India - Karnataka Social Forestry Project

Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No. 11929 PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT INDIA KARNATAKA SOCIAL FORESTRY PROJECT (CREDIT NO. 1432-IN) June 1, 1993 MICROFICHE COPY Report No.:11929 IN Type: (PCR) Title: KARNATAKA SOCIAL FORESTRY (CR Author: GIBBS, CHRISTOPHER Ext.:31735 Room:T9044 Dept.:OEDDI Agriculture Operations Division Country Department II South Asia Regional Office This decoaent has a residcted distuibedea sad may be used by ealsonly In the peforuance of their olial dudes. Its contests wasot otewulse be disclsedaslb WeUd Bank authstsation. INDIA KARNATAKA SOCIAL FORESTRY PROJECT (Credit No. 1432-IN) PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS Name of Curency India Rupees (Rs.) Appraisal Year (1983) US$1.0 = Rs.10.1 Intervening years (1983184 - 1990/91) US$1.0 = Rs.13.7 Completion Year (1991/92) US$1.0 = Rs.24.4 FISCAL YEAR OF BORROWER April 1 - March 31 ABBREVIATIONS DCF Deputy Conservator of Forests ERR Economic Rate of Return FEW Forest Extension Worker GOI Government of India GOK Government of Karnataka IIPO Indian Institute of Public Opinion IRR Internal Rate of Return KSFD Karnataka State Forest Department MTR Mid-Term Review NGO Non-Government Organization GDA Overseas Development Administration PIM Project Implementation Manual PCR Project Completion Report RFO Range Forest Officer SAR Staff Appraisal Report SFW Social Forestry Wing VFC Village Forest Committee FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY THE WORLD BANK Washington, D.C. 20433 U.SA. 00. ao...o.wd opiiaU." Evkmo June 1, 1993 MEMOANDJMTo.THE EXECUTEDIRECIMRSAND1'HE_PRESIDENT Subject: Project Completion Report on India Karnataka Social Forestry Project (Cr.1432-IN Attached is the Project Completion Report on India Karnataka Social Forestry Project (Credit 1432-IN) prepared by the South Asia Regional Office, with Part H contributed by the Borrower. The project achieved its physical targets and, in terms of its stated objectives, the overall outcome is rated as satisfactory. The project, however, did not alleviate fuelwood shortages; the poverty groups which provided an important part of the rationale for the project, were addressed only marginally, effective community participation in project implementation was not attained; and institutional development of the implementing agency to improve its capacity to work coLaboratively with villagers, failed to occur. Useful adaptations to the original project design did occur during implementation, but they resulted largely from beneficiaries' independent responses to market conditions and external pressure from environmental groups on the Bank and the Borrower. Project sustainability is rated as unlikely on social and institutional grounds. An impact evaluation is intended at a future date. Attachment This document has a restricted distribution and may be used bY recipients only In the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorzastion. FOR OICIAL USE ONLY PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT INDIA KARNATAKA SOCIAL FORESTRY PROJECT (Crdit No. 1432-IN) TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE .......................................................................................... 1 EVALUATION SUMMARY ............................................................................. & PART I PROJECT REVIEW FROM TIIE BANK'S PERSPECTIVE.............................. 1 1. Prjectasdentity ............. . ................................................. 1 2. IncLoduction ................................ .................... 1 3. Background ............................................................................................. 2 4. Ptgect Otjectives and Description ............. ... .. ..***. ........... .............. 3 5. Project Concept and Design................... ..................................... 3 6. Project Inplementation................................................................................. 6 7. The Role of Governm ent Policies .................................................................. 10 R. Project Acbievements ..................................... .... ..... 11 9. Project Sustainability ........... .................................................. 14 10 Institutional Performance .................... ................. 15 11. Overall Findings and Lessons Learned ............................................................. 17 PART I PROJECT REVIEW FROM THE BORROWEk'SPERSPECVE ................. 19 PART I STATISTICAA, I ORMATION ............................................................. 26 1. Related Bank lIans and Credits ..................................................................... 26 2. Pxqject'limetable ....................................................................................... 27 3. Credit Disbursements ................................................................................. 27 4. Project Implementation................................................................................. 28 5. Projct Cost and Financing ........................................................................... 30 A. Project Costn......................................................................................... 30 B. Project F cing ............................................................................. 30 6. P Results ......................................................................................... 31 A. irc Benefits ................................................................. ... ..... ..... 31 B. Price of Outputs ................................................................................... 31 C. E ono iC IMPaCt ......................................................................... ........ 32 D. Fitncial Impact ......................... ................................... ...... 32 7. Status of Covenants ........................................... .............. ..................... 33 8. Mission Data and Staff Inputs.................................................................. 34 A. Mission Data ............0..................................................................... 34 B. staff inputs ......................................................................................... 34 AT1TACHMdENT 1 ......................................................................................... 35 1. Financia Costs - Models I and II, Gomal and C & D Lands ..................................... 35 2. Financial Costs - Model III, Tank forehores ..................................................... 35 3. Financial Costs - Model IV, Canal Banks........................................................... 36 4. Financial Costs - Model V, Roadsides................................................ . 36 5. Financial Costs - Model VI, Bamboo .............................................. ............... 37 This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the perforuance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. 6. Fania Costs - ModelV1I,Farm Forestry ....................................................... 37 7. P~rojct Economic Analysis .......................................................................... 38 MAPS BRD 17162 IBRD 17163 PROJECT COMPLET1ON REPORT INDIA KARNATAKA SOCIAL FORESTRY PROJECT (Credit No. 1432-IN) PREFACE This is the'roject Completion Report (PCRN for the Karnataka Social Forestry Project (Credit No. 1432-IN) for which a Credit of SDR25.6 million (US$27.0 million equivalent) was approved on December 20, 1983. The Credit was closed on March 31, 1992, three years behind schedule. During the funds redeployment exercise for India in December 1991, SDR2.2 million (US$3.0 million equivalent) was cancelled. The final disbursement from the credit was made on September 1, 1992 and the balance of SDR23.4 million was fully disbursed. Parts I and I of this report were prepared by an FAO/CP project c letion mission which visited India in July 1992 (Preface, Evaluation Summary, Parts I and IM. Part II was prepared by the Government of Karnataka. The preparation of this PCR was based inteal on the Staff Appraisal Report, the legal documents, supenision reports, correspondence between the Bank, the Overseas Development Administration [(ODA), co-financer of the Credit], and the Borrower, internal Bank memoranda, and disc ssions with Bank staff both at Headquarters and at the New Delhi Office. iff PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT INDIA KARN 4TAKA SOCIAL FORESTRY PROJECT (Credit No. 1432-IN) EVALUATION SUMMARY Project Objectives 1. The project's primary objective was to augment fuiwood supplies in priority rural and semi-urban areas through the establishment of plantations on Government, vitag and private lands. Secondary goals were the provision of small dimension timber, fodder and other related forest products. the project covered the entire State, priority for tree establishment was in those districts which at least two of the three conditions: (a) mean annual ainfall below 800 mm; (b) designated forest area less than 15 percent of total geographic area; and (c) more than nine tural-based persons per ha of deAi forest area. The project's main target group was the landless, marvinl farmers (0-1 ha) farmers (1-2 ha). To achieve these ends, the project was to plant f50,00 ha of plantations with nearly 900 million seedlings, 88 percent of which were to be given to private landholders. In addition to the primary planting activities, the project was to provide support to the Karnataka State Forestry Department (KSFD) for project or nt monitoring and evaluation, research, training, extension and ublicity. Due to exchange rate movements and delays in procurement and staff hiring, a can undisbursed Credit balance remained at the end of the original Closing Date in December 1988. For this reason, and to fulfil unained planting targets, the project was extended three times, eventually lengthening the project life from 5 to 8 years and 3 months. Implementation Experience 2. Plantation establishment advanced rapidly at first because of existing capacity and experience in the KSFD. In contrast, hiring of staff, purchasing of vehicles and civil works proceeded slowly. Delays in sanctioning staff positions partially explain the initial recruitment problems. The number of sanctioned positions eventually reached 2,814, or 62 percent of the Staff Appraisal Report (SAR) target, of which 96 percent were filled. Monitoring and evaluation, research, training, extension and publicity were particularly weak aspects of the project. Publication of the Prqject Implementation Manual (PIM) was delayed until December 1986. Furthermore, a Monitoring and Evaluation cell was never established which hindered on-going evaluation. A Research Manual was eventually produced in 1988, but was never seriously followed. A total of 7,415 persons received project-funded training, 43 percent of whom were from outside the KSFD. Unfortunately, training was not provided to forest rangers or guards although they had the greatest training needs. From 1987 onwards, two new tramining facilities became available, but these were not adequate for the level of training envisioned. The proposed extension approach, involving the training of subject matter specialists to back up the existing agricultural extensionists, was never formally implemented. Instead, the KSFD developed its own extension approach by converting forest guards into extenslonists. In addition, forest extension workers were often assigned non-extension duties, and motivators faced an array of constraints because of this. Nonetheless, the motivators could be credited with generating an increased interest in tree planting. Iv 3. Plantations were generally well established under the project. Survival rates for the period 1983/84 to 1987/88 for private and plantations were 67 percent and 82 percent, respectively. Survival rates are surprisingly good in the light of concerms aboutpoor seedling quality, but the rate of growth appears lower than anticipated, due to high ..ant- densities, pilferage and post and disease problems with some species, and uOZY establishment technology. Sowing of various native and exotic species on mounds created by trench excavation was practiced, but survival rates were often poor or nil because of trampling A shading out. Species choice was dominated by Eucalyptus teredcornis, but this was eventually modified in the face of strong criticism from local and international environmental ups, despite lack of scientific evidence of the reportedly negative effects of the species. By the bCal year of the project the use of Eucalyptus had declined to a maximum of 3 percent of the trees planted on villagegovernment plantations and 17 percent on private lands. Overall. Eucalyptu was estimated to at 34 percent of the seedlings raised under the project. Ptoduction and distribution of s s was based on Kissan or "farmer" nurseries set up with the assistance of the prqject. However, only limited private marketing of seedlings occurred and whether the Kissan nurseries will continue to operate is unclear. 4. Despite an emphasis in the project's design on consultation with communities concerning specie. selection and impacts on fodder supplies, little consultation tok place during the propet's early years. Opportunities improved markedly with the introduction of ancroplanning in 1986, bt its promise was never realized and only a few microplans were actually undertaken before planth., was commenced. Little planning was done for management of plantations established prior to 1991, although most of the 94 management plans so far completed are reasonably well prepared (3,500 are still to be done). Village Porest Committees (VFCs) have been set up in only 100 ommunlties and coverinp less than 5 percent of the villages. Many of these have reportedly been formed because the project so required, and not because the members wanted to contribute. NGOs could have helped with management planning but their involvement was not envisioned in the project's design and generally the KSFD has not made a large-scale effort to work with volunteer groups. Project Results 5. Using forestry planting targets as a base for assessment, the project might be considered effective. Over 41,000 ha of plantations were established on village/government lands and a reported 507 million seedlings were distributed to farmers (estimated as sufficient to plant 122,000 ha). As a social forestr project, directed at benefitting poor people, the project had major deficiencies. Thee was httle community participation and the poorest people did not reap the benefits envisaged at appraisal. Under the project, 3,627 villages benefitted, each establishing an av of 11.3 ha of block and/or strip plantations. However a benefit-sharing order, which was ised by the Government in 1986, applied only to block plantations (not strip plantations) and was not effectively implemented until management planning began in earnest in 1991. Concerns also arose during the project over whether smaller and marginal farmers and the landless were benefitting from the distribtion of seedlings. Evidence suggests that larger farmers circumvented the free seedling litts and have benefitted more than was indicated by proect records. The landless only had their homesteads to plant. They were supposed to benefi through supplies of cheap fuelwood but this did not happen as most of the produce were sold to traders. The promised non-timber products were also not produced. V Project Sustainability 6. Sustainability will be a critical issue for this projecL Since much less attention was paid to participation, support, and feedback activities, than to planting targets, there are serious doubts concerming the future management and regeneration of existing community plantations. Villagers tend to regard the woodlots as public works projects and not as community assets, and the number of management phuns yet to be prepared is daunting - more than 3,500 are required within the next few years - and even interim guidelines for management of these plantations have not been adopted. Concerning farm forestry, attempts to price seedlings have largely failed. Farmers are not well informed about alternatives to Eucalyptus which is still the most readily marketable crop, and many continue to see. trees as competing with crops. Part of this is due to lack of suitable alternative models and weak entension efforts. However, there are encouraging signs: several communities have expressed interest in locating woodlots in their areas, and some private independent nurseries have appeared in a few districts, partially in response to the project. The potential impact on wood markets and price levels due to possible ove-supply has not been assessed (but it has become an issue in other states with similar projects). Findings and Lessons Learned 7. Th Karnataka Social Forestry Project is unusual in that physical targets appear to have been met but the project cannot really be deemed a success. While the forestry production objectives were largely fulfilled, the project did not ensure that benefits were directed to the poorest people. The main reasons for this are: (a) failure to a the magnitude of the change that the Department was required to make: frum a policing body to a developmental agency; (b) training of the lower level field staff who actually had to implement the program was neglected; and (c) high planting targets utilized most available resources and few were left to nurture crucial prom support units. To a large extent, the project simply expanded upon existing activities rather ta stimulating significant changes in the technical and social aspects of the Department's work. The lack of serious community consultation, especially in the early years, engendered a passive attitude towards community plantations amongst villagers, and this has hindered the project's long-term success. Most of the wood harvested from these plantations will likely be sold for urban and industrial use and it is questionable how mudh the disadvantaged are likely to benefit from an increase in wood supply. Kissan or "private" nurserymen could not graduate to self-reliance, due to competing departmental nurseries which supplied free seedlings. Many recipients of free seedlings have also planted trees to supply industry, rather than to increase rural fuelwood supplies, which was one of the project's chief aims. In hindsight, it was not realistic to expect to supply cheap fuelwood to the poor through community forestry and private plantations and many of the problems of realizing that goal could have been foreseen. 1 PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT INDIA KARNATAKA SOCIAL FORESTRY PROJECT (Credit No. 1432-N) PART L Project Review from the Bank's Perspective 1. Project Identity Project Name Karnataka Social Forestiry Project Credit No. : 1432-IN RVP Unit : South Asia Region Country : India Sector : Agriculture Sub-sector : Forestry 2. Introduction 2.1 Forest Sector Situation. India is estimated to have a forest and woodland area of about 650,000 square kilonetres, accounting for 22 percent of the total land area. Timber, fuelwood and charcoal are the primary products produced, with fuelwood alone accounting for 65 percent of rural energy consumption. Minor products such as lac for export fodder atd fruit are also important, as are certain forests of eligious significance which have n designated as sacred groves. Pressure on India's forests has been immense, due to a combination of wood requirements, overgrazing, tue and expansion of the cultivated area to meet food needs.Population growth is one of the mqjor causes of deforestation, which in tum results in serious environmental problems such as soil erosion and reservoir sedimentation. A availability of fuly.od has led to its substitution with cowdung and agricural residues, to a reduction in the application of organic fertilizers to farm fields and, consequently, to dinins ng soil fertility. 2.2 Policy Environment. The need to address the critical shortfall in fuelwood supply, as well as to increase the productivity of degraded woodlands were key issues behind the development of social forestry in India. Recognizing the need to take action on the forest situation, the 1952 Forest Po promoted the notion of protecting existing forests and involving people in the establishment management of village forests and "tree-lands" by providing them with a direct stake in such land. Frther definition was provided with the revised National Forest Policy of 1988 which emphasims the ecological importance of maintaining and increasing the forest cover in vulnerable areas. The new policy outlines a series of measures, such as the use of tee "patta" schemes and private supply of industrial wood requirements to involve communities a the protection and nanagement of forests, and individuals in social forestry activities. Tee patta refers to the granting of usufrct to individuals over trees planted on government lands in return for a commitnent to maintain them. As a result of the pn;icy response to India's forest concerns, the 2 country's wooded area actually increased at an annual average rate of 0.3 percent during the period 1965 to 1989. 2.3 Bank Leading and Social Forestry. Contributing to the afforestation effort has been the Bank's active involvement in India's forest sector, including the financing of seven projects in social forestry alone since 1978. The first generation of social forestry projects, in Uttar Pradesh (Credit No. 925-IN) and Gujarat (Credit No. 961-IN), were followed by projects in West Bengal (Credit No. 1178-IN) and Jammu and Kashmir/Haryana (Credit No. 1286-IN), prior to appraisal of the Karnataka project in 1983. Subsequently, social forestry projects were commissioned in Kerala (Credit No. 1514-IN) ind in several states (Gujarat4 Uttar Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh and Rajasthan) under the Nati nal Social Forestry Project (Credit No. 1611- IN). These projects were all designed to address the shortage of fuelwood and other secondary products in rural areas. Since the last of the social forestry projects was initiated in 1985, thinking has shifted away from support to social forestry alone, to include management of government forests, active participation of communities, and a greater role for non-government anizations. Two projects have been initiated under this new approach: Maharashtra Forestry (Cet 2328-IN) and West Bengal Forestry (Credit 2341-IN). Both projects were appraised in 1991. 3. Background 3.1 The State of Karnataka is -tuated in Southwest India, with an area of about 192,000 km2 (19.2 million ha) and a population of 45 million (1991). With an avere-ge population growth rate of about 2.0 percent per annum from 1981-91, it is one of the fastest growing States. Most of the State lies on the Deccan Plateau, bordered in the west by a coastal strip about 30 km wide, with av e rainfall of 3,000-3,700 mm, and by the Western Ghats, low hills of altitudes up to 1,500 mandaverage rainfall of 2,500 mm. Average rainfall elsewhere in the state is about 1,350 mm, but many areas are classified as drought prone. Government forests cover 20 percent of the State's land area, with less than one percent additionally accounted for by private forests. Approximately 50 percent of the forested area has a canopy density of less than 20 percent and is rated as degraded. Productivit is expectedly low, because of past degradation through unrestricted felling, burning and overgrazng, and also because of aridity %nd low soil fertility. The estimated state- wide consumption of fuelwood is 4 million tonnes, of which 25 percent is consumed by rural users for domestic purposes and the remainder by urban dwellers and industry. Within the project area, consisting of the dryer portions of the Stte, per capita daily consumption of fuelwood is estimated at 1.3 kg, and fuelwood meets 80 percent of overall rural fuel needs. 3.2 Social forestry activities in Karnataka prior to the project emphesized planting on government lands and involved mnimal consultation with local people. Early planting programs were nonetheless sible for the establishment of over 16,000 ha of pistations plus the distribution of 211 m ion seedlings between 1979/80 and 1982/83. In order to step up the pace of activity, the Government of Karnataka prepared a project proposal in 1981 for multi-lateral fn c onsideration. This proposal, which was to serve as the project's preparation report, the need to increase wood production and self-sufficiency in wood products primarily in twelve dryer districts of the State and to involve villagers in the planting and management of plantations. Approximately 180,000 ha of plantations were to be created un&kr the proposal, of which 60% were to be on private farmlands planted with seedlings provided by the govenment and the remainder on government lands. Communities were to benefit financially from the government plantations by sharing in any revenues generated from village plantations, and from the employment created by the project. 3 4. Project Objectives and Description 4.1 The primary objective of the project at appraisal was to augment fuelwood supplies in priotity mural and seml-urban areas and, secondarily, to provide small timber, fodder and other Wlated forest products. The project also targeted the landless, marginal (0-1 ha) farmers and small (1-2 ha) farmers, as beneficiaries. To achieve these ends, the Staff Appraisal Report (SAR) set out an ambitious planting program covering some 150,000 ha of plantations involving the production and distribution of nealy 900 million seedlings, of which 88 percent were to be given to private landholders under a "farm forestry" sub-component. More specifically, the project was to establsh: (a) 20,000 ha of plantations on village gomal and government owned C&D class wastelands 1; (b) 3,000 ha of plantations on irrigation tank foreshores; (c) 4,000 ha of strip plantations along roadsides and canal banks; (d) 2,000 ha of bamboo plantations; and (e) 120,000 ha of private plantations on farmlands. 4.2 In addition to the primary plantinp activities, which constituted the most important project component, funds were included for "implementation assistance" to the Social Forestry Wing (SFW) of the Karnataka State Forestry Department (KSFD), the implementing agency. Under the project organization component, support took the form of Incremental staf=f vehicles and equipment and civil works. Training and research comprised the remaining two activities. The SAR advised against formulation of a distinct extension service, recommending instead that existing agricultural extension services be utilized with support from a core of forestry expertise amongst KSFD field staff. To support the extension service, the SAR made allowance for the hiring of 3,000 forest "motivators" to work directly with communities and individuals in promoting the planting of trees. 4.3 Total project costs were estimated in the SAR at Rs.552.3 million (US$56.6 million) in 1983' currency units. Planting activities alone accounted for 52 percent of the total. The Bank was to provide standard fi" for 48 percent of project costs, while an additional 40 percent was to be co-financed by the British governments Overseas Development Administration (ODA) as a grant. The Government of India was to finance the remaining 12 percent of costs. The OA assistance ended on March 31, 1990, when its third and last extension was completed. The Bank's share of project costs was increased to 90 percent overall in line with the Bank's revised country assistance strategy for agriculture projects. S. Project Concept and Design 5.1 In designing the project, a number of guiding principles were taken into consideration. These included "tng of areas for planting with low cropping potential, involving communities in the projects activities and ensuring project outputs went towards satisfying local wood product 1 Gomel lands efr to gazing lands mder te conol of villages, wile CAD lands are wastelands which were originally controlled by the GOK Revenue Department but which were handed over to dhe Forestry Department in 1979. 4 needs, especially those of the less advantaged. The project was also designed with the intention that project costs would be recovered wherever possible. Innovative features in the project's design included a much greater reliance on farm forestry than in previous projects and the intention to use existing extension services. However, the Karnataka Social Forestry Project was appraised at a time when social forestry in India was increasingly coming =uder fire from non-governmental organiatons (NGOs) and international envirnmental -oups for its over reliance on Eucalyptus, and a tendency to displace food crops and generate supplies of industrial wood rather than fuelwood, and fruit and fodder for local use. Unfortunately, this controversy was not sufficiently taken into account in the discussion in the SAR and the project design. With 92 percent of farm forestry plantings proposed as Eucalypas, it was little wonder that the project came under intense scrutiny. The Eucalyptus issue and other key aspects of the project design worthy of closer review are discussed below. 5.2 The Eucalyptus Controversy. In Kolar District, where the Karnataka version of the controversy raged strongest, the species was criticised for lowering water tables, competing with crops for limited soil moisture, robbing the soil of nutrients, and exposing vast areas to erosion. Some of the criticisms may have been unfair. For example, lowering of the water table was partially due to a arge increase in the number of borewells drilled in Kolar over the period considered, while soil nutrient losses may have ccuned regardless of the species selected because of the poor quality of some of the sites planted. ODA has conducted research in Karnataka examimag the impact of Eucalyptus on the water table, but thus far results have been indeterminate. Wile Eucalyptus on a per tree basis may use somewhat more water than other species, on a per unit of wood produced per unit of water supplied they are very efficient. Project- funded research at the University of Agncultural Sciences at Bangalore, however, has shown that Eucalyptus has a strong competitive effect on adjacent cropped areas. In response to criticism levelled at the prqject, the KSFD, despite lack of scientific evidence of the reportedly negative effects of Eucalypaus, early on reoriented the species mix away from Eucalyptus for block and strip plantations, increasing the emphasis instead on fruit and multi-purpose trees. In light of the controversy, the projets design should have taken greater account fthe potential shortcomings of Eucalyptus in arriving at a species mix for the vancus planting models. However, farmers planted eucalyptus not because of ignorance, but because of its fast growth and ready marketability, and also partly because it did not require as much labor and other costly inputs as agricultural crops. 5.3 Industrial versus Social Forestry. The practice of supplying industrial wood to the local pulp and paper industry was well established in Karnataka, especially in Kolar and surrounding districts, before the project was initiated. The fact that much of the project's output would likely this market should have been apparent from past experience in the State, and in the light of the returns available in companson tofuelwood sales. The pulp and paper industry will no doubt benefit from the project, but perhaps not as much as some critics have argued. Thus most pulpwood is obtained from distant Kolar and Bangalore districts, with hauls of 250 to 300 kn, whereas those obtained from areas near the paper mills are used for cash and food crops which bring higher returns than Eucalyptus. Planters have responded to the industrial demand for Eucalypus according to local growing conditions, labour availability and the incentives available for different land uses, and not to pressure from industry wishing to reduce its transport costs. Nonetheless, the prices paid by the pulp and paper industry reflect industrial policies which protect such industries and which may result in higher input prices. By distributing free seedlings for industrial woodlot planting 1, the project inadvertently subsidized the pulp and paper industry. S Trlds happmd puly because of political cmideions ad panly due to KSFD official relucame netwlbstaading ageeauat with do Bank to prce seedling at each tension. S 5.4 Village Fuelwood Supply. The project was predicated on the notion that by increasing local supplies of biomass, rural access to fuelwood would necessarily improve. This assumption can be faulted on several accounts. First, villagers by and large do not purchase their fuelwood. Cooking energy needs ae still met from biomass gathered freely, and when one item becomes scace, such as fuelwood, it is replaced by another source of energy such as crop residues or dung (with obvious uences for soil fertility). Consequently, except in urban and semi- urban areas, there is little demand for fuelwood. The SAR recognized this and proposed that up to two-thids of community plantation harvests would be auctioned to traders supplying urban and semi-urban areas, and not be retained in the communities where the plantations would be situated. This does little however to increase local supplies of forest products, which was a stated objective of the project. Second, the existence of a fulwood shortage is not always perceived by individual villages, even though evidence exists that overall forest cover is being depleted. Supplies are adequate in some communities because of plentiful cuttings from coconut, and in other areas, Prosopis jAlfora has been planted or has spread naturally after being introduced into Bellary District twenty years ago. The advent of copious supplies Prosopis, despite its being considered a nuisance by some, has clearly been an important development for fuelwood supply. Ironically, its spread has occurred side-by-side with the project's activities, and has in all likelihood reduced the need for the project in some areas. However, the poteni for promoting Prosopis under the aegis of the project was never realized. Third, m by the rich of the free seedling supply should have been foreseen, but were not. farmers sent others to collect seedlings for them while others on-sold the seedlings. Fourth, the landless have only limited areas to plant. Fifth, community plantations took place on land which were thought to be unused* in fact the were used, in particular by the weaker sections, and planting this land increased the an4 of the local villagers to the project. 5.5 All of the above points would have been fairly obvious if Adequate sector work, including socio-economic studies, had been done prior to the project's initiation. A Wood Balance Study, proposed at the time of appraisal and agreed to during ject negotiations, was not completed until 1987. Available far too late, the study considered only the demand side and was far too general to have had much application to the project area nonetheless, it tended to support the assertion that the fuelwood shortage may be a more site-specific problem than previously realized. 5.6 The Reliance on Block Plantations. The SAR indicated that the project's objectives would be met through "plantations located throughout the State." Aroforestry, which can be defined as the planting o trees in association with cropping rather than a place of it, was not explicitly included in the project's design, although some of the recommended species are more commonly associated with a rather than with block plantings. Since smaller farmers are constrained from planting inblocks landholding size, the concentration on promoting block plantations limited their participation, which had been targeted in the project's objectives. Ec i block plantations was also criticised for displacing food crops and farm labour, but these complaints were not always well-founded 1. Some farmers did plant their seedlings along bunds, randomly within fields, and around their houses, but there are widely held beliefs that all trees compete with crops and reduce yields and this discourages such practices. Consequently, I The loss of food producdon was anamined by various supervision teams and it was concluded that most cropped land that was planted to trees was of low productivity, and that falling net revuns from drylad farming in these a was encouraging farmers to seek alternative land uses. while block plantations do displace farm employment, this view ignores the prevailing labour market dynamics which may lead landowurs to seek lower labour intensity land uses in response to labour availability, wages and personal cireumstances. 6 without including agroforestry in the project's design, efforts to dispel this notion and to introduce crop-friendly trees under the project were minimal. 4. Project Implementation 6.1 The Pace of Implementation. Hirin of staff, purchasing of vehicles and construction of civil woks proceeded slowly in the early years. In contrast, plantation establishment advanced rapidy because resources were lEy in place and because of the relative ease of implementation. i ad , the project provided retroactive financing of up to US$2.7 million for the continuation of lantin and nursery production which were well underway prior to 1983. Delays in sanctioning staff and a decision to eliminate the purchase of motorcycles and bicycles for Range Forest Officers (RFOs) and extension workers/motivators, partially explain the slow pace of implementation in early years 1. 'The number of sanctioned positions eventually teached 2,814, or 62 percent of the SAR target, of which 96 percent were filled. Most of the shortfall was due to a failure to recruit motivators - only 1,500 were sanctioned of a total SAR target of 3,000 2. A shortage of trained foresters also made it difficult to fill the forester positions, and this was further complicated by a ban on hiring of foresters after 1988/89. 6.2 Implementation Support Issues. Implementation support consisted of monitoring and evaluation, research, training, extension and publicity activities. Taken together, these project activities were particularly weak, despite frequent comment by monitoring and supervision missions. Publication of the Project Implementation Manual (PIM) was delayed until December 1986, leaving an information gap for those implementing the project A Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Cell was never constituted within the project Instead, the M&E cell was created in 1986 under the direct control of the Principal Conservator to service the entire Forestry Department As a result, few studies were done of relevance to the project Record keeping was sporadic at the district and Circle levels, so that many reports and statistics were not properly transmitted to headquarters in Bangalore. Similar problems occurred with research, despite the Bank's urging from early on. A research manual was eventually produced in 1988, but was never seriously followed. Research conducted included the following: (a) the suitability of species for various plantation models; (b) the performance of tall plants; (c) the optimal trench and pit size; (d) grafting techniques; and (e) nursery techniques. However, only general qualitative results were available at the termination of the project Research funded by the project and conducted at the University of Agricultural Sciences, examined seed quality and tree-food crop competition amongst agroforestry species.This work was found to be both interestino and well done. A total of 7,415 KSFD staff, NGO members, Mandal Panchayat representatives, teachers, students, nursery operators, farmers and others received project-funded training. Of this total, 43 percent were non- project recipients - a surprisingly high figure given the great need within the project itself. Training was provided to higher grade staff but not to the lower level field staff (Rangrs and below) who had to implement the project From 1987 onwards, two new training facilities became available, allowing more regular courses. However, these facilities were never adequate for the level of training activity envisioned in the SAR. For example, motivators were to receive 2 to 3 weeks of initial training, followed by monthly refresher courses. In practice, they attended only a single 3- I According to de KSPD, RPMs were encouraged to purchase their own veldcles and then receive a mileage allowance for govermuent travel, in liou of motorcycle purchases. 2 Motivators were employed part-time initially, but later they sought full-time government jobs which prompted the KSFD to give up further recruitment. Of the 1,473 motivators actually emAployed at tie project closing date, 275 were female. At nearly 19%, the number of female motivators came close to eaching the pject's target of 20%. Social forestry may have been more successful if the proportion of women motivators had been higher. 7 day course and no formal refresher courses. Despite these problems, training was one of the better support activities. 6.3 Under the extension approah proposed in the SAR, subject matter specialists in social were to be trained to backup the existing agricultural extensionists. This approach was never formally, although informal contacts continue to occur between KSPD field staff d gricultural extension workers. Part of the problem was an unwillingness by the AgricultureDepartment staff to promote what they viewed as an activity which displaced annual croppin. Many KSFD staff were unaware of agroforestry's potential compatibility with cropping, and these misconceptions were never addressed. Instead, the KSFD chose to develop its own emonsion approach by converting forest guards into extensionists. The 350 forest extension workers (FEW) were required to supervise nearly 1,500 motivators, as well as perform other activities. In theory the duties at the two levels overlapped enormously, but in practice the FEWs were often assigned non-extension duties, such as supervision of community plantings and nurseries. Motivators faced an array of constraints in performing their duties: pay was low and neither transport allowances nor bicycles were provided, despite the fact that some motivators had to service up to 54 villages. Nonetheless, the motivators were credited on a nuraber of occasions with generating intreased interest in tree planting. 6.4 Publicity activities included the production of posters, videos and pamphlets, and the organization of mass meetings. The latter comprised 1,952 contact meetings involving headquarters staff during 1986-92, 807 of which took place within the Bangalore Circle area (Bangalore Rural, Tumkur and Kolar Districts). Printed and film publicity materials, while being of some usefulness, were devoted mostly to the promotion of tree planting, especially among literates, consequently they were of limited use to illiterate farmers. 6.5 Technical Aspects. Plantations were generally well established under the project: ex post research by the Indian Institute of Public Opinion (IIPO) indicates that the Karnataka Social Forestry plantations had the highest survival rate of the 5 different state projects examined. For farm forestry, the overall survival rate for the period 1983/84 to 1987/88 was 67 percent. As might be expected, this figure is somewhat lower than the 82 percent survival rate estimated for block and strip plantations. Survival rates are surprisingly good in light of concerns expressed by various supervision missions about seedling quality 1. However, survival rates #ve no indication of the rate of growth, and from imited field data, growth rates (or at least standing stocks) appear lower than those anticipated at appraisal. Several factors may account for this. For instance, the SAR secommended block plantation densities of 5,000 trees/ha, which was probably too high, except for production of a few specific products. The KSFD reduced the density early in the project to between 1600 and 2000 trees/ha, but even this would be high where the sowing of fodder grasses or the planting of fruit trees was to be undertaken. A second factor is want of silvicultural management oplantations, about which more has been said later. A third factor is pilferage frn community plantations, which has resulted in substantially reduced standing stocks at some sites. Finally, and disease problems have hindered the growth of some species such as Leucaena 6.6 Seedlings at block plantations were planted in 4 mx 0.45 mx 0.45 m trenches and trench size was a matter of contention between the Bank and the KSFD, with the KSFD preferring a 45 cm trench to the SAR's ecommended 30 cm trench. The use of the 45 cm trench increased the establishment cost of the block plantations by approximately 25 percent. Sowing of various native 1 Seedling quality concerns partially stemmed from the inadequate supply of seeds fam potentially desirable "pu" trees, 'seed stands', 'seed production areas' ot 'clonal seed orchards' so that the supply of better quality seeds was insufficient for planting needs. 8 and exotic species on the mounds created by trench excavation was a practice carried on thoughout the project. Although this technique was attractive ecologically, survival rates were poor or il, In some cases, because of trampling and shading out. This technique and other practices associated with trenching generally worsened rather than improved plantation economics. The Bank supervision missions in the last two years of the project advocated a vegetadve conservation technology which involved digging a contour v-ditch and establishment of a hedge row with vetiver grass and shrubs in the ditch, but this was not implemented even on a trial basis. 6.7 BeZore launching of the project, there was no convincing scientific evidence of the adverse effect of Eucalyptus. The SAR therefore proposed a species mix dominated by Eucalyptus teredcorx, but this was eventually modified in the face of the strong criticism noted above. Some argue that the KSFD over-reacted to the criticisms by limiting the proportion of Eucalyptus seedlings that could be raised In Government and kissan nurseries to only 15 percent. In the first year of planting, 1983-84, Eucalytus species represented from 17.5 percent to 59.5 percent of non-farm forestry plantigs, depending upon planting model. By tbe final year of the prqject, 1991- 92, Eucalyptus had declined to a maximum of 3 percent of the species mix for any one planting modeL Under farm forestry, Eucalypms was to constitute 92 percent of the seedlings distributed; however, by 1991-92 the share of Eucalyptus had declined to no more than 17 percent. Overall, Eucalypais was estimated to represent 34 percent of the seedlings raised under the project. 6.8 Planning and Community Participation. Despite the emphasis in the Project Agreement on consultation with communities concerning species selection and to ensure there were no adverse impacts on fodder supplies from plantations sited on gomal lands, the project went ahead in its early years with vCry Ittle community consultation. On CAD lands, which villagers rarely differentiated fom gamal lands in terms of usage, the Agreement was less stringent, and the KSFD was essentially free to plant whatever and wherever they wanted. The potential for community participadinImproved markedly with the introduction of m1crplaning In 1986. This technique, which was already in use elsewhere in India, involves prepara of a Villape Profile covering demographics, landholding and other relevant statistics, followed by interviews with representative families to determine their perceptions and needs reladng to forestry. From these interviews a draft plan is formulated by KSFD stalf and modified after discussions. However, the promise of microplanning was never realized and in the projects latter years enthusiasm waned and fewer ancroplans were completed. In addition, the quality of later microplanning was clearly lower than initial efforts and many were actually undertaken after planting was completed. Timing difficulties with the selection and approval of target villages at the political level were partially to blame for the low number of useful microplans completed, but many could have been initiated prior to formal approval being received. 6.9 Little planning for the management of those plantations ahead established was done pnarto 1991, even though some lntations were by then at least 7 years old. By June 1992, onl management plans far abo1 communities (only 5 percent of the total) have been out of the 3,600 communities requiring them. Those completed appear to have been well thought out reflecting the dedication of project field staff and improvements in consultation. Village Forest Committees (VFCs) that have been set up in these 100 communities are key elements in plantation management planning, as they serve as a focal group for community discussions and decision- making. Because the management of plantations was no longer the KSFD's resposbitity after the first three years, silvicultural options like thinning, pruning or lopping, coppicing and follow-up multiple-shoot cutting were largely neglected. Intermediate harvests could have provided a Bow of products as incentives to the user communitiesto protecthe plantations. A managementplanning workshop funded by ODA in September 1991, has also been a factor contributing to this success. However, an ODA evaluation indicates that many VFCs were formed in response to project conditionality and did not reflect a real desire by villagers to participate. Furthermore, women 9 members were often spoken for by male elatives, and the committees were usually dominated by the panchayats. While preparation of such a large number of management plans would be time consuming, interim guidelines on silvicultural aspects of plantation management and a back-up action plan for the next few years are needed. 6.10 At the Mid-tem Review (MTR) in 1986, the project's evaluators noted the absence of NGO participation in the project. In contrast, social forestry projects elsewhere in India have used NOOs as effective linkages between the Forestry Department and communities. That NGO involvement was not envisioned in the SAR was probably a shortcoming in project design. The Indian Forestry Service has a long tradition of keepigpeople out of forests, and although a change in focus has been an important element in Idinsocial forestry, the expectation that Forestry Departments could make such a transition so quickly was =nrealistic. In fact, the KSED has made strides in this direction, despite a seeming reluctance to work on a significant scale with NGOs. KSFD feels that there are few NGOs with established credentials with thelc population and proven comnmitment to social forestry. This attitude derives partly from some gnc NGO failures at establishing plantations under the project. Nevertheless, NGOs could h played a more useful role in promoting participation and bridging the gulf between the KSFD and the cAmMunities although this may have required direct project support and training. 6.11 Seedling Production and Distribution. The central mechanism for production and distribution of seedlings was the use of Kissan or "farmer" nurseries set up with the assistance of the project. Project seedling production data showing the importance of Kissans in seedling production are presented below. Seedling Production by Type of Nursery (millions) epart* ota ________ 0.No 184 7 3 5lY - 76 100 32. 7 52 .3- - 3 00 986 15.9 120 8 -_ 87 100 980731.4 54~ 4. 7 8.3 100 987/8 .j 59 53 1 1 9.7 100 988P1.3 71 .71.2 _ 02 10 989 1. 73 11.9 1 3.0 S_ . 00 9911 1. 55 1.- 27 10 99im. 9 12.2 ., S 8 0 Total: 33.0 52 196.9 4 16.3 _ 462 @ 6.12 Kissan operators were initially selected by ject staff and were provided with poly bags, seeds and other inputs free of charge. They were expected to sell ti r seedlings back to the government at a fixed prce* and repay the cost of inputs from the proceeds Later modifications included an attempt to get Xssan operators to sell seedlings to private individuals, but a number of barriers prevented this from working: (a) nursery operators were required to price at or above the established government price, which denied theM the opportunity to take advantage of costs which were lower than those of govemrnent nurceries; (b) the general availability of free seedlings, either legitimately or clandestinely, hindered the development of demand for iced seedlings (c) the willingness of the government to purcha seedlings at fixed prices m it too easy f Kisban operators to ignore market development; and (d) changes occurred in the selection of Kissan operators (termed "beneficiaries") which favoured political criteria over technical ones. In the end, 10 only limited private market development occurred and little revenue was earned from seedling sales. At project 'lsn the fate of project-suprtdKissan nurseries was unclear, although there was evidence of the dvlpetof off-shoot ieenntnurseries, including some operated by women 1. 6.13 The project was to hand out to individuals a limited number of free seedlings, as dictated in the SAR. These limits per individual as actually implemented, and as indicated a the SAR, are shown below. Free Seedling Distribution Limits (per person) ear roposed (SAR) Seedl ng Actual Seedling Limit simit t98___8_4 2 _500 984/85 .500 1500 9858 750 1.500 9861{7 750 1500 (750 of ficially, but not implemented) 1987/88 750 750 9 900 989190 _250 1990/91 ______1250 (except Banalore and Kolar) 1991/92 250 1992/93 ftpOe) 50 (except 3 commercial species) 6.14 Problems developed with free seedling distribution limits because of differing views of the project's purpose. The Bank saw the project as augmenting biomass availability for subsistence uses in rural areas, coupled with private sector development in the production and mariketing of seedlings. Consequently, the Bank pushed for ever lower free seedling limits, despite a covenant that only required the KSFD to reduce the limit to 750 seedlings by 1985/86 (which was nonetheless missed by two years). In contrast, the KSFD saw the ect's more important functions as increasing tree cover and providing improved income p bities for landowners, and therefore preferred high or even no limits on fiee seedling distribution. 7. The Role of Government Policies 7.1 Several government policies had an adverse impact on the project, yet were essentially outside its control: (a) Decentralization of Local Governance. Jurisdiction over a number of matters was decentralized to district level Zilla Parishads and sub-district Mandal Panchayats in 1987/88. The Mandal Panchayats, whose jurisdiction covered up to 15 or 20 villages, replaced the individual Village Panchayats. Forestry responsibilities at the Deputy Conservator of Forests (DCF) level and below were handed over to the Zilla Parishads, while the higher KSFD management was elegated to playing a supporting role. In reality, DCFs now serve two masters leading to delays and complications. The changes initialy I The Goveamnt issued an order in 1991 canceling all Kissan mdaeries created under a separate program. but many disuicts appear to have applied dhs order to project-supported Kissan nurseries as well, although there was an agreement with the Bank to continue to promote such nurseries at the thne of the third and last extasion of the projec. 11 held some promise of greater accountability and participation at the district level, but instead some of the Zilla Parishads and Mandal Panchayats have introduced political considerations into the selection of Ksan beneficiaries and candidate villages for woodlot development. (b) Interdepartmental Land Transfers. The C&D class wastelands available to the KSFD for use in the project were orimall y lands under the control of the Revenue Department The transfer of these 1.8 million acres (0.8 million ha) to the KSFD was begun in 1979 under a government order to promote their rehabilitation. In 1991 the GOK, under pressure to provide land to the landless and to regularize existing encroachments, authorized the resumption of 1.5 million acres (0.6 million ha) to Revenue Department control, seriously reducing the amount of land available for social forestry plantations. (c) Control of Wood Product Marketing. The cutting, sale and transport of wood products in Karnataka is strictly regulated by government orders and Acts which determine which species can be cut (even on private lands), at what prices wood products can be sold (in some cases), and under what conditions they can be transported outside the village. The Tree Preservation Act prohibits cutting of all but 11 tree species on both public and private lands, except for small quantities deemed to be for personal use only.1 Although such a law is difficult to enforce, farmers are liable to avoid tree planting altogether rather than risk a run-in with the law. Government aministered prices or "seignorage" rates are applied to produce harvested from government plantations or sold through government wood depots. Although marketpnces are free to find their own level, they are undoubtedly influenced by sales of produce from government lands. Marketing of wood rcts is further constrained by transport restrictions, as set out in the Forest Produce Transit Rules. In effect, wood products cannot be tasOr tedA outside the village ppewihut a permit requiring payment of Rs.5pertrucloa, exepthealoads of small diameter fhelwood (one every 24 hours), twigs and leaves, and Eucalypas and Camaina logs, for which a recent exemption has been made in Kolar and Tumkur Districts. This rule effectively gives the KSFD control over most movement of wood products, and while it may be necessary for the control of illicit trade, the inconvenience of acquiring a permit significantly discourages legitimate commercial trade in wood products. L Project Achievements 8.1 Physical Targets. The targets set for the project were expressed as hectares planted or seedlings distributed, an approach that may have been less suitable than numbers of beneficiaries. Nonetheless, measured on the basis of these targets, as adjusted at the mid-term review in 1986 and later when extensions were granted, the project was a success 2. Initially, The 11 species exampted from the Act are Camuarina, Coconut. Erythuina, Eucalypts Olyrcidia. Hope& wghtina, Prosopis, Rubber, Sesbania, Silver Oak and Leuceaa. 2 The Developnent Credit Agreement was amended in March 1991 to show a farm forestry planting target of 221.500 ha. It is believed dis figure was calculated by dividing the revised planting density .'ntadian of 2500 treerjha into the revised seedling distribution target of 553 million. 12 community woodlot planting was to emphasize gomal lands, which were under village management, as opposed to the C&D wastelands, which were under KSFD control. However, the KSPD found it easier to plant on land under its own control, and ultimately C&D plantings exceeded gomal by 20 percent. In practice, villagers did not appear to differentiate between the two management regimes, since bot represented common lands used mainly for grazing, fuelwood collection and soil excavation. Planting targets and reported achievements are shown in the table below. Planting and Seedling Targets and Achievements (ha) 'ARGET Ictual Actual as % _______________________ _____ lated ofERxtensin Revised evised SAR MTR [tension asolands( 00) 2000 2150 V 26105 99 fakfrehos3.000 15.000 500" 6.637 10 'aalbanksandiwcdsides 4,00 4000 16000 5,787 96 G3mbo 2A000 2,00 000 2,507 125 arnn f ry 120,000 112200 55 To149000 151500 62500 63,000 2 IaFn forsVry (adlions of seeLinms 799 529 53 507 92 P, This figur is an estimaw. at 2.50 ha 20% e2plaentand 20% wa aie. 8.2 These achievements should be tegarded as indicative for the following reasons. It is difficult to verify the figures, when the project did not include mapping or aerial surveyiasg of the planted areas and the area of farm forestry is only an estimate based on the number of seedlings distributed to farmers. There is also some discrepancy in the records regarding seedling prduction and distribution. For example project records indicate a total distribution of some 600 million seedlings - 507 million for farm and 90 million for plantations, whilst only some 446 million seedlings were reportedly ced between 1983/84 and 1991192. However, field observations suggest that areas reported as planted represent a reasonable estimate of areas actually planted. 8.3 Project Beneficiaries. Under the project's community plantation activities, 3,627 villages benefitted, each one having planted an avage of 11.3 ha of block and/or strip plantations. According to the SAR, benefits were to be distributed so as to: (a) help out the rural poor; (b) encourage community pardcipation and promote further plantings; (c) provide resources to village Panchayats for "general development" work; and (d) help KSFD recover a portion of costs. This was to be done via a benefit-sharing mechanism to be agreed upon between the Bank and KSFD before the end of 1984, but nothing was implemented by the KSFD until 1986, and even then it applied only to block plantations (not strip plantations).The government order issued could not be effectively implementedfor want of an action plan or guidelines for silvicultural treatments and until m etplanning began in earnest in 1991. 8.4 Under the 1986 government order, direct wood benefits accrue locally via: (a) free access to lop and top, fruit and fodder; (b) preferential access to harvested wood for the poor at no charge or at concessional rates; and (c) sale of the remaining produce at subsidized rates to villagers-at-large. On one plantation has so far been harvested under a management plan (several others have been cut the local Mandal Panchayat a mnagemt was handed over from the KSFD) and local benefits there consisted of the free distribution of a share of produce to those 13 dnated as disadvantaged. There were no subsidized sales to other members of the village and instead, the bulk of the produce was auctioned to outside buyers. A nw government order has been under discussion for some time. It is intended that this order should improve on the 1986 one by dg coverage to strip plantations, by gi greater resPonsibility to VFCs, and by increasingcommitments for investment existin new plantatlons. 8.5 Figures concerning the number and type of beneficiaries under farm forestry were compiled annually by the project, although no formal targets were set in the SAL These statistics are presented below. hOOd BWeAdWy saI"ce 8.6 The data indicate seedlings distributed and the numbers of individuals receiving them - but not whether these same individuals actually planted the seedlings they received. This is an important point since controversy arose during the project over the degree to which smaller and margimal farmers and the landless were benefiting. These data suggest they were. However, the results from the project-funded evaluation survey administered by the University of Mysore, indicated below for Belgaum district (one of the 12 priority districts covered by the project), show that larger farmers have clearly benefitted more than smaller farmers, when this is viewed on a "seedlings planted" basis. I vea BeMdary SWIW=s*em Ifoet Retueds an WW 8Waado q SVq, BdgWm DWA e a id* ISir 8.7 That such a discrepancy between project and survey data should exist is not surprising,, as it was common knowledge among project field staff that large farmers were circmventing limits on the distribution of free seedlings by recruiting others to fetch seedlings on their behalf. In fact, the data show that the number of seedlings planted closely coitelates with landholding size districtwise. Further, it would be almost impossible for the average landless beneficiary to plant an average of 201 seedlings (or 964 in Belpaum district) around a family compound, although enors in cla ng landowners were noted m early project years. Random chek by University of A ' ciences staff indicated that amongst smaller landholders, standing trees represented on average only 30 to 40 percent of the number of seedlings obtained from the nursery by the landholder, as indicated in project records. This evidence further supports the conclusion that many seedlings were either wasted or that larger farmers may have benefitted 14 much more under the fam forestry component than is Indicated by project records. The pmblem was compounded by the KSFD indecision to price seedlings. 8.8 Finandal and Economic Results. Based on revised targets it is estimated that, the project will produce between 9 and 10 million tonnes of fuelwood, pulpwood, timber and bamboo, as well as nearly 700,000 tonnes of fodder, and over 7 million tonces of fruit. Uncertainty regarding some of the seedling producton figures makes these estimates, and in tum those of the revised financial and economic calculations, somewhat speculative. Financial rates of return (IRR) calculated at appraisal ranged from 5.1 percent to 15.7 percent for the various planting models involving community lands. Farm forestry showed IRRs from 18.8 percent to 25.9 percent while overall, the project was expected to show a 22 percent economic rate of return (BRR). Revised calculations ndicate somewhat lower values - planting models yield IRRs of 3.4 pecent to 12.6 percent and the project ERR is estimated at 16.9 percent 1. All prices and costs used in the eestimates were expressed in 1991/92 Rupees and a 30 year projet life was considered. incurred after project closing were estimated by applying appropriate percentage rates to project expenditures, and by taking account of plantation maintenance costs. Land oty costs were considered by allowing for an average annual retu of Rs.10/ha for zing ds and Rs. 1,000ha for croplands (farm forestry), with the latter reduced to Rs.600/ha M the calculations to accouut for fallow and non-productive lands taken up by the project 2. The revised rates of return are lower for a number of reasons: (a) the SAR used market prices rather than stumpage values in calculating returns, without allowing for harvesting and marketing costs; (b) pilfering and lower giowth and survival rates (the latter concerns farm forestry only) have reduced ie from appraisal expectations; (c) the not impact on cropping and grazing is likely to be higher than estimated earlier; and (d) project costs in Rupee terms were much higher than anticipated. Offsetting these dampening influences on financial and economic viability were lower costs associated with reduced planting densities and a much greater emphasis on fruit trees, which generate substantial not revenues. 9. Project Sustanability 9.1 Sustainability will be a critical issue for this project. Since so much attention was paid to planting targets, and so little to participation, support and feedback activities, there are serious doubts concerning the future management and regeneration of existing comwmity plantations. For instance: (a) Many individuals see the community woodlots as occupying land better suited to cultivation by the landless, and some commuities have noted a worsening shortage of fodder, after planting trees on their common lands. In general, villagers still see the woodlots as public works projects rather than viewmng them as community assets that they could manage, maintain and benefit from themselves. (b) Mandal Panchayats do not exhibit a great deal of interest in assuming the responsibility for managing community plantations. They lack both the technical know-how and the resources, and for these reasons they have 1 The s-esdmamed project ERR includes his nefms hereas w hese were not includ"l in as indivMual planting models analysed. 2 Surveys carred out by d Univesity of Agricukural Sciences at Bangalore Indicated dat an average of 62% of lands under private block plantations had been previously cropped. 15 tended to harvest some plantations under their control prematurely and without consideration of the user communities' needs. (c) The number of management plans yet to be prepared is daunting - more than 3,500 are still required within the next few years. The staff resoutces alone needed for the task are unikely to be available, yet without management in place, communities may not see the benefits they were prmise and interest in subsequent replanting may wane. KSFD has not looked into this aspect, nor has decided on issuing a general guideline for technical management and a time-bound action plan for implementation covering all the plantations of the project. 9.2 This said, there are several encouraging sifas: several communities have expressed Interest in locating woodlots in their areas, and private independent nurseries have appeared in a few districts, partially in response to the project. 9.3 Concerning farm forestry, attempts to price seedling have largely failed. Farmers are not well informed of alternatives to Eucatyptu, which is still the most readily marketable crop. And many continue to see trees as competing with crops. Part of this is due to lack of suitable alternative models and weak extension efforts. Nonetheless, industrial markets are well developed and accessible to larger plantation owners, with pulp and paper mills and tile factories now supplying seedlings at discounW rates to potential suppliers of iusi wood, independently of the KSFD. 9.4 Additional issues relating to sustainability include the possibility of market saturation, a problem experienced in other states which have sponsored social forestry projects. Little assessment of the preject's impact on price levels has been done, and no one has considered the likely impact once the more than 160,000 ha planted unde the project reach harvesting age. There are also some concerns as to the government revenue implications of the project The one plantation so far harvested generated revenues of Rs.23,615, net of harvesting costs but including taxes, which is insufficient to cover the establishment costs incurred in 1985 of approximately Rs.140,000 1. Even if only the IDA-financed portion of costs is considered (this is 48 percent of total costs), the revenue generated was only one third the amount needed. 10. Institutional Performance 10.1 The Bank and ODA. Problems in the project's design led to criticism from national and international environmental groups. Perhaps these issues could have been avoided if additional sector work had been undertaken prior to appraisal. While the Bank replied in written form to the complaints, there was rarely a strong response in terms of project management. It was ODA, rather than the Bank, which independently initiated research into the environmental effects of Ecalyfpus. The Bank made attempts to involve NGOs in the project, some of whom were the project's most vocal critics. For example, at the mid-term review it was recommended that meetings take place between the KSFD and local NGOs, and later NGOs were invited to participate in the monitoring mission of March 1989. Nonetheless, NGO support for the project was never obtained, and in hindsight, a much greater effort was probably needed. Relationships with ODA and the KSFD were cotxial, but there were several sticking points. ODA had nder n appraisal with the Bank and initially agreed with joint project goals. However, ODA modified its project objectives after the mid-term review and focussed heavily on institutional changes. Several points 1 This plantation is located in Dhorwar district and consisted of 35 ha of Leaea leeonphala, plante at a density of 2000 trees/ha. Pilferage was a major problem and accounts for the low yields at harvesting. 16 of discussion between the Bank and the KSFD relating to policy Issues recuned many time. The main Issues included: (a) the limits to the distribution of free seedlings; (b) the development of the Kissan nurseries; and (c) the issuance of benefit sharin orders. Despite intensive dialogue, these points were not all fully resolved to the Bank's 10.2 Supervision missions were generally dominated by ODA staft particularly during the first 5 years of the project when a number of the missions mounted were ODA led. This generated some concern withia the Bank that its own prerogatives were being neglected. However, KSFD staff were particularly grateful for the technical a e provided by the ODA teams. In total, 12 tupervision missions were mounted, averaging 1.33 per year, and an average of 10 staff weeks were used annually for this purpose. This may have been an insufficient commitment of resources given the controversial nature of the project Nevertheless, su on reports and especially the documents prepared by the monitoring missions and the I Review team were useful and insightful, although these did not always flect the degree of controversy surrounding the project. There were also occasional instances of misinformation: for example, according to the KSFD, a monitoring and evaluation cell was never constituted within the project, yet it was indicated that the Department was in full comliance with this covenant Supervision reports benefitted from staff continuity hroughout the project life, but especially in later Bank-led missions. 10.3 The KSFD. On the basis of previous project experience, the SAR recognized the risk inherent in designatin; the KSFD as implementing agency. While the SAR concentrated on possible delays in the posmng of staff and project infrastructure, to this should have been added the risk associated with the shift n outlook required of the KSFD. Nonetheless, there was progress in this area, as evidenced by the willingness of some field staff to undertake participatory planning work, and the emphasis on community involvement in a new project proposal prepared by the Department Major areas of weakness in performance concerned compliance with covenants, record keeping and staffing issues. Many of the key areas of on-going discussion between the Bank and the KSFD were covered by covenants, and several were complied with late, others were only weakly complied with or were eventually assessed as no longer relevant For an tmental advisory committee was established arly on, as requed, but later on the Mthat rs lty rested with the Mandal PaCMYas Such a committeC have helped foster greater ties between the KSFD and the A Department concerning extension and agroforestry. Complicating all aspects project manaement, including the project completion evaluation, was a weak system for transmitting statistics and documents from the field and for filing at headquarters. 10.4 Recruitment of staff was slow initially and never reached recommended levels, but more importantly, staff were shifted to different positions at an alarming rate. The Social Wing was viewed as similar to the other departmental wings, so that staff were rotinely transferred to the project with little or no training in social forestry. Some senior staff did receive cverseas training through the project but at least in two cases, individuals were moved to a different wing within 9 months of completing the training. Without adhering to some criteria in recruiting for mid-level positions, the prJect suffered, since staff trained in conventional forestry techniques are not necessarily well-suted to activities such as participatory planning.Those staff which were most appropriate for social forestry were inevitably relocated. 10.5 Disbursements. Financial issues were not a major problem, as reflected in the "full compliance" designation accorded to the relevant covenants. Statements of Expenditure (SOEs) were occasionally late, but after a suspension of disbursements from 01 October 1986 to 03 March 1987, the situation Ii ved. A few blems were created by the change in the system of local gvernance in 1987/88, which some financial reporting responsibilities to the Zilla 17 10.6 Disbasements on payrolls, purchasing and civil works followed a predictable pattern: low expenditures initially, followed by a bunching of expenditure activity during the final extension periods. More than 50 percent of all civil works construction took place dt the final year of the project, indicating a desire to "use up" project funds before they were lost. Cost overruns in Rupee terms, based on SAR expenditure estimates, ran from 20 percent to 123 e with payrolls showiag the greatest gap. The reasons for these overruns were the 0Howing: (a) the significant devaluation of the Rupee, which increased import costs; (b) a substantive across-the-board pay increase awarded to GOK staff during the early years of the project; (c) higher Inflation durin the project years than anticipated in the SAR and (d) design changes to the planting models w h raised per hectare costs. Only combined training, research and studies spending was below the SAR target, and in this case, significantly so 1. 10.7 Due to favourable exchange rate movements and delaysent and hiring, a ailfcant undisbursed credit balance remained at the end of the initial5 year project period. For this reason, and to fulfil as yet unattained planting targets, the project was extended three times, eventually lengthening the project life from 5 years to 8 years and3 months. 11. Overall Fludiug and Lessons Learned 11.1 The Karnataka Social Forestry Project is in some respects an unusual one in that physical targets appe to have been met but the project cannot be deemed a success. The KSFD was already very active in planting government lands and ha"ding out seedlings prior to the project, and it could have caried on with this without the project's assistance, To an unfortunate extent, the project expanded the scale of these activities rather than stimulating significant changes in the technical and social aspects of the Departments social farestry work. The main reasons for this am (a) failure to appreciate the magnitude of the change that the Department was required to mak. from a policy body to a development agency; (b) training of the lower level field staff who actually had to Implement the program was neglected, and; (c) high planting targets utilized most available resources and few were left to nurture crucial ject support units. As a result, the envisaged social benefits did not materialize while the action targets were largely met. There was little opportunity for informed adjustments in species mix and other recommendations, since most of the project's planting was accomplished so early. While such project phasing leads to favourable economics, it does not result in an experience for the implemeting agency which is as enriching as it could be. The lack of community consultation on plantation siting, Species selection and benefits sharing, especially in earlier years, further limited the pJecs effectiveness by engendering a passive attitude towards community plantations amongst villagers. Few were willing to undertake any plantation work without being paid, for instance. 11.2 Ultimately, it could be that much of the wood harvested from community plantations will be sold to traders for urban and industrial use. Some communities have responded to this by incorPorating iatomng ent a provision for locally needed infrastructure to be constructed with their share of the pocees. This may be a laudable development. In many cases, it has been the less advantaged who have forsaken common property access to grazng and potential access to encreachable land and have therefore borne the opportunity costs of plantation development. One can question whether they will benefit cm nsurately from the proposed use of these sevenues, as only a small number are likely to benefit directly from an increase in wood supply. To avoid this 1 Only wo studies wer Amded, te Wood Balance Study ad the Evaluadon of the Impact of Social Paresty in Kntaka, costing Rsl95.250 and Rs229,000, respectively. The Wood Balance Study was allocated ass Mlon in as sAR cost esimates. 18 problem the project should have been designed to more closely match its objectives (rural self- sufficiency in fuelwood), or else the objectives should have been stated differently. 11.3 For similar projects in the future, the following thoughts may be useful lessons from the Karnataka experience: (a) Villagers are more concemed with overall land use issues than with planting trees alone. Projects should take this into account by strengthening ex aw anin and by recognizing that some communities may not wish to have any devoted solely to trees. (b) Project targets were denominated as physical areas to be planted and not as beneficiaries. Defining targets in terms of beneficiaries, as defined by landholding size, would create greater incentives for the project to meet its social objctives. (c) Industrial forestry should not be confused with social forestry. Subsidizing pulp and paper production Ih.s wider implications and is not consistent with what is usually understood by the concept of social forestry. Promotion of chief ly industnal species (Le. Eucalypass) should be left mainly to the private sector and project activities shou'd focus instead on extension and research assistance. (d) The KSFDdemonstrated that the Indian Forestry Service is certainly capable of meeting planting targets. However, lower level field staff should have been given intensive training and KSFD could have benefitted from assistance with the difficult task of involving people in planning and management, since there are many capable organizations which specialize in these activities. Support and training for NGOs should be an important element in project design, including a funding commitment which would bring these groups into the project itself. (e) Priority locations for the project's activities were targeted at the district level at appraisal. Subsequent developments have shown that fuelwood shortages are much more localized than this, so that different criteria are requred to assess need. Strong sector work prepared in advance of proje,t appraisal could help in identifying these and other problems and lead to more effective solutions. (f) Reaching the smaller landholders and landless in significant numbers is not possible if only block plantations are promoted. Encouraging araforestry is critical, and this can only be achieved if (i) adequate research is carried out concerning non-competitive species, and (ii) farmers come to see trees as ,t entially compatible with cropping. (g) Ther were several instances of misnderstandings amongst co-financiers and the implementing agency as to the purpose of the project, despite agreement on the physical targets. A greater effort should be made to revisit each agency's project goals, since the emphasis may need to change as experience is gained. 19 PART IL Project Review fom the Borrower's Perspective Karnataka Forest Department gratefully acknowledges the support, guidance and funding provided by the World Bank/ODA for 'he execution and implementation of the Social Forestry Project between the years 1983 to 1992. The project generated considerable rural employment and also provided intellectual exchange of ideas through interactions with external sources of knowledge over the entire project period. It would be appropriate to reiterate certain well known facts in order to fully appreciate, the constraints under which the programme has been implemented.. (1) We have very heavy proasures of both human afid bovine population on our forests and therefore,. the plantations raised under the '.Social Forestry Project have been subjected to those pressures which exist constantly. (II) More than 70% of the population lives in the rural -areas where the project has been implemented. Implementing a programme of the type amidst pressure of subsistence population has its own negative impacts. Despite the above, as acknowledged in the Completion Report', the plantation efforts have been very successful, recording.a survival rate of 82% and an independent survey has revealed that Karnataka State has emerged the most successful States as regards the survival percentage. (Survey conducted by the Institute of Public Ophoion). Some of the observations which have been made by the FAO Team in the PCR are clarified here below:- 20 (1) We do not really endeavour to counter those observations specifically, nevertheless we would like to provide some background information on the existing situation within the Karnataka State which might be useful for proper appreciation. 1) In a situation existing in India where there is a tremendous pressure of population it is difficult for 'any functionary of the Government to clearly stick to his own defined work. The object being welfare of the people, very often varied kinds of jobs are handled by the Government functionaris with an intention to help the people. Therefore, sometimes the roles of Researchers, Extension workers and field Foresters, all get merged in one. 2) The perceived view on the -delayed on going evaluation does not really carry much 'conviction. 'in the light of the fact that the main object of the Project being planting of trees, has been acknowledgedly very successful. 2(a) External evaluation by independent organisationslinatitutions always carrief better conviction and therefore, the Karnataka Forest Department has relied more upon the external evaluation thdn upon the internal evaluation. The Evaluation Report of the Indian Institute of Public Opinion, and the analysis made by the Karnataka State Bureau of Statistics and Economics and the Institute of Socio Economic Change, Bangalore, on the progress and performance of the Project, speak well of the success of the Project. 3) The price of wood has been rising very steeply in the last two decades and farmers have been changing their choice of species with the passage of time. Some 20 years ago, Casurina was the most sought after species; some ten years ago, Eucalyptus became the first choice while as of 21 now Teak to the most sought after species for planting on Farm lands. The pace of change has been so dynamic that the Monitoring process has only been following the trail of A happenings rather than keeping pace with it. The coice of Eucalyptus by the farmers has been partly because of ready marketability and partly because of rise. in cost of inputs for agricultural production. 3(a) Fuelwood is always a subsidiary product of a tree and nearly .50% of biomoss from most trees is utilised as fuelwood in Karnataka. Farmers change the utilisation. pattern- of the wood depending upon the compulsions as also the market price. In many cases, EUcAlyptus Plantations have served as stepping stones to the farmers, facilitating intensive development of their agricultural lands by way of providing better inouts, thereby bringing better incomes. In a -few cases, the surplus fuelwood generated from Eucalyptus plantations has been supporting few Small Scale Industries like Tile and Brick Industries, as In Malur Taluk of eastern Karnataka. Whereas, in certain coastal places where Social Forestry was a non-priority activity, the existing Tile Industries are facing shortage of fuelwood. 4) The Farmer's (Kissan) Nurseries have played their role of being a bridge between the Department and the Agriculturists. At this stages we are looking at quality seedlings of the choice species which should be produced by qualified nurserymen and sold at competitive prices. The general environment is very favourable for planting tree species on the Farm lands at this juncture. 5) The advent of NGOs in India is a recent phenomena. Majority of them are still in a process'of establishing their credentials with the local population. The Karnataka Forest Department has always been willing not only to join hands but also to support those NGO's who have proved their commitment to the cause of Social Forestry. 22 6) The Indian farmers have the traditional experience and knowledge of not only groWing agricultural crops but they have also fairly rich knowledge of growing trees on their lands.' If they opt for commercial species like Eucalyptus, Casurina or Teak in addition to Tamarind. Mango I or Jack fruit it is their conscious choice and a commercial compulsion and is not borne out of ignorance. 7) The greatest testimony of community participation is that almost all plantation efforts have been a good success and this would not have been possible if the community was opposed to that. However, we do find that the local environment is not free from problems where these plantations would be handed over for their future management. We do acknowledge that it is ..an evolving process and hopefully it would succeed in course of time. 8) Designing of a Project or a Research programme therein is invariably at a philosophical and conceptual level, which is often done by visualising the existing situations and may or may not be location compatable. Once designed, there is tendency to stick to the conceived models and it* is only later that one realises that1 * is not always possible to put all the ideas in the same design and obtain desired results. Besides the environmental factors, there is also the play of socio-exonomic forces both in implementation and in success of programmes. It also cannot be said with certainity t.hat lessons temt will always form the foundation of all future programmes, as the factors of the soco-economics keep' changing. 8 a) The foundation laid by; the. Social Forestry Project and the lessons.1.eimt. .therefrom have been quite useful while conceiving the new project OWestern Ghats Forestry and Environment Project" which has already taken off. Further the virtual II phase of the Social Forestry Project. called "Forestry and Environment* Project for Eastern Plains" has been designed on the bania of the 23' experience gained from the Social Forestry Project and the same is under the active consideration of the State Government. Forest Management perspective in Karnataka has been changing quite rapidly. The State Government is in the process of giving a definite shape to the Joint Forest Planning and Management concept, wherein active involvement of the villagers will be one of the key factors at all the levels of Planning, Implementation Management and sharing of the produce. In a heterogenic village composition like in India where class, caste and community factors operate, it is rather difficult to formulate cohesive plans of Forest Management. However, it is evident that the initial suspicion on 'the part of the villagers about the forestry projects are wearing cbt and the new Projects which are emerging will be far superior, thus enabling to give proper weightage to the social choices during the implementation of forestry projects in the State, thus ensuring sustainability. The development impact of the Project is very much in evidence in the rural areas. Creation of about 41,000 Ha. of block plantations has made a positive impact in solving fuel wood problems wherever it existed. The lops and tops from the trees are alreaty being collected by the local people for their day to day needs and whenever the plantations are harvested the produce is being made available firstly to the local people and only when there is no demand, the produce will be allowed to be moved to the other places. The block plantations contain invariably tree fodder species which serve as. a fodder bank and whenever there is scarcity of fodder, the'loppings from the fodder trees are being made use of by the rural public. Infact, the trees along the roadsides are our best messengers spreading 24 the'message of Social Foresfry amongst our people. Partly. because of the awareness created due to recently completed Social Forestry Project and partly due to'changing economic considerations, planting of trees outside the forest lands is gaining considerable popularity. This can be said to be one of the mejor development impact of the Project. Lessons Learnt.: 1) Free distribution of seedlings is not the best mode of encouraging planting on private lands. During the process of the project implementation, it has emerged that people expect quality seedlings and they are prepared to pay reasonable price for the same. 2) In several cases ic has been difficult for the Department to hand ove the plantations to the local communities for their future management as the villagers feel that at this point of time they are not certain about protecting and managing these plantation. in the best possible way. 3) The common knowlcdge of useeing is believing" is true for Social Forestry programmes also. Wherever there have 'been good demonstration areas, the message of Social Forestry and planting of trees has spread very well. 4) For planting on :their landa farmers need quality seedlings, extension mechanism and package of practices. In the absence of these, they are reluctant to go wholehearted. 5) The on going project has generated, pushed up the costs-of overhead for planting activities, partly also du6 to several visits, meetings, workshops and missions. It may be desirable to.assign a fortnight may be six months for all such external activities related with the Project. 25 6) It has not been always possible to avail the services of specially trained personnel for the jobs for which they were trained and as such placements have been beyond the control of the Project Authority, which is not the best option for efficient project implementation. The relationship between the Bank and the Department were quite cordial and the entire project was implemented in a. friendly atmosphere. The participation of the ODA, which is a co-financier, has been substantial on the technical side. Their association with the project has helped particularly to solve some technical problems. The ODA concentrated more on the research and training aspects. 26 PART II Statistical Information 1. Related Bank Loans and Credits Crdit No./Pry ect Naw P~rpose Year of Status Approval. Cr.925-IN To increase the supply of fåewood In rural aras, to 1978 Completed uttar Pradesh Sodal provde poles, bama, small timber, fodder gras Forestry Project and minor forustry products and streugthmn tbC social fouestyk organiman to carry out project yorks. Cr.961-1N 1979 Completed Oujarat Social Forestry Project Cr.178-IN 1982 Complet d West Bengal Social Forestry Project Crj.286.IN 982 Compted Jammu and Kas~mir and Haryana Social Forestry Project.. Cr.1514IN •1984 Ou.goig Kerala Social Forestry · Project. Cr.1611-IN. To aist the States of Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, 1985 On-going Na~ana Social Foremy ffmachal Pradesh, Rajastan to uxpand and Project Improve th sod a forestry actiities Cr.2328-IN To support restructuring and ratalidat= of the 1992 On-going Maharashtra Forestry State's forstry department and its nveat t proraimes, and to foster a greter rolb in forestry and development for viage commun~ae, no. government institdes, cooperatives and the. private Cr.241-IN 1992 On-going West engal F~restry 27 2. Project 'åmetable Dat Panned Dat@ RPvksd Date Ac~a Preparaion Dec. 1981 AppraIsa1 Jan/Feb. 1983 Nqotiatio 1*983 November 1983 ~oard Approval October 1983 December 1983 Credit SIgning February 1984 Credit Effeeiveness May 1984 Closing 1/ December 198 December 89 December 90 March 92 March 1992 1/ Project caoing extended 3 times. 3. Credit Disbursements (Cmulative In SDR fillions) IDA Fsel Years Apprasal Esd ate Ac~unk Mcnas a f Ap- .mat 83 1.8 31)1w 84 2.7 3.6 133 85 10.1 7.0 69 86 18.0 10.5 58 87 22.5 13.0 58 88 24.8 14.9 60 89 25.0 17.3 69 90 25.6 19.7 77 91 23.4 23.421 100 / Retroactive flancing of up to US$2.7 mifion was a~owed uder the terums of the Credit. U The Credit closed on Y 31,1992 and an amount of SDR2.2 =ilmln was canc1~l p ___ ___I! jqj h o &&&!&；〔〕！&i{!!!&&&&!&&&&’〕 務路·才置 。。．:：。．。二。．,,：。。：，。，；。！讓’& t 。。。。。，．。二。。二。，．。：，。，二l廷 嗡 。。．。。。。：。。。：。。。。。。。：。。，111 30 L Projed Cost and Fh~ A. P~ Cost SAR Adud A~ISM cka wwh 252 34.0 ns V~ a Equ~ 27.4 329. 120 plotadm 28U 5»3 184 ~ MW &aff MI 23Z5 223 Trgakg~~ and &u~ 7.9 3-5 44 Codb~ 99.7 114 13 Tow sm MA 153 Projed Fbmdng - Adud US$ moon % Of TOW US$ U~ *tT~ MA 27.0 48% 29.511 ODA 23.0 40% N.& 21 GoliGm 6A 12% NJL T«d s" 100% NAL Eqd~ to r~ SDR23.4 cww~ of SDR2.2 mfim 21 Irmd ftom wao n« amld* at time of PCR p%»~ 31 6.Prmject Results A. Direct Benefts Unit Apprasal Estimate Actual/PCR Eutine£ (Nov.1983) (1992) Indcators Gomal Lands ha 15,000 11869 C&D Lands ha 5,000 14,236 Tank Forshor ha 3000 6,637 Cand Banks ha 1,000 1,151 Roadsides ha4,6 Bamboo ha 2,000 2,507 Farm Foresty ha 120,00 122,0001/ Producon. Fuelwood mt 5,00 5,9422/ Poles/Pulpwood mt 21,600 2ß94 3/ Bamboo mt 200 77 Tber mt 100 32 Small Tunber mt 300 743 Fodder mt 700 667 Fruit mt 1,700 793 No. er mnekies: Farm Forestry thousands 3/400 919.6 Non-Farm Foresry vilages- 3,27 Employment Generated Farm Forsty mandiys 58 milhln 24.0 milion 4/ Non-Farm Forestry mandays 12 million 22.5 minion B. Price of Outputs ...... SAREtiate ...... ...... PCR Fat ...... Unit Finan~al 5/ Economic Finan~l 5/ Economic ..... Rupe~s per Unit .......... Rup.s per Unit ..... Fuelwood mt 200/350 280 400/500 6/ 400 Poles/Pulpwood mat 330/500 400 800/1,000 800 Bamboo at 110/420 340 325 480 rber mt 600/1,000 800 7,400/3000 2,400 Smal Tmber =t 480/750 600 800/1,000 800 Fodder mat 600 600 0 200 Fruit æt l200/2,000 1600 000 1,600 1/ Based on 507 milion s~nts distributed, 20% replacement, 20% waste, and 24500 tres/ba. 2/ Fuel and pulpwood. 3/ Poles only. 4/ Basd o 197 man~lys/ha and 122,000 ha. 5/ SAR prices are mubr~ GOK and market price averages PCR wta are subsidized and market stumpage values 6/Includes fuel and pulpwood. 32 C. Econende Impact Apprsal Estimate Actual (PCRD Vst4ut Emonwi Rate of Rotuin (%) 22.0 16.9 Prject lfe (YCars) 36 30 Standard Conversion Factor (SCP> 0.8 0.8 Conversion Factor for Un~n°11d Labor 0.7 0.8 D. Finn~n Impact FaCa Rate of R~tura (%): Gomal Land 123 C&D Land 13.6 9.6 Tank Foreshores 143 83 R ~adido, Dry 62 Roadde,Wet 15.7 Canal Baks 11.9 8 Bamboo 5.1 3.4 Farm Forstry 20.0 12.61/ Studis Purpose Status Wood sahamne Study To coBect data on wood Completed December 87 emnplilia and supl Project Evai n Study Eva1nation/survey of Completed July 92 projet iu 5Districts 1/ Excludes fruit trees. tJ lim glii ~1 < 04I 04U 4 34 8. Misson Data and Staff Inputs A. Mission Data TypeD DMs sey No.cfr qMdm Fed.ms m T~ I3/ fiCC Mo/YO 'o la HeM 1/ adag2/ rooualp 4/ repado~ 1/81 <01/0GO Appraisal 01/83 IDA/ODA 6 1 05/84 IDA 3 10 LA 2 1 F 2 02/85 IDA/ODA 7 10 ,F,S,E,P 2 1 F 3 09/85 IDA 1 14 P 2 2 MP 4 01/86 DA/ODA 5 18 NA 3 3 KT 5 09/86 IDA/ODA 5 6 NA 2 1 MP 6 01/87 IDA/ODA 6 12 NA 2 2 MT,F 7 02/88 IDA/ODA 7 16 NA 2 2 B&T 8 10/88 IDA 3 7 NA 2 2 MT,F 9 03/89 ODA 8 13 FP,B 2 2 F 10 11/89 IDA/ODA 3 6 F,P 2 2 M 11 07/90 DA 2 6 F 2 2 M 12 03/91 IDA 2 5 F 2 2 MT 13 01/92 IDA 2 5 F 2 2 M Compledo 07/92 FAO/CP 2 19 F,B 2 2 M 1/ A-Ag.k~um DRuuI Deelopment; EmEcoomdst; F-Fonay IGInsiutio P A~ojec S-Sodolog 2/ hd~ a~ in ~=g: 1-poe=n or ~inor %oblem, 2-modet p~om.,-major poe~s(1984/85) 1-no uigniflcnh publes;02-noderate proble~s 3-ajor problem, being addsed; 4-ajor pobl em ong added (1986 onuards). 3/ Trend: 1-kmproving; 2-tat&ansy; 3-detrioraing. 4/ Type of p~ea Flaancal; M-MMaMMcå• T-Téical B. Staf Inputs (ss) Sa. ao j~ Q& PM PM W36 FM M PM P87 FU PM F9 9 PM91 PM Ta A/18 2.10 230 Apjaiset 20.30 3.00 2ss0 Negodadas 5.10 .10 Ig Operadens 5.10 £.10 Supenision 8.0 8.90 26A0 1750 6.60 6.30 7.00 860 4,60 94.0 P~ojct Compedon . 1.00 1.00 Ma 1 220 210 8=0 2640 1750 60 6.30 7» 8* 16R 143m 35 _.－卼－..‘『範―・』．--―。―-,-,.--.-，』―&―。―-,―。―--,;... cr tillit i J. . ....... mun i J. i al 11 1 91* u §tillit l J. tillit i a. tillit§ i -Dl* i tillit 1 910 . ....... 11Mil i a. uim i a. i a. I a. tillit i a. .... num i a. MM i a. mun i a. IUM i a. i a. fMil i a. mun §a. i a. i a. il.=91 i a. t i i. fli l i a. i J. i a. mun i a. mull i a. i a. MM i a. Ima uum .... tillit i a. nma ImlIl i a. UUM lium tillit§ IIMI i a. i a. Imil a. num i a. 9£ ”〕·’〕一！·’&’一〕’〕’〕’&-&―。”: 必C &&&．蠟ㅣ·，l-,[--1,-―。―,,‘· IBRD 1716 MAY IM k- ýl-& 7D0 ISOHYETS IN MILLIMETERS RIVERS, D~ AND WEIRS DISTRICT HEAD~TERS STATC HEADQUARTERS INDIA BURMA DISTRtCT "NWIES 48 STATIE B~Es INTERNATIONAL 8OUNQAR1IES MA HA R. SH;rRA KA 081i0pur 82 1--, Kd A NOHRA MA PESH Reic ur 223 INDIA K, \RNAI-AKA SOCIAL FORESTRY PROJECT 60.4 0 6ffl TYPES OF FOREST Dhar r TROPICAL WET EVERGREEN TROKAL SIE-Mi -EVERGREEN 36 llary DEGRADED EVERGREEN AND SEMI-EVERGREEN 174 MOIST DECIDU0US Karwar % DRY DECIDUOUS* 6M- SCRuB 83 413 TOTAL AREA UNDER FOREST (IN )000 Høj chl durga 27;ý oshi oga z q. v, -616 87 164 sø, Q. Ilt' 19 dy00 Ah'A8lAN SfA 413 0 40 80 m KILOMETERS IA J IBR 17163 MAY 1983 a or B..0 e jaart f he r 8e* .45 1 h è .madn F.agc Coregreal flny l~ 7,, d~ N . A ~ ~. IBUMA IN - KARNATAKA SOCIAL FORESTRY PROJECT SOILS ROCKY AREAS 0 DISTRICT H4EADOIARTERS fly.~ *. * ~ ~/'.~jRED LOAMY SDitS ® STATE H4EADQUARTERS RED SANDY SOLS .---•-- DISTRICT BOUNDARS S-LATERITE SOuts .--.••' STATE BOUNDARIES - LATERITE GSRAVELLY S01LS -•.*"- INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARIES *SH4ALLOW BLACK SOILS RIVERS MEDIUJMBLACKCSOILS DEEP BLACK SDILS MIXED RED AND BLACK SOILS +COASTAL ALLUVIUM SOLS TWA TAMIL NADVJ FAA KILOMETERS KERA..ANHR PAAS