Interim evaluation¹

Introduction

The Special Programme for Soil and Water Conservation and Agroforestry commenced in October 1988 in four provinces of the central plateau (Passoré, Yatenga, Bam and Sanmatenga). In 1996 a second phase expanded the programme area to Boulkiemdé, Sanguié and Namentanga. Total programme cost over the 15 years of implementation is USD 38.1 million, of which USD 26.7 under IFAD loans (SRS 011-BF in Phase 1 and SRS 044-BF and 0369-BF in Phase 2).

The overall programme objectives were: (i) conservation of natural resources; (ii) effecting a lasting improvement in production, incomes and living standards for rural households farming on land of less than three hectares, or approximately 40 000 smallholdings (20% of them headed by women) for an estimated population of between 320 000 and 400 000 people.

The programme completion date was scheduled for the end of June 2003. Accordingly, and given the possibility of renewed action in the area, the IFAD Office of Evaluation was asked to conduct a mid-term evaluation. The mission’s objective was to assess, in a spirit of collaboration and partnership, the relevance of the actions and approaches taken, measure their impact and changes made, and draw lessons for the future as to what ought to be pursued, ended, or improved.

The evaluation partnership and process

Partners in the collaborative evaluation were: (i) the IFAD Office of Evaluation officer responsible for the study; (ii) the Secretary General of the Ministry of Agriculture; (iii) the officer in charge of the IFAD Burkina Faso portfolio; (iv) the officer in charge of the BOAD portfolio; (v) the programme director; and (vi) an officer from the IFAD Technical Advisory Division.

The evaluation mission worked in the project area from 25 January to 16 February 2003. The following methodology was employed:

• A three-day facilitated self-evaluation by the programme team, with a presentation and analysis of each component in plenary session.
• A mission to the field including: (i) meetings with beneficiary villages (27 villages in total) and others, discussions, site visits and contacts with the major stakeholders; (ii) meetings with counterpart services at the provincial and departmental levels and participation in the Kongoussi provincial technical consultative framework; (iii) meetings with other actors in the area (PDL, OPA, NGOs). A sample of villages was selected randomly from the eight provinces and fifteen components involved in the programme.
• Interviews with major participants and national counterparts (PNGT2, AFD, DANIDA, GTZ, ministries, INERA).
• A workshop held at Yako for reflection and an exchange of experiences on the evaluation mission’s findings and issues still outstanding.
• Delivery of provisional findings to the Ministry.
• Drafting and validation of the concluding agreement following an analysis of comments transmitted by the programme on the mid-term evaluation report.

Back to Top

Major findings on programme results and impact

Generally speaking, the mission observed that the quantitative objectives set had been achieved and that the programme had generated many positive results. Among these are: (i) an improvement in productive capital for smallholdings (91 500 ha of land received treatment, including rehabilitation of 5 000 ha of degraded soil) and an increase in farm equipment rates; (ii) a 25% increase in food crop yields on 20% to 30% of the land in the 489 villages concerned; (iii) an increase of incomes (FCFA 815 million in benefits derived from micro-credit).

Food and nutritional security for the households involved rose from 80% to 90% of yearly coverage; 233 000 people benefited from better access to potable water and improved health through the installation of 261 basic wells. The economic situation of women has benefited from the programme’s voluntarist strategy of support (subsidies and credit) and training to alleviate their workload and enable them to access income-generating activities, which has raised their status and given them more power within the communities. The programme has also enabled certain techniques to be validated and confirmed in soil and water conservation, agroforestry (assisted natural regeneration), livestock breeding, village water systems and micro-credit. These techniques can now be replicated on a larger scale.

On the other hand, the expected positive impact in terms of strengthening social capital and local and collective capacities has not measured up to the investments made. The research and development component has not led to any real innovation in terms of soil fertility, agricultural intensification or reforestation under a medium-term crop settling perspective, in response to farmers’ expectations. Rather, it has enabled results to be quantified and existing techniques to be refined. Institutional strengthening under support components for farmers’ organizations, village land management committees and public technical services is not sufficient to warrant the expectation, by the programme’s conclusion, that these structures will have become autonomous or that any significant intervention on own funds will have taken place. Finally, the land management approach itself must be more precisely defined in order to lead in future to comprehensive land use management plans for villages on a contractual basis and a reflection on and implementation of rules governing the management of natural resources within communities.

The importance of the programme results and impact is nevertheless undeniable, and the complexity of managing such a programme must also be appreciated in the context of the vigorous institutional and socio-economic development observed in the course of the past 15 years in Burkina Faso.

Back to Top

General lessons learned from the programme experience

Very generally, the principal lessons learned from the 15 years of programme activities, which may be applicable to other future projects by the Ministry and IFAD, are as follows:

a) It is crucial to prepare an exit strategy for projects or programmes to ensure both that achievements are maintained and that the dynamics implemented are pursued and expanded. To this end, it is important:

1. To work from the outset on institutional arrangements that balance out participation by the various social actors and, if necessary, to support the emergence of service providers who may not yet exist but will be indispensable over time, once the project structure and financing has been withdrawn.
2. To define a clear, phased and flexible strategy, when the project is being formulated, to ramp up the capacity of the target audience to the point where they are able to take over management of their own development.
3. To prepare logical frameworks with more qualitative indicators and establish a monitoring and evaluation system capable (using ad hoc resources) of monitoring not only compliance but also the timing of actions and methods with respect to the philosophy of the contract documents.
4. To work towards more responsiveness on the part of decision-makers (managers and donors) so that a programme may evolve during implementation, ensuring that procedures and deadlines do not stand in the way of making needed adjustments to ongoing projects.

b) The demand-driven approach should not rule out defining a regional and local strategy for the project. In areas as fundamental as soil and water conservation or agroforestry, and if one aspires to achieve clear results in land use management at the regional level, it is essential that a strategy be negotiated on a contractual basis with the collectivities concerned. This will ensure a measurable approach to economic and technical intervention (with respect to global issues) that is also consistent within the appropriate development unit (a watershed, in the case of soil and water conservation).

c) The research and development function remains essential within projects so that the supply of technical services can evolve, but in order to produce the expected results it must put forward more pragmatic solutions and be more precise in the financial and economic areas identified by beneficiaries. This implies a superior knowledge of real constraints and strategies in the rural environment which research does not always possess. Competition and/or partnership with other service providers and putting in place studies/research/development packages would enable projects to open up new results potential.

d) Intensification of agro-pastoral production calls for a multitude of technical improvements proposed by the project (land use management, agroforestry, livestock breeding techniques, improvements in soil fertility) that must be better integrated in order to maximize synergies. A strategy that seeks complementarity among project components and sometimes concentrates interventions, is generally recommended.

Back to Top

Major evaluation recommendations reached by consensus with stakeholders

11. In view of the programme’s achievements and the broad scope of the environmental, agricultural and human challenge in this area, the mission recommends:

a) Preparation of another sector intervention on issues of land use management and crop settling, supported by IFAD and subject to conduct of in-depth studies before formulation of the new programme, e.g.:

1. Conduct a zoning exercise to measure changes and current trends in water and wind erosion in the central plateau,
2. Study the configuration and capacity for intervention of operators and borrowers existing locally, and
3. Put in place small-scale pilot operations to determine the feasibility of certain new rural occupations (groups of young conservationists, in particular).

b) Based on lessons learned through experience acquired under the programme, adoption of a fundamentally different approach that includes, from the outset, an evolutionary strategy based on local actors and an exit strategy for planned withdrawal of the project structure.

c) An intervention in rural finance that falls within the strategy of counterpart institutions but sets much more ambitious targets for shared penetration rates (currently just 4% after 15 years).

Recommendations for the short term:

12. The mission recommends the following measures for managing the final programme phase:

• Ensure that government counterpart funding committed is forthcoming to achieve favourable project implementation and closure of IFAD and BOAD loans (154 million provided for under 2003 financial legislation, plus approximately 346 million still outstanding for this year to be negotiated).
• Take steps to maintain rolling stock and equipment with a view to continued intervention.
• Ensure proper implementation of operations to repay credits granted by Banque agricole et commerciale du Burkina (BACB) so as not to create new problems. Repayment of credits granted between 1998 and 2002 will be followed by that of more recent credits up to 2006. The lack of a BACB branch in the area and the limitations of departmental committees in place raise the risk of possible defaults. It is imperative therefore to find an alternative solution to recover amounts outstanding. The mission recommends that the programme approach BACB to arrange for repayments to be made through a financial operator set up in the programme area.

Finally, in view of the possibility of future intervention in the central plateau area and renewed collaboration with the institutions there present, it is important for IFAD to take part, the details of participation to be worked out, in the steering committee for the Rural Finance Action Plan.

Back to Top

---

1. This agreement reflects an understanding among partners to adopt and implement recommendations stemming from the evaluation. The agreement was formulated in consultation with the members of the Core Learning Partnership (CLP). The latter comprised the representative of regulatory authority ; the Country Portfolio Manager, BOAD ; Mr Hamed Haidara, Country Portfolio Manager, IFAD, Mr Lucien Lompo, Director of PS-CES/AGF, Mr Alessandro Meschinelli, Technical Adviser, IFAD ; and Mr Jean-Philippe Audinet, Evaluation Officer, IFAD