Stakeholder participation through social assessment in the Argentina Small Farmer Development Project

OCIAL DEVELOPMENT NOTES Note No. 35 May 1998 Stakeholder Participation through Social Assessment in the Argentina Small Farmer Development Project In this example, social assessment (SA) The government and the Bank had general alerted the World Bank and the Go,,ernment ideas about which stakeholder groups would of Argentina to social differences among most influence, and be influenced by, the beneficiary groups and to problems and project, including government planners and priorities that needed attention during project state agents responsible for the implement- design and implementation. By helping the ation of PROINDER, intermediary organi- task team better identify the poor and ways to zations, and beneficiary groups such as small reach them, the SA process fed into the farmers, wage laborers, sharecroppers, youth, development of project components that women, and indigenous groups. However, would stress equity and maximize social project planners needed answers to the benefits. following questions before they could Background formulate the appropriate project components. . What are the priorities and relative power of One-and-a-half million people, or 36 percent teekysaeodr n hi ecpin of~~~ Aretn' rua.ouain iei these key stakeholders and their perceptions pofvArge.Intinais rualy pulbaton,ived iunry of proposed strategies to alleviate rural poverty. In this highly urbanized country oet where 87 percent of the population live in poverty? large cities, rural poverty has been overlooked . What are the survival strategies, needs, and by urban-based decisionmakers. In 1993, the priorities of different groups of rural poor? Government of Argentina piloted the . What project activities and targeting and decentralized, beneficiary demand-driven, eligibility criteria are appropriate in this Programa Social Agropecuario (PSA), to context? channel technical and financial assistance directly to poor, rural communities. After a . Are there intermediary organizations with year of experience with the pilot, the whom the beneficiaries, government, and government requested World Bank assistance Bank can collaborate? to develop a more comprehensive rural . What institutional arrangements would be assistance program, including the Argentina appropriate for channeling resources and for Small Farmer Development Project strengthening beneficiary participation in (PROINDER), to increase the incomes of the project planning and implementation? rural poor and strengthen the institutional capacity of beneficiary groups and local e Hlow will the project ensure that indigenous institutions. peoples will benefit and that the project Steven Schonberger is task manager of the Argentina Small Farmer Development Project. For more information on the social assessment, contact Estanislao Gtacitua-Mario at the World Bank, 1818 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA, Fax: 202-676-9373, E-mail: egacituarnario@worldbank.org. Thie viewos expressed in this note are those of thie authzor(s) and do not necessarily reflect thte official policies of thie World Bank.  complies with the Bank's operational policy participants identified obstacles to on indigenous peoples? development, including individual constraints To answer these questions, the to achieving a higher standard of living. Government/Bank task team incorporated a Each workshop also produced an action pan comprehensive SA process into the project a r t preparation phase. ~~and recommendations to overcome those constraints and obstacles. These plans and Methodology recommendations were used by project A planners to develop project components that Aonmulti-discwiplguinartea ofrlocl treflect the needs and concerns of a broad range consultants, with guidance from the of stakeholders. Government/Bank team, used a combination of qualitative and quantitative SA methods to obtain data on the nature and incidence of Box 1. Indigenous Peoples Strategy rural poverty, and to design project The SA held community meetings and participatory components accordingly. workshops with indigenous groups to incorporate their needs into project design. As a result, PROINDER Joint analysis of case study and census material, includes provisions for: The team began by reviewing case-study * Special dissemination mechanisms to ensure that materials and carried out a joint analysis of indigenous groups are adequately informed of census data with the government's census relevant projects bureau to establish a profile of the rural poor. . Culturally appropriate technical assistance and This helped the SA team to begin to training to ensure that demand-driven projects are understand the categories and incidence of prepared with the full participation of indigenous poverty and it assisted them in devising a groups sampling strategy for future SA activities. . Specific project criteria and resource allocation to stimulate project proposals from indigenous groups Workshops. The government agency . Specific targeting criteria for provinces, such as responsible for PROINDER and regional Formosa and Salta, with high concentrations of extension agents organized 22 participatory indigenous peoples diagnostic workshops with beneficiaries and . Greater coordination with other programs and intermediary organizations in the Northwest, between agencies working with indigenous groups. Northeast, Cuyo, Pampas and Patagonia regions of Argentina. Most workshops were held on the regional or provincial level; Workshops also allowed stakeholders to organizers attempted to find workshop venues assess the activities and capacities of that reduced travel distances for participants. intermediary organizations, including This strategy also helped to maximize the community-based organizations (CBOs) and participation of rural women. Special nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) at participatory meetings were held with local and provincial levels, in order to plan for indigenous groups to ensure that issues their involvement in this and other poverty affecting them, including legal issues, were alleviation projects. At each workshop, inter- adequately considered in project design (see mediary organizations shared information Box )l. about their legal status, field(s) of operation, population groups served, organizational Workshop organizers facilitated discussions experience, and capacity in service delivery on rural poverty issues within their regional programs. Workshop facilitators guided context, first through questionnaires on partcipants through discussions of each beneficiary levels of income and expenditures, organization's strengths, constraints, and kinds of on-farming and off-farm activities, needs, and identified areas of potential migration rates, and degree of participation in involvement with PROINDER. social service/community organizations (see Focus groups. To ensure broad dissemination Box 2). Questionnaire results became ocuship o ens ad dimenat discussion points around which workshop and ownership of plans and recommenda- tions, the SA team held focus groups with 2}  Box 2. Example of Farmers' Definitions of Poverty* Monffily income level Principal sources of income Level % Off-farm On-farm Rem/Pen/Subs** Extremely poor <$49 96 59 37 (39%) 42 (44%) 17 (18%) Poor 50-99 39 24 17 (44%) 19 (49%) 3 (8%) Fractionally poor 100-149 13 8 5 (38%) 7 (54%) 1 ( 8%) Resource-limiated 150 14 9 9 (64%) 5 (36%) - Total - 162 100 68 (42%) 73 (450/%) 21 (13%) * Source: Survey of workshop participants, 1995. Monthly income levels are based on per capita income in U.S. dollars. ** Rem/Pen/Subs indicates that remittances, pensions, and subsidies were the primary sources of income. state-level government officials and later with principal economic activity, while farm NGO representatives. This important step in production is the main source of support in the SA process sparked discussion about the Patagonia. The SA helped government and policy implications of the SA findings. project planners identify seven categories of A World Bank social scientist spent nine staff rural poor and their corresponding survival weeks, incl.ding mission travel, super g strategies. With this information, they were the SA (see Box 3 for practice pointers). The able to formulate eligibility criteria for project data collection and analysis lasted six months selection and targeting criteria to ensure the and cost US$185,000 including local consultant inclusion of vulnerable groups. fees, field work, workshops, travel, and. Equity through flexible, demand-driven project expenses. The government financed US$115,000 components. Youth identified access to land as a through a grant and the remaining US$70,000 major constraint to reducing poverty; women was financed by the World Bank. identified their lack of access to, and control over, financial resources; and indigenous Findings Influenced Project Planning groups noted their vulnerability to Setting priorities for the project. The SA displacement. Correspondingly, each group findings helped the task team set the fcllowing identified different development priorities priorities for the PROINDER project: ranging from improved community infrastructure (women), increased technical . Support to agricultural production through assistance and appropriate technology (men), improving production-oriented infrastructure and greater access to financial resources and increasing crop yields (youth). Understanding distinctions like these * Diversifying productive activities through convinced project planners that if project technical assistance and training, income- benefits were to be equitably achieved, generating projects, and marketing support PROINDER components and activities would