India - Kerala Social Forestry Project

Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No. 13588 PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT INDIA KERALA SOCIAL FORESTRY PROJECT (CREDIT 1514-IN) OCTOBER 6, 1994 Agriculture Operatins Division India Department South Asia Regional Office 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 authorization.  PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT INDIA KERALA SOCIAL FORESTRY PROJECT (Credit 1514-IN) CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS Name of currency (abbreviation) = Indian Rapee (Rs.) Currency Exchange Rate: Appraisal Year Average (1984/85): US$ 1.00 = Rs.11.89 Intervening Year Average (1985/86-1991/92): US$1.00 = Rs.15.94 Completion Year Average (1992/93): US$1.00 = Rs.26.41 FISCAL YEAR GOI and all States: April 1 to March 31 WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Metric System ABBREVIATIONS CPCRI Central Plantation Crops Research Institute ERR Economic Rate of Return FD Forestry Department GOI Government of India GOK Government of Kerala KAU Kerala Agricultural University KFRI Kerala Forest Research Institute KSFP Kerala Social Forestry Project M & E Monitoring and Evaluation MTR Mid-Term Review NGO Non-Government Organization SAR Staff Appraisal Report SFW Social Forestiy Wing WB World Bank  FOR OFFICAL USE ONLY THE WORLD BANK Washington, D.C. 20433 U.S.A. Of foe Dof.atotoe-G&~ Opwatonm Evaluaon October 6, 1994 MEMORANDUM TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS AND THE PRESIDENT Subject: Project Completion Report oll India Kerala Social Forestry Project (Credit 1514-IN) Attached is the Project Completion Report on India: Kerala Social Forestry Project (Credit 1514-IN), approved in 1984. Parts I and II were prepared by the South Asia Regional Office and Part II was prepared by the Borrower. The project was the sixth in a series of ten Bank-supported social forestry projects in India. The main objectives of the project were to increase farmers' incomes and self-sufficiency in wood products; establish plantations to increase production of fuelwood, poles, and small timber; and strengthen the Social Forestry Wing of the Forest Department. The project included a component to promote production of medicinal plants and benefit tribal people. The project satisfactorily met its main objectives: incomes have been improved; wood production has been increased; soil erosion has been reduced; and institutional capacity for social forestry in Kerala has been strengthened. Returns to plantation investment are higher than expected at appraisal because of high value wood production. These achievements were made possible because the project was implemented flexibly. The appraised project was not closely tailored to agroecological conditions in Kerala, nor to the priorities of stakeholders. The blanket approach to farm forestry adopted by Bank-supported social forestry projects in India was successfully modified during implementation. The project did not, however, benefit the tribal population significantly, and the modest targets set at appraisal for this component were reduced following the Mid-Term Review. The quality of the PCR is satisfactory, with one exception: the weak performance of the tribal forestry component is not explained. But in this and other regards, the PCR findings of the Bank and the Borrower are consistent. The outcome of the project is rated as satisfactory, with modest institutional development impact. Sustainability is uncertain because the future availability of financial resources to operate and maintain project components appears to be in doubt. The project may be audited. Robert Picciotto by H. Eberhard K6pp 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 authorization.   FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT INDIA KERALA SOCIAL FORESTRY PROJECT (Credit 1514-IN) TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ...................................................... i EVALUATION SUMMARY ......................................................................... iii PART I. PROJECT REVIEW FROM BORROWER'S PERSPECTIVE ......................... . 1 1. Project Identity ............................... 1 2. Background ............................... 1 3. Project Objectives and Description ............................... 2 4. Project Design and Organization ............................... 2 5. Project Implementation ............................... 3 6. Project Results ............................. 8 7. Project Sustainability ............................... 10 8. Bank Performance ................................................................................. 10 9. Borrower Performance ....................... 10 10. Project Documentation and Data ..................... 10 11. Lessons Learned ....................... 11 PART II. PROJECT REVIEW FROM BORROWER'S PERSPECTIVE ............ ............. 13 PART III. STATISTICAL INFORMATION ....................................................... 40 1. Related Bank Loans and/or Credits ............................... 40 2. Project Timetable ............................... 40 3. Credit Disbursements ............................... 41 This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performunce of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.  4. Project Implementation ............................. 41 A. Physical Targets and Achievements .............................. 41 B. Staffing, Civil Works and Vehicles ....................... ............................. 42 5. Project Cost and Financing ............................. 43 A. Project Cost .............................. 43 B. Project Financing .............................. 43 6. Project Results .............................. 44 A. Direct Benefits .............................. 44 B. Economic Impact ............................. 45 C. Financial Impact .............................. 45 D. Price of Outputs .............................. 45 7. Status of Covenants ............................. 46 8. Use of Bank Resources .............................. 47 A. Staff Inputs (staff weeks) .............................. 47 B. Mission Data .............................. 48 TABLES 1. Exchange Rate and Inflation Factors .49 2. Cost Overruns. 50 ANNEX 1: FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC RE-EVALUATION. . 5 1  i PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT INDIA KERALA SOCIAL FORESTRY PROJECT (Cr.1514-IN) PREFACE This is the Project Completion Report (PCR) for the Kerala Social Forestry Project for which Credit 1514-IN for SDR 30.6 million (US$31.8 million equivalent) was approved on July 31, 1984. SDR 4.5 million was cancelled on December 5, 1991 during the funds redeployment exercise. The Credit closed on March 31, 1993, 15 months behind schedule. Final disbursement from the Credit was made on August 19, 1993 and the balance of SDR 1.3 million was cancelled. The Preface, Evaluation Summary, and Parts I and III of this report were prepared by an FAO/World Bank Cooperative Programme mission which visited India in September/October 1993. Part II was prepared by the Government of Kerala (GOK). Preparation of this report is based, inter alia, on the Staff Appraisal Report, the legal documents, supervision reports, correspondence between the Bank and the Borrower, internal Bank memoranda and reports, field visits and discussions with the Kerala Forestry Department and the Bank staff in New Delhi and Washington.   iii PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT INDIA KERALA SOCIAL FORESTRY PROJECT (Credit 1514-IN) EVALUATION SUMMARY Objectives 1. The main objectives of the project were to increase farmers' incomes and self- sufficiency in wood products through plantation of trees, making special efforts to involve tribal people; increase fuelwood, small timber and poles by establishing plantations on land belonging to the Government and other institutions; and strengthen the Social Forestry Wing of the Forest Department and related institutions with provision for investment in extension, research and training. Implementation Experience 2. The project was implemented over a period of eight years and four months as against the six years planned at appraisal. Total planted area surpassed the appraisal targets. Implementation of the institutional development component was slow at the start, and the targets for additional staffing and vehicles were still not met at completion. The number of private nurseries which emerged during project operations, exceeding the appraisal estimate, declined dramatically following the discontinuation of the buy-back arrangement towards the end of the project. Seedling quality improvement undertaken by the project included identification of "plus trees" for seed production and collection, and formulation of seedling grading standards. However, limited attention was given to the management of "plus trees," and seed procurement for project plantations continued to be from uncertified sources and with limited quality control. Seedling grading standards were not used in day-to-day project operations, partly because of the large scale seedling production. Plant mortality was high. Technical guidance and supervision provided for private nurseries was not up to the level recommended at appraisal, and the project initiatives did not lead to major technological improvements either in nursery operations or in plantation development and management. 3. Farm forestry has been dominated by high value timber species compared to casuarina, acacia and eucalyptus recommended at appraisal. This change in stand composition has arisen from the farmers' preference for species of commercial value. Establishment of plantations on government lands has prevented further degradation of these sites. Similarly, plantations in coastal areas have become effective shelter-belts against wind and water-induced erosion. Plantations in institutional lands have not been protected well, resulting in illicit felling and damage to growing stock. Given the high literacy rate in Kerala, the project's publicity efforts have worked well. However, the expectation that the existing agricultural extension system would provide follow-up guidance did not materialize. 4. Compared to several social forestry projects in other parts of India, the implementation of the project's research component has been successful. Training activities, however, have come to a stand-still following the termination of the project and the training facilities established under the project remain underutilized due to budgetary constraints. For the same reasons, new plantations have recorded a sharp decline after project closure and the services of almost all the  iv staff belonging to the Social Forestry Wing are not fully utilized. The actual cost of implementing the project was Rs.897 million - with about 50 percent increase over the appraisal estimate of Rs.599 million (US$54.5 million). Results 5. The project proved successful in achieving its main objectives: it has improved farmers' income earning opportunities, increased wood production, helped check water and wind erosion, and strengthened institutional capacity. It did not, however, benefit the tribal population significantly. The expected returns from plantation investments are far higher than anticipated at appraisal, mainly due to the high value wood production. A key accomplishment has been the strengthening of FD for implementing a larger statewide social forestry programme capable of generating benefits in the long term. Sustainability 6. Sustainability of several of the activities initiated through the project is in doubt because of the non-availability of budgeted funds. Lessons Learned 7. The key lessons learnt in the implementation of the project are as follows: 8. A blanket approach to farm forestry, similar to that adopted for other social forestry projects in the country, was followed, irrespective of prevailing farmning systems characterized by tree and annual crops in Kerala. Tree species provided under this approach (mainly for fuelwood and fodder) were at variance with farmers' preference for commercial species. In the design and formulation of the projects, macro-level data should be reconciled with locality-specific data/information in order to ascertain the perception and priorities of different stakeholders. For example, surveys to determine species preferences of farmers, market prospects, and site compatibility should have preceded the design of the project and would have led to more accurate predictions of planting material requirements. 9. Contrary to expectations at appraisal, farmers plant trees on their own land primarily to obtain cash incomes, rather than to meet their domestic fuelwood needs. The project's fuelwood production goals, therefore, could have best been achieved by plantations on public land. 10. While free or subsidized seedling distribution contributed positively to the achievement of the project's planting targets, in the short termn, it tended to undermine the fiscal sustainability of the project after the completion of the disbursement period. 11. While designing project implementation units (e.g. Social Forestry Wing) for execution of defined project activities, consideration should be given to the eventual integration of the unit with other wings of the FD structure, thereby meeting sectoral requirements for human resources. This has the advantage of promoting staff morale and ensuring the long-term stability of the organization.  1 PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT INDIA KERALA SOCIAL FORESTRY PROJECT (Credit 1514-IN) PART I. PROJECT REVIEW FROM BORROWER'S PESPECTIVE 1. Project Identity Project Name Kerala Social Forestry Project Credit No. 1514-IN RVP Unit South Asia Region Country India Sector Forestry 2. Background 2.1 Kerala, with about 29 million people and 39,000 km2 of total geographical area, is the most densely populated (700 persons/km2 or three times the national average) state in India. About 29 percent of its land area is under forests, and 60 percent under cultivation. More than 90 percent of the landholdings in the state are less than 1.0 ha in size, and land use involves a mix of several crops including trees (rubber, coconut, arecanut, and cashew - often intercropped - which account for over 60 percent of the cropped area), and foodcrops (paddy and tapioca) and spices (pepper and cardamom). The state contains a large number of enterprises engaged in the production of plywood, veneer, pulp and paper, which use wood as raw material and fuel. In recent decades, forested areas available for exploitation have declined and sources of fuelwood supply have not expanded in pace with the growing demand from the increasing population. To alleviate the situation, the Government of Kerala (GOK) has been implementing since 1982 a series of social forestry schemes which have shown the potential for increasing both wood production and farm incomes. 2.2 The Kerala Social Forestry Project (KSFP), implemented with World Bank assistance, represented the largest of such schemes and covered the entire state of Kerala. It was also the sixth in the series of ten projects in India supported by the Bank with total IDA credits of some US$500 million, mostly for social forestry development in several other states of India including Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, West Bengal, Jammu and Kashmir, Haryana, Karnataka, Rajasthan, I-limachal Pradesh and Maharashtra. In addition, a Forestry Research, Education and Training project has recently been appraised at an estimated cost of US$56.4 million with institutional and physical infrastructure components.  2 3. Project Objectives and Description 3.1 The objectives of KSFP were to: (a) increase farmers' incomes and self-sufficiency in wood products through their plantation of trees, making special efforts to involve tribal people; (b) increase production of fuelwood, small timber and poles by establishing plantations on available government lands, along railroads, canal banks, roadsides and coastal belts, and grounds of educational and other institutions; (c) reduce the effects of water and wind erosion, and lessen pressure on existing forests; and (d) strengthen the existing Social Forestry Wing (SFW) of the Forest Department (FD) and related institutions, and their capability to conduct a statewide social forestry programme which would yield benefits in the long-term. Project components included: plantation activities (85,300 ha) including farm forestry (69,200 ha), large and small block plantations on government lands (11,000 and 1,000 ha respectively), plantations along coastal, railway, roadside and canal strips (2,000 ha), special (tribal) fuelwood plantations (2,000 ha), and medicinal plants (100 ha) pilot scheme, plantation protection, extension and publicity, training, research and studies, and institutional development. 3.2 As appraised in 1984, this project was to be implemented over a period of six years at a total estimated cost of US$54.5 million (Rs.599 million) including an IDA Credit of US$31.8 million. The Credit became effective in March 1985, providing for retroactive financing from January 1984. 4. Project Design and Organization 4.1 The project design appropriately focused on the key elements of assistance required for the implementation of a large-scale social forestry programme in the state. It correctly emphasized a low-cost farm forestry component (81 percent of the total planting target area), complementing it with needed infrastructure and support services including orientation/reorientation training for the staff of the Forestry Department and related institutions. The project also sought to address, on a pilot scale, poverty alleviation concerns through support to the tribal population (tribal fuelwood and medicinal plants component). Small and large block plantations on public land aimed at reducing pressures on existing forests, and minimizing water and wind erosion. Seedling pricing has been an area of concern from the early stages of the project cycle. At appraisal, it was expected that a limited number of seedlings - 500 casuarina and 500 of other species - would be distributed free to each participating farmer and seedlings in excess of this free limit should be paid for at the actual financial cost of production. This was intended to meet the requirements of small farmers and gradually build up incentives for the transfer of this operation eventually to the private sector. For reasons explained in para 5.21, this strategy has been neither effective nor practicable. 4.2 In order to give singular attention to social forestry development, special provision was made to strengthen the capacity of the Social Forestry Wing in the Forestry Department to implement the project. In retrospect, however, it would appear that adequate attention was not given at the formulation stage to the possibility of integrating the functions of the Social Forestry Wing and other wings, e.g. Territorial Forestry Wing of the Forestry Department. Similarly, there was inadequate recognition of the need to align the project proposals with those of ongoing projects for the development of tribal communities living in forest areas. Past experience shows that the Forest Department alone could not advance the interest of the tribal population through tree planting without supplementary investments which would generate quick returns (e.g nurseries, medicinal plants processing/marketing and small ruminants production).  3 5. Project Implementation 5.1 The project was implemented over a period of eight years and four months instead of six years as planned at appraisal. The Credit Agreement was amended on three occasions (September 1989, October 1990, and November 1991), to allow a higher proportion of the costs to be met by IDA. The project underwent a Mid-Term Review in 1987, and a revision in December 1990, when the Government of India (GOI) and World Bank (WB) decided to extend the project until 31 March 1993. Following this and the 1991 Credit amendment, planting targets were increased from 85,300 to 127,100 ha. The increased target covered mainly farm forestry (87,000 ha) and large block plantations (37,000 ha) and was financed from Credit savings resulting from the devaluAtion of the rupee. There were no major changes in other components. 5.2 Plantation targets. Total planted area surpassed appraisal target by 32 percent but did not reach (by 12 percent) the expanded target set at project extension. As shown in Part Ll4A of the Report, there were shortfalls vis-a-vis the targets set at project extension in respect of area planted under farm forestry (9 percent), large block plantations (27 percent), and tribal fuelwood plantations (10 percent). On the other hand, there was an increase in the area under small block plantations (170 percent). The tribal medicinal plants scheme met its revised target. As compared to appraisal expectations, strip plantations achieved only 54 percent of the targets, and the farm forestry component registered a decline in its share of the total planted area from 81 percent to 71 percent. This was largely offset by the increased share of the second largest component, i.e. block plantations (from 13 percent to 24 percent). Given that plantation densities were well below appraisal estimates (see para 5.10), the total number of trees planted was below the appraisal target. 5.3 Other targets. The institutional development component for strengthening the Social Forestry Wing of the Forestry Department provided for incremental staffing (360), civil works, mainly residential and office buildings (521), and vehicles (359). Implementation was slow at the start, and the targets for additional staffing and vehicles were still not met at completion. Due to largely local budget constraints, only 73 percent of the planned positions were filled, and 65 percent of the vehicles procured. Some of the divisional posts were filled with junior level officers (e.g. Assistant Conservator of Forests instead of Deputy Conservator of Forests). In earlier years, unduly low schedules of rates for civil works were reported to be main factors contributing to contractor reluctance to take up construction work. These rates were later revised in 1991. Although the total expenditure on civil works was less than the appraisal allocation (in US dollar terms), the number of works completed exceeded the appraisal target by 36 percent. Residential buildings accounted for the larger proportion of this increase and most of them were constructed during the last two years of the project, utilizing a part of the Credit savings. Most of the buildings have been well constructed and utilized for the intended purposes. 5.4 Private and departmental nursery development and production. Seedling production for farm forestry and public plantations was to be achieved through the establishment of a network of (1,055) private and (50) departmental nurseries. Family-operated (landowner and two family members) nurseries of 80,000 to 110,000 seedlings per annum capacity were expected to play an increasingly dominant role in seedling production. However, instead of targetting individual families, project management promoted the involvement of voluntary groups and non- governmental organizations (NGOs) in the establishment and management of these nurseries. This was done to avoid any perceptions of favouritism in the selection of nursery operators, and for equity considerations. Because of quick and high returns, several of the voluntary groups/ NGOs participated. The success of this experience was influenced by timely disbursement of payments due to them. Where project payments were delayed, even the motivated voluntary groups were reluctant to continue with nursery operations.  4 5.5 The number of private nurseries, which exceeded the appraisal target by reaching a maximum number of 3,168 in 1988-89, has since declined to 426 (in 1991-92) mainly in response to the discontinuation of the buy-back arrangement followed under the project, whereby the project purchased all seedlings produced for distribution to applicants. Most seedlings were raised in polypots and their density was infuenced by polypot size. 5.6 Private nurseries produced, on average, 150 seedlings per m2 as against the production rate of 100 seedlings/M2 estimated at appraisal. This is within the expected nursery operational efficiency rates of projects of this kind. However, their unit size and capacity were below th,e appraisal estimate. The Departmental nurseries (consisting of about 26,000 nursery beds), with a seedling production rate of 150 to 160 seedlings/M2, continued to be the dominant source of seedlings for private and public sector planting activities. At project completion, only 34 percent of total seedling producdon was from private nurseries, and the expectation that the private sector would become the primary source of seedling production did not materialize. 5.7 Nursery technology and management. The project contributed to impart and transfer improved nursery development and management technology to the private sector. This was done through providing training and supplying the required inputs, e.g. seeds and polythene bags, to the participating private nursery operators. 5.8 Surveys funded under the project have reported 40 percent plant survival in farm forestry as compared to 55-60 percent in public plantations. This difference is attributable to high rates of pre-planting seedling wastage (in farm forestry) rather than differences in the quality of seedlings produced in private and public nurseries as surmised by some. Given the generally favourable rainfall conditions in Kerala, the reported plant mortality rate is high. Field observations indicate that this could have resulted from high moisture stress (drought) - micro- climatic conditions in the project area. 5.9 Seedling quality improvement initiatives undertaken by the project included identification of "plus trees" for seed production and collection, and formulation of seedling grading standards for important social forestry tree species. However, there was limited management given to these "plus trees" (e.g for crown thinning and exposure for better seed production), and seed procurement for project plantation activities continued to be primarily from uncertified sources and with limited quality control. Seedling grading standards were not used in day-to-day operations of the project, partly because of the scale of seedling production. Similarly, no initiative at the seedling production stage was taken to improve farm forestry plant survival rates by increasing seedling tolerance to moisture stress and drought, which 60 percent of farm forestry survey respondents identified as the main factor in high plant mortality. These operational difficulties could have been addressed by: (a) incorporating grading standards in the seedling production system itself, i.e. by controlling seeding and seedling density; manipulating polypot dimensions, and nursery bed or seedling nutrient management; and (b) favouring production of seedlings with high root-shoot ratios by varying seedbed seedling density, polypot size, fertilizer composition and frequency, and applying techniques like root-pruning. Technical guidance and supervision provided for private nurseries was not up to the level recommended at appraisal (for instance in 1988-89, the ratio of forester to the number of private nurseries was 1:16 as against the recommended 1:5). 5.10 Private and public plantations establishment. Provision was made in the project for the free distribution of seedlings, up to 3,000 casuarina and 500 seedlings of other species, including eucalyptus and Acacia auriculiformis per family for farrn forestry. Over 80 percent of farm forestry planting has been done by farmers with holdings of less than one hectare. Each beneficiary, on average, planted 25 seedlings, 95 percent of which were planted on farm  5 boundaries and homesteads. The established plantation composition, however, does not correspond to Staff Appraisal Report (SAR) expectations. Instead of casuarina, eucalyptus and acacia, farm forestry has been dominated by high value timber species such as ailanthus and teak. These changes in stand composition have arisen from the farmers' preference for species producing higher value products. A key characteristic of these changes is the need for increased plant spacing (i.e. about 4 m2 per plant) which would lead to lower biomass production. 5.11 Casuarina and Acacia auriculiformis have been planted on public lands in line with the appraisal report's proposals. The planting density for both species has been about 4,000 plants/ha as compared to the high density of 4,500 and 10,000 plants per ha for acacia and casuarina respectively, recommended in the SAR. Although the SAR recommended high density could be consistent with the original main objective of the production component, i.e. fuelwood production, it was inappropriate to the home-garden conditions of Kerala. The effective stand density in established stands ranges from 2,000 to 2,223 trees/ha. Stands established under the strip component are similar to block plantations in species mix and stand structure. 5.12 Plantation management technology. Post-planting management in farm forestry has only been carried out in block plantings which constitute only 5 percent of these plantations. For teak block plantations, these include weeding and soil working, fertilization and irrigation, and in some cases, branch pruning to improve stemwood quality. However, in the case of boundary and homestead planting, no post-planting care has been taken of the trees as farmers at this point do not see any value in the activity. Protection by fencing and harvest-scheduling have been the only management activities carried out in respect of plantations on government land. Lack of appropriate arrangements between the project and the participating institutions for protecting the established plantations has led to illicit felling and removal of trees, particularly in strip and institutional plantations. 5.13 The farm forestry plant survival rate estimate (40 percent) is based on the number of seedlings distributed and not on plants actually planted by the beneficiary. Field observations indicate that a significant proportion of the mortality has been a consequence of high seedling wastage (i.e. seedlings distributed but not planted), especially in the early years of project implementation. Some of the wastage could be attributed to the unrealistic emphasis on acacia and casuarina seedling distribution. These species were less compatible with the existing farming system and not preferred by the beneficiaries who were primarily interested in planting high-value species like teak and ailanthus. These problems could have been minimized if appropriate pre- plantation surveys had been carried out to determine farmers' preferences. 5.14 Furthermore, trends in survival rates (35 percent to 40 percent in farm forestry and 50 percent to 55 percent in public plantations) and productivity estimates (10 to 12m3/ha/yr as compared to l5m31ha/yr), indicate that project initiatives did not lead to major technological improvements in either nursery operations or plantation development and management. The project did not address critical problems such as high mortality due to moisture stress and drought. As discussed earlier, apart from actions aimed at increasing drought tolerance of seedlings through improved nursery management, simple moisture conservation techniques including mulching would have gone a long way in mitigating this problem. Similarly, the provision of marketing guidance based on a standing tree girth to volume conversion table would have helped farmers to estimate the volume of their wood production and enhanced their negotiating power at the time of sale of their tree products. 5.15 The establishment of plantations on government land has prevented further degradation of these sites. The coastal strip plantations have become effective shelter-belts against wind and water-induced soil erosion. However, the present harvesting plans, which involve  6 almost total biomass harvesting, do not give adequate attention to soil nutritional aspects of plantation management. Such a high level of biomass harvesting can result in 'export' of large amounts of soil nutrients from these areas. Therefore, it would be essential that FD, while developing silvicultural and harvesting regimes, gives due importance to this aspect of sustainable wood production. 5.16 Protection arrangements. Another area of concern relates to lack of satisfactory arrangements for protection of public plantations established, both in institutional and degraded forest areas. The arrangements for long-terrn protection were not worked out in advance for institutional plantations. Consequently, after the termination of FD's activities in these lands, the benefiting institutions have not taken over protection responsibilities, resulting in illicit felling and damage to growing stock. Plantations established in degraded forest areas face similar problems due to lack of well-defined responsibilities for the local communities. Although, project management organized about 300 village panchayat committees to protect these plantations, only 160 were actually established, and most of them remain non-functional. 5.17 Publicity and extension. The project's provision for publicity was mainly used for dissemination of information through radio, film-shows and news media, and publication and distribution of materials on nursery and tree planting techniques. Given the high rate (over 95 percent) of literacy in the state, this approach worked well. It resulted in creating awareness among the public about the possibility and profitability of growing trees outside the traditional forest lands. It also led to the emergence of a large number of voluntary organizations, including women's associations, interested in operating nurseries and promoting farm forestry. The Social Forestry Wing maintained good liaison with extension staff of the Agriculture Department and made use of the available rural extension facilities, e.g. "Krishi Bhavans" (farmers' meeting points) to propagate farm forestry and distribute seedlings. However, the expectation that the existing agricultural extension system would lend support for providing follow-up guidance did not materialize, as indicated by farm forestry survey results which show that up to 70 percent of the beneficiaries did not receive any planting/post-planting extension advice. 5.18 Training. Training funds were mainly used for: (a) the construction of a training centre in Arippa, situated at about 60 km away from Trivandrum; (b) Forest Department staff training; and (c) training of farmers and representatives of voluntary organizations. The Arippa Training Centre was constructed at a total cost of Rs. 11 million. All the civil works, including classrooms (with a capacity for 200 trainees), dormitory, staff and guest quarters covering about 5.7 ha of land area, have been completed, and equipment and furniture procured as planned. GOK has endowed the Centre with about 200 ha earmarked for its future expansion which, given the land scarce situation in the state, reflects the state's recognition of the importance of forestry training. Since it became functional in 1990, the facilities available in this Centre are reported to have been used for training some 2,500 persons including representatives of panchayats and NGOs, and agricultural extension workers (30 percent of whom were women), in social forestry operations. Training activities have, however, come to a standstill following the termination of the project. Consequently, the Centre now remains unused, due to lack of budget for training activities. 5.19 Project funds were used both for domestic and overseas training. Three state-level forestry officials benefitted from overseas training in communication technology and social forestry. Some 34 senior forestry officials of the Social Forestry Wing participated in the project- funded study tours to various national centres in forest administration and management, grassland development, and agro-forestry. Orientation courses and seminars/workshops on social forestry techniques were organized within the state in collaboration with the Kerala Agricultural University and other institutions for about 850 FD staff. The project also conducted short-term orientation  7 courses for farmers, women's groups, student "nature" clubs, and representatives of voluntary organizations. The short-term nature of the training courses organized, non-utilization of training consultancies, and the apparent reluctance of the government to use Credit funds, especially for overseas training, have contributed to the less than full use of the appraisal allocation. 5.20 Research and studies. In comparison to several WB-funded social forestry projects in other parts of India, the project has been successful in the implementation of its research component. A commendable aspect is the effective collaboration between the Forest Department and research institutions in carrying out social forestry-related research. From the outset, the advice of a Technical Committee consisting of representatives from the Social Forestry Wing, Central Plantation Crops Research Institute (CPCRI), Kerala Forest Research Institute (KFRI), and Kerala Agricultural University (KAU), was used to identify research priorities and define the scope of project research studies. The project financed a number of investigations relevant to social forestry operations in the state and covering a range of subjects, e.g. wood supply and demand, traditional and improved agro-forestry systems, seed collection procedures, and medicinal plant propagation. Most of these studies were completed on time. The results of some of these studies, e.g. Biomass Yield Tables with information on production allocation to different tree components, and documentation/analysis of social and ecological dimensions of indigenous agro- forestry systems in Kerala, could provide a sound basis for future planning of social forestry development and management in the state. 5.21 Seedling pricing. In the initial years, the Social Forestry Wing was reluctant to sell seedlings lest it might adversely affect implementation of the farm forestry component. Further, during the same period, seedlings were also being distributed free of cost under other ongoing schemes in the state. Moreover, the arrangement to distribute part of the seedlings free of charge and sell the rest not only imposed a cumbersome record keeping but resulted in 'binami' transactions by beneficiaries to evade paying for priced seedlings. At the recommendation of the Mid-Term Review (MTR), cashew and grevillia seedlings distributed under the project were priced in 1988-89 at Rs.0. 10 for basketed plant. This price was subsequently eliminated later due to resistance from growers. A second attempt was made in the following year to price the seedlings at Rs.0.65 for ailanthus, Rs.1.25 for silver oak, and Rs.0.25 for teak stumps. For other species which were distributed in excess of the free distribution limit of 10 naked-root and 3-basketed seedlings, prices were fixed at Rs.0.02 per naked-root and Rs.0.10 for containerized seedlings, respectively. 5.22 Tribal plantations were originally included to benefit the socially backward and poor tribal population living in and around the forest areas. Following the Mid-Term Review, these plantation targets were reduced from 4,200 to 2,100 ha which, in turn, reduced the involvement of tribals and hence their employment opportunities in the project plantations. The area under tribal medicinal plants was also small and of an experimental nature, incorporating numerous species, many of which have no market. There appears to be no indication either that the tribals would be continuing with the schemes introduced under the project or deriving any major benefits therefrom. 5.23 Monitoring and evaluation (M & E). As planned at appraisal, an M & E office was established in 1986. It implemented a monitoring system in accordance with the "Operational Guidelines to the Monitoring and Evaluation of Social Forestry in India" formulated by GOI and WB. The office also monitored the physical and financial progress of the project, and conducted farrn forestry surveys for 1985-86. For other years (1987-1988), these were undertaken by the Economics and Statistics Department of the State Government. Other investigations initiated by the M & E unit include evaluation of plantations by KFRI (1985-1990), study on wastage of seedlings (1987), and an impact study by consultants. Computers provided under the project proved useful  8 in upgrading the monitoring process. Two posts of M & E supervisors and three posts of instructors, however, provided under the project were not filled. As a result, data processing and analysis work was adversely affected. Overall, the establishment of the M & E unit improved information collection and its documentation. However, the linkages between this unit and the planning and field divisions were limited, so that there is little evidence that implementation decisions were affected by the outcome of its studies. 5.24 Project cost. At the time of appraisal, the project was estimated to cost Rs.599.2 million (US$54.5 million) or Rs.7,025/ha over a planting area of 85,300 ha. The actual cost of implemen,ting the project over 112,373 ha of planted area was Rs.896.8 million (US$52.1) or Rs.7,980/ha, representing a cost overrun of about 50 percent in rupee terms or nearly 14 percent in per ha/rupee terms. The depreciation of the rupee against the US dollar has, however, led to an under-run of 5 percent in costs expressed in dollars. As expected, about 60 percent of the costs (compared to 58 percent at appraisal) were incurred directly on plantation activities. Total project costs at appraisal and completion of the project are given in Part III/SA. As shown in Table 2, the cost increase of 50 percent in rupee terms was caused by escalating prices and wages, which accounted for 44 percent of the additional costs; and quantities higher than the appraisal estimates which accounted for 6 percent of the additional costs. The breakdown of cost overruns is presented in Table 2. 5.25 Cost control. The project design has sought to reduce the cost of plantation models by allocating the largest share to the least cost plantation system (i.e. farm forestry). The design however acknowledged the additional benefits (production of poles and fuelwood on otherwise unproductive land, generation of considerable employment and conservation of land) obtainable from block plantations on government wasteland, which were sufficient to justify its high cost. It was considered appropriate to limit the extent of generally high cost strip plantations. Appraisal expectations have, by and large, been met as total cost per ha at project completion is estimated at Rs.5,320 (farm forestry), Rs.15,886 (large block plantation), Rs.8,713 (small block plantation) and Rs.10,750 (strip plantation). The overall project cost increase of 50 percent is partly explained by a reduction in the share of low cost farm forestry plantations, i.e. 71 percent of the total planted area compared to 81 percent foreseen at appraisal. 6. Project Results 6. 1 The project was successful in achieving its main objectives: it has improved farmers' income earning opportunities, increased production (though less than expected) of fuelwood, poles and timber, helped check water and wind erosion, and strengthened the institutional capability of the Social Forestry Wing of the Forest Department and related institutions. It did not, however, benefit the tribal population significantly, limiting their involvement to very small-scale plantation schemes. The project has directly generated 2.30 million person-days of employment from plantations, about 30 percent higher than targeted at appraisal. Despite its overall achievements, the project suffered from some serious shortcomings. These related to distribution of seedlings without ascertaining farmers' preferences, high seedling wastage, lack of attention to moisture stress and drought which adversely affected plant mortality, and lack of satisfactory arrangements for protection of public plantations. 6.2 Production. Current estimates place the eventual size and distribution of production at 5.2 million m3 of fuelwood, 9.9 million m3 of timber, and 1.2 million m3 of poles, giving a total production of 16.3 million m3 over a 32-year production cycle, which equals only about 33 percent of the appraisal estimate. This large shortfall in project production is due to: (a) lower effective plant densities in farm forestry, i.e. 1,000 plants/ ha compared to the SAR estimate of up to 3,000/ha; (b) reduced effective densities in public plantations - one-half to one-fourth of  9 SAR projections because of a combination of low initial planting densities and mortality; and (c) Mean Annual Increments (MAIs) ranging from 8m3 to 12m3 per ha, compared to the SAR estimate of 10 to 15m3/ha for different species. 6.3 At appraisal, 72 percent of total production was expected in fuelwood and poles, and 28% in timber and peelers. However, as a consequence of change in the species mix and effective densities in response to farmer demand, the product mix would be 39 percent and 61 percent in fuelwood/pole and timber respectively. In spite of the reduced volumetric production, in farm forestry, the expected returns from plantation investments are far higher than anticipated, mainly due to production of high value teak and ailanthus. 6.4 Financial analysis. Financial rates of return, not estimated at appraisal, have been calculated based on PCR estimates of biomass yields and prices, detailed in Annex 1. The cash flows for the main plantation models (taken over a 32-year period), have been estimated using average level of costs updated to 1992/93. Costs are calculated per hectare and 1992/93 constant prices are used for both costs and returns. Farmers' labour inputs and products accruing to rural households have been valued at imputed prices equal to market wage rate (Rs.40/person-day) and prices ranging from Rs.20/pole to Rs.1,200/m3 for timber (see Section 6D of Part III). The opportunity cost of land is valued at Rs.1,000/ha/yr for only block planting by farmers which is assumed around 5 percent of the area planted to farm forestry, and Rs.100/ha/yr for grazing areas in public land. The results of the analysis show favourable rates of return ranging from 33 percent to 57 percent depending on the type of planting. 6.5 Economic re-evaluation. An economic re-evaluation has been undertaken for the project as a whole and for three of the five sub-projects. In line with the methodology of the SAR, no benefits have been included for the pilot tribal programme for the cultivation of medicinal plants which only account for 0.1 percent of total planted area. Similarly, production from tribal fuelwood plantations has been excluded due to inadequate and incomplete monitoring data. This accounts for less than 2 percent of total planted area. The analysis has been carried out in 1992/93 prices with past expenditures restated in 1992/93 price terms using the wholesale price index. Phased investment costs in financial terms, as well as in economic terms for the purposes of the analysis are shown in Table 1. The details regarding planted area and expected yields, as compared with the assumptions at appraisal, are in Annex 1. The following conversion factors have been used in converting the financial prices to economic values: Unskilled labour including farm labour 0.70 Standard conversion factor (SCF) 0.80 Output prices, in financial and economic terms at stump, are summarized in Part III/6D. A 32-year period of analysis has been used for the purposes of estimating ERRs. 6.6 Based on the above assumptions, species mix and yields, the current estimate of ERRs for the project as a whole and for the two sub-projects (farm forestry and departmental plantations) are 33 percent, 45 percent, and 29 percent as compared with the appraisal estimate of 26 percent, 33 percent, and 15-26 percent respectively. A combined analysis was undertaken for the departmental plantations (large block, small block and strip plantations) in the absence of adequate segregation of investment costs. The improved output prices (especially for timber) and shift of species mix to high value items have more than offset the reduced survival rate (40 percent in contrast to the appraisal estimate of 60 percent). 6.7 The sensitivity analysis indicates that a reduction in benefits by 20 percent would lower the ERR for the project as a whole to 29 percent; a reduction by 50 percent would lower the  10 ERR to 22 percent; while an increase in cost by 20 percent and by 50 percent would reduce ERRs to 30 percent and 27 percent respectively. A combined reduction in benefits and increase in costs by 50 percent will lower the ERR to only 16 percent. The project is therefore not sensitive to variations in either costs or benefits. 7. Project Sustainability 7.1 A key accomplishment of the project has been the strengthening of the Forest Department, and related institutions, to provide support for implementing a large-scale tree planting programme outside the traditional forest lands over the long term. However, sustainability of the programme is in doubt because of the non-availability of budgeted funds, particularly for plantation development in public lands with the result that the strengthened institutions cannot be effectively utilized. At present, the services of almost all the staff (about 300) belonging to the SFW, are not utilized for want of a budgeted programme for forestry operations. Similarly, the physical facilities established through the project are likely to remain under-utilized in the absence of such support. Sharp declines in the scale of post-project plantation programmes and in the training activities at Arippa centre are indicative of this problem. Project plantations generate adequate resources generally providing surplus revenue to meet continuing development needs. A revolving fund mechanism, as recommended by the Bank missions, appears to be an ideal option to keep aside funds for sustaining project forestry operations. 8. Bank Performance 8.1 The Bank support to the project until its completion was satisfactory. The supervision missions included competent foresters familiar with the local situation, as well as with operational aspects of social forestry projects in other parts of the country. Besides providing continuity in their staffing, the Bank supervision missions made useful contributions towards adoption of bio-engineering soil and moisture conservation techniques. The Bank responded flexibly in dealing with problems of financial management. The decision to increase disbursement percentages helped to relieve local funding shortages and attain higher targets but in so doing could have reduced the pressure on the state government to allocate the funds required to sustain the institutions. Timely extension of the project closing date enabled the government to utilize the Credit savings for expanded operations. 9. Borrower Performance 9.1 The project was the first major effort in the forestry sector ever undertaken by the state government. Inspite of this , the FD adapted itself well to the project implementation needs. The Social Forestry Wing responded positively to several of the recommendations of the supervision missions. A noticeable shortcoming was lack of progress in the establishment of the "Revolving Fund" to utilize the returns from project investments. The effectiveness of some of the project operations was hampered by a number of factors, including delays in the release of local funds, limited deployment of project staff for supervising private nurseries and monitoring and evaluation of project activities. 10. Project Documentation and Data 10.1 The SAR provided a general framework for project operations. In retrospect, it would appear that it should have been supplemented by an implementation manual specifying technical and management aspects of plantation development (i.e. nursery layout, application of  I1 seedling grading standards, stand establishment procedures including pre-plantation surveys, silvicultural practices, and harvesting regime) for enhanced project performance. 11. Lessons Learned 11.1 A blanket approach to farm forestry, similar to that adopted for other social forestry projects in the country, was followed, irrespective of prevailing farming systems characterized by tree and annual crops in Kerala. Tree species provided under this approach (mainly for fuelwood and fodder) were at variance with farmers' preference for commercial species. In the design and formulatiop of the projects, macro-level data should be reconciled with locality-specific data/information in order to ascertain the perception and priorities of different stakeholders. For example, surveys to determine species preferences of farmers, market prospects, and site compatibility should have preceded the design of the project and would have led to more accurate predictions of planting material requirements. 11.2 Contrary to expectations at appraisal, farmers plant trees on their own land primarily to obtain cash incomes, rather than to meet their domestic fuelwood needs. The project's fuelwood production goals, therefore, could have best been achieved by plantations on public land. 11.3 It would have been advantageous to broaden the definition of farm forestry targets by including both the area planted as well as the number of households benefited. 11.4 While free or subsidized seedling distribution contributed positively to the achievement of the project's planting targets, in the short term, it tended to undermine the fiscal sustainability of the project after the completion of the disbursement period. 11.5 While designing project implementation units (e.g. Social Forestry Wing) for execution of defined project activities, consideration should be given to the eventual integration of the unit with other wings of the FD structure, thereby meeting sectoral requirements for human resources. This has the advantage of promoting staff morale and ensuring the long-term stability of the organization. 11.6. When a component (such as the medicinal plants pilot scheme under this project) forms an insignificant proportion of the total project investment and is outside the direct purview of the implementing agency (FD), it receives only slight management attention and seldom attains its goals.  12 PART II. PROJECT REVIEW FROM BORROWER'S PERSPECTIVE  13 KERALA SOCIAL FORESTRY PROJECT CREDIT 1514-IN PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT - PART II SOCIAL FORESTRY WING, KERALA FOREST DEPARTMENT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. JULY 1993  14 Kerala Social Forestry Project (CREDIT 1514-Iro Part II PCR Introduction: The Social Forestry Progranme in Kerala with the assistance of the World Bank started in the year 1984. The agreement was executed on 12..12..1984+. As per the project doct"ment the period of the project was fixed as six years 1984 to 1990. The original cost of the uroiect in terms of SDR was fixed as 30.6 million and US ` 31.8 million in rupee terms Rs.599.1 million. The important objectives of the project and the compo- nents are narrated below:- - to increase the farmer's incomes and self sufficiency in wood products through their planration of trees; to increase production of fuelwood, small timber and poles by establishing plantations on available Governzment lands, along the sides of railway lines, on canal banks, roadsides and coastal belts and on the gro;nds of edu- cational and other institutions; - to reduce the effects of water, aztd wind erosion and lessen pressure cn existing forests;  15 - to strengthen the eixsting Social Forestry Wing of the Forest Department and related institutions and their capability to conduct a State wide Social Forestry Prograrze which would yield benefits in the long term. The project consists of the following camponents: 1. Distributicn of 340 million seedlings under farm forestry to raise plantations of about 69,000 ha.; 2. Large and small block plantations in Government land totalling 12,000ha.; 3. Strip plantation of 2,000 ha. along canal banks, road sides, railway sides and coastal belts; !-. Special plantation schemes for tribal peoole to th- extent of 2,100 ha.; 5. Establishment/ir-prov,r-nt of small family co3rated nurseries and large nurseries serring departmental plantations; 6. An intensive progra=ze of extension and publicity, strengthening the linkage between Sccial o.-restry and Agricultural Extension; 7. Training for Social Forestry staff, Volantary and other interested organisations and farers, and strengthenirg of selected institutions for Social Forestry Training; 8. Research activities including development of reco-men- dations to be transmitted to the farmers by exten--_on and evaluation of planting prcgramares, carrying cu: of forestr; related research and studies and a wocd supply and demand study;  16 9. Improving the capability of mall farmers and schools to handle nursery work and increasing the role of voluntary organisations, and rural communities in Social Forestry; and 10. Monitoring and evaluation of the project in accordance with the guidelines for 1 onitoring and 3valuation develooed by Government of India and IDA. By the year 1990 the Social Forestry Project achieved the complete physical targets laid down in the original project for farm forestry and bLock plantation. Civil works were also progressing and other activities like extension training, research and studies, monitoring and evaluiation were all pro- grassing. The rate of exchanga of rupee is Dollar and rupee Vs SDR depreciated considerably and as a result of which the physical targets were revised. There was about Ps.4-00 million available in the project account. This necessitated for the extension of the project frcm 1990 for two more years uzto 1993. In the extension proposals submitted in 90 it was proposed to undartake additional planting activities to the extent of 16,1+10 ha. in the degraded forests and civil works 1+10 additional buildings and purchase of few vehicles and equiDments etc. In farm forestry 4.5 crores seedlings were targett,.d for distribution.  17 The combined achievement are furnished below: Achievement s: Large Block Plantations - 27027.01 Small Bkock Plantations - 2696.149 Strip Plantations - 813.74Y + 200.93 Km. Tribal Fuelwood Plan - 1665.10 Tribal Medicinal Garden - 112.60 Civil Works - 507. No. Farm Forestry - Distributed 38.49 crores seedlings equivalent to 79969.50 ha. Research & Studies: The Kerala Social Forestry Project has a Component Research and Studies. We had entrusted thrae Research In- stitutions viz. Kerala Forest Research Institute, Kerala Agricultural University, Central Plantation CroDs Researc:n Institute - a wes research projects and The follc-ing stu- dies have been cc=oleted and fin2l reports received. :Iame of Eesearch Project AgencyJ 1 . Ccccnut based Agro-forestr-y Systems. - C.P.C.R.I., Kasargcde. 2. Oil Palm Based Agro- forestry. - C.P.C.R.I., Kasaragode. 3. Demand and Supply` o" Wood and theirFuture Trends. - K.F.E.I., Peechi.  18 4.~ Litter Dynaflics root nodulation K. .R.I. and microrizhial association Peechi. in Accacia AuricIfiiQf:o)iF ~'.Water use 01 se ecctea indigenous and exctic trees. - K.F.R.I., Peechi. 6. Propagaticri of Xedic-nal Plants Bamboo and Rattan by -P*ehi- tissue culture met!.cds. Peechi. 7. Studies on yield fr ALcacic. - K.F.FR.I., Plantations in Kerala. Peechi. 8. Exploitation of indigenous -K.k.U multi-purpose tree species Vellayani in Agro - Scc-' Forestry Syster's. 9. Seed viability and e.ina- - tion studies in selected Vellayani. forest tree species. The project hiad spent approximately ziz.87 crores till 31.3.1993 sinee it: inception.  19 PART -II (a). Adequacy and accuracy of factual information in Part-III of the P.C.R. WJe have not received the Part-III of the P.C.R. from the Bank. Hence unable to comrent at this stage. (b). Comments on analysis of Part-I of the P.C.R. As the Part-I of the P.C.R. has not been received from the Bank till now, we are unable to offer our Comments. (c). Bank's Derformance during the evolution and imole- mentation of the Droject. The success of the Kerala Social Forestry Project is mainly attributable to the co-ordination and Co-operation extended by the Bank and its staff during the implementatior of the project. The Bank's personnel consisted of professionals in all relevant disciplines. The mission members were experienced in their resoective fields. The over all performance of the Bank during the implementation was extremely good. Lessons learned. 1. The Social Forestry Project of Kerala learned certain lessons which are slurrarised below while implementing tne programme.  20 2. Onc2 the Bank sanctions the loan a 'Pass Boo'k System' should be introduced. The pass book will contain the details of the loan amount and the subsecuent with- drawals o-f the crediz by way of 'reimbursement claims' and the balance at credit in the borrowers' account. In the case of Kerala Social Forestry Project a monthly disbursement summary was received intermittantly thrDugh the Government of India. The monthly disbursement summary did not contain the current exclhange rate at which tLhe loan amount has been debited. As a result Df which the borrov;er could not calculate the amount available in his credit at a particular point of time without consulting Government of India. This information will enab:le the pr3ject authorities to formulate their plans and ta'-e aonrooriate steos for speedy implementation of the -rDject. 3* Flexibility rpeuired: The prinject document contains the sanctirned amount for different cormonents of the project. Hoxever, when the actual imolementation takes place there mar' be a few interlinked activities to be carried out whic` inay not find a place in the approved project document. Such interlinked activities would supnlement and act as complement to the whole activities which have been undertaken. In such cases the project authorities a7e not given the liberty to allocate fund1s for the inter- linked activities. Therefore, a flexible aporoach  21 is required in respect of allocating money to the project components and some flexibility to be made available to the Project Manager. Thlis flexibility may be fixed in terms of the perzentage of financial target of each component. 4. Timely release of funds: As per the usual pattern of funding the State Government have to snend the amount first, and claim reimbursement afterwards. It has been our experience and as per the available recoris in our office,the reimbursement claims 'were combined two or three together and the amounts released. Though during 1992 advance payment of the financial assistance was sanctioned on some occasions; it was not done regularly. There-fore there should ye periodic release of amounts in advance to the State Government within definite intervals. This will enable smooth and timely inplementation of the programmes. The assistance received may have to be utilised by operating a separate treasury account free from any treasury ban. 5.. Monitorinc: Monitoring o- the project by the Bank should xegin with the commencement of the project work, as against its commencement from mid-term appraisal. This would enable to strengthen the monitoring and evaluation activities and take anpropriate decision in time.  22 6 ) 2O.n)obi;ion Iof ta zuperv iion 22j_ion! The sazervisory mission should consist of not only ciualified oersonnels -'iO orofes_ionals from the Xan:c but also bome local -ne7iers from 1ifferent .iweciolines so that the as_es -ient of tho -rojec-. ao well as a->.res_ing the oroobens at the tioe of irole-ient-tion coui be mnde nore effective. 7 ) T.he n_-.l LDr i a in2- re resentative In tle station 7 T-ti( ett1 nc-zr or reo r)r . entative_ J.0n5 . tJl t'o1 9: jj:ct uut.a.-1nt Lin aatoo:rlty _-O to h) 3orrDr o vn oerforiawce oux