 |
|
|
|
Overcoming the Limitations of the Rehabilitation Concept
The rationale for rehabilitation projects was conceived by the World Bank in the late 1970s and early 1980s. A quick fix-up of existing productive infrastructure was needed to boost rapidly declining economies and restore the Governments’ financial position, particularly their foreign exchange earnings. Hence emphasis was placed on irrigation areas as having the largest potential for a rapid increase in production. Experience has shown rehabilitation of large-scale irrigation schemes to be unsustainable under current modes of management.
In Sudan, the rehabilitation of irrigation infrastructure has been the main thrust of several IFAD-assisted projects (039-SU, 134-SU, SRS-005-SU). Unfortunately, the major cause of productive infrastructure degradation, which was overlooked by the rehabilitation concept, is related to the general problem of the role of parastatals in development. At the end of the 1970s, the basic concept of Agricultural Production Corporations using tenant farmers was no longer valid. On a global scale, the concept failed because of the lack of motivation, autonomy, competition and of fiscal discipline which resulted in the lack of care and maintenance of public assets. In Sudan, it became obvious that the achievements of rehabilitation, under the existing style of project management were short-lived. For future projects involving rehabilitation of infrastructure, mechanisms including adequate beneficiary involvement and fiscal contribution, need to be devised.
Given the national situations, future rehabilitation of public infrastructures are likely to be needed in Sudan and elsewhere. Project designers should take into account the lesson that the bureaucracy, with its control of project leverage, might resist desired changes for its own interests. This is not a side issue in countries in which the public sector has historically been as predominant. It is therefore, extremely important that any rehabilitation of physical infrastructure be tied to a restructuring of the institutional framework, avoiding a mere restoration of what used to be.
Maximum beneficiary involvement in the management and financing of rehabilitated schemes should be the goal of projects. To this end, the formation of water users’ associations will need to be emphasised. The eventual aim should be collective management and ownership of facilities by beneficiaries.
Projects should, as necessary, strengthen the capabilities of regional authorities to assist beneficiaries in managing their own rehabilitated schemes.
Projects should assist government in taking necessary measures to ensure equity among growers within schemes and not allow management to be ‘highjacked’ by more powerful growers.
References:
1. Sudan - Country Portfolio Evaluation, CPE94 CESSU94E IFAD 1992.
2. Sudan - New Halfa Irrigation Rehabilitation, 039-SU, IFAD, 1980.
3. Sudan - Northern Province Irrigation Rehabilitation Project, SRS 005-SU, Interim Evaluation, 1991.
4. Sudan - Northern Region Agricultural Rehabilitation Project, 134-SU R134SUBE,Interim Evaluation, 1991.
