Zambia - Agricultural Sector Investment Program Project

Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No. P-6422-ZA MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS ON A PROPOSED CREDIT OF SDR 41.2 MILLION (US$60.0 MILLION EQUIVALENT) TO THE REPUBLIC OF ZAMBIA FOR AN AGRICULTURAL SECTOR INVESTMENT PROGRAM MARCH 13, 1995 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.  CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS Currency unit: Zambian Kwacha (ZK) ZK1.00 = US$0.0014 US$1.00 = ZK700 FISCAL YEAR January 1 - December 31 WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Metric system ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ADF - African Development Fund ASIP - Agricultural Sector Investment Program ICB - International Competitive Bidding IDA - International Development Association IFC - International Finance Corporation IMF - International Monetary Fund LCB - Local Competitive Bidding MAFF - Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries MOL - Ministry of Lands NEAP - National Environmental Action Plan  FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ZAMBIA AGRICULTURAL SECTOR INVESTMENT PROGRAM Credit and Program Summary Borrower: Government of the Republic of Zambia. Implementing agencies: Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries (MAFF) and Ministry of Lands (MOL). Beneficiaries: Bank of Zambia, commercial banks and financial institutions, private agribusiness enterprises, smaliholder and commercial farmers. Poverty category: Program of targeted interventions. The research and extension subprograms of the ASIP would focus on improving food security and reducing poverty among rural households through the promotion of affordable production technologies. In addition, through increased crop production and diversification, the ASIP is expected to improve the incomes of women farmers, who are the main providers for their families. Amount: SDR 41.2 million (US$60.0 million equivalent). Terms: 40 years. Commitment fee: 0.50% on undisbursed credit balances, beginning 60 days after signing, less any waiver. Financing plan: See schedule A. Net present value: Not applicable. Project design based on cost-effectiveness. SAR: 13518-ZA Map: [BRl) 20328 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 bc disclosed without World Bank authorization.   MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION OF TIIE PRESIDENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS ON A PROPOSED CREDIT TO THE REPUBLIC OF ZAMBIA FOR AN AGRICULTURAL SECTOR INVESTMENT PROGRAM 1. I submit for your approval the following memorandum and recommendation on a proposed Development Credit to the Republic of Zambia for SDR 41.2 million, the equivalent of US$60.0 million, on standard IDA terms and with a maturity of 40 years to help finance Zambia's Agricultural Sector Investment Program over the next four years. The Government and the beneficiaries will provide US$140.0 million, and donors will provide US$150.0 million, of which US$60.0 million will come from ongoing projects. 2. Background. The Movement for Multiparty Democracy (MMD), which came to power in November 1991, embarked upon an economic reform program whose objectives are to restore internal and external economic stability, change the way the economy is managed, get the Government and parastatals out of business activity, promote the private sector, and focus Government's efforts on the creation of a positive enabling environment for private sector business and the provision of the necessary infrastructure and social services. Since early 1992, Zambia's overall policy performance has improved, and the implementation of the policy reform agenda has remained on course. The direction of policy has remained clear, and the progress has been steady. The pace of liberalization and decontrol has been good. In particular, Zambia's macroeconomic performance in terms of fiscal balance and money supply growth has been strong. As a result, inflation declined from an average annual rate of over 100 percent in the previous four years to an annual rate of 22 percent in the last half of 1994. Interest rates have also declined (from over 200 percent in April to about 25 percent in December), and this has strengthened the Government's ability to maintain budget discipline and to control the deficit. The Government has decontrolled prices of all agricultural products and inputs, eliminated exchange rate restrictions, and liberalized export and import trade, and it completed several major privatizations in 1994. 3. Despite significant progress on the stabilization front, the Zambian economy is still in a deep recession. Gross domestic product (GDP) is estimated to have declined by 7.5 percent in 1994, partly because of a sharp drop in maize output, but also because of declines in copper output and manufacturing. In part, this is an inevitable result of the tight monetary policies required to fight inflation. In addition to these aggregate demand and financial sector problems, individual real sectors have had difficulties. Agricultural growth has been impeded by poor rains. Manufacturing still suffers from transitional tax and tariff anomalies, and copper mining output has suffered from technical problems at the smelters. The Government needs to make greater progress in policy reforms related to parastatals, the financial sector, the civil service, the land market, and public sector investment. It also needs to accelerate the privatization program. The 1994-96 Policy Framework Paper (PFP), scheduled for Board consideration in April, spells out the Government's policy reform agenda. To complement the PFP, specific agricultural sector policy and institutional reforms that are required to further agricultural growth are contained in the Government's letter of agricultural sector development policy. The main areas of reform include additional market liberalization, privatization of agricultural parastatals, land use and tenure, and elimination of agricultural credit subsidies.  - 2 - 4. Continued strong fiscal performance and reduced inflationary expectations should permit increased liquidity in the financial sector in 1995. With thlis, and the measures being taken to address tax and tariff anomalies to phase out subsidies to attract private sector capital and management into copper mining, and to strengthen financial institutions, private investment should begin to recover in 1995, leading to a more vigorous supply response and economic growth. In addition the proposed Agricultural Sector Investment Program (ASIP) Would have favorable impact on the Government's fiscal position. The ASIP is expected to result in about 53 percent aggregate savings which are mainly attributable to cost reduction from the elimination of government subsidies for agricultural credit, and higher revenues from agricultural services through improved cost recovery measures. Besides, the ASIP expenditures are a very small share of total government spending and are not projected to exceed 4 percent of annual government expenditures during the period 1995-99. 5. Sector context and lessons from experience. Agriculture figures prominently in Zambia's economy and is expected to play a critical role in its growth and restructuring. Although agriculture accounts for only 18 percent of GDP, this small share belies the extent to which Zambia depends on the sector. About 60 percent of the population depends on agriculture for its livelihood. Agriculture employs about 67 percent of the labor force and remains the main source of income and employment for rural women and contributes to poverty reduction. Furthermore, agriculture will continue to provide most new jobs for at least the next decade, even with higher industrial growth rates, because of the country's small industrial base and declining mineral resources. However, between 1965 and 1991 agricultural growth rates averaged 2.2. percent a year, less than the population growth rate of 3.2 percent a year. This was largely because of the inappropriate government policies of the past. The high inflation rates and the associated interest rates discouraged investments in agriculture while price controls of agricultural outputs resulted in adverse terms of trade. Agricultural issues have also figured prominently in the country's fiscal problems: subsidies to the sector averaged about 3 percent of GDP during 1983-91. With improved agriculture sector policies, Zambia could greatly expand agricultural production. Productivity in the smallholder subsector, which is considerably below the production frontier and the genetic potential of the crop varieties, could be increased by 94 percent for maize and 85 percent for soybean. Agriculture is expected to become an increasingly important source of foreign exchange. In 1993 agriculture was the second major earner of foreign exchange for Zambia's non-traditional exports with total foreign exchange earnings of US$33.7 million. The proposed ASIP would further enhance the Government's efforts to improve the effectiveness and sustainability of donor support and create the enabling environment for higher agricultural productivity. 6. The need for more sustainable means of using donor support is based on a number of lessons of experience in implementing donor-financed projects in Zambia and elsewhere in Africa. First, the proliferation of donor-assisted projects (prior to the preparation of ASIP, there were about 180 donor-financed projects in agriculture alone) and over-reliance on foreign technical assistance undermine public sector management capacity and government commitment to implementing programs. Second, executing projects through over-centralized agencies does not work, and public sector decentralization is essential. Third, creating separate, or parallel, structures for implementing also is ineffective. Instead, the planning, disbursement, accounting, procurement, and monitoring and evaluation functions of the government line ministries must be upgraded, and donors must be encouraged to channel support through existing government agencies rather than introducing their own procedures. Fourth, subsidized credit undermines the  viability of Zambia's rural financial institutions. And fifth, the rigid designs of earlier projects prevented their adaptation to unforeseen changes during implementation. The ASIP is designed to address the above concerns. 7. Program concept and objectives. The ASIP has seven features that distinguish it from traditional donor-supported projects. It covers the country's entire agricultural sector. It has been prepared by an all-Zambian task force whose members were drawn from both the private and the public sector. It would be implemented within the institutional framework of the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries (MAFF), and no separate project units would be established. Donors' procedures for procurement, reporting, accounting, and auditing would be standardized as much as possible. Use of long-term expatriate technical assistance would be kept to a minimum. The flexibility of its design allows for annual reviews and adjustments through systematic client and donor consultation. And it is embedded in public sector reforms in the agricultural sector aimed at increasing decentralization and encouraging participation by the beneficiaries. All the major donors involved in Zambia's agricultural sector support the proposed approach and have pledged to channel their assistance to the sector through the ASIP framework. 8. The ASIP is expected to be the first in a series of four-year programs supporting the medium- and long-term goals outlined in the Government's Letter of Sectoral Development Policy. The Government's main agricultural development objectives, as reflected in the program, are to improve household food security, promote better use of natural resources, generate employment and raise incomes, and increase export earnings and contribute to the balance of payments. 9. Program description. The ASIP has four main components. The first, policy and institutional improvements, would focus on outstanding policy reforms in key areas of marketing, trade and pricing, food security, and land use and land tenure. It also would support institutional restructuring and strengthening, with an emphasis on improving the capacity of sectoral agencies to provide efficient services (in cases where the private sector cannot presently provide the services) in priority areas of agricultural research, extension, livestock, and rural finance. The second component, public investments, would complement and support the policy and institutional improvements in the following priority areas: (i) agricultural research to provide appropriate technologies for increased productivity; (ii) agricultural extension to accelerate dissemination of technologies, increase productivity, and promote resource conservation; (iii) livestock production and heaith to strengthen public support services to smallholders, improve disease prevention and control, and increase productivity; (iv) fisheries development for smallholders, especially for resource-poor lhouseholds; (v) rehabilitation of small-scale irrigation facilities for smallholders; (vi) agricultural training to strengthen human resources; and (vii) farm power and mechanization to help smallholder farmers increase production. The third component, private sector development, wouldl help create an enabling environment and incentives for the private sector and support measuies that would improve services and stimulate growth. This component also would support financial services for productive agricultural activities, seed multiplication and distribution to provide improved seed and plant material to smallholders and new product development. The fourth component. pilot investment schemes, would establish a rural investment fund to support small-scale capital investments in rural communities on a matching grant basis, and the privatization of government farms. It also would support the introduction of new technologies, which would be broadly disseminated after a pilot and demonstration stage.  10. Program fmnancing. The ASIP would provide an effective mechanism for collaborative financing of agricultural activities by the Government and donors. It would provide a framework that would enable donors to support specific components of the program while ensuring that their assistance was coordinated and complementary. IDA would finance research, extension, training, institutional support, and pilot schemes. The program, which would cost an estimated US$350.0 million over four years, would result in cost reductions of 53 percent relative to projected expenditures (in nominal terms) without the program. It would achieve these savings mainly by eliminating the Government's budgetary subsidies to agricultural credit. IDA would provide US$60.0 million (about 17 percent of the total program cost). Other members of the donor consortium would provide US$150.0 million (about 43 percent of the total program cost), mostly through parallel financing; US$60.0 million of this amount would come from ongoing projects. The Government and the program beneficiaries would finance the balance, US$140.0 million, or 40 percent of the total program cost. IDA would finance incremental recurrent costs on a decreasing basis while the Government would finance a progressively larger share of the incremental recurrent costs, increasing its contribution from 23 percent in year 1 to 45 percent in year 4. The costs and financing plan for the program are provided in schedule A. Procurement and disbursement details are provided in schedule B. The timetable of key processing events is provided in schedule C. And the status of Bank operations in Zambia and the statement of IFC investments are provided in schedule D. 11. Program implementation. The program would be implemented countrywide through an organization broadly in line with the present structures of the MAFF and Ministry of Lands (MOL), although each ministry would undergo minor organizational changes to accommodate the program. The ASIP would be undertaken within the MAFF structure in accordance with guidelines agreed to at negotiations. The MAFF's Planning and Policy Division would be responsible for monitoring implementation, and an independent Zambian institution would carry out the systematic client consultation assessment and the annual sectoral performance review. In line with the Government's policy of decentralization, many of the program's activities would be managed at the district level. To strengthen the implementation capacity of line agencies, the ASIP would include training and staff redeployment to improve the skills mix. The program also would include annual reviews of its activities to identify necessary adjustments to the implementation plan. The key performance indicators that would be periodically monitored are contained in annex 1. 12. Program sustainability. Several features of the program would help ensure its sustainability. The ASIP's design by Zambians and its use of existing government channels for implementation would create a strong sense of national ownership. The Government's policy reforms and the collaborative donor support would provide a sound foundation for the development of agriculture and its capacity to contribute to the growth of incomes and generation of employment. Finally, the ASIP would result in efficiency gains by eliminating wasteful public expenditures in agriculture, including credit subsidies. 13. Rationale for IDA involvement. Zambia's agricultural sector has great potential for responding rapidly to the economic reform program supported by the Bank and the IMF. Agriculture can play a vital role in economic adjustment by providing the initial supply response needed to stimulate economic activity, and can support economic growth in the long-run by providing sustainable export earnings. But if the expected growth is to materialize, the private investments have to be promoted and public support must be made more efficient. In addition, donor support should be better coordinated to ensure maximum impact. The Government and donors would form a partnership for the formulation and implementation of agricultural sector  - 5 - programs. The Government would be responsible for identifying and preparing' its priority programs in agriculture and would then work with donors to improve the programs' efficiency, capacity, and sustainability without, however, sacrificing ownership. The coordinated policy reform and investment planning coupled with coordinated donor support would be much more difficult without the leadership and involvement of IDA. 14. The latest Country Assistance Strategy for Zambia was reviewed by the Board on March 10, 1994. The Agricultural Sector Investment Program forms a key component of the country strategy. The country strategy proposes to assist Zambia in three main areas, all related to the overall goal of poverty reduction: (i) stimulating growth by removing policy constraints and improving the enabling environment, including fiscal management; (ii) promoting private sector development and greater public sector efficiency; and (iii) supporting targeted interventions for the poor and vulnerable groups. Improving household food security and income is critical to meeting these objectives, and support for agriculture is thus a key element of the country strategy. The reforms supported by this program would improve the management of fiscal resources, substantially increase public sector efficiency, and provide the necessary incentives to stimulate private investment in agriculture. In addition, the program would focus on smallholder farmers and thus would especially benefit the poor, particularly women, by raising their incomes through higher productivity and employment creation. 15. Agreed actions. As conditions of Board presentation, the Government submitted to IDA a Letter of Sector Development Policy, a program implementation plan, and evidence that the financial management unit has been established in the MAFF and staffed. Assurances were obtained at negotiations on an annual review of ASIP activities, the integration of ASIP expenditures into the MAFF budget, the restructuring of existing projects to fit into the ASIP framework, the preparation of an implementation plan for carrying out actions contained in the Letter of Sector Development Policy, the elimination of a budgetary allocation for agricultural credit by September 30, 1995, and the preparation of a timetable for privatizing state farms. The establishment of program accounts by the Government is a condition of effectiveness. An amendment to the land laws to facilitate the subdivision of land and implementation of policy measures to provide for the subdivision and sale of state farms is a condition of disbursement for the land subprogram. 16. Poverty category. The ASIP would help alleviate rural poverty by boosting crop production and increasing diversification. Women, who play a vital role in Zambia's agricultural sector as farmers, managers, decision makers, and farm laborers, are expected to be major beneficiaries of the ASIP. And because women are the main providers for their families, the higher incomes for women that are expected to result from the ASIP should improve household food security. 17. Environmental aspects. The ASIP would support improved farming systems and conservation practices. Zambia, as a land-surplus country, has the scope for sustainable expansion of cultivated areas. An important check on inappropriate expansion of cultivation will be provided by a National Environmental Action Plan (NEAP) - to be implemented concurrently with the ASIP - which restricts cultivation on environmentally sensitive areas. In addition, the use of the proceeds of IDA Credit to purchase agricultural inputs that IDA deems environmentally unacceptable will not be permitted. Because the ASIP has been classified as a category B program, an environmental mitigation plan has been prepared.  - 6 - 18. Programn objective category. This program would contribute to broad reduction of poverty in the country by improving efficiency in aericultural production, increasing food security, and improving nutrition. The research and extension sub-programs would focus on developing and promoting affordable production technologies, particularly for improving the incomes of women farmers. In addition, the program would support the privatization of government-owned agricultural enterprises, increased commercialization of somne services provided by the government, and the reallocation of budgetary resources to activities that are considered essential for efficient delivery of agricultural services. 19. Participatory approach. This program was prepared by a Zambian task force whose members were drawn from the Government, the private sector, and NGOs. Program development was initiated through a broad public discussion of the policy framework that continued throughout the preparation of the program. Systematic client consultation and sector performance analysis, carried out on a continual basis, would form integral parts of the monitoring and evaluation system, and their results would be used to manage the program and ensure improved delivery of services to beneficiaries. A rural investment fund would provide resources directly to communities for locally initiated and implemented projects. 20. Programn benefits. The ASIP would benefit the economy in several ways. It would create an enabling economic environment by removing regulatory and statutory restraints on competition, rationalizing the public sector's role to minimize the distortions created by government interventions, investing more in the provision of essential agricultural services and rural infrastructure, and reducing waste in public expenditures. Such an environment would enable farmers to increase production, which would lead to higher incomes for them, lower prices for consumers, and higher export earnings for the country. By focusing on smallholder farmers, the ASIP would directly benefit a large number of the rural poor, particularly women, by raising their incomes through higher productivity and employment creation. To ensure the economic viability of the program, investments supported under the ASIP would be limited to those with an economic rate of return of more than 10 percent. Furthermore, the process adopted for preparing the program and the content of the resulting operation would have far-reaching benefits for Zambia. And the program includes extensive systematic client consultations and the use of beneficiary and stakeholder assessments to monitor implementation - both features that would enhance participation by beneficiaries. 21. Risks. The ASIP could face some challenges. These might include inadequate funding of the Government's share of local costs, the failure of donors to dovetail their projects into the ASIP framework, derailment of the macroeconomic reform program, and the adverse impact of recurrent droughts. But these risks have been minimized by the program's design and by upfront actions to ensure that the Government provides adequate counterpart funding and remains committed to its reform agenda, which is supported by the IMF and IDA. In addition, all donors have agreed to provide coordinated support to the agricultural sector and to restructure their existing projects to fit into the ASIP approach. Moreover, donors are likely to continue to provide drought relief, as they have in the past, as long as the Government maintains prudent macroeconomic and sectoral policies. The research and extension sub-programs of ASIP will also focus, among other things, on developing and disseminating drought resistant and early maturing staple food crops. These are indications that ASIP can achieve its objectives.  22. Recommendation. I am satisfied that the proposed credit would comply with the Articles of Agreement of the Association and recommend that the Executive Directors approve it. Lewis T. Preston President by Sven Sandstrom Washington, D.C. March 13, 1995  - 8 - ANNEX- I Page 1 of 1 ZAMBIA AGRICULTURAL SECTOR INVESTMENT PROGRAM Sector Key Performance Indicators Indicators Actual Estimated ASIP (Projected) 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Agricultural GDP (1977 406 272 411 398 395 407 423 444 466 constant zk million) Total Value of agricultural 29.5 42.7 63 50 55 66 82 107 140 export (US$ million) Food production index 1981 133.3 116.8 153.4 140.0 130 140 148 158 170 = 100 Land productivity (yield per 1.3 0.6 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.8 1.9 2.1 2.2 ha of major food crops) (tons) Net agricultural income per 71 47 85 70 70 78 82 88 95 farm household (1977 constant zk) Index of real producer 500 1200 1000 900 900 925 950 980 1020 prices (1985 = 100) 90 kg. bag of maize Fertilizer Use (Kg/ha) 12 14 14 13 14 15 16 18 18  - 9 - Schedule A Page 1 of 2 ZAMBIA AGRICULTURAL SECTOR INVESTMENT PROGRAM Estimated Program Cost and Financing Plan Estimated Program Cost (millions of U.S. dollars) Local Foreign Total Policy and institutional improvements MAFF headquarters 9.5 1.0 10.5 Policy and planning 5.4 6.2 11.6 Financial management unit 0.6 1.0 1.6 Standards 2.7 2.0 4.7 Subtotal 18.2 10.2 28.4 Public investment Extension 37.0 21.0 58.0 Research 16.0 19.0 35.0 Live production and health 22.3 26.0 48.3 Fisheries 7.6 9.0 16.6 Farm power and mechanization 1.3 1.8 3.1 Irrigation 3.5 3.2 6.7 Training 7.8 7.2 15.0 Subtotal 95.5 87.2 182.7 Private sector development Seed multiplication and distribution 2.8 1.4 4.2 New products development 3.0 3.0 6.0 Rural finance: Agricultural iiputs 20.0 36.0 56.0 Marketing ano trade 8.2 11.2 19.4 Subtotal 34.0 51.6 85.6 Pilot investmenr schemes Rural investment fund 17.0 10.0 27.0 Subdivision and priv'atization of state farms 11.3 15.0 26.3 Subtotal 28.3 25.0 53.3 Total program cost 176.0 174.0 350.0 Note The figures in this table are indicative and will bh revised aniually in consultation between the Government and donors, taking into account the previous year's result. The total program cost includes contingencies.  - 10 - Schedule Page 2 of 2 Estimated Financing Plan (millions of U.S. dollars) Source of financing Local Foreign Total IDA 20.0 40.0 60.0 Other donors 40.0 50.0 90.0 Ongoing donor-supported 26.0 34.0 60.0 projects' Government 70.0 50.0 120.0 Beneficiaries 20.0 - 20.0 Total 176.0 174.0 350.0 a. Includes US$20 million from ongoing IDA projects.  - 11 - ~~~~~~Schedule B Page 1 of 2 ZAMBIA AGRICULTURAL SECTOR INVESTMENT PROGRAM Procurement Methods and Disbursement Procurement Method (millions of U.S. dollars) Category ICB LCB Other NBF TOTAL Civil works (rehabilitation) 7.0 0.8 22.2 30.0 (6.8) (0.7) (7.5) Goods (vehicles and equipment) 19.5 1.0 1.2 24.2 45.9 (19.5) (0.9) (1.0) (21.4) Credit 66.5 66.5 Rural investment fund 10.0 17.0 27.0 (10.0) (10.0) Technical assistance (mainly short-term) 6.6 25.4 32.0 (6.6) (6.6) Training 10.4 26.6 37.0 (10.4) (10.4) Recurrent costsa 49.1 49.1 Incremental recurrent costsb 5.1 57.4 62.5 (4.1) (4.1) Total 19.5 8.0 34.1 288.4 350.0 (19.5) (7.7) (32.8) (60.0) Note. Figures in parentheses are the amounts financed by IDA. ICB is International Competitive Bidding; LCB is Local Competitive Bidding; Other is procurement not covered under ICB or LCB such as forced account, shopping procedures and direct contracting; NBF is non- Bank financed. a. Includes staff salaries, and staff allowances and expenses. b. Includes travel and subsistence, operating and maintenance costs, and other miscellaneous operating costs.  - l ' - ~~~~~ScheduleB Page 2 of 2 Disbursement Amount and Percentage for IDA Credit Category Amount Share of financing (millions of U.S. dollars) Civil works, including rehabilitation 7.5 100% of foreign expenditures and 90% of local expenditures Goods and agricultural inputs 21.4 100% of foreign expenditures and 90% of local expenditures Rural investment fund 10.0 100% Consultant services and training 17.0 100% Operating costs of IDA-financed sub- 4.1 90% in years I and 2 and programs 75% thereafter Estimated IDA Disbursement Schedule (US$ 60.0 million) Program year FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY2000 Annual disbursements 8.5 12.5 16.0 17.0 6.0 Cumulative disbursements 8.5 21.0 37.0 54.0 60.0  - 13 - Schedule C Page 1 of 1 ZAMBIA AGRICULTURAL SECTOR INVESTMENT PROGRAM Timetable of Key Processing Events 1. Time taken to prepare: 24 months 2. Prepared by: The Government of Republic of Zambia with a Zambian Task Force 3. First IDA Mission: March 1993 4. Appraisal Mission: June 1994 5. Negotiations: December 1994 6. Board presentation: March 1995 7. Planned date of effectiveness: June 1995 8. List of relevant PCRs. None This rcport i, ha* l , i, . .L , - , I !. . . ; !.i''., I JuncTIk 1994 comprising of Messrs/Mmnes. N. Okidcghe, Sen o, F ir. .. si' N h. . , i.. IHUn ., i :ci. cov,or on Sector l.ending; S. Bunyasi, Sr. Agriculturai Econwiosl, M 'J H.'. >, I !s.P..c. I:- ii.xiicial Amillwt: I. Shuiiker, Economist; R. Noronha, Sr Land Use SpeL alist. V -. .rh o- ', i..i L.,,no i,, c,.1 ri.d1., Planning & Budgeting Specialist; J. Makanda, Financial Mgt Spxci3Pn. Y . ,t z ,> . i .-]r.jniL. -1 'cnn, L,i *ur'.cricn, Otlicer; A. Fields, Procurement Officer: H. Binswanger, Sr. Ad% sir ILit,l1..; w. J} v. ..