World Bank Documentdocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/698781468041390940/pdf/multi... · Actual...

Document of

The World Bank

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Report No. 6800

PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT

INDIA

BIHAR AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION AND RESEARCH PROJECT

CREDIT 761-IN

May 29, 1987

Project; DepartmentSouth Asia Regional Office

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance oftheir official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

PROJECT COMYLETION REPOR'

INDIA

BIHAR AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION AND RESEARCH PROJECT(CREDIT 761-IN)

Abbreviations and Acronyms

ADA - Additional Director of AgricultureAEO - Agricultural Extension OfficerAO - Agricultural OfficerARF - Adaptive Research Farm (DOA)BAERP - Bihar Agricultural Extension and Research ProjectBAU - Birsa Agricultural UniversityDA - Director of AgricultureDAO - District Agricultural OfficerDy. DAO - Deputy DAODDA - Deputy Director of AgricultureFTS - Field Trial StationsGDk' - Gross Domestic ProductGOB - Government of BiharGOI - Government of IndiaIDA - International Development AssociationJDA - Joint Director of AgricultureX - Million(s)il&E - Monitoring and EvaluationNAN? - National Agricultural Extension ProjectNARJ? - National Agricultural Research ProjectNDO - World Bank New Delhi OfficeNEC - North-Eastern Councilk'CR - Project Completion ReportFWD - Public Works DepartmentRAU - Rajendra Agricultural UniversitySARC - State Adaptive Research CommitteeSAU - State Agricultural UniversitySMS - Subject Matter Specialists'T&V - Training and Visit System of ExtensionVLEW - Village Level Extension WorkerWE - World Bank

FOR OFFICIL USE ONLYTHE WORLD BANKWashington, D.C. 20433

U.S.A.

Offike ot SctwrtvC.waiOperatic"s IValuuamuni

May 29, 1987

MEMORANDUM TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS AND THE PRESIDENT

SUBJECT: Project Completion Report on India:Bihar Agricultural Extension and Research Project(Credit 761-IN)

Attached, for information, is a copy of the report entitled'Project Completion Report: India Bihar Agricultural Extension andResearch Project (Credit 761-IN)" prepared by the FAO/IBRD CooperativeProgram in collaboration with the Department of Agriculture, Bihar,and submitted to OED by the South Asia Regional Office. Furtherevaluation of this project by the Operations Evaluation Department hasnot been made.

Rem K. Chopra

for Yves Rovani

Attachment

This document has* restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performanceof their offial duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Dank authorintion.

FOR OMCIAL USE ONLY


INDIA


Table of Contents

Pa&e No.

Preface .............................. .......................... iBasic Data Sheet ................ ....iEvaluation Summary ................................... v

I. INTRODUCTION * ........ ewe. *.. *.o.*o.......0.00......000000...1

II. THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR .................. ........ .. ,0 1Agriculture in India ..... oo000000 .0......0 1Agriculture in Bihar 00009000000 *.........000.............. 2

III. PROJECT FORMULATION ... *......................... 3Origin ... 0 3Project Appraisal .. 0.0.................... 3Goals and Targets 000.0...000000000000000.00000....@O 4General Description of the Project ..... ................. 4Project Components 00....... 000000 00000000000 000000000.... 4

IV. IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATING PERFORMANCE .................. 6Start-up .06000000000000.. . 6Revisions ................. . 6Overall Performance .. 0000 *** . 6Physical Implementation ................... 0.0.00.0 7Procurement .... 7........................... .......00 7Institutiornl Improvement and Operating Performance .**.. 8Input Supply and Marketing ..................... e..... 14Routine Project Reporting ............................... 14

V. PROJECT COSTS AND FINANCING ......... 15Project Costs . .... 0..0.*...........*...... 0 15Credit Allocation and Disbursements ..... ................ 15Financial Management *00000000000000000000. 0 ....0 .. 16

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performanceof their official duties, Its coitents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

VI. ASSESSMAENT OF IMPACT ... ............ 16Impact on Production ...... *.. ................ ... .. ..... 16Institutional Impact ................. , 19

VII. BANK PERFORMANCE 19...................................... ... 19

VIII. CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED .. o .......... ....... O.. 19Project Justification and Objectives .... ................ 19Project Content and Scheduling .......................... 20Project Formulation and Operating Outcomes .............. 20Evaluation of Implementation and Outcomes ............... 20

TABLES

1. Key Indicators2. Progress of Ci-.il Works Activities, Units Completed3. List of Vehicles and E-uipment Procured4. Staffing Progress5. Number of Persons Trained Per Year - Extension6. Equipment Procured: Adaptive Research Component7. Staffing of Adaptive Research8. Project Reporting9. List of Publications of the Monitoring and Evaluation Cell

10. Estimate of Annual Workload of Monitoring and Evaluation Staffin Staffdays

11. 1894-85 Work Plan for Monitoring and Monitoring-cum-EvaluationSurveys and Special Studies

12. Results of M&E Surveys: Farmer Awareness of T&V System13. Results of M&E Surveys: Rate of Adoption of Recovaendations14. Monitoring Surveys: Reasons for Partial or Non-Adoption of

Recommendations15. Relationship between Yield Rate and Visits16. Expenditure Statement Under World Bank Agricultural Extension Project17. Project Costs: Comparative Analysis18. Schedule of Disbursement (as of March 15. 1985)19. Yields of Major Crops: Annual. Five-year Moving Average of Index20. Change of Cropping Pattern Under Extension in Bihar (from 2 to 5 crops)21. List of Technologies Generated and Recommended for Adoption of Farmers22. Crop Production

ANNEX I - Comments of the Government of India on the Final Draft ProjectCompletion Report for the Bihar Agricultural Extension andResearch Project (Credit 761-IN)

MAP: IBRD No. 12926R

- i -


INDIA

BIHAR AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION AND WM=ARC PROJEC(CREDIT 761-IN)

Preface

This to the Project Completion Report (PCR) of the Bihar AgriculturalExtension and Research Project, for which Credit 761-IN was approved onDecember 27, 1977 in the amount of US$8.0 million. The Credit was closed onMarch 31, 1985, 2 years and 5 months behind schedule; an unused balance ofUS$3.83 million equivalent was cancelled. The date of final disbursementwas August 23, 1985.

The PCR was prepared by E%.^T,BRD Cooperative Program in collaborationwith the Department of Agriculture, Bihar, following a mission to that statein March 1985. and is based on a review of the Staff Appraisal Report (No.1754a-IN of December 14. 1977), the Credit Agreement of January 6, 1978,correspondence with the Borrower, internal Bank memoranda on project issuesas contained in relevant Bank files, as well as interviews with officialsboth in the Bank and in India who have been associated with the project.

A copy of the draft report was sent to the Borrower on March 6, 1987for comments. Comments received from the Borrower have been incorporated andare attached as Annex 1.

This project has not been subjected to an audit by OED.

- Li -

PROWECT COMPLETION REPORT

INDIA

BIHAR AGRICULTURAL iXTENSION AND RESEARCH PROJ(CTtC"EDIT 761-IN)

BASIC DATA SHEET

KEY PROJECT DATAActual as %

Appraisal of AppraisalEstimate Actual Estimate

Total Project Cost (US$ million) 16.0 32.7 204Credit Amount (US$ million) 8.0 4.17 52Amount Cancelled (US$ million) - 3.83Date of Board Approval 12/77 12/27/77Date of Effectiveness 3/31/78 5/2/71 134 LaClosing Date 10/31/83 3/21,'85 12.4 LInstitutional Performance FairNumber of Beneficiaries 7.6 3.8 50

(million farm families)

STAFF INPUT Lb-Y77 FY78 FY79 FY80 FY81 FY82 FY83 FY84 FY85 FY86 Total

Negotiations - 4.8 - - - - - - - - 4.8Identification/

Preparation 1.2 2.1 - - - - - - - - 3.3Appraisal - 4.7 - - - - - - - - 4.7Supervision - 1.6 11.4 5.8 4.1 1.0 8.4 16.3 6.3 15.6 79.5

CUMULATIVE DISBURSEMENTS

FY79 FY80 FY81 FY82 FY83 FY84 FY85 FY86

Appraisal Estimate (US$ Million) 0.3 1.6 2.8 4.5 6.8 8.0 - -Actual (US$ Million) - 0.61 0.89 1.33 2.19 2.78 3.93 4.17Actual as X of Estimate - 38 32 30 32 35 49 52Date of Final Disbursement August 23, 1985

- iii -

MISSION DATA

Date No. of Specialization PerformanceMission (mo/yr) Persons Represented Rating Trend Problems

Identification /c 9/76 /e /f /A /hPreparation /Appraisal 4/77 4 Ecn/Res/Ext(2)Supervision I 6/78 2 Ecn/Ext 3 2 PSupervision II 12/78 2 Ecn/Ext 3 1 PSupervision III 6/79 2 kcn/Sxt 3 2 PSupervision IV 10/79 2 Ecn/Ext 3 2 PSupervision V 5/81 2 Ecn/Ext 3 2 PSupervision VI 11/81 Agr/Ext/Res 3 2 PSupervision VII 5/82 Ext (2) 3 1 M.PSupervision VIII 1/83 Ext (2) 3 2 M.TSupervision IX 9/83 3 Ext/Agr (2) 3 1 MTSupervision X 3/84 3 Agr/Ext (2) 3 2 M,TSupervision XI 9/84 3 Agr(2)/Ext/(Fin) 3 2 MTSupervision XII 2/85 2 Agr/Ext 3 2 M.TCompletion 3/85 2

OTHER PROJECT DATA

Borrc. r: Government of IndiaExecuting Agency: Government of BiharFollow-on Project: Special Sub-Project under National Agricultural Extension Proj. III

Credit No. 1754-INAmount (US$ million: 9.00 out of total credit of 85.00 millionApproval Date: 11-20-86

Fiscal Year: April 1 - March 31Name of Currency (abbreviation): Indian Rupees (Rs)Currency Exchange Rate:

Appraisal Year Average: 1977 US$1.00 - Rs 9.00Intervening Years Ave.: 1977-84 US$1.00 - Rs 8.80Completion Year Average: 1985 US$1.00 - Rsl2.00

/a Calculated in .erms of months from oate of Board approval./b Input as staff weeks. Source: World Bank Planning and Budgeting Department.Ic As a result of Agricultural Sector Survey of Eastern Region States of India

(Report No. 1440-IN)./d Prepared by Government of Bihar assisted by NDO./e Ecn = Economist; Res = Research Expert; Ext = Extension Specialist;

Fin = financial Analyst./f 1 = Problem-free or minor problems; 2 = Moderate problems; 3 = Major problems.LR =. Improving; 2 = Stationary: 3 = Deteriorating./h L = Political; M = Managerial; T = Technical.

- iv -


INDIA


EVALUATION SUMMAJY

Introduction

The Eastern Region, comprising the States of Assam, West Bengal,Bihar, Orissa and Eastern Uttar Pradesh, is India's major rice growing area.Most of the region has moderate to heavy monsoon rains and large areas ofrelatively alluvial soils. Yet foodgrain yields are generally lower thanelsewhere in India and production has barely kept pace with population. Witha view to accelerating foodgrain production, the Government of India and theWorld Bank agreed to undertake a joint review of the Eastern Region to assessagricultural potential and identify critical constraints. This resulted inthe Eastern States Foodgrain Review of 1976 and it was agreed to give specialemphasis to the development of agricultural projects. The Bihar AgriculturalExtension and Research Project was the fourth in the region. followingsimilar projects in Assam, Orissa and West Bengal.

Objectives

The principal goal of the project was to provide a sound foundationfor the long-term development of extension services and adaptive researchactivities in order to increase agricultural production especially amongsmall scale farmers. The objective was appropriate at that time and remainsrelevant today. Over a period of five years, the project was to extend thetraining and visit methodology of extension in the entire state, improveextension training facilities, develop and strengthen adaptive agriculturalresearch, and establish a Monitoring and Evaluation Cell to monitor theprogress of the project.

Implementation Experience

The project was designed to bring the benefits of improved extensionand research to the entire state. lhe envisaged institutional transformationhas been only partly met. The project achieved little progress during itsinitial years. There was delay in sanctioning funds and also the totalbudget provided was inadequate for full implementation of the program.However. project implementation improved from late 1982 following recognitionby Government of Bihar of the advantages of effective agricultural extensionservice, and its commitment to the project's success. However, implementa-tion never caught up with the planned schedule. The project formulation

-v -

seriously underestimated the magnitude of administrative problems related tochanges within the civil service. The project did not recognize the time itwould take to introduce and consolidate a major reorganization within theexisting institutions, with the result that many planned posts of VEW. AEOand SMS remained unfilled through the project period.

The project objective of institutional development was achieved onlyin 16 districts of the State. Project implementation suffered from poorinternal supervision which was largely due to staffing shortfalls. Substan-tial delays occurred in respect of civil works; there was considerable short-fall in the number of houses, offices and stores constructed. The shortfallwas partly because no advance action was taken to select sites and partlybecause of delayed and inadequate funding. The routine training activitiesof T&V system were properly followed. However, the quality of trainingsuffered from lack of adequately trained SMSso. Apart from the routine train-ing, other special training of SMS, AEO and VEW was not planned systemati-cally. However, the State Department of Agriculture has lately recognizedthat the quality of training should be improved and the follow-on projectwould pay particular attention to training. Implementution of agriculturalresearch program proceeded satisfactorily. Research has been stepped up inthe Department of Agriculture, with emphasis on adapting technologies tofarming situations. Final project costs are above appraisal estimates, Rs.279 million against estimate of Rs. 144 million, which were mainly due toincreased salaries. As only 10 of salaries were reimbursable, the totalproject costs situation was very different from the reimbursement situation.

Results

No economic rate of return calculation was prepared for theseprojects at appraisal or at completion. It is still too early in the courseof project implementation to expect a fully reliable measure of projectimpact. The comparison of yield data for cereals, pulses and oilseeds col-lected by GOB of pre-project and project years did not indicate a clearlysignificant impact of the project. An apparent impact of the project hasbeen the change in cropping pattern. which has been observed to follow thelines of extension recommendations., The main trends noted were: increase incash crop area (mainly potatoes), sad emphasis on rabi crops (black and greengram and wheat). However it is difficult to measure the impact of extensionon yields as the causality cannot be clearly established in view of the manynon-project factors. The M&E surveys, however, indicated a positive responseof farmers to extension advice and the yield obtained by such farmers washigher than those who did not receive extension advice.

Sustainability

The training and visit system has proved as an appropriate vehiclefor technology transfer; as a result of its introduction, new agronomic

- vi -

practices are found to spread more quickly than before. The greatest con-straint to sustainability is in respect of administrative and operationalproblems which have been clearly identified, and for which solutions aregenerally known. Strong commitment by the state government is essential toensure that those problems are effectively tackled and sufficient funding isprovided by the state. The state government has indicated its full commit-ment to the T&V system, and qualitative improvements would be made in thefollow-on project (special subproject under the National Agriculture Exten-sion Project III).

Findings and Lessons

The project objectives of institutional development in terms ofdeveloping a framework of extension were achieved only in part of the state.The build-up of operational capability was much slower than planned. Thetime it would take to introduce and consolidate major reorganization in theexisting and already strong institutions was, in retrospect, too optimisti-cally assessed. Extension alone is only one of the contributing factors toincreased production, and the project would have a significant impact onagricultural productivity only after considerable further institutionalimprovement and manpower development have occurred under the follow-onproject, and with simultaneous improvements in other support services, suchas input supplies, water management and irrigation.

- 1 -


INDIA


I. INTRODUCTION

1.1 The Eastern Region, comprising the States of Assam, Bihar, Orissa,West Bengal and Eastern Uttar Pradesh, is India's major rice growing area.Most of the region has moderate to heavy monsoon rains and large areas ofrelatively fertile alluvial soils, and tuiere is a large unexploited surfaceand ground water resource. Yet, foodgrain yields are generally lower thanelsewhere in India; production has barely kept pace with population growthand most indicators of social and economic development are lower than for therest of India. Around 1974, special emphasis was given to the development ofagricultural projects in the Eastern Region States, aimed at achieving quickincreases in foodgrain production while paying particular attention toproblems faced by small farmers.

1.2 One such project was the Bihar Agricultural Extension and ResearchProject (BAERP). The core of the project was to reorganize and strengthenthe agricultural extension service and related adaptive research throughoutthe state.

1.3 The estimated total project cost was US$16.01 M of which US$8.0 Mwould be an IDA Credit.

1.4 Information sources used for the PCR include: the BAERP AppraisalReport (No. 1754a-IN of December 14, 1977) and all BAERP supervision missionreports; related World Bank (WB) reports for Bihar and other states; cor-respondence and information files of the World Bank New Delhi Office (NDO);and discussions with farmers, local government officials, NDO staff andproject staff during a field visit in August 1985.

II. THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR

Agriculture in India

2.1 India has a population of about 750 N (198i), growing at 2.1%annually. The total land surface is some 3.7 M km , of which 49Z is cultiv-able and 11X irrigated. National income has grown at nearly 4% per annumsince 1950. Agriculture is the dceinant sector and engages about 70X of thelabor force, contributes 40% of GNP and accounts for 60% of total exports.

-2-

During the past 15 yeats, GOI development plans gave priority to agricultureand sought to raise food grain production by increasing the use of irriga-tion, fertilizers, plant protection chemicals, and seeds of improvedvarieties. In support of this objective, the agricul&ural credit institu-tionts were strengthened and irrigation development eas accelerated. From themid-seventies, increasing attention was given to establishing improved exten-sion services and upgrading the related research capabilities.

2.2 Since 1960, per capita income has risen at an annual rate of 1.5%reaching US$270 in 1985. Foodgrain production has grown at about 2.3%annually, sightly exceeding the rate of growth of population. Living condi-tions in the cities and among landowners have improved considerably.However, for the rural and urban poor, which comprise around 50% of totalpopulation, there has been little change in living conditions. Consequently,GOI is emphasizing the need to raise the growth rate of agricultural outputfrom 2.3 to 3% per annum, in an effort to cope with the growing populationand to improve the lot of the poorest. Much of this increases will have tocome from rainfed agriculture, and an effective agricultural extension serv-ice is considered to be a necessary vehicle to achieve this.

Agriculture in Bihar 1/

2.3 Bihar in 1985, has about 73 M inhabitants, having risen from the lastcensus of 69.8 M in 1981; it has a total land surface area of 174,000 km2.Population growth is some 2.4% annually (1971-81); about 13% of the popula-tion are scheduled tribes and castes. The net cultivated area is about8.5 M ha, or 49% of the total surface area. Agriculture is the predominantindustry. The state has just over 8 M farm families with an average farmsize of 1.1 ha. Some 73% of the farms are less than 1 ha. The croppingintensity of paddy areas is about 130%; 34% of the net cultivated area isirrigated. The per capita income in 1980/81 to 1982/83 was Rs 1,986 comparedto the all-India average of Rs 1,724. In terms of agricultural income gener-ated per unit area, Bihar is about average among all states, with Rs 2,500per ha (1982).

2.4 From May to September the climate of Bihar is humid--tropical in theplains but cooler in the hills. Mean daily temperatures vary from 10 degreesCentigrade in January to over 38 degrees Centigrade in May. The rainfall is1,200 to 1,600 mm/year, (average 1,272 mm) with 75% concentrated between Mayto September.. However, supplementary irrigation can contribute to higheryields. Floods in the river valleys are frequent.

1/ Data Sources: Center for Monitoring Indian Economy, Economic Intel-ligence Unit, Bombay: "Agricultural production in India" 1985.

-3-

2.5 Paddy is the main cereal crop with some 7 M ha (44% of gross croppedarea) followed by wheat with 0.8 M ha (201) and maize with 9%. Of other foodcrops, oilseeds (rape, mustard, linseed), are important. Sugarcane, juteand potatoes cover 4% of total area and may be considered major cash crops.

III. PROJECT FORMULATION

Origin

3.1 Soon after independence, GOI began sponsoring a number of programsdesigned to meet the need for more effective agricultural development: theCommunity Development Programs in 1952, National Extension Service Blocks in1953, Intensive Agricultural District Programs in 1960, Intensive Agricul-tural Area Programs in 1963-64, Small and Marginal Farmers DevelopmentProgram in 1969-70. Despite their proliferation, these programs covered onlya small proportion of the farms, generally the wealthier.

3.2 Fifth Plan agricultural production targets looked to the EasternRegion to provide around half of India's increased foodgrain productionduring the plan period, although it was recognized that, because of theunusually severe constraints to development in the region, a concentratedeffort would be needed to realize the full potential.

3.3 In November 1974, GOI and WB agreed to undertake a joint review ofthe Eastern Region comprising Assam, Bihar, Orissa, West Bengal and easternUttar Pradesh, to assess agricultural potential, identify critical con-straints and ascertain the opportunities to accelerate foodgrain production.This resulted in the Eastern States Foodgrain Review of 1976 and it wasagreed to give special emphasis to.the development of agricultural projects.

3.4 The BAERP was the fourth such project to be formulated in the region,following similar projects in Assam, Orissa and West Bengal and was the sixthIDA-supported agricultural extension and research project in India. 'Theproject was intended to achieve quick increases in foodgrain production. Theextension component was designed to address particularly the problems ofsmall farmers. Experience of the training and visit system (T&V) had beenobtained in India through pilot projects in the Rajasthan Canal Command AreaDevelopment Project" and the "Chambal Command Area Development Project" in1974/75.

Project Appraisal

3.5 The project was prepared by the Government on Bihar (GOB). A WorldBank mission visited Bihar in April 1977, resulting in Appraisal ReportNo. 1754a-IN dated December 14, 1977.

-4-

Goals and Targets

3.6 The immediate target was to achieve early and sustained improvementsin crop production by revitalizing, reorganizing and intensifying agricul-tural extension activities in the T&V pattern. The project was to be phasedover five years and cover the whole state. The short-term strategy was toclose the gap between the technology already practiced by better farmers andthat of the majority of farmers.

3.7 Improvement in production was to be attained by the introduction ofnew technologies to be developed through the adaptive research componentwhich aimed to evaluate, test and modify technologies developed by RajendraAgricultural University (RAU) and its substations.

3.8 Overall, the primary aim of the project was to achieve a long-term,statewide, integrated development of institutions and practices dealing withagricultural extension and leading to increase agricultural production.

General Description of the Project

3.9 The five-year project provided for:

- Reorganization and strengthening of the agricultural extensionservice by provision of additional staff, housing, equipment,vehicles and staff training*

- Development and strengthening of adaptive research by provision ofadditional staff, vehicles, simple farm buildings and equipment, and

- Project monitoring and evaluation by provision of staff, equipment,transport and funds for studies.

Project Components

3.10 Extension. By the introduction of T&V system throughout the state,farmers were to be provided, on a regular and systematic basis, withup-to-date advice on farming practices best suited to their specific condi-tions, especially proven practices having immediate impact on production.Preconditions for introducing T&V were the establishment of single line ofcommand from the Director of Agriculture (DA) to the Village Level ExtensionWorkers (VLEWS) and the transfer to the Directorate of Agriculture (DOA) ofmost existing village level multipurpose workers and merging them with otherredeployed DOA staff into a unified extension service employed exclusivelyfor agricultural extension.

3.11 Additional staff were to be provided to achieve staffing patternsin accordance with T&V norms (based on one VLEW for every 850 farm families),enabling the extension service to interact closely with selected contact

-5-

farmers, who woulc comprise about one-tenth of all crop farmers. Additionalstaff appointments were to be made to achieve these norms. Extension mes-sages communicated to farmers were to be simple and relevant to seasonalaspects of the area's crops and initially they were to emphasize low-costimproved cultural practices. Introduction of higher cost inputs and prac-tices were to be followed at a later stage. Visit programs of VLEWs, super-visory staff patterns, and training and technical support of all extensionstaff, were to be in accordance with T&V methodology. 1/

3.12 To assist extension staff to maintain the required regular and fre-quent farm visits, field staff were to be encouraged to rent housing withintheir work areas; also suitably sited houses were to be constructed for 25%of field-level staff. Loans for motorcycle and bicycle purchases were to bemade available for appropriate levels of field staff and additional vehiclesprovided at headquarters, district and sub-divisional levels. Incrementalvehicle operating costs were to be provided, along with staff travellingallowances, with sufficient incentives for purchase and utilization of cyclesand motorcycles.

3.13 In order to strengthen field supervision and technical support, andto further decentralize extension activities, all sub-divisions were to beprovided with additional staff.

3.14 The project was to support training of both new and existing staff,by providing attendance costs for orientation, seasonal, foundation andspecial short courses, and scholarships for advanced training of selectedstaff.

3.15 Research. The project was to improve the adaptive research programin order to provide practical answers to farmers' problems and to evolvetechnological packages of practices adapted to local conditions. It was tofocus on main crops, especially those grown under rainfed conditions, and toconcentrate on developing low-cost practices. Particular attention was to bepaid to soil and water management (including conservation), cvltural prac-tices, use of good quality seeds and also to cropping patterns.

3.16 The Field Experiments Service, to be renamed the Adaptive ResearchService (ARS) of the DOA, was to assume responsibility for the adaptiveresearch program; it was to be strengthened and headed by a suitablyqualified senior officer of the Department of Agriculture. In addition, 36government-owned seed farms, to be known as Adaptive Research Farms (ARF),located throughout all 31 districts, were to be provided with additionalfacilities for field experimentation.

1/ Agricultural Extension: Training and Visit System (World Bank, 1977,revised 1983).

-6-

3.17 The project was to construct a small office/field laboratory at eachof the 36 farms. A small quantity of farm equipment specifically for use ofthe adaptive research program and transport for supervisors of the fieldtrials program was to be provided. Field staff were also to be eligible formotorcycle and bicycle loans. In addition, incremental staff salaries,allowances and field operating expenses were to be provided. Professionalstaff of ARS was to be increased and additional support staff assigned atARFs.

3.18 Monitoring and Evaluation. An M&E unit was to be created in the DOAto carry out sample surveys and special studies which were to provide infor-mation needed for day-to-day project management and longer term policyplanning.

IV. IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATING PERFORMANCE

Start-up

4.1 The Credit was approved by the Board on December 17, 1977 and signedon June 1, 1978. It was declared effective on May 2, 1978, although GOB'ssanction for its first phase of implementation in five districts was formallyaccorded only in September 1978. However, the project only started fully inearly 1979, due to an apparent lack of commitment among senior officials.The start of the M&E component was delayed until 1983, due to difficulties inposting key personnel and other supporting staff.

Revision

4.2 No formal change was made in the project design. However, up until1984, only 16 out of the total of 31 districts were covered under theproject. This resulted in a revision of targets relating to VLEWs, AEOs,SAOs, etc., and also to civil works and vehicles. The revision was agreed onbetween GOB and NDO, although no change was made in the Credit Agreement.The original project closing date was October 1983, however it was extendedtwice, first by one year to October 1984, and later by six months toMarch 31, 1985.

Overall Performance

4.3 Extension anid Research. The project achieved little progress duringits initial years. There was a delay in sanctioning funds for the firstphase. Also, the budget provided was inadequate for full implementation ofthe program. This situation, however, eased from 1982-83 onwards followingrecognition by Government of Bihar of the advantage of an effective agricul-tural extension service and its commitment to the project success. Govern-ment of Bihar took a number of actions including sanctioning and filling of

-7-

vacant staff positions, initiating efforts to organize and improve fieldextension and training activities. However, implementation never caught upwith the planned schedule.

4.4 Although most of the physical targets were eventually revised, par-ticularly due to the delay resulting from inadequate provision of budget,project progress remained slow because of administrative and proceduraldelays. However, at the time of project completion, a structural andinstitutional framework for future development is in place and there areindications that impact targets could be achieved in the future.

Physical Implementation

4.5 Civil Works. Originally, the responsibility for civil works wasproposed to be vested with the Public Works Department of COB. The initialamount released was Rs 0.54 M for 1979/80. However, the PWD was notenthusiastic to take up the construction of small civil works in remoteareas.

4.6 In rural areas, construction was also delayed because no advanceaction was taken to select sites. Delays were also caused by late sanction-ing of funds and cement shortages. DOA, however, took special action byallocating sites for staff houses on their own farms and this step generallyhelped, so that the non-availability of proper sites, experienced during theearlier years, was to some extent resolved. Later, GOB agreed that construc-tion could be undertaken up by the Rural Engineering Organization (REO), theBihar State Cooperative Marketing Union and the Bihar Agricultural MarketingBoard. During 1983/84 a sum of Rs 11.6 M was distributed for civil worksamong the three agencies, which improved project progress significantly.

4.7 Construction was carried out by these agencies in accordance with GOBapproved tendering procedures and relevant regulations. No major defects inbuilding have been observed or reported but some of the buildings requiremore funds for further roof curing and minor reinforcement work.

Procurement

4.8 All vehicles (Table 3) and equipment (Table 6) were procured moreor less as planned. Vehicles were manufactured locally and purchased as perexisting Government procedural methods. Equipment was purchased locallythrough prudent shopping and no delay was experienced.

4.9 The availability of personal loans for the purchase of motorcycles byAEOs was about 80Z of the number planned; in the case of bicycles for VLEWs,it was only about 33%. The demand for bicycles was low. Motorcycle loanswere restricted to Rs 6,500 in the beginning and later raised to Rs 7,600.

-8-

4.10 Staffing Structure. The structural reorganization of staff proceededslowly. Transfer of VLEWs from the Block Development Officers to the exten-sion service in the first phase of five districts was authorized, but onlypartially implemented. The schedule for expanding T&V throughout the statewas cut back so that at the end of the extended project period, T&V wasoperating in only 16 of the 31 districts, with only 3,340 VLEWs (67X) inposition. The key post of ADA (Extension) was unfilled until 1982. Middlemanagement personnel were primarily engaged in general administrative workand practically never carried out vital supervision in the field. The spe-cial project allowance proposed in the appraisal report was not granted andstaff of all grades resisted transfer to the extension service.

Institutional Improvement and Operating Performance

4.11 Extension. The m4in constraint to implementation has been in theprovision of field extension staff. According to Government proce(ure, theappointment of VLEWs is made by District Magistrates for their respectiveDistricts. Action by the Magistrates has been tardy. For instance, postswhich were sanctioned one year earlier have not yet been filled. Extensionsupervisors have little say on such appointments and the criteria for selec-tion are often questionable. The basic qualification of VLEWs is matricula-tion, however, without any basic sciences. Although candidates with inter-mediate science are available (which would facilitate later admission tofurther studies and promotion), additional qualification above the matricula-tion level is seldom a major factor in selection.

4.12 By and large, project implementation has suffered from poor internalsupervision, partly due to staffing shortfalls. More time will be needed toimprove extension services and to change attitudes of individuals within andoutside the service away from the traditional approach to extension estab-lished previously and prior to the introduction of the T&V system.

4.13 The posts of SMSs have so far failed to attract even those qualifiedpersons already in the Directorate of Agriculture. The SAO who controls theSMSs is of the same rank, or, on occasions, even junior. Housing facilitiesor housing allowance are not available. There is a monthly incentiveallowance of Rs 75 for SMS, but this compares with Rs 150 given to officersof the same rank in the Area Development Program. This discrepancy detersexperienced staff from accepting SMS posts. Consequently, those drafted asSMSs are usually agricultural graduates without specialized technical com-petence.

4.14 The post of Deputy DAO was created with the objective that the DAOwould be free to look after the work of extension and the Deputy DAO wouldassist him in his day to day office work. But this did not work satisfac-torily. The Deputy DAOs have remained in the office as planned, but the DAOshave not been able to devote themselves to extension activities because ofthe many statutory duties and meetings.

-9-

4.15 The ADA (Extension) was to have received technical support from ateam of senior SMSs in Agronomy, Plant Protection, Soil and Water Management,Training, and Farming Systems. These posts were practically unfilled and theADA remained without technical support. A single post of JDA (Extension) hasbeen created only recently to assist in technical matters. The experience ofthe first phase has revealed a need to create a post of DDA to assist the ADA(Extension) in his day to day administration and control of the extensionprogram, particularly in recruiting staff, monitoring of budget affairs andfinancial accounts, preparing service manuals and job charts, and gettingfeedback from the field on administrative problems.

4.16 During the first phase of the project the scientists of the SAUscould not visit the field or make joint visits with extension staff owing tolack of vehicles. Motor vehicles were provided at various levels in theproject. However, of the total of 105 vehicles so far provided, about 85%are utilized for extension work. About 15% are utilized for exclusivelynon-extension work. The deployment of vehicles for purposes other thanextension has been due to the fact that the District authorities usedvehicles during periods of civil emergency.

4.17 Another transportation problem was the availability of loans forpurchase of motorcycles and cycles for AEOs and VLEWs, respectively. Forbicycles, the TA provision is only the same per kilometer as is given fortravelling on foot and is inadequate to cover maintenance. Therefore, fewloans were requested by the staff.

4.18 For historical reasons and because other branches of government donot have village level staff, VLEWs are still considered by farmers to begeneral as well as technical representatives of Government, to whom allproblems should be addressed; to deny farmers such assistance could jeopard-ize the credibility of VLEWs and it is inevitable that this conflict ofinterest will continue until other supporting services become stronger anddivision of responsibility can be defined and operated in practice.Recently, some more field staff have been appointed under IRDP and thisaction will reduce the pressure on VLEWs for non-extension work. A furtherproblem concerns the amount of time taken in program administration, fulfill-ing reporting requirements and attending meetings. This is a problem par-ticularly at middle management levels.

4.19 Research. Research has been stepped up in DOA with the support ofthe project, with emphasis on adapting technologies to farming situations.Research has also been consolidated in the SAUs (which have zonal outsta-tions) where many new technologies have been developed. In 1982 the BirsaAgricultural University (BAO) with its main campus at Ranchi in southernBihar, was divorced from the old established Rajendra Agricultural University(RAU). BAU is situated in an area with 60X tribal people and is oriented

-10-

particularly to that area, with its basically different agricultural andagriculture-related problems.

4.20 The formal division of research responsibilities between the DOA andthe SAUs is the traditional one. DOA confines its activities to adaptiveresearch which is carried out first on 36 Agricultural Research Farms (ARF),averaging about 10 ha each. The proven technologies are further tested onfarmers' fields (about ten trials of between a quarter and a half hectareeach are conducted in the area served by each ARF) before their release forlarge scale adoption.

4.21 Extension-Research Coordination. The decisions about which tech-nologies should be investigated in the SAUs and the zonal out-stations andwhich should then be subjected to adaptive trials, are made in thetwice-yearly pre-season meetings of the State Adaptive Research Committee(SARC), which includes representatives of both DOA and SAUs. The SAU programis subject to further confirmation by the University's own AgriculturalResearch Committee. The deliberations of SARC are influenced by feedbackfrom field-level extension staff and researchers, which is generated in themonthly workshops held regularly ct zonal level, and consolidated by theDistrict Adaptive Research Committees. The rather imprecise division ofresponsibility between DOA and SAUs for adaptive and applied research is wellunderstood by the participants and does not cause major problems. However,there is a tendency for DOA to encroach into some aspects of zonal appliedresearch which the SAUs have not been able to cover due to lack of resources.Whereas BAU accepts this situation, not having had time to develop strongresearch programs, RAU researchers feel some resentment that their statutoryresponsibility for the full range of basic and applied research is beingeroded by strengthening of DOA's research program under the project. There-fore, although RAU cooperates well in general, there is an atmosphere ofpotential confrontation, which is fueled somewhat by the fact that no projectfunds have been available to assist the SAUs iv their extension-relatedactivities (e.g., for transportation of SAU staff to monthly workshops andfield visits, and preparation of extension pamphlets). The SAUs are beingassisted by NARP, but there are lacunae at the research-extension interfacewhich are not addressed by either of the related WB projects, NAEP and NARP.

4.22 The trials programs of the ARPs and on their satellite farmers'fields have been well planned and executed on the whole, though they tend tobecome stereotyped state-wise, without much targetting on specific localproblems. Also, the ARF program, which is directed from state-level with itsown ADA and staff cadre, has not yet been sufficiently integrated into fieldextension activities (for instance VLEWs and AEOs do not regularly use thefarmers' field trials or the ARFs for their reference or demonstration tofarmers).

-11-

4.23 The overall impression is that the ARF program has improved over theyears in the right direction, and has already contributed to the propertransfer of technology messages to producers. An indicative and encouragingsample of technologies which have been developed is given in Table 21.

4.24 Training. The routine training required by the T&V system has beenfollowed, i.e., fortnightly trAining of VLEWs and AEOs by SMSs and SAOs; andmonthly workshops for SMSs, SAOs, DAOs and zonal DOA together with SAU staff.However, identification and elaboration of topical impact points has beenweak; also practical skill training has been absent. The fact that posts ofdistrict level SMS have only recently been approved (and there are still noSMSs at state level) has contributed to the problem. Not only have staff,especially SMSs, been less in number than required, but they have in generalbeen insufficiently qualified to give specialized instruction. The fringebenefit attractions of non-extension agricultural activities have caused thebetter qualified staff to resist transfer to T&V duties and so regular train-ing quality has suffered.

4.25 As regards non-routine training, very little has been achieved, seeTable of Key Indicators (Table 1). The state level officer of DOA respon-sible for education and training, the JDA (Education), is directly respon-sible to the DA and has no special relationship to the ADA (Extension).Therefore, the appraisal stipulation that the ADA (Extension) would beresponsible for training did not take account of the actual situation. Therehas been no master training program and all non-routine training has been onan ad-hoc basis. Proposals for upgrading training for T&V staff (i.e. degreecourses) have experienced problems of clearance, as each application has hadto receive approval from the APC, Ministry concerned and Cabinet. Of about50 staff of VLEW rank in MOA who have been selected annually for degreecourses, only about 20% have been T&V staff.

4.26 It has been recognized by DOA that a more specialized approach tomanpower development is required with the accent on quality rather thanquantity. Attention has to be directed to identifying and correctingweaknesses within the training structure as well as gearing course contentand participation more closely to personal skill levels. A particular areaof weakness has been in the routine training of extension staff, where coursecontent has lacked novelty and specific relevance, mainly because of under-qualified and inexperienced trainers and also limitations in the technicalrecommendations coming from research. Greater understanding of theseproblems by trainers and researchers is to be addressed through the follow-onproject (NAEP).

4.27 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E). Staffing as per the appraisalreport at headquarters consisted of one post of Senior AgriculturalEconomist, one of Farm Management Specialist, two of Research Officer, two ofSenior Statistical Assistant and two of Investigator. In August 1985 thestaff position was that the post of Senior Agricultural Economist had been

-12-

upgraded and redesignated as JDA (Monitoring and Evaluation) and filled by asenior officer having experience only in agricultural extension. The postof Farm Management Specialist had been redesignated as DDA (Training) and,likewise, a specialist in agricultural extension had been appointed. The twoposts of Research Officer redesignated as DDA (Research); one is being mannedby an officer having sufficient background in statistics and the other islying vacant. There are six Statistical Assistants working as supportingstaff.

4.28 At di3trict level, as per appraisal report, 16 posts of SeniorStatistical Assistant have been created, but six of these are lying vacant,35 posts of Investigators have been created at the subdivisional level asagainst the 76 posts indicated in the appraisal report; of these posts,presently eight are vacant.

4.29 The M&E Cell was sanctioned in 1978/79, but activities started onlyin August 1982. By August 1985, out of 10 studies made, 6 reports have beenpublished. Main findings were that: (see Tables 12 and 13)

(a) Only around 70% of farmers knew the VLEWs;

Cb) In about 30% of all cases VLEWs did not visit contract farmers atall during the survey period;

(c) Nearly 60% of non-contact farmers have never been visited by VLEWs;

Id) Adoption of HYV seed rate and recommended varieties showed adifference of 20% in the case of non-contact farmers compared with55% for contract farmers;

(e) In fertilizer application, 30%, 20% and 15% of farmers fully adoptedthe recommendation for nitrogen, phosphate and potash fertilizersapplication, respectively;

(f) In plant protection the fully-adopted rate was lower than forfertilizer, averaging between 10% and 20%; and

(g) Recommended agronomic practices have beeni adopted by a largeproportion of farmers.

4.30 Some impact of the T&V program was evidenced in the surveys. Therehas been increase in yield and income on farms under T&V. There has beennearly 100% increase in the use of HYV seeds and fertilizer. Lack of supervi-sion has been found at all levels.

4.31 The methodology of surveys was kept as outlined in the M&E guide butbecause of manpower constraints, crop cutting samples were left to the DOA'sstatistical service and the Directorate of Economics and Statistics.

-13-

4.32 The work-load of the monitoring and evaluation unit (Table 10) showsthe desired concentration on survey work and the unit's supervision of theappropriate categories. Evaluation work still represents only a small por-tion of the work-load (not differentiated in the table) and is limited tofirst attempts. A work plan is shown in Table 11.

4.33 A special report prepared in November 1983 provided an assessment ofgeneral performance which was supported by the impression of the mission,that the M&E work has progressed well, especially considering the late start.Also, however, that there is inadequate staff for both supervision andcompilation.

4.34 The M&E surveys may be broadly divided into:

- those monitoring the operational implementation of the project, and

- those concerned with the adoption of technology.

4.35 The aim of the first group of surveys was tG obtain knowledge on theprocess and status of the introduction and institutionalization of the T&Vsystem. Analysis of farmeris reactions showed that awareness of the T&Vprogram is low (46-99%) among contact farmers, but lower (31-70%) amongnon-contact farmers. Frequency and regularity of VLEW's visits and otherconnected criteria were monitored. Regularity of visits on a fixed day isknown to 34-95% of contact farmers and 17-55% of non-contact farmers. Stillonly 15-61% of contact farmers knew the place of visit of the VLEW. Amongnon-contact farmers it was 18-55%. These and other data are contained inTables 12 to 14.

4.36 The other group of surveys assessed if farmers were familiar withrecommended practices and whether they had adopted them. If negative theywere asked why they had not complied. In Tables 13 and 14, rates and reasonsfor partial or non-adoption of recommendations are given. Lack of capital(too expensive) or non-availability of inputs rank among the most frequentreplies. Lack of irrigation and a technology not being profitable are lessfrequently mentioned. Although these surveys do not answer the ultimatequestion of the growth rate in production, they do nevertheless expressmeasurements of the appeal of the technologies being introduced (as a feed-back to research) and the effectiveness of the extension service in trans-ference of messages to farmers. There were limitations in the surveysrelated to data gaps and over-simplification of the technology content;therefore, the results should be seen merely as indicative. Some correla-tions with yields are given in Table 15.

4.37 One special study was carried out by the M&E cell (Table 10) tosupplement the routine seasonal monitoring and evaluation studies. The

-14-

guidelines for the studies were that they should be "both flexible and ver-satile, easy to carry out and should focus on well defined topics and smallsocial and geographic units". Subjects chosen were "Characteristics ofContact Farmers in Bihar" and "Socio-Economic Conditions of Farmers inBihar". Publication of the first special report is under preparation.

Input Supply and Marketing

4.38 Bihar's agricultural technology is not highly developed, compared toIndia generally. Bullocks are the main draught animals and there is littlemechanization by tractors. This is partly explained by the rather small sizeand extensive fragmentation of holdings. Food crop production is of majorimportance in terms of contribution to GDP. Fertilizer consumption in foodcrops is some 31 kg/ha (1984) up from 19 kg in 1978/79, compared to anall-India average of 35 kg/ha.

4,39 Fertilizer is mainly applied to paddy, wheat, maize, potato andsugarcane, but the rates for paddy and wheat are still too low. Seed asinput needs still more attention. Only some 25% of paddy fields are plantedto HYV. Of the wheat area 90% is already under HYVs. During the projectyears planting of improved seeds nearly doubled. Accordingly, short termcredit went up from Rs 78.7 M in 1980/81 to Rs 180 M in 1984/85. Foodgrainyields are low (paddy 0.9 t/ha). Per capita foodgrain production averaged135 kg/ha from 1979 to 1982, against the all-India average of 181 kg in 1983.In the years 1970 to 1981 Bihar had 0.84% annual food production growth,against all-India 2.2%.

4.40 The situation in agricultural marketing is also still far from satis-factory, though much ha3 been achieved during the recent years. Out of 672wholesale markets in the State, 117 regulated markets han been set up by theend of 1979-80, and four more will have been set up during the Sixth Planperiod. The World Bank helped to finance 47 of these markets. Besides thesewholesale markets, there are some 7,000 public rural 'hats' and a number ofprivately owned 'hats', of which some 200 have been developed along modernlines. Storage and warehousing facilities in rural areas were supported bycommencing construction of 116 rural godowns during the period 1980 to 1984,7 of which are already completed. However, in remote areas of Bihar outletsfor inputs and facilities for collection of the produce are still poor.

Routine Project Reporting

4.41 Semi-annual project progress reports have been received regularly,although late at times. Financial reporting was especially weak; some"icertified statements" for 1978-79 to 1981-82 were received but were returnedby WB to GOB for correction and verification; they have not yet beenre-submitted (see Table 8).

-15-

V. PROJECT COSTS AND FINANCING

Project Costs

5.1 Total project costs including contingencies amounted to US$16.01 Mor Rs 144 M. The cost breakdown i& given below.

Functions Percent

Extension 81.2Staff Training 3.6Adaptive Research 12.1M&E 3.1

Total 0QO.O

Category of Expenditure

Civil works 28.4Equipment and vehicles 24.0Consultancy & fellowships 0.2Evaluation/Studies 0.4Training costs 1.8Establishment 45.2

Total 0-0.0

Project Financing

Total project costs was financed as follows:

IDA credit US$ 8.00COB/GOI 8.01

US$ 16.01

Disbursements of the credit were permitted as follows:

- 1001 of the cost of consultants and of foreign costs of importedvehicles and equipment;

- 80% of cost of civil works and of locally procured equipment andvehicles and local training, fellowships and evaluation; and

- 101 of total salaries of extension and adaptive research personnelengaged on the project.

Credit Allocation and Disbursements

5.2 The comparison between the credit allocation under differentcategories and the actual disbursements were as follows:

-16-

Credit Allocation Disbursement--------- (US$ million) ----------

Civil Works 2.900 0.542Local training/follow-up 0.250 0.199Equipment and vehicles 2.400 1.116Salaries, incremental staff 1.940 2.313Consultancies 0.001 -Unallocated 0.500 -

8.000 /a 4.17

7ia--Light difference in totals due to rounding.

Financial Management

5.3 Funds were initially handled by the Director of Agriculture. InDecember 1983 Government delegated powers of disbursing officer to the ADA(Extension). Budget provisions for the project were made on an annual basisby submission of estimates of expenditure from the MOA to the Ministry ofFinance. Provisions were not adequate to meet the project requirements asproposed in the appraisal report. Particular difficulties arose in budgetingbecause the project was not included in the Fifth Five-Year Plan (1974/79).The project was included in the Sixth Plan; procedures of annual sanction ofthe scheme were thereby facilitated. However, the system of annual sanctionsdid not permit long-standing planning and had an adverse bearing on theexecution of the project. Even with 18 months extension of the project date,reimbursable expenditures remained low.

5.4 The original total project costs were estimated at Rs 144 M(US$16.01 M) with reimbursements from the Credit amounting to Rs 72 M. Theactual expenditures on the project for the period 1978-79 until March 31,1985 were Rs 297 M as given in the statement, Table 16. Although this amountwas much higher than the original estimates of proposed costs, the overrunwas caused entirely by expenditures on salaries, due to inflationaryincreases and the extended project period. As only 10% of salaries werereimbursable, the total project cost situation was very different from thereimbursement situation.

VI. ASSESSMENT OF IMPACT

Impact on Production

6.1 For the assessment of the growth of production, natural conditionsprevailing in recent years as well as levels of inputs have to be taken intoconsideration. Besides changing factors (amount and timeliness of rainfall,utilization of improved seed, fertilizer and agro-chemicat application rates)

-17-

there are those factors which remain constant like soil quality but whichstill have varying effects on production according to other related condi-tions such as flooding and erosion. Average crop yields may decline as areasof less-favored soils are brought into production. The increased area comingunder irrigation adds another variable. Also the effectiveness of supportingservices like credit, marketing and agricultural extension as well as linkedresearch are all relevant. Summarizing, in Bihar the following factors areworth mentioning:

- in the year 1978/79 there were severe floods;

- weather conditions were not favorable from 1979/80 to 1983 due todrought; also 1985 has again been too dry;

- much of the land in the river valleys is endangered by frequentflooding;

- irrigation plays a major role;

- high yielding varieties seeds are not yet widely used particularlyfor rice; and

- input supply is still rather poor. In remote areas there is nosupply at all; also, about 25% of farmers do not qualify for loans.

6.2 Although it is still too early to expect a fully realistic andmeasurable impact of the project, the official yield data of the pre-projectand project years have been compared and indexed (Table 19). It should benoted that, given the range of variables affecting production and limitationson the quality of data available, the information on the pre-project andproject years is only a poor substitute for information on with and withoutproject conditions. The index figures of rolling five-year averages, takingthe pre-project period 1971/75 as the base line, for major crops are asfollows:

1971/72-1975/76 1972/81 1978/82 1979/83 1980/84

Rice 100 102 99 92 93Wheat 100 92 93 95 97Pulses 100 95 97 99 -Oilseeds 100 104 93 89 -Gram 100 96 101 104 -Maize 100 135 - 130 -

6.3 It may be observed that by 1985, average yield trends did not indi-cate a clearly significant impact of the project. However, as noted above,there are many problems in assessing or isolating impact of one factor (theproject) alone and factoring out the impact of other variables, such as high

-18-

variation of natural factors like amount and timeliness of rainfall and theoften devastating flooding. Also population pressure leading to expansionof cultivation into marginal soils plays a role. Besides, the effect ofagricultural extension and research on growth also depends upon physicalinfrastructural improvements, like drainage or development of minorirrigation.

6.4 Lack of uniformity over time of the data bases of official statisticshamper long-term analysis. Also, the standard error in district levelestimates is often in excess of the normally accepted 5X. The disaggregationof project and non-project factors, therefore, presents considerable dif-ficulties. Although a multi-factoral regressional analysis is theoreticallypossible, it would only be worthwhile after improving the accuracy anduniformity of data.

6.5 The absence of significant increase in yields is also due to inade-quacies in fertilizer and other input supply. Often, farmers do not obtainfertilizer at times required. For last Rabi season fertilizer was not avail-able in December when required. More retail outlets are necessary and smallfarm short-term credit to all farmers; many farmers are not eligible for suchloans due to failure of repayment of earlier loans.

6.6 The desired coordination between the Input Supply Agency and theAgricultural Extension Service has not been fully developed. Though exten-sion functionaries are not directly involved - and should not be involved -in input supply work, better assessment of the requirements and improvementin logistic work are necessary.

6.7 It is not useful to apply an economic rate of return calculation forthe extension activities. The yield increase of 1 zo 22 by 1985 which wouldgenerate a rate of return of above 50% (as postulated in the appraisal reportmay well have occured, but causality cannot be clearly established in view ofmany non-project factors.

6.8 Though the economic results of the project cannot be expressed mathe-matically, changes of farmers' attitudes about improved farming methods, andin the rates of adoption were enthusiastically stated by farmers and agricul-tural officials.

6.9 An apparent impact of the project has been the change in the croppingpattern, which has been observed to follow the lines of extension recommenda-tions and indicate the positive effect of T&V. The main trends ares (seeTable 20)

- Increase in cash crops area (mainly potatoes);- New emphasis on Rabi crops (black and green gram); and- increase in wheat production.

-19-

Institutional Impact

6.10 The effect of the project on institution building in the DOA has beendisappointing. Considerable follow-up will be necessary to establish T&V asa viable operational system. The build-up of operational capability was muchslower than planned and had not been fully achieved by the end of theextended project period. The institutional framework of T&V has been intro-duced and the mechanics of T&V are accepted and practiced routine, but train-ing sessions are not well prepared, mainly due to shortage of qualified SMSs.Farmers' response has been positive to extension advice. Similarly, farmerswho were visited by the extension staff twice or more during the crop seasonobtained higher yield than those who have one or no visits (see Table 15).The gains achieved lack momentum, however, and will easily be lost unless theeffort is sustained.

VII. BANK PERFORMAdCE

7.1 The World Bank, mainly through supervision missions (see Basic DataSheet) and other technical back-stopping by NDO staff contributed sig-nificantly to project achievements and to maintaining some sort of momentumof T&V at field level. The comprehensive field reports prepared duringsupervision appear to have been particularly valuable; going far beyond thescope of the usual supervision report and having provided specific observa-tions and recommendations which have given continuity and substance to thesupervision/development process. Continued support for the process is beingformulated for inclusion in a future phase of NAEP.

7.2 Early in the project there were significant delays in civil worksimplementation. The inclusion of an architect in an early supervision mis-sion would have helped identify constraints in construction and promoteviable courses of action to circumvent the problems. Delays in disbursementmight have beea reduced if early supervision missions had devoted more effortto resolving budgetary constraints faced by the project.

VIII. CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED

Project Justification and Objectives

8.1 The main objective of the project was to strengthen and reorganizethe extension service and related applied research activit;es in order toincrease agricultural production especially among small-scale farmers. Thatobjective was appropriate at the time of project formulation and remainsrelevant today.

-20-

Project Content and Scheduling

8.2 The project content was boldly conceived to bring the benefits ofextension and research to the whole cropped area of the state. The resultshave not fully justified the original boldness, in that the envisagedinstitutional transformation has been only partially achieved. However, thesenior state authorities have eventually become convinced that the T&V sys-tem, as proposed by the project, will be effective in raising agriculturalproduction when it reaches the optimum level of performance.

8.3 With regard to scheduling, the project was over-optimistic in assess-ing the time it would take to implement major reorganizations within theexisting and entrenched institutions. The degree of progress achieved bythe end of the project period was much less than planned.

Project Formulation and Operating Outcomes

8.4 The project design in relation to extension and research wasgenerally well-conceived and comprehensive. However, project preparationand appraisal gave insufficient attention to the details of the administra-tive mechanisms needed for achieving institutional reforms within the civilservice personnel context.

8.5 The aims and objectives of the various types of courses and trainingsessions included in the project were insufficiently described in theappraisal report. As a result, implementation of the training component wasespecially poor. An input by a training specialist during formulation couldhave given clearer and specific guidance for implementation in the form of aprospective master plan for training.

8.6 Civil works components were well conceived but all fell behindschedule. Some of the delays could have been foreseen and perhaps fore-stalled by involving a professional architect in project formulation.

Evaluation of Implementation and Outcomes

8.7 It is too early for an evaluation to be made of the impact of theproject, which would have to be measured in terms of improvements in yieldsand production. The project objectives in institutional development have notyet been achieved, however. In particular, the generation of an adequateamount and quality of technical packages of practices for transference tofarmers, has been - and continues to be - slow.

8.8 Compared with similar projects, in other Indian States, achievementshave been disappointing. It seems likely that, during the project formula-tion period, more attention should have been given to the degree of commit-ment to the T&V system and its financial implications to all of the

-21-

authorities concerned with its implementation. In the early stages ofimplementation, the project was not well supported even within the DOA.

8.9 The State Finance Department was apparently also not committed to theproject; it was reluctant throughout to sanction the appropriate budgetaryprovisions. The decision to base the reimbursement of salaries on 10% of thetotal extension and research salary bill rather than on a higher proportionof incremental salaries, was undoubtedly an incentive for the Ministry ofFinance to resist new staff appointments.

8.10 The project can have a major impact on agriculture only after furtherinstitutional improvement has occurred and the system has built up greatermomentum. It is too early to predict with certainty what the eventual impactwill be. However, responses of farmers and DOA staff have been enthusiasticand new practices are found to spread more quickly than before; the improve-ment has been noticeable in both irrigated and rainfed areas.

't/Z I

J l,( l)8t lf C/~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

- 23 - Table 1Page 1


INDIA

BIHAR AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION AND RESEARCH PROJECT(CR. 761-IN)

Key Indicators

TargetOriginal AchievementAppraisal Revised 1/ As at July 1985 Comments

AGRIC'JLTURAL EXTENSION

Staff

VEW 8,980 4,997 3,340 4,317 sanctionedAEO 1,123 625 2/ 366 532 sanctionedSAO, ASAO 157 35 (66) 58 66 sanctionedDAO, Dy. DAO 62 32 29 32 sanctionedSMS - subdivision 228 70 53 70 sanctioned

- district 155 58 0- headquarters 4 4 4 Not full-time

Zonal JDA 7 7 7ADA 1 1 1

Civil Works

YEW houses 2,245 800 91 (72) 3/ 163 sanctionedAEO house/office 281 52 30 (12) 42 sanctioned

Vehicles

4WD - headquarters 1 1 1- district 31 16 16- subdivision 145 76 69

Motorcycle 1,123 - 281Bicycle 6,735 - 864

Training

Snr. staff 630 - 6VEW refresher - - 770SMS/AEO refresher 1,500 - 0SMS special courses 120 - 46AEO orientation 1,130 - 302Univ. Deput - BSc. 140 - 80

- 24-

Table 1Page 2

MONITORING AND EVALUATION

Staff

DDA (in lieu Snr.Ag. Econ.) 1 1 1 Presently JDA

Research Officer (DDA) 2 2 1Farm Management

Specialist (DDA) 1 1 1 Works as DDA(Trg.)

Snr. Stat. Asst. (HQ) 2 2 8Snr. Stat. Asst.

(field) 31 16 10Investigator (field) 76 35 27

VEHICLES

4WD - headquarters 2 - 2Motorcycle 31 10Bicycle 76 - 0

ADAPTIVE RESEARCH STATIONS

Staff

HQ - JDA/DDA 4 4 2- Asst. Agron., etc. 3 3 -- Research Officer 5 5 -

Asst. Agron. 36 18 15Jnr. R.S. 108 54 36Field Asst. -

- on ARS 144 72 72- in district 288 144 140

VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT

4WD 37 18 15Poer Tiller (tractor) 36 18 18Meteorologicalequipment 36 18 18 To oe set up

Weighing, etc.,equipment 36 18 18

- 25.-

Table 1Page 3

CIVIL WORKS

Office/store 36 18 14Threshing floor 36 18 14Garage/store 36 18 14

TRAINING AND CONSULTANCY

Fellowships(ARS staff) 60 mm - 0

Consultants 10 mm - 0

1/ Revised target for 16 distr-icts.w/ A later revision.

- Completed and (in progress in brackets).

.lENDIA REOIT 761-IN

Il1lAR AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION AND RESEARCH PROJECT

Progreas in Civil Works Activities. Units Iomuleted

Tarqet as_ 1 0 -82 D12-03 83-84& p4-pS __ rotal per Sanction

MarketingBoard eicasco. un __ REO M. B

V L W Quarters Not Comp. - 3 (REO) - - 21 48 72 (3 64 906) a 163Completed - - - 43 48 91

A* EO Not Coop. - 2 (REO) - - 4 6 12 (2 16 24) = 42 aCompleted - - - - 12 18 30

Adaptive Research Not Coop. - - - - - - - - - _Complex Completed - - - - - 14 14 - _ 14

Note, 1. Agencies mentionedg they use contractors, do not undertake work themselves.

2. Unit price Marketing Boerd (M) VLW Rs. 49.500 (Base 1985)AEO Rs. 66.500 0

Siseomaun (B) VLW Rs. 52.300AEO Rs. 66.700ARC Rs.12'.000

Rural Eng. VLW Rs. 4:.700 (Base 1986)Organisation (REO) AEO Rs. 60.900 ( - ) )

-27 - Table 3

INDIA: CREDIT 761-IN


List of Vehicles & Equipment Procured(Period 1978-79 to 31 March 1985)

Number Number 1/ Number 2/Item purchased distributed misallocated

VEHICLES

4 WD Diesel Jeeps 101 100 14 WO Diesel Station 2 1 1Jeep Trailer 7 7 -Car 1 - 1Motorcycle 281 279 -Tractor with Trailer& accessories 7 7 _

EQU IPMENT

Typewriters - Hindi 39 35 4*- - English 2 2 -

Duplicating Machine 42 42 -Photocopier 1 1 -16 mm Film Projector 36 31 1Entertainment Films 2 2 -Dictaphone 6 Nil 6Electric Generator 36 36 -Audio Visual System 36 23 -Public Address System 30 22 _Overhead Projector 35 29 -Table Calculator 21 8 -Pocket Calculator 66 31 -Canvas Sheet 38 - -Ourry Carpet 41 30 -Cash Chest 1 1 -Steel Almirah 38 34 4Steel Chair 160 140. 20Steel Table 21 19 2

1/ Balance being still in stock.

2/ Items of equipment which have been &',locatedto non-extension functions in DOA.

- 28 -

INDIA: CREDIT 761-INTable 4


STAffING PROGRESS

Extension Appraisal tarRet Achievement as on

Orig. Rev. Sane. 78-79 79-80 80-81 81-82 82-03 83-84 84-85

VEW 8980 4997 , 4317 2240 2240 2240 2474 3131 3389 3340

AEO 1123 625 532 280 280 280 257 284 377 366

SAO 157 66 66 34 26 28 29 34 54 58

DAO/ADAO 62 32 32 10 10 10 22 23 26 29

SFS (district) 155 58 15 15 10 12 (2) - - (2)

SMS (subdiv) 288 70 70 48 27 33 33 44 51 53

SMS (HQ) 4 4 (3) - - - - - - (3)

Zonal JDA 7 7 7 4 4 4 6 6. 7 7

ADA (Ext) 1 1 1 1 - - 1 1 1 1

Asst. D.A. - - - - - 1 (*) 1 1 1

MONITORING AND EVALUATION:

nA (MIE) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1()(Sr.Agri.Econo-mica)

DDA (Pesearch) 2 2 1 1 1 1 - 1 1 1(5)

DDA (Training) 1 1 1 - 4 1 1 1 1 1 (5)

SSA HQ 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 .2 2 8

JSA 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

investigator HQ 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Z 2 a

SSA (disttict) 31 16 16 3 3 2 5 9 10 10

Invest. (field) 76 35 35 11 11 11 11 21 27 27

ADAPTIVE RESEARCH:

JDA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

DDA 3 3 3 3 3 1 2 1 3 1

Asst. Agron. 36 18 18 7 6 6 7 16 16 15

JRA 108 54 54 1S 21 21 21 26 36 36

(1) Orig.^ original target in appraisal reportRev. * revised target agreed GOB/W8 in 1981 because only 16 districts would be coveredSanc.f number of posts setually sanctioned in GOB budgetary provision

(2) In 81-82 district SMS posts werd abolished but from 85-86 are to be restored

(3) JDA post vas sanctioned at the end of fi. .ancial year 84-85 to act as SMS Agronomy

(4) Posted to assist ADA (Ext) as technical secretary

(5) The incumbents have never been suitably qualified for M&Z and wore mostly engagedon other duties before 83-4

IADIA: CREDIT 761-1N

8liAR AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION AND RESEARCH PROJECT

Number of persons trained per Year - Extension INote 6)

TvoJe of Trainitn 1978-79 79-S0 00-81 81-82 82-B3 83-84 84-8s TOTAL

Pre-season Trainina(number of personnel trainedper year) (I)

VEWs 900 1989 1989 1989 26f2 3131 3340 3340 (2)Other staff 150 21S 230 230 440 450 481 48; (2)

Soecia) Short Courses(total number of courses) (3)

VEW/AEO (3)Other staff - - 5 5 14 6 100 130Orientation 30 35 - 107 60 - 120 352VEW Refresher (4) - - 234 234 255 210 175 1108

Pre-service and Promotion courses

VEWfVLW (4) (5) - - 174 t80 as 86 - 526Promotional Training (4) - 50 50 50 49 42 - 241OSc./MSc. for VEWs (4) - - I I 1 4 - 7

foreign Visits - I - 2 - - 2 5

TQ3A1. courses held 30 86 464 579 465 348 397 2369

TOTAL courses planned (7) 650 640 710 790 820 - - 3610

(1) Courses are held twice per year, for about 6 days per year.however. these numbers include VLWs not engaged on extension duties.Separate data tor extension are not available.

(2) The highest number trained in any one year; the same staff are trained every year.

(3) No special short course was arranged for VEWs or AEOa.

(4) Numbers include about 50% of personnel assigned to non-extension duties;separate extension data not available.

(5) VEWIVLW pre-service training comprises nine-month courses at fourExtension Training Centres.

(6) Excluding regular fortnightly training of all VEW/4VO and monthlyworkshops attended by all SMS. SAO and DAD.

(7) From Appraisal Report: it is not Possible to compare directly the appraisalforecast with the actual achlrvement. because of different methods of counting

LR-3H-TA86

-30- Table 6

INDIA. CREDIT 761-IN

BIHAR AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION AND RESEARCN PROJECT

Eguipment Procured . Adaptive Research Component

ADAPTIVE RESEARCH FARMS (Equipment per farm)

A. Meteorological Eguipment

Non-recording rain gauge.Stevenson screen.Wind vane.Open pan evaporimeter.Dry and Wet bulb thermometers.Minimum and Maximum therometers.Soil thermometers. (set)

S. Labora-ory Farm Equipment

Tractor with trailer.Power tiller.Duster.Sprayer.Wheat thresher.Measuring tapes.Balances and Scales.Callipers.Steel tape.Spring balance.Pocket calculator.Petromax lamp and torch.

C. Vehicles

Jeep.Jeep trailer.

ADAPTIVE RESEARCH HEADQUARTERS

A. Equl2mnts

Duplicating machine.Mazox copier.Calculators.Typewriter.

B. Vehicle

Jeep (Diesel).

NB: This list does not include a set of furnitures purchased for eachof the ARfs and H.Q.

- 31 -

Table 7



Staffina of Adaptive Research

No. of PostsRevised In position

Planned Planned July 1985

HEADQUARTERS - (Adaptive Research)ADA (A.R.) 1

JOA (A.R.) - 1 1JDA (Soil Science) 1 _

DOA (Soil Science) - 1 1JDA (Agronomy) 1

DDA (Agronomy) -1 1

JDA (Statistics) 1 -

DDA (Statistics) - 1 1Stenographer 1 - 1

ADAPTIVE RESEARCH FARMS (NO.18)Assistant Agronomist 18 - 15

Junior Research Assistant 54 - 18Store Keeper 18 - 18

Jeep Driver 18 - 16

-32 -

Table 8



Project Reporting

REPORTS REQUIRED

No. Type Frequency EntttY Reporting Format Agreed

1 Project Progress 6-monthly GOO Yes2 Accounts & audit Annual GOB Yes3 M & E Summary Annual GOB No

REPORTS RECEIVED

REPORT NO. 1 REPORT NO. 2 - REPORT NO. 3

Required Received Peguired Received Required Received(period ending) (period ending)I/ (period endingr

*09.78 03.79 ) ) 03.83 3/ Received03.79 08.79 03.80 ) ) 03.44 - Received09.79 08.80 03.81 ) J ) /03.80 12.80 03.82 )Due )09.80 04.81 03.83 ! )03.81 09.81 03.84 ) )09.81 04.82 03.85 ) )03.82 02.8309.82 06.8303.83 09.8309.83 01.8403.84 08.8409.84 02.8503.85

1/ Report due within nine months of this date.

2/ Some "Certified statements' for 1978-79 to 1981-82 received but thesehave been returned to GOB for verification and correction; not yetre-submitted.

3/ Monitoring and evaluation only started functioning recently; earlierreports not requested.

- 33 -

Table 9

INDIA


List of PubLications of the Monitoring and Evaluation CelL

A. MONITORING SURVEYS

1. Rabi, 1982-83 Nov. 82 to Mar. 83 Published

2. Kharif, 1983-84 June 83 to Dec. 83 Published

3. Rabi, 1983-84 Nov. 83 to Mar. 84 Published

4. Kharif, 1984-85 June 84 to Dec. 84 To be published

B. MONITORING-CUM-EVALUATION SURVEYS

1. Rabi, 1982-83 Published

2. Kharif, 1983-84 Published

3. Rabi, 1983-84 Published

4. Kharif, 1984-85 To be published

C. SPECIAL STUDIES

Characteristics of Central Farmers andSocio-Economic Conditions of Farmers in Bihar To be published

- 34 -

fable 10

BIHAR AMRUTUA EX IONU MAN NM MM

Estimte of Anual Vorkica of niftorWin aW Evlut10ion Staff in No-DAYS

JOA M PUTin Statistics I Statistial Field

Tr of Activity jar Res. 9fficer Scmililst I/ Assstant InvestiL&tor

Questionnire design 2 5 - -

Modification ofquestioaire 1 - .

Sale design 1 - -

Selection of sale - - - 45 -

Training 6 6 5 22 6

Supevision of fieldwort 60 100 go 45 -

Field rkof surveys - - - - 80

Scrunity of data - 14 - 90 -

Taulation of dataand analysis - - 60

Report writing - 90 -

Adeinistratlon 90 30 30 - _

Meeting with otherofficers 60 60 45 -

Misellarous go 90 45 s0 90

Total orking days per individual 310 310 310 322 n6

l/ I fact a genral etenion spcialist, nking as ODA (Training).

- 35 -

NDIA Cn£DIT - 761-IN Table 11

SIMUI GRITCULUAL TNSI0ot & _ESAtaCM PRIOJECT

1984-85 Work Plan for Monitoring and Monitoring-cum-Evaluation Surveys and Special Studies

Khatif Kha:tf Rsbi Rabi Special StudyMS M45 MS M&2

1. Questionnaire design 1.4.84 1.7.84 1.10.84 1.12.84

15.4.84 1S.7.84 15.10.84 15.12.84

2. ModIficAtion of question- 16.4.84 16.7.84 16.10.84 16.12.84naire

23.4.84 23.7.84 23.10.84 23.12.84

Printing of schedules 25.4.84 25.7.84 25.10.84 25.12.84

30.4.84 30.7.84 30.10.84 30.12.84

4. Designing of the survey 16.4.84 - 16.10.84 -

fl 18.4.84 18.4.84

5: Drawing of samples 16.4.84 16.7.84 16.10.84 16.12.84

30.4.84 18.7.84 30.10.84 30.12.84

6. Training of Field Staff 3.6.84 - 3.10.84 -

5.6.84 5.10.84

7. Yield vork 1.8.84 15.10.84 10.1.85 1.3.85

15.9.84 15.12.84 15.2.85 15.4.85

8. Scrutiny 6 analysis 10.10.84 16.12.84 16.2.85 16.4.85 No special study work do"

30.10.84 30.12.84 28.2.85 15.5.85 in 1984-85. FroM 1985-86three special studie haebeen tae up.

9. Report writing 1.11.84 1.2.85 1.3.85 1.6.85

30.11.84 28.2.85 30.3.85 30.6.85

10. Prlnting of reports

1HD.A CREDIT 761-IN


Results of MiE Survevs Farmers Awareness of TbV System

MS Rabi USE Rabi MS Kha-1f MAE Kharif US Rabi USE Rabi MS Kharif MEE Kharif1982-s3 1082-@3 1903-01 M2;-84 1983-84 1983-84i t904-8z 1904-05

................................... (Percentage of Farmers) .

Farmers knowinu VEW

Contact fkrrers 46 99 56 69 70 60 70 67Non-contact farmers 31 70 46 50 44 42 43 40

Frequency of visits ofVEW durina oraviousfour weeks

(a) Nti visitContact 11 5 33 33 33 30 31 29Non-contact 16 39 58 59 57 58 58 59

(b1 One visitContact 12 17 17 26 23 23 20 22Non-contact tO 29 15 21 19 20 16 18

(ci Two and more visitsContact 33 78 50 41 45 47 49 51Non-contact 19 32 26 21 24 22 26 28

Reft4laritv of visitson the fixed day

Contact 34 95 42 39 43 40 49 46Non-contact 22 55 22 18 17 20 22 20

Place of visit

(a) field.Contact Is 61 14 36 32 43 41 40Non-contact 8 23 7 13 14 20 21 is

(b) OtbAr otJAce crCuIbt) .t It 34 23 41 44 40 29 30Nun-cuntdct tO 50 1G 34 32 37 28 30

t Ms 5 Monitoring Sear vey.2 m&e 5 Monitoring--cum-Evaluatlon Suevey.

-I .-z ez *£ n 1s it I - 9Z 52s ,lm.2 Zt 82 IC 1$ it i£ £112ZZ 1135Sit *1 1£aSIe*J

at lSi ?F1841 "as

- - - - 4 - * -1 1£ III a P i1 tIIz1lBIA1i a 91 £t IS a CZ of a to el a U is It It "16pe t qa

U6 I" 01-961 5 831

- - - - - - * 11 91 at a U n a *1 of p1LI ItU^8el la 2 S 95 8 £ S t t IC9t £9 Pfi i 1P 'Iii'j

fSll U'1 u'I SS S1U1

N~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I W1fWTIi

^ ~~~~~~~~~To) tww ii fumin r zxu)

rtl a 13 I- i- a a I r s El I SI as Jsyita W g sw

Typ^ww"TMVV" riXEfrwl OJ Sltnq

I nrm^wTti

INOIAi CREDIT 761-IN


Monitorina Surveys 2 Reasons for Partial or Non-adoption of Recomm_ndations(Percentage of Farmers)

Lack ofToo Lack of Input not proper Not profitable

Recommendation Sample size Expettsve Irrigation avallable knowledge and othersCF NCF CF NCF CF NCF CF NCF CF NCF CF NCF

Kharlf 1903-84 1086 1103 1

t. Seed rote - - 13 13 6 4 9 9 tO 14 13 s )

2. Selection of HYV - - 21 25 18 17 18 IB 13 iS 9 9

3. AppliCation offertilizer - - 41 42 28 37 14 11 15 i6 3 3

4. Plant Protectionmeasures - - 37 46 - - 25 25 16 16 1 2

S. ^Aronomic practices - - is is 22 27 6 7 le 22 3 3

Rabi 1983-84 740 576

1 Seed rate - - It IS 6 3 7 9 3 4 4 6

2. Applicatton offertilizer - - 39 42 25 30 22 24 a 14 15 20

A. Plant Prot-ctionmeasures - - 37 42 - - 25 34 12 to 12 23

4. A4W tomtc practices - - 61 25 I to 10 21 a 19' 6 Is

CF s Contact FarmerNCF a hon-Contact Farmer

-39-Table 15



Relationship Between Yield Rate and Visits

Survey No. of Visits Irr"iated Rainfed' Total

Rabi 1982-83 Nil 1,707 N.A. 1,707(Wheat) One 1,782 N.A. 1,782

Two or more 2,103 N.A. 2,103Total 1,915 N.A. 1,915

Kharif 1983-84 Nil 1,994 1,631 1,845(Paddy) One 2,631 2,287 2,533

Two or more 2,718 2,482 2,701Total 2.496 1,892 2,520

Rabi 1983-84 Nil 2,026 1,550 1,981(Wheat) One 2,039 1,508 1,869

Two or more 2,279 1,395 2,186Total 2,154 1,479 2,050

Relationshie Between Yield Rate of Cropsand Main Source of Advice to Farmers

Survey Source of Advice Irrigated Rainfed Total

Rabi 1982-83 Extension personnel 1,997 N.A. 1,997(Wheat) Other farmers 1,910 N.A. 1,910

Other sources 1,880 N.A. 1,880No advice 1,670 N.A. 1,670Total 1,945 N.A. 1,945

Kharif 1983-84 Extension personnel 2,652 2,286L 2,592(Paddy) Other farmers 2,179 1,868 2,104

Other sources 2,642 1,699 2,228No advice 2,222 1,508 1,904Total 2,565 1,893 2,396

Rabi 1983-84 Extension personnel 2,240 1,602 2,166(Wheat) Other farmers 1,943 1,496 1,870

Other sources 2,216 1,570 2,167No advice 1,98 1,475 1,921Total 2.154 1,553 2,079

INDIAt CREDTI 7.fi1-1N

BtHAR AGRICULTURAL EXTEhSION AND RESEARCH PROJECT

Exoend1ture Statement under World Bank Agricultural EEtenslon Protect

Sino - I t e m s 1978-79 1979-80 1980-Uil 1981-82 1982-83 1983-84 1984-85 TOrTA

............................... ............ R 0 0) .......................... ............ ......... ROo)....,,,.,,,.,,,,,I

1. Civil Works - - - 690.000 - 11.657.500 - 12.247.500 0

2. Equipments 844.Y31 110.7t9 855.085 2.070.836 t10.150 3,296.285 449.938 7.737.7443. Vehfctes 2.993.58t 129.753 1,102.1t9 t55.983 - - - 4.901.438

4. Training and 14.749 | 80.266 8.253 31t.370 S85.631 640.05t 879.674 2.527.000Fellowships

S. Satsries 23.332.337 13.236.400 26.729.895 27.394.553 41.2S7.604 56.325.013 69.693.996 263.999.798

6. Physical Contingency& Misc. E,penditure 494.849 1.075.235 718.617 620.080 636.451 1.081.325 1.297.701 5.924.258Including Trials

T O T A L 27.680.247 14.632.373 29.413.969 31.749.822 48.619.838 73.000.160 72.321.309 297.417.736

It

I"DIA2 CR1DIT 761-1

SlSHAR AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION AND RESEARC" PROJECT

PrCoect Costs :COrnarative AnalYsIs

I of Exoend- AdditionalAmount of the .1/ 1ture to be Amount Amount already aount

Items of work Lcredit allocated rnAmkbursea actually re£mbursef cl-amed Disbursnment Z/Planned Revised by we sent by WO by 7J85 aarcfni

.... ... ... I.. ... ... .... ... ... ... Rs million . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1. Clvil Works 26.1 31.9 80 12.2 / af S101 1.489 20.6

2. Equipment a VehiCles 21.6 26.4 so 12.719 10.284 - 38.9

3. Trainin S Feltlowship 2.25 2.75 80 2.527 2.02 _/ 73. 6 $

4. Consult-cy 0.09 0.11 o - -

5. Salaries 17.46 21.34 10 263.999 22.328 1.35 110.9

6. Unallocated 4.S 5.50 - - . -

7. Physical contingency - - - 5.924and trlals

TOTAt 72.00 88.00 - 297.417 39.733 2.839 48S

.If The smount shown in the Credit Agreement Is US dollers, converted here to Rs.The planned' is at the original rate of Rs 9 - USS 1. the 'Revised Is thesame aount converted at the operational rate of Ro It = USS t. These amountsdo not reconcile sith the Table of Totsl Project Costs as contained in theAppraisal report. Also. In respect of 'salaries'. the appraisal estimate wasthe incremtental cost, whereas reimbursement Is S percentage of total extensionstaff cost.

I/ Total reombursement as percentage of the 'se.itstl stpaeeb i.redit allocation.

It This amount was advanced to the construction agencies appointed by GOB butstatement of expenditure received from them was Rs 8.237 M. on which reimburse-ment claimed.

_i Ps 0.444 M. expenditure Incurred and is being claimed.

- 42 -

Tstble IS

II: CRff 761-IN

SOA lAMRIC&UL EXMNSIgo AS RESEMO PECr

Schle o1' Di0ewet (La n 15 March 198S)

A C C U L U L A t E D I S A U R S E M E N T S

Lats Lats!La EstatetAltE l

Aetutal ar1aiL S as S an. tl E.FY 6 Oartrs Total Estiate Estiate Estimate E(culttv) Est1jt@

(2/83)

................. . .. .......... . .. ( I ........ ... ).. ..t

FY 197979 - 3 0 0.1 0 2.00W 2

4 0 0.3 0 4.063 1,3549

ist 0.3 0.6 50 4.899 814%2nd 0.3 1.0 33 - 03rd 0.5 1.3' 38 5.275 AO.5%4th 0.6 1.6 36 - 0

FT 19181nst 0.6 1.9 32 7.269 38.3%

2nd 0.7 2.2 32 9.899 44.9%3rd 0.8 2.5 32 -4th 1.0 2.8 36 -

FY 1O21st 1.2 3.1 39 -2nd 1.2 3.5 1.5 34 10.823 30.9%3rd 1.2 4.0 1.1 30 11.974 29.9%4th 1.3 4.5 1.5 29 - -

FY I9&lst 1.3 5.0 1.7 26 19.616 39.6%2nd 1.3 5.6 1.9 23 -3rd 1.8 6.2 2.1 29 -4th 2.2 6.8 2.3 32 22.331 32.8%

1st 2.2 7.6 2.5 29 25.543 33.6%2nd 2.S 8.0 3.0 31 30.118 3J.6%3rd 2.8 35 -4th 2.8* 35 - -

1St 3.1 39 39.766 53.2%2nd 3.1 39 2.839 (eapected)3rd

Closing date 10.31.83* 3.31.85

SourCe: '1> - W4 orld Boak.p £ * 6011.

I2 - U6 96 1 61*'

- U £- A m off

tot tit "I wistoII getiot 11V - S as u *..q

u at 4;T zz @*nw*£6 66 ill Sal *)j* tq111

- 1191 6*3 ,sl' 9us Ul- ass us i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~t ~~~sated AV4e

- 10 911~~" US L9IFSI11£ 139 U9 3*3 e~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~n 114

an - lid - 9su: 29n t

I~ ~ ~~FU Ul Will! U IWltU

- 3E'i 3E'6 ~~~it's to' UI' 5Its6 in6' h.Z' to' £91 W6 to- sn e~~ms goc fta u1 toS a9 us us at ,c 9wSpi

Su£ hi Oi 9 to5 619 6in lS It 119 61 15 99£ tit 114- M - M *6 16IZ If'll Wll fll tilli 15t AUS II6 Sml

-55'! NS'6 Z-4't 5l,' mLI of's itz'l tIZ' *nl 3fue 9C1 ral oul we"91,11 1I SU .D*1 "I P16 is S 16 US" 358 £16 5*6 F jJjt"

#101 i

- 44 - Table 20

(tOtAi CR3IT ?61-1N

Izs A3C1L1L"RAI. lo AISZ NDM 05334CR PlojcT

C _ ns CrontAa _atte" joiset mtomeam Lan Snor (Itro. to S crops)

tWO Ie om. caigs toa 'cgeppng patters at too impiientstato ot TY .oteaston to Saner. Apo-*co8gicbLooe-vs- M&St%nO estcroppingpatta. _ t044 croppn pato.t. tternos t. Do" no wtn tatauzar tots. time era am soonh La BInr. btut up untu n. Tnv 78stz 05"

eiS ilint et oetr lose n tatte so0n" oa. btCe ot tooe r,40m50 pattetti Ut* 0onn ..A4 cno Odoot O tOr tcn Molrte

2096 KaiC ot tao distrits bcotana Ctopping Pattern I.tc_eeOB Croppian fttteaulb. Nme o on 2er antsm L tLo Scn netn U uaatu Itrsaere Uftartiaat tmtii4

tnciueaoo ot Cte an. USa Cr.n

I Mtto AUVSSiA Plans Uat ane bt Cnmparto. Itce- PaLrs at apoead/ l is *-Whet an.-pne/cn n Ibias r.. orDue to tacneOae La GesCAa . Smama, SStct. n, tQtO. Leta. Serity ouas-Potsco bae-Arstar (Sep. omm) Sltu Crt_-

trrigatso arm Hubs*trmr. Vestieta cc" bA&e n-9bet matate-eet Potato tatPatto Risce-PuAsom (hattIe. btst-Potato-

P547-UeSta Cr6eJ Cr'.P?4y Potato (ase-CrtA tstato-Ulieat

Vk&**-q"t

Potato-Onsou

RaCa-Uba"t-CrS.

RACa0-Potato-Osiowa

nicuetU8IO of Rosi sa Grnet Cr5S

MtrtO Fast A.uuyaSA Putted. Katoapr. RAce-Patio,. Kaua. Juts-ace batstAre (t.) JutOmstPlt"c (Jute cil i- Son r. Arart aRteuheat Raise-Rpo2tbet Jets-baa rbaa.

etton. or" datev- Rise-Post of Linseoe. IrSe-Potano Rtts-PVLe ti4) Jutea-RUS-sitied) Lotayrus Rige-potato Rilce-be-orsnm

Jute-Ric Cr

R&xas-Grseo-Us- _ Cr_ .Riase-1areasGre.n

(nciueao ot SateS_. Oats. a Cres Or'.

W eutt SunIt A4ttaia Gays. Anurgaoae. ate-aos biOs-Potato RitOs'.- of L5tu Racarbet-GreaDus to otrase. an Reatee. lbojpau. RIc*-Paira ot Lacuprwo bg-ftiseea Riee 1oew_ Ci".

rwatee are Patna Cr_5 or Lentil Rice-bet batca RAter-Vamt-OmostJowar-fatsop Rice-otvato- 145m-Atet r Ores

iatsO-AttCt OGtom RAICOsersoma-R*.ba.o-Fstjew. ltce-otate-Osion

-Ctr_ (TL aa) madstP atato-Gro_-Vbst (do) p Ct_ arm

MbSS-Potato-teet

ntsy St"" Ftot.. t"Qbwe .e CrtwaadtMV reepczlasced RIet as to

Cnattal e4 Raeti o .3. portion of Rtca-Palto RiCe-beet haCs-Sa±t4oer RacO-Ilaeaanters Platee. Rabaul ditrict 5tiea-felIm Rca-Potato RXiC-LMtt4 uAcGeu-Ptato-fte

Rut? atr (grosmy ,Na r-fattor Relany-satrioer au_e*-fteat"Vt04507 loan to Lou Conoata-PtW SorIee Potato Creue-Vegeoe00o4) balso-Arnar mat

PAca-Uet-Orse.cr'.

RACs-tiSeSoyaboa-Ubsar ot

Vegetable

S eneta Flaote S lV. portion o@ Riletse-low bAls-Potato S_mm as Zone 4 RiCelatx"ry ar" (Sr,.44Y Rafli disntrit NAa-tauon Rn_e-Poctto Rc-S cflmer RMe- e eam" lof to &OM mise-peara ot ltRcn-Usert Rtace-LeotU batstPoto-Vbefteso) L tbyte Rice Seem Gteu eo

Go0s4 -e.low Paro-Ssstous, Sdrta_VetaaIaH043s-Athrba .c-I5tCSoyegoe-Srttlsreir aea

RAe-mba

- 45 -

Table 21Page 1

INDIA


List of Technologies Generated and Recommended for Adoption of Farmers

1. Varietal

- Sita, Janki, Sugandha. Radha and Rajendra Dhan in rice underdifferent field situation.

- Laxmi and HaeLant in maize.

- Bahar in Arhar.

- 12 in Moong and Navin in Urd, Q Varuna and B.R. 40 in Rai. M13 and333 AK.12-24 and Kubair in G.nit.

- 8.0.70 and 8.0.91 in sugarcane. R.A.U.-1 in Millet and RS-5 insweet potato.

- HP1101, HP1209, and C 306 in wheat.

2. Agronomical

Cultivation of winter maize. summer planting of Urd in wheat-paddyrotation, cultivation of summer till. two tier planting of sweet potatowith Rs-5 and Q cross-4. Interculturing of maize and Arhar in alternaterows of 75 cm each.

3. Plant protection

(a) Insects

- Control of Mango hopper by carbaryl or monocrotophos orendosulfan at the rate of 0.5 kg/ha.

- 46 -

Table 21Page 2

- Treatment of 3 weeks rice seedling with either fenitrothion orphosphamidon or endosulfan at the rate of 0.5 kg/ha. Anotherspray if needed after 40-50 days of transplanting of seedlings.

- In maize, application of carbaryl or phorate granulee 5 kg/ha. Phorate @ 10 kg/ha granules (102) against whitegrubs. Application of gamma BHC at sowing time in Sugarcane.Neem seed Kernal suspension against pod bvorers in Arhar. Earlysowing of mustard against aphid infestation.

(b) Diseases

Treatment of wheat seeds with Vitavas (0.25 g/kg) for control ofloose smut. 4 sprayings of Dithane M-45 against late blight ofPotato 0.251 maize rust. Baviston 0.05% spray for control of sheathrot of rice, brown spot of rice and leaf spot of millets. Seedtreitment of pulses with Baviston + Theirsm. Rajendra Dhan 201,Saket 4, Ratna, IR 20 are resistant to Tungro virus of rice andtolerant to bacterial blight disease.

Soil and Fertilizer Management

Application of ZnSo4 Q 25 kg/ha every three years, and pyrite9 1.5-2.0 ton/ha in low pH soil repeated every 3rd year. Use ofRhizobium and Algae cultures in legumes and rice respectively.Reclamation of salt affected soil.

Water Management

Water schedule for wheat, malze, paddy and sugarcane.

Cte(63 teS

.. .. ............... ,.............................. ...... v M tn ................................... ...........

lice 4,21Q.4 4,57.6 4M3.7 4,2t.6 1,4.5 3,1. 4,15U. 3,*1.6 4,33.6 4,47.6 4,44.5 4,117.5 4,432A 4,S1.6 4,1. 5,43.5 5,4t.5 3,534.9 5,64.1 4,151.?

n ut Uu.I A.1 X4.4 157.2 M.7 V17.4 $7. V7.6 1,113.2 132.S 76. 94 4.0 751.6 912.1 68.4 MI 7.2 8619.5 7U.I

.Jr. *.1 t .9 U2.l 1.4 S.4 9.0 7.3 .4 6.0 5.0 4.2 6.2 1.1 I.6 7.9 5.4 5.8 6.6 6. 5.**

137.6 31.6 96. 6 nJ ".7 U.6 243.1 "A. Q.1 i.j 53.1 62.1 86.5 611 7.1. 9.1 119.1 12)1 71.2 5n4.2 n3.4

sket 5261 417.2 417.1 47.3 365.0 983.5 n53.1 .66 1,12. 2,41 1576e 4,6 I,RSJ 0.7 2,6.6 2,214J 2,56. 1,mA 2,53.9 2,261.3

kStw 2$4.1 2M7.1 171.1 162.1 126.4 233.5 163.6 177.6 141.5 355. 126.4 6. 6.6 18.6 El 31.4 9.3 9.? *S.$ U.S

frau 263.6 2m.7 m1.5 334.4 3U3.3 264.5 156.6 147.6 174.2 171.3 I333.1 04.1 I5J 034.1 111.3 124.4 13.0 l.S 146.1 123.J

StlO eulse6 76.1 666.7 6ns.3 7t.2 .4 675.6 763. 7.6 717.6 542.J 522.1 5i1.6 716.6 R. 24 45S. 763.6 A3.$ R2.3 774.3

U_lei 34.2 31.5 J.? 31.6 12.1 28.3 1361 43.2 43.2 31.9 11.6 24 44.3 6L6 3.T 46.1 37.6 t7. 42.6 H.6

lietd dAntV4 55.6 27.5 32.6 33.3 21.6 54.6 39.1 51. 53.5 349 44.6 43.0 49.2 t .6 41.3 5z.7 .3 33.2 39.4 46.4

lnn M174.t 3. 2U.6 112.6 t".6 594.6 U6.1 125.1 U3.1 T.6 133. .1 134.6 121.3 Ilt.2 5351 176.7 33.3 34.3 145.1

lul . 1t,444. ,157.1 6.6 64.6 9.6 6.6 466.6 60.0 . 476.6 A.6 31.2 50.6 MI. a.7 172.0 63. 93.2 19A 033.1

J;"acas. 4,U6.1 5,664.6 1,151.1 5,942.6 41- 3,917 5,1194.6 6,563.6 4,201.0 4,477. 4,333.0 5,157. 5,530.6 4,161. 4,175.0 4,D.4 3,570.2 3,M93.6 3,.4 4,37a.3

PtaSew 831.2 .6 61.6 7A.4 765.6 6.6 1,1,7.1 On2.$ 1,121.5 A.4 .6 149.6 5,414.0 1,311.2 1,53.4 1,131.1 1,0R.4 ,1,2. 1,221.1

ma113l,t 163.6 3.6 6.9 ISe.- 76.6 114. 94.6 14.6 n7.4 41.6 6.0 74.6 ".46 17.6 41.1 71.0 71.7 47.5 52.0 5t45

- ,k-

T1, I's f " , if h / k

Annex 1- 49 - Bake 1

mX Uttt ht."*~~~Omt 74/41) (90)

_ f. *t*

flu. S.L. s'.^a, *mgcle|trfor LIDWOW.*} ( FDoperlmt eI Agriculture & Coqp.'tfhmn)

mIniTRY OPF AGICULTUREOVIRMINMNT Of INDIA

coo N"ee t1 ) VI-T&woo INN t, 4: d" rstTqt VwW, qf V ent Wok No*.A R K. Pu rm. Nefvw MM.Ih

sA"r Shri Natbur.

This has refetene 0 toy p. lette No. 3(1G6)/86-F9VW- -d " Ostber ISfe ed mar l*nt1 t daftret ?"lase A9gr-Ietualteb aJeuRi r.

(Ctedit ?61-}) to Are 3.k0 Hall of the I6eld Oank (Olhi SPlice). The comments as forwarded by you were bosedan thoes oomnioeted to Shki 3*b. S.jo 30@it se"etary, KAvido out letter No. 5(19)/6-T&V dated 7th ;uly, 1986.

We have oge.ntly r*ooivod a draft PCR en the taseprepared by the bwld Banks South Eset Region. £nsloeedkindly find a copy, Apparently, the ommonts that wereeoemmtce?ed to Pr. 3ohn Hall de not find mention In thisdraft. It SEA has no objection we eSy bring thLi to thenotia, of the Uorll Bank9forwarding owu comment.*

it-*l t@@

yours sinicerelys,

Sd/-5... Gheal)O

Undwr Sesrtaro'y,r Tn Bank WZR,Department ot lEonoic Affairs,Nofth BlockNew DeZh 11001

opy to Mr. Graham Qonaldson, Division Chief,Agriculture & Human Resources, Operations Lvaluation Department,Tho Ilorld Bank, International Bank for Reconstruction andDevelopment, International Development Association, 1818 H btreet,N.i"LU llashington, D.C, 20433 U.S.A.

Director (F ield tension).

- 50 -

my,; Annex 1

-- ~~~~~~Page 2

NJI IU. naai DWALXN3R* 000n

D UNUOIX !tgtA1101 SUUDRAE 11IU1AR AL

1131 BW! DAT!D *IAR 6, 1987 ADX8D3 !0Joint a5531AIT. 2I! 01 UGOJOKIC AI?AIIUGAWINGma@ 01EM O101I 23101 iif 3PIO! 01FSINAZ ASRICMUL!UIMI=8Z X01 AD MBAR0 110C8 (OR 761Iff). GOIIS o0US !ATh WQY!. 01 31 AO WV?. OP MIA ONX =3 DiA1.0.1. WM BUT 3? = TO X. J=BI ALt S,NIJIR 13080Oiw NNW DmI 0103 TM OUR LN!3 DAM 0010 7,11 901 01 fVARl T3XD NIB ION TO tI3 VOMD MIK 2O 013oo1oaA3)ISN US FINAL P.C.R(.) neARza(.)_ _ _ W., _ m a Om_ g _w _ _ _ _

J° - '0 (- 5 WILVII 5 ;bayed 30 hrarh, 1987

Deputy Beoretary

cop j st In confirmation to:-

it. an Donalson, Divlsion Chief Agriculture &Huam eqouroes, Operations Bvaluation Deprtment,fo Wor' Bankg, 1818 . Streot, N.W. Vahla6ton,

'.0.2043 , UBA. I flnd frou the copy of the POC nowsent by ou that the comments sent by us to Ir. Hallare not rflectod thoria. A copy of the comnats

y 4p earlier to Mr. Hall is enclosed for your} esdy rmiaaoe. fnoes may kindly be incorporated Inthe fnal .

Dpuy Irrtar t$3)

-~ 51 -Annex 1Page 3

Comments on the draft Project CoMletion Report(PCR) of Bihar Agricultural Extension and Research

Para 4.3 Project implementation improved from late 1982following recognition by Government of Bihar of tho advantagelof an effective agricultural extension service and itscommitment to the project's success. Government of Bihartook a number of actions including sanctioning and fillingof vacant staff positions, initiating efforts to organiseand improve field extension and training activities,

compliance with financial covenants and importantly, pro-vision of adequate budgetary resources from 1983-84.These measures resulted in setting up of a structural andinstitutional foundation ; future development during

the later part of the Project.

Para 4.21 The draft PCR inadvertently mentions that the monthlyworkshops are held at sub-divisional level . These work-shpps are held at zonal level in Bjhar.

Para 4.Z5 It is now accepted by the Department of Agriculturethat the training quality should be improved and greaterunderstanding of these problems by trainers and researchersis to be addressed in all the future projects.

Para 6.1 The impact of the Project has been apparent in3 areas: (i) shift from food crops to cash crops like potato,

(ii) exphasis on rabi crops, and (iii) increase in wheatproduction.

para 8.10 2bx A reference has been made in the first sentence

for this para to the Ministry of Finance. Presumably,this refers to the Department of the State Government.

84 8s5 86 sr 887

INDIAB I H A R

AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION and RESEARCH PROJECTPOLITICAL-GEOGRAPHIC REGIONS

, * State Copital@ District HeodQuarters

Main RoadsJfi- . ru- .--.-.. RaylwsDistrict Boundaries

WEST ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~State Boundaries

} ? -w E s-T r 7Xj0 20 40 60 International Boundaries''j iil., - ~ ~ Rivers

( - . - ' . °l , 20 40 60 Location of Constituent Colleges, Research Stations and Substations-27°4-A M P A - Location of Adoptive Reseach Farms 27--

~cWAMP Af { z; GEOGRAPHIC REGIONS:k t - 27 ' / i' ~ ~ ^'~ Northern PlainsI ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Central Plains

6 ? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~i Plateau and Hilly Areas

0 a t S [ W \1sA l 4 G u R S A.) \U 4, P 5 |261

u -~ ~ ~~~~~~~~--* ~.N\N'~ N KV~Z- NŽ#v StZAL

IBRD 12926R

I. -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

S -W. .A.1%.

(S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Mrt8

World Bank Documentdocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/698781468041390940/pdf/multi... · Actual...

Documents

Transcript of World Bank Documentdocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/698781468041390940/pdf/multi... · Actual...