construction has also started on a large (204 Mm3 capacity) reservoir on the Song Cai about 15 km upstream of the Tan My headworks. This is designed to regulate flow in the Song Cai to Tan My and also to other irrigation headworks downstream at Nha Trinh and Lam Cam (near to Phan Rang city). However, construction of the dam has stalled and with no clear program for its recommencement, the subproject water balance specifically excludes the use of storage in the future Song Cai reservoir. Water availability, therefore, depends solely on reliable, run-of-river flows in the Cai River at Tan My weir. The Nhon Hai-Thanh Hai subproject lies at the tail end of the Tan My irrigation system pipeline. This tail-end system receives some water from the small Ong Kinh reservoir but the planned subproject is designed based on water supplied from the pipeline from the Tan My weir. Its water requirements will therefore not be satisfied until upstream requirements have been satisfied first. The proposed cropping pattern on which subproject designs are based is summarized in Table 2.

Table 2: Proposed Cropping Pattern for Ninh Thuan Subprojects

Crop Crops per

year

Crop Area (ha)

Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon

Nhon Hai-Thanh Hai

Perennial crops: mostly Grape and some Vietnamese apple and mango

2 1000 400

Vegetables: green beans, onion, garlic, chili 3 600 400

Fodder grass 3 200 200

Total 1,800 1,000

2. Rainfall

11. The mean annual rainfall in Ninh Thuan varies from 1,750 mm in the far northern part of the Province to 800 mm or less along parts of the coast around Phan Rang (sees Figure 2). The two subprojects are located on the edge of one of the driest parts of the Province. Summary details of the nearest rain gauges are given in Table 1 of Annex 1.

4

12. The Nha Ho station best represents rainfall over the irrigation area. However, as monthly time series data for Nha Ho were not available, data from Phan Rang were used to estimate mean and reliable rainfall over the subproject areas (Figure 1). This may be slightly conservative. Based on Figure 2 the mean annual rainfall over the catchment above Tan My weir is estimated between 1,550 and 1,600 mm per annum.

Figure 1: Mean and Reliable Rainfall Recorded at Phan Rang

Figure 2: Isohyetal Map of Mean Annual Rainfall - Ninh Thuan

Source of data: IWRP, Hanoi

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Rai

nfa

ll in

mm

reliable mean

5

3. Climate

13. The climate stations at Phan Rang and Nha Ho are located in, or close-to, the subproject areas. Data observed at the two stations are similar. Relative humidity, hours of sunshine and evaporation measured with a Piche evaporimeter are slightly higher at Phan Rang while average temperature and Penman potential evapotranspiration are slightly lower. Mean monthly values of climate parameters are shown in the Hydrology (Table 3 of Annex 2). Climate data from Phan Rang were used as the basis for computing potential evapotranspiration for use in crop water requirement calculations. Penman evapotranspiration varies from 3.52 millimeter per day (mm/d) in December to 5.03 mm/d in April.

4. Water Demand

14. CROPWAT has been used to compute crop water requirements (CWR) using climate data and reliable rainfall estimates from Phan Rang climate station. Reliable rainfall in the critical period from December to April is close to zero. CROPWAT calculates irrigation water requirements (IRW) using the planned cropping pattern.

15. An allowance for domestic water supply of 0.03 m3/s (0.08 Mm3) to Ninh Hai District is made from water delivered by the Tan My pipeline. This supply has high priority even without construction of Song Cai reservoir and is included in the headworks demand.

16. Demand for the Than Son-Phuoc Nhon subproject, for 1,800 ha, peaks at 1.06 m3/s in March, and averages 0.60 m3/s.

5. River Flow

17. Flows are measured in the Cai River at Phuoc Hoc. This gauge is close to the Song Cai dam site and would be ideal for indicating river flows at Tan My. However, detailed inspection of the flow record indicates these data are unreliable. In the absence of observed data from the Song Cai, flows at Tan My were estimated using a rainfall-runoff model. The estimated flows were calibrated against observed flows in the Luy River in Binh Thuan Province. The mean monthly observed and estimated flows are given in the Hydrology (Table 5 of Annex 2). The data suggest that the upper Song Cai catchment is much wetter than the Song Luy. Flows at Tan My weir are minimal in April, just 15.5 m3/s (mean) and 8.7 m3/s (85% reliable flow).

18. Until the Song Cai Reservoir is built, there is no significant storage available to augment periods of low flow at the Tan My weir. The water available to the two subprojects, therefore, depends on minimum reliable flows in the river minus any environmental flow requirement that must be allowed to pass the weir and continue on down the river.

19. According to Vietnamese norms (QCVN 04-05: 2012/BNNPTNT), the environmental flow is set at the average dry season flow that is exceeded 90% of the time (usually referred to as Q90) plus any downstream water requirements. For the purpose of the WEIDAP, the dry season has been defined as the driest three months of the year on average. The Q90 monthly river flow at Tan My for the dry months of February to April is 1.23 m3/s.

20. There are other large irrigation areas downstream of Tan My that are fed from weirs on the Cai river at Nha Trinh and Lam Cam. However, there is also a large inter-basin transfer canal that joins Song Cai from the Don Duong reservoir via the Da Nhim hydropower plant and Song Pha. The Pha river joins the Song Cai about 10 km downstream of the Tan My weir.

6

21. The Song Cai reservoir plans for an allocation of water from Song Cai for the Nha Trinh and Lam Cam schemes. In the meantime, it is assumed that the large transfer from Don Duong reservoir is sufficient to support these schemes without additional water from Tan My.

22. The flow release downstream of Tan My weir is required to meet the environmental needs of the 10 km section of river between Tan My and Song Pha.

6. Subproject Water Balance

23. The supply demand balance for each month of the year is shown below and tabulated in the Hydrology (Table 6 of Annex 2), and includes for both subprojects as well as environmental demands. The calculation indicates that this is just enough water for both subprojects, with a combined net area of 2,800 ha, as well as to meet environmental flow requirements (see Figure 3).

Figure 3: Summary Water Balance Using IWRP Factors

C. Cropping Patterns, Command Area and Soils

24. Land slopes are mostly quite flat (0-3%), but broken by gullies and streams that flow north to south though the command area, and some small, but steep hills. Some undulating areas, bisected by gullies and near hills, have moderate slopes (4-8%). Overall, land slopes pose no constraint on irrigated agriculture.

25. Soils have been mapped over an area of 9,861 ha, and soil types and land utilization types (LUTs), are tabulated below and shown on the map in Annex 1 (Figure 1).

NINHTHUANSUB-PROJECTS(TDA2+3)

DrySeason= 8months(Jan-Aug) Criticalperiod= 1months(June)

Weirinflow

SUPPLY

Grossdemandatheadwork

Environm-entalflow

DEMAND

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

Supply Demand

Millioncubicm

etres

Supply/demandbalance

supply/demand Deficit

Water Balance: in million cubic meters Supply Demand Usable reservoir storage 0 Gross demand at headwork 3.37 Resrvoir inflow 6.389 Environmental flow 3.188 Total 6.389 6.558 Balance -0.169 (Deficit)

7

26. Reasonably deep, >1 m, grey soils (soil-type1) extend over 2,673 ha (27%), and are medium/ moderately suited to irrigated agriculture (S2) for the full range of expected crops, including Vietnamese apples, grape, vegetables, maize, tobacco, soya, sugarcane, and fodder. Other reasonably good soils suited to a range of crops comprises mostly grey brown soils (soil types 2-6), which extend over 732 ha (7% of the area). Grey brown soils (soil type 7), extend over 4,647 ha (47%) and are least suited to irrigated agriculture (S3). Various shallow (0.3-0.5 m) and/ or stony soils (types 8-11) extend over 1,809 ha (19%) and are not suited to irrigated cropping.

27. The soil area covers the whole of the sloping terraces through which the steel pipeline passes from east to west. The proposed subproject will cover a gross area of 3,960 ha, mostly to the east and south of the pipeline. Within this area, category S2 soils extend over about 1,400 ha, while Category S3 cover about 1,900 ha. The rest is not suited for cropping.

28. The proposed cropping pattern includes perennial grape and Vietnamese apple, as well seasonal vegetables and grass for fodder. Soil types and crop land use types are shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Soils Types and Land Utilization Suitability

Legend

LUT 1: Maize LUT 2: Tobacco/ Soya/ Maize LUT 3: Maize/ Soya LUT 4: Vegetables LUT 5: Sugarcane LUT 6: Cassava LUT 7: - LUT 8: Grass/ fodder

LUT 9: Vietnamese Apples

D. System Feasibility Design

29. On completion, the Song Cai storage dam is expected to supply 6,800 ha in the whole Tan My irrigation system. In the meantime, completed parts of Tan My irrigation systems, including the Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon and Nhon Hai-Thanh Hai subprojects, will operate as gravity pipe systems supplied by the new Tan My steel pipeline3 from the existing Tan My weir. The Tan My steel pipeline

3 The government has constructed the first 31 km of the Tan My pipeline and expects to complete the rest in 2018.

8

will function as the main Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon subproject pipeline. However, as it is being constructed by the government, it is not included under WEIDAP design.

30. Following discussions between MARD, Ninh Thuan Province, and ADB, the net irrigable area will be 1,800 ha for the Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon subproject, and the water allocation will be 1.8 m3/s, equivalent to 1.0 l/s/ha.

31. With limited water, high efficiency distribution and application is required to provide flexible supplies for high value cropping. It is anticipated that over some areas, grass (fodder) will be cultivated for which flexibility is less important. Details of the crop water calculations are presented in Supplementary Appendix 1 (Design Principles for Subprojects).

32. Outline layouts for ten pipe systems were prepared extending over a gross area of 3,043 ha. The command boundaries for each system typically comprises one of the streams or gullies that bisect the area, draining from north to south. The gross and net areas of each of these systems, associated pipeline lengths and soil suitability for irrigated agriculture are tabulated as shown in Table 4 below.

Table 4: Proposed Irrigated Area and Pipe Density

33. The net area of 2,434 ha for these ten systems is based a ratio of 80% for the net - gross areas. Some/ parts of the systems need to be excluded to reduce the net area to about 1,800 ha. A google map image showing system boundaries and pipeline layouts is shown in Figure 2 of Annex 1. The average pipeline density for these systems is 16.2 m/ha and required pipe diameters will vary from about 700 mm for the upper part of the largest system to about 200 mm.

34. Systems and areas to be make up the subproject were firmed up based primarily on soils and land suitability mapping, together with field visits. Six systems were identified with a combined net area of 1,800 ha, as shown on the map in Figure 3 of Annex 1. Pipeline designs for these six systems were prepared to meet the level of irrigation service adopted for WEIDAP, and comprise ring or dead-end branch systems. Details are tabulated below (Table 5).

Pipe System Gross

Area (ha)

Net Area (ha) %

Pipe length (km) Km/ha Remarks

TM11 - Single 48 38 80% 0.32 8.33 S2 soils

TM14 - Ring Main 328 262 80% 5.59 21.30 S2 soils

TM16 - Single 211 169 80% 2.94 17.42 S2 soils over 151 ha, S3 over 60 ha

TM18 - Ring Main 739 591 80% 9.00 15.22 S3 soils (low priority)

TM20 - Single 129 103 80% 1.43 13.86 S2 soils

TM21 - Ring Main 235 188 80% 3.16 16.81 S2 soils

TM22 - Ring Main 333 266 80% 4.63 17.38 S2 soils over 84 ha, S3 over 249 ha

TM24 - Ring Main 399 319 80% 5.35 16.76 S2 soils

TM26 - Single 414 331 80% 3.75 11.32 S2 soils over 143 ha, S3 over 271 ha

TM28 - Ring Main 207 166 80% 3.29 19.87 Mostly S3 soils (low priority)

3,043 2,434 80% 39.46 16.21

9

Table 5: Summary of Piped Subsystem Designs

No. Name Type Net Area

(ha) Diameters (mm) Length

(m) Density (m/ha)

1 TM14 Ring 322 250 - 500 6,037 18.8

2 TM16 Ring 350 250 - 500 5,320 15.2

3 TM18 Ring 272 200 - 500 4,553 16.7

4 TM20 Ring 273 160 - 500 4,487 16.4

5 TM22 Ring 335 160 - 500 4,870 14.5

6 TM24 Branch 248 250 - 400 3,393 13.7

Total 1,800 28,660 15.9

35. The sub-systems designs require 28.66 km of HDPE pipe, ranging in diameter from 160 mm to 500 mm, and giving average density of 15.9 m/ha. About 1,219 ha (68%) of fields will have access to water within 250 m, 446ha (25%) from 250 m to 500 m and only 135 ha (7%) beyond 500 m as shown in Table 6.

Table 6: Pipe Diameters and Lengths

(mm) Length (m) (mm) Length (m) (mm) Length (m)

630 - 400 2,392 200 2,453

550 - 355 5,527 160 1,463

500 1,386 315 5,581

450 2,149 250 7,710 Total 28,660

Pipeline diameter

36. Consistent with the modern LOS standards adopted for WEIDAP, the Project will equip the six piped subsystems with about 360 standard hydrant manifolds, each with a 5 l/s design discharge. The total design discharge of the 360 hydrant manifolds is 1.80 m3/s. The unit cost of simple PVC/ HDP hydrant manifolds is about $435 (80 mm diameter) or $320 (63 mm), giving a total cost of $156,600, equivalent to $87/ ha. The spacing of hydrant manifolds will be about 80 m. Each hydrant manifold will supply about six to 12 households.

37. Rigid PVC or black HDPE pipe will be adopted. For the larger pipes (>500 mm), glass fiber reinforced plastic (GRP) is a possible alternative to HDPE. However, though very smooth, it vulnerable to damage until placed in the ground. Also, adoption of several different pipe types is not recommended.

38. Each sub-system will connect directly to the Tan My steel pipeline. The connection arrangement is shown in the Engineering Drawings (Figure 1 of Annex 3) and includes for pressure meter, pressure control valve and operation valve. The one-direction valve, shown on the figure, may not be needed. A volumetric flow meter may be provided.

39. The high-tech agriculture production zone is expected to be developed in west of the subproject area, in subsystems 14 and 16.

40. The main highway runs along/ near to the southern boundary of the subproject, and a small paved highway runs north-south, passing through the proposed TM-18 system. A road is expected to be provided along the main steel pipeline – part of this pipeline cost.

41. To support farm - market access, particularly for the high-tech agriculture production zone, as well as to provide access along the pipeline for inspections and repairs, paved roads are

10

required. The pavement will be either 3.0 m or 7.0 m wide as shown in the drawing including in the Engineering (Figure 3 of Annex 3). In total, 36.64 km of roads are proposed.

E. Detailed Design Requirement

42. At detailed design (DD) the proposed layout arrangement and boundaries for the proposed six systems will be confirmed with additional site checks and possibly additional soil survey. Also, the location of the proposed high-tech zone, to be on the best possible soils, with road access and good electricity4 supply needs to be confirmed. Culvert cross drainage crossings are proposed.

43. The ratio of net irrigable and gross areas needs to be confirmed, excluding gullies and buffer strips along gullies, and infrastructure, etc.

F. Drainage Design Requirements

44. The sloping gross service area includes heavy-textured soils with limited internal drainage. However, it is also dissected by a well-developed network of creeks that serve as natural surface drainage lines. Therefore, detailed design should include (i) a study to determine whether HVC production will benefit from drainage improvements, and (ii) if so, their design. It is particularly important that the high-tech agricultural zone is well drained.

G. System Operation Considerations

45. On-off control valves, flow, and pressure meters would be installed at the head of the six pipeline sub-systems, and also at one or more other key locations in the ring main systems. The valves would allow any sub-system to be closed in case of leakage/ pipe fracture, while the flow meters would allow water use to be monitored. Meters will also be installed at each hydrant. Clamp-on ultrasonic digital meters (measuring flow rate and volume) fixed around the pipes and powered by battery (5-year life) are suggested. Data from these meters would be transmitted over the cellular (GSM) network, and stored on computer at the control office. Pressure meters would also be linked to the central office, giving warning of pipe failure. Manual operation of values is proposed, though these could be upgraded later.

46. In addition to the above, individual famers’ who wish to connect to manifolds would be provided with a valve and flow meter to monitor usage. These meters would be cheap, possibly simple mechanical meters read manually.

47. The system is gravity fed and the natural head is sufficient to ensure reliable supplies to farmer hydrants. Provision of constant flow valves is suggested to ensure that each hydrant gets the same flow, i.e. 5.0 l/s.

48. Those farmers wishing to use high pressure application technologies would need to re-pressurize at the hydrant offtake point to raise the level of head as required (at the individual cost of the farmer).

49. Operational requirements are minimal other than to respond to burst pipes or failed valves, and may best be undertaken by a private operator under a public-private partnership (PPP) with the irrigation management company, whereby the operator would collect a service fee from beneficiary farmers. Assuming service fees are to be recovered, then adoption of pre-paid meters at hydrants may be considered. 4 Electric connectivity will be funded by private sector

11

III.COST ESTIMATES

50. Cost estimates are based on the design outlined herein. Direct material and installation costs are based on price estimates provided by the National Design Specialist (NDS). Costs associated with detailed engineering design and supervision, project management and other overhead costs have been based on a percentage of construction costs in accordance with government norms. Detailed engineering design costs include feasibility study costs (FSC) that are being financed by the government. Construction supervision and the cost of works are being financed by loan funds. Resettlement estimates are based on current pipe alignments and will need to be updated following detailed engineering design when alignments are finalized. The resettlement cost associated with the main 2,000 mm pipe have not been included in this estimate. The cost for operating and maintaining the facilities during implementation is based on an estimate for private operators that will recover operating costs from farmers within the command area. Table 7 presents the summary costs for the subproject. As this is a gravity fed system and piped as well, the operating and maintenance costs are minimal.

12

Table 7: Summary Costs - Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon Subproject

51. In addition to the subproject costs as identified by the NDCs, additional allocation of internal access roads has been added to the upgrading existing road alignments that currently serve the proposed high tech agricultural production zone (HTAPZ) estimated at some 43 km serving the zone area to improve market access as an incentive to private investment (in addition to the increased reliability and higher level of service for water deliveries).

Detailed Costs Unit Cost Total Total

Unit Total (US$ '000) D Millions US$'000

I. Investment Costs

A. Construction

1. Civil Works

a. HDPE Pipe System

D = 75 mm meter 2,076 0.008 416.5 17.1

D = 200 mm meter 2,829 0.04 2,981.6 122.3

D = 250 mm meter 8,893 0.06 14,116.8 579.1

D = 300 mm meter 6,437 0.076 13,017.7 534.0

D = 350 mm meter 6,375 0.096 16,277.0 667.7

D = 400 mm meter 2,759 0.149 10,987.5 450.7

D = 450 mm meter 2,478 0.187 12,344.6 506.4

D = 500 mm meter 1,598 0.231 9,848.2 404.0

Accessories of HDPE pipe lump sum 1 1,398.914 37,313.0 1,530.7

Valves, meters and manifolds lump sum 1 376.624 10,045.6 412.1

Connections with main delivery pipe /a meter 1 224.469 6,286.6 249.3

Other counterpart costs meter 1 307 6,938.2 307.0

Subtotal 140,573.4 5,780.5

b. Other Works

Drainage structures lump sum 1 69.558 1,855.3 76.1

Surface drainage system lump sum 1 2,204.847 58,809.5 2,412.5

Subtotal 60,664.8 2,488.6

c. Items identified by PPTA

Support for O&M during maintenance period l/sum 1 76.3 2,355.9 87.3

d. Farmer Access Roads

Class A roads km 6.35 320.982 54,365.4 2,230.2

Class B roads km 36.642 105.387 102,999.9 4,225.4

Culverts unit 26 1.494 1,036.2 42.5

Underground siphon lump sum 11 52.731 15,471.3 634.7

Subtotal 173,872.7 7,132.8

Subtotal 377,466.8 15,489.2

B. Other Non-structural Items Related to Works

Category 5 costs from NDC /b lump sum 1 780.594 20,820.6 854.1

C. Detailed Eng. Design, Bid Doc. Prep. & Con. Supervision

Detailed engineering design /c lump sum 1 632.137 14,286.3 632.1

Construction supervision /d lump sum 1 222.102 5,260.7 223.8

Subtotal 19,547.0 855.9

D. Resettlement and Compensation lump sum 1 945.31 21,364.0 945.3

Subtotal 439,198.5 18,144.5

13

IV.PROJECT IMPACT

A. Socio-economic Status of Beneficiaries

52. Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon subproject is located in the four districts of Ninh Hai, Ninh Son, Thuan Bac and Bac Ai of Ninh Thuan. Agricultural land comprises 21% (49,847 ha) of total land area while forest represents 64% (151,497 ha) and includes much of the regrowth areas where crops were previously grown. There are 30 communes and two townships with a 2015 population of 235,059, 88% of which reside in rural areas. The ethnic minority population accounts for 31% of the participating commune population compared to 23.8% for the Province. The Raglai and Cham are the two largest groups with 23.5% and 6% in four subproject districts, the remaining 1.7% including Hoa (Chinese) Chu Ru, Tay, and Nung. Composition of Ethnic Minorities is presented in Table 8. Raglai and Cham are considered as aboriginals of Ninh Thuan. The Raglai mainly live in upland areas deriving their main income sources from agriculture and forestry while Cham people live in lowland areas with diversified income sources including agriculture, trading, cottage industry and handy crafts.

Table 8: Ethnic Minority Composition in Subproject Districts

Whole Province

Subproject Districts

Total Ninh Hai Ninh Son Thuan Bac Bac Ai

Ethnic Minority 23.8 8.8 22.6 68 84.5 31.2

• Cham 12.3 8.3 3.6 8.3 0.8 6

• Raglai 10.4 0.5 14.2 59.6 81.8 23.5

• Hoa (Chinese) 0.4 0 1 0.01 0.003 0.3

• Others 0.6 0 3.8 0.003 1.8 1.4

Source: PPTA Consultant- Data collection from Ninh Thuan CEMA, 2016.

53. The provincial incidence of poverty in 2016 using the new poverty line based on multi- dimension poverty criteria was 14.9% compared with 9.9% country-wide. In the subproject area, the incidence of poverty is higher at 24.0%. Table 9 shows that poverty still persists in the mountainous areas where the proportion of ethnic minority population is highest and is concentrated amongst the Raglai.

Table 9: Incidence of Poverty in Subproject Districts, 2016

Province

Subproject Districts

Whole Subproject

Ninh Hai Ninh Son Thuan Bac Bac Ai

Poverty rate overall 14.93 7.86 25.95 38.22 58.78 23.95

Poverty rate of Ethnic Minority 38.51 10.65 56.75 53.87 67.38 54.00

Poverty rate of Cham Ethnic Minority

13.40 5.93 14.94 35.73 22.81 14.38

Poverty Rate of Raglai Ethnic Minority

62.75 67.52 78.53 51.40 67.82 63.07

Source: Ninh Thuan DOLISA and CEMA, 2016.

54. Although agriculture is practiced on only 21% of the subproject area, it plays an important livelihood role and provides the main source of income (Annex 4, Table 1). The gross value of agricultural output was D2,093.2 bn accounting for 49% of the provincial figure. In contrast, forestry land is about 64% of the land area but contributed only D19.3 bn. The main annual crops in participating districts (Table 10) include paddy, maize, cassava and vegetables and other subsistence crops. The main cash crops are perennial tree crops including cashew, fruit (grapes, Vietnamese apple, and mangos) also shown in Table 11.

14

Table 10: Population and Areas in Participating Districts

Indicators Province

Subproject Districts Share of province

(%) Ninh Hai Ninh Son Thuan

Bac Bac Ai Total

Natural Land Area (km2) 3,355 253 771 318 1,027 2,370 71

Total Land use (ha) 335,534 25,358 77,180 31,826 102,722 237,086 71

+ Agriculture Land (ha) 83,736 5,906 22,123 7,426 14,391 49,846 60

+ Forestry Land (ha) 189,117 12,122 36,738 20,697 81,939 151,496 80

Average population 595,850 91,937 75,208 41,229 26,685 235,059 39

By Sex

+ Male 300,529 46,370 37,932 20,795 13,459 118,550 39

+ Female 295,321 45,567 37,276 20,434 13,226 116,503 39

By Sub-region

+ Urban 215,748 16,112 11,740 0 0 27,852 13

+Rural 380,102 75,825 63,468 41,229 26,685 207,207 55

Table 11: Cropping Patterns in Subproject Districts

Indicators

Province

Subproject Districts Share of province

(%) Ninh Hai Ninh Son Thuan

Bac Bac Ai Total

Planted area of cereals (ha) 49,111 6,044 13,592 3,844 3,837 27,317 56

Production of cereals (ton) 273,409 36,001 77,698 17,598 8,828 140,125 51

Production of cereals per capita (kg)

459 391 1,033 427 331

Planted area of annual crops

70,248 6,801 23,494 5,240 5,362 40,897 58

Annual crops (ha)

Paddy 37,258 6,018 9,279 2.54 772 16,071 43

Maize 11,775 19 4,297 1,304 3,012 8,632 73

Cassava 3,232 5 2,635 110 443 3,193 99

Vegetable 11,015 518 3,271 997 800 5,586 51

Perennial crops (ha) 11,672 622 2,098 2,473 3,160 8,353 72

Cashew 3,923 81 702 1,176 1,394 3,353 85

Planted area of fruit 5,847 519 1,151 729 1,088 3,487 60

Grape-fruit 1,226 390 73 5 0 468 38

Mango 413 37 117 72 23 249 60

VN Apples 950 33 51 3 0 87 9

Source: Ninh Thuan and District Yearbook 2015.

55. There are three general hospitals, three regional clinics and 30 health care stations (one per commune/ township) in participating districts. Between 92-97% of children under 1-year old are immunized compared to 98% for the province. Kindergarten, primary school and secondary school facilities are available at commune level throughout the subproject districts. There are nine high schools located within this area.

56. The Thanh Son- Phuoc Nhon subproject will impact predominantly on the five communes of Xuan Hai, Bac Phong, Nhon Son, Phuoc Trung and Loi Hai (see Table 12). The combined population is 52,705 from 13,782 households, of which 42.8% are ethnic minorities. However, only 5,857 households have land within the proposed command area (42.5%) and of these 48.8% are ethnic minorities and 10% are poor.

15

Table 12: Subproject Commune Socio-economic Statistics

Xuan Hai

Bac Phong

Nhon Son

Phuoc Trung Loi Hai

Subproject Area

Population 17,220 6,042 14,347 2,512 12,584 52,705

Number of household 4,174 1,627 4,558 564 2,859 13,782

Number of Ethnic Minority household 1,889 5 832 528 2,652 5,906

Poverty rate - as whole (%) 6.54 13.46 9.34 51.08 33.43

Poverty rate – Ethnic Minority (%) 6.00 40.00 30.29 53.60 26.62

Number of benefit household 1,530 1,668 1,835 169 655 5,857

Number of benefit Ethnic Minority household

1,250 2 799 152 655 2,858

Number of poor household who are beneficiaries

73 167 128 10 216 594

Income per capita per year (VND million)

27.5 28 25 5.8

Average Household Agricultural Landholding (ha)

0.8 1 0.5 0.9 0.16

Source: PPTA consultant- Data Consolidation from Ninh Thuan DOLISA, CEMA and field visit data collection, 2016.

57. Poverty rate of subproject communes ranged from 6.5-51.1%. Poverty is (i) found in all communes but is more prevalent (and persistent) in mountainous communes; (ii) poverty is more concentrated amongst the Raglai indigenous people (IP) whose main income sources are based on low valued crops (rice, maize, and cassava) and forest product extraction.

58. The impact on beneficiary farmers will be to have more reliable access to water, particularly during periods of drought. It is noted that the improved subproject irrigation scheme will expand the agricultural land area for cultivation and provide opportunity for diversification of crops. However, from the social perspective, issues have been identified that include (i) the vulnerable villagers (poor, EMs, female-headed household amongst the poor households) are less likely to benefit from the subproject because some are landless or have only small areas of land; (ii) for many of the poor households, particularly for EMs, farming customs/habits and the high investment cost is likely to constrain the adoption of modern irrigation methods and practices to improve application efficiencies; and (iii) cropping patters in the post irrigation system scenario are not demand driven. Technical requirements, the appropriateness of larger investment, farming custom/habit, marketing are also barriers for diversification into HVCs, especially amongst the poor and/or EM farmers. It is recommended that technical support and a grant incentive be provided for the disadvantaged groups to assist them in not only crop diversification but in adopting micro irrigation.

B. Socio-economic Survey Results

59. The socio-economic household survey was carried out in the subproject command area based on 28 farmer-interviews as shown in Table 13. Key features are:

• Five out of 28 respondents (18%) of are female-headed household with an average of 4.8 per HH.

• The overall average household size is 5.6 per HH. • 14 women (50%) and 14 men (50%) responded to the survey. • 24 HHs were classified as poor (86%). • 4 HHs were classified as non-poor (14%). • The proportion of ethnic minorities in survey sample was of 96%.

•

16

Table 13: Composition of Survey Sample and Household Size

Number of Household

Total Household Members

Average Household Size

Total survey 28 156 5.6

+ Of which: Female headed household 5 24 4.8

By sex disaggregation

+Men 14 78 5.6

+ Women 14 78 5.6

By Ethnicity

+ Kinh 1 3 3.0

+ Indigenous Ethnic Minority 21 113 5.4

+ Immigrated Ethnic Minority 6 40 6.7

By Economic Status

+ Poor 24 134 5.6

+ Non Poor 4 22 5.5

Source: Socio-economic Survey conducted in 2016 by CPO consultants.

60. The results of the socio-economic survey are presented below and are summarized in tabular form in Annex 4 attached hereto. Annex 6 presents the project pictures.

61. Education Level: The educational level of farmers is considered important for technology adoption. Education level of respondents is rather low with the highest level of secondary school (11%). Some 43% of respondents have never been to school. Women/ female headed households appear to be disadvantaged in terms of access to education with over 60% having never been to school.

62. Occupation and Household Income: The major occupation of the study area is agriculture production including livestock rearing for most (85%) of respondents. Agriculture activities also contributed 70% of total household income. However, it differs from other subprojects as vulnerable people (poor, indigenous ethnic minority and women/female headed households) have additional income from non-agricultural activities such as salary from off-farm business (workers; government staff) and/or from small private enterprises. Although those people had diversified income sources, their absolute average income was far lower than Kinh and non-poor households.

63. Household Expenditure: In 2015, the average annual household consumption was VND 38.6 million (VND 7.4 million per head). This varied between the different social groups. Consumption per household and per capita was almost 1.5 times higher in non-poor household than in poor households. Although consumption was only 1.2 times higher in Kinh households than in ethnic minority households, consumption per capita in Kinh household was 2.2 times higher because of family size. The share of consumption on daily food and drink was almost 75% of the total consumption expenditure in all groups with exception in non-poor households (54%). Kinh and non-poor households spent a significant proportion of consumption on social events like Tet holidays, wedding etc.

64. Household Assets: All interviewed farmers had their own house because of government policies and programs to support ethnic minority and poor people improving housing conditions. Some 67% of poor and ethnic minority household live in permanent dwellings while for non-poor households, the equivalent figure is 50%. Female-headed households appear to be advantaged in housing conditions with 80% having solid permanent

17

house compared to 64% overall. All non-poor Kinh and female headed households have access to electricity from main supplies and all own televisions; whereas only 67% immigrated ethnic minority and 83% poor households had access to electricity. Vehicles (motorbikes) ownership is high but there were large differences between poor and non-poor households between Kinh and ethnic minority families.

65. Drinking Water and Sanitation: All sampled households obtain their water from either a single-family water tap (90%) or wells (10%). Flush toilets connected to a septic tank or sewage pipes and double-vault composting latrines were the most common in the area. However, about 4% of less advantaged households like poor, ethnic minority households still have no toilet. The most common health problem experienced by households was ‘flu and colds (54%) followed by petechial fever (7.1%) and diarrhea (3.6%). However, immigrated ethnic minority and female headed householders appear to be disadvantaged in term of health problems compared with other groups. A much higher proportion of female headed household (20%) and immigrated ethnic minority (17%) reported experiencing diarrhea compared to 3.6% from all sampled households.

66. Land Holding and Land Ownership: All respondents own residential land comprising residential plot and house garden with an average area of 586 m2 and 311 m2 respectively. Kinh and non-poor households held a smaller residential plot than other groups, yet the house garden area they owned was 10 times larger than those owned by other groups. Female headed household held the largest residential plots (2,100 m2) and the smallest area of house garden land (60 m2). All respondents have agricultural land that average 7.1 sao. The size of agricultural land holding by female headed household was about 75% that of male headed households. No one has forest land. Regarding legal ownership status of the resident and farming land, some 82% of survey households who own residential plots had ‘Land User Rights Certificates (LURC). Only 43% and 71% of households had LURCs for their house-garden plot and agricultural land respectively. Ownership of house and farming land were dominated by males rather than females in all social groups except female headed households.

67. Agricultural Activities: Crops grown in the area were mainly low value crops like rice, maize and some vegetables. Farmers grow crops throughout the year based on water availability. They plant rice and vegetables in agricultural land when water is available. During the recent drought, almost land remained uncultivated. This explains the higher poverty incidence in this subproject area. Most of the potential command area is considered rangeland where livestock rearing provides the main source of livelihood. Major animal types are cattle, goat, pig and poultry. Cows are used for draught power - plowing and as a household asset, and manure for fertilizer. Goats and pigs are reared as a source of cash income in times of need. Small ruminants and animals tend to be reared by ethnic minority and poor households as a source of their income. Female headed household raised poultry (chickens) and goats at small herds of less than 10 head.

68. Source of Water and Irrigation Practices: In order to have irrigation water, farmers collected from many sources including surface water like rain fed canals and ponds, reservoirs and ground water from wells and bore holes. In the rainy season, 36% of farmers rely on rain fed water. However, in dry season 54% farmers collected surface water from canals ponds and reservoirs and only 7% farmers pumping from their own wells/boreholes. Vulnerable groups such as poor, ethnic minority and female headed households are disadvantaged in terms of access to surface water from canals and reservoirs because their fields are located at greater distances from surface water sources. The most common method applied was water by hand-

18

held hose. One reason is the cost of investment in equipment to deliver water to the more remote areas.

69. Household Liabilities: Some 43% of respondents are in debt. Indebtedness of Kinh people and non-poor households was more common than in other social groups. A lower proportion of vulnerable groups (like indigenous ethnic minority and poor households) are in debt although the government offered them preferential interest rates/loans. The reason for their debt status included lack of productive land, lack of knowledge and technical advice, and lack of self-confidence. Loans were mainly obtained from the state-owned banks like Agribank and Social Policy Bank (SPB). All borrowers cited agricultural activities as their main reason for borrowing.

70. Constraints and Vulnerability: The most serious constraint was the lack of irrigation facilities. Farmers also cited livestock and crop diseases as significant constraints along with prolonged dry seasons, low soil fertility (due to high temperatures), and lack of rain. The lack of irrigation was the most common constraint amongst disadvantaged social groups like poor and ethnic minorities than other groups. This reflects the fact that ethnic minorities and poor households experienced difficulties accessing water sources because their farms are located further from canals/reservoirs and are unable to draw sufficient water for irrigation, especially during periods of drought. Furthermore, farmers, especially ethnic minorities say they lack agriculture extension service and technical support regarding fertilizer and other inputs and land.

71. Participation and Awareness: Farmers associations appear to be very active in the area with nearly 80% of households participating as members. Unlike the farmers associations, the Women’s Union (WU) appears to be weak in the area with 25% respondents, even only 40% women/ female headed householders belonging to this organization. Similarly, none participated in other types of community groups such as water use groups, cooperatives, interest groups etc. This low participation rate increases the need for a project participation strategy. There is indication that men (husbands) were involvement in community meetings, attending extension training courses and other community activities in greater proportion than women/wives, especial women/wives in households headed by men. However, the situation was different in households headed by women. As head of the family, women are very active participating in community meetings, community activities as well as extension courses. Reasons are that local authorities/organizers always invited the head of household to participate/attend public activities and/or training courses.

72. With respect to benefit and potential impact of the subproject, clearly people believe that the greatest benefit would be increased yield of existing crops. Ethnic minorities believe irrigation improvement will permit crop diversification into HVCs. Disruption during construction, loss of land and resettlement issues are considered the most serious negative impact identified by farmers. This implies that, before and during implementation, a communication strategy and dissemination campaign should be conducted.

C. Gender Considerations

73. Over the last few decades, Viet Nam has made significant progress in improving its population’s well-being in general and reducing gender disparities. There still exist gender issues in the project area as following (i) lower education level; (ii) less advantages in ownership of assets and (iii) overload work on female headed households.

19

74. Gender Division of Work: Men are mainly responsible for heavier production work, while women spend more time on un-paid domestic work such as taking care children, cooking, cleaning etc. In agricultural production, the intra-household tasks and responsibilities tend to be husbands having responsibility for soil preparation, watering and operating motorized equipment while the wife is responsibility for harvesting. However, in female headed households, women are responsible for productive and non-productive activities compared to others, spending 6.5 hours per day compared to 4 hours for women from male headed households. Among younger couples, there is an increasing tendency for sharing housework. However, due to the pervasive influence of conservative traditional culture, many young women continue to be responsible for housework.

75. Participation and Decision Making: The roles of women differ between household headed by women and by men. The husbands/men participate in community activities as well as training courses. As a result, decision making is often delegated to men/husband in these households. By contrast, females from women headed households participated in almost community meetings/activities as well as extension courses and then have responsibility in decision making.

76. Awareness of respondents on HIV/AIDS was good with 86% having heard of HIV/AIDS while only 20% had heard of climate change. A higher proportion of women, especially female headed households were aware of the HIV/AIDS and climate change than men.

77. The main challenges faced by female farmers relate to their limited ownership of productive assets as well as their restricted access to knowledge, technology, services, and markets. In focus group discussions, married women reported they only attend agricultural extension training when their husbands are temporarily absent. They also often mention conflicting housework and caring responsibilities as a reason for non-participation.

78. Overall, the subproject will benefit women and not impose hardship or any negative impacts. The water supply improvements provide enough water to satisfy their need for irrigation will reduce labor costs and time saving for watering. A gender action plan (GAP) is needed to address concerns of women to improve their social status in the local communities.

D. Environmental

79. The subproject has been categorized as B on environmental safeguard in the Project Concept Note as few significant impacts are identified and none of them is irreversible. This IEE has been prepared to screen impacts and formulate mitigation measures in three phases of subproject implementation including pre-construction; construction and operation. Institutional arrangements have been formulated to ensure that subproject Environment Management Plan (EMP) is implemented.

80. In the design and preconstruction phase, the potential impacts have been identified relating to (i) land acquisition and resettlement; (ii) clearance for unexploded ordnance (UXO) before construction. To minimize the impacts, Central Project Management Unit/Provincial Project Management Unit (CPMU/PPMU) will (i) undertake necessary land acquisition and compensation before construction starts to ensure that all affected households have received compensation in accordance with the current provincial market and ADB’s Safeguard Policy Statement (SPS); and (ii) conduct survey on UXO in the subproject area to ensure it is cleared before construction.

20

81. Potential negative impacts in the construction phase have been identified as (i) disturbance of the cultivation activities when installing pipe lines, (ii) excavated of soil, domestic and toxic wastes effect the environment if they are improperly managed at sites, (iii) dust generation caused by the activities of excavation, levelling and operation of construction machines and transportations at sites, (iv) occupational and community health and safety impact are potential at sites where the subprojects being constructed with machines, excavated holes without being covered and conflicts between locals and the subproject migrant workers, and (v) community road may be damaged due to heavy transportation of materials to sites. To address all above adverse impacts, contractors will (i) collaborate with local people and authorities to plan pipeline installation through farms, (ii) preventing stockpiling of materials on access roads, (iii) properly manage excess excavated soil or allow farmers to reuse them, (iv) collect construction and domestic waste at sites to sort out for reuse, selling for recycling, otherwise discharge them to local landfill, (v) comply with management of hazardous wastes such as oil, grease leaking out at site, following Circular 36/2016/BTNMT, (vi) suppress dust by keeping excavated soil and stockpile moist, minimize gas emissions throughout well maintained machinery and turn off machines if not working, (vii) provide workers with adequate personal protective equipment when working at sites and training courses of health, safety and behavior attitude respect to community cultures especially with ethic minority communities; and (viii) rehabilitate or compensate any damage on community roads due to the subproject construction.

82. In the operation phase, potential negative impacts have been identified as relating to (i) pipe line system being potentially damaged due to cultivation activities, and (ii) conflict of water use among beneficiaries in period of shortage of water. To minimize the impacts, the implementing agency Ninh Thuan Department of Agriculture and Rural Agriculture (DARD) will (i) manage the right of way (ROW) of pipe carefully, prevent villagers to occupy the right-of-way for cultivation; and (ii) establish a reasonable mechanism of operating the system especially in the period of water shortages to ensure all beneficiaries have equal opportunities to access the irrigation system.

83. Identified key stakeholders received public consultations from provincial to commune level with a focus on the affected people views where beneficiaries were highly supportive of subprojects because of recent experiences with drought. Environmental issues are not viewed with high importance by participants because they have known that most of civil works are in small scale and construction works are far from the residential areas. They are more concerned at land acquisition and compensation issues and using the currently unused land. All of these concerns are addressed in the EMP outlined in the Initial Environmental Examination presented in Appendix 2 to the report and Recommendation of the President (RRP) as outlined in Linked Document (LD) No.12.

84. Institutional Arrangements: MARD’s Central Project Office (CPO)/CPMU and Ninh Thuan DARD’s PPMU are the institutions that will play key roles in the implementation of the subproject as well as ensuring environment safeguards. One Environment Safeguard Specialist (ESS) will be recruited under Loan Implementation to support subproject implementation in Ninh Thuan. The ESS will support the CPMU in updating the EMP and as well as monitor the compliance of the contractors during construction phase. The ESS will also be responsible for training and capacity building on the implementation of EMP.

85. DARD’s PPMU will engage Construction Supervision Specialists (CSSs) for the monitoring and supervision of the subproject in general and for environmental monitoring. These consultants will support the PPMU officers to ensure that contractors implement the provisions of the subproject EMP.

21

86. Conclusion: The Initial Environment Examination (IEE) for Ninh Thuan Province subprojects was undertaken to determine the environmental issues and concerns associated with the proposed irrigation modernization subproject. Design modifications made during preparation are considered more suitable in terms of ensuring better irrigation level of service. The assessment confirms that the subproject remains classified as Category B for environment based on ADB Safeguards Policy Statement (SPS, 2009).

87. There are expected beneficial impacts on health and well-being of people because of the proposed irrigation project for Ninh Thuan Province. Besides, most of the environmentally negative impacts are expected to occur during the construction phase, not expected to cause irreversible and significant adverse environmental impacts and are easily mitigated by appropriate and conventional measures. All adverse impacts are addressed by the EMP including the institutional responsibilities for implementing the mitigation measures. The IEE concludes that the subproject combined with available information on affected environment is sufficient to identify the scope of environmental impacts of the subproject. No further environmental assessment is therefore required. The ESS will update the EMP before finalization of the detail design.

E. Resettlement

88. With two design/layout options still under consideration, the precise estimate for resettlement and land acquisition cannot be provided. Initial estimates for resettlement provided by social and environmental safeguard specialists is estimated at $0.92 million and this figure is exclusive of the resettlement associated with the main pipeline currently under construction. The number of affected persons is estimated at 2,420 from 432 households. There were 46 vulnerable affected households that qualified for special allowances. Based on the proposed pipe layout, there is expected to be some 0.2 ha of perennial cops impacted upon which compensation must be paid as well as a further 3.3 ha of annual crop and 12 ha of what is termed forest land but is only scrubby regrowth affected by the resettlement impact.

89. These initial estimates are based on the revised pipe layout following the recent redesign using ringed pipe systems. The resettlement impact will need to be reassessed once the final alignment of pipes is determined. As the area is largely barren land, it is unlikely the extent of compensation will increase. However, based on initial design estimates, the level of compensation could well be reduced further from these estimates as the command area has been significantly reduced from the initial area of 3,700 ha to 1,800 ha based on the limited water availability given the fact that the Reservoir over the Cai River is yet to be completed.

22

Table 14: Estimate of Resettlement Costs for Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon

No Item Unit Quantity Unit price

(VND) Amount (VND)

A Compensation and assistance

19,261,450,000

1 Land compensation

6,333,060,000 Perennial crop land m2 16,530 20,000 330,600,000 Annual crop land m2 333,470 18,000 6,002,460,000

2 Crops compensation

170,270,000 Grape tree 26 400,000 10,400,000 Jujube tree 29 130,000 3,770,000 Rice m2 44,600 3,500 156,100,000

3 Assistance

12,758,120,000 Vocation training; job conversion, for those who lose perennial crop land

m2 16,530 40,000 661,200,000

Vocation training, job conversion for those who lose annual crop land

m2 333,470 36,000 12,004,920,000

Allowance for vulnerable households HH 46 2,000,000 92,000,000

B Detail measurement survey HH 432 200,000 86,400,000 C Management costs (2% of A)

385,229,000

D Sub-total (A+B+C)

19,733,079,000 E Unidentified costs associated with

resettlement

644,267,050

F Contingency (5% x D)

986,653,950 Total (D+E+F)

21,364,000,000

F. Economic

90. The economic impact of the subproject on the economy of Ninh Thuan is likely to be significant in that currently unused areas of agricultural land are to be brought back into production. Furthermore, it is anticipated that the HVCs proposed in the ‘with project’ cropping patterns will generate significant benefits for participating farmers owning land and also providing employment opportunities for working on the larger agricultural holdings that are likely to eventuate through the high-tech agricultural production zone. The cost of the 2,000 mm steel pipe has been considered a sunk cost and has not been incorporated in the economic assessment. As such, the unit investment costs are moderate - more expensive than a channel irrigation system but still reasonable given the reduced pipe densities made possible by design modifications. Rates of return from the largely HVCs is expected to be considerable above the cost of capital although this must also be tempered by the relatively poor soils throughout the command area (that have been actively selected out of the command area). However, production costs are likely to be higher from the higher input regimes and this will modify anticipated returns. Initial indications are that most HVCs contemplated for this area are in strong demand throughout the country and prices are relatively stable.

91. The Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon Subproject will draw water from a pipeline currently being constructed. Water will be distributed through ringed delivery pipes from which farmers will obtain access through hydrant manifolds within 500 m of their fields. The expected command area is 1,800 ha, much of which has very little economic activity comprised mainly of grazing areas and some rain-fed crops. It is expected that, through irrigation, farmers will grow grapes, Vietnamese apples, vegetables and fodder for cattle.

92. The economic analysis of this subproject examines the incremental net value of production “with” the project relative to that “without” the project. Financial valuations of the subproject investment, agricultural output and the cost of production are, in this analysis, converted to their economic equivalents by excluding transfers from one part of society to

23

another and attempting to identify the real benefits and opportunity costs to the economy by translating all prices into a common, undistorted footing. The results of this analysis are derived from the work of the national feasibility study consultants in late 2016. As the costs of the subproject investment and the size of the command area were refined in early 2017, the earlier work was adjusted to these new costs and area and returns brought to a common series of international and domestic price derivations where appropriate. The revised financial cost is VND 445.0 billion ($19.7 million), or $10.9 thousand per ha, and the cost in economic terms is VND 339.1 billion. These costs include the investment in 43 km of roads in the rather undeveloped subproject area. Normal O&M costs are expected to total VND 0.18 billion per year.

93. The Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR) for this subproject is expected to be 18.4% and the Economic Net Present Value evaluated at 9% is D470.1 billion. The benefits included in this calculation include both the incremental net crop revenue from the irrigation scheme as well as the producer surplus provided by the roads. If incremental benefits were to decrease (from the base case) by 20%, the EIRR would fall to 16.0% while an increase in the cost of investment by 20% would decrease the EIRR to 16.4%. Overall, these results indicate that the subproject is expected to give strong and robust economic returns due primarily to the relatively undeveloped nature of the command area “without” the project. Switching values for the three variables analyses show a robust result. The switching value for increases in costs is 285%, for declining benefits is 40% and for operating cost increases is 965% indicating a robust result.

94. A “snapshot” of the tenth year after construction would indicate that the incremental net crop economic value “with” the subproject will be VND 55.6 billion ($2.5 million) more than might be expected “without” the project. In household financial terms this year 10 “snapshot” would translate to an increased net crop income of VND 15.3 million ($0.7 thousand) per “average” household farm (estimated to be of 0.5 ha in size). The summary results of the economic analysis of this subproject are presented in Table 15 over.

24

Table 15: Economic Assessment of Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon Subproject

Thanh Son - Phuoc Nhon Subproject, Ninh Thuan Province 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 202526 2026/27 2027/28

Benefits

FS Command Area (CA) assumption ha 3,700

PPTA Command Area (CA) assumption ha 1,800

FS Economic stream of benefits/a

(VND106) 34,967 81,589 110,727 116,555 116,228 115,902

FS benefits adjusted to PPTA CA (VND106) - - - - 17,011 39,692 53,867 56,703 56,543 56,385

PPTA road producer surplus (VND106) (3,504) (4,878) (6,106) (5,487) (3,107)

Total PPTA benefits (VND106) - - - - 17,011 36,188 48,989 50,596 51,056 53,278

Costs (includes technical support and roads in PPTA costs)

FS economic cost calculation (VND106) 12,888 21,480 85,919 214,797 94,511 12,888 12,888 12,888 12,888 12,888

PPTA Econ. Cost calculation (VND106) 14,656 31,446 135,008 124,431 33,607 817 179 179 179 179

PPTA economic cost calculation (VND106) 14,656 31,446 135,008 124,431 33,607 817 179 179 179 179

PPTA Financial Cost Total (incl. road) $ '000 19,690.4

Constant 2017 Financial O&M Cost (VND106) 199 199 199 199 199 199

Current Financial O&M Cost (VND106) 10.0 249 259 269 279 289 299

Net Economic Benefit Stream

FS net economic benefit stream (VND106) (12,888) (21,480) (85,919) (214,797) (59,544) 68,701 97,840 103,667 103,340 103,014

PPTA adjusted net economic benefits (VND106) (14,656) (31,446) (135,008) (124,431) (16,596) 35,371 48,810 50,417 50,877 53,099

EIRR

FS EIRR (irrigation only) % 17.8% (not including roads)

PPTA FS EIRR adjusted for cost and CA % 18.4% (includes roads)

ENVP (at 9% discount rate)

FS ENPV (VND106) 246,589

PPTA FS ENPV adj. for cost and CA (VND106) 470,102

ENVP (at 10% discount rate) (PPTA figures) (VND106) 371,717

Sensitivitity analysis (on PPTA's FS adjusted figures)

Benefit decrease of 20% EIRR % 16.0% (14,656) (31,446) (135,008) (124,431) (19,998) 28,133 39,012 40,298 40,665 42,443

Cost increase of 20% EIRR % 16.4% (17,588) (37,736) (162,009) (149,317) (23,317) 35,208 48,774 50,381 50,841 53,063

Switching Values for a 9% EIRR

Benefit decrease switching value % 40%

Investment cost increase switching value % 285%

O&M cost increase switching value % 965%

25 Annex 1

Annex 1

SCHEME LAYOUT

Figure A1.1: Soils for Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon Subproject

26 Annex 1

Figure A1.2: Layout for Potential Subsystems, Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon Subproject

Annex 1 27

FIGURE A1.3: Layout of Subsystems to be Developed for Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon Subproject

Annex 2 28

Annex 2

HYDROLOGY STATISTICS

Table A2.1: Rainfall Stations Close to Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon

Rainfall Station

Location Mean Annual Rainfall

Latitude Longitude Elevation

(masl) Amount

(mm) Period

Tan My 11° 43’ 108° 50’ 35 1166 1977 – present

Khanh Son 12° 01’ 108° 58’ 60 1764 1976 – 2015

Ba Thap 11° 42’ 108° 03’ 5 772 1979 – present

Nha Ho 11° 42’ 108° 54’ 5 821 1978 – 2009

Phan Rang 11° 34’ 109° 59’ 5 804 1979 – present

Data source: i) Ninh Thuan Water Resources Planning for 2020 and Vision of 2030, 2016 and ii) IWRP (2016), Bao Cao, Ra Soat Tong Hop Tinh Toan Can Bang Nuoc.

Table A2.2: Monthly Mean and Reliable Rainfall at Stations Close to the Subproject

Rainfall station Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual

Tan My

mean 5 2 21 41 117 99 97 115 216 218 153 75 1,160

Khanh Son

mean 15 5 25 52 186 180 177 173 293 243 281 134 1,764

Nha Ho

mean 3.2 2.5 15.5 21.9 80.8 66.3 75.4 60.8 150 155 135 55.3 821

Phan Rang

mean 6.4 2.7 12.2 21.0 68.9 59.8 53.4 49.5 142 163 160 65.4 804

85% 0 0 0 0 11 9 20 17 65 49 35 0

Note: Data from Phan Rang were used to calculate both mean and reliable rainfall for the subproject irrigation areas

Table A2.3: Mean monthly Values of Climate Parameters at Phan Rang and Nha Ho

Parameter Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual

Phan Rang Climate Station

T°C 24.7 25.3 26.7 28.2 28.2 27.3 26.8 26.7 26.5 26.5 26.2 25.2 26.5

RH% 77 77 78 79 82 85 86 86 87 85 82 79 82

Sun (hrs.) (hrs./day)

264 8.5

263 9.4

296 9.6

277 9.2

237 7.6

193 6.4

202 6.5

192 6.2

182 6.1

199 6.4

215 7.2

228 7.4

2750 7.5

Wind (m/s) 1.7 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.5 1.7 1.6 1.8 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.7

Evaporation Piche (mm) (mm/day)

143 4.6

140 5.0

155 5.0

141 4.7

118 3.8

97.9

3.3

91.3

2.9

92.3

3.0

81.6

2.7

86.4

2.8

103 3.4

122 3.9

1373

3.8 Penman (mm/day)

3.81 4.35 4.82 5.03 4.49 3.97 3.91 3.88 3.76 3.68 3.66 3.52 4.07

Nha Ho climate station

T°C max. 32.3 33.4 34.6 35.8 37.7 37.7 37.6 37.7 36.6 34.3 33.2 32.1 35.3

min. 17.8 18.6 20.1 22.5 23.6 23.7 23.5 23.2 22.9 21.8 20.6 18.3 21.4

mean 24.6 25.4 26.7 28.2 29 29.1 28.7 28.7 27.8 26.9 26.2 25.1 27.2

RH% 71 73 75 77 78 76 76 76 82 83 80 74 77

Sun (hrs.) 215 231 247 249 227 215 204 214 171 170 167 171 2480

(hrs./day 6.9 8.2 8.0 8.3 7.3 7.2 6.6 6.9 5.7 5.5 5.6 5.5 6.8

Wind (m/s)

Annex 2 29

Parameter Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual

Evaporation Piche (mm)

123 114 124 114 110 112 124 126 83.2 71.4 83.9 111 1296

(mm/day) 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.8 3.5 3.7 4.0 4.1 2.8 2.3 2.8 3.6 3.5

Penman* (mm/day)

3.68 4.25 4.56 4.85 4.57 4.61 4.41 4.60 3.94 3.59 3.40 3.31 4.15

* Penman evapotranspiration at Nha Ho has been calculated using wind data from Phan Rang Key to parameters:

• T°C - Temperature in degrees Celsius

• RH% - Relative humidity in %

• Sun - Sunshine duration

• Wind - Wind run in m/s, assumed to be measured 2m above ground level

• Piche - Evaporation as measured using a Piche evaporimeter

• Penman - Potential evapotranspiration has been computed from climate parameters

in the above table use the Penman-Monteith equation embodied in FAO’s CROPWAT software (version 8).

Table A2.4: Monthly Water Demand (85% reliable) for Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon Subproject at the Headwork (conveyance efficiency of 80%)

Month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Annual

Discharge (m3/s) 0.79 0.97 1.06 0.51 0.64 0.70 0.67 0.70 0.36 0.34 0.01 0.44 0.60

Volume (10^6m3) 2.12 2.37 2.84 1.32 1.71 1.81 1.79 1.87 0.93 0.91 0.03 1.18 18.89

Source: Institute of Water Resources Planning, “WEIDAP Feasibility Study (FS) Summary Report; Review and Summary of Water Balance Assessment, Hanoi, 5/2017.

Table A2.5: Mean Monthly River Flows at Song Luy (actual) and Tan My Weir (est.)

Location Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual

Song Luy gauging station

m3/s 4.19 2.22 2.29 3.78 13.7 17.7 18.3 19.6 36.7 64.8 27.0 9.41 18.3

mm 11 5.5 6.2 10 37 45 50 54 97 177 71 26 590

Tan My weir – mean monthly flows

m3/s 15.3 8.93 5.94 5.96 14.9 19.8 19.8 17.2 38.8 45.2 57.5 36.4 23.8

Mm3 41.0 21.8 15.9 15.5 39.9 51.4 52.9 46.2 100 121 149 97.5 752

mm 51 27 20 19 50 64 66 57 125 150 185 121 935

Tan My weir – 85% reliable monthly flows

m3/s 13.7 8.5 5.3 3.3 6.1 2.5 2.8 8.4 22.0 22.7 9.2 11.5 9.68

Mm3 36.81 20.85 14.28 8.67 16.30 6.39 7.63 22.49 56.92 60.85 23.87 30.72 305.78

mm 45.7 25.9 17.7 10.8 20.3 7.9 9.5 27.9 70.7 75.6 29.6 38.2 379.8

Notes: Catchment area to Song Luy gauging station - 982 km2 Catchment area to Tan My weir - 805 km2

30 Annex 2

Table A2.6: Monthly Subproject Supply-demand Balance, Mm3

Location Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Tan My weir

85% reliable monthly flow

36.81 20.85 14.28 8.67 16.30 6.39 7.63 22.49 56.92 60.85 23.87 30.72

Environmental flow requirement

3.29 3.00 3.29 3.19 3.29 3.19 3.29 3.29 3.19 3.29 3.19 3.29

Available water 33.52 17.85 10.98 5.48 13.01 3.20 4.33 19.19 53.73 57.55 20.68 27.43

Total subproject demand

Thanh Son -Phuoc Nhon

2.12 2.37 2.84 1.32 1.71 1.81 1.79 1.87 0.93 0.91 0.03 1.18

Nhon Hai - Thanh Hai

1.18 1.37 1.71 0.65 0.54 1.56 1.29 1.07 0.13 0.56 0.52 0.48

Supply/ demand balance

Thanh Son -Phuoc Nhon

31.40 15.48 8.14 4.16 11.29 1.39 2.54 17.32 52.80 56.64 20.65 26.25

Nhon Hai - Thanh Hai

30.23 14.12 6.43 3.51 10.76 -0.169 1.25 16.25 52.67 56.08 20.13 25.77

Notes: 1. All figures in Mm3

31 Annex 3

Annex 3

ENGINEERING DRAWINGS

Figure A3.1: Control Valve and Chamber at Head of each Pipe System

32 Annex 2

Figure A3.2: Possible Hydrant - Manifold Arrangement

33 Annex 3

Figure A3.3: Service Road Sections

Annex 4 34

Annex 4

SOCIAL SURVEY TABLES

Table A4.1: Major Occupation of Sampled Households

Main Occupation

% of Respondents

By Economic Status By Ethnicity By Gender Total

Poor Non-poor Kinh

Indigenous Ethnic

Minority

Immigrated Ethnic

Minority Men Women + Agriculture 83.3 100.0 100.0 81.0 100.0 100.0 71.4 86.0

+ Non-agriculture 16.7 0.0 0.0 19.0 0.0 0.0 28.6 14.0

+ Others 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100 100.0 100.0 100.0

Source: WEIDAP socio- economic baseline household survey, 2017

Table A4.2: Average Household Income by Ethnicity and Economic Status

Income (VND’000s) From

Agriculture From non-Agriculture

From Laboring

Other Sources Total Income

$ Equivalent

(VND22,600)

By Ethnicity

Kinh 100,000,000 - 15,000,000 - 115,000,000 5,088

Indigenous EM 30,333,333 - 17,142,857 1,095,238 48,571,429 2,149

Immigrated EM 45,666,667 - 15,833,333 - 61,500,000 2,721

By Economic Status

Poor 27,541,667 - 15,000,000 958,333 43,500,000 1,925

Non- poor 87,500,000 - 27,500,000 - 115,000,000 5,088

By Gender Disagregated

Male headed HH 43,021,739 - 6,173,913 1,000,000 50,195,652 2,221

Female Headed HH 4,300,000 - 65,600,000 - 69,900,000 3,093

Source: WEIDAP socio-economic baseline household survey, 2017

Table A4.3: Expenditure in Sample Households, 2015

Consumption Total survey

By Ethnicity By Economic Status By Gender

Kinh Indigenous

EM Immigrated EM Poor Non-poor Female

Headed HH Male Headed

HH

Average Household Expenditure (Dong)

38,582,857.1 47,300,000.0 38,629,523.8 36,966,666.7 36,050,833.3 53,775,000.0 32,680,000.0 39,866,087.0

Average household size (person)

5.2 3.0 5.4 6.7 5.6 5.5 4.8 5.7

Annual average per capita (Dong)

7,419,780.2 15,766,666.7 7,178,938.1 5,545,000.0 6,456,865.7 9,777,272.7 6,808,333.3 6,946,363.6

Share of total

Routineliving expenditure

74.5 67.7 78.5 61.3 79.5 54.4 65.5 76.1

Health care 2.0 2.1 2.3 0.9 2.1 1.4 1.2 2.1

Education 4.0 - 3.1 8.3 2.9 8.6 4.9 3.8

Clothing and shoes 2.0 2.1 1.9 2.3 1.7 2.8 1.2 2.1

Transport and communications

2.1 4.2 1.8 2.7 1.7 3.7 4.2 1.7

Consumption Total survey

By Ethnicity By Economic Status By Gender

Kinh Indigenous

EM Immigrated EM Poor Non-poor Female

Headed HH Male Headed

HH

Energy (electricity, etc.)

2.8 2.1 2.6 3.4 2.8 2.6 2.0 2.9

House repairs 1.9 - - 9.0 - 9.3 12.2 -

Social events (Tet etc.)

10.1 21.1 9.1 11.7 8.5 16.7 6.1 10.9

Community expenses

0.7 0.6 0.8 0.4 0.7 0.6 2.6 0.4

Source: WEIDAP socio- economic baseline household survey, 2017

Table A4.4: Household Assets in Sampled Households

Type of Assets

% of respondents

By Economic Status By Ethnicity

Female Headed

Household

Male Headed

Household Total

Survey Poor Non- poor Kinh

Indigenous Ethnic

Minority

Immigrated Ethnic

Minority

Type of House

Solid Permanent 66.7 50.0 0.0 66.7 66.7 80.0 60.9 64.3

Semi - permanent 33.3 50.0 100.0 33.3 33.3 20.0 39.1 35.7

Wood frame/ thatched roof

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Electricity 83.3 100.0 100.0 90.5 66.7 100.0 82.6 85.7

Indoor kitchen 16.7 0.0 0.0 19.0 0.0 0.0 17.4 14.3

Refrigerator 16.7 0.0 0.0 9.5 33.3 0.0 17.4 14.3

Working TV 75.0 100.0 100.0 85.7 50.0 100.0 73.9 78.6

Working radio 12.5 25.0 100.0 14.3 0.0 0.0 17.4 0.0

Bicycle 50.0 25.0 0.0 47.6 50.0 20.0 52.2 20.0

Motor cycle 70.8 100.0 100.0 76.2 66.7 100.0 69.6 100.0

Tractor 8.3 0.0 0.0 9.5 0.0 0.0 8.7 0.0

Car 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Animal Cart 16.7 50.0 0.0 19.0 33.3 0.0 26.1 0.0

Source: WEIDAP socio-economic baseline household survey, 2017.

Annex 4 36

Table A4.5: Expenditure in Sample Households, 2015

Consumption Total Survey

By Ethnicity By Economic Status By Gender

Kinh

Indigenous Ethnic

Minority

Immigrated Ethnic

Minority Poor Non-poor

Female Headed

Household Male Headed Household

Average Household Expenditure (Dong)

38,582,857.1 47,300,000.0 38,629,523.8 36,966,666.7 36,050,833.3 53,775,000.0 32,680,000.0 39,866,087.0

Average household size (person)

5.2 3.0 5.4 6.7 5.6 5.5 4.8 5.7

Annual average per capita (Dong)

7,419,780.2 15,766,666.7 7,178,938.1 5,545,000.0 6,456,865.7 9,777,272.7 6,808,333.3 6,946,363.6

Share of total

Routine living expenditure 74.5 67.7 78.5 61.3 79.5 54.4 65.5 76.1

Health care 2.0 2.1 2.3 0.9 2.1 1.4 1.2 2.1

Education 4.0 - 3.1 8.3 2.9 8.6 4.9 3.8

Clothing and shoes 2.0 2.1 1.9 2.3 1.7 2.8 1.2 2.1

Transport and communications

2.1 4.2 1.8 2.7 1.7 3.7 4.2 1.7

Energy (electricity, etc.) 2.8 2.1 2.6 3.4 2.8 2.6 2.0 2.9

House repairs 1.9 - - 9.0 - 9.3 12.2 -

Social events (Tet etc.) 10.1 21.1 9.1 11.7 8.5 16.7 6.1 10.9

Community expenses 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.4 0.7 0.6 2.6 0.4

Source: WEIDAP socio- economic baseline household survey, 2017.

37 Annex 4

Table A4.6: Household Assets in Sampled Households

Type of Assets

% of Respondents

By Economic Status By Ethnicity

Female Headed

Household

Male Headed

Household Total

Survey Poor Non-poor Kinh

Indigenous Ethnic

Minority

Immigrated Ethnic

Minority

Type of House

Solid Permanent 66.7 50.0 0.0 66.7 66.7 80.0 60.9 64.3

Semi - permanent 33.3 50.0 100.0 33.3 33.3 20.0 39.1 35.7

Wood frame/ thatched roof

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Electricity 83.3 100.0 100.0 90.5 66.7 100.0 82.6 85.7

Indoor kitchen 16.7 0.0 0.0 19.0 0.0 0.0 17.4 14.3

Refrigerator 16.7 0.0 0.0 9.5 33.3 0.0 17.4 14.3

Working TV 75.0 100.0 100.0 85.7 50.0 100.0 73.9 78.6

Working radio 12.5 25.0 100.0 14.3 0.0 0.0 17.4 0.0

Bicycle 50.0 25.0 0.0 47.6 50.0 20.0 52.2 20.0

Motor cycle 70.8 100.0 100.0 76.2 66.7 100.0 69.6 100.0

Tractor 8.3 0.0 0.0 9.5 0.0 0.0 8.7 0.0

Car 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Animal Cart 16.7 50.0 0.0 19.0 33.3 0.0 26.1 0.0

Source: WEIDAP socio-economic baseline household survey, 2017.

Table A4.7: Type of Latrine by Economic Status, Ethnicity, and Gender

Type of Latrine Facility Used

Number of HH

By Economic Status By Ethnicity Female

Headed Household

Poor

Male Headed

Household

Non-poor

Total Survey

Kinh Poor Non-poor Kinh

Indigenous Ethnic

Minority

Immigrated Ethnic

Minority

Flush toilet with septic tank, sewage pipes

37.50 25.00 100.00 33.33 33.33 60.00 30.43 35.71

Pit latrine 16.67 0.00 0.00 14.29 16.67 0.00 17.39 14.29

Single vault compost latrine

12.50 0.00 0.00 14.29 0.00 20.00 8.70 10.71

Double vault compost latrine

29.17 75.00 0.00 33.33 50.00 20.00 39.13 35.71

public toilet 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

No toilet 4.17 0.00 0.00 4.76 0.00 0.00 4.35 3.57

Source: WEIDAP socio-economic baseline household survey, 2017.

38 Annex 4

Annex Table. A4.8: Households Experiencing Health Problem in the Last Year

Survey Respondents

(% of Households)

Cold, Flu Eye

Redness TB Malaria Petechial

Fever Hepatitis Diarrhea

Total survey 53.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.1 0.0 3.6

By Ethnicity

+ Kinh 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

+ Indigenous Ethnic Minority

61.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Immigrated Ethnic Minority

16.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.3 0.0 16.7

By Economic Status

Poor 54.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Non-poor 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 25.0

By Gender

Female headed Household

40.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0

Male headed Household

56.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.7 0.0 0.0

Source: WEIDAP socio-economic baseline household survey, 2017.

Table A4.9: Average Land Holding by Ethnicity, Economic Status, and Gender

Residential Land Area Holding Agricultural Land (sao)

Forestry Land (ha)

Residential Plot (m2)

House garden (m2)

Whole sample 585.7 310.9 7.1 0.0

By ethnicity

Kinh 200.0 2800.0 3.0 0.0

Indigenous Ethnic Minority

650.0 205.0 5.6 0.0

Immigrated Ethnic Minority

425.0 266.7 12.8 0.0

By economic status

Poor 652.1 179.4 7.2 0.0

Non poor 187.5 1100.0 6.1 0.0

By Gender

Female headed Household

2110.0 60.0 5.1 0.0

Male headed Household

254.3 365.4 7.5 0.0

Source: WEIDAP socio-economic baseline household survey, 2017.

Annex 4 39

Table A4.10: Livestock Holdings by Household

Type of Livestock Size

Number of HH Rearing Livestock

Total Household

with Livestock

By Ethnicity By Economic

Status By Gender

Kinh

Indigenous Ethnic

Minority

Immigrated Ethnic

Minority Poor Non-poor

Female Headed

Male Headed

Cow (head)

0 0 5 0 5 0 2 3 5

From 1-5 1 13 1 13 2 3 12 15

From 6-10 0 2 3 3 2 0 5 5

>10 0 1 2 3 0 0 3 3

Goat (head)

0 1 10 4 11 4 3 12 15

From 1-5 0 8 0 8 0 0 8 8

From 6-10 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1

>10 0 2 2 4 0 1 3 4

Pig (head) 0 1 12 4 15 2 4 13 17

From 1-5 0 9 2 9 2 1 10 11

From 6-10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

>10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Poultry (head)

0 1 12 4 13 4 4 13 17

From 1-10 0 6 0 6 0 1 5 6

From 11-20 0 1 2 3 0 0 3 3

>20 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 2

Source: WEIDAP socio-economic baseline household survey, 2017

Table A4.11: Source of Water (% respondents)

Sources of Water Total

Response

By Ethnicity By Sex Disaggregate By Economic

Status

Kinh

Indigenous Ethnic

Minority

Immigrated Ethnic

Minority

Female Headed

Household

Male Headed

Household Poor Non- poor

Rainy season

Rain fed only 35.7 0.0 33.3 50.0 80.0 26.1 41.7 0.0

Irrigated by pumping from river/stream/canal/ reservoir

32.1 0.0 33.3 33.3 20.0 34.8 37.5 0.0

Irrigated by pumping formfarmer's own shallow well/pond/ borehole

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Irrigated by buying water from private

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Dry season

Rain fed only 21.4 0.0 19.0 33.3 0.0 26.1 16.7 50.0

Irrigated by pumping from river/stream/canal/ reservoir

53.6 100.0 57.1 33.3 40.0 56.5 58.3 25.0

Irrigated by pumping from farmer's own shallow well/pond/ bore-hole

7.1 0.0 4.8 16.7 20.0 4.3 4.2 25.0

Irrigated by buying water from private

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Source: WEIDAP socio- economic baseline household survey, 2017.

40 Annex 4

Table A4.12: Type of Water Application Method

Irrigation Practices

Number of Household

Using

By Ethnicity By Economic

Status By Sex Disaggregate

Kinh

Indigenous Ethnic

Minority

Immigrated Ethnic

Minority Poor Non- Poor

Female Headed

Household

Male Headed

Household

Flooding/ moveable hose irrigation

18 1 14 3 16 2 3 15

Overhead sprinkler irrigation

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Micro sprinkler irrigation

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Drip irrigation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Other 2 0 1 1 2 0 0 2

Source: WEIDAP socio-economic baseline household survey, 2017.

Annex 4 41

Table A4.13: Indebtedness in Subproject Command Area

Number of Household

By Ethnicity By Economic

Status

Female Headed

Household

Male Headed Househ

old Kinh

Indigenous Ethnic

Minority

Immigrated Ethnic

Minority Poor Non- poor

Number of surveyed Household

28 1 21 5 24 4 5 23

Number of indebted Household

12 1 8 3 8 4 4 8

Percentage 42.9 100.0 38.1 60.0 33.3 100.0 80.0 34.8

Sources of Loan

Relatives, Friends, neighbors

8.3 0.0 12.5 0.0 12.5 0.0 0.0 12.5

Money lender 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Credit fund/ People’s credit Cooperatives

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Agribank 25.0 100.0 12.5 33.3 12.5 50.0 25.0 25.0

Social policy Bank 66.7 0.0 75.0 66.7 75.0 50.0 75.0 62.5

Fund for poverty 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Women Union/other Associations

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Others(specific) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Purposes of Borrowing

Agricultural Activities 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Non-agricultural Activities

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Purchase of consumer durables

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Purchase/improvement of dwelling

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Household consumption needs

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Health treatment, injury, accident

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Other (specify) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Formality of Loan

Loans without collateral or deposits

50.0 0.0 75.0 0.0 75.0 0.0 75.0 37.5

Mortgage loans 50.0 100.0 25.0 100.0 25.0 100.0 25.0 62.5

Source: WEIDAP socio-economic baseline household survey, 2017.

42 Annex 4

Table A4.14: Most Serious Issues in Agriculture (%Responses Agreeing)

Most Serious Agricultural Constraints

Lack of

Land

Lack of

Labor Lack of

Irrigation

Lack of New or Hybrid

Varieties Insect/ Pests

Lack of Agriculture Extension

service and technical

knowledge

High Price of

Inputs

Lack of Fertilizer

and Other

Inputs

Low Selling

Price

Total survey 10.7 3.6 78.6 7.1 53.6 14.3 7.1 17.9 14.3

By Ethnicity

Kinh 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Indigenous Ethnic Minority

9.5 4.8 85.7 4.8 47.6 14.3 0.0 23.8 19.0

Immigrated Ethnic Minority

16.7 0.0 50.0 16.7 83.3 16.7 33.3 0.0 0.0

By economic status

Poor 8.3 4.2 83.3 8.3 54.2 16.7 8.3 20.8 16.7

Non poor 25.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

By Gender

Female headed Household

40.0 0.0 80.0 0.0 40.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0

Male headed Household

4.3 4.3 78.3 8.7 56.5 17.4 8.7 21.7 13.0

Source: WEIDAP socio-economic baseline household survey, 2017

Table A4.15: Community Participation

Membership in Community Organizations

Farmer Association

WUG/WUA Cooperative

Interest Group

Agricultural Extension

Group Youth Union

Women Union

Religion Group

Saving and

Credit Group

Agricultural Processing

Group

Total Response

78.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.7 25.0 17.9 0.0 0.0

By Ethnicity

Kinh 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Indigenous EM

85.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 19.0 23.8 0.0 0.0

Immigrated EM

50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

By Gender

Female headed Household

80.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 40.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Male headed Household

78.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.7 21.7 21.7 0.0 0.0

By Economic Status

Poor 83.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.5 16.7 20.8 0.0 0.0

Non- poor 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Source: WEIDAP socio- economic baseline household survey, 2017.

Annex 4 43

Table A4.16: Sources of Information on HIV/AIDS

Survey Respondents

(% Survey Responses)

Have you heard of HIV/AIDS?

Main Source of Information on HIV/AIDS

TV Radio Poster Relative/ Friend

Health Worker Other

Total 85.7 75.0 14.3 10.7 3.6 10.7 0.0

Female headed household

100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 20.0 0.0

By Gender

+ Men 78.6 71.4 7.1 7.1 0.0 0.0 0.0

+ Women 92.9 78.6 21.4 14.3 7.1 21.4 0.0

By Ethnicity

+Kinh 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

+ Indigenous EM 95.2 81.0 14.3 9.5 4.8 14.3 0.0

+ Immigrated EM 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

By Economic Status

+ Poor 91.7 79.2 12.5 8.3 4.2 12.5 0.0

+Non poor 50.0 50.0 25.0 25.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Source: WEIDAP socio- economic baseline household survey, 2017.

Table A4.17: Sources of Information on Climate Change

Survey Respondents

(% Survey Responses)

Have you

heard of Climate

Change?

Main Source of Information

Internet TV News paper

Radio/

Loud Speaker

Display Panel Leaflet

Community Meetings

Self- searching

Relatives/ Friends

Total 21.4 3.6 14.3 0.0 7.1 0.0 0.0 10.7 0.0 0.0

Female headed HH

40.0 20.0 40.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

By Ethnicity

+ Kinh 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0

+ Indigenous EM

23.8 4.8 14.3 0.0 4.8 0.0 0.0 9.5 0.0 0.0

+ Immigrated EM

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

By Economic Status

+Poor 20.8 4.2 12.5 0.0 4.2 0.0 0.0 8.3 0.0 0.0

+ Non poor 25.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 0.0 0.0

By Gender

+ Men 14.3 0.0 14.3 0.0 14.3 0.0 0.0 7.1 0.0 0.0

+ Women 28.6 7.1 14.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 0.0 0.0

Source: WEIDAP socio-economic baseline household survey, 2017

44 Annex 4

Table A4.18: Benefits from Improved Irrigation System (% Survey Responses)

Survey Respondents

Increased yields of current

crop production

Increased number of crops per year

Increased cultivated land area

Opportunities for crop

diversification

Increased land

values

Provide food

security

Create more job

opportunities

Opportunity for

aquaculture

Total 96.4 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Of which female headed Household

100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

By Ethnicity

Kinh 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Indigenous Ethnic Minority

95.2 0.0 0.0 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Immigrated Ethnic Minority

100.0 15.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

By Economic Status

Poor 95.8 0.0 0.0 4.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Non Poor 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

By Gender

Men 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Women 92.9 0.0 0.0 7.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Source: WEIDAP socio-economic baseline household survey, 2017/

Table A4.19: Gender division of Responsibilities in Production Activities (% of Responses)

Responsible Person Farming

Fishery/ Aquaculture

Worker/Hired Labor Trading

Occasional Working Outside

Total survey

Husband 25.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Wife 10.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Both husband and wife

53.6 0.0 7.1 0.0 0.0

Other 10.7 0.0 7.1 0.0 7.1

No activity 0.0 100.0 85.7 100.0 92.9

Female headed household

Husband 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Wife 40.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Both husband and wife

40.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0

Other 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

No activity 0.0 100.0 80.0 100.0 100.0

Male headed Household

Husband 26.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Wife 4.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Both husband and wife

56.5 0.0 4.3 0.0 0.0

Other 13.0 0.0 8.7 0.0 8.7

No activity 0.0 100.0 87.0 100.0 91.3

Source: WEIDAP socio-economic baseline household survey, 2017.

Annex 4 45

Table A4.20: Gender Division of Responsibilities in Non-production Activities (% of Responses)

Responsible Person

Fetching Water

Fetching Fuel

Caring for

Children

Caring for

Elderly

Housework- Cooking/ Cleaning

House Repair

Buying Goods at

Market

Selling Agricultural

Products

Total survey

Husband 32.1 32.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.4 3.6 35.7

Wife 7.1 0.0 39.3 14.3 53.6 3.6 39.3 10.7

Both husband and wife

0.0 10.7 10.7 3.6 0.0 7.1 25.0 46.4

Other 14.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.7 0.0 0.0 0.0

No activity 46.4 57.1 50.0 82.1 35.7 67.9 32.1 7.1

Female headed household

Husband 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 20.0

Wife 40.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 60.0 40.0

Both husband and wife

0.0 20.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 40.0

Other 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

No activity 40.0 80.0 60.0 80.0 60.0 80.0 20.0 0.0

Male headed household

Husband 34.8 39.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.7 4.3 39.1

Wife 0.0 0.0 47.8 17.4 60.9 4.3 34.8 4.3

Both husband and wife

4.3 8.7 4.3 0.0 0.0 8.7 26.1 47.8

Other 13.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.7 0.0 0.0 0.0

No activity 47.8 52.2 47.8 82.6 30.4 65.2 34.8 8.7

Source: WEIDAP socio-economic baseline household survey, 2017.

46 Annex 4

Table A4.21: Gender division of Responsibilities in Participation and Decision Makings (% of responses)

Responsible Person

Participation in Decision making on

Community meetings

Attend agricultural extension training courses

Mass organization

Community supervision

activities

Budgeting and

Financial Production investment

Education/ job of their

children

Total survey Husband 53.6 78.6 50.0 46.4 46.4 46.4 46.4

Wife 39.3 21.4 32.1 25.0 7.1 7.1 7.1

Both husband and wife

3.6 0.0 3.6 0.0 46.4 46.4 39.3

Other 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

No activity 3.6 0.0 14.3 28.6 0.0 0.0 7.1

Female headed household

Husband 20.0 40.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0

Wife 80.0 60.0 80.0 80.0 40.0 40.0 40.0

Both husband and wife

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.0 40.0 20.0

Other 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

No activity 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0

Male headed household

Husband 60.9 87.0 56.5 52.2 52.2 52.2 52.2

Wife 30.4 13.0 21.7 13.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Both husband and wife

4.3 0.0 4.3 0.0 47.8 47.8 4.3

Other 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 43.5

No activity 4.3 0.0 17.4 34.8 0.0 0.0 0.0

Source: WEIDAP socio-economic baseline household survey, 2017.

Table A4.22: Average Working Hours per Day by Gender Disaggregation (hours)

Survey Respondents

Productive Work

House Work/ Child

Community Work Total Hours

Total survey

Men 5.07 0.79 0.57 6.43

Women 3.29 0.64 0.29 4.21

Female headed HH

Men 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Women 5.00 0.50 1.00 6.50

Male headed HH

Men 5.46 1.10 0.05 6.62

Women 2.60 0.70 0.70 4.00

Source: WEIDAP socio-economic baseline household survey, 2017.

47 Annex 5

Annex 5

ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF THANH SON-PHUOC NHON SUBPROJECT

A. Introduction

1. The economic analysis assesses the economic viability of the project through standard cost benefit analyses. The analysis is undertaken for each of the eight subprojects proposed for inclusion in Water Efficiency Improvement in Drought-Affected Provinces Project (WEIDAP) ‘the project’ and for the overall project, including the incremental costs of project management allocated to individual subprojects. The economic analysis is conducted in accordance with the ADB’s Guidelines for the Economic Analysis of Projects (1997) and Key Areas of Economic Analysis of Investment Projects (2013).

2. This subproject will enable the transformation of dry land, currently most of which is not being cropped and comprises patchily grassed, thorny shrubs and cacti. Much of the land is currently used for grazing of cattle and small ruminants (goats and sheep), but in the recent past, it supported maize and vegetable cropping by small holders when water was available. Unreliable water supplies led to some farmers abandoning crop agriculture, but “with project,” many are expected to return to the area and resume farming. In addition, commercial farming is expected to be attracted to the area given the more reliable water supplies, with private sector companies buying-up land from smallholders to amalgamate larger contiguous plots. Several commercial farms are anticipated, each about 50 ha in size, under the concept of High Tech Agricultural Production Zones. With reliable water supplies, the ranges of crops that can be grown include grapes, Vietnamese apple, vegetables, and grass (fodder).

3. The larger scale commercial farm(s) are likely invest in high efficient irrigation equipment, drip for grape and perhaps sprinklers for vegetables. Smallholders may have capital constraints but are expected to adopt drag hose and basin/furrow irrigation techniques. Pressures at hydrants may be sufficient for hose irrigation, but on-farm pumping would be required for sprinklers and/ or drip systems.

B. Economic Rationale

4. Agricultural development in Ninh Thuan is constrained by a combination of sub-optimal agricultural practices, limited water resources, low efficiency of water utilization, highly variable water resources made available through deteriorating irrigation distribution systems, excessive use of fertilizers and pesticides, inadequate market access roads and irrigation systems that rely upon ground water sources (where they exist) that, in coastal environs, are threatened by saline intrusion and inadequate drainage systems for high-value crops. Investment is required to modernize irrigation infrastructure to promote production of high-value crops compared with traditional rice systems that will improve water use efficiency, thereby leading to sustainable use of productive resources that are generally beyond the available resources of predominantly small-scale producers. Significant areas of irrigable land have been abandoned in view of the limited water resources available that is being addressed by the subproject. Moreover, the sustainable use of this fragile underground and surface water environment should be considered a public good since the broader community will benefit increasingly from the improved environment. In an attempt to better use existing land resources, the government is financing the installation of a 34 km pipeline to deliver water from the Tan My Reservoir bringing surplus water within more convenient access to these abandoned areas as well as to areas impacted by the rapidly

48 Annex 5

spreading saline wedge creeping into coastal areas. The area is well suited to HVCs and has a climate suitable for crops that are vulnerable to high levels of humidity and thus increased vulnerability to fungal related infestations. The introduction of water will facilitate the expansion of high-value crop production with unique crops for Viet Nam including Vietnamese apple, grapes, aloe vera, asparagus and other vegetable crops. The low humidity is also conducive to livestock rearing and grass production is proposed to support this initiative.

C. Demand Analysis

5. The main outputs to be produced by the subproject include Vietnamese apple, grapes, garlic, aloe vera, asparagus and other high-value vegetable crops. This demand analysis focuses on selected, high-value commodities that are expected to dominate plantings in the new irrigated areas, not the perpetuation of previous maize and cassava that are viewed as low valued commodities that suffer relatively high water-requirements compared to any revenue they generate. Prior to the project, wet season rainfed maize and industrial crops were grown in areas to the north west of Phan Rang. Maize has been used as a proxy for all other annual crops currently grown in the command area.

6. Vietnamese apple is a highly sought after seasonal fruit in Viet Nam that looks similar to a green ‘granny smith’ variety but is of smaller size. It has a similar crisp sweet flesh surrounding the one seed that gives it the appearance of a large plum. The dry conditions of Ninh Thuan suit the growing requirements of this fruit where it has some resistance to fungal attack that is common when grown in other parts of Viet Nam. It is also grown in the cooler regions in the northern mountains of Viet Nam that produce a smaller fruit. During its relatively short season of two to three months, it is distributed throughout the country and is highly sort after for family consumption. When in season, it is often used as a gift when paying social visits to other families. There are no figures available on the areas planted to this crop or the production levels achieved. Due to its short supply season, prices for this fruit are high and domestic demand cannot be satisfied from existing plantings. Incremental production from the 225 ha that are expected to be planted once at full production will deliver an incremental quantity of about 2,200 tons onto the market. At this level, the impact on farm gate prices will be negligible although producing farmers can expect to make substantial profits given the current price levels this fruit achieves.

7. Table grapes are grown in small quantities in Ninh Thuan on a very small scale commonly of less than 0.2 ha per plot adjoining farmer households although the provincial government is keen to attract larger scaled commercial investors in this industry. Both green and red varieties are produced but suffer from small berry size and low sugar content when mature. They are destined for the domestic market and compete directly with the imported fresh table grape from PR China with larger sized berries and sweeter taste. Grapes are traditionally grown using a horizontal elevated canopy allowing the harvest of bunches underneath the canopy. In view of the water shortages in this area, many farmers irrigate their grapes from rivers that drain the area, some adopting trickle irrigation using micro-sprayers to water more efficiently given the frequent shortages. The local varieties have been selected from trials at the local research station5 but more recently, more promising varieties have been introduced using tissue culture and cuttings from other countries. As such, there is greater confidence in their ability to compete with the imported product but it will take time for old varieties to be culled and new ones established

5 There are three organizations that have been tasked to produce planting material of grapes for farmers, namely the

Cotton Research Centre, Ninh Thuan Domestic Animal and Crop Breeding Centre and Binh Thuan Socio-Economic Development Centre. All of them are researching on rootstocks to identify suitable planting materials for different soil and climatic conditions of the various grape growing regions. Besides, the Cotton Research Centre is conducting studies to propagate grapes by the in vitro method.

Annex 5 49

(gestation period of three years before commercial harvest). The comparative advantage local producers have is their limited use of chemicals and consequently the risk of chemical residues on the berries. Imports from PCR are considered by local consumers to have high levels of chemicals applied to achieve the quality delivered and as a result, there is some reluctance to buy table grapes from this source.

8. Viet Nam has an area of table grapes of approximately 3,000 ha, 1,500 ha of which are grown in Ninh Thuan and the country produces an estimated 75,000 tons of grapes per annum. Incremental plantings considered achievable in Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon Subproject is 370 ha that will produce an estimated 9,000 tons at full production. This represents a significant increase over the existing area (40%) and with the latest varieties, will be a significant boost to supplies on the local market. Domestic prices make possible a very attractive return to the farmers and many have expressed a desire to plant table grapes to supply this rapidly growing market. Given the level of imports from PR China and the USA, import substitution should be possible as long as local producers can match the berry size and sugar levels achieved with the imported product. Those farmers who are able to access improved planting material and with the resources to produce high quality fruit have demonstrated a capacity to produce berries of comparable characteristics to the imported varieties.

9. The other common land use proposed is for vegetable production that include garlic, spring onions, shallots, onions, aloe vera, asparagus, and a number of specialty vegetables. The dry climate is very conducive to production of high-value vegetables as long as water can be delivered for their growth. Returns to farmers are high from these crops and the level of production is insignificant compared with the demand country wide. The area has established itself as a source of high quality alliaceous vegetables that command a significantly higher price on the domestic markets and buyers recognize the superior quality of good produced in Ninh Thuan. These crops take typically three to four months to grow and harvest allowing double cropping subject to water availability. The incremental area planted to vegetables is estimated at over 1,500 ha per annum. While this is a significant addition to local supplies (some 20-30 tons/ha can be achieved from these crops), the domestic demand far exceeds likely incremental production. Given the high quality characteristics for which vegetable production in Ninh Thuan is recognized, incremental production is unlikely to impact upon price levels farmers will achieve with the subproject.

D. Cost Analysis

10. The subproject proposes new piped irrigation systems over traditional canal systems for sound technical reasons. Canal systems are suited to paddy production, which do not require high degrees of flow control. The existing irrigation sources rely heavily on groundwater where it is available that have become affected by the saline intrusions as the volume extracted exceeds the available recharge rates. Agriculture in the subproject area is either non-existent or limited to wet season low valued crops - maize and industrial annual crops. The proposed piped system to serve the new Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon Subproject, allows for flexible and efficient delivery of irrigation water because of their high degree of flow control capacity and minimal operating costs being a gravity-fed system. Piped distribution systems are suited for high-value crops, which the government strongly promotes to reduce environmental impact (e.g., groundwater depletion) of inefficient irrigation water use, meet the increasing water demand from residential and industrial users, and help farmers increase their cash income. Piped irrigation systems are designed to take water from the government built Tan My pipeline that is already under construction. The subproject will connect to this pipeline and adopt ringed distribution designs that maintain head in the piped systems so that farmers in the project areas draw water from the piped water supply

50 Annex 5

systems to their plots - many without incurring additional pumping/distribution costs. The systems also allow future improvements such as adoption of field drip or sprinkler systems, metering, and cost recovery. Different pipe distribution alignments were developed to identify the least cost alternative that resulted in the lowest pipe density in terms of meters per square kilometer. This modernization is therefore not the least cost alternative compared to open canals but provides for a better managed system that will provide a higher level of service to farmers with improved water efficiency.

E. Major Assumptions and Methodology

11. The economic analysis was carried out for Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon Subproject by comparing with- and without-subproject scenarios, following ADB’s Guidelines for the Economic Analysis of Projects. “Without” the subproject scenario does not assume the status quo, but declining water availability impacting on crop production anticipated over the 25-year project life-span. Financial costs and benefits were converted to economic values using the world price numeraire. Economic costs and benefits were expressed in constant 2017 prices with an exchange rate of VND 22,600 per US dollar. Transfer payments such as taxes, duties and subsidies are excluded in calculating economic values. In the case of major traded goods, economic values are based on border parity prices. For non-traded goods and services, a standard conversion factor of 0.9 was used. The economic opportunity cost of the capital of 9% was assumed.

F. Economic Analysis

12. Economic Benefits. Benefits expected from the investment in the modernized piped irrigation system under the subproject include:

(i) Enhanced crop yields due to increased and more reliable water during the dry season. Weighted average yield increases on existing crops are expected (estimated at 30% for all crops and fodder grown in the command area).

(ii) Improved average quality of production resulted from the increased proportion of better quality crops, which translates into higher average prices. Average price increases are expected for all crops - Vietnamese apple (Jujube), grapes and specialty vegetables based on improved proportions of higher quality produce.

(iii) Conversion of land growing lower valued crops (such as rain-fed maize and industrial crops) or fallow, to cultivating HVCs. In this subproject, only a small percentage of the command area is planted to HVCs but also incremental areas yet to be converted.

13. Economic Cost. The financial cost of the subproject investment is VND 445.5 billion ($19.7 million), which is equivalent of VND 339.1 billion in economic terms. Costs include construction, detailed design and supervision, resettlement compensation, O&M during the implementation period that under the new law will become the responsibility of the recipient farmers, together with the cost of connecting to the piped water distribution system and the technical support for the introduction of water efficient application techniques. O&M is estimated to be 1% of investments for the gravity fed irrigation water through a piped system that will provide an estimated 10 m of residual head throughout the subproject command area where farmers can connect directly to strategically placed hydrants. Total routine annual O&M for the subproject is expected to be VND 8.6 million in economic terms. It is assumed that every tenth year there will be a major maintenance effort (periodic maintenance) for more expensive repairs associated with sections of underground pipes, the purchase of new pumps and other major items estimated at

Annex 5 51

VND102.2 billion every 10th year. Comparative production areas with and without the subproject are detailed in Table A5.1 below.

Table A5.1: Comparative ‘With’ and ‘Without’ Subproject Areas

14. Economic Viability. The results of the overall economic analysis are estimated by comparing the economic costs and benefits of the subprojects to demonstrate it is economically viable with an economic internal rate of return (EIRR) of 18.4% and an economic net present value (ENPV) of VND 470.1 billion (Table A5.2). The flow of economic benefits and associated costs for Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon Subproject are presented in the Table below.

Table A5.2: Economic Analysis of Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon Subproject (Economic Terms VND million)

Source: Consultant’s estimates based on domestic feasibility study reports.

Crop ha Crop ha Crop ha Crop ha

Ninh Thuan Province

Thanh Son - Phuoc Nhon Rice 1 63 Grape 18 Rice 1 - Grape 389

Rice 2 63 Apple 42 Rice 2 - Apple 267

Grass 35 Grass 219

Fallow 265 Fallow -

Veg. 1 - Veg. 1 924

Veg. 2 - Veg. 2 924

Veg. 3 1,377 Veg. 3 924

SubprojectTraditional Crops

Without Project (in 2032)

High Value Crops

With Project (in 2032)

Traditional Crops High Value Crops

O&M Total Incremental Net

Cost Costs Benefit Benefit

2018-19 14.66 - 14.66 - (14.66)

2019-20 31.45 - 31.45 - (31.45)

2020-21 135.01 - 135.01 - (135.01)

2021-22 124.43 - 124.43 - (124.43)

2022-23 33.43 0.18 33.61 17.01 (16.60)

2023-24 0.64 0.18 0.82 36.19 35.37

2024-25 - 0.18 0.18 48.99 48.81

2025-26 - 0.18 0.18 50.60 50.42

2026-27 - 0.18 0.18 51.06 50.88

2027-28 - 0.18 0.18 53.28 53.10

2029-30 - 0.18 0.18 71.39 71.22

2030-31 - 0.18 0.18 85.50 85.32

2031-32 - 119.66 119.66 105.48 (14.18)

2032-33 - 0.18 0.18 127.12 126.94

2033-34 - 0.18 0.18 158.71 158.53

2034-35 - 0.18 0.18 188.72 188.55

2035-36 - 0.18 0.18 220.00 219.82

2036-37 - 0.18 0.18 245.75 245.57

2037-38 - 0.18 0.18 271.68 271.50

2038-39 - 0.18 0.18 289.92 289.75

2039-40 - 0.18 0.18 304.10 303.92

2040-41 - 0.18 0.18 310.99 310.81

2041-42 - 119.66 119.66 322.51 202.85

2042-43 - 0.18 0.18 310.77 310.59

2043-44 - 0.18 0.18 310.77 310.59

2044-45 - 0.18 0.18 310.77 310.59

EIRR 18.43%

ENPV (9%) 470.10

Year

Investment

Cost

52 Annex 5

G. Sensitivity Analysis

15. Sensitivity tests were conducted individually for each of the subprojects and for the overall project, including project management costs. The tests included: (i) a 20% investment cost increase; (ii) recurrent cost increases; and (iii) a 20% benefit decrease; Switching values were estimated for the impact of either a cost increase or a benefit decrease as well as for the change in O&M expenses. The results of the sensitivity analyses indicate that the overall project is sufficiently robust with a 20% investment cost increase reducing the EIRR to 16.4% and a 20% benefit decrease reducing it to 16.0% (Table A5.3).

Table A5.3: Sensitivity Analysis of Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon Subproject

EIRR = economic internal rate of return, ENPV = economic net present value. Source: Consultant’s estimates based on domestic feasibility study reports.

H. Distribution Analysis

16. The poverty incidences used for the analysis comprised the weighted values for each commune represented in the command area of the subproject. The socio-economic household survey was carried out in the subproject command area based on 28 farmer-interviews in beneficiary communes. Key findings from the survey include:

(i) Five out of 28 respondents (18%) of are female-headed household with an average of 4.8 per household.

(ii) The overall average household size is 5.6 per household. (iii) 14 women (50%) and 14 men (50%) responded to the survey. (iv) 24 households were classified as poor (86%). (v) 4 HHs were classified as non-poor (14%). (vi) The proportion of ethnic minorities in survey sample was of 96%.

17. A “snapshot” of the 10th year after construction would indicate that the incremental net crop economic value “with” the subproject may be VND 55.6 billion ($2.46 million) more than might be expected “without” the project. In household financial terms, this year 10 “snapshot” would translate to an increased net crop income of VND15.3 million ($700) per “average” household farm (estimated to be 0.5 ha in size).

I. Investment Sustainability

18. An assessment of the financial sustainability of the investment is complicated by the recent introduction of the Law on Hydraulic Structures in which the principle of ‘user pays’ has been proposed. This goes against the previously (2007) Decree No.115 that waived all service

Benefit decrease of 20% EIRR % 16.0%

Cost increase of 20% EIRR % 16.4%

Switching Values for a 9% EIRR

Benefit decrease switching value % 40%

Investment cost increase switching value % 285%

O&M cost increase switching value % 965%

Annex 5 53

fees for irrigation water by the beneficiary farmers. Under that Decree, responsibility for payment of O&M charges was allocated to the provincial government. The irrigation management companies charged with operating and maintaining irrigation systems received a budgetary allocation from the provincial government to provide these services. Under the new Law, responsibility for O&M charges are to be paid by the farmer beneficiaries. The extent to which this can be achieved remains to be seen and it has been assumed that the provinces will continue to be responsible for irrigation O&M charges. For this reason, incremental O&M costs due in respect of the Thanh Son-Phuoc Nhon Subproject have been compared to the provincial budget to determine its capacity to meet the incremental charges.

19. For the purposes of this exercise, the incremental O&M costs have been assessed as a percentage of the investment costs for annual routine O&M (1% for the gravity fed piped system). In addition to the routine O&M costs, it is assumed that periodic maintenance will be required every 10 years after subproject completion that has been estimated at 30% of the investment cost. The sum of these two figures has been compared to the annual budget allocation for the economic sector in the province and the ratio estimated to assess the impact of the incremental costs. The results of the assessment are presented in the Table 4 and 5 below.

Table A5.4: Analysis of the Provincial Budget Allocation - Ninh Thuan

Actual

Thực tế

Projection

Dự kiến

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

REVENUE

NGUỒN THU

I. Development budget

Ngân sách nhà nước cho đầu tư phát triển 1,471,927 739,540 1,010,310 737,425 533,117 880,880 932,400 986,933

- State Budget for investment

Ngân sách nhà nước 1,151,927 739,540 1,010,310 737,425 470,627 864,344 914,896 968,406

- Foreign Loan

Vốn vay nước ngoài 0 0 0 0

- Local mobilization fund for investment

Huy động đầu tư 320,000 0 62,490 16,536 17,503 18,527

II. Revenue

Nguồn thu của tỉnh 1,833,603 1,200,000 1,476,621 1,953,414 1,891,500 1,865,159 1,974,246 2,089,714

III. State Budget

Hỗ trợ từ ngân sách nhà nước 1,296,265 1,334,653 966,827 966,827 1,458,285 1,363,963 1,443,737 1,528,177

Total Revenue

Tổng nguồn thu 4,601,795 3,274,193 3,453,758 3,657,666 3,882,902 4,110,001 4,350,383 4,604,824

EXPENDITURE

CHI

I. Development Investment

Chi đầu tư phát triển 1,478,272 928,740 1,047,189 1,115,725 445,213 1,034,235 1,094,725 1,158,752

II. Social and Economic Services

Dịch vụ xã hội và kinh tế 3,652,177 2,197,603 2,255,399 2,363,471 2,813,685 2,769,135 2,931,093 3,102,524

Education and Training

Chi giáo dục và đào tạo 211,128 948,322 990,996 1,033,307 1,176,259 1,194,994 1,264,885 1,338,865

Health Care

Chi Y tế 228,202 278,069 286,934 291,446 359,418 349,469 369,908 391,543

Science and Technology

Chi cho khoa học và công nghệ 8,410 13,643 14,189 14,900 15,880 16,925 17,914 18,962

Culture, Information and Broadcasting

Chi Văn hóa, thông tin và truyền thông 39,878 36,727 36,658 36,147 38,462 42,873 45,380 48,034

Pension and Social Relief

Chi lương và bảo trợ xã hội 124,788 87,027 43,704 66,018 39,584 69,906 73,995 78,323

Economic Services and Enviroment Protection

Chi sự nghiệp kinh tế và sự nghiệp môi trường 218,087 160,843 182,646 219,368 237,776 229,488 242,911 257,118

General Public Administration

Chi hành chính công 229,091 233,426 220,799 287,252 309,210 301,524 319,159 337,826

Other social & economic expenditures

Chi khác cho dịch vụ xã hội và kinh tế 2,592,593 439,546 479,473 415,033 637,096 563,956 596,940 631,853

Addition to Financial Reserve and others

Chi bổ sung quỹ dự trữ tài chính và các khoản chi 271,359 147,850 151,170 178,470 582,004 295,518 312,801 331,096

Total Expenditure

Tổng chi 5,401,808 3,274,193 3,453,758 3,657,666 3,840,902 4,098,887 4,338,619 4,592,372

SURPLUS (DEFICIT)

CHÊNH LỆCH THU CHI (800,013) - - - 42,000 11,114.11 11,764.15 12,452.20

O & M Cost without Project

Chi phí bảo trì các công trình thủy lợi khi chưa có 29,614.97 30,367.19 26,850.91 35,296.14 43,962.95 44,311.68 44,674.29 45,051.32

O & M Cost with Project

Chi phí bảo trì các công trình thủy lợi sau khi có dự 29,614.97 30,367.19 26,850.91 35,296.14 43,962.95 44,311.68 44,674.29 45,051.32

Incremental O & M Cost (IOMC)

Chi phí bảo trì công trình thủy lợi tăng thêm

Plan

Dự toán

Annex 5 54

Table A5.5: O&M Sustainability Analysis of Ninh Thuan Subprojects

2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030

REVENUE

NGUỒN THU

Total Revenue

Tổng nguồn thu 4,874,147 5,159,221 5,460,969 5,780,365 6,118,441 6,476,291 6,855,070 7,256,003 7,680,385 8,129,588

EXPENDITURE

CHI

Total Expenditure

Tổng chi 4,860,966 5,145,270 5,446,202 5,764,734 6,101,896 6,458,778 6,836,533 7,236,382 7,659,616 8,107,604

SURPLUS (DEFICIT)

CHÊNH LỆCH THU CHI 13,180.49 13,951.38 14,767.35 15,631.05 16,545.26 17,512.95 18,537.23 19,621.41 20,769.01 21,983.73

O & M Cost without Project

Chi phí bảo trì các công trình thủy lợi khi chưa có 45,443.36 45,850.99 46,274.85 46,715.57 47,173.83 47,650.32 48,145.77 48,660.93 49,196.59 49,753.56

O & M Cost with Project

Chi phí bảo trì các công trình thủy lợi sau khi có dự 45,443.36 45,850.99 53,835.82 47,045.06 47,503.32 47,979.81 48,475.26 48,990.42 49,526.08 50,083.06

Incremental O & M Cost (IOMC)

Chi phí bảo trì công trình thủy lợi tăng thêm 7,560.97 7,560.97 7,560.97 7,560.97 7,560.97 7,560.97 7,560.97 7,560.97

Ratio Analysis

Phân tích tỷ lệ

IOMC/Total Revenue

IOMC/ Tổng nguồn thu 0.14% 0.13% 0.12% 0.12% 0.11% 0.10% 0.10% 0.09%

IOMC/Total Expenditure

IOMC/Tổng Chi 0.14% 0.13% 0.12% 0.12% 0.11% 0.10% 0.10% 0.09%

IOMC/Expenditure on Economic Services and

Enviroment Protection 2.48% 2.34% 2.21% 2.09% 1.98% 1.87% 1.76% 1.67%

IOMC/Surplus (Deficit)

IOMC/Chênh lệch thu chi 51.20% 48.37% 45.70% 43.17% 40.79% 38.53% 36.41% 34.39%

Ninh Thuan Province (Million VND)

20. Based on the historic budget allocations to the respective categories for the provincial budgets, it is estimated that O&M in respect of the two subprojects in Ninh Thuan will reach between 0.09-0.14% of total revenue. Taking into consideration the allocation to Economic Services in the province, the ratio increases to between 1.67-2.5% of the allocation each year for routine maintenance. Every 10 years the requirement for periodic maintenance is more significant reaching 46% of the Economic Services allocation in that year. This is unlikely to occur as periodic maintenance does not occur in only one year and can be spread over a number of years. It is therefore unlikely that the periodic maintenance will reach that level in any one year. For this reason, it is concluded that the incremental O&M required by the investment in the subprojects can be addressed within the provincial resources. The situation will be further improved if farmers assume some responsibility for this maintenance as is proposed under the new Law.

Annex 5 56

Annex 5.1

Estimation of Economic Prices for Traded and Non-traded Goods

Table A5.1.1: Estimation of Economic Price of Rice

Vietnam: Water Efficiency Improvement in Drought-Affected Provinces

(2017 Constant Viet Nam Dong) 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030

Rice: (Export parity in 2017 currencies)a/

Thailand (current $)a/

$/t 396 385 389 393 397 401 405 409 414 418 422 427 431 436 440

Thailand (constant 2010 $)a/

422 406 400 397 395 392 389 386 383 380 377 374 371 368 365

MUV (2010=1.00)b/

2010 0.94 0.95 0.97 0.99 1.01 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08 1.10 1.12 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14

MUV (2017=1.00)b/

2017 0.99 1.00 1.03 1.04 1.06 1.08 1.10 1.12 1.14 1.16 1.18 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20

Rice FOB Bankok (constant 2017 $) $/t 400 385 379 377 374 371 369 365 363 360 357 355 358 362 366

Quality Adjustmentc/

$/t 360 347 341 339 337 334 332 329 327 324 322 319 322 326 329

Freight, insurance, etc. $/t 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35

CIF Ho Chi Minh City $/t 395 382 376 374 372 369 367 364 362 359 357 354 357 361 364

CIF Ho Chi Minh City in VND d/

'000 VND/t 8,931 8,622 8,506 8,450 8,396 8,344 8,294 8,225 8,177 8,113 8,058 8,005 8,079 8,153 8,228

Freight & handling Saigon to project areae/

'000 VND/t 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429

Conversion to paddyf/

'000 VND/t 5,526 5,325 5,250 5,214 5,179 5,145 5,112 5,067 5,036 4,994 4,958 4,924 4,972 5,021 5,069

Milling chargese/

'000 VND/t 129 129 129 129 129 129 129 129 129 129 129 129 129 129 129

Handling and transport farm to mille/

'000 VND/t 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107

Economic Farmgate Price per tonne '000 VND/t 5,290 5,089 5,014 4,977 4,942 4,909 4,876 4,831 4,800 4,758 4,722 4,688 4,736 4,784 4,833

Economic Farmgate Price per kg '000 VND/kg 5.29 5.09 5.01 4.98 4.94 4.91 4.88 4.83 4.80 4.76 4.72 4.69 4.74 4.78 4.83

a/ WB Commodity Price Projections prepared January 24, 2017 for 2016-2025 and 2030 with 2026-2029 interpolated and post 2030 equal to 2030 prices.

(Thailand, 5% broken, white rice, milled, f.o.b. Bangkok)

b/ Manufacturing Unit Value Index

c/ Adjustment for Quality 10%

d/ Exchange rate of Vietnamese Dong (VND) per $ during in March 2017: 22,600

e/ SCF --- applied on half the amount of handling, tranportation and milling. 0.9

f/ Conversion factor of paddy to rice 65%

Annex 5 57

Table A5.1.2: Estimation of Economic Price of Maize

Vietnam: Water Efficiency Improvement in Drought-Affected Provinces

(2017 Constant Viet Nam Dong) 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030

Maize: (Import parity in 2017 currencies)a/

Maize: Gulf Port (in current $)a/

$/t 159 160 163 167 170 174 178 181 185 189 193 197 202 206 210

Maize: Gulf Port (constant 2010 $)a/

$/t 169 169 168 169 169 170 170 171 171 172 172 173 173 174 174

MUV (2010=1.00)b/

2010 0.94 0.95 0.97 0.99 1.01 1.02 1.05 1.06 1.08 1.10 1.12 1.14 1.16 1.19 1.21

MUV (2017=1.00)b/

2017 0.99 1.00 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08 1.11 1.12 1.14 1.16 1.18 1.21 1.23 1.25 1.27

Maize: Gulf Port (in constant 2017 $) $/t 160 160 159 160 160 161 161 162 162 163 163 164 164 164 165

Frieght and Insurance to Ho Chi Minh City $/t 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50

CIF Ho Chi Minh City $/t 210 210 209 210 210 211 211 212 212 213 213 214 214 214 215

CIF Ho Chi Minh City in VNDc/

'000 VND/t 4,746 4,746 4,725 4,746 4,746 4,767 4,767 4,789 4,789 4,810 4,819 4,827 4,836 4,844 4,853

Storage/marketing margin 5% 237 237 236 237 237 238 238 239 239 241 241 241 242 242 243

Transport to district leveld/

'000 VND/t 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429

Price at district center '000 VND/t 5,413 5,413 5,390 5,413 5,413 5,435 5,435 5,458 5,458 5,480 5,489 5,498 5,507 5,516 5,525

Conversion to farm production (pre-processing) 60% 3,248 3,248 3,234 3,248 3,248 3,261 3,261 3,275 3,275 3,288 3,293 3,299 3,304 3,310 3,315

Less transport from farm and milling costsd/

'000 VND/t 215 215 215 215 215 215 215 215 215 215 215 215 215 215 215

Farmgate price per tonne '000 VND/t 3,033 3,033 3,019 3,033 3,033 3,046 3,046 3,060 3,060 3,073 3,079 3,084 3,090 3,095 3,100

Farmgate price per kg '000 VND/kg 3.03 3.03 3.02 3.03 3.03 3.05 3.05 3.06 3.06 3.07 3.08 3.08 3.09 3.09 3.10

a/ WB Commodity Price Projections prepared January 24, 2017 for 2016-2025 and 2030 with 2026-2029 interpolated and post 2030 equal to 2030 prices.

(U.S. hard red winter, Gulf port)

b/ Manufacturing Unit Value Index

c/ Exchange rate of Vietnamese Dong (VND) per $ during in January 2010: 22,600

d/ SCF --- applied on half the amount of handling, tranportation and milling. 0.9

58 Annex 5

Table A5.1.3: Estimation of Economic Price of Rock Phosphate Fertilizer

Vietnam: Water Efficiency Improvement in Drought-Affected Provinces

(2017 Constant Viet Nam Dong) 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030

(TSP: (in 2010 currencies)a/

TSP: Morocco (in current $)a/

$/t 112 105 106 108 109 111 112 114 115 117 119 120 122 123 125

TSP: Morocco (in constant 2000 $)a/

$/t 119 111 110 109 109 108 108 107 107 106 106 105 105 104 104

MUV (2010=1.00)b/

2010 0.94 0.95 0.96 0.99 1.00 1.03 1.04 1.07 1.07 1.10 1.12 1.14 1.16 1.18 1.20

MUV (2017=1.00)b/

2017 0.99 1.00 1.02 1.05 1.06 1.09 1.10 1.13 1.14 1.17 1.19 1.21 1.23 1.25 1.27

TSP:Casablanca (in constant 2017 $) $/t 113 105 104 103 103 102 102 101 101 100 100 100 99 99 98

Freight and Insurance to Ho Chi Minh City $/t 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50

CIF Ho Chi Minh City $/t 163 155 154 153 153 152 152 151 151 150 150 150 149 149 148

CIF Ho Chi Minh City in VNDc/

'000 VND/t 3,674 3,503 3,482 3,460 3,460 3,439 3,439 3,417 3,417 3,396 3,388 3,379 3,370 3,362 3,353

Handling and transport to district centerd

'000 VND/t 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429

Price at District Center '000 VND/t 4,103 3,932 3,911 3,890 3,890 3,868 3,868 3,847 3,847 3,826 3,817 3,808 3,800 3,791 3,783

Transport and Handling to Farmd/

'000 VND/t 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107

Farmgate price per tonne '000 VND/t 3,996 3,825 3,804 3,782 3,782 3,761 3,761 3,740 3,740 3,718 3,710 3,701 3,693 3,684 3,675

Farmgate price per kg '000 VND/kg 4.00 3.83 3.80 3.78 3.78 3.76 3.76 3.74 3.74 3.72 3.71 3.70 3.69 3.68 3.68

a/ WB Commodity Price Projections prepared January 24, 2017 for 2016-2025 and 2030 with 2026-2029 interpolated and post 2030 equal to 2030 prices.

(70% BPL, contract, f.a.s. Casablanca)

b/ Manufacturing Unit Value Index

c/ Exchange rate of Vietnamese Dong (VND) per $ during in January 2010: 22,600

d/ SCF --- applied on half the amount of handling and tranportation. 0.9

Annex 5 59

Table A5.1.4: Estimation of Economic Price of Urea

Vietnam: Water Efficiency Improvement in Drought-Affected Provinces

(2017 Constant Viet Nam Dong) 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030

(Urea: (in 2017 currencies)a/

Urea: Black Sea (in current $)a/

$/t 199 220 225 231 236 242 248 254 260 266 273 280 286 293 300

Urea: Black Sea (in constant 2010 $)a/

$/t 212 232 232 233 235 236 238 239 241 242 243 245 246 248 249

MUV (2010=1.00)b/

2010 0.94 0.95 0.97 0.99 1.00 1.03 1.04 1.06 1.08 1.10 1.12 1.14 1.16 1.18 1.20

MUV (2017=1.00)b/

2017 0.99 1.00 1.02 1.05 1.06 1.08 1.10 1.12 1.14 1.16 1.18 1.20 1.23 1.25 1.27

Urea: Black Sea (in constant 2017 $) $/t 201 220 220 221 223 224 226 227 229 229 231 232 233 235 236

Freight and Insurance to Ho Chi Minh City $/t 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50

CIF Ho Chi Minh City $/t 251 270 270 271 273 274 276 277 279 279 281 282 283 285 286

CIF Ho Chi Minh City in VNDc/

'000 VND/t 5,673 6,102 6,102 6,123 6,166 6,188 6,231 6,252 6,295 6,316 6,346 6,376 6,406 6,436 6,466

Handling and transport to district centerd

'000 VND/t 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429 429

Price at District Center '000 VND/t 6,103 6,531 6,531 6,553 6,596 6,617 6,660 6,681 6,724 6,746 6,776 6,806 6,836 6,866 6,896

Transport and Handling to Farmd/

'000 VND/t 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107 107

Farmgate price per tonne '000 VND/t 5,995 6,424 6,424 6,445 6,488 6,510 6,553 6,574 6,617 6,638 6,668 6,698 6,728 6,758 6,788

Farmgate price per kg '000 VND/kg 6.00 6.42 6.42 6.45 6.49 6.51 6.55 6.57 6.62 6.64 6.67 6.70 6.73 6.76 6.79

a/ WB Commodity Price Projections prepared January 24, 2017 for 2016-2025 and 2030 with 2026-2029 interpolated and post 2030 equal to 2030 prices.

(Bulk, f.o.b. Black Sea ports)

b/ Manufacturing Unit Value Index

c/ Exchange rate of Vietnamese Dong (VND) per $ during in January 2010: 22,600

d/ SCF --- applied on half the amount of handling and tranportation. 0.9

60 Annex 5

Table A5.1.5: Estimation of Economic Prices

Vietnam: Water Efficiency Improvement in Drought-Affected Provinces

(2017 Constant Viet Nam Dong) 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030

Economica

Outputs

Paddy (Spring) '000 VND/kg 5.3 5.1 5.0 5.0 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.8

Paddy (Autumn) '000 VND/kg 5.3 5.1 5.0 5.0 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.8

Srawb/ '000 VND/kg 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

Maize '000 VND/kg 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1

Dragon Fruit Grade 1 (70% w/o proj., 80% with proj.) '000 VND/kg 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0

Dragon Fruit Grade 2 (20% w/o proj., 30% with proj.) '000 VND/kg 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0

Dragon Fruit Grade 3 (10% w/o proj., nil with proj.) '000 VND/kg 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

Dragon Fruit weighted average w/o proj. '000 VND/kg 12.2 12.2 12.2 12.2 12.2 12.2 12.2 12.2 12.2 12.2 12.2 12.2 12.2 12.2 12.2

Dragon Fruit weighted average with proj. '000 VND/kg 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6 13.6

Dragon Fruit weighted ave. with proj. (incl. switch) '000 VND/kg 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5

Mango (Grade 1 (40% w/o proj., 60% with proj.) '000 VND/kg 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0 72.0

Mango (Grade 1 (40% w/o proj., 30% with proj.) '000 VND/kg 31.5 31.5 31.5 31.5 31.5 31.5 31.5 31.5 31.5 31.5 31.5 31.5 31.5 31.5 31.5

Mango (Grade 1 (20% w/o proj., 10% with proj.) '000 VND/kg 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8

Mango weighted average w/o project. '000 VND/kg 43.6 43.6 43.6 43.6 43.6 43.6 43.6 43.6 43.6 43.6 43.6 43.6 43.6 43.6 43.6

Mango weighted average with project. '000 VND/kg 49.7 49.7 49.7 49.7 49.7 49.7 49.7 49.7 49.7 49.7 49.7 49.7 49.7 49.7 49.7

Mango weighted average with project (with switch) '000 VND/kg 48.5 48.5 48.5 48.5 48.5 48.5 48.5 48.5 48.5 48.5 48.5 48.5 48.5 48.5 48.5

Pepper Grade 1 '000 VND/kg 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0

Pepper Grade 2 '000 VND/kg 130.0 130.0 130.0 130.0 130.0 130.0 130.0 130.0 130.0 130.0 130.0 130.0 130.0 130.0 130.0

Pepper w/o 50% grade 1, 50% grade 2 '000 VND/kg 140.0 140.0 140.0 140.0 140.0 140.0 140.0 140.0 140.0 140.0 140.0 140.0 140.0 140.0 140.0

Pepper with project 65% grade 1, 35% grade 2 '000 VND/kg 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0

Pepper with project (includes switch) '000 VND/kg 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0

Coffee Grade 1 '000 VND/kg 45.5 45.0 44.0 43.1 42.5 41.7 40.9 40.0 39.4 39.0 38.3 37.5 36.8 36.1 35.4

Coffee Grade 2 '000 VND/kg 36.4 36.0 35.2 34.5 34.0 33.3 32.7 32.0 31.5 31.2 30.6 30.0 29.5 28.9 28.3

Coffee weighted average w/o (.5 gr.1, .5 gr 2) '000 VND/kg 41.0 40.5 39.6 38.8 38.2 37.5 36.8 36.0 35.5 35.1 34.4 33.8 33.2 32.5 31.9

Coffee weighted average with (.65 gr 1, .35 gr. 2) '000 VND/kg 42.3 41.9 41.0 40.1 39.5 38.8 38.0 37.2 36.6 36.2 35.6 34.9 34.3 33.6 32.9

Coffee weighted ave. with project (incl. switch) '000 VND/kg 42.3 41.9 41.0 40.1 39.5 38.8 38.0 37.2 36.6 36.2 35.6 34.9 34.3 33.6 32.9

Cashew '000 VND/kg 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0

Inputs

Rice seed '000 VND/kg 6.3 6.1 6.0 6.0 5.9 5.9 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.7 5.7 5.6 5.7 5.7 5.8

Maize seed '000 VND/kg 58.5 58.5 58.5 58.5 58.5 58.5 58.5 58.5 58.5 58.5 58.5 58.5 58.5 58.5 58.5

Coffee cuttings (poly bag) '000 VND/kg 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0

Manure '000 VND/T 720.0 720.0 720.0 720.0 720.0 720.0 720.0 720.0 720.0 720.0 720.0 720.0 720.0 720.0 720.0

Foliat Fetilizer spray '000 VND/pole 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0

Rock Phosphate '000 VND/kg 4.0 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7

NPK Special (16:16:8) '000 VND/kg 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0

NPK Special (20:20:15) '000 VND/kg 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0

Liquid ferrtilizer for leaf '000 VND/kg 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0

Liquid fertilizer '000 VND/kg 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0 33.0

Organic Fertilizer '000 VND/kg 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3

Magnesium Sulphate '000 VND/kg 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 18.0

Gypsum/Limestone '000 VND/kg 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5

Urea '000 VND/kg 6.0 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.5 6.5 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.7 6.7 6.7 6.8 6.8

Mulch material '000 VND/roll 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0 27.0

Fungicide '000 VND/lt 1,500.0 1,500.0 1,500.0 1,500.0 1,500.0 1,500.0 1,500.0 1,500.0 1,500.0 1,500.0 1,500.0 1,500.0 1,500.0 1,500.0 1,500.0

Ínsecticide '000 VND/unit 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0

Herbicide - Glyphosate '000 VND/lt 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0

Pole '000 VND/each 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0

Pump '000 VND/each 3,000.0 3,000.0 3,000.0 3,000.0 3,000.0 3,000.0 3,000.0 3,000.0 3,000.0 3,000.0 3,000.0 3,000.0 3,000.0 3,000.0 3,000.0

Sprayer '000 VND/pole 2,260.0 2,260.0 2,260.0 2,260.0 2,260.0 2,260.0 2,260.0 2,260.0 2,260.0 2,260.0 2,260.0 2,260.0 2,260.0 2,260.0 2,260.0

Electricity (without subsidy)b

'000 VND/kwh 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

Fuel '000 VND/lt 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0

Labor (Du Du) '000 VND/day 225.0 225.0 225.0 225.0 225.0 225.0 225.0 225.0 225.0 225.0 225.0 225.0 225.0 225.0 225.0

Labor (Dak Lak) '000 VND/day 157.5 157.5 157.5 157.5 157.5 157.5 157.5 157.5 157.5 157.5 157.5 157.5 157.5 157.5 157.5

Labor (Khanh Hoa) '000 VND/day 153.0 153.0 153.0 153.0 153.0 153.0 153.0 153.0 153.0 153.0 153.0 153.0 153.0 153.0 153.0

a/ Economic prices are as derived in Tables 1 and 2 above and (for other items) adjusting the financial prices by the SCF.

b/ A 10% existing public subsidy of electricity prices is indicated in "Fossil Fule Fiscal Policies and Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Vietnam", p. 26, Hanoi, 2012. For an economic price of electricity this subsidy amount has been added to the financial price.

61 Annex 6

Annex 6

SUBPROJECT PICTURES

Tan My Weir

6th March 2017

Steel Supply Pipeline Crossing over Song Cai River from right to left bank, 5km downstream of

Tan My Weir, 6th March 2017

Phuoc Trung Reservoir, North of Command Area, 6th

March 2017 Command Area – scrub bush used for grazing, 6th

March 2017

Quality top soil being imported and spread in farm in

command area, 6th March 2017 Thanh Son Reservoir inside Command Area, 6th

March 2017