Evaluation purpose and scope

At the request of the Executive Board of the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) a series of Country Portfolio Evaluations (CPEs) were undertaken in countries where IFAD had significantly wide development experience. After Yemen and The Sudan, Bangladesh was selected as the country where IFAD has supported the greatest number of projects (12) to date.¹

The purpose of the Bangladesh CPE is to draw lessons of experience to improve future project design and implementation. To this effect, the CPE focused on the following issues:

• To what extent have the programming, design and execution of IFAD-financed projects taken into account the needs of target beneficiaries, ensured their participation, and improved their access to technology, inputs (including water), and finance?
• In the light of experience, what are the most effective organisational structures and managerial arrangements for project implementation?
• What has been the impact of those projects on food production and employment? Is the impact sustainable? Are the projects replicable?
• In view of the country's changing political and socio-economic context, what are the implications of lessons learned for future IFAD strategy?

The main report consists in ten chapters grouped under three general sections. Section one: Programme features and delivery reviews the evolving national context (Chapter II) in which the projects have been programmed (Chapter III) and implemented (Chapter IV); a particular attention is paid to the relationships between the projects and the institutional set-up (Chapter V);

Section Two: Main results by field of intervention evaluates the extent to which IFAD projects have progressively increased the target groups' access to technology (Chapter VI), water (Chapter VII) and rural credit (Chapter VIII), and thus contributed to increased agricultural production and rural employment; and

Section Three: Project Impact and Implications for IFAD discusses the effectiveness of IFAD approaches to poverty alleviation (Chapter IX); it subsequently presents the evaluation's findings, conclusions and recommendations (Chapter X).

Programme development and main achievements

The programme

During 15 years of activities in Bangladesh, IFAD has supported government policies and programmes with a progressive emphasis on equity issues. Broadly speaking, the IFAD programme can be divided into two phases. During the first phase (1978-1983) six large projects were approved, for a total lending of USD 118 million which mostly supported the Government's food grain production strategy. They comprised two flood control and drainage projects, one fertiliser programme loan, one agricultural credit project, and two rural development projects.

During the second phase (1984-1992), six other projects were approved (for a total IFAD contribution of USD 75 million); these were smaller and more oriented towards poverty alleviation. They included two income-generation activities projects for landless men and women (Grameen Bank II and III), one crop intensification/diversification project for marginal and small farmers, two "protein production" (fish and poultry) projects for two of the most vulnerable rural population groups, fishermen and women, and one project to help poor rural producers affected by cyclones to cope with the crisis.

On average, IFAD has financed 43% of the projects' total cost (of which 64% represent local costs), supporting in particular credit components (60%), civil works and equipment (25%), agricultural development (11%) and institutional support (10%). The share of IFAD in total project cost financing varied extensively from one project to another regardless of the type of projects.

The average loan size has decreased from USD 18.5 million, during the period 1979-1983, to USD 9 million from 1984 onwards.² The average project cost remained fairly stable (in current terms) at about USD 37 million.

Government of Bangladesh (GOB) officials (as well as some bilateral donors) acknowledge IFAD's specific contribution: early emphasis in IFAD projects on targeting beneficiaries (in the Small Farmer Agricultural Credit Project (SFACP), Loan No. 041-BA), and later on, the development of instrumentalities such as group formation, new credit models, people's participation and decentralisation helped GOB to "operationalise" and experiment with some of the equity objectives of the successive five-year plans; at the same time these initiatives stimulated Government's interest in cooperating with NGOs.

Technical aspects

The projects have been based on the general assumption that the basic technology being used was adequate and known to small and marginal farmers, but insufficiently accessible to them. The technical package which has contributed to the overall increase in agricultural production consists of the combination of increased irrigation, high yielding variety seed and fertilizer application.

There is evidence that small-farmers who had access to this package through IFAD-financed projects have performed well, and even slightly better than large farmers. Thus the technical rationale of these projects proved generally correct. However, earlier projects have had a heavy bias towards infrastructural development which subsequently proved to have been of much less direct benefit to the landless and smallholders compared with advantages derived by better-off farmers.

Another issue raised by project experience, is that with more specific targeting being considered, the requirement is for technology which is specifically relevant to IFAD's target groups. The latter are likely to be concentrated in low to very lowlands, where flooding is more frequent, cropping seasons are short, alternative crops are few, cropping intensities are low and land holdings are small.

In spite of some significant efforts by IFAD to promote technology which is specific to target group needs (e.g., the technical assistance grant to undertake on-farm research on rainfed rice), a lot remains to be done in order to bridge the gap.

Flood Control, Drainage and Irrigation (FCDI). IFAD has financed two FCDI projects - Pabna Irrigation and Rural Development Project (PIRDP) and Small-Scale Flood Control, Drainage and Irrigation Project (SSFCDIP) - in order to reduce heavy crop losses due to flooding in large flood-prone areaeas on some 250 000 ha in the regions of Pabna and Faridpur. With respect to flood control, neither IFAD nor the cofinanciers (and/or cooperating institution) had identified degn errors in the Pabna project (too large an area and costly pumped drainage) in time for a reformulation of the project to take place. However, lessons learnt in the Pabna project were taken into account in the design of the SSFCDIP (involving smaller polders in Faridpur area).

16. As far as the irrigation component is concerned, the IFAD cofinanced large gravavity irrigation scheme (20 000 ha) in Pabna is still not operative 14 years after project approval, while its conceptual and design errors are even more serious than those inherent in the Flood Control and Drainage component. However, since 1980, IFAD, recognising that minor irrigation n was the leading determinant in the "green revolution", financed three projects: SSFCDIP, Southwest Rural Development Project (SRDP) and North-West Rural Development Project (NRDP) for the provision of tubewells, pumps and command area development (CAD) to irrigate 125 000 ha.

Overall impact

IFAD projects contributed their share to national self-sufficiency in food grains which has been recently achieved; however, this contribution has been only nominal at macro-level due to the modest size of IFAD's lending. More profound, although difficult to measure, has been IFAD's influence on pty alleviation, as well as on government policies and programmes.

Income-generating Activities (IGA) are often promoted by Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs). IFAD was very perceptive in recognizing as early as 1980 the importance of such activities for the poor and, accordingly, in pursuing its association with the Grameen Bank (GB). IGAs were also introduced into several other rural and agricultural development projects. Although IGAs were not generally identified as separate project components, they constituted the largest single allocation of loans altogether giving employment opportunities to about one million of the country's poor (and thus, through their families, indirectly or directly affected a total of five or six million persons). While IFAD and concerned institutions may be proud of the results achieved so far, the latter remain modest when compared with the overall extent of poverty in Bangladesh.

 Sustainability - replicability

Groundwater Irrigation Models associated with seasonal credit for inputs are certainly sustainable and replicable in view of the large groundwater potential. Generally, shallow tube wells (STWs) and treadle pumps are more adapted to small and marginal farmers' needs than larger irrigation equipment, viz., deep tube wells s (DTWs).

To make Credit Models sustainable, subsidies are necessary to cover some of the expenses which are not transaction costs (in particular the cost of group formation and training). Many features of credit projects for IGA based on the Grameen bank model are certainly replicable.

The mission considers that the FCDI projects are not sustainable as they imply a continuous drain on government resources for their operation and maintenance. Their replicability is also doubtful, unless the "Flood Action Plan" demonstrates the contrary. Research for deep water rice varieties is probably a more effective means to boost aman production than FCDI. For the protection of human lives, houses and livestock, alternative solutions such as shelters and pile foundation houses should be investigated.

Effects on Government policies and programmes

IFAD's most important contribution to development in Bangladesh has been to help the Government implement/experiment with new development methods in favour of the poor. It seems fair to say that without IFAD volvement, it would have been more difficult for Government to mobilize adequate resources, both internal and external, for that purpose. The early support provided by IFAD to the GB is the most prominent example of the role played by IFAD.

Recommendations for future IFAD strategy

 

Overall, programming-cum-targeting appears as a real area of success of IFAD intervention; this owes a lot to three factors: firstly, the programming of IFAD resources has been based on an open dialogue with GOB concerning the implications of the two-pronged IFAD mandate of food production and poverty alleviation. Secondly, the gradual "independence" which IFAD gained from larger International Financing Institutions (IFIs) contributed to the definition of an autonomous IFAD strategy. Thirdly, open-mindedness on what NGOs were doing allowed a better understanding of the dynamics of poverty in Bangladesh and inspired new approaches to support those government objectives which were of greater concern to IFAD.

Therefore, the rationale of CPE recommendations is essentially one of consolidation, increased effectiveness and possibly expansion of the present programme, with new openings envisaged, particularly in technology generation, to fill the gaps and to respond better to the needs of small farmers and the rural landless. It must be noted, however, that most of the ongoing innovative projects have not yet proven their sustainability. Nevertheless, results to date appear promising and thus these projects could be tentatively replicated, provided the improvements suggested by field experience are taken into account.

Quick-disbursing projects should also be programmed, in orderer to balance innovation with rapid assistance to the poor. This could be achieved through the replication of successful project approaches stemming from IFAD's own experience and/or that of potential cofinanciers.

For area-based projects, IFAD should ensure that other employment activities (labour intensive construction of infrastructure, housing improvement and construction) or social programmes (education and health) are supported in parallel by other institutions: the World Food Programme (WFP), the GB, and NGOs.

Crop diversification has become a priority objective to cope with the problems stemming from rice monoculture. This opens up new avenues for future IFAD activities, e.g., specific research activities, upgrading of extension capabilities to meet changing conditions , promotion of livestock (small ruminants, poultry) and cash crops Research efforts should be made more intensive. Synergetic effects between on-going projects in the same areas or fields should be sought. The evaluation specifically recommends that IFAD should:

• promote an intensive, targeted research programme. This programme should be completed by Farming Systems Research.
• encourage low-cost minor irrigation investments and consider expanding tubewell ownership by the poor where possible. IFAD should not finance FCDI programmes until careful examination of the results of the Further Action Plan (FAP) has been carried out, and should concentrate on water management inside existing polders.
• put more emphasis than in the past on animal production and fisheries as well as on activities which are upstream and downstream of crop production (rural micro-enterprises).

Benchmark surveys to assess farmers' needs are important to determine farmers' resources (e.g., land area, soil type, irrigation) and needs; and should be incorporated in project design and given priority during implementation.

Research-extension links should be improved. The main constraint to the use of the formal extension service in relation to adaptive research is the lack of incentives and motivation. Any amount of reorganization or links to research will pay little dividends as long as extensionists remain poorly paid.

Given the ineffectiveness of the link through contact farmers, linkages between extension and NGOs working in the rural areas should be developed. IFAD should encourage contractual arrangements between its projects and NGOs to deliver extension messages to the farmers.

 

---

1/ In this report all statements refer to the situation prevailing at the time of mission's field visit, that is, March 1993, unless otherwise specified.

2/ In current US Dollar terms.