Project Evaluation Summaries
Prepared by the Policy, Planning and Evaluation Unit (PPEU)

---

Niger

---

I. Basic Project Data

Project Numbers:	NER/87/CO2, NER/90/013
Project Title:	Rural Development in Mayahi (PDRM)
Type of Evaluation:	Final
Government Executing Agencies:	• Ministry of Finance and Planning • Directorate of Programming and Planning • Mayahi Department Directorate of Planning • Mayahi District Planning Service
UN Cooperating Agencies:	FAO
Sector:	Rural Development
UNCDF Budget:	$US 4,752,732
UNDP Budget:	2,224,226
Gov't. Budget:	197,700
Total Project Budget:	<$US 7,194,658
<	$US 995,576
Duration:
Date Project Approved:	31 January 1994
Date Project Began:	June 1994
Date of Mid-term Evaluation:	January 1997
Date of Final Evaluation:	November 1998

II. Background

The Mayahi Rural Development Project (PDRM) forms part of a series of UNCDF- and UNDP-financed projects in West Africa under the heading of "Participatory eco-development", which combines the social and economic development of the population with protection and rehabilitation of their environment.

Beginning in 1999 the project is to be subsumed by the National Anti-Poverty Programme (PNLCP), which the government of the Niger has implemented with the assistance of UNDP, UNCDF and other contributors and agencies.

The PNLCP was intended to cover the Mayahi region in Maradi department. The region is socially poor, economically disadvantaged, physically degraded and geographically isolated. The characteristics of the region are: low coverage of social services; very low school-enrolment and literacy rates; relatively low and constantly declining productivity rates for agriculture and livestock breeding; and highly variable weather patterns, which make family units and communities vulnerable to ecological and economic crises, poor harvest and instability in regional markets.

III. The Project

The project's overall objective is to improve the living conditions of the inhabitants of Mayahi by reestablishing a sustainable agricultural and ecological balance, increasing productivity and agricultural output and meat production, and diversifying economic activities by creating permanent jobs in the rural areas.

The project revolves around four immediate objectives:

• Establishment of a capacity for cooperation, decision-making and management at the village level.

• Re-establishment in the long term of a sustainable agricultural and environmental balance in the village commons.

• Elimination of the chronic decline in agricultural output and the yield of small herds.

• Diversification of economic activities in the rural areas and in secondary and tertiary urban areas by developing non-agricultural employment.

The concept of "participatory eco-development" implies a notion of development linked to the fundamental economic and social human needs, cultural and political human needs, and sustainable management of the natural resources on which humans depend for their livelihood.

IV. Findings of the Evaluation Mission

It would seem premature to form an overall assessment of the project's achievements given the low level of implementation of the immediate objectives and expected results, the lack of indicators in the project document and especially the absence of any system of monitoring or evaluation for the better part of the implementation phase (a formal system was established under the project in May 1998).

The method followed by the evaluation mission consisted of conducting a detailed review of all project activities component by component, and analyzing their potential, the stakes involved and their strengths and weaknesses.

A. Evaluation of the results achieved

Component 1A: Implementation of the eco-development approach

From the start the PDRM team was ill-prepared to carry out the project approach, and the training courses and methodological support were not effective. The approach proved to be too formal and rigid and did not encourage imagination, creativity, flexibility or adaptability either among the PDRM team or among the target population. The diagnostic studies gave rise to a data collection process that was too cumbersome, too complicated and too long.

The institutional framework created is still in early stages of development, and the farmers organizations are still fragile and must develop into a complex social and economic network.

Component 1B: Environmental rehabilitation

The activities under environmental rehabilitation were based on three questionable principles (principles mentioned in the project document and which marked the achievements): restoration of environmental or ecological balances, which is today rejected in most ecological research and by most approaches to natural resources management; the absence of a genuine "ecology culture" among the populations in the project area; and the responsibility of the populations for environmental degradation.

The approach followed has made extensive use of subsidies and the "anchoring actions" formula was used without investigating its ambiguous repercussions or alternative scenarios. Of the 10,000 hectares that were to have been covered by agro-forestry development activities only 3,272 were developed under the project.

Component 2A: Herding and small-scale animal husbandry

There was considerable delay with activities relating to herding and small-scale animal husbandry. It is too soon to analyse the implementation features of this strategy and to evaluate its impact.

The approach has several shortcomings—particularly the overly technical approach under which local problems were conceptualized in technical terms. Some basic assumptions were not sufficiently tested and are thus questionable. The strategy presented is merely a collection of fragmentary initiatives without any dynamic linkages, and which are not combined into a coherent whole. The involvement of the livestock herders in a participatory approach is still in the early developmental stage. Organizing the livestock breeders is dealt with in a cursory manner—involving for the most part the mere strengthening of a local association.

Component 2B: Soil fertility and seeds

The impact of these initiatives on agricultural productivity is already significant in terms of an increase in household income. However, many of the methods employed are still provisional in nature, and the integration between the community-based approach and the approach geared to individual farmers is weak.

Component 3: Diversification of economic activities

Savings and credit activities begun under the project have elicited a great deal of interest, especially among women. However, most of the loans granted are for commercial activities, at the expense of production activities proper. The involvement of women is still a relatively recent phenomenon and needs to be strengthened.

Component 4: Quality-of-life and human resource

This component has absorbed the bulk of all investments (57%). The activities are received by the inhabitants with great interest and even enthusiasm. The main weakness is linked to the arrangements for financial contributions from the beneficiaries. Two different systems of contribution appear to be at odds with the principles of a genuinely participatory approach. The risk is that they will fail to promote genuine mobilization of the community.

Component 5: Support services and the project support unit

Team spirit and cooperation within the team appear to be good. Relations with the technical services have improved markedly compared with what they were at the start of the project. The support unit has increased opportunities for technical exchanges with other structures and with other projects operating in Maradi (Aguié and Tessaoua) or in other departments.

Considerable instability in the permanent human resources situation affected project activities and relations with the target populations. The PDRM management unit has no control over some aspects of the use of temporary human resources.

The absence of a procedures manual handicapped the work of the support unit. FAO funding was characterized by the lengthy processing of paperwork, delays and the technical, methodological and administrative monitoring formula.

Assessment of project design

The concept of eco-development embodied in the project seems to be suited to an approach that integrates socio-economic development and environmental balances. Its underlying basic assumptions are correct. The project's objectives are relevant and they accord with the efforts of the government of the Niger to promote rural development and natural resources management by means of increased involvement by the people. The project document, however, has not adequately clarified the modalities for the implementation of the participatory approach and it contains few operational and methodological suggestions.

The project's pilot dimension has not received the due emphasis which would foster flexibility and pragmatism in its implementation. No frame of reference is to be found in the project document. The project design constitutes weak logic, insufficient realism, and an underestimation of the organizational and institutional aspects and the potential risks.

The relationship between anchoring actions and larger-scale actions was neither conceptually clear nor easy to implement in operational terms. The results have often been questionable, disappointing and even ambiguous. Lastly, the idea of the small region was conceptually confused.

VII. Recommendations

In the light of these assessments and the findings—keeping in mind the formulation of the second phase of the project within the national anti-poverty programme—the evaluation mission makes the following recommendations:

Approach and concepts

• The linkages and synergies between the environment, the economy and society should be reaffirmed.

• The level of the project's intervention and the characteristics of its interventions should be clearly specified.

• The concept of village commons should be revisited.

Targeting

• Local participation should be organized.

• There should be a shift towards sustainable systems of living.

• The accent should be placed on the poor.

• Women should be involved to a greater extent.

Means to be employed

• An impetus should be given to the project team and its coordination structure.

• Rural leadership activities and training should be strengthened.

• The capitalization of information and monitoring and evaluation should be pursued more deeply.

• Networks for communication and exchange should be promoted.

Main areas of intervention

• Production activities should be intensified.

• The economy should be diversified.

• The resiliency of local systems should be strengthened.

• Conflicts over the use of space should be prevented and managed.

VIII. Policy Implications and Lessons Learned

The main lessons for similar activities to be undertaken in the future relate to:

• The implementation of a simple, clear system for the initial training of the project team in the methods involved in the approach, and of a regular system for monitoring and evaluation.

• The necessity of regular support for the team in conceptual and methodological terms, not only in the startup phase but throughout the implementation phase.

• The need to clarify the respective roles of donors and cooperating and executing agencies (this stems from the necessity of providing an interlocutor for the support unit).

• The necessity of properly identifying the aspects pertaining to credit and savings and the related mechanisms for intervention well before the start of the project.

• The urgency, from the standpoint of project management, of providing the project support unit with a genuine procedures manual and other management tools.

• The necessity of defining an appropriate communications strategy simultaneously with project formulation.

IX. Mid-term Evaluation Team

The evaluation team was composed of three consultants:

• Mr. Angelo Buonfiglioli—expert in participatory methods and farmers organizations, chief of mission (representing UNDP/UNCDF)

• Mr. Massimo Rossi—specialist in food security and land management (representing FAO)

• Mr. Kanta Mahaman Sani—economist, specialist in monitoring and evaluation (representing the government of the Niger)