India - Third National Agricultural Extension Project

Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No. 16156 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT INDIA THIRD NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION PROJECT (Credit 1754-IN) December 9, 1996 Agriculture and Water Operations Division Country Department II South Asia Region 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 EOUIVALENTS Currency Unit = Indian Rupees (Rs) SAR (December 1986) Rsl3.00 = US$1.00 Completion Year (March 1995) Rs31 .37 = US$1.00 WEIGHTS AND MEASURES (Metric System) FISCAL YEAR OF BORROWER April 1 to March 31 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AEO Agricultural Extension Officer ATC Advanced Training Centre DOA Department of Agriculture DOE Division of Extension (of Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India) EEI Extension Education Institute FMC Field Management Committee FTS Field Trial Station GOA Government of Assam GOI Government of India GOHP Government of Himachal Pradesh GOUP Government of Uttar Pradesh HP State of Himachal Pradesh ICAR Indian Council of Agricultural Research IDA International Development Association MANAGE National Institute of Agricultural Extension Management M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MOA Ministry of Agriculture NAEP National Agricultural Extension Project NARP National Agricultural Research Project SAR Staff Appraisal Report SAU State Agricultural University SDR Special Drawing Right SMS Subject Matter Specialist SSP Special Sub-Projects T&V Training and Visit System of Agricultural Extension UP State of Uttar Pradesh VEW/VEO Village Extension Worker/Officer WB World Bank ZRS Zonal Research Station Vice-President : D. Joseph Wood Director : R. Drysdale Division Chief/Manager S. Barghouti Staff Member: A. Seth, Principal Agriculturalist  FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT INDIA THIRD NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION PROJECT (Credit 1754-IN) TABLE OF CONTENTS P R E F A C E ..............................................................i EVALUATION SUMMARY ............................................................. ii PART I. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ASSESSMENT 1..................................... A. Project Objectives .............................................. I B. Achievement of Project Objectives .............................................. 2 C. Implementation Record and Major Factors Affecting the Project ....... 7 D. Project Sustainability .............................................. 12 E. Bank Performance . .............................................. 12 F. Borrower Performance . .............................................. 12 G. Assessment of Outcome .............................................. 13 H. Future Operation .............................................. 13 I. Key Lessons Learned .............................................. 14 PART II. STATISTICAL TABLES ............. ................................... 16 Table 1. Summary of Assessments ........................................... 16 Table 2. Related Bank Loans/Credits ........................................... 18 Table 3. Project Timetables ........................................... 19 Table 4. Loan/ Credit Disbursements ........................................... 19 Table 5. Key Indicators for Project Implementation ......................................... 20 Table 6. Key Indicators for Project Operation ........................................... 24 Table 7. Studies Included in Project ............. ...................... . ..... 24 Table 8. Project Costs and Financing .......................................... 25 Table 9. Economic Costs and Benefits .......................................... 25 Table 10. Status of Legal Covenants .......................................... 26 Table 11. Compliance with Operational Manual Statements .................... .......... 28 Table 12. Bank Resources: Staff Inputs .......................................... 28 Table 13. Bank Resources: Missions ............... ............................ 29 Appendix A. Analysis of Crop Production Trends ................................................ 30 Appendix B. Mission's Aide Memoire ................................................ 39 Appendix C. Internal Consultancy Studies ................................................ 55 Appendix D. Borrower's Assessment ...................... .......................... 58 Tis document has a restricted distribuiion and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their oificial duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed wiLhout World Bank authorization.  I  i IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT INDIA THIRD NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION PROJECT (Cr. 1754-IN) Preface This is the Implementation Completion Report (ICR) for the Third National Agricultural Extension Project (NAEP III) in India for which Credit 1754-IN in the amount of SDR71.7 million (US$85.0 million) was approved on January 20, 1987 and made effective on January 5, 1988. SDR12.5 million and SDR3.0 million were cancelled on December 5, 1991 and May 1, 1993, respectively, as part of the funds redeployment exercise. The IDA Credit was closed on March 31, 1995, after a one-year extension. Final disbursement from the Credit was made on August 24, 1995 at which time the revised credit amount was fully disbursed. This ICR draft was prepared by a mission from the FAO/World Bank Cooperative Program which visited India in July 1995. It was finalized by Mr. Ashok Seth and Ms. Teresita Estoque, Agriculture and Water Operations, Country Department 2, South Asia Regional Office, and and reviewed by Mr. Shawki Barghouti, Division Chief, and Ms. Kazuko Uchimura, Project Adviser, SA2DR. Preparation of the ICR was based on material in the project files, field investigations and discussions with staff of the World Bank and Departments of Agriculture (DOAs) of the Governments of Assam (GOA), Uttar Pradesh (GOUP) and Himachal Pradesh (GOHP) and the Division of Extension (DOE) in the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) of the Government of India (GOI), who were associated with the project. Representatives of the Directorates of Extension of the GOA, GOUP, GOHP and GOI contributed to the preparation of the ICR by arranging field visits and meetings with field staff and farmers concerned with the project, providing separate draft completion reports on the project and commenting on the mission's Aide-Memoire. The Borrower's Assessment of the Project is in Appendix D.  i  11 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT INDIA THIRD NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION PROJECT (Credit 1754-IN) Evaluation Summary Introduction 1. The project (NAEP III) was the fifteenth in a series of IDA-assisted projects since 1974 to introduce and strengthen the Training and Visit (T&V) system of agricultural extension throughout the states of India. While early assistance was given to many individual states, at the national level, later support was given through three NAEPS (Credits 1523-IN, 1569-IN and 1754-IN). Project Objectives 2. The project aimed to (a) introduce the T&V system of agricultural extension in Himachal Pradesh (HP) and eastern Uttar Pradesh (UP); (b) further strengthen the reorganized agricultural extension system and the linkages between research and extension that were introduced in Assam under the Assam Agricultural Development Project (Credit 728-IN); and (c) assist in the implementation of Special Sub-Projects (SSPs) on extension related activities at the central and state levels through the replenishment of the SSP fund established in the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) under NAEP I (Credit 1523-IN). The realization of these objectives was to be achieved through the provision of funds for construction of offices, residential and training facilities, incremental staff, purchase of vehicles and equipment, and operating expenses. These would support and improve: extension services and adaptive research; staff training; monitoring and evaluation (M&E) and information unit activities; further development of the capacity of the Division of Extension (DOE) of the Government of India (GOI) as a national coordinating and technical assistance agency; extension development in western UP and a limited number of districts in the States of Punjab and Bihar; and training facilities and training programs in a number of small states and educational and research institutions throughout India. 3. The project was based on the Bank's and GOI's long experience in agricultural extension development and aimed at completing the introduction of the T&V system of agricultural extension throughout the majority of states in India. It appeared to respond well to the Borrower's circumstances and the development priority for the agricultural sector oriented towards increasing agricultural production, achieving self-sufficiency in foodgrains and increasing farm household incomes.  iii Implementation Experience and Results 4. Achievement of Project Objectives. The T&V system of agricultural extension was subsequently institutionalized in the States of UP and HP and strengthened in Assam as planned (refer target indicators in Part II, Table 5). SSPs supporting the expansion of the T&V system in other states were successfiul in Punjab but not in Bihar. Other SSPs improved the capability of selected institutions to provide training to extension staff in improved technologies of priority commodities and in extension management. In addition, a number of other SSPs improved communication capabilities and production of media materials for extension purposes in many states, provided overseas training for extension trainers, and strengthened the capacity of the central government to undertake in-depth reviews of various aspects of the extension system in India. The states now have a more professional agricultural extension service than previously, as a result of better organizational structure, better technical and administrative control, improved facilities and equipment, better staff mobility, and better trained and more knowledgeable staff, and improved links with research. However, there still exists significant scope to improve the institutional, managerial and operational effectiveness and efficiency of agricultural extension services to ensure greater impact on farm production and household incomes (see para 8 and paras 12-14). 5. Project Sustainability. Following completion of the project, both the Governments of UP and Assam appear committed to maintain the basic institutional arrangement and operational model of the T&V agricultural extension system introduced/strengthened under the project. However, in HP there has been a move to break up the system by separating agricultural and horticultural extension activities and terminating regular staff training programs. Reduced regular budget allocations for 1995/96 for all DOAs and continuing serious problems with staff vacancies in UP and HP, however, indicate some uncertainty in all states in the maintenance of the agricultural extension system as planned. 6. Project Costs and Financing. From the IDA Credit of SDR71.7 million (US$85 million), total disbursements as of August 24, 1995 (following a five-month grace period for reimbursements after project closure) were SDR56.2 million (US$77.71 million), with SDR15.5 million (US$18.375) canceled. Thus in SDR terms, 78 percent of the original Credit was utilized. Additional IDA disbursements of SDR12.083 million (US$16.65 million) were provided for financing the SSP in western UP from savings from the unspent IDA Credit for NAEP I (Credit 1523-IN). Total project cost was Rs.2,824 million (estimated US$125.38 million at historic annual exchange rates), which was 55 percent above the original estimated project cost in Rupee terms, due to a 138 percent devaluation of the Rupee against the US Dollar, but was only 89 percent of estimated project costs in US Dollar terms. 7. Implementation Timetable. While many of the physical targets set in the SAR were met, they were generally delayed in relation to the original implementation schedule  lv in the SAR, were adjusted in all states following project mid-term reviews, and required a one-year extension of the project to be substantially completed. 8. Key Factors Affecting Achievement of Project Objectives. The strong commitment of state DOAs was an important factor in establishing/strengthening improved agricultural extension services. The regular training programs of field extension staff and farm visits, and closer research-extension relationships, enhanced staff and farmer knowledge and the adoption of improved agricultural technologies and practices by farmers. However, a number of factors' concerning problems with staff quality and recruitment, staff mobility, civil works program and project financing (paras 19-27, Part I), contributed to both delays in project implementation and in successfully completing the institutional system proposed. More generally, the project design emphasized institutional establishment and operational modality. Lesser emphasis was given to project impact on farm production and household incomes. Weaknesses were apparent in the M&E system introduced (para 30, Part I) and its effectiveness in feeding back appropriate information to management and insufficient use was made of the outcomes of special studies on the extension system undertaken by the DOE. There was also a growing awareness that the T&V system introduced was too rigidly structured, both in terms of institutional structure and operational modality. When these factors were combined with emergent state funding constraints, this lead to some positive modifications of the system by the state DOAs aimed at improving operational efficiency and effectiveness and financial sustainability. 9. Bank's Performance. The Bank undertook more than 75 missions to assist the Governments of Assam, UP, HP, Punjab and Bihar in early project preparation and supervision missions during implementation of the project. A more critical analysis of previous Bank-supported projects in extension in India at project appraisal may have foreshadowed the emergent deficiencies in the standard 'T&V system blueprint" as proposed. Supervision mission reports indicated that the missions provided detailed reviews of implementation progress of the project, and while indicating deficiencies in implementation, gave helpful and constructive advice to overcome such problems. Supervision missions were generally staffed from the World Bank Resident Mission in India, and by local consultants. Because these were frequent, short-duration missions, this provided a continuous contact and assistance in implementation. 10. Borrower's Performance. The DOAs of the Governments of Assam, UP and BP endeavored to implement the project as proposed. Much has been achieved in terms of institutional development, improvement of extension services to farmers, and agricultural production. All State DOAs have modified the originally proposed T&V system in various ways to improve extension performance and impact on farm production. Several outside factors, such as slow budget release, staff recruitment bans, problems with redeployment of staff and cancellation of some investments (civil works and vehicles) caused serious delays or failure to implement several proposed activities. These chronic IMostly subject to Governuent/Implementing Agencies' control.  v problems were repeatedly brought to the notice of the respected state governments by World Bank supervision missions, but were never speedily or satisfactorily resolved. 11. Assessment of Project Outcome. The overall project outcome is assessed as partially satisfactory, as significant deficiencies occurred both in implementation achievements and operational effectiveness as a result of flawed project design (refer para 12). A professional agricultural extension services was substantially established, together with functional and effective linkages between research and extension, resulting in an appreciable increase in extension credibility among farmers and associated gains in crop productivity and increased intensity and diversity of farm production. While achievements in establishing improved extension services in three additional districts in the State of Punjab under the SSP for Punjab was also satisfactory, the result for the SSP in the State of Bihar was unsatisfactory. The implementation of other SSPs resulted in an improved national perspective on extension development in India and contributed significantly to the establishment of a chain of training centers throughout the country. Summary of Findings, Future Operations and Key Lessons Learned 12. Important Findings. The main finding that has emerged is that the design of the T&V system as promulgated by the Bank in India is seriously flawed, particularly in relation to operational modality. While the project has contributed to improvements in food production and farm household incomes, the T&V system has not provided sufficiently widespread coverage of the farming community, is based on a top-down system of packaged messages to farmers, does not have the anticipated dissemination of information from contact farmers to fellow farmers, and, being both staff and cost intensive, appears to be financially unsustainable. Governments have had to consider alternative means of reducing staffing levels and modalities of operation of extension services and other opportunities for cost savings, to ensure a more cost-effective, responsive and quality service to farmers. 13. Plans for Future Operations. The three project states have acknowledged the need for further improvements in extension services. Future objectives for development of extension services include policies to further promote the farmer-centered approach to extension, to curtail non-extension activities by extension staff, to improve staff mobility, to improve broad-based advice and coordination between relevant line agencies, to improve the marketing situation, to provide specific training programs for rural women, to better utilize public sector media for promoting extension information, to improve research-extension linkages, and to promote greater involvement of NGOs in DOA extension programs. 14. Lessons Learned. The main lessons learned relate to the need for further improvement to the extension services, as follows: a) All state DOEs variously modified the T&V agricultural extension system introduced to improve efficiency. Important institutional and operational  vi modifications that have implications to further development of extension services in India include: the possibility of modifying the hierarchical structure of the T&V system by a reduction in operational/supervisory layers of staffing which reduce costs and place SMSs in closer contact with farmers (Phase II in UP); adoption of farmer-centered group approach (in Assam) which can create greater farmer coverage and participation in extension activities; the possibility to reduce the frequency of regular training for SMSs and AEOs/VEWs (both in Assam and HP) as knowledge and skills of these staff improve; and the need to broad-base extension advice and technical support to farmers on all aspects of farm production. b) Lack of staff mobility is still constraining operations of field extension staff. Inadequate advantage was taken by the state governments of finance and provide policy support for the proposed personal loans scheme for staff to purchase private vehicles for public use. c) More emphasis should have been given in project design to improve management capacity, promoting operational decentralization and planning, improving staff supervision and performance, funding special studies to evaluate project impact, ensuring that M&E activities would provide appropriate feedback to management decision-making, ensuring participatory involvement of farmers in diagnosis of problems and opportunities to improve farm production and in research and extension and planning, and providing appropriate incentives for staff to improve their individual performance. d) There is a need to more fully exploit the use of cost effective media materials (radio, television and video and printed materials) and modern communication systems to enhance dissemination of technical information). e) There is a need to review the methodologies used for monitoring and evaluation of the extension system and provide appropriate training in data collection and analysis so that M&E Units can provide a much better evaluation of the operational effectiveness and efficiency of the extension system, the impact of extension on farming practices, productivity and farm household incomes and the needs for further research. The M&E system should also operate in a more decentralized, more locally specific manner. f) The inclusion of a component to finance SSPs for the GOI to undertake regular reviews and special studies, provided flexibility in project design to allow the GOI to obtain a national perspective on extension development in India. However, insufficient use was made of this information by state DOAs to rectify specific constraints and identified weaknesses in extension development.  vii g) The T&V system, as instituted, is both staff and cost intensive, and thus places considerable financial strain on State Governments to maintain the system and thereby affects staffing levels and availability of funds for operations, maintenance and further essential capital investment. Governments have to consider means of reducing staffing levels of extension services and other opportunities (e.g. reducing government involvement in input supplies) for cost savings, as well as policies which prmote extension services (advice) from NGOs, input suppliers, private sector and mass media.  IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT INDIA THIRD NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION PROJECT (Credit 1754-IN) PART I: PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ASSESSMENT A. Project Objectives 1. The objective of the Third Agricultural Extension Project (NAEP III) was to: (a) introduce the training and visit (T&V) system of agricultural extension in Himachal Pradesh (HP) and eastern Uttar Pradesh (UP); (b) further strengthen the reorganized agricultural extension system and the linkages between research and extension that were introduced in Assam under the Assam Agricultural Development Project (Credit 728-IN), and (c) assist in the implementation of Special Sub-Projects (SSPs) on extension-related activities at the central and state levels through the replenishment of the SSP fund established in the Ministry of Agriculture of the Government of India (GOI) under NAEP I (Credit 1523-IN). The realization of these objectives in Assam, UP and HP was to be achieved through the provision of incremental staff, vehicles, equipment and operating expenses to support extension; comprehensive staff training programs; support for adaptive research; the activities of the monitoring and evaluation information (M&E) unit; and construction of offices, residential and training facilities. SSPs included assistance in extension development in western UP, and a limited number of districts in the states of Punjab and Bihar, as well as limited but wide-ranging assistance to improve training facilities and training programs in a number of small states and selected educational and research institutions throughout India. 2. NAEP III was the fifteenth in a series of IDA-assisted projects since 1974 to reorganize and strengthen agricultural extension in India through the introduction of the T&V system of agricultural extension. This project would complete IDA assistance in agricultural extension development to all seventeen major states in India. Earlier support at the national level was given through the National Agricultural Extension Project (NAEP I-Credit 1523-IN) and the National Agricultural Extension Project II (NAEP II-Credit 1569-IN). Originally it was proposed that five states would participate in NAEP III (Assam, UP, HP, West Bengal and Bihar), but as components were not adequately prepared for appraisal for West Bengal it was not included and Bihar was only included under a SSP. NAEP III became effective in January 1988, although project start-up activities commenced as early as 1985/86, and was originally scheduled to be completed by March 31, 1994, but was extended by one year (to March 31, 1995). 3. The project concept supported the Bank's country strategy to ensure a uniform approach to agricultural extension by completing the introduction of the T&V system  2 throughout the majority of states in India. It also responded well to the Borrower's circumstances and the development priority for the agricultural sector oriented towards increasing agricultural production, achieving self-sufficiency in foodgrains and increasing farm household incomes. It, however, implicitly assumed the existence and promotion of appropriate technologies for extension to farmers in all areas, but technologies promoted were mainly confined to the more favored environments. Overall, the timing of the project, its scope and the relative size of project components were appropriate. However, the large number and relatively small monetary size of the SSPs, except in UP', determined that their supervision by the World Bank would not be cost effective, thus supervision responsibility was given to GOI. While many risks were identified in the Staff Appraisal Report (SAR) which could adversely affect project implementation, these were considered as minimal. Many of these individual risks materialized to a variable extent, but collectively had only a moderately adverse effect on project outcome. B. Achievement of Project Objectives 4. The T&V system was substantially institutionalized in the States of UP and HP and strengthened in Assam as planned (refer target indicators in Table 5, Part II). The design of the project placed more emphasis on physical achievements in institutionalizing the T&V system of agricultural extension than on initiatives concerned with improving quality and impact of extension. While physical targets set for judging project achievements in terms of institutional development and operational modality were found to be generally satisfactory, the methodology used for evaluation of extension quality and impact by Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) units was inadequate. It was therefore difficult for extension managers and project supervisors/evaluators to properly assess the effectiveness of the extension system introduced and its impact on agricultural production. Sector Policies 5. The Bank's agricultural program in India during the past 24 years has aimed at assisting India to achieve self-sufficiency in foodgrains and increase farm incomes in an equitable manner. This project responded to a request from GOI to IDA to provide further assistance to establish professional agricultural extension services throughout all the major states of India in an attempt to achieve these national goals. The project has contributed partially to the achievement of these sector objectives in Assam, UP and HP, although the precise extent of its contribution cannot be estimated (refer para 18). Physical Objectives 6. Except for inadequate staff recruitment in UP and HP and insufficient provision of housing for field staff in all states, many of the physical targets set in the SAR were substantially met by the scheduled completion of the project (March 31, 1994), but were generally delayed in relation to the original implementation schedule. Mid-term reviews For convenience the review of the SSP for western UP is included with the original eastern UP component.  3 scheduled for 1990 were separately undertaken by the Governments of Assam (GOA), UP (GOUP), and HP (GOHP) in 1991. Many of the original physical targets were revised according to these reviews (refer Table 5, Part II): increased staff numbers, decreases in civil works program (particularly staff housing), increases in vehicle numbers and increased training programs. The most significant outcome of the review was to utilize unspent funds from NAEP I to extend the project coverage to include an extra 31 districts in western UP under a separate SSP, with appropriate funding for incremental staff, civil works, vehicles and equipment and training programs. 7. Civil Works, Vehicles and Equipment. Some 288 offices, 4,500 houses, 171 training halls, and some DOA and State Agricultural Universities (SAU) training facilities were scheduled for construction under the project in the States of Assam, UP and HP (refer Table 5, Part II). In addition, funds were provided for the purchase of some 57 cars, 416 jeeps/vans and 8,300 motorcycles/mopeds/bicycles. The most significant changes to the attainment of project targets were in relation to: (a) additional construction of offices and residences at headquarters and zonal centers in Assam; (b) a large reduction in the number of residences constructed for field extension staff in all states; (c) an increase in vehicle purchases in UP and large reduction in HP; and (d) considerable variation between states in implementation and success with uptake of motorcycle/moped and bicycle purchases by field staff under the government personal loans scheme. The project also provided audio-visual equipment to support extension operations, as well as office furniture and equipment needed for expanded extension activities for training and effective monitoring and evaluation. 8. Incremental Staff. Some 11,060 incremental staff positions were to be created for the newly established extension directorates in UP and HP, as well as some 640 additional staff in Assam. Most incremental staff positions were sanctioned and filled as scheduled in Assam, but although sanctioned were only partially filled in HP (around 25- 30 percent vacancies during project) and greatly underfilled in UP, due to long-continuing litigation by some 1,500 government staff under the Community Development Department refusing re-deployment to field extension positions in the Directorate of Extension. 9. Staff Training. A considerable amount of training was undertaken by all states during the project. Training for staff included: a) Regular fortnightly and monthly training for field extension staff, Training halls were established under the project and regular fortnightly training for Village Extension Workers (VEWs) by Subject Matter Specialists (SMSs) were undertaken. SMSs in turn received monthly training from Extension Departments of the local State Agricultural Universities (SAUs). b) A range of short in-service training for all staff was undertaken. While many in-service training activities were completed as scheduled (some greatly exceeded the original targets), there were some areas of training in which the  4 number of courses or individual number of staff participating was greatly reduced, most notably study tours and promotional and refresher training. Institutional Development 10. T&V System of Extension. The T&V system of extension was substantially institutionalized in the States of Assam, UP and HP as planned. In Assam, the extension system established under the previous World Bank project (Credit 728-IN) was continued and strengthened under this project. In UP it was newly established in a phased manner, firstly in eight districts in 1985/86, a further eight districts in 1986/87, and nine districts in 1991/92 in the eastern part of the state, and in the second phase, under the SSP for UP, in 31 districts in the western area in 1991/92, leaving eight hill districts remaining outside the T&V system. In HP, the T&V system was established and institutionalized as planned in all seven agricultural districts and five horticultural districts throughout the state. The SSPs in the States of Bihar and Punjab aimed to expand the T&V system to a further 11 districts in Bihar and three districts in Punjab. A single line of technical and administrative command was established for extension activities with staff stationed at zone/division, district, sub-division/block, clust