Burkina Faso - Second National Agricultural Services Development Project (NASDP II)

Report No. PIC2715 Project Name Burkina Faso-Second National Agricultural(@+) Services Development Project (NASDP II) Region Africa Sector Agriculture Project ID BFPA296 Borrower Republic of Burkina Faso Implementing Agency for Ministere des Enseignements Secondaire, the Research Component Superieur et de la Recherche Scientifique (MESSRS) -B.P. 7130 -Ouagadougou 03 Burkina Faso Tel 226 33 57 08 - Fax 31 09 68 Implementing Agency for Ministere de l'Agriculture et des the other components Ressources Animales (MARA) Secretariat General - B.P. 7010 - Ouagadougou 03 -Burkina Faso Tel 226 30 85 14 - Fax 31 08 70 Date this PID prepared March 10, 1997 Appraisal date June 10, 1996 Post-appraisal date February 4, 1997 Board Approval June 1997 1. Country/Sector Background. Burkina Faso is a landlocked country with a population of about 10 million. About 80 percent of the people live in the rural areas. Its sahelo-soudanian climate is characterized by low and irregular rainfalls. Soil, water and biomass resources are limited and fragile. Agricultural resource degradation is accelerating because of over-exploitation, high population pressure and the continued use of traditional production systems which are maladapted to current conditions. With a gross national product of US$300 per capita in 1994, Burkina Faso ranks among the world's poorest countries. 2. To create an environment that would improve agricultural production and rural living standards, mainly to benefit the smallholders, the Government initiated sectoral reforms which include: (a) the liberalization of internal trade and external trade of agricultural commodities and food; (b) the restructuring, privatization, or liquidation of agricultural parastatals; and (c) the reorganization of the cotton and sugar sub-sectors. In addition, a reorganization of the Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources is under review. It aims at limiting the Ministry's interventions to sectoral policies, land reform and provision of basic public agricultural services, including the generation and dissemination of improved agricultural technology. 3. Project Objectives. The proposed four-year project constitutes the second phase of both the National Agricultural Research Program  and the National Agricultural Services Program, which are currently under implementation. The project would aim at: (a) increasing agricultural productivity and farmers' revenues; (b) improving natural resource management and promoting sustainable production systems; and (c) promoting and empowering, on a pilot basis, efficient and representative farmers' organizations. 4. Project Description. The project would include five components, namely research, agricultural extension, animal health, pilot programs for promotion of farmers' organizations and small rural infrastructures, and support to the restructuring of public agricultural services. The project would expand its approach to research and extension by fostering close linkages between them and also with farmer organizations. 5. Research: On-going priority research programs would continue to be supported by the project. In line with the national Strategic Plan, the project would pay greater attention to promising new fields of research such as vegetable and food production, forestry, post-harvest technology and appropriate mechanization. The project would contribute to improve: (a) research relevance from farmers' viewpoint, quality and accountability for results; and (b) logistical and financial management of research institutes. The project would build additional research facilities, provide vehicles, motorcycles and technical equipment for researchers, and pay for operating and training costs. 6. Agricultural extension (rainfed and irrigated crops, livestock husbandry, natural resource management): the project would help consolidate the national system of extension by improving: (a) the capacity for regional and local diagnoses, along with the linkages between research and extension; (b) the presence of extension staff in the field, especially female staff; (c) the monitoring and evaluation system; (d) the accounting and budgetary control systems of local implementing bodies; and (e) the practice of staff annual performance review. To improve polyvalence, all front-line extension agents specialized in crop productions would be trained in animal husbandry. The project would provide vehicles and technical equipment to the staff of MARA involved in Agricultural Services as well pay for operating and training costs. 7. Animal health: the project would help: (a) finalize the regulatory framework and definition of the private and public roles, (b) privatize the veterinary profession and the distribution of veterinary pharmaceuticals, and (c) support remaining public sector tasks including sanitary control, disease surveillance and food inspection. This component would include studies and consultations, training, specific credit for installation of private veterinarians and financing of regional diagnostic laboratory facilities. 8. Pilot programs: The project would support two pilot operations: (a) farmer organizations component (at regional and local levels), which should take part in adaptive research and improve the capacity of these organizations to transfer technologies and know- - 2 -  how to their members, and, secondly, strengthen their capacity to provide services to farmers ; and (b) a program for small rural infrastructures to study the processes and feasibility of financing village-level operations intended for communal usage. The project would provide consultancies, training, vehicles, technical and office equipment, as well as regional/international study travel for board members and selected staff from farmer organizations. Under the second pilot program, also small-scale civil works would be financed through a community participation method. 9. Restructuring of agricultural services: in line with the Agriculture SECAL II--already appraised--the project would: (a) carry out relevant supporting measures, including possibly setting up a temporary unit in charge of restructuring; (b) carry out detailed studies for the reorganization of MARA and CRPAs; and (c) provide training for both redundant and remaining staff. The project would provide consultancies, training, logistic and operating costs. 10. Project Financing. The estimated total project cost is US$47 million, of which IDA would contribute to a maximum of US$41 million. Detailed costs, funding pattern, financial participation by Government and beneficiaries would be determined at negotiations. 11. Project Implementation. The project would include two implementing agencies. The research component would be implemented by the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique et Technique (CNRST) under MESSRS, through two of the four new research institutes (the existing six institutes are to be merged into four). The other components (including support measures to restructuring of agricultural services and the pilot operations) would be implemented by MARA. Close coordination among components would be achieved through appropriate mechanisms to be agreed upon at negotiations. Some of the project activities would be contracted to local consulting firms or/and NGOs, with relevant back-stopping by experienced international consultants. 12. Project Sustainability. In the long run, public funding will likely continue to be necessary for the agricultural research and extension activities in Burkina Faso because of the poverty of the producers. However, progressive subcontracting/transfer of some activities and services to farmer organizations and the private sector would improve efficiency, facilitate cost recovery and promote the financial sustainability of research and agricultural services. 13. Environmental Aspects. The generation and dissemination of natural resources conservation and management techniques would be expanded and intensified through the project, including soil conservation, improvement of fertility and water management. Linkages with the National Land Management Program (PNGT) would be further developed and the extension services would continue and consolidate the initial actions carried out by the PNGT mobile teams. The project has been classified under category B as it is -3 -  unlikely to have any negative environmental impact. 14. Program Objective and Poverty Categories. The program would emphasize household food security, nutrition and poverty reduction among small farmers, many of whom are female, through increased productivity, crop diversification and post-harvest activities. The promotion of farmer organizations would help small farmers, including women, to strengthen their bargaining power and capacity to behave like stakeholders. The appropriate Targeted Intervention Categories are estimated to be "Raising Productivity" and "Poverty Alleviation." Contact Point: Public Information Center The World Bank 1818 H Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20433 Telephone No.: (202) 458-5454 Fax No.: (202) 522-1500 Note: This is information on an evolving project. Certain components may not necessarily be included in the final project. Processed by the Public Information Center week ending April 18, 1997. - 4 -  ANNEX ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 1. Arable agriculture in environments such as that of Burkina Faso inevitably introduces the risk of environmental degradation because of loss of organic matter, drawing and leaching of nutrients and increasing of erosion. Also, because the use of tradional methods does not allow intensification of cultivation required to satisfy the food demands of an increasing population, expansion of the cultivated land is necessary, magnifying that risk. Traditional systems are based on shifting cultivation which relies on prolonged periods under bush fallow to regain the fertility destroyed by a relatively brief period of cultivation. The increased pressure on good lands reduces the period of fallow and, thus, undercuts the natural processes which permit soil restoration and fertility generation. It also reduces the proportion of the total land area which is protected by perennial vegetative cover and, thus increases erosion. Larger herds owned by pastoralists have similar if less dramatic effects, largely because of the annual burning which reduces tree cover to scattered fire resistant species and destroys the dry-grass mulch before the onset of the rains, but also because of the direct effect of compacting and of tracks in encouraging water run-off and erosion. 2. Soil organic matter is very important in maintaining soil texture and, thus the capture of rainfall and prevention of erosion, and in preventing the loss of nutrients by leaching; arable cultivation in the tropics destroys the soil organic matter and traditional pastoralism prevents its accumulation. Both systems encourage the loss of mineral nutrients (by leaching and export) which, in turn, leads to soil acidification which, in its turn, leads to aluminum toxicity; each progressively reduces productivity and limits the crops and forages that can be grown; and reduced productivity forces even further expansion of cultivated areas. The precise effects are defined by climate, soil and topography. For example, highly seasonal and variable rainfall distribution will magnify the importance of soil moisture conservation and erosion control. In the areas in the south-western part of the country, the more substantial rainfall will cause a degree of leaching of nutrients but a more permanent vegetative cover compared to the other parts of the country is likely to counter some of the risk of erosion. 3. Increasing productivity per unit area provides an alternative which can satisfy the demands of the increasing population without exacerbating these adverse environmental effects. Yield increases of 15 percent to 50 percent that can be attained using technology that is already available. Most of these technological packages rely on environment neutral components (varieties better adapted to the environment, and/or varieties resistant to pests and diseases, biological control of pests, better crop geometry, etc.). Some include the use of fertilizer and/or pesticide, but at levels that are most unlikely to affect the environment. Currently, Burkina Faso uses an average of only 7.5 kg of fertilizer per ha of arable land, compared to double that figure for the whole of Africa, 97 Kg - 5 -  for the world as a whole, and 660 Kg for the Netherlands. The current use of pesticides (at about 1,200 tons of liquid pesticides and 44 tons of powder pesticides per annum for the whole country) is negligible and even then concentrated on one fourth of the country. The project will promote technologies which minimize the requirement for pesticides, notably the extension of messages such as pest scouting and threshold interventions instead of the systematic, calendar-bound sprayings, the use of varieties and breeds resistant to pests and diseases, and the use of integrated pest management techniques for the control of weeds as well as of pests and diseases. 4. In addition, many technological packages will reduce or even prevent the adverse environmental effects inherent in replacing natural forest by agriculture. These include: the use of "living hedges" (of grasses, especially Vetiver grass or Vetiver-type of grasses, and trees) or stone walls as contour bounds; the use of one of a variety of agro-forestry techniques to re-cycle nutrients and control erosion (as part of "living hedges" and as wind- breaks); the maintenance of soil cover in the form of a mulch (living and dead mulches, the latter in the form of crop residues, agro-forestry pruning, dessicated range grasses, etc.); and one of the many possible mixed-cropping combinations. Trees are interplanted with an understory of crops such as yams, cassava; maize, intermixed with low-growing crops such as groundnut and cowpea which are planted in small clearings. Such mixed cropping patterns largely reduce the exposure of the soil to rains, and maximize the biological re-cycling of nutrients. In addition, mechanization which depends on the relatively little-damaging animal traction, allows the more timely planting of crops and, thus extended protection of the soil surface. 5. The integration of livestock husbandry with cropping ensures that nutrients are recycled whilst maximizing the economic return of the whole farm enterprise; it thus provides a strong incentive for farmers to continue this sound agronomic practice. There is one draw-back however: organic materials that may have been used to protect the soil surface are consumed as fodder, so that additional efforts are required to control erosion. One particularly valuable technology is the use of agro-forestry techniques (contour hedges or alley-cropping) to provide dry-season fodder and re-cycle deeply-leached nutrients prior to the onset of the next wet season. 6. The promotion of agro-forestry techniques will also provide environmental protection for lands outside the normal cropping area: the trees provide fuel wood which would otherwise be obtained from forests which are protecting other, often steeper lands, and which are assisting with the conservation of rainfall. 7. As the project is categorized as B in the environmental system of the World Bank, a "targeted environmental analysis" is needed before project effectiveness. The analysis would help the project management to: (a) identify the training requirements for proper environmental - 6 -  monitoring inside the project; (b) identify the environemental parameters to be monitored (natural resources, technology etc.); and (c) identify cross-sectoral opportunities like urban agriculture and also recycling of organic wastes for peri-urban agriculture. -7 -