Turkey - Igdir-Aksu-Eregli-Ercis Irrigation Project

 IGDIR-AKSU-EREGLIS-ERCIS (IAEE) irrigation project Report No: ; Type: Report/Evaluation Memorandum ; Country: Turkey; Region: Europe And Central Asia; Sector: Irrigation & Drainage; Major Sector: Agriculture; ProjectID: P008950 Turkey: Igdir-Aksu-Eregli-Ercis (IAEE) Irrigation Project (Loan 2433-TU) The Turkey Igdir-Aksu-Eregli-Ercis (IAEE) Irrigation project, supported by Loan 2433-TU for US$115.3 million, was approved in FY84. The loan was closed on June 30, 1992, three years late and US$4.9 million was canceled. About US$56.9 million was re-allocated from Loan 2663-TU (the Drainage and On-farm Development project) where physical investments needs were less than anticipated, and was used to complete works unfinished at loan closing. The Implementation Completion Report (ICR) was prepared by the FAO/World Bank Cooperative Programme on behalf of the Europe and Central Asia Regional Office. Appendix B is the borrower's contribution to the ICR, and Appendix D contains the borrower's comments on the draft ICR. The main objectives of the project were to increase agricultural production and incomes through irrigation investments in schemes in the south and east, expand rural employment, and develop a long-term investment program for irrigation. The main components were completion of four irrigation schemes, construction of additional irrigation infrastructure, rehabilitation of existing schemes, on-farm development, feeder roads, strengthening of the agricultural extension service, staff training and technical assistance for implementation and irrigation planning studies. Implementation was the responsibility of two agencies, which also were responsible for the drainage project (Loan 2663-TU), the General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works (SDI) and the General Directorate of Rural Services (GDRS). A much larger project than originally approved was eventually completed satisfactorily, with some shortfalls in revised objectives. At approval project preparation was not sufficiently advanced. Physical expansion and rehabilitation targets were raised substantially after site surveys and were largely achieved, although supplementary funding from Loan 2663-TU was needed to complete the works. The area irrigated was almost double that planned at appraisal. The training and extension components were implemented as planned, except that extension coverage did not reach planned intensities. Cost recovery did not meet targets as covenants were not enforced. GDRS did try to recover the costs of on-farm development, and although recovery of O&M costs of SDI schemes reached a nominal 57 percent, collection was so delayed that high inflation made real repayment much less. The Bank agreed to finance irrigation subsector planning from Loan 2663-TU, and a comprehensive master plan was prepared. Implementation took longer than the over-ambitious schedule because engineering plans had to be completed; the scale of the works increased; there were lengthy contracting and procurement delays; an (overlooked) agreement with Iran had to be negotiated for the use of international waters, and there were contractor performance problems. Intentions at appraisal to monitor production and income changes, the main objectives, were not adequately reflected in the loan documents or followed up and thus this crucial aspect of performance was not documented. However, the economic rate of return (ERR) was re-estimated, using data gathered by the ICR mission in the field, at a weighted average of 10 percent, compared with 20.3 percent at appraisal. Outcome is rated by the Operations Evaluation Department (OED) as marginally satisfactory, institutional development as moderate and sustainability as uncertain. Sustainability prospects are subject to farmers maintaining schemes recently turned over to them (through initiatives assisted under the companion drainage project), one scheme is short of water and another is threatened by tourism development. These ratings confirm the ICR ratings. OED agrees with the ICR's rating of Bank performance as satisfactory on balance, despite unsatisfactory performance during preparation and appraisal. The main lessons learned concern the need in such projects to give more attention to institutional and policy issues, rather than just physical requirements, the need for well advanced designs before projects are approved, including a careful analysis of water availability, and the importance of ensuring that monitoring and evaluation provisions are adequate. The ICR is satisfactory, but did not adequately address production and income growth, which were the main objectives of the project, or plans for future operation. An audit is planned jointly with the Drainage and On-farm Development Project (Loan 2663-TU).