Zambia - Agricultural Research and Extension Project

Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No. 16780 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT ZAMBIA AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND EXTENSION PROJECT (CREDIT 1746-ZM) June 25, 1997 Agriculture Operations Eastern and Southern Africa 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 Appraisal: US$ 1.0 = K 7.2 K 1.0 = US$ 0.139 Completion: US$ 1.0 = K 1,300.0 K 1.0 = US$ 0.0008 FISCAL YEAR OF BORROWE GRZ: January 1 - December 31 IDA: July 1 - June 30 Vice President: Callisto E. Madavo Country Director: Phyllis Pomerantz Technical Manager: Sushma Ganguly Staff Member: Rajah Ranasinghe FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ACC Agricultural Communication Center ADF African Development Fund ARPT Adaptive Research Planning Team ASIP Agricultural Sector Investment Program BS Block Supervisor CARO Chief Agricultural Research Officer CEO Camp Extension Officer CP Cooperative Program CRT Commodity Research Team DAO District Agricultural Office DATU Department of Agriculture Training Unit DCA Development Credit Agreement DOA Department of Agriculture FMU Financial Management Unit FSRT Farming Systems Research Team GART Golden Valley Agricultural Research Trust GRZ Government of the Republic of Zambia IDA International Development Association ISNAR International Service for National Agricultural Research KAP Knowledge-Attitude-Practice MAFF Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MTR Mid-Term Review MIS Management Information System NAIS National Agricultural Information Service NOK Norwegian Krone NRAP National Research Action Plan NTF Norwegian Trust Fund PAO Provincial Agricultural Office PIMU Project Implementation and Management Unit PPF Project Preparation Facility RETU Research and Extension Training Unit SAR Staff Appraisal Report SMS Subject Matter Specialist SRT Specialist Research Team TA Technical Assistance TAS Technology Assessment Site TS Trial Site T&V Training and Visit VEG Village Extension Group ZAREP Zambian Agricultural Research and Extension Project 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. IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT ZAMBIA AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND EXTENSION PROJECT (CR. 1746-ZM) TABLE OF CONTENTS PR E FA C E .........................................................................................................................................i EVA LUATIO N SUM M ARY ...................................................................................................I....... ii PART I: PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ASSESSMENT.......................................................... A. STATEMENT/EVALUATION OF OBJECTIVES.......................................................1 B. ACHIEVEMENT OF OBJECTIVES.............................................................................2 C. MAJOR FACTORS AFFECTING THE PROJECT......................................................7 D. PROJECT SUSTAINABILITY ..................................................................................... 9 E. BANK PERFORMANCE............................................................................................... 9 F. BORROWER PERFORMANCE ...................................................................................9 G. ASSESSMENT OF OUTCOME................................................................................... 10 H. FUTURE OPERATION................................................................................................ 10 I. KEY LESSONS LEARNED ........................................................................................ 11 PART II: STATISTICAL TABLES.............................................................................................. 12 TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENTS .............................................................................12 TABLE 2: RELATED BANK LOANS/CREDITS ...................................................................... 14 TABLE 3: PROJECT TIMETABLE .........................................................................................14 TABLE 4: IDA CREDIT DISBURSEMENTS: CUMULATIVE ESTIMATED AND ACTUAL ..........15 TABLE 5. KEY INDICATORS FOR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATioN ............................................ 16 TABLE 6: KEY INDICATORS FOR PROJECT OPERATION ...................................................... 17 TABLE 7: STUDIES INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT .................................................................. 17 TABLE 8A : PROJECT COSTS ............................................................................................... 18 TABLE 8B: PROJECT FINANCING ....................................................................................... 18 TABLE 9: EcoNoMIC COSTS AND BENEFITS ...................................................................... 18 TABLE 10: STATUS OF LEGAL COVENANTS........................................................................19 TABLE 11: COMPLIANCE WITH OPERATIONAL MANUAL STATEmENTs...............................20 TABLE 12: BANK RESOURCES: STAFF INPUTS ..................................................................20 TABLE 13: BANK RESOURCES: MISSIONS...........................................................................21 A PPEN D ICES ................................................................................................................................22 APPENDIX A : AIDE-M EM OIRE............................................................................................23 APPENDIX B: BORROWER'S CONTRIBUTION TO THE ICR..................................................36 APPENDIX C: SUPPLEM ENTAL TABLES...................................................................................43 APPENDIX D : M AP.........................................................................................................................47 -i- IPLEMENTCATION COMPLETION REPORT REPUB1IC OF ZAMBIA AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND EXTENSION PROJECT (Cr. 1746-ZM) PREFACE 1. This is the Implementation Completion Report (ICR) for the Zambia Agricultural Research and Extension Project (ZAREP), for which an IDA Credit (1 746-ZM) of SDR 10.8 million (US$ 13.0 million equivalent) was signed on March 19, 1987 and became effective on March 13, 1992. (The delay in effectiveness was due largely to the suspension of disbursements to Zambia because of arrears in debt service.) The Mid-Term Review took place in February 1993. The Credit closed on June 30, 1997 with a total disbursement of SDR 10.5 million and an undisbursed balance of SDR 0.3 million. 2. This ICR was prepared by a missionI from the FAO/World Bank Cooperative Program, on behalf of Agriculture Operations Group 1 (AFTAI) of the World Bank. Preparation of the ICR began with the mission's visit to Zambia from January 27 to February 12, 1997. This report is based on material gathered from the project files and supervision reports, as well as discussions with IDA and Government of Zambia staff associated with the project, and representatives of the Norwegian Agency for International Development and the African Development Fund (cofinanciers). The mission undertook intensive discussions and field investigations with research and extension staff and farmers in five districts of three provinces, and the mission visited five research facilities. Contributions to the report were made by Alex Mundia (AFMZM); Rajah Ranasinghe, Jacob Kampen, V. Venkatesan, Fred King, and Susheila John (AFTAl); and Jacomina de Regt (AFTS 1); it was reviewed by Sushma Ganguly, Technical Manager, AFTAL. 3. The borrower contributed to the preparation of the ICR through participation in the discussions and field visits, and provided useful comments on the mission's aide-memoire. In addition, the borrower provided a response to the ICR, which is included as Appendix B. No comments were received from the cofinanciers. 1 The mission consisted of Guy Evers, Mission Leader and Agronomist, and Andre Wooning, Economist, (FAO/CP); and James Litsinger, Research Specialist (Consultant). - ii - IMPLEMENTATIN COMPLETION REPORT REPUBLIC OF ZAMBIA AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND EXTENSION PROJECT (Cr. 1746-ZM EVALUATION SUMMARY Introduction 1. Since the 1960s, the Bank has been active in assisting Zambian agriculture. During the eighties, the Bank supported the agricultural sector by providing credits which focused on regional development (Eastern and Southern Provinces), input supply and marketing, coffee development, and sector rehabilitation. The Agricultural Research and Extension Project (ZAREP), which followed the national Agricultural Rehabilitation Project, was intended to further strengthen key agricultural institutions. 2. The overall objective of the project was to raise the productivity of Zambia's agricultural sector by improving the research and extension services, particularly for smallholders. The specific objectives of the project were to strengthen existing institutions and infrastructure; upgrade human resources; strengthen research-extension linkages; establish a Training and Visit (T&V) extension system; and promote better coordination of external assistance. The project, to be implemented over a period of eight years, was to support: (i) Research Services for organizational restructuring, strengthening of research teams, and rationalizing and strengthening the national station network; (ii) Extension Services for organizational restructuring, introducing a T&V system in three of the nine provinces, and establishing an Agricultural Communication Center (ACC); (iii) Training for implementing a staff development program comprising the establishment of a Research and Extension Training Unit (RETU) and provision of fellowships up to MSc degree level and other training courses held locally or abroad; and (iv) Project Management for strengthening the Department of Agriculture (DOA) of the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries (MAFF) to implement the project, and for establishing a Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system. The project was financed by an IDA Credit (US$ 13.0 million), a grant from the Norwegian Government (referred to as NTF) (US$ 7.2 million) administered by IDA, a loan from the African Development Fund (ADF) (US$ 12.6 million), and the Government of the Republic of Zambia (GRZ) (US$ 6.0 million). A Project Preparation Facility (PPF) of US$ 1.0 million was approved by IDA in 1986. 3. The initial project objectives were well-defined and the project strategy rightly called for a step-wise approach to expansion of the T&V extension system. A 15- to 20-year planning horizon was envisaged, of which the project constituted the first phase. When the IDA Credit became effective, some five years after approval (see para. 4 below), the project objectives and design were still considered to be appropriate, and were not revised. However, the Development - iii - Credit Agreement was amended to expand the extension component to cover all nine provinces instead of the three provinces envisaged at appraisal. Project Implementation and Results 4. Soon after Credit approval, IDA suspended disbursements to Zambia (in May 1987), due to arrears in debt service. Credit effectiveness was delayed by about five years, until March 1992. Consequently, project implementation started slowly, as only some activities were made possible through the use of the PPF and some funds from the cofinanciers. When the IDA Credit became effective, 60% of the project expenditures (including 80% of IDA funds) were incurred in about three years. The project closing date, initially set for December 31, 1995, was postponed once, until December 31, 1996 and, during this extension year, ZAREP activities were transferred to the Agricultural Sector Investment Project (ASIP). 5. The objective of rationalizing and strengthening the institutional structure of the research system was largely achieved, while the objective of involving farmers in the determination of research priorities and design/implementation of on-farm research was partially achieved. The project supported MAFF in formulating a National Research Action Plan, which became the blueprint for the major reorganization of the research system, and the research stations were reduced from 32 to 21. The research structure was reorganized into a network of nine Commodity Research Teams, seven Specialist Research Teams and nine Farming Systems Research Teams. Linkages between research and extension were strengthened, but further staff training is required to improve their skills in participatory approaches, enabling them to better interact with farmers in determining priorities and in the design/implementation of research and extension programs. Farmer involvement was also hindered by problems with maintenance and utilization of vehicles and by inadequacy of operating funds. In addition, the project supported the conversion of the Golden Valley Station into the Golden Valley Agricultural Research Trust (GART), a non-profit organization formed by MAFF and the Zambian National Farmers Union, which is intended to become self-financing. 6. The objectives of strengthening extension management and establishing a T&V system were largely achieved, while the objective of transferring appropriate technologies to small farmers was partially achieved. Substantial progress was made in removing the burden of input supply, credit, and marketing from the extension service, as GRZ's liberalization program proceeded. In spite of the phased approach agreed at appraisal, however, ZAREP extension activities were rapidly expanded to all districts which did not receive support from other donors. By the 1994/95 season, the project covered 48 of the country's 64 districts. Some 70% of the technical recommendations covered crop husbandry, including the promotion of hybrid maize production technologies, and crop diversification. Two external factors affected the adoption of extension recommendations, especially those concerning input-dependent technologies for maize: (i) GRZ gradually withdrew from agricultural input supply and marketing, and removed subsidies, resulting initially in higher prices and/or shortages of inputs; and (ii) a serious drought which occurred in the early 1990s, resulting in poor response to purchased inputs, although it encouraged farmers to adopt crop diversification recommendations. The objective of strengthening alternative means of communication, such as mass media, distribution of posters, leaflets and booklets, was marginally achieved. The project financed some audio-visual equipment and, in 1996, the Agricultural Communication Center (ACC) was accommodated in the former ZAREP office block, although it lacks a suitable radio and television studio. -iv - 7. The training objectives of the project were partially met, as the Research and Extension Training Unit (RETU) was not put into operation and the project-funded training needs assessment was found substandard and not adopted. Consequently, the selection of training opportunities was not guided by a well-defined capacity-building strategy. Nevertheless, over 200 staff benefited from local short courses, 70 from short courses abroad, and 60 from long- term academic programs. 8. The M&E Unit successfully contributed to improving the research and extension management system. The Unit established a reporting system to enable the DOA to monitor the output of field extension staff. The Unit also assisted the Research Branch in setting up two databases. A mid-term review (MTR), conducted in 1993, made a thorough analysis of project activities and largely confirmed the approach agreed at appraisal. While MTR recommendations were generally followed for research activities, they were largely ignored for the extension and training components. 9. The project provided a substantial increase in mobility for research and extension staff. However, the intensive use of cars and motorcycles for project and non-project activities, combined with the poor quality of roads, called for frequent maintenance and repair operations. At present, many cars are in poor condition or grounded. The bicycles proved to be inadequate and were rapidly grounded, drastically reducing the mobility of Camp Extension Officers (CEOs). Numerous facilities were constructed under the project, but the use of pre-fabricated structures, lack of reliable contractors, delay in payments, time pressure and inadequate supervision resulted in a number of sub-standard and/or incomplete buildings. 10. The project financed some 600 person-months of international technical assistance (TA), mostly for long-term assignments. Around 60% of international TA was spent on managerial tasks, but a substantial part of the short-term thematic TA was dropped, especially that intended for adjusting extension methodologies, improving Farming Systems Research (FSR) methodologies, and enhancing alternative means of communication. During the first few years, the weak performance of the TA team was considered a serious constraint to project progress. However, the appointment of a new TA team in 1991 brought significant improvement in project administration. 11. The project only partially met its objective of enhancing donor coordination, especially regarding extension activities. The M&E Unit-prepared database of donor assistance contributed to reducing duplication of funding, but the assumption that other donors would support the T&V management system proved unfounded. Toward the end of the project, coordination among donors improved (in part as a result of ASIP preparation) through their participation in annual planning meetings. 12. Actual project costs are estimated at about US$ 35.2 million, or about 91% of the appraisal estimate (US$ 38.8 million). The project expenditures exceeded the appraisal estimates for three categories: overseas training (US$ 3.7 against US$ 1.4 million), vehicles (US$ 6.2 against US$ 4.1 million) and incremental recurrent costs (US$ 10 against US$ 3.8 million). These changes were mainly due to the rapid expansion of extension coverage, in contrast to the phased approach agreed at appraisal. The Credit disbursement amounted to SDR 10.5 million, or about 97% of the Credit, and SDR 0.3 million remained undisbursed. Overall, GRZ met only 25% of its funding commitment, which adversely affected project operations. -v- 13. Given the current implementation of ASIP, project activities are likely to continue in the medium term. However, the project-supported T&V system has proved to be costly under Zambian conditions, with high staff allowances and transport costs. The project extension activities are, therefore, not sustainable without substantial donor funding. Except for the GART experiment, the current research activities also remain heavily dependent on donor funding. Because of the low quality of civil works, major rehabilitation is already required for project- funded buildings, raising concerns about their durability. 14. Supervision by IDA was intensive and generally satisfactory, facilitating implementation of the project. IDA was less successful in supervising civil works activities, and in ensuring proper use of project vehicles. More follow-up should have been given by IDA and GRZ on the MTR recommendations. GRZ was generally effective in strengthening the institutional infrastructure of the research and extension systems, but it was less successful in expediting procurement procedures, supervising civil works, and in controlling the use of project vehicles. The inadequate flow of operational funds to the field negatively affected T&V implementation. 15. On balance, the outcome of the project is considered to be marginally satisfactory. Restructuring of the institutional infrastructure was reasonably successful, in spite of the turnover in MAFF officials and weaknesses in administrative systems such as procurement. Project training contributed to raising the level of professional skills. The T&V system was introduced with reasonable success, although it has proven to be a substantial fiscal burden. Field observations suggest that adoption rates among smallholders have increased, but surveys show little difference in these rates between members of the Village Extension Groups and other farmers. (This result may have been affected by the drought during the early 1990s and by the higher input prices.) An economic rate of return was not estimated at appraisal, as the project was intended to constitute the first phase of a long-term capacity-building program, and a rate of return was not calculated as part of the completion exercise. Future Operations and Key Lessons Learned 16. The research, extension and training components of ZAREP have been incorporated into the on-going ASIP as sub-programs, for which work plans are prepared annually. The completion mission made recommendations for consideration by the ASIP research, extension and training sub-programs (Appendix A). These address the need to: (i) further rationalize the research facility network; (ii) increase the use of participatory approaches to strengthen farmer-extension-research linkages; (iii) undertake an independent assessment of past extension experiences to make adjustments to, and improve the sustainability of, the T&V system; and (iv) give further emphasis to training of district and field staff. 17. Key lessons learned are as follows: (a) Farmer involvement in determination of priorities and in design/implementation of research and extension programs is critical to their success and to their sustainability. Therefore, adequate resources should be devoted to increasing the participatory skills of research and extension staf, and mobility of staff must be maintained. - vi - (b) Government commitment, especially in terms of appointment of staff, provision of adequate funding, and implementation of agreed actions, is crucial for project success. (c) Phased implementation of a longer-term extension program is important to its success. The major expansion of area introduced during the course of the project resulted in reduced effectiveness and contributed to an unsustainable fiscal burden. (d) Labor constraints and financial viability, which still need to be addressed, form a major impediment to adoption of released technologies. (e) The restructuring of the extension service and re-focusing on its core functions were successful, although the T&V system proved to be costly under Zambian circumstances. Adjustments need to be made to improve its efficiency and cost effectiveness. (f) The GART experiment suggests that there is a role for the private sector in research, particularly research relevant to larger farmers and for cash crops. This would allow GRZ to focus on smallholders, thus reducing its fiscal burden. (g) Civil works are an important element of research and extension infrastructure, but where there is lack of proper quality control, the use of relatively inexpensive pre-fabricated structures may prove to be more costly in the long run. ZAREP was incorporated into ASIP one year before scheduled completion, but there was inadequate follow-up on outstanding project commitments. In the future, the incorporation of on-going IDA-funded projects into a SIP should consider not only the integration of future project activities, but also the continuation of activities during the transition. IPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT REPUBLIC OF ZAMBIA AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND EXTENSION PROJECT (Cr. 1746-ZM) PART I: PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ASSESSMENT A. STATEMENT/EVALUATION OF OBJECTIVES 1. During the period 1982-1987, IDA supported the agricultural sector in Zambia by providing credits which focused on regional development (Eastern and Southern Provinces), coffee development, and sector rehabilitation. The Agricultural Research and Extension Project (ZAREP) followed the national Agricultural Rehabilitation Project, and was intended to further strengthen the country's agricultural institutions. The overall objective of the project was to raise the productivity of Zambia's agricultural sector by improving research and extension services to farmers, particularly smallholders. The specific objectives of the project were to: (i) strengthen existing institutions and infrastructure in support of decentralized research and extension programs; (ii) upgrade human resources; (iii) strengthen linkages between extension and research; (iv) establish a Training and Visit (T&V) system as the basis of the National Extension Program; and (v) promote better coordination of external assistance (in addition to IDA, support was provided by the African Development Fund and the Norwegian Trust Fund). The project, to be implemented over a period of eight years, included: (a) Research Services for: (i) organizational restructuring to formulate and coordinate research programs, establish policies and set priorities; (ii) strengthening Adaptive Research Planning Teams (ARPTs), Commodity Research Teams (CRTs) and Specialist Research Teams (SRTs); and (iii) rationalizing and strengthening the national station network. (b) Extension Services for: (i) organizational restructuring, including measures to improve the planning and coordination of extension activities; (ii) introducing a T&V system in ten districts of three of the nine provinces; and (iii) establishing an Agricultural Communication Center (ACC). (c) Training for implementing a staff development program comprising: (i) the establishment of a Research and Extension Training Unit (RETU); and (ii) fellowships up to MSc degree level and other training courses held locally or abroad. (d) Project Management for strengthening the institutional capability of the Department of Agriculture (DOA) of the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries (MAFF) to -2- implement the project, and for establishing a management-oriented Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system. 2. In the late 1980s, although small-scale farmers predominated (76% of households), they benefited little from research and extension activities, as these reached only a small minority of them. The management capacity of the Research Branch was weak and highly dominated by donor agencies who funded up to 80% of the budget, while professional staff were largely made up of expatriates (53%). The activities of over 20 donors through 70 projects, were uncoordinated, leading to duplication and, at times, conflicting objectives. The Extension Branch also lacked an organizational structure and the capacity to effectively carry out its functions. Extension workers were short of appropriate technologies for the widely spread and diversified farming community, although a number of extension approaches were promoted by donors. Many of the extension staff lacked adequate training and were considered under- qualified for their positions. 3. The project objectives, intended to address these major institutional issues, were well defined and the project strategy rightly called for a step-wise approach to expansion of the T&V extension system. A 15- to 20-year planning horizon was envisaged due to the anticipated protracted payoff period for capacity building of human resources and civil works for research services to provide improved technologies. The project was, therefore, conceived as a first phase of a succession of interlocking projects. When the IDA Credit became effective in March 1992, some five years after approval (para 21), the project objectives and design were still considered to be appropriate to the prevailing circumstances, and were, therefore, not revised. However, the IDA Development Credit Agreement (DCA) was amended in November 1992 to expand the extension component to cover all nine provinces instead of the three provinces envisaged at appraisal. This rapid expansion of area was not in line with the cautious approach agreed during project appraisal. B. ACHIEVEMENT OF OBJECTIVES Research Services 4. The objective of rationalizing and strengthening the institutional structure of the research service was largely met, while the involvement of farmers in the determination of priorities and the design/implementation of on-farm research was partially achieved. The project supported MAFF in formulating a National Research Action Plan (NRAP), which became the blueprint for the major reorganization and restructuring of the research system. The earlier system was considered problematic as experiments were centrally planned, trials unnecessarily repetitious and not appropriate for farmers' conditions, results often went unreported, and research stations were located by province rather than by agro-ecological regions. 5. The NRAP called for the rationalization of research facilities within three main agro-ecological regions (see Map). The 32 research facilities were assessed and consolidated along the lines agreed at appraisal. The overall number of research facilities now totals 21: three Regional Centers (Regions I, II and III), five Research Stations, 10 Technology Assessment Sites (TASs), and three Trial Sites (TSs). One research station and eight TSs were closed, while four research stations were downgraded to TASs. -3- 6. In line with the rationalization, the research structure has been reorganized into a network of research teamsi composed of: eight CRTs, fourteen SRTs and five Farming Systems Research Teams (FSRTs, formerly called ARPTs) under the coordination of three regional and four divisional Chief Agricultural Research Officers (CAROs), who report to the Deputy Director. While linkages between research and extension have been strengthened, further staff training and sensitization is required to improve their skills in participatory approaches, enabling them to better interact with farmers in determining priorities and design/implementation of research and extension programs. Farmer involvement was also hindered by problems with the maintenance and utilization of vehicles (para. 26) and the inadequacy of operating funds (para. 30). 7. With the adoption of NRAP, program formulation became decentralized and budgeting was controlled at each research facility. The project, in conjunction with the International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR), assisted the Research Branch to develop two essential research databases: (i) Research Data Archive, which includes information on all research trials since the 1950s, assists researchers during the process of planning and prioritizing research activities to assess where research gaps and duplication exist; and (ii) INFORMfor Research Managers assists in preparing annual work plans, budgets, and summaries of on-going research. The system is currently expanding and is now operational in one regional center, two research stations, and one TAS. 8. The Golden Valley Station was based on an expansion of the Mount Makulu Research Center in Region II because of the unsuitablility of the initial site.2 IDA and the Swedish Government funding contributed to improvement of the infrastructure of this station through the construction of housing facilities and the provision of an irrigation system, as well as a laboratory and farm equipment. In line with the Government of Zambia's (GRZ) liberalization policy and desire for cost recovery, it was decided in 1994 to incorporate the station into a trust, for which the project funded a study that provided guidance in setting up the trust. Subsequently, the project technical assistance (TA) and Bank supervision gave strong encouragement for its establishment. The resulting Golden Valley Agricultural Trust (GART) is a non-profit organization formed by MAFF and the Zambian National Farmers Union (an association of larger farmers), which is intended to become self-financing. ZAREP also financed the salary of the Station Manager for three years. GART now has 15 contracts, mostly with the private sector, dealing with seed production, conservation farming and minimum tillage, chemical weed control and irrigation. Extension Services 9. The objectives of strengthening extension management and establishing a T&V system were largely achieved, while the objective of transferring appropriate technologies to small-scale farmers was partially achieved. In 1991, the project facilitated MAFF in formulating its National Extension Action Plan, which provided a framework for launching the project-supported extension activities. In-service training and orientation workshops were organized to introduce the new system to staff, while technical and administrative functions were separated to allow technical staff to concentrate on field activities. The extension service was also largely relieved of the burden of input supply, credit, and marketing, as a result of GRZ's liberalization program. Because of the initial implementation delays (para 21), the project started its activities in 10 districts for the 1991/92 season. One season after the introduction of T&V, ZAREP extension activities were expanded in all provinces to all districts which did not receive CRTs: cereals, oil seeds, food legumes, fibre crops, roots and tubers, vegetables, tree/plantation crops, foragegrasses and livestock; SRTs: soils, plant protection, agro-forestry, agricultural economics, irrigation, farm power/machinery, and food storage. In particular because of the rise in soil pH from fallout from a nearby cement factory. -4- support from other donors, in spite of the recommendations of the mid-term review (MTR) to postpone expansion until an assessment was made for the 10 initial districts. By the 1994/95 season, the project covered 48 of the 64 districts of the country. The T&V system was not adjusted to varying farming conditions, such as low population density or peri-urban areas, as agreed at appraisal. Each Provincial and District Agricultural Office (PAO & DAO) was provided with 4-wheel drive vehicles, the Block Supervisor (BS) with a motorcycle and Camp Extension Officers (CEOs) with a bicycle. Camp houses were built for CEOs in 10 districts.3 The project also provided office and field equipment and operating costs, including field allowances. 10. The T&V system was based on fortnightly visits by CEOs to Village Extension Groups (VEGs); establishment of fanner-managed adoption plots; fortnightly training workshops for CEOs; and monthly workshops for Subject Matter Specialists (SMSs). The T&V system was to cover agricultural and livestock aspects, to which fisheries was later added. Initially, extension messages were prepared by provincial staff on the basis of Knowledge-Attitude-Practice (KAP) survey findings, which were carried out in each district (para 13). Over the last two years, following budget reductions, GRZ decided to modify the initial T&V system by reducing the intensity of field activities as follows: visits by CEOs to VEGs from fortnightly to monthly; training workshop for CEOs, from fortnightly to monthly; and workshops for SMSs, from monthly to quarterly. Towards the end of the project, VEGs have been increasingly consulted in the selection of technical messages to be discussed during their meeting with CEOs. Some 70% of the technical recommendations covered crop husbandry, including the promotion of hybrid maize production technologies, and crop diversification, including sorghum, groundnut, bean and wheat. Other recommendations dealt with animal husbandry, soil conservation and agro-forestry, animal traction and storage. However, extension messages did not fully address farmers problems, because messages have tended to be input-dependent and repetitive, with only a few new technologies promoted. Moreover, blanket recommendations that do not reflect market opportunities and input price changes4 continued to be disseminated. While simple low cost messages have been adopted by a large number of VEG farmers, the main reasons for non-adoption of some technologies are: labor shortage, unavailability or late availability of inputs, lack of credit, unprofitability of the production recommendations, and marketing uncertainties. 11. The objective to strengthen complementary means of communication was marginally achieved. In order to complement the field extension operations, the project was to support the now-called National Agricultural Information Service (NAIS) to enhance alternative means of communication through mass media, distribution of posters, leaflets and booklets. An Agricultural Communication Center (ACC) of 300 n2 was planned to be built in Lusaka, but this did not take place because it received low priority from project management. The project financed some audio-visual equipment, and, in 1996, the ACC was accommodated in the former ZAREP office block, although it lacks a suitable radio and television studio. Training 12. The SAR budgeted for a large training component for research and extension staff (technical and administrative). In-country training was emphasized, although provisions were also made for overseas training including study tours and university courses up to the M.Sc. level. For this purpose, the DOA The change in project area for the extension component was included in the first amendment of the IDA Credit Agreement. While the amendment made provision for incremental requirements of mobility, it did not fully meet operational funding requirements and it did not cater for incremental camp house needs. 4 The completion mission observed that, although the price of fertilizers more than doubled for the 1996/97 cropping season, the fertilizer recommendation for maize was still at the high level of 400 kg/ha (200 basal and 200 top-dressing). -5- was expected to establish a Research and Extension Training Unit (RETU). The training objectives of the project were only partially met, as the RETU was not put into operations and the project-funded training needs assessment was found substandard and not adopted. Consequently, the selection of training opportunities was not guided by a well-defined staff capacity building strategy. Local training concentrated on short courses and over 200 staff benefited from courses covering extension, production, computer use, accounting, and farm management. Overseas training has covered academic programs for Diplomas (10), Bachelors (4), Masters (30), Doctoral (15), and over 70 short courses. Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) 13. The M&E Unit started operating in 1991. The Unit established a system to evaluate the performance of the extension services. Baseline data were collected for 48 Districts, using the Knowledge-Attitude-Practice (KAP) survey methodology. Adoption rate surveys were conducted on a regular basis from 1992 onwards, initially for the 10 pilot districts, while new districts were added in subsequent years. The Unit also established a reporting system for field operations to enable the DOA to monitor output of field extension staff, and this contributed to the improved performance of the extension services. The Unit also assisted the Research Branch in setting up two databases (para 7). Another important activity was the development of a database for donor-funded research and extension projects. From mid-1993, the M&E Unit was also involved in preparatory activities for ASIP. The Unit largely achieved its objectives to increase the effectiveness of the research and extension management system. 14. A mid-term review (MTR), conducted in February 1993 by an independent team of local and international experts, made a thorough analysis of project activities. The MTR largely confirmed the approach of the SAR. Regarding research, it was recommended to: (i) convert Golden Valley into a partially self-sustaining trust; (ii) complete research station rationalization according to NRAP; (iii) decentralize research responsibilities linked to a merit-based remuneration system; and (iv) integrate adaptive research into research and extension. Regarding extension, the MTR recommended that expansion beyond the pilot areas (established only in the same year), be postponed until the results of those pilots could be evaluated. Furthermore, to reduce costs, the Review advised that maximum use be made of other extension communication systems. The MTR also advised against the heavy emphasis placed on Ph.D.-level overseas training, and suggested that funds be used for personnel upgrading, using the University of Zambia's facilities for M.Sc. courses and in-service training. While MTR recommendations were generally followed for research activities, they were largely ignored for the extension and training components. Mobility and Infrastructure 15. The project supported a substantial increase in mobility for research and extension staff, although maintenance and utilization proved troublesome (para. 27). The vehicle workshop at the Mount Makulu Research Center was upgraded to conduct major repairs for all project vehicles. Provincial workshops were also equipped to undertake maintenance and minor repairs. The project funded the salary of a superintendent at the Mount Makulu workshop, and training to enhance drivers' and mechanics' capabilities. A large quantity of spares was imported, as they were difficult to obtain locally, especially at the beginning of the project. The procurement of spares proved cumbersome as delays in supply were regular and sometimes wrong parts were sent. Spares have not yet been received for the last shipment of s At a later stage, the RETU was to have been called the Department of Agriculture Training Unit (DATU). This unit was to coordinate training for all DOA staff financed by GRZ, ZAREP, as well as other donors. The creation of DATU was postponed, awaiting MAFF restructuring. -6- cars and motorcycles. The spares were partly distributed to the provinces, and partly stored at Mount Makulu, in a temporary store, while a new project-funded large store is still under construction. 16. As part of the rationalization of the research station network and the expansion of the extension service, numerous facilities (offices, laboratories, training rooms, housing, etc.) were rehabilitated or constructed. However, the civil works program encountered design and construction quality problems (in part because of the use of pre-fabricated structures). The lack of reliable contractors, delay in payments, time pressure and inadequate supervision, resulted in a number of sub-standard and/or incomplete buildings. Technical Assistance (TA) 17. The SAR made provisions for 606 person months (pm) of long-term and 190 pm of short-term TA. The project financed some 600 p-m of international TA, mostly for long-term assignments (Table 5 of Part II, and Tables 3-4 of Appendix C). Around 60% of International TA was spent on managerial tasks including some eight years for the Project Implementation and Management Unit (PIMU), and 4.5 years for the GART farm manager and the Mount Makulu workshop superintendent. The specific TA for M&E, research and extension represented only 11%, 15% and 1% respectively. During project 6 implementation, a substantial part of the short-term thematic TA was dropped, especially that intended for adjusting extension methodologies, improving FSR methodologies, and enhancing alternative means of communication. The project TA was rated unsatisfactory during the first four years of project implementation, while it is considered to have contributed substantially to project achievements afterwards. Although not anticipated at appraisal, some 100 pm of short-term national TA was financed under ZAREP, which contributed to the ASIP preparation process (1993-94). Donor Coordination 18. The project was intended to assist GRZ in enhancing donor coordination in order to avoid duplication of activities, to harmonize research and extension methodologies and to optimize the use of the limited financial resources. The project only partially met this objective, especially regarding extension activities. The M&E Unit-prepared database of donor assistance contributed to reducing duplication of funding. Coordination of extension activities was based on the assumption that all donors would adopt the ZAREP-promoted T&V management system, which was not recognized by all donors as a suitable approach. Consequently, alternative extension systems continued to be supported in a number of non-project districts, while in a few cases different extension approaches prevailed even in project districts. Towards the end of the project, donor coordination improved (in part as a result of ASIP preparation) through their participation in annual planning meetings, but greater involvement in regional planning is needed. Project Costs and Financing 19. Actual project costs are estimated at about US$ 35.2 million, or about 91% of the SAR estimate (US$ 38.8 million). The project expenditures exceeded the estimated amounts for overseas training (US$ 3.7 against US$ 1.4 million), vehicles (US$ 6.2 against US$ 4.1 million) and incremental recurrent costs (US$ 10 against US$ 3.8 million). These changes are mainly due to the expansion of the project area for 6 See first DCA amendment (of November 1992). -7- the extension component from 10 to 48 districts, in contrast to the phased approach agreed at appraisal (Part II, Table 8A). 20. IDA disbursements amounted to SDR 10.5 million, or about 97% of the Credit; SDR 0.3 million remained undisbursed. In US$ terms, IDA disbursement amounted to US$ 15.2 million (about 42% of total project costs), as opposed to the US$ 13.0 million envisaged at appraisal, because of the appreciation of the SDR against the US dollar. The three main categories of expenditure financed by IDA are overseas training (23%), vehicles, equipment and supplies (33%), and incremental operating costs (20%). Some 84% of the Norwegian Grant (US$ 6.6 million) has been disbursed (about 19% of total project costs), and around US$ 1.3 million remains undisbursed. The bulk of the Norwegian Grant was used for strengthening research facilities and financing research operations in the Northern Province. Some 80% of the ADF Loan has been disbursed (about 35% of total project costs). The bulk of the ADF Loan was used for financing civil works, technical assistance and mobility. The contribution of GRZ amounted to some US$ 1.3 million (about 4% of total project costs), equivalent to only 25% of its estimated amount at appraisal. Low GRZ funding implies that incremental recurrent costs were largely borne by external funding. C. MAJOR FACTORS AFFECTING THE PROJECT Implementation Record 21. The project was identified in 1983, prepared in 1984 and appraised at the end of 1986. A Project Preparation Facility (PPF) of US$ 1 million was approved in 1986. Soon after project approval at the end of 1986, IDA suspended disbursements to Zambia (in May 1987), due to arrears in service payments. Therefore, IDA Credit effectiveness was delayed by about five years, until March 1992. The NTF Grant and ADF Loan became effective in mid-1989. Consequently, project implementation started slowly, as only some preparatory activities for civil works, studies and procurement, supported by TA, were made possible through the use of the PPF, and arrangements negotiated by the co-financiers. However, ADF- and NTF-funded activities were also delayed, as they were dependent on IDA-funded activities. When the IDA Credit became effective, the project attempted to overcome this delay. A remarkable 60% of the project funds (or 80% of IDA funds) were disbursed in only three years, between 1992 and 1994. Because of the five-year delay in IDA Credit effectiveness and the concurrent emergence of the ASIP concept, ZAREP appears to have been perceived as a "transitional" project. Consequently, a number of issues which were to be addressed under ZAREP, were handed over to ASIP (e.g. the formation of RETU and the establishment of the ACC). From January 1996, ZAREP research, extension and training activities were fully integrated within ASIP. From 1996, the PIMU merged with the ASIP Financial Management Unit (FMU), and follow-up of specific ZAREP management aspects received low priority, especially regarding on-going civil works, training abroad and purchase of spare parts for cars and motorbikes. Government Liberalization Policy 23. During project implementation, the liberalization program modified substantially the role of the Government in the agricultural sector. GRZ gradually withdrew from agricultural input supply and marketing, and removed subsidies. This resulted in an initial disruption of the input supply and marketing systems and in changes in relative prices. (In particular, fertilizer prices increased markedly in relation to product prices.) These initial higher prices and/or shortages of inputs adversely affected the -8- adoption of extension messages, especially regarding the input-dependent technology promoted for maize. Government Funding 24. An important factor adversely affecting project implementation was the inadequacy of counterpart funds. Funding of project operations has been irregular, including, in 1992, a complete omission to insert project activities in the MAFF budget, and, in 1996, a budget cut of over 50%, due to GRZ's payment of arrears on foreign debt. Overall, the Government met only 25% of its funding commitment. In addition, the inadequate flow of funds for field operations negatively affected T&V implementation. Drought 25. Project implementation was adversely affected by the serious drought which prevailed in Zambia during the early 1990s. A number of technical recommendations (e.g. use of hybrid seeds and fertilizers), especially for maize, could not be applied or yielded disappointing results. However, it provided a favorable context for disseminating recommendations on crop diversification. Project Management 26. Since the project had no separate identity, apart from the national programs it encompassed, the creation of an ad hoc management unit was not proposed at SAR. Consequently DOA had primary responsibility for implementing the project, supported by TA. However, because of the heavy routine work load of DOA senior management, the role of TA became critical for achieving project objectives. During the first years, the weak performance of the project implementation TA team was considered a serious constraint on project progress. From 1991 to the end of 1995, the appointment of a new TA team and the establishment of PIMU brought about significant improvement in project administration. PIMU greatly facilitated the implementation of research and extension activities, which remained under the responsibility of DOA staff. Regular meetings of the Extension and Research Management Teams also contributed to solving problems and enhancing project achievements. Operation and Maintenance of Vehicles 27. Problems in maintenance and repair of vehicles proved to be a key issue in project implementation. The intensive use of cars and motorcycles for project and non-project activities, combined with the poor quality of rural roads, called for frequent maintenance and repairs. At present, many project cars are in poor condition or grounded. Towards the end of the project, the establishment of a staff ownership scheme for motorbikes contributed to the improvement of their use and maintenance. The bicycles, purchased through local competitive bidding, proved to be inadequate and were rapidly grounded, reducing drastically the mobility of CEOs and affecting negatively the implementation of the T&V system. 7 This issue is currently being addressed under ASIP. It is estimated that project cars run for at least 50,000 km per year, with a maximum recorded of over 100,000 km. The mission was informed that PAOs and DAOs had difficulties to restrict the use of ZAREP cars to project activities (the use of project cars for non-project activities has been estimated to exceed 50%). -9- D. PROJECT SUSTAINABILITY 28. Given the current implementation of ASIP, and donor commitment to support research, extension and training activities, project activities are likely to continue in the medium term. However, in 1996, as ZAREP activities were being integrated within ASIP, the reduction and delays in release of operational funds, aging of vehicles and increased difficulties to maintain them, led to a rapid decline in T&V implementation, indicating that a decrease in donor funding rapidly paralyses field extension activities. The modified T&V system proved expensive under Zambian conditions, with substantial staff and vehicle costs. The project extension activities are, therefore at this time, not sustainable without substantial donor funding. While the experience of GART suggests that there may be scope for self-financed agricultural research (for larger farmers and for cash crops), the current level of regular research activities also remains dependent on substantial donor funding. 29. Because of the low quality of civil works, major rehabilitation is already required for camp houses, medium cost houses, and some office/training infrastructure, raising concern about the durability of these investments. E. BANK PERFORMANCE 30. The initial project design was adequate, with well thought-out phasing and attention to project risks. With the flexible attitude of the co-financiers, it was possible to get the project started when the IDA credit was still frozen, mainly by mutual funding arrangements. There were 13 supervision missions before the MTR, and 8 afterwards. Supervision has been intensive and generally satisfactory, facilitating implementation of the project. However, the fact that research and extension activities were generally supervised separately (until the MTR) may have undermined the objective of better linking the two. IDA has been less satisfactory in supervising civil works activities, and in ensuring proper use of project vehicles. More follow-up should have been given on the MTR recommendations to carry out an assessment of the T&V approach before expanding the project extension activities, and a better balance of post-graduate with graduate/under-graduate degrees and overseas training with local training. During 1996, when project activities were integrated within ASIP, specific Bank supervision of ZAREP procurement and disbursement matters would have helped to solve pending problems and to make fuller use of available funds. F. BORROWER PERFORMANCE 31. The institutional infrastructure of the research and extension systems has been rationalized and strengthened. However, the insufficient and erratic flow of GRZ counterpart funds hampered implementation. The Government has been weak in expediting procurement procedures, in supervising civil works, and in controlling the use of project-funded vehicles. More adequate follow-up could have been given to the recommendations in the MTR and audit reports. There was also a high MAFF staff turn-over and frequent reorganization of MAFF departments and units, which negatively affected staff morale and project implementation. Finally, GRZ faced difficulties in fulfilling its role of coordinating donors supporting its research and extension activities. -10- G. ASSESSMENT OF OUTCOME 32. On balance, the outcome of the project is considered to be marginally satisfactory. Restructuring of the institutional infrastructure was reasonably successful, in spite of the turnover in MAFF officials and weaknesses in the administrative systems (e.g. procurement). Project training contributed to the increased level of professional skills. On the extension side, the T&V system was introduced with reasonable success, although it has proven costly. 33. Operation of the research and extension systems has proceeded reasonably well, with greater interaction between researchers and extensionists and, to a lesser extent, farmers. Decentralization of the extension service has provided greater authority and responsibility to district officers, who now are better able to tailor programs to the circumstances and needs of the farmers in their districts. However, inadequate counterpart funding has constrained the mobility of both researchers (e.g. in terms of collaborative on-farm research) and extensionists (in promoting the formation of additional farmers' groups and visiting all groups on a regular basis). 34. Field observations suggest that adoption rates among smallholders have increased, but surveys undertaken by the M&E Unit show little difference in these rates between VEG and non-VEG members. In part, this may result from the drought during the early 1990s and by higher input prices (and changed price relationships). However, it may also result in part from inadequate adaptation of recommendations to changed conditions, especially prices. In any case, the institutional infrastructure is now largely in place, and it is expected that the flow of recommendations will have an increasing impact in future years, provided that they are developed in collaboration with farmers and continually adapted to changing conditions, and that the T&V system is supplemented by mechanisms which do not impose a heavy fiscal burden, using alternative communication techniques and the media. 35. The SAR did not quantify expected impact on agricultural production and did not estimate an economic rate of return, as the project constituted the first phase of a long-term capacity building program. Therefore, no attempt has been made to calculate an economic rate of return at completion. 36. ZAREP also contributed to the preparation and establishment of ASIP. The project's PIMU financial procedures have been adopted by ASIP's FMU, and the M&E Unit laid the foundation for ASIP's Management and Information System (MIS). H. FUTURE OPERATIONS 37. The research, extension and training components of ZAREP have been incorporated within the on-going ASIP as sub-programs, for which work plans are prepared annually.? An MIS, including performance indicators, has been established within each sub-program, and overall responsibility rests with the M&E unit of the MAFF's Policy and Planning Division. The completion mission made a few recommendations for consideration by the ASIP research, extension and training sub-programs, which are presented as an attachment to Appendix A. These address the need to: (i) further rationalize the research facility network; (ii) increase the use of participatory approaches to strengthen farmer-extension-research linkages; (iii) undertake an independent assessment of past extension experiences to make methodology adjustments to, and improve the sustainability of, the T&V system; (iv) prioritize extension staff training 9 There are also a number of scholarships and civil works obligations, initiated under ZAREP, which roll over to respective ASIP sub-programs. - 11 - towards district and field staff; and (v) re-consider the recent GRZ decision to separate animal health and production from the Research and Extension Branches. I. KEY LESSONS LEARNED 38. Farmer involvement in determination of priorities and in design/implementation of research and extension programs is critical to their success and to their sustainability. Therefore, adequate resources should be devoted to increasing the participatory skills of research and extension staff, and mobility of staff must be maintained. 39. Government commitment, especially in terms of appointment of staff, provision of adequate funding, and implementation of agreed actions, is crucial for project success. 40. Phased implementation of a longer-term extension program is important to its success. The major expansion of area introduced during the course of the project resulted in reduced effectiveness and contributed to an unsustainable fiscal burden. 41. Labor constraints and financial viability, which still need to be addressed, form a major impediment to adoption of released technologies. 42. The restructuring of the extension service and re-focusing on its core functions were successful, although the T&V system proved to be expensive under Zambian circumstances. Adjustments need to be made to improve its efficiency and cost effectiveness. 43. The GART experiment suggests that there is a role for the private sector in research, particularly research relevant to larger farmers and for cash crops. This would allow GRZ to focus on smallholders, thus reducing its expenditures. 44. Civil works are an important element of research and extension infrastructure, but where there is lack of proper quality control, relatively inexpensive pre-fabricated structures may prove to be more expensive in the long run. 45. ZAREP was incorporated into ASIP one year before scheduled project completion. During that year (1996) there was no specific follow-up of outstanding project commitments. In the future, the integration of on-going IDA-funded projects (or IDA-administered trust funds) into a SIP should not only consider the integration of future project activities, but also the continuation of activities during the transition. -12- PART H: STATISTICAL TABLES TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENTS A. Achievement of Ojectives Substantial Eatial NeI ble Not AWlicable Macro policies 0 I I FK1 Sector policies FII E] F] [] Financial objectives E] [r Institutional development El FI Fi Physical objectives L7 Fl E[ Poverty reduction L7 Fl ] Gender issues F-] Other social objectives L]l Environmental objectives Li Fi [I Rl Public sector management l rl [I F] Private sector development F- rl -- fII Other (specify) Fi l Li Li B. EMjctsusalinabiliy Li* U Ucertain l O7 El -13- Highly C. Bank prrance satisary Satisfctor . Deficiet Identification F1 Preparation assistance E7 Appraisal [] [] Supervision [I [] D. Borrower pefomance satisfactory Satisfagto Deficiet Preparation Fl 7] Implementation E7 Covenant compliance D Fl] Operation (if applicable) E E ghl ighly E. Assessment of outcome satisfatory Satisfactory Unsatisfactry unsaisfactoir Og' OiO Marginally satisfactory. -14- TABLE 2: RELATED BANK LOANS/CREDITS Loan/Credit Title Purpose Year of Status Approval Preceding Operations 1. Eastern Province Agricultural Increase of crop production through 1981 Completed Development Project improvement of agricultural extension, research, input supplies, processing and credit facilities 2. Southern Province Agricultural Increase of crop and livestock production 1981 Completed Development Project through the improvement of agricultural extension, veterinary and tsetse control, input supply, credit and marketing services 3. Agricultural Rehabilitation Agricultural sector development through 1985 Completed Project policy and institutional reforms complemented by input supply 4. Second Coffee Project Smallholder and commercial coffee 1987 Completed development Following Operations 5. Agricultural Marketing and Support road infrastructure and the private 1992 On-going Processing sector to be involved in marketing and processing of agricultural commodities 6. Agricultural Sector Investment Sector development by making more 1995 On-going Program effective donor and GRZ resources TABLE 3: PROJECT TIMETABLE Date Actuall Steps in Project Cycle Date Planned Latest Estimate Identification AugJSept. 1983 Preparation June 1984 Appraisal Aug. 1983 AugJSept. 1986 Post-appraisal - June 1986 Negotiations July 1985 Oct. 1986 Board presentation Sept. 1985 Feb. 9, 1986 Signing Mar. 19, 1987 Effectiveness June 1987 Mar. 13, 1992 Mid-term review Feb. 1993 Project completion Dec. 1995 Dec. 1996 Credit closing Dec. 1995 Dec. 1996 -15- TABLE 4: IDA CREDIT DISBURSEMENTS: CUMULATIVE ESTIMATED AND ACTUAL (USS MILLION) 86/87 87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 IDA Credit Appraisal estimate 0.4 2 4.5 7.3 9.8 11.9 12.6 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 Actual 0.2 0.6 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.5 2.8 5.8 11.5 14.5 14.9 Act as% of estimate 41 32 21 13 10 13 22 44 87 112 115d Total Project Appraisal estimate 1.2 5.9 13.0 21.0 28.0 33.2 36.4 38.8 38.8 38.8 38.8 Actual 0.2 0.7 3.0 4.9 6.8 10.5 14.6 20.1 30.4 34.5 35.2 Act as % of estimate 14 12 23 23 24 32 40 52 78 89 91 Date of final disbursementw before 31/4/1997' To be updated by the IDA afterfinal disbursement (following processing of outstanding claims during the grace period) First five years refer to the disbursement of the Project Preparation Facility (PPF) r/ Actual IDA disbursement exceeded appraisal estimates due to depreciation of the US$ against SDR Undisbursed IDA credit balance (31/12/1996) = 0.4 million SDR -16- TABLE 5. KEY INDICATORS FOR PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION Indicators Unit Estimated Actual 1. Research Research facilities restructuring Facilities closed No. 19 12 Facilities upgraded No. 3 4 Facilities downgraded No. 2 5 Facilities opened No. 1 0 Expenditure ratio: operating/personnel Ratio > 0.3 1.1 Database for research management No. 0 2 2. Extension District covered by T&V No. 10 48 T&V management system Implementation workshops No. 400 1,330 CEO visits to VEGs Frequency Fortnightly Monthly CEO visits to VEGs Duration 1 day 1-3 hours CEO training workshop Frequency Fortnightly Monthly SMS training workshop Frequency Monthly Quaterly Active VEG groups No. - 5,535 Farm families reached No. 55,900 80,000 - 150,000 3. Training RETU No. 1 0 Research staff training Diploma (abroad) No. 0 5 Post-Graduate course No. 0 3 B.Sc. (abroad) No. 0 4 M.Sc. (abroad) No. 12 18 Ph. D. (abroad) No. 0 15 Short-term courses (abroad) No. 15 3 Extension staff training Diploma (abroad) No. 0 14 M.Sc. (local) No. 4 14 M.Sc. (abroad) No. 0 7 Short-term courses (abroad) No. 0 40 4. Monitoring and Evaluation Districts included in MIS No. - 45 Camps included in MIS No. - 1,193 Adoption rate surveys completed No. of districts 18 KAP studies completed No. - 44 districts 5. Technical Assistance Long-term international TA Person-month 606 572 Short-term international TA Person-month 190 34 Short-term national TA Person-month 0 98 6. Mobility Vehicles No. 142 238 Motorbikes No. 176 > 500 Bicycles No. 331 > 1,000 Minibuses No. 10 15 7. Civil Works (Construction) Low cost houses (CEOs) No. 126 126 Medium/high cost houses No. 54 36 Agricultural Community Center No. 1 0 -17- TABLE 6: KEY INDICATORS FOR PROJECT OPERATION L Key Operating Indicators in SAR/President's Report Estimated Actual Not applicable TABLE 7: STUDIES INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT Study Done by Purpose as Defined at Status Impact of Study Appraisal or Redefined 1. Five-year Action Program Consulting Develop a work plan for Completed Limited value as recommendations for Research Firm restructuring of the Research in 1987 conflicted with those in SAR Branch organization setup 2. National Extension Action GRZ/DOA Prepare a comprehensive Completed Served as the basis for project for Plan plan to reorganize Extension in 1991 launching project extension Services activities 3. National Research Action GRZ/DOA Prepare a comprehensive Completed Served as the basis for project Plan plan to reorganize Research in 1991 setting up project research activities Services 4. Knowledge, Attitudes and ZAREP Monitoring and Evaluation Series of Enabled to evaluate extension Practices (KAP) Surveys tool surveys activities and propose adjustments from 1992 to 1995 5. Adoption Rate Surveys ZAREP Monitoring and Evaluation Series of Provided indications on T&V tool studies from performance 1993 to 1995 6. Golden Valley Trust Consultant Study the feasibility of Completed Contributed to define GART Feasibility Study chartering Golden Valley in 1993 institutional and organizational set- station into a trust up 7. Assessment of potential Consulting Develop plan for unused Completed Negligible (report classified and for expanding Firm agricultural lands as means in 1993 confidential) agricultural production in of increasing production Zambia 8. Staff development and ZAREP Develop a staff training plan Completed Negligible, report considered sub- training review for Research and Extension in 1995 standard Branches 9. Past Research Data ZAREP Data base to summarize past Completed Useful tool for research planning Collation research achievements in 1996 1O.Lime Study Done by Identify sources/availability N/A N/A other donor of lime and potential use I I.Women in Development Done by Women's role in agricultural N/A N/A other donor production -18- TABLE 8A: PROJECT COSTS (USS MILLION) Appraisal Estimate Actual/Latest Estimate (31/12/96) Local Foreign Local Foreign Category a' Costs Costs Total Costs bl Costs Total echnical assistance 1.1 5.5 6.6 - - 6.6 Training (overseas) - 1.4 1.4 - - 3.7 Training (local) 0.5 - 0.5 - - 1.2 Civil works 4.3 3.4 7.7 - - 5.7 Vehicles 0.3 3.8 4.1 - - 6.2 Equipment & supplies 0.5 2.5 3.0 - - 1.7 Incremental recurrent costs 1.9 1.9 3.8 - - 10.0 Unallocated 3.8 7.9 11.7 - - - Total 12.4 26.4 38.8 - - 35.2 Project costs were not kept according to components. Detailed distribution between local and foreign cost figures not available. TABLE SB: PROJECT FINANCING (US$ MILLION) Appraisal Estimate Actual/Latest Estimate (31/12/96) Local Foreign Local Foreign Source Costs Costs Total Costs Costs, Total IDA credit 1.5 11.5 13.0 - - 14.9 Norway grant 1.5 5.7 7.2 - - 6.6 ADF loan 3.4 9.2 12.6 - - 12.4 GRZ contribution 6.0 0 6.0 - - 1.3 Total 12.4 26.4 38.8 - - 35.2 Actual disbursement exceeded appraisal estimate due to depreciation of the US$ against SDR Detailed distribution between local and foreign cost figures not available. TABLE 9: ECONOMIC COSTS AND BENEFITS There was no net present value (NPV) or economic rate of return (ERR) estimated at appraisal. Therefore the NPV and ERR were not re-estimated by the ICR mission. An assessment of the project outcome is presented in the main report. -19- TABLE 10: STATUS OF LEGAL COVENANTS ZAREP Original Revised Covenant Present Fulfillment Fulfillment Description of Agreement Section Type Status Date Date Covenant Comments DCA 3.03 M C Sept. 88 Sept. 93 MAFF to produce policy statement on Complied with irrigation and implement it DCA 3.04 M C June 88 Dec. 93 Report of Task Force on Livestock Complied with. Development Policy developed and Proposals submitted reviewed by IDA under ASIP DCA 3.05 M C Annual Annual Annual Work Program and budgets to Complied with be reviewed and approved by IDA DCA 3.06 M C Dec. 87 Dec. 92 A four-year research program Complied with developed and approved by IDA to develop from year program DCA 3.07 M NC Dec. 88 March 94 Long-term agricultural manpower Conipliance under projection and training program ASIP developed DCA 3.08 M C Aug. 89 March 94 Mid-term Review report to be Complied with developed DCA 3.09 M C Semi-Ann. Semi-Ann. Semi-Annual Program Reports on Complied with project comments submitted by IRA and implemented accordingly DCA 3.10 M C Maintenance of BOZ/ZNCB Project Complied with Advance Account for recurrent expenditure DCA 3.11 M C Dec. 87 March 94 Establish a M&E Unit Complied with DCA 4.01 M C Maintain adequate records for Complied with (a)(bXc) accounting and expenditure Accounts audited and submitted DCA 4.02 M CD Dec. 88 Dec. 88 Design system of budgeting financial Complied with in and cost accounting acceptable and May 91 cleared by IDA DCA 5.01 M CD Dec. 87 Dec. 87 AFDB Loan Agreement effectiveness Complied with DCA 6.01 M C May 87 May 87 (a) Appoint Project Coordinators by Complied with MAFF (b) Five-Year Research Plan by consultants (c) Establish Special Accounts (d) Acceptable research sites and extension camp houses selected. Status: C: Complied with CD: Compliance after delay NC: Not complied with SOON: Compliance expected in reasonably short time NYD: Not yet due -20- TABLE 11: COMPLIANCE WITH OPERATIONAL MANUAL STATEMENTS Statement Number and Title - escribe and Comment on Lack of Compliance Not Applicable TABLE 12: BANK RESOURCES: STAFF INPUTS Stage of Planned Revised Actual Project Cycle Weeks USS Weeks USS Weeks '000 US$ Preparation for appraisal 66 141 Appraisal 117 256 Negotiations through approval 10 24 Supervision 147 439 Completion' 12 30.1 12 30.1 n.a. n.a. Total n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. 340 861 Only for completion phase, planned estimates were available. -21- TABLE 13: BANK RESOURCES: MISSIONS Performance Ratinge Stage of Project Month/Year Number Days in Specialized Skills Implemen- Development Types of Cycle of Field Representeda tation Impact Problems/ Persons Status Identification 8-9/83 2 10 Preparation 5-6/84 3 7 Appraisal 1-2/85 8 25 Post-appraisal 7/86 4 28 Negotiations 10/86 - - Supervision I 3/87 2 5 AE, AG - - EF 2 / 9-10/87 3 17 AE, AG, AR - - EF 3 / 6/88 1 n.a. AE - - EF 4 3/89 1 11 AR 2 1 EF, RM 5 9/89 1 9 AR 3 1 EF, RM, DC, TA 6 4-5/90 2 9 AE 3 1 EF, CW, TA 7 12/90 2 4 AE, AR 2 2 EF, TA 8 6-7/91 4 20 AE, EX, AR 2 2 EF 9 12/91 1 12 EX 2 2 EF 10 3-4/92 3 13 AE, EX, AR 2 2 CF 11/ 6-8/92 2 12 EX, AR - - CF, RM 12' 10-11/92 2 8 EX, AS - - CF, FF 13 2-4/93 5 14 EX, AE, AS, AR 2 2 DC Mid-term review 3-4/93 5 32 AE, AR, EX, AG - - 14 7/93 8 21 AE, EX, AS - - DC, FF, PR 15 9/93 2 7 EX, AS - - CF, PR 16 2/94 1 7 EX 2 2 FF, DC, MO 17 5-6/94 2 n.a. EX, AS 2 2 FF, MO, CW 18, 11-12/94 2 6 EX, AS - - FF 19 1/95 2 12 EX, AS S S FF 20 5/95 2 ? EX, AS S S CW, PR 216/ 1/96 4 16 AS, EX, AR - - FF, MO, CF Completion 01-02/97 3 1$ AG, AE, AR - AG = Agriculturist; AE = Agricultural Economist; AR = Agricultural Research Specialist; EX = Extension Specialist; AS= Alcultural Services Specialist EF = Delay in credit effectiveness; CF = Counterpart funding ; TA = Technical assistance; PR = Procurement; CW = Civil works; MO = Mobility; FF = Flow of funds to the field; DC = Donor coordination; RM = Research management. I = Non significant problems; 2 = Moderate problems; 3 = Major problems (appropriate action is being taken to address these problems); S = Satisfactory. Form 590 not available. -22- APPENDICES -23 - LMENTNATION COLETION REPORT EPUBLIC OF ZABIA AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND EXTENSION PROJECT (Cr. 1746-ZM) A. Aide Memoire Introduction 1. 'A missioni from the FAO/World Bank Cooperative Program visited Zambia from 27 January to 12 February 1997 to prepare the ICR for the above project. The mission worked closely with staff concerned by ZAREP from the Ministry of Finance (MOF) and the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries (MAFF), especially from the Research and Extension Branches of the Department of Agriculture (DOA). The mission also held discussions with representatives of NORAD, SIDA and EU. Field visits were made to five districts in three Provinces2 where discussions were held with - 3 representatives of MAFF and farmers. The mission also visited five research facilities . 2. The mission is grateful to the officials of the Government of the Republic of Zambia (GRZ), farmers, and the WB and FAO offices in Lusaka for their assistance in information gathering and organising successful field visits. Preliminary impressions and findings are presented below, and are subject to modifications following further detailed analysis. Objectives and Components 3. The purpose of the project was to raise the productivity of Zambia's agricultural sector by improving research and extension services to farmers, particularly smallholders. The objectives of the project were to: (i) strengthen existing institutions and infrastructure in support of adaptive and applied research, and extension programs; (ii) upgrade human resources; (iii) strengthen linkages between extension and research; (iv) establish a modified Training and Visit (T&V) system as the basis of the National Extension Program; and (v) promote better coordination of external assistance. According to the Staff Appraisal Report (SAR), the project was intended to support, over a period of eight years: (a) Research Services for: (i) organisational restructuring to formulate and coordinate overall research programs, establish policies and set priorities; (ii) strengthening Adaptive Research Planning Teams (ARPTs) and Commodity Research Teams Guy Evers, Mission Leader/Agronomist (FAO/CP), Andre Wooning, Agricultural Economist (FAO/CP) and James Litsinger, Research and Training Specialist (Consultant). 2 Chongwe (Lusaka Province), Choma and Kalomo (Southern Province), and Kapiri Mposhi and Mkushi (Central Province). Mount Makulu Research Station, Golden Valley Agricultural Research Trust, Kabwe and Magoye Technology Assessment Sites and Mochipapa Research Station. -24- (CRTs); (iii) strengthening Specialists Research Teams (SRTs) especially to restore and/or sustain soil productivity; and (iv rationalisation and strengthening the national station network by phasing out redundant facilities and upgrading infrastructure and equipment at the remaining stations. (b) Extension Services for: (i) organisational restructuring, including measures to separate technical and administrative functions, an improving the planning and coordination of extension activities; (ii) introducing a modified T&V system, adapted to varying conditions in 10 districts of Lusaka, Central and Northern Provinces (four pilot districts before the mid-term review); and (iii) establishing an Agricultural Communication Centre (ACC). (c) Training for implementing a comprehensive staff development program comprising: (i) the establishment of a Research and Extension Training Unit (RETU); (ii) fellowships up to MSc degree and other overseas and local training courses; and (iii) upgrading of training facilities. (d) Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) for establishing a systematic, management- oriented monitoring and evaluation system, including a comprehensive mid-term review (MTR) of research and extension strategies and programs. (e) Project Management for strengthening the institutional capability of MAFF to implement the project, and providing an internationally recruited team. 4. The project objectives were well articulated in the SAR. The project document was cautious and its strategy called for step-wise approach to expansion of the T & V system. A 15- to 20-year planning horizon was envisaged due to the anticipated protracted payoff period for capacity building of human resources and civil works for research services to provide improved technologies. The project was conceived as a first phase of a succession of interlocking projects. Project Timing, Financing and Costs 5. The project was identified and prepared by the WB in 1983 and 1984, and appraised in 1986. It was to be co-financed by IDA, a Norwegian Grant (Trust Fund administered by IDA = NTF), and the African Development Fund (ADF). A Project Preparation Facility (PPF) of US$ 1 million was approved in 1986. The IDA Credit Agreement was signed in March 1987 . The NTF Grant and ADF Credit became effective in mid-1989, and IDA Credit in March 1992. The MTR was launched early 1993. There were 13 Bank supervision missions before the MTR, and 8 afterwards. The project initial closing date was set at December 1995, later extended to December 1996. In January 1996, the project activities were integrated into the multi-donor supported, Agricultural Sector Investment Program (ASIP), after which no specific ZAREP supervision took place. 6. ZAREP provisional estimates of total project costs amount to US$ 35.2 million compared with the SAR estimate of US$ 38.2 million. To illustrate the application of funds, the Table below shows disbursements against the planned allocation of funds among categories of expenditure. Since the project The Development Credit Agreement was amended in November 1992, in August and November 1993, and early 1995. -25 - is now in a four month grace period, to allow for disbursement of outstanding commitments as of 31 December 96, final amount and allocation of funds will slightly differ. -26 - Planned allocation and disbursement of funds by category Credit/Grant and category Credit/Grant allocation Disbursed SAR Last Amendment 31 Dec 1996 IDA Credit (x ,000 SDR) (1987) (1995) 1 Technical assistance 5,670 1,050 904 2-A Overseas training 1,000 2,250 2,407 2-B Local training 250 300 250 3 Civil works 580 1,270 529 4 Vehicles, equipment, supplies 500 3,150 3,430 5 O&M: buildings, vehicles, equipment 330 2,040 2,020 6 Refund of PPF 830 741 741 Unallocated 1,640 789 77 Total IDA 10,800 10,800 10,358 Norwegian Trust Fund (x,000 NOK) (1987) (1989) 1-A Mount Makulu Central Research Station 27,300 24,400 15,269 I-B Misamfu Zonal Research Station 3,500 3,100 2,861 1-C Mufulira Region Research Station 4,900 4,300 552 I-D Mongu Regional Research Station 4,900 4,300 6,122 1-E Mbala Trial Research Station 1,400 1,000 0 1-F Research activities in the Northern Province 10,500 10,500 12,803 1-G New Research Stations 100 55 2 Consultancies, Training, Estab. Mgt. Unit 4,800 4,749 Unallocated 1,819 Total Norwegian Trust Fund 52,500 52,500 44,229 ADF Credit (x ,000 SDR) Total 12,600 8,887 GRZ (x ,000 US$) 5,400 1,261 Implementation Experience 7. General. The project implementation started slowly because of the initial five year delay in IDA Credit effectiveness. Some preparatory activities for civil works, studies and procurement, supported by technical assistance (TA), were made possible through the use of the PPF, and arrangements negotiated by the co-financiers. However, ADF- and NTF-funded activities were also delayed, as they were dependant on IDA funded activities. When IDA Credit became effective (until 1995), the project attempted to overcome this delay, and even to exceed the initial extension program (see par 14). Consequently, some 80% of IDA Credit, and 60% of total project costs were disbursed in about three years. From 1993, ZAREP resources (including TA) were also used for ASIP preparation. From 1996, as ZAREP research extension and training activities were integrated within ASIP, only a few withdrawal applications were claimed under the IDA Credit and NTF. - 27 - 8. arch Services. ZAREP contracted an initial strategic study in 1988 that paved the basis for the National Research Action Plan (NRAP) which became a blueprint for the major reorganisation and restructuring of the research system. The former system was considered problematic as experiments were centrally planned, trials unnecessarily repetitious and not appropriate to farmers' conditions, results often went unreported, and research stations were located by province rather than by agro-ecological regions. NRAP addressed these problems following the objectives set out in the SAR. 9. Rationalisation of Research Facilities: the NRAP called for delineation of research target domains based mainly on annual rainfall, resulting in three regions being defined. The 27 research facilities were then assessed and redundancies were to be eliminated. The number of facilities now totals 16: two regional centres (Regions II and III), four research stations, and 10 Technology Assessment Sites (TASs). Closed were 10 TASs and one research station with four research stations downgraded to TASs. The former trial site at Sinazongue has yet to be upgraded to the Region I centre. ZAREP funded civil works and laboratory equipment to upgrade the regional centres and research stations as well as five TASs. 10. The research structure has been reorganised into a network of research teams5 composed of: nine CRTs, seven SRTs and nine FSRTs (formerly called ARPTs) under the coordination of three regional and three divisional Chief Agricultural Research Officers (CAROs), who report to an overall coordinator, for whom terms of references have been developed. ZAREP supported these teams through equipment, vehicles, computers and operational funds. A succession of new teams and divisions, as well as coordinating committees was formed whose makeup and number have been in continual revision. Their meetings required substantial time, vehicles and budget. Despite these revisions, FSRTs, CRTs, and SRTs are still composed of separate staff, therefore maintaining communication barriers. A performance- based merit system to increase staff morale has been developed, and awaits final approval. 11. The mandate of FSRTs is to link researchers with farmers and extension. These multi- disciplinary units are based at research facilities and perform on-station and on-farm trials. During the period of ARPTs, one team member was appointed as the Research and Extension Liaison Officer (RELO). ARPTs, once functioned as autonomous units (with their own farmers' groups), but under the new re-organisation, the FSRTs have been integrated into the research structure. The RELOs were dropped, and research-extension liaison is now part of the mandate of the District SMSs for Extension Methodology. While linkages have been strengthened, further training would be required to improve their skills in participatory appraisal, to better identify and prioritise farmers problems and possible solutions. 12. With the adoption of NRAP, program formulation became decentralised and budgeting was controlled at each research facility. The ZAREP M & E and biometrics groups (with project TA and the expertise of ISNAR) teamed up in Mt. Makulu to assist research services develop two Research Databases. Past research trials to the 1950s have been computerised to form a Research Data Archive. Analysis of the database assists researchers to know where research gaps and duplication exist. A second database, Inform for Research Managers, has been developed that produces costed annual work plans, budgets, and summaries of current trials. The system is currently expanding and is now operational in one regional centre and two research stations. CRTs: cereals, oil seeds, food legumes, fibre, roots and tubers, vegetables, tree/plantation, forage/grasses and livestock; SRTs: soils, plant protection, agro-forestry, agricultural economics, irrigation, farm power/machinery, and food storage. -28 - 13. Golden Valley Station is an expansion research farm of Region II (Mt. Makulu) and was given increasingly greater status due to the unsuitability of the Mt. Makulu site6. Donor funding from ZAREP and SIDA greatly improved infrastructure at the Golden Valley station (irrigation system, buildings, soil laboratory and farm e4uipment). In line with the GRZ liberalisation policy and desire for cost recovery, it was decided in 1994 to incorporate the station into a trust. ZAREP funded a study that provided guidance in setting up of the trust. Subsequently, the project TA and Bank supervision gave strong encouragement for its establishment. The resulting Golden Valley Agricultural Trust (GART) is a self-financing, non- profit organisation which was formed by MAFF and the Zambian National Farmers Union (ZNFU), with linkages to the national seed company (ZAMSEED). ZAREP also financed the salary of the station manager (TA) for three years. GART now has 15 contracts, mostly with the private sector, but the desire for outside funding may marginalize small-scale farmers from its activities. 14. Extension Services. As per the National Extension Action Plan (NEAP) prepared by GRZ in 1991, the project-supported extension activities following a modified T&V system. In-service training and orientation workshops were organised to introduce the new system to staff. Each Provincial and District Agricultural Office (PAO/DAO) was provided with 4-wheel drive cars, Block Supervisors (BSs) with motorbikes and Camp Extension Officers (CEOs) with bicycles. Camp houses were built for CEOs in 10 districts. The project also provided office and field equipment and operating costs, including field allowances. In addition, technical and administrative functions were separated to allow technical staff to concentrate on field activities. Because of the initial implementation delays, the project started its activities in 10 districts for the 1991/92 season. After one T&V season, it was agreed by GRZ and the Bank to gradually expand ZAREP extension activities to all districts not covered by other projects. Althoufh the MTR recommended to postpone expansion, the project covered 47 districts by the 1994/95 season . The T&V implementation in expansion project districts was constrained by shortage of qualified staff, camp houses and funding. The T&V system was not adjusted to varying farming conditions, such as low population density or peri-urban areas, as recommended by the SAR. 15. The modified T&V was based on fortnigthly visits by CEOs to Village Extension Groups (VEGs); establishment of farmer-managed adoption plots; fortnightly training workshops for CEOs; and monthly workshops for SMSs. The T&V system was to cover agricultural and livestock aspects, to which fisheries was added later on. Initially, extension messages were prepared by provincial staff on the basis of Knowledge-Attitude-Practice (KAP)-survey findings which were carried out in each district (see par. 21). Technical messages have tended to be input-driven and repetitive, with only a few new technologies promoted. Blanket recommendations that do not reflect market opportunities and input price changess continued to be disseminated. While simple messages have been adopted by a large number VEG farmers, the main reasons for non-adoption of a technology are: labour shortage, unavailability / late availability of inputs, lack of credit, unprofitablility, and marketing uncertainties. 6 In particular because of the rise in soil pH from fallout from a nearby cement factory. The change in project area for the extension component was included in the first amendment of the IDA Credit Agreement. While the amendment made provision for incremental requirements of mobility and operating costs, it did not cater to incremental requirements of camp houses. 8 The mission observed that, although the price of fertilisers more than doubled for the 95/96 cropping season, the fertilizer recommendation for maize was still at the high level of 400 kg/ha (200 basal and 200 top- dressing). - 29 - 16. Over the last 2 years, VEGs have been consulted in the selection of technical messages to be discussed during their fortnightly meeting with CEOs. In addition, following budget reductions, it was decided by GRZ to further modify the T&V system by reducing the intensity of field activities as follows: visits by CEOs to VEGs from fortnightly to monthly; training workshop for CEOs, from fortnightly to monthly; and workshops for SMSs, from monthly to quarterly. During 1996, as ZAREP activities were integrated within ASIP, reduced and delays of operational funds, ageing of vehicles and increased difficulties to maintain them led to a decline in T&V implementation. Staff morale has been low over the last year, especially for CEOs who have poor housing facilities and inadequate mobility. 17. In order to complement the T&V field operations, the project intended to support the now-called National Agricultural Information Centre (NAIS) to enhance alternative means of communication through mass media, distribution of posters, leaflets and booklets. A 300 m2 Agricultural Communication Centre (ACC) was to be built in Lusaka. Low priority was given to this issue, as the project only financed some audio-visual equipment. The ACC was not constructed, but, in 1996, it has been accommodated in the former ZAREP office block. 18. Training. SAR budgeted for a large training component for research and extension staff (technical and administrative). In-country training was emphasised with overseas training provision for study tours and university courses up to the MSc level. The RETU, was to be set up to coordinate training for all DOA staff financed by GRZ, ZAREP, and more than 20 other donors. The creation of this unit was postponed, awaiting MAFF restructuring. ZAREP sponsored a training needs assessment which should have provided a basis for a master plan, but the study was substandard and not adopted. 19. Local training has concentrated on short courses and over 200 staff benefited from courses covering extension, production, computer skills, accounting, and farm management. Overseas training has covered academic programs for Diplomas (10), Bachelors (4), Masters (30), Doctoral (15), and about 50 short courses. The ad hoc nature of selection of postgraduate candidates, who typically appeared to select their own subject areas, has led to a situation where many received degrees but certain disciplines such as weed science, rural sociology, and agricultural economics are under-represented. Overseas training generally dominated over local training, and only two students conducted their thesis work in-country. 20. Project Management. During the first years, the delay in releasing IDA funds and the weak performance of the project implementation TA-team have been the most serious constraints to project progress. From 1991 to end-1995, appointment of a new TA team for the project Implementation Unit (PIU) has brought about significant improvement in project administration. PIU greatly facilitated the implementation of research and extension activities which remained under the responsibility of DOA staff. Regular meeting of the Extension and Research Management Teams also contributed to solving problems and enhancing project achievements. From 1996, the PIU merged with the ASIP Financial Management Unit (FMU), and follow-up of specific ZAREP management aspects received low priority, especially regarding civil works, training abroad and purchase of spare parts for cars and motorbikes. 21. Monitoring and Evaluation. The M&E Unit started operating in 1991. One of its first activities was the collection of baseline information, through KAP studies, in Central and Lusaka Province, later followed by the other provinces. From 1993, in each project district, Adoption Rate Surveys were conducted to provide feed back for the extension program. Data collection was done by regular field staff (District SMSs and BSs). However a number of them, done in 1995, await analysis and reporting. Another important activity was to develop a Management Information System, involving: (i) camp database; (ii) report system for field operations; (iii) research database (in collaboration with research); and (iv) database including donor funded research & extension projects. From mid-1993, the M&E Unit - 30- was also involved in preparatory activities for ASIP. Despite the late implementation and set-backs due to lack of staff and equipment, the unit made considerable achievement in increasing the effectiveness of the research and extension management system. 22. A Mid-Term Review, conducted in 1993 by an independent team of local and international experts, made a high quality thorough analysis of project activities. The MTR recommendations were largely in line with the SAR. Regarding research, it was recommended to: (i) convert Golden Valley into a partially self sustaining trust; (ii) to complete research station rationalisation as per NRAP; (iii) to decentralise research responsibilities coupled to a merit based remuneration system; and (iv) to integrate adaptive research into research and extension. Regarding extension, the MTR recommended that expansion beyond the pilot areas (established only in the same year), be postponed until the results of those pilots could be properly evaluated. Further, to minimise the cost (related to transport), the Review advised that maximum use be made of other extension communication systems. The MTR also advised against the heavy emphasis placed on PhD-level overseas training, and suggested that funds be used for extension personnel, using University of Zambia (UNZA) facilities for MSc courses and in-service training. It further recommended that extension staff be trained in Farm Management and Marketing aspects, and that a study should be conducted on the roles and needs of women in agricultural development. 23. Procurement and Maintenance of Mobility. The project purchased a total of 238 cars, 15 mini busses, 3 trucks, 13 tractors, around 500 motorcycles and 1,000 bicycles. The workshop at Mount Makulu was upgraded to conduct major repairs for all project vehicles. Provincial workshops were also equipped to undertake maintenance and minor repairs. The project provided TA (Mt. Makulu superintendent) and training to enhance mechanics' capabilities. 24. A large quantity of spares was purchased, as they were difficult to obtain on the local market, especially at the beginning of the project. The procurement of spares proved cumbersome as delays in supply were regular and sometimes wrong parts were sent. Spares have not yet been received for the last shipment of cars and motorcycles. The spares were partly distributed to the provinces, and partly stored at Mt. Makulu, in a temporary store. A project-funded, large new store is still under construction. 25. Problems in maintenance and repair of vehicles proved to be a key issue in project implementation. The intensive use of cars and motorcycles combined with the poor quality of rural roads called for frequent maintenance and repair operations. The fact that all operations at the central workshop at Mt. Makulu (or provincial workshops) was done without charge might have contributed to less careful use of the vehicles. At present, many cars are in poor condition or are grounded. The local bicycles proved unreliable and only a fraction is still running. 26. Civil Works. 126 prefabricated camp houses, 36 houses for professional staff, 11 stores, and 17 other buildings (office blocks, classrooms, dormitories) were constructed under the project. A total of 71 buildings was renovated. The lack of reliable contractors, delay in payments, time pressure and inadequate supervision resulted in a large number of sub-standard buildings, already requiring substantial renovation. Factors Affecting Project Implementation It is estimated that project vehicles run for at least 50,000 km per year, with a maximum recorded of over 100,000 km. -31- 27. A number of factors have positively or adversely affected project implementation: (i) five year delay for IDA credit effectiveness; (ii) inadequate GRZ counterpart funding; (iii) liberalisation of the economy, including GRZ withdrawal from direct marketing, input supply and credit activities; (iv) good and sub-standard performance of TA; (v) decentralisation policy and increased role played by districts; (vi) poor flow of operational funds from Lusaka to the field; (vii) delays and inadequate procurements; (viii) lack of selection of capable building contractors; (ix) lack of donor coordination, including, in some cases, their reluctance to support the T&V system or reorganise the research system along the lines promoted under ZAREP; (x) high GRZ staff turn-over; (xi) frequent reorganisation of MAFF departments and units; (xii) emergence of the ASIP concept, its preparatory process and implementation before ZAREP completion. Bank and Borrower Performance. 28. Bank Performance. Project overall design was adequate, with well-thought phasing and attention to project risks. With a flexible attitude of the co-financiers, it was possible to get the project started when IDA-credit was still frozen, mainly by mutual funding arrangements. Supervision has been intensive and overall satisfactory, and maintained momentum of and provided guidance to project activities. However, the fact that research and extension activities were generally supervised separately (until the MTR) may have undermined the objective of better linking the two. More follow-up should have been given on MTR conclusions, especially the recommendations to: (i) postpone the expansion of ZAREP extension activities; (ii) carry out an assessment of the T&V approach; (iii) adjust T&V to local conditions; and (iv) better balance post-graduate with graduate/under-graduate degrees and overseas training with local training. 29. Borrower performance. In general, MAFF has assumed responsibility in implementing the ZAREP program (in research and extension), at national, provincial and district levels. However, long procurement procedures, insufficient and erratic flow of GRZ funds hampered implementation. More adequate follow up could have been given to the recommendations in MTR and audit reports. Assessment of Outcome 30. The overall project achievements are considered satisfactory, especially the improved management capacity and output of the Research and Extension branches of MAFF. The various types of review and planning meetings contributed to more interaction between researchers, extensionists and farmers, and generally to a more effective research system. The increased professional skills are reflected by the quality of several workshop proceedings provided to the mission. Concerning extension, the staff morale and the output of district, block and camp staff improved with the availability of resources, including allowances, and a well-defined work plan. The decentralisation process of extension services, supported by ZAREP, has given more responsibilities to DAO's, who are increasingly able to perform as individual managers. Furthermore ZAREP has contributed in the preparation and establishment of ASIP. The project's PIU financial procedures have been adopted by ASIP's FMU, and the M&E Unit laid the foundation for ASIP's Management and Information System. 31. The SAR did not quantify impact on agricultural production and did not estimate an ERR, as the project constituted the first phase of a long term capacity building program. New technologies related to conservation tillage have been developed by research and are currently tested at farmers' level. Following the early 1990's drought, extension activities proved an effective channel for promotinIg crop diversification in maize-based cropping systems, therefore contributing to food security. M&E data -32- suggest that, on average, each CEO organises 10 VEG-meetings per month, with an average of 12 participants per meeting. Provisional estimates suggest that, each month, 15% to 25% of farmers attended VEG-meetingsto. However, there are indications that the VEG-meetings attendance decreases after 2-3 years, possibly due to the lack of new messages. Although adoption rates have been reportedly increasing, adoption rate surveys show little difference in adoption between VEG and non-VEG members. Project Sustainability 32. Given the current implementation of ASIP, and donor commitment to support research, extension, and training activities (including IDA as the donor of last resort), the sustainability of project activities is likely to be assured in the medium term. But as experienced during the transition from ZAREP to ASIP, a decrease in funding rapidly paralyses field extension activities. The modified T&V system has proven to be expensive, relying excessively on vehicles and field allowances. The project extension activities are, therefore, considered not sustainable without major donor funding. While the experience of GART suggests that there may be scope for self-financed agricultural research, the level of current regular research activities remains dependant on substantial donor funding. 33. Because of the low quality of civil works, major rehabilitation is already required, for camp houses, medium cost houses, and some office/training infrastructure, raising major concern on the future sustainability of such investments. Future Operations 34. The future operations of ZAREP have been defined under the on-going ASIP, for which a work program is prepared annually. There remain a few pending withdrawal applications for 1996, which require follow-up by the Bank and GRZ during the ZAREP grace period (IDA Credit and Norwegian Grant). There are also a number of scholarships and civil works obligations, initiated under ZAREP, which will roll over to ASIP respective sub-programs (new commitments from January 1997). The mission has drawn a few recommendations for consideration for the ASIP research, extension and training sub-program, which are present as an attachment to the Aide Memoire. Lessons Learned 35. ZAREP was integrated into ASIP one year before project completion. During that year (1996) there was no specific follow-up of outstanding project commitments, while only a few expenditures have been submitted against the remaining balance (Credit and Trust-Fund). In the future, the incorporation of on-going IDA-funded projects (or IDA administered Trust Funds) into ASIP should consider not only the integration of project activities, but should also clearly define follow-up arrangements to use undisbursed project funds until actual project completion, in accordance with IDA rules and regulations. 36. The teaming up of the M & E and biometrics units with ISNAR proved to be the key in developing computerised, low cost databases to archive past research trials, and as a planning and reporting tool which should be emulated elsewhere. The exercise has proved a valuable tool for research managers. 10 These figures may be over-estimated, as data are recorded by the extension staff themselves. -33- 37. The GART experience shows that there is scope and a role for privatisation in generating research funds to reduce government expenditures by contracting research and selling services to the public and private sectors. 38. Civil works are a key component in government infrastructure strengthening but cheaper options such as pre-fabricated structures and lack of proper quality control may prove to be more expensive, in the long run. 39. Labour constraints and financial viability assessment, which have been chronically ignored by research and extension activities during the project, are a major impediment to adoption of released technologies. Follow-up 40. The mission will prepare a draft ICR in accordance with the Bank's guidelines for submission to the Bank by mid-March 1997. GRZ will prepare its own evaluation and send it to the Bank in due course for incorporation in the final ICR. - 34 - ATTACHMENT TO AIDE MEMOIRE Suggestions for Future Operation Research. 1. There may be still scope for further restructuring of the research station network through further delineation of agro-ecological regions. The current delineation into three vast regions has been based mainly on rainfall. Clearly, agro-ecological and farming systems features could be incorporated to increase the number of recommendation domains to about 7 regions. Ideally, a single research station would be identified to serve each region. Further study therefore is warranted to delineate the boundaries of key production systems. 2. There may also be scope for reducing the number of TASs. To date, new technologies have to first be perfected on-station before they are tested on-farm. Experience elsewhere has shown that stations can never fully represent all farm situations and the most expeditious method for fine tuning technology is to give it to farmers at an early stage. Farmers can be taught to perform single variable trials that most TASs carry out now. 3. Low adoption of single technology recommendations and the increasing diversification of agricultural enterprises argue for technology interventions of a more fundamental nature. Useful technologies can be developed by maximising nutrient recycling to improve soil fertility linked with livestock enterprises, soil and water conservation practices, and crop residue management. Naturally- occurring biological and cultural methods of pest control should be emphasised to lessen the dependence on, but not necessarily do away with, inorganic fertilisers and pesticides. Research teams should address farming systems rather than mono-crops which would require more of a systems' perspective. Greater effectiveness in conducting FSR would accrue if it is carried out as a program that selects members from various line services, rather than as an autonomous team. FSRTs should therefore be formed from a mix of professionals taken from SRTs, CRTs, and extension. 4. Research teams should interact more closely with farmers so that efforts of research are more accurately directed to solving what farmers' problems really are. Participatory approaches aim to lessen the distance between farmers, extensionists, and researchers and start with a revision of attitudes, in which extensionists and researchers no longer see themselves as teachers, but recognise their own involvement in a learning process together with the farmer. Once this partnership would be formed it would start with a common diagnosis of problems and prioritisation, and the extension staff and farmers would work together experimenting, with the researcher's, proposed solutions to the problems. They would then adapt them, following an iterative process, until they jointly arrive at improved and acceptable practices. -35- Extension. 5. In light of past experiences of the T&V system and alternative extension approaches promoted by various donors, the DOA has initiated a process to develop the Zambian Participatory Extension System (ZAPES). ZAPES is intended to better meet farmers priorities under their prevailing circumstances in a liberalised economy. ZAPES has been adopted as the ASIP extension approach'1. This initiative should be encouraged, and the dialogue between the various extension system's stakeholders be encouraged. In addition, along the lines of the SAR and the MTR recommendations, an independent assessment of the past extension experiences in Zambia should be carried out to draw lessons, and to contribute to the definition of future extension approach(es). However, a deadline should be given for the process, so as to crystallise the DOA extension approach(es), and to avoid regular adjustments which would be counterproductive and lead to farmer, staff, and donor confusion. 6. While improving the proposed ZAPES, consideration could also be given to the following: (i) one single extension approach cannot be adapted to varying prevailing conditions, and there is a need for adjustments according to population densities and varying production systems; (ii) contribution of the private sector to extension; (iii) integration of livestock into the extension approach; (iv) gender aspects; (v) need for farmers to take a more proactive role in marketing, inputs supply and credit activities; (vi) consistency with on-going public sector reform, economic justification and sustainability; and (vii) successful extension approaches elsewhere under comparable conditions. Training. 7. A large number of extension staff are underqualified for their positions. As they did not receive priority under ZAREP, they will have to receive training at in-service centres for diploma and higher levels to meet job requirements. The training strategy developed under ASIP should consider prioritising training needs accordingly. The NAIS staff, which were not served by ZAREP, may deserve priority. Removal of livestock activities from Research and Extension Branches. 8. Under the current reorganisation, the Directorate of Animal Health and Livestock Production will be created and include the current Livestock Husbandry unit in research and Livestock Extension. This step should be re-considered, as it may create an additional barrier between these institutions and result in less co-ordination and integration between the crops and livestock sectors. See Workshop Report on the Development of Participatory Extension Approach, MAFF, October 1996, and ASIP Extension and Information Sub-program annual Workplan and Budget for 1997. - 36 - IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT REPUBLIC OF ZAMBIA AGRICILTURAL RESEARCH AND EXTENSION PROJECT (Cr. 1746-ZM) B. Borrower's Contribution to the ICR -Comments on Implementation Completion Report (ICR), extension Component 1. ACHIEVEMENTS a) Physical The introduction of the ZAREP brought about many attributes which saw the "revival' of the extension System in those provinces where it was operating. There were definitely more achievements than failures in as far as the "performance" of the system was concerned. An Extension Action Plan was for the first time designed and this gave solid foundation for the overall extension Policy in Zambia clear guidelines on Organisation and management of extension in Zambia were introduced. The National extension Programme were established through the Action Plan. The shift from Project Approach to Programme Approach now being advocated in ASIP was actually started by ZAREP. The Supply of funds was timely adequate and consistent. Again decentralisation being developed in ASIP was initiated by ZAREP through direct funding to districts. The M & E Unit in ZAREP performed well by establishing an internal MIS and this has been carried through into ASIP. An elaborate training programme was designed and many extension personnel benefited. This contributed significantly in building capacity in extension. Adequate logistical support was provided and this increased the interaction between extension and farmers. The Civil Works Programme - The quality of the works was unsatisfaction. As stated in para 9 of the report one would therefore agree that the objectives of strengthening extension management was largely achieved. - 37 - b) Adoption of Technologies Again It is correct (as stated in the report) that achievement here was partial. The reasons for this are various and include:- * The classical T & V System whose concept was mainly that of "delivering" messages: The involvement of farmers in the programme as a whole was inadequate. This situation applied to Research also. * Weak support services to provide inputs, marketing and credit Poor Research extension linkages leading to lack of Uoint approach to technology development. The observations and concerns raised by Mr. Venkatesan are strongly supported and I wish to emphasise that it is no longer correct to assume that research ends at technology development while that of Extension is to do only with transfer or dissemination. The performance of Research therefore cannot be based on technologies developed only but on the extent to which these technologies are demand driven and adopted. Lessons learnt in ZAREP have helped us strengthen extension further under ASIP by addressing the factors that had posed hindrances i.e. * Modification of the T & V System into a Zambian structured Participatory Extension Methodology, still being developed. * Strengthen R/E linkages (i.e. joint Planning, Execution, Monitory and Evaluation of programmes, Significant pro&esG has been made here.) L.J. Mwafe Acting Deputy Diroetor (Ext.) 23L0§/1997 - 38 - AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND EXTENSION PROJECT1 (ZAREP) Project Implementation Assessment Comments From Soils and Crops Research Branch B. Achievement of Objectives Research Services Statement (ppS): Rcscarch Centre for Region I, formerly a TS, has yet to be up.graded Comment: - Region I Research Centre was not recommended by the mid-term evaluation of ZAREP. No Station could therefore be up graded or built to Region I status. - No TAS was closed, the TAS concept was developed later. Statement (6):. In line with rationalisation, the research structure has been reorganised into a network comprised nine CRTA, Aeven SRTs and nine Farming System Research Teams Comment: - CRTs are eight and not nine - SRTs are fourteen and not seven - Five Farming Systems Research Teams (by 5 disciplines and not by provinces) - Four divisional Chief Agricultural Research Officers instead of three appearing - Who report to overll Co-ord inator, should "read who report to the Deputy Director" Statement; A performance based merit system to increase staff morale developed under the project awaito final apprvmal. Comment: - If developed never seen one Statement (7): The INFORM system is currently expanding and is now operational in one regional centre and two research stations. Comment: - It should be at four Research Stations (one regional center, two research stations and one TAS) - 39 - Statement (8): IDA Contributions, together with Swedish Goverment. to improve the infrastructure of this station through construction of housing facilities and provision of irrigation system, as well as a soil laboratory and farm equipment. Comment. No soil laboratory at Golden Valley was developed. The labs developed were for maize, sorghum and millets. Contributions towards irrigation equipment and housing as well as overall Golden Valley development should be put in figures or financial proportions for each Donor (SIDA and CIDA). Statement: GART now has 15 contracts, mostly with the private sector, dealing with plant breeding (including maize and sorghum hybrids). Comment: No seed company is carrying out plant breeding at Golden Valley apart from conducting demonstrations only. Extension Services Statement (9): The extension service was also largely relieved of the burden of input supply, credit and marketing as a result of GRZ's liberalising programme. Comment: There hasn't been such involvement by extension services to supply inputs, credits and marketing. Statement (10): Over the last two years, following budget reductions, GRZ decided to modify the initial T&V system by reducing the intensity of field activities as follows visits by CEOs to VEG frornortnight to monthly. Comment: This modification from fortnight to monthly was partly due to budgetary constraints and largely due to pace of technology generations which was slow. Statement (10): Footnote 5: The fertiliser recommendation for maize of 400 kg (200kg basal and 200 kg top-dressing) was still at high level. Comment: 200 kg basal and 200 kg top-dressing for maize is not high level. This is average recommendation. What we need is to look for alternate sources for nitrogen as options for low coat inputs. - 40 - Training Statement (12): Research and Extension Training Unit (RETU) Comment: - It was established under first ZARFP TA but never took off Procurement of Vehicles and Civil Works Statement (15): The Project funded the salary of superintendent (TA) at Mt Makulu workshop, and raining to enhance drivers and mechanics capabilities. Contnent: - The capacity of the personnel trained under the programme hasn't improved all what is required are qualified personnel. - The programme created problems in the workshop for not accepting to work or procure spares for the vehicles which were not bought by ZAREP. This situation was later correctud. Statement (16) :The project only partially met its objectives set for civil works 4aviU"., duqu Lo dcirn vnd conatructiort quality problrme. Tho aale Af reliable contractors delay in payments, time pressure and inadequate supervision resulted in a large number of sub-standard and/or uncompleted buildings. Comment: - The main problem was to do with the poor choice of constructors and consulting firms. - The civil works programme with a few exceptional cases (e.g. Simulumbe) were a greaL disappointment in all stations. To - date some work has remained uncompleted. Technical Assistance (TA) Statement (17): During project implementation, substantial part of the service term . thealatic TA was dropped especially tfiat intended for adjusting extension methodologies improving for methodologies, and enhancing alternative means of communication. Comment: -The recruitment mode of the TA was not transparent and even his terms of reference were not communicated to the Sub Programme where the workshop is hosted. - 41 - Donor Co-ordination Statement (18) ;.Towards the *-nd of the project, donor co-ordination improved through their participation in annual meetings, but greater involvement in regional planning is needed. Comment: - Involvement of Donors in regional planning meetings is not clear. Project Costs and Financing Statement (20): Some 84% of the Norwegian Grant (US$ 6.6 million) has been disbursed (about 19% of total project costs), and around US$ 1.3 million remains undisbursed. Comment: Where is it ? The office of the Deputy Director was frequently asked for this money but to no avail. Statement (21) : The transition from ZAREP to ASIP affected the implementation of certain progranunes, the momentum was reduced. Comment: - Due to low priority given Lu on-Sotn5 civil works, training abroad and purchase of cars and motorbikes. C. MAJOR FACTORS AFFECTING THE PROJECT Operation and Maintenance of Vehicles Statement (27): Towards the end of the project, the establishment of a staff ownership scheme for motorbikes contributed to the improvement of their use and maintenance. Comment: - This scheme should be extended to vehicles. D. PROJECT SUSTAINABILITY Statement (28): While the experience of GART suggests that there may be scope for self financed agricultural research (for large farmers and for crops). Comment: - GART still depends on GRZ Grant and Donor funds for investment, operations, as well as facilities, equipment and human resources. - 42 - F. BORROWER PERFORMANCE Statement (31): The Government has been weak In expediting procurement procedures, and controlling the us of project funded vehicles. Comment: It is not Government alone which was weak but also the Donor. G. ASSESSMENT OF OUTCOME Statement (31): Training has substantially raised the level of professional skills and Zambian scientists now constitute over 90% of the research staff (up 50% at appraisal Para 2) Comment:- The increase in Zambia in Zambian scientists can not be attributed to ZAREP but from earlier programmes (such as ZAMARE, SADC/ICRISAT, NORAD, SIDA, CIDA) as Zambian scientist trained through ZAREP are just starting to return. H. FUTURE OPERATION Statement (37): The bank would require follow-up on the need to (1) further rationalisation the research facility network. Comment Which research facility network require further rational isation? Statement (37): (v). Re-consider the recent GRZ decision to separate animal health and production from the Research and Extension Branches. Comment: To be taken up with Directors of Field Services and Research and Spedialist Services. Statement (39): Labour constraints and financial variability, which have been chronically ignored by research and extension activities during the project, form a major impediment to adoption of released technologies. Comment The word chronically to be substituted by "still need to be addressedm. W. Mwale (Dr)' Deputy Director RESEARCH AND SPECIALIST SERVICES - 43 - INMEMENTATTON COMEPLETON REPORT REPUBLIC OF ZAMBIA AGRICULTURAL, RSEARCH AND EXTENSION PROJECT (Cr. 1746-ZM) C. Supplemental Tables Table 1 Research Station Network. Proposed under SAR, Consultant Report. NRAP so compared to currsnt at Type Of station Stations with SAR Consultant NRAP Current project civil N Former Research Stations Recon i9m 198Z 1221 iffZ wd1A 1 Mt. MakululGolden Valley 11 RC RC RC RC Yes 2 Kabwe II fClosure TAS TAS TAS Yes 3. Mochipapa II RS TS RS RS Yes 4. Misamfu Ill RC RC RC RC Yes 5 Simulumbe (Mongu) I RS RC RS RS Yes 6. Msekera II RS TAS RS RS Yes 7. Mwinflunga Ill Closure Closure Closure Closed 8. Mansa III RS TAS TAS TAS 9 Mufulira Il RS . TAS TAS TAS Yes 10 Magoye II Closure TAS TAS TAS Yes 11 Nanga (NIRS) bt II RC Closure RS RS Yes 12. Mutanda III RS TAS RS RS 13 Livingstone c/ I n a. RC RC Not built Former Substations (TAS 14. Lusitu (Mbals) III Closure Closure Closure TS 15. Luchecha (Mbala) Ill Closure Closure Closure TAS 1. Malashi 11 Closure TS Closure Closed 17 Longe (Kaoma) II TS TS Closure TAS 18. Sesheke I Closure TS TAS TAS Yes 19. Kataba Valley II Closure TS RS TAS 20. Masumba I TS TS TAS TAS Yes 21. Chabililula III Closure Closure Closure Closed 22. Chalimbana II Closure TAS Gene Closed bank Former Tnal Sctes (TS) 23. Mbala III TS TS Closure Closed 24 Kabompo Ill TS TS TAS TAS 25. Kalabo III Closure Closure Closure Closed 26. Siatainda I Closure Closure Closure Closed 27 Jumbe II Closure Closure TAS Closed 28. Chayabi Ill Closure Closure Closure Closed 29. Mpongwe III Closure TS Closure Closed 30 Lukulu III Closure TS Closure Closed 31 Sinazongue I Closure Closure TAS Closed 32 Siatwala di I Closure Closure Closure TAS Yes Specilhzed Station 33. Namushakene Farm Inst II Closure TS Closure TS 34. Katito Farm Ill Closure TS Closure TS Act RC 3 4 3 3 v* RS 6 0 a 5 TAS 0 7 9 10 TS 4 12 0 3 Sub-Total 13 23 18 21 Clo RS 4 2 1 1 ed TAS 7 3 5 3 TS 8 8 7 8 Sub-Total 19 11 13 12 Not built 1 TOTAL (active closed) 32 34 31 33 at RC Regional Centre, RS - Research Station, TAS Technology Assessment Site, TS Trial Sits bi National Irrigated Research Station cJ Planned in SAR but considered too expensive di Location of planned Region I Centre Table 2A: Overview of Agreed Allocations and Amendments of IDA Credit IDA ('000 SDR) Category of Expenditure DCA Amendment No.1 Amendment No.2 Amendment No. 3 Actual Actual (Mar. 87) (Aug. '93) (Sept '93) (begin '95) (Dec. 1996) as % of Amend. No3 Consultants' services 5,670 1,300 1,300 1,050 904 86 Overseas training 1,000 2,000 2,000 2,250 2,407 107, Local training 250 300 300 250 250 100 Civil works 580 1,270 1,270 1,270 529 42 Vehicles, equipment & supplies 500 2,100 2,100 3,150 3,430 109 O&M building,equipment, vehicles 330 2,300 2,300 2,040 2,020 99 Refunding PPF 830 741 741 741 741 100 Unallocated 789 789 789 0 - Total 10,800 10,800 10,800 10,800 10,358 96 Note: Amendment No.2 (Sept 1993) was to change coverage of local component of consultancies services (from 95% IDA to 100% IDA funded). 4:- Table 2B: Overview of Agreed Allocations and Amendments of Norwegian Grant Norad Grant ('000 NOK) Category of Expenditure Administration Agreement Agreement Actual Actual as % of (Dec. 87) (Mar. '89) (Dec. 1996) Grant Agreement Mount Makulu RC* 27,300 24,400 15,269 63 Misamfu RC* 3,500 3,100 2,861 92 Mufulira TAC* 4,900 4,300 552 13 Mongu RS' 4,900 4,300 6,122 142 Mbala TS' 1,400 1,000 0 0 Research activities in N. Provinces 10,500 10,500 12,803 122 Now Research Stations 100 55 55 Consultancies, trainag 4,800 4,749 99 Total 52,500 52,500 44,229 84 See Table I - 45 - Table 3: Technical Assistance Provided under ZAREP (aH funding included). hR p60on-mons) 1987 1985 1989 1990 1991 1992 199 1994 1995 1998 TOTAL Project Coordinator 3 12 12 12 13 12 12 12 12 6 106 Financial Controller 2 12 12 12 10 12 12 12 12 0 96 ManpowerfTraining 2 12 12 12 0 4 0 0 0 0 42 Procurement 0 12 12 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 Monitoring and Evaluation 0 0 0 9 6 12 12 12 12 3 66 Irrigation Economist 0 12 12 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 Research Management 0 0 7 12 18 17 8 0 0 0 80 Golden Valley Farm Man. 0 0 0 0 3 12 12 12 12 3 54 Mount Makulu Workshop 0 0 0 0 2 12 12 12 12 3 53 Food Security 0 0 0 0 2 8 0 0 0 0 10 Biometrician 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 5 12 3 28 Extension 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 6 Mid Term Review 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 7 ASIP Short Term local Cons. 0 0 0 0 0 0 71 27 0 0 98 TOTAL TA. (LOC. & INT.) 7 60 67 81 54 96 182 92 72 il 698 TOTAL INTERNATIONAL TA. 7 60 67 81 54 95 81 6W 72 18 600 Table 4: Technical Assistance Provided under ZAREP (by funding sources). (In person-months) 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 TOTAL A. IDA FUNDING Project Coordinator 3 12 3 0 3 21 Financial Controller 2 12 3 6 23 Manpower/Training 2 12 3 17 Procurement 12 3 15 Monitonng and Evaluation 6 3 9 Imgation Economist 12 3 15 Mid Term Review 7 7 ASIP Short Term local Cons. 71 27 98 B. NTF FUNDING Project Coordinator 9 3 12 Financial Controller 9 3 12 Manpower/Training 9 3 12 Procurement 9 3 12 Monitonng and Evaluation 0 frgation Economist 9 3 12 Research Management 7 3 3 1 14 C. ADF FUNDING Project Coordinator 9 13 12 12 12 12 3 73 Financial Controller 9 10 12 12 12 6 61 Manpower/Training 9 4 13 Procurement 9 9 Monitonng and Evaluatlon 9 6 12 12 12 6 57 Irngation Economist 9 9 Research Management 9 15 16 6 46 Golden Valley Farm Man. 3 12 12 12 12 3 54 Mount Makulu Workshop 2 12 12 12 12 3 53 Food Security 2 8 10 Biometrician 8 5 12 3 28 Extenson 6 6 GRAND TOTAL 698 - 46 - Table 5. Index of Agricultural Production, 1989/90 to 1995/96 (1989/90 = 100) CROP 1989/90 1990/91 1991/92 1992/93 1993/94 1994/95 1995/96 White Maize 100 94 73 145 74 54 104 Virginia Tobacco 100 25 108 122 n.a. 67 58 Burley Tobacco 100 64 197 198 n.a. 123 149 Groundnuts 100 2,044 1,692 4,228 3,167 3,048 3,388 Sunflower 100 51 27 70 52 65 127 Wheat 100 114 118 134 n.a. n.a. n.a. Paddy Rice 100 163 101 187 62 115 136 Soya Beans 100 97 93 108 82 69 149 Seed Cotton 100 157 91 190 n.a. 54 121 Mixed Beans 100 1,406 2,971 3,722 3,214 3,223 3,039 Sorghum 100 100 56 529 371 772 699 Source: Government Republic of Zambia, 1996: Macroeconomic Indicators, Jane 1996, Ministry of Finance, Economic Analysis and Report Unit, Lusaka. - 47 - UPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT REPUBLIC OF ZAMiA AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AD EXTENSION PROJECT (Cr. 1746-ZM) D. Map Z.AMBUA: Agrlcuturci Resarchr and Extension Project _______ Map } AGRO-ECOLOGCCAl REGIONS AND RESEARCH SIAnONS LUCHECMAE g \ D KATO FarM - MANSA1d 2 MUTADA9 REGIONA CENMRE MFUURA RESEARCH SUA11N MASMBA N 1ECNOOG ASSESKENkk LONG CLOsD SIULME . r 2. Mklas~ NAIWRJSHKENE Forins ---3. Caæn A~ 1 4. CWakr~ 6. db R~ 7. sla~Id 8. ä 800 rnm 9. Chi 10. Mpmng . -· -- B >s00nm . l . - -00 13. LMwngnn 0 200 Dn MO > lOnn 1. 97M2 e- IMAGING Report No.: 16780 Type: ICR