Project Evaluation
Summaries
Prepared by the Policy, Planning and Evaluation
Unit (PPEU)
Niger
I. Basic Project Data
| Project Number: | NER/87/C02 |
| Project Title: | Rural Development of Mayahi (PDRM) |
| UN Cooperating Agency: | FAO |
| Government Executing Agency: | Ministry of Finance and Planning - Mayahi Planning District Unit |
| Sector: | Rural development |
| Sub-Sector: | Agriculture |
| UNCDF Budget: | US$ 4,752,732 |
| UNDP Budget: | 1,199,623 |
| Gov't. Budget: | 197,700 |
| Total Budget: | 6,150,055 |
|
UNCDF Expenditures at Evaluation: |
1,944,705 |
| Date Project Approved: |
31 Jan 1994
|
| Date Project Began: |
June 1994
|
| Date Project Evaluated: |
Jan 1997
|
| Type of Evaluation: |
Mid-term
|
 |
|
II.
Background
The district of Mayahi, situated in Maradi department, has a population of 270,000. Most of the population lives in 802 villages and hamlets, and a single urban centre. Conditions in this isolated area are harsh, on the whole worse than the national average, and aggravated by local conditions: the Sahelian climate, progressive environmental degradation, a poor system of roads, low literacy rate and school enrolment, weak economic (markets) coverage, and very traditional and hierarchical social organization. In addition, the national political situation has recently been volatile.
Mayahi district has already benefited from numerous external development activities, such as the construction of feeder roads, the first phase of which was financed by UNCDF; establishment of a grain bank (funded by ACOPAM/ILO-WFP); labour-intensive works (ILO-HIMU); nutrition and food security (UNICEF); integrated management of agricultural and rural resources project (PIGRAR).
Identified in 1987 and formulated in 1990, the Mayahi rural development project (PDRM) was intended to be part of the new UNCDF approach involving participatory eco-development based on the experience gained in managing local rural territories (terroirs), village-based development in partnership with the local community.
III. The Project
Through a participatory eco-development approach focused on rehabilitating the environment, the project aims to create and promote local momentum for sustainable development (management of rural territories, assumption of responsibility by the inhabitants).
The project's immediate objectives are:
• To build capacity in the villages for concerted action, decision-making and management;
• To restore in the long-term a sustainable agricultural and ecological equilibrium in the village territories;
• To halt the chronic decline in agricultural output (farming and livestock raising); and
• To diversify economic activities in the rural area and in the secondary urban centres (rural market towns) by developing non-agricultural employment.
The project activities are clustered around four components: environmental rehabilitation; agricultural and herding production; diversification of economic activities; quality of life and human resources. The project approach is by nature flexible as regards the precise and quantifiable identification of activities.
IV. Purpose of the Evaluation
The mission's purpose was to conduct a mid-term evaluation of the implementation of the participatory eco-development approach, and the level of involvement of the various parties. It aimed to analyse the preparation of village development plans, the organization and transfer of responsibility to village management committees, women's participation, the conduct of the village activities, and arrangements for financing rural activities. It also sought to examine the organization of the project and its relationship with the partners, the role and intervention of the signatories of the project agreement, and the coherence of the project with national master plans. Lastly, the mission was expected to formulate recommendations concerning the conclusion of the project and longer-term activities (continuation of activities and regional upscaling, in accordance with the terms as set out in the original project design).
V.
Findings of the Evaluation
A. Assessment of results achieved
In two and a half years, the project has undertaken activities in 14 villages which are at different points in their implementation (in relation to the stages of the eco-development approach). Several factors have impeded the implementation of activities, including major movements of project staff, the complex nature of the approach and the lack of experience with its implementation, and the very limited degree of concerted action and cooperation with the district technical services. At the current stage, the level of awareness and genuine participation of the villagers is not easy to ascertain, nor is the impact or sustainability of the activities undertaken.
Implementation of the approach and preparation of village management and development plans (PADVs)
Two PADVs have been drawn up and are still being discussed in the villages. They propose programming over time at the level of the rural territories. They do not take explicitly into account inter-village and regional relationships. The conduct of the different stages of the approach that is to result in the preparation of the PADVs has been more difficult and slower than anticipated. The complexity of the methodology and inadequate external inputs have hampered and slowed down the work of field reconnaissance and village diagnostics, and the utilization of data. The poor quality of some support activities, such as promotional, communications, training and literacy activities, have had a significant impact on the degree of mobilization of different population groups and their assimilative capacity.
Organization of village committees
Village management committees and subcommittees have been set up, but most of them are poorly organized and are not sufficiently representative of the various segments of the population. A clear definition of the roles and functions of the committees and of the training for committee officers is needed to strengthen the accountability of these organs.
Implementation of activities in the villages
A large number of activities have been launched in the 14 villages covered by the project, in the fields of environmental rehabilitation, agricultural and pastoral production, and quality of life (social and economic infrastructures). These include plant nurseries and tree farms, support for small-scale animal husbandry, composting, seed multiplication, technical training, distribution of small-scale agricultural equipment, construction of grain banks, village warehouses, social residences, health centres, digging of new wells and rehabilitation of existing wells, etc.
Most of these activities, which are geographically and thematically varied, were inadequately planned and integrated into the village development plans. In addition, most of these activities, considered to be startup or foundation-building activities, have to a great extent been subsidized, with the village contribution in kind or in cash being relatively small. Lastly, the poor supervision and monitoring do not augur well for the assumption of responsibility and future maintenance of these projects by village groups.
Credit
The recent establishment (early 1996) of a credit scheme managed by an independent partner (CARE-BRK) and the encouraging performance during the first year suggest the possibility of an extension of these lending activities and a growing participation by the population, especially women.
Project management and cooperation with partners
At the present stage the project team has not established sustained cooperation with the technical services of Mayahi district. Major rotation of the project staff (two national managers and three CTAs, three national experts, all in two and a half years) has not facilitated the insertion of the project into local institutional structures. However, contracts concluded with specialized NGOs (credit, well digging and construction) have produced good results.
B. Assessment of project design
The project document does not encompass all the aspects of the project, especially with regard to the implementation of a participatory approach. There are certain gaps in the description of the project activities which have a direct impact on the implementation and management of different components. Several activities have been overlooked or mentioned but not described or quantified (e.g. promotional activities, group committees), while others have been considerably underestimated (time needed to successfully carry out the participatory approach, training activities, complexity of management). The novelty of this kind of project may account for this. The distribution of technical and financial responsibilities among the four partners (Government, UNDP, UNCDF and FAO) has complicated management of the project.
The project's approach is based on an active partnership with private or public organizations, while preserving a relatively simple structure in order to prepare for the succession to the project through a phase-out of the involvement of State structures and external assistance. Insufficient advantage has been taken of the importance attached to partnership and the participation of national experts.
VI. Recommendations
Implementation of activities in the village lands (terroirs)
In order to plan for the effectiveness and optimal sustainability of activities undertaken in the villages, important points must be taken into account:
• Concerted action with the inhabitants and joint planning for the implementation of activities;
• Integration of activities into development plans and physical planning;
• Conduct of prior feasibility studies and inclusion of all production lines;
• Determination of arrangements for the participation of all segments of the population in the implementation, management, maintenance and pursuit of activities; and
• Establishment of structures for promotional action and support for the management committees and holding consultations on a regular basis.
Project management
A reorganization of the project and an adjustment of its objectives are needed to lead to prepare a realistic programme for 1997 and for the conclusion of the ongoing project (1998). The division of labour between the four signatories to the agreement must be clarified in order to avoid prolonging the current situation, characterized by a lack of coordination, confusion and, at times, duplication.
The project team must be filled out (two posts are vacant), reorganized through a redefinition of the responsibilities of the technical staff, and given a fresh impetus. A promotional activities component and support for village organizations should also be added. Lastly, emphasis must be placed on the need for regular contributions and critical analysis of results all throughout the apprenticeship and project adaptation phase.
Participation
The active participation of the population in all phases of the project must be strengthened through increased and better-targeted village support activities, and external training and supervision interventions. Indeed, the whole concept underlying the approach is based on increased participation and responsibility.
Activities targeted specifically to women must also be undertaken, taking into account conditions prevailing in the traditional local society. This recommendation goes hand-in-hand with improved application, during the background study phase (MEGEVE), of everything relating to knowledge of the social context.
Monitoring and evaluation
Different solutions should be explored to remedy the existing situation and establish systematic monitoring of activities and their impact on farms and village communities.
Cooperation with partners
The aim of strengthening participation by the governmental technical services should be to promote a deepening of activities in villages and the extension of those activities to other villages, as well as to make for greater integration of the project into the regional institutional setup.
Regional dimension and eco-development approach
Further thought and research are needed to improve both the quality of the approach at the village level and the pace of preparing the PADVs in an inter-village and regional perspective. The improvement must involve better knowledge of the environment (introduction of agricultural and socio-economic zoning) and greater participation by the different parties concerned, in particular the rural inhabitants.
Lastly, conceptual and practical lessons must be drawn from the project and from other projects in which this approach has been followed, with a view to improving implementation of the various phases, adaptation of the approach to local conditions, participation of the partners, the pace and quality of programming of village activities.
VII. Policy Implications and Lessons Learned
On the basis of the lessons learned from the project, the main policy implications relate to:
• The eco-development approach: There is a need for training in the eco-development approach and the promotion of awareness among all the parties involved, both public and private.
• Participation: There is a need to strengthen participation at the village level through regular dialogue and reviews that directly involve the management committees and village groups. This will help to prepare gradually for the succession to the current project structure, by incorporating the project in the existing institutional fabric and providing support for the promotion of national and local expertise.
• Involvement of local partners: The background study phase, diagnosis, and the search for solutions must be carried out in close coordination with the appropriate agencies, local technical services and the project team. The participation of local organizations, both public and private, in planning and implementing activities is also important.
VIII. Evaluation Team
The team members were Mr. Frédéric Jenny (Team Leader, representing UNCDF and the FAO Investment Centre); Mr. Joel Gallard (specialist in the participatory approach, representing FAO); and Mr. Amadou Bana (economist, representing the Government). At the request of the PDRM management, two national consultants, Mr. Abdoulaye Chalare, sociologist, and Mr. Ousseau Niandou, rural engineer, were assigned to the evaluation mission.