Ex-post Evaluation

1. Outline of the Project

Country:

Philippines

Project title:

Diversification Crops Irrigation Engineering Project (Phase II)

Issue/Sector:

Agricultural Engineering

Cooperation Scheme:

Project-Type Technical Cooperation

Division in Charge:

Agricultural Development Cooperation Department

Total Costs:

Period of Cooperation

May 1993 - May 1998

Partner Country’s Implementing Organization:

National Irrigation Administration, Department of Agriculture

Supporting Organization in Japan:

Related Cooperation:

1-1 Background of the Project

Despite the fact that agriculture was one of the major industries in the Philippines and contributed a great deal to the Philippine economy, more than half of the inhabitants in the rural areas were classified as living in the poverty. The Government of the Philippines promoted its “Crop Diversification Policy” with the aim of raising the income of farmers from the mid 1980s. Given this situation, a technical cooperation program entitled the “Diversified Crop Irrigation Engineering Project (DCIEP-I)” was carried out by the government over a five-year period starting from May 1987. It included the preparation of technical manuals for secondary crop cultivation and technical training for engineers in the National Irrigation Administration (NIA). Before the end of the project, the government of the Philippines requested a technical cooperation project “DCIEP - II”, in order to verify and modify the technical manuals based on the results of the pilot projects conducted in DCIEP-I.

1-2 Project Overview

In order to increase income of farmers in the Philippines, the Government of Japan provided cooperation on the use of technical manuals produced by the DCIEP- I, the improvement of the manual based on the proven results and the upgrading of technical skills of NIA engineers.

(1) Overall Goal
To increase crops through water management, facility operation and maintenance and sound irrigation for secondary the crop season. With the country’s main National Irrigation System (NIS) in the country, an irrigation management center will be established.

(2) Project Purpose
1) To upgrade the engineering potentials of NIA staff through such as conducting case studies and verification of the manuals.
2) To maintain continuously and develop techniques which are established in NIA, by the Philippines.

(3) Outputs
1) To enhance NIA engineers’ skills.
2) To revise irrigation manuals.
3) To improve hydrological analysis accuracy and to carry out case studies.
4) To manage water distribution and to carry out further case studies.
5) To introduce and apply a on trial basis, economical facility maintenance and repair skills, and to carry out the case studies.
6) To establish basic data related to irrigation planning and management.
7) To carry out training related to comprehensive irrigation technique.

(4) Inputs

2. Evaluation Team

Members of Evaluation Team

Team Leader/General: Nick Baoy, JICA Philippine Office
Abelardo Armentia, Shinfield Consultancy Phil., Inc.
Planning of Survey: JICA Philippine Office
Shinfield Consultancy Phil., Inc.

Period of Evaluation

December 13, 2002 – March 12, 2003

Type of Evaluation:

Ex-Post Evaluations by Overseas Offices

3. Results of Evaluation

3-1 Summary of Evaluation Results

<Development since after the Project Period>
When the terminal evaluation was conducted in 1998, the National Administration (NIA) agreed to establish an Irrigation Engineering Center (IEC) as a successor for the Diversified Crops Irrigation Engineering Program (DCIEP) I and II, transferring its activities, machinery and counterparts to the IEC after the project was completed. However, the IEC was not established, due to the following reasons; 1) organizational reforms by the government of the Philippines, 2) the need for a large budget to cover the damage caused by the El Nino phenomenon and the financial difficulty involved in establishing a new organization, and 3) the change in NIA’s directors and resulting policy changes.

(1) Impact
The cropping intensity due to the National Irrigation System (NIS) has risen gradually after 1993, with a 5% increase in the actual irrigated area during the period from 1999 to 2001. With the exception of 1998, when the El Nino phenomenon wreaked havoc, the NIS always maintained a 130% cropping intensity. Statistics show that the rate of NIS’s irrigated area and cropping intensity rose slightly after the project as well. However analysis by NIA staff indicates that this is largely due to NIA’s independent projects such as rehabilitation of irrigation facilities, facility maintenance, and improvements to the NIS operations and management.

Table: NIS’s Service Area, Actual Irrigated Area and Cropping Intensity (in percent), 1993-2001

(Source: NIA Corporate Plan, 2002-2011)

According to an interview with farming members of the Vegetable-Rice Irrigators’ Association, some farmers who received technical transfer were able to increase income through crop diversification. However, few farmers have begun the diversification of crops due to the costs and risks.

As for other impacts, it was notable that manuals and pamphlets prepared by the project were utilized in other government agencies like the Bureau of Soils and Water Management (BSWM) of the Department of Agriculture (DA).

(2) Sustainability
The establishment of the Irrigation Engineering Center (IEC) was not realized, even though it was meant to take over the activities of the DCIEP. Therefore, DCIEP activities were not continued within NIA, except for a few exceptions. Some equipment was used for system operation and equipment management in NIA and the Casecnan Multipurpose Irrigation and Power Project (CMIPP) Conditions, however, others were relatively underutilized because after the project was completed, the NIA did not allocate funds for operation and management costs for the equipment provided. On the other hand, recipients utilized acquired knowledge and skills in their present workplaces, and improved their skills to some degree after the project. Also, in a group discussion with farming leaders, it was claimed that the knowledge and skills acquired through the project were utilized and effective.

In terms of finance, the NIA’s budget was in deficit since 1993, which was one reason for the failure to secure sufficient funds for the operation and management. However, there are efforts within NIA to re-implement the use of LAN and the irrigation database management systems that had been discontinued due to insufficient funds and the transfer of the technicians who had received DCIEP training. This creates the possibility that staff that received DCIEP training could be reappointed.

3-2 Factors that Promoted the Realization of Effects

(1) Factors Concerning the Planning
N/A

(2) Factors Concerning the Implementation Process
N/A

3-3 Factors that Impeded the Realization of Effects

(1) Factors Concerning the Planning
N/A

(2) Factors Concerning the Implementation Process
1) With NIA’s overall budget decreasing, it was not possible to secure the funds necessary to continue with the project’s activities after 1998, which was a major inhibiting factor.
2) After 1998, NIA’s executive officers were changed several times, and with it came changes in NIA’s policies and project priorities. This affected the establishment of IES and lowered the current priority placed on crop diversification. As a result, the project results have not been maintained as expected.

3-4 Conclusion

The overall goal “to implement water management, facility management and irrigation of secondary crops through NIS on a nationwide scale” shows good statistical results. However, due to the failure to establish the IEC, the project staff and transferred knowledge and skills are being used in NIA projects on a limited basis.

3-5 Recommendations

(1) To bring about the modernization of irrigation development, the NIA is required to establish an Irrigation Engineering Center (IEC) to manage its inherent functions. Therefore, it is worthwhile reconsidering the establishment of the Center.

(2) The budget should be secure and sufficient for the project and NIA staff that participated in the training should utilize the acquired knowledge and skills. In addition, it is also necessary to take measures to utilize equipment provided by the project.

3-6 Lessons Learned

(1) To ensure the project’s sustainability, a permanent division within the implementing agency should be assigned as a counterpart organization, with permanent staff serving as project counterparts, instead of setting up a project management unit.

(2) For implementing similar projects, it should focus on matters related solely to the IES, and a project, which focuses on 1 or 2 of those should be considered. Through this process, sustainability of the effect of the project and verification of the impact will be ensured. In this case, the overall goal was set at a national level, and it should have been determined that it was difficult to measure the extent to which the project contributed to the entire IES, considering that the project targeted a few NIS projects.

3-7 Follow-up Situation

N/A