Water for a food-secure world IFAD agricultural water management investments in “challenging...

Water for a food-secure world

IFAD agricultural water management investments in “challenging contexts”: IFAD

context, commonalities across countries, & recommendations

June 2012Douglas J Merrey

Consultant to IWMI

Water for a food-secure worldWater for a food-secure world

Overview

• The IWMI Project on water management in “challenging contexts”

• IFAD’s organization: structure, culture, reforms• Case studies: Analytical framework• Common findings• Recommendations & way forward


Improving Sustainability of Impacts of Agricultural Water Management Interventions

in Challenging Contexts• “Challenging”: post-conflict, weak institutions• 5 countries (Nepal, Sri Lanka, Ethiopia, Burkina

Faso, Ghana)– Case studies of IFAD AWM investment projects– Fieldwork, analysis, development of guidelines,

recommendations, training modules

• Goal: Help IFAD improve project quality


IFAD Context• Investments target agricultural development

for lifting people out of poverty– Next 3 years: $4.6B to lift 80m people– Rhetorical emphasis: improve equity, gender,

“learning organization”– Recent analysis—Significant scaling up of AWM

investments in recent COSOPs: +/-25% of total investments

– Does IFAD have the technical capacity to support this level of investment?


Observations-IFAD• IFAD reform process: decentralization of

responsibility to CPMs [& CPMs to countries]– Direct responsibility for policy dialogue, planning,

implementation at program & project level• Replaces contracting out eg, to World Bank, UNOPS• Dependence on consultants—”intellectual capital” and

pathway to influencing IFAD investments

– Weak technical support from HQ• PTA as “the enemy”—quality reviews of new projects at

a late stage: “gatekeeper”• Process to change this—IWMI project contributes


Defining context…

SYSTEM OF

STUDY

CONTEXT(local and macro)

Targeted communityTargeted resourceAWM interventionImplementing agencyFunding agencyRecipient government

Institutional contextBiophysical contextPolitical-economic contextCultural contextDiscursive contextExternal actors

OUTCOMES

Livelihood improvementSustainaibilityFairness& legitimacyAdaptabilityResilienceAgricultural growth


Analytical Framework


Broad Challenges from Research

• Partial and poorly directed ‘community’ participation and buy-in

• Poor communication: within donor agencies and between projects and government implementers

• Unbalanced attention to ‘hardware’ than ‘software’• Lack of downward accountability [ie, to clients]• Weaknesses in design, supervision and monitoring• Not multi-sectoral—work in sectoral “silos”


Broad Challenges cont’d• Inadequate technical support– Lack of expertise for using community driven development

approaches– Poor integration with other project components

(marketing)

• Limited implementation of laws and policies• Gender inequity• Weak local institutions [elite capture]


Design & Implementation• Project design: well crafted on paper, but goals fail to

match reality; proposal design team external; weak consultative/participatory approach

• No continuity design to implementation team• Infrastructure design and construction: often faulty;

challenges in personnel capacity – few well-trained engineers

• Supervision focuses in financial & physical progress not achieving project goals [poverty, livelihoods, equity]


Delays

• Start-ups extremely slow: bureaucratic process; funds disbursement; changes in costs

• Politicization of project: taints procurement; tendering; implementation;

• Capacity challenges on part of local government project staff to meet project criteria


Operation & maintenance, sustainability, productivity

• Community hand-over and ownership• Funds for maintenance insufficient• Training/capacity • Disengagement after hand-over

Lack of sustained productivity


Recommendations • Project design include adequate time and

funds for capacity building• Project design process should be more

consultative – with national programs and with communities– “Ownership” at national, local government,

community levels

• Promote multi-sectoral involvement in design & implementation


Recommendations

• Find solutions to recurring problems – – Capture and share lessons learned– Learning process should be built into projects– Improve KM across projects, countries, regions

• Invest in strengthening local institutions– Engage with government, stakeholders– Training on engaging with communities and adapting

project design and implementation to local context


Recommendations• Test new approaches to address gender and

other social equity issues: more than quotas• Design mechanisms for more downward

accountability– M&E– Stronger role of FO in contracting for infrastructure

• Build on existing institutions & knowledge• Continued and targeting engagement after

hand-over


Way forward• Strengthen capacity of regular consultants—

IFAD “intellectual capital”– Consultant roster under development—intended

to support CPMs and projects– IWMI learning module on community

engagement-to be tested in Nepal, Ghana– IWMI & PTA--Major Consultant Learning Event

planned for November in Rome• Promote innovative types of investments


Thank you!

Water for a food-secure world IFAD agricultural water management investments in “challenging...

Documents

Transcript of Water for a food-secure world IFAD agricultural water management investments in “challenging...