Public Disclosure Authorized INDIA STAFF PROJECT REPORT ...

Document of

The World Bank pv

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

-lz 9l S / SReport No. 2601a-IN

INDIA

STAFF PROJECT REPORT

APPRAISAL OF THE

GUJARAT COMMUNITY FORESTRY PRO.

November 20, 1979

South Asia Project DepartmentAgriculture E Division

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance oftheir official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

US$1.00 = Rupees (Rs) 8.60 1/

WEIGHTS AN0D MEASURES

Metric. System

FISCAL YEAR

GOI, GOG and Agenicies: April 1 - March 31

ABBREVIATIONS

ACF = Assistant Conservator of ForestsAddl. CCF = Additional Chief Conservator of ForestsCCF = Chief Conservator of ForestsCF = Conservator of ForestsCU = Communications Unit(s)CFW - Community Forestry WingDCF = Deputy Conservator of ForestsDDO = District Development Officer(s)DFC = District Forest CommitteeEC = Evaluation Cell

EF = Extension Forester(s)ER = Extension Ranger(s)FE = Fuelwood EquivalentFLCS = Forest Labor Cooperative SocietiesGFD = Gujarat Forest DepartmentGOG = Government of GujaratGOI = Government of IndiaGSFDC = Gujarat Stat:e Forest Development CorporationICB = International Competitive BiddingKVIC - Khadi and Village Industries CommissionLCB = Local Compet:itive BiddingMU = Monitoring UnitNPV - Net Present ValuePA = Protection AssistantPWD = Public Works DepartmentROR = Rate of ReturnSCF = Standard Conversion FactorTDO - Taluka Development Officer

1/ Until September 24, 1975, the Rupee was officially valued at a fixedPound Sterling rate. Since then it has been fixed against a "basket"of currencies. As these currencies are floating, the US Dollar/Rupeee-.change rate is subject to changes Con-viersions in this report havebeen made at US$1 to Rs 8.60.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

INDIA

GUJARAT COMMUNITY FORESTRY PROJECT

Table of Contents

Page No.

I. BACKGROUND ......................................... 1

A. Forestry in India ............................. 1Sectoral Context ..... .............. 1Bank Group Role in the Sector ............... 1

B. The State of Gujarat ..... ............. 2General ...................... 2Panchayat System ............................ 3Present Consumption of Energy ............... 3

C. Forestry in Gujarat ........................... 4Environmental Conditions and Forest Types ... 4Contribution of Forests to the Economy ...... 6Forestry Institutions ................ 7Forestry Programs ..... ............. 8Community Forestry ..... ............ 8

1II THE PROJECT.91. TEPOET........................................ 9

A. General ........................... . 9General Description ......................... 9Project Phasing ............................. 10Project Area ................................ 11

B. Detailed Features ............................. 12Village Woodlots ............................ 12Operating Procedures ........................ 13Reforestation of Degraded Forest .... ........ 14Afforestation of Private Agricultural Lands.. 14Strip Plantations ........................... 15Farm Forestry ............................... 15Plantation Design and Establishment .... ..... 15Nurseries ................................. 17Plantation Maintenance ..... ............... 17Plantation Protection ..... ................ 17

This report is based on the findings of a Bank mission which visitedIndia in March 1979, comprised of: Messrs. R. D. H. Rowe, P. Dax,J. H. Lindt, Jr. and Mrs. I. Girardot-Berg (IDA); and Messrs. C.W. Hollowayand R. Noronha (Consultants). Assistance was also provided by Mr. C.P.R.Nottidge and Ms. L. Lassen (IDA).

I This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performanceof their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

- ii -

Table of Contents (Cont'd)

Page No.

Conservation of Fuelwood Supplies .... ....... 18Introduction of More Efficient Wood Burning

Stoves ........ .......................... 18Introduction of Improved CremationFacilities ....... ....................... 18

Research .......... .......................... 19Project Implementation ..... ................. 19Hiousing and Transportation for Staff .... .... 20Expansion of Training Facilities .... ........ 22Fellowships ........ ......................... 22Monitoring and Evaluation ..... .............. 22

III. COST ESTIMATES AND FINANCING ....................... 23

A. Cost Estimates ................................ 23B. Proposed Financing ............................ 24C. Procurement ................................... 24D. Disbursements and Audits ...................... 25

IV. ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT ........................ 26

Community Forestry Wing ............................ 26Project Coordination ............................... 27Inservice Training ................................. 28Preserv:ice Training ................................ 28

Assistant Conservator of Forests (ACF) .... .... 29Extension Rangers (ER) ........................ 29Extension Foresters (EF) ...................... 29Protection Assistants (PA) .................... 29

Monitoring and Evaluation .......................... 29Public Information ................................. 30

V. PRODUCTION, MARKETING AND FINANCIAL RESULTS .... .... 30

Yields and Production .............................. 30Sharing of Produce between Villagers .... ........... 31Cost Recovery ...................................... 33

VI. BENEFITS, JUSTIFICATION AND RISKS .................. 33

Benefits ........................................... 33Fuelwood, Small Timber and Other Forest Produce 34Conservation of Fuelwood ...................... 34Employment .................................... 34Envrironment ................................... 34

Economic Rate of Return ............................ 35Efficiency Pricing ............................. 35Economic Net Present Value ..................... 37

- iii. -


Page No.

Economic Analysis of the Introduction of WoodSaving Cremation Units ........................... 37

Project Risks ...................................... 37

VII. RECOMMENDATIONS .................................... 38

LIST OF ANNEXES

l Project Models, Species and YieldsT-l Comparison of Plantation Models - Designs,

Establishment and MaintenanceT-2 Plantation Planning TargetsT-3 Comparison of Plantation Models - YieldsT-4 Properties and Uses of Trees and Other Species in the ProjectT-5 Plantation Model I - Roadside Saurashtra and KutchT-6 Plantation Model II - Roadside Mainland GujaratT-7 Plantation Model III - Railside Saurashtra and KutchT-8 Plantation Model IV - Railside Mainland GujaratT-9 Plantation Model V - CanalsideT-1O Plantation Model VI - Village Woodlot (Irrigated)

Whole of GujaratT-ll Plantation Model VII - Village Woodlot (Rainfed)

Saurashtra and KutchT-12 Plantation Model VIII - Village Woodlot (Rainfed) Mainland

GujaratT-13 Plantation Model IX - Reforestation of Degraded Forests

Panch Mahals, Bharuch, Vadodara, ValsadT-14 Plantation Model X - Afforestation of Private Land

Dangs District2 Project Approval, Procurement, Disbursement and Audit3 Financial Analysis and Cost Recovery

T-l Financial Costs and Returns to GOGT-2 Cost Recovery - Model VI - Village Woodlot (Irrigated) Whole

of GujaratT-3 Cost Recovery - Model VII - Village Woodlot Saurashtra & KutchT-4 Cost Recovery - Model VIII - Village Woodlot Mainland Gujarat

4 Economic AnalysisT-l Economic Analysis - ResultsT-2 Sensitivity AnalysisT-3 Costs and Benefits Streams at Market PricesT-4 Costs and Benefit Streams at Efficiency PricesT-5 Project OutputT-6 Financial and Economic PricesT-7 Estimate of Fuelwood PriceT-8 Benefits and Justification - Wood Saving Units

- i.v -


5 Schedule of Estimated IDA Disbursements6 Implementation Schedule7 Project Costs and Charts

T-l Summary Project CostsT-2 Project Organization - Staff and Other Operating CostsT-3 Project Organization - Building, Housing, Vehicle and

Equipment CostsT-4 Training and Fellowship CostsT-5 Research and Seed Testing CostsT-6 Planting CostsT-7 Stoves and Crematoria CostsT-8 Monitoring and Evaluation Costs

Chart 20400 Proposed Organization ChartChart 20399 Organization Chart: Community Forestry Field StaffChart 20398 Funding, Planning and Implementation Linkages for

Village Woodlots

8 Reference Material Available in South Asia Regional InformationCenter and in Project File

MAPS

IBRD 14322 General Map of Forest ReservesIBRD 14323 Gujarat Forestry Service

INDIA


I. BACKGROUND

A. Forestry in India

Sectoral Context

1.01 India's forests account for 23% of the total land area and coversome 75 M ha. Domestic roundwood requirements by the year 2000 are projectedto be nearly 290 M m3 (fuelwood 225 M m3 and industrial roundwood 65 M m3).Continuation of existing plantation programs should ensure the supply ofindustrial hardwood and about half of the coniferous roundwood demand. Re-garding fuelwood, on the assumption that 150 M m3 continues to be suppliedfrom existing resources, provision will have to be made for an additional75 M m3 by the year 2000. This would require an annual planting program ofsome 450,000 ha, but in terms of availability of both land and financialresources, this target cannot be achieved. Plantings of 225,000 ha annuallyover the 1980s would be a more realistic target.

1.02 India's strategy for forestry development thus reflects twopriorities: firstly, to develop production forestry programs to supply thegrowing needs of the domestic wood products industry (particularly pulp andpaper) and, secondly, through community forestry programs to supply fuelwood,fodder, small timber and minor forest produce to the rural population. En-compassing both objectives is recognition of the vital role forestry playsin soil and water conservation. In order to carry out this strategy, theNational Commission on Agriculture (1976) recommended that each state reorga-nize its Forest Department into two separate wings, one to remain in chargeof traditional production forestry and wildlife activities, while a new wingwould be created to develop community forests. The Forest Departments ofGujarat and Uttar Pradesh states were the first to create community forestrywings.

Bank Group Role in the Sector

1.03 The Madhya Pradesh Forestry Technical Assistance Project (Credit609-IN) is the initial phase of a major project aimed at the establishmentof a forest-based industry in Bastar District. The recently completed feasi-bility study (November 1979), financed under the Credit, has recommended theestablishment of an integrated industrial complex with one mill producingsawnwood and a pulp mill producing kraft pulp to supply a printing and writingpaper mill. The Kandi Watershed and Area Development Project (appraised in1978) involves reforestation and pasture development over some 18,000 ha ofPunjab's Siwalik Hills. It is expected to be presented to the Board laterthis fiscal year.

-2 -

1.04 In early 1978, in recognition of the need to expand communityforestry activities, Government of India (GOI) and the Bank agreed to examinethe possibilities of developing projects in Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh. TheUttar Pradesh Project was appraised in November 1978 and a Credit for US$23 Mapproved in June 1979.

B. The State of Gujarat

General

1.05 The State of Gujarat, with an area of 19.6 M ha, has a populationof about 31.5 M (1978), increasing by about 2.6% per year, of which 72% livein rural areas. Although relatively urbanized and, by Indian standards,highly industrial]ized, agriculture and allied activities still contribute 36%of the net domestic product of the state.

1.06 As a result of ecological differences and socio-cultural factors,there are large variations in the incidence of poverty between regions anddifferent segments of the population. A significant percentage of the pop-ulation belongs to traditionally disadvantaged groups: scheduled tribes(14%) and scheduled castes (7%). The tribal population is concentrated inthe hilly, forested eastern region of the State and scheduled castes aredispersed throughout the State. The labor force constitutes 31% of thetotal population.

1.07 Gujarat has nearly 18,300 villages of 1,050 people on average;35% of villages, however, have populations of less than 500 persons. Tradi-tional patron-client relationships between castes in villages are breakingdown and today many services, such as land preparation and planting, are paidfor in cash.

1.08 Livestock form an integral part of village life; a householdpossesses on average either two cattle or buffalo which provide milk, draughtpower, manure, and dung cake for cooking. Cattle and buffalo generally grazevillage commons and neighboring waste lands of which there are an estimated5.8 M ha throughout the state. Apart from grazing, the diets of cattle andbuffalo are supplemented by cut grass, leaves of fodder trees, and cropstubble and residues.

1.09 Forest lands are under increasing pressure as population growthnecessitates more intensive cultivation and a search for new lands for grazingand growing crops. The position has been exacerbated by distributing land tothe landless and granting homesteads t:o tribal people who have cleared andcultivated forest areas. In addition,, increased cattle and buffalo popula-tions have resulted in overgrazing of village commons and over exploitationof fodder from forest areas.

-3-

Panchayat System

1.10 Since April 1963, Gujarat has followed a policy of gradual trans-fer of administrative powers to panchayats (i.e. elective corporate bodies atthe village, taluka (subdistrict),.and district levels) (see Project File,Item 3). Provision is made at all levels for representation of women, sched-uled castes and tribes. At the taluka and district levels, members of thelegislative assembly and of parliament, and the chief revenue officer are alsorepresented. There are 12,000 village, 82 taluka, and 19 district panchayatsin the State.

1.11 The scope of activities that panchayats can undertake is wide andcovers almost every activity that falls within the rubric of rural development.Panchayats, operating through existing production committees, can make provi-sion for the development, maintenance, and regulation of grazing lands,pastures, village woodlots, and the storage of grass. Pursuant to this, theState has vested the control of grazing and waste lands contiguous to villagesin village panchayats. The State is also empowered, under the Indian ForestAct, to assign reserved or protected forests to village panchayats.

1.12 The State provides administrative assistance to panchayats throughtransferred officials, and officials on deputation. Village panchayat fundsare few and are obtained from cesses, tax refunds from the State, State loansand grants, and from villagers themselves. The average total annual incomeis about Rs 8,200 (approximately US$953) and an estimated 80% of villagepanchayats have incomes below the average. Taluka panchayats disburse fundsto village panchayats. All accounts are audited annually by the Examiner,Local Funds Department.

1.13 Generally, the performance of panchayats has been satisfactory ex-cept that the audits are often delayed--the result of staff shortages in theLocal Funds Department. The major constraint under which panchayats operateis the low level of finances, most of which are spent on administration andpriority matters for development (agriculture, water, roads).

Present Consumption of Energy

1.14 In 1972 an estimated 4.46 M m ton of fuelwood, 1.06 M m ton of drieddung cake and 0.16 M m ton of charcoal were consumed in Gujarat (Project File,Item 1), equivalent to 165 kg of wood, 40 kg of dung cake and 6 kg of charcoalper head. In terms of fuelwood equivalent, this amounts to 0.26 m3/person/year, close to the national average of 0.28 m3 and would require the annualfelling of some 110,000 ha of fuelwood plantations.

1.15 The costs of using dung cake for fuel, instead of using it as anorganic manure to increase agricultural production, are high. In 1972, on theabove figures, almost 10% of the total cow dung produced was burned. Assumingan application of 5 m ton/ha, this dung could fertilize 0.2 M ha and increaseyields by some 3 quintals of food crops/ha. Thus, in terms of food productionforegone, the annual loss amounts to about 60,000 m tons of foodgrains.

-.4-

1.16 In 1972 fuelwood and dung cakes accounted for 84% of the energyrequirements of rural households. Kerosene, coal, charcoal, and soft cokemade up the balance. It is rare to find, electricity or gas being used forcooking and lighting in rural areas. Cooking is done on open fires or onsmall, open stoves made of clay and sand. (chulahs) which burn at very lowthermal efficiency. Stoves are normally located at floor level and con-structed without chimneys. Although attempts have been made in the pastby the Khadi and Village Industries Commission (KVIC), various governmentdepartments and voluntary organizations to introduce smokeless and moreefficient stoves, success has been limited because none of the above entitieshave had sufficient staff to demonstrate how they should be used or to makelocally acceptable improvements.

1.17 In rural areas, it is estimated that about 80% of domestic fuel iscollected free by women and children whc, spend up to three hours a day insearch of firewood, cattle dung and crop wastes. However, in some of thelarger, more prosperous villages small quantities of fuelwood are bought atprices which range from Rs 250 to Rs 300C/m ton. Fuelwood prices range fromRs 250/m ton (Palanpur) in areas close to forest reserves, to as much asRs 500/m ton (Rajkot) in the arid, treeless areas of Saurashtra and Kutch.In Vadodara the 1979 price of fuelwood has more than doubled since 1965 whenit was Rs 120/m ton. Cow dung cake prices range from Rs 110/m ton in Suratto Rs 200/m ton in Ahmadabad.

1.18 Statewide consumption of fuelwood for cremation purposes is pres-ently estimated at about 140,000 m ton annually, costing some Rs 35 M.

C. Forestry in Gujarat

Environmental Conditions and Forest Types

1.19 Gujarat State divides naturally into two principal regions: main-land Gujarat, in the east, and the Saurashtra-Kutch peninsula, in the west(see Map IBRD 14322). Mainland Gujarat consists of alluvial plains and itseastern border is formed by hill ranges with altitudes of 300-700 m. TheSaurashtra peninsula is an area of low hills (75-100 m altitude) that isjoined to the mainland by a neck of low-lying land. Kutch adjoins Saurashtrato the north and is an undulating, dry rocky region with the Rann of Kutch, avast expanse of arid, saline mudflats, occupying most of its northern andsoutheastern areas.

1.20 There are three climatic seasons: winter (November-February),summer (March-June) and the monsoon (July-September). Temperature changescan be extreme, especially in the arid north and northwest, ranging fromaround 10C in winter to around 450C in summer. Annual rainfall declinesquite sharply from southeast to northwest, and ranges from 1,000-2,000 mm onthe southern mainland to 200-400 mm over most of Kutch (see Map IBRD 14322).

-5-

1.21 The forests of Gujarat may be grouped into four major types:

(i) moist deciduous forests found in the southernmost dis-tricts of the mainland (Surat, Valsad and Dangs) whichform the State's major source of commercial timber(Tectona grandis, Adina cordifolia, Dalbergia sisooo,Terminalia crenulata) and bamboos (Bambusa bambos andDendrocalamus strictus);

(ii) dry mixed deciduous forests of the central mainland andthose parts of Saurashtra with moderate rainfall (600-800 mm/anrum). Tree species are similar to the moistforest type but growth and quality are poorer;

(iii) dry scrub forests located in northern and westernregions of the State and include Acacia spp.,Anogeissus latifolia, Azadirachta indica, Erythrinasuberosa and Zizyphus spp.; thorny shrubs are frequentand trees are used primarily for fuelwood; bamboo(D. strictus) occurs only in hilly areas; and

(iv) mangrove forests confined to the sea coast; the mainspecies is Avicennia officinalis, which is of inferiorquality and used mainly as fuel.

1.22 All inland forest types, except in the most arid areas, are charac-terized by considerable diversity of species. This contributes markedly tothe biological efficiency and stability (against climatic fluctuations andinsect or disease outbreaks) of the forest.

1.23 Virtually all forest areas within Gujarat are owned by the Stateand managed by the Forest Department (GFD) (See Map IBRD 14322). The totalarea now administered by GFD covers 1.96 M ha, divided into reserved (61.7%),protected (5.9%) and unclassed (32.4%) forest. Thus, only 10% of the State'sgeographical area is forest covered. Barren, uncultivable lands and grazingareas comprise some 5.8 M ha.

1.24 This deficiency in forest resources is more acute than comparisonssuggest. Firstly, the distribution of the resource is uneven, substantialblocks of forest being confined to hill areas along the eastern borderof mainland Gujarat and in the southern and western areas of Saurashtra.Secondly, productivity of more than half the forest estate is low, eitherbecause of aridity and low soil fertility or because of past degradationthrough illegal felling, overgrazing and burning. An understanding of forestconservation is lacking in most sectors of the community as, traditionally,the forest has been regarded as an apparently inexhaustible supply of freeproduce and as a reservoir of land for alternative uses. Over the past twodecades GFD has expended considerable effort to improve productivity by forestrehabilitation, improved management and greater control of illegal degradation.

- 6 -

Since 1969 GFD has also embarked on a program of community forestry designedto increase local awareness of the need to replace forest resources (paras1.37 and 1.39).

1.25 All areas under the immediate jurisdiction of GFD are managed underthe supervision of its territorial staff in accordance with forest workingplans, prepared and revised at regular intervals by GFD. As a result ofunsatisfactory performance, exploitation by private timber contractorswas abolished and since 1972 all operations have been jointly undertakendepartmentally or by Forest Labor Cooperative Societies (FLCS) (para 1.33).

Contribution of Forests to the Economy

1.26 In 1974--77, the State forests annually produced an average of150,000 m3 of timber, 300,000 m ton of fuelwood (which includes fuelwoodtaken, without charge, by right holders), 73,000 m ton of bamboo (a third ofwhich was trade quality) and 22,000 m ton of fodder grass. In addition, awide variety of other minor forest products were extracted, including gums,dried leaves, edible flowers and fruits, and oilseeds.

1.27 State forests support a number of industries: some 620 sawmills;a pulp and paper mill; factories at Derol, Rajpipla, Vyara and Valsad, whichproduce betel nut, dyes and tannin fron Acacia catechu logs; activated carbonfactories at Rajpipla, and a series of private pharmaceutical works atJunagadh, Ranitalao, Surat and Udha, manufacturing medicinal products fromherbs, roots, bark and fruits. In addition, there are a great number ofcottage industries making furniture, doors, window frames and shutters,matches, toys, pencils, bamboo baskets and mats from forest products. Theforests' contribution to State revenue is about Rs 100 M per year (2.2% ofthe State's total revenue).

1.28 The forests provide considerable benefits to members of scheduledcastes, marginal iarmers and landless laborers (who form the bulk of thepopulation in and around the forests) in the form of free fuelwood, fruit,flowers, grazing, honey, poles for hut construction, and bamboo (either freeor at subsidized rates) for cottage industries. Work in forest areas alsoprovides the main source of paid employment for these people. In 1976/77,primary forest production generated 7 ]N man days of employment.

1.29 Nevertheless, shortages of primary forest products, especially fuel-wood, building poles and fodder are becoming increasingly severe and arelikely to become worse in the future. Although rehabilitation and improvedmanagement of the existing forest estate would help alleviate the situation,the magnitude of the problem and the inequitable geographic distribution ofexisting forest resources are such that the long-term solution lies in theafforestation of rLew areas. Presently, many areas such as road, rail andcanal reserves and, especially, village common lands and other wastelandsthat could grow trees, are unproductive. Thus, afforestation of new areas,combined with rehabilitation of existing degraded forest, would provide areasonably well distributed forest resource, with environmental benefits aswell as increased forest products.

-7-

Forestry Institutions

1.30 The head of the State Forest Department is the Chief Conservator ofForests (CCF), supported by two Additional Chief Conservators (Addl. CCF),responsible for forestry operations and for wildlife management. Alsodirectly responsible to the CCF are two Conservators of Forests (CF), onefor project planning, monitoring and evaluation and one concerned with thecontrol of illegal activity in the forest (See Chart 20400).

1.31 At field level, there are presently nine operational circles, eachunder the direction of a CF. Four circles (each with 4-7 divisions) areresponsible for production forestry and three circles (each with 5 divisions)for community forestry. The remaining two circles are responsible for wild-life management, research and working plans. In total, the Department'sforestry staff is composed of 91 professionals, 1,740 technical staff, and3,215 vocational staff.

1.32 There are four levels of formal forest institutional training.Assistant Conservators of Forests (ACF) are recruited from science graduatesand undertake a one year course at the Indian Forest Colleges. Rangers arerecruited from science graduates and are given a one year course at the RangerCollege at Rajpipla or training centers in other states. Foresters arerecruited from those having a secondary school certificate and are trainedfor eight months within the State at the Foresters and Forest Guard TrainingSchool at Kakrapur. Forest Guards (Protection Assistants) are recruited fromhigh school level candidates and taken directly into service. After a periodof inservice training, they are given a six month course at Kakrapur. Forestryresearch is presently performed under the supervision of the silviculturistin GFD.

1.33 In 1949, schemes were initiated to establish FLCS in Gujarat, withthe aim of increasing financial returns to forest laborers, and encouragingresponsibility among tribal people for the management and conservation of theforest. All exploitation is now done either by FLCS or GFD. There arepresently 147 FLCS with a total membership of approximately 68,000 (94% ofwhom are tribal people), supervised by the Cooperatives Department and GFD.In mid-1977, FLCS had working capital of Rs 156.3 M, share capital of Rs 11.1M and reserves of Rs 11.7 M. GFD determines the number of forest coupes eachyear and allocates them to FLCS, which then fell, extract and market thetimber. Profits (from which all harvesting and marketing expenses, includinginterest on loans, are deducted) are shared between GFD and FLCS in the ratio80:20. In 1977, income from sales amounted to Rs 27.8 M.

1.34 In 1976, the State established a Gujarat State Forest DevelopmentCorporation (GSFDC) to improve the efficiency of forest exploitation, todevelop forest industries and to initiate grading and processing of forestproducts by tribal people. Unlike many other corporations of this type, GSFDChas concentrated on the production of minor forest products of high potential.Its efforts have met with considerable success. In 1978, it organized thecollection, grading and marketing of 132,000 bags of bidi leaves (used formanufacture of local cigarettes), 5,039 m ton of mahuda flowers (an edible

- 8; -

flower, which can be used in the production of alcohol) and 1,155 m ton ofmahuda seeds (which are crushed for oil).

Forestry Programs

1.35 Since 1951, State programs have included reforestation of degradedforest areas, afforestation of eroded land and desert and coastal fringes, andestablishment of fast growing tree plantations. Since 1970, 132,873 ha havebeen planted. Total expenditures unde!r the Fifth Plan amount to Rs 215 M, ofwhich the allocation for 1978/79 is Rs 73 M.

Community Forestry

1.36 In 1969, Gujarat launched a community forestry program and embarkedon establishment of fuelwood plantations along roadsides and canal banks. Asthis early program was a success, GFD decided to expand its community forestryactivities, resulting in 1974, in the creation of a separate administrativewing to deal with the establishment of plantations outside forest reserveson public and private lands in rural areas. In the same year, the firstplantations on village common lands were established following an intensivepublicity campaign extolling the benefits of village woodlots. Next, in 1976,

a start was made on rehabilitating the! State's degraded forests with fuelwoodand pole plantations. By 1978, the Ccmmunity Forestry Wing (CFW) of GFD hadsuccessfully established some 35,000 ha of plantations (Project File, Item 2,T-1), including over 12,000 ha of village woodlots, 10,000 ha of plantationson degraded areas and 10,000 ha of plantations alongside roads and canals.GFD has now established an average of 8 ha of trees in over 1,500 villages.About 20 villages have already established and now manage woodlots of theirown.

1.37 The main objective of the present community forestry program is toprovide fuelwood in rural areas where it is needed most. However, it has beenpossible to design plantations so that they also provide poles, bamboo, fodder,grass, fruits, oilseed and gum without: seriously affecting fuelwood yields.Moreover, these additional products, particularly grass and fruit, bring earlyreturns in the rotation and are therefore much appreciated by villagers.

1.38 The early plantations alongside roads and canals involved littlepublic participation, but nevertheless created a marked awareness amongvillagers. Seeing stands of trees growing on what had previously beendesolate ground, people realized that tree growing was possible within theircommunities, and that the benefits were considerable. These new plantationsalso gave many people their first favorable impression of GFD.

1.39 Another important objective of the community forestry program wasto encourage farmers in the countryside, and private individuals and groupswithin the cities, to plant trees on their own lands. To do this, GFD pro-vides free seedlings and advice to those who will plant trees. The "farmforestry" scheme started in 1970 with the distribution of some 2.2 M seedlingsand by 1979 just under 86 M had been collected by growers. Little is knownabout the number of trees that have survived, but GFD is convinced the schemeis helping to generate the self-help attitude so necessary to the long term

-9-

success of community forestry. An innovative component of the "farm forestry"program is the involvement of children in tree planting. GFD supplies seedand technical assistance to schools that are prepared to set up small nur-series on their compounds. The children grow and tend the seedlings and arepaid Rs 0.15 per seedling by GFD who collect and distribute the plants. In1977, half a million seedlings were raised in this way by 5' schools.

II. THE PROJECT

A. General

2.01 In the past it was sound policy for GFD to assume full responsibil-ity for implementing community forestry programs, but through experience,Government of Gujarat (GOG) now recognizes that more responsibility for futuretree planting and subsequent management must be passed to the beneficiariesthemselves. Therefore, one of the project's aims is to gradually shiftresponsibility for establishment, maintenance, protection and harvesting ofvillage woodlots from GFD to village panchayats. Although this shift cannotbe entirely accomplished within the five-year project implementation period,provision would be made for about 2,300 of the 9,350 villages participating inthe project to take on responsibility for tree establishment and maintenance.

2.02 The project's primary objective would be to increase supplies offuelwood in rural areas. Secondary objectives would be to provide poles,bamboo, small timber (used, among other things, for agricultural implements),fodder, grass, fruits, oilseeds and other minor products from the same plant-ations. In addition, the project would introduce improved crematoria, developand introduce improved stoves as fuelwood conservation measures and wouldprovide considerable paid employment to the poorest section of the population(tribal people, scheduled castes and the landless) in tree planting andmaintenance. The project, principally through soil conservation, would alsohelp stabilize the environment.

General Description

2.03 During the five year project period the project would:

(a) establish 37,440 ha of village woodlots;

(b) reforest 30,000 ha of degraded forests;

(c) afforest 1,000 ha of privately owned eroded agricultural lands;

(d) establish 37,000 ha of strip plantings along roads, canalsand railroads;

(e) develop nurseries to provide planting stock for projectand farm forestry;

- 1 -

(f) maintain and protect about 25,000 ha of past plantings;

(g) provide community forestry staff, particularly at theoperational and extension levels, including staff requiredto establish one new commun:ity forestry circle and two newdivisions, and also to support publicity, research, training,planning and monitoring actfivities;

(h) construct staff houses, a project headquarters andtwo vehicle workshops;

(i) provide vehicles to improve management, supervision andforestry extension services;,

(j) strengthen research activities, and construct four researchand seed testing/storage centers;

(k) develop the training of project staff, including provision offellowships and special trai.ning in community developmentskills; and

(1) construct about 10,000 smokeless stoves and 1,000 cremationfacilities.

Prime responsibility for implementation would be with CFW.

Project Phasing

2.04 Given below is the proposed planting program. In addition, about30 M tree seedlings would be distribut:ed annually to farmers for plantingaround fields and homesteads.

Project Planting Program (hectares)

Project Year1 2 3 4 5 Total %

Category

Village Woodlots 4,560 6,000 7,680 8,880 10,320 37,440 36Degraded Forests 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 30,000 28Private Forests 200 200 200 200 200 1,000 1

Strip Plantations

Roadside 3,800 5,700 7,600 6,900 7,600 31,600 30Railside 1,600 1,800 3,400 3Canalside 200 300 400 500 600 2,000 2

Total 14,760 18,200 21,880 24,080 26,520 105,440

% 14 17 21 23 25 100 100

Target number ofSelf-help villages 300 400 500 500 600 2,300 /a

/a Equivalent to the establishment of some 9,200 ha of village woodlots.

Because this is an innovative project, and it is impossible to predict withcertainty villagers' and farmers' response to the alternative approaches tocommunity forestry, flexibility would be maintained during project imple-mentation to shift the proportion of planting from one category to anotheraccording to results. Provision is also made in the project (para 4.15) formonitoring the results and for an interim joint GOG/IDA review at the endof project year 3.

Project Area

2.05 The project would be implemented in all of the State's nineteendistricts located throughout mainland Gujarat and in the Saurashtra/Kutchregions (Map IBRD 14323). It has been estimated that some 6 M ha of landare suitable for community forestry plantations. Ultimately, some 10%of village common and other waste lands (580,000 ha), 1/ and 200,000 ha ofdegraded forest, 60,000 ha of private agricultural lands and 60,000 ha along-side roads, railways and canal banks would be improved.

1/ Includes: barren and uncultivable land (2.7 M ha); permanent pastureand other grazing land (0.8 M ha); and cultivable waste land (2.3 M ha).

- 1,' -

B. Detailed Features

2.06 All four categories of plantations (village woodlots, reforestationof degraded forest, afforestation of private agricultural lands and stripplantations) have differing conceptual., establishment, management, harvesting,marketing, legal and funding features which distinguish them from one another(see Annex 1, T-1 and T-5 to T-14). I)etails of each category are summarizedin the following paragraphs.

Village Woodlots (37,440 ha)

2.07 Two schemes involving different levels of community participationwould be introduced: one (Village Self-help Scheme), where the panchayatwould assume full responsibility for the village woodlot; and the other(Supervised Village Scheme), where parLchayats are as yet unwilling to assumethis responsibility. In both cases, woodlots would be established on landeither belonging to panchayats or on government land vested in panchayats.The principles involved in the Village Self-help Scheme have already beentested and accepted by some 20 villages located in areas where communityforestry programs were first instigated.

(a) Village Self-help Scheme - (about 2,300 villages representing25% or more of woodlot area or about 9,200 ha): would includethose villages prepared to accept full responsibility for estab-lishment, management and harvesting of woodlots. These villageswould be expected to pay from their own resources at least thelabor costs of land preparation, planting, maintaining, protectingand harvesting their own wocidlots. Part of the labor costs couldbe provided through governme!nt sources (para 1.12). Technicalassistance, seedlings and other inputs required would beprovided by CFW through Extension Rangers (ER) and ExtensionForesters (EF). A written a[greement, defining the obligationsof both parties, would be concluded between GFD and the villagepanchayat. Special care would be taken to provide incentivesfor villagers to participate in such schemes (para 5.06). Inaddition, villages in this scheme would be given priority forthe introduction of smokeless stoves and cremation facilities.

(b) Supervised Village Scheme - (involving about 7,050 villagesor no more than 75% of woodlot area): would involve thosevillages without existing woodlots and unwilling at this stageto accept full responsibility for woodlot establishment andsubsequent management and harrvesting. An agreement between CFWand the panchayats would be entered into whereby CFW wouldadvance funds for all activities from establishment to harvest-ing and would recover direct. costs (excluding the cost ofseedlings) and charge a manaLgement fee. The area developedwould be limited to 4 ha per village.

- 13 -

Chart 20398 indicates linkages involved in planning, funding and implementingvillage woodlots. During negotiations, assurances were obtained that about9,200 ha of village woodlots would be established under the Self-help Scheme.

Operating Procedures

2.08 CFW, acting through ER and EF, would encourage villages to joineither scheme by explaining the benefits to be obtained from the creationof village woodlots, by assisting the panchayat in demarcating areas ofgrazing or waste lands which can be planted to trees, and by explaining thenature and provisions of agreements to be entered into between the panchayatand CFW. Where a village panchayat wishing to create woodlots has insuffi-cient land suitable for afforestation, EF and ER would assist the panchayatin obtaining the Collector's sanction to vest government lands for the purposeof forest development. The scheme application (Project File, Items 4 and 5)would be finalized at a meeting of the village assembly. The Taluka Develop-ment Officer (TDO) or his representative, ER and EF would attend the meetingand explain to the assembly the main features of the application. The assemblywould also determine the extent of resources (both labor and financial) whichwould be contributed by the panchayat and work out the types and number ofspecies to be planted in the demarcated area with the assistance of EF and ER.In cases where villages panchayats lack funds to pay for labor, credit wouldbe made available under existing arrangements (para 1.12). These funds,carrying an annual interest rate of 10%, would be recovered at time of felling.Project implementation does not depend on free village labor; such an approachwould not be workable in Gujarat.

2.09 Scheme applications from village panchayats 1/ would first be for-warded to the taluka panchayat and then to the district panchayat for endorse-ment. TDO and District Development Officer (DDO) would assist taluka panchayatsin making recommendations and advise on the priorities to be recommended to theDistrict Forest Committee (DFC). District panchayats would be assisted byDeputy Conservator of Forests (DCF) in arriving at recommendations. Communityparticipation in decision-making and planning would be furthered throughpanchayat representation on the DFC where the annual district forest develop-ment plan would be prepared and priorities finalized (See Chart 20398).

2.10 Once proposals have been agreed, village panchayats would be assistedwith implementation through regular extension visits by EF and through training.Training would first be given to members of the production committee, astatutory committee of the village panchayat responsible for implementation ofagricultural and forestry programs. Thereafter, training would be given topersons nominated by the panchayat. EF would develop the villagers' skillsand understanding of forestry through regular visits, increased publicity(films, talks, posters) and by organizing one-day visits of groups of villagersto demonstration areas where panchayats or farmers have developed their ownplantations.

1/ Alternatively, the scheme applications can be forwarded through EF/ERto DFO to District Forest Committee.

- 12+ -

2.11 During plantation establishment, ER would assist the village pan-chayat in determining arrangements for future land use in the plantation arecThese would include decisions such as whether grass should be allowed to becut and carried or grazed, and what tree limbs could be lopped or fodderleaves collected.

2.12 In the case of the Supervised Village Scheme, at the end of threeyears from the date of commencement oi works, TDO or his representative and ERwould assist the village assembly in determining whether and when the villagepanchayat should assume management of the village woodlot.

2.13 TDO and ER would also assist the village panchayat in preparinga scheme for the distribution of timber and poles at every thinning, fellingand coppicing. In particular, TD0 or his representative and ER would adviseon the percentage of timber and poles which should be distributed to thepoorer sections of the village and the terms on which such distribution shouldtake place.

Reforestation of Degraded Forest (30,000 ha)

2.14 Thirty thousand ha of degraded State-owned forest reserves wouldbe rehabilitated through replanting with fuelwood and other species. Twoapproaches, dependent upon prevailing labor conditions in the area and eachrequiring different amounts of CFW supervision, would be used. The firstapproach would involve the use of casual laborers employed by CFW to establishand maintain plantations. Harvesting and marketing would be done by FLCS(para 1.33), with net profits being split 80:20 between CFW and FLCS. Thesecond approach would encourage full time employment of tribal people andother socially disadvantaged groups. Groups of 9-15 families would be housedin or near areas to be reforested. They would be assured a water supply,given materials for home construction, permitted to establish kitchen gardensand keep a limited number of cattle (no goats). Such families would not begiven title to lands as it is government policy not to encourage settlementin forest lands. Harvesting would be done by this permanent labor force andnet profits shared 80:20 between CFW and the laborers l/ (para 5.02 (c)).Assurances were obtained at negotiations that adequate facilities would beprovided to full time laborers required to live and work in degraded forestareas.

Afforestation of Private Agricultural Lands (1,000 ha)

2.15 As a pi:Lot effort, CFW would encourage tribal families to returnmarginal agricultural land in forest areas to trees. A variety of contractarrangements would be tested, among which would be the following plan.

1/ If the head of a family dies before final felling or coppicing, CFWwould, whenever possible, continue to employ members of the family onthe same terms. If, however, such employment is not possible, CFW wouldpay the surviving family members a proportion of expected net profits andthe family would leave the community.

- 15 -

First, an area of at least 2 ha for each family would be selected and anestimate made of the present annual cash returns from growing food crops(usually about Rs 250/ha). Following agreement with the family as to theobligations of both parties, CFW would annually advance to the family, to bededucted from future forest product sales, an amount equivalent to presentcash returns from agriculture and payable in two installments (April andAugust) (see Project File, Item 6). These interest-free payments would coin-cide with the times when cash is most required by farmers. CFW would thenestablish teak and bamboo and maintain the plantation for three years; there-after, maintenance would become the farmer's responsibility but CFW wouldretain full responsibility for decisions related to silvicultural matters.Harvest and sales would be supervised by CFW, at which time CFW would recoverany direct costs incurred, including cash advances made, and return 100% ofnet profits remaining to the owner.

Strip Plantations (37,000 ha)

2.16 Full responsibility for all plantations alongside roads and canalshas been delegated by State authorities to CFW. Negotiations are in progressat the national level to determine how planting along railways would behandled.

2.17 Villages that have strip plantations adjacent to their lands wouldbe allowed to collect grass, fodder, fallen wood and other minor produce fromthese areas but not cut trees, poles, bamboo or small timber. The latterwould generally be destined for urban areas and would be sold by CFW. Netprofits from plantations would be split on a 50:50 basis between CFW and thetaluka concerned. The taluka panchayat would then distribute profits equit-ably among village panchayats, thus enabling villages not adjacent to stripplantations to also benefit from the scheme. Priority would be given forthe use of these funds for further village woodlot development.

Farm Forestry

2.18 Under the project, CFW would continue to make about 30 M seedlingsavailable annually to farmers, private individuals and groups within citiesto plant on their land; these would be provided free of charge. Both nakedroot and polypot seedlings would be raised in State nurseries and farmerswould obtain these upon request at the nursery site or at temporary distribu-tion centers (such as taluka headquarters, selected villages and schools).Farmers receiving seedlings would be given instructions on planting, care andutilization of the plants. A roster would be maintained of the recipient'sname, address, and number of seedlings obtained to allow spot monitoring ofseedlings distributed and their survival rate (para 2.30).

Plantation Design and Establishment

2.19 Overall, approximately 90% of trees planted would produce fuelwoodor poles; the balance would be mainly fruit trees. Thirty percent of treesplanted for fuelwood and poles would also produce good leaf fodder. Fodder

- 16 -

would be supplemented by grass that would be cut within plantations, eitherfrom natural grasses whose production would be increased by protection fromuncontrolled grazing or, in village areas, from high-yielding grasses andlegumes sown or planted between rows of trees. Every tree species grown wouldbe multipurpose in that it would produce two or more products. Plantationspecies have been selected primarily for their adaptability to the proposedsites and their ability to meet the project's production requirements.Gujarat has a wide range of environmental conditions and the list of recom-mended species is correspondingly diverse. A list of the principal andsubsidiary tree species and selected grasses and legumes and their uses isgiven in Annex 1, T-4.

2.20 A number of plantation modeLs have been developed to meet the vary-ing ecological conditions found throughout the State and to satisfy variouscultural conditions (irrigated or rainfed) and social needs. Details aregiven in Annex 1, T-1 and T-3. In vil.lage woodlots, fruit trees would occupy18-20% of plantation areas and village models would have 50% or more of theground surface area sown to improved grasses or legumes. Bamboos would berestricted to mainland and irrigated sites. Degraded forests would be refor-ested with miscellaneous pole and fuelwood species (84% of the plantationareas) and some bamboo. In degraded i-orests, there would be no provision forfruit trees. In the case of private forest plantations, teak would occupy 90%of the area and would be thinned at 11 years, coppiced at 15 years and againat 30 years after planting. Bamboos would provide the balance of stock tobe planted. Fuelwood and pole species would occupy the bulk of strip planta-tions (57 to 100%--the latter in Saurashtra-Kutch railsides) with higherproportions of Leucaena (44%) and EucaLlyptus (50%) in irrigated canal areas.Planting costs are shown below:

Range ofCategory of Plantings Planting Costs /a

(Rs/ha)

Village Woodlots

Self-help 900 - 1,000 /bSupervised 2,600 - 4,500

Reforesitation of Degraded Forests 1,800

Afforestation of Private Lands 2,000

Strip P:Lantations 2,700 - 8,400

/a Expenditures incurred during first three years, including nursery,planting, protection and maintenance costs. On average, labor costsrepresent 72% of total planting expenditures.

/b Excludes labor costs paid by the villages.

- 17 -

2.21 Annual planting programs would be agreed at meetings involvingstate, circle and divisional officers. Firstly, planting sites would beselected and surveyed in November-April, some 14-20 months before planting.Soils would be examined and, if existing vegetation suggests high alkalinityor nutrient deficiencies, remedial treatment undertaken. In November-Aprilof the following year (2-8 months before planting), land pr-paration would beundertaken. Planting pits would be aligned and dug in all areas except inprivate agricultural lands which would be staked in preparation for plantingwith teak stumps. Protection barriers would also be constructed during thisperiod. Seedlings for the current year's planting would be transported toplanting sites in mid June in preparation for planting with the onset of therains in late June or early July.

2.22 Nurseries. At present there are some 210 forest nurseries (40permanent and 170 temporary) for raising nursery stock under the communityforestry program in Gujarat. It is proposed to increase this number to 440nurseries and to enlarge some existing sites to meet the increased plantingrequirements of the project. It is estimated that 15% of new nurseries wouldbe permanent and the rest temporary. Where required, each nursery wouldbe equipped with a water pump. Each nursery would be in the charge of an EF.Casual labor, frequently women, would prepare nursery beds, fill polypots withsoil, sow seed, and weed and water plants.

2.23 All tree seed, except improved strains of Leucaena leucocephala(koo-baval) would be obtained from within the State. All seed would be testedand stored at four regional testing and storage units (para 2.29). Therewould be no direct sowing of tree seed at planting sites. All planting stockwould be six months to a year old seedlings, except for trees used for replace-ment in the second year which would be two years old at planting.

2.24 Plantation Maintenance. Tending operations would consist primarilyof replacement, weeding and hoeing around trees, and irrigation or wateringin certain areas. For costs, see Annex 1, T-5 to T-14. Funds are also in-cluded for the maintenance of about 25,000 ha of existing plantations.

2.25 Weeding and soil working around the base of each tree would beundertaken six times in all plantations: three times in the first year,twice in the second year and once in the third year. Thereafter, no furtherlabor would be required as shade would be sufficient to suppress weed growth.Grass cutting would normally eliminate the need for weeding in spaces betweentrees. A nitrogenous fertilizer would be applied to trees during the firstweedings in the first and second years. Plantations on canalsides and onirrigated village land would be irrigated as necessary. A high proportion ofdrought-resistant tree species would be grown in rainfed plantations.

2.26 Plantation Protection. All plantations would require protectionagainst livestock and occasional attack by insects; certain areas would requirespecial protection against fire. Extensive strip planting in Gujarat beganseven years ago and local people have become familiar with these areas andappear to have accepted communal responsibility for excluding livestock from

- is -

plantations. This situation has enabled GFD to use cheap, light weight fence-which are more of a psychological deterrent to entry than a physical one.Five types of perimeter barrier would be used; the choice dependent on inten-sity of stock pressure, availability of materials and the type of area Lo ucprotected. They are, in ascending order of linear cost: (i) piled brushwoodand thorn fence (Rs 335/km); (ii) live hedge (using the fast-growing cact-i_Euphorbia royaliana) (Rs 600/km); (iii) bamboo and wire fence (four-strand,plain galvanized wire stretched through drilled bamboo poles) (Rs 970/km);(iv) trench and live hedge (Rs 2,500-:3,000/km); and (v) rubble walls (drystone or rubble) (Rs 5,000/km). Further details are provided in Project File,Item 8. Watchmen would be employed to patrol all strip plantation fencing forthe first three years and each would be responsible for 10 ha of plantationsin the first year after establishment and 20 ha thereafter.

Conservation of Fuelwood Supplies

2.27 Introduction of More Efficient Wood Burning Stoves. By makingsimple adjustments to the fire box and by addition of a smokestack, a morefuel efficient stove can be manufactured from local clay and sand at smallcost (approximately Rs 50 per stove). In cooperation with the KVIC, Depart-ment of Health and other private organizations concerned with the design andpromotion of such improved stoves in Gujarat, the Training, Research andCommunications Unit would launch a program to popularize the use of theseimproved stoves. Within each of the four Communications Units (CU), therewould be a group, headed by a female social worker, whose task would be todetermine and encourage the use of the most appropriate stove for the localityconcerned. Three or four demonstration stoves would be constructed in eachvillage establishing Self-help Woodlots (including one to be built in thelocal EF's home). The social worker would be assisted by five artisans whowould construct 100 stoves each per year. The Monitoring Unit (MU) would playan important role in determining receptivity, utility and fuelwood savings.Assurances were obtained during negotiations that 10,000 improved stoveswould be built and demonstrated in at least 2,300 villages over the five-yearproject implementation period.

2.28 Introduction of Improved Cre!mation Facilities. Improved, sociallyacceptable cremation facilities which reduce the amount of fuelwood neededfrom 400 to 240 kg per cremation would' be provided 1/ to those villagesestablishing Self-help Woodlots and in the State's main urban centers wherethe need is greatest. The units would. cost about Rs 4,000 each. Assuranceswere obtained at negotiations that, at project completion, some 800 units inrural areas and 200 units in cities would be installed by artisans employedby CFW or by local manufacturers. The! CF (Training, Research and Communi-cations) would be responsible for overall implementation of this component,including the selection of sites and liaison with other organizations suchas the Sadvichar Parivar (a private ch,aritable organization) who have alreadybeen involved in promoting these units.

1/ On the basis of one unit per 3 to 4 villages.

- 19 -

Research

2.29 The project would provide for increased research, seed testingand storage. The research program would be under the direction of theDeputy Conservator of Forests (DCF) (Research) who in turn is responsible toCF (Training, Research and Communications) (See Chart 20400). Close liaisonwould be maintained with GFD's silviculturalist and the territorial forestresearch organization, The project would develop four field stations anda small research institute, staffed by five professionals and supportinglaboratory personnel, which would be located in the Forest Ranger Collegecomplex at Rajpipla. The institute's professional staff would compose anagrostologist, a horticulturist, an ecologist, a soil scientist and an ACFin charge of seed testing. Together, this staff would provide the mainscientific support to field units of CFW. The four field research stationswould be located at: Bhuj (Kutch), Rajkot (Saurashtra), Mahesana (northmainland Gujarat), and Rajpipla (central and south mainland Gujarat). Staffwould be involved in the establishment, demarcation, management and measure-ment of field trials and be responsible for routine seed testing and seedstorage within their region.

2.30 The principal objectives of the research program would be toincrease tree productivity and decrease establishment and maintenance costs.Research would involve collaboration with other government departments,research institutes and universities, experienced in these fields. A tech-nical committee to review the progress of the research projects has beenconstituted. The research organization would also be involved in'the mon-itoring of farm forestry activities (para 2.18) by devising sampling tech-niques, collecting data, and selecting tree species and management techniquesof special relevance.

2.31 A tentative research program for the project has been prepared byGFD but its scope is too broad and requires more limited and specificobjectives that can be achieved within the project period. Assuranceswere obtained at negotiations that a research program, acceptable to theAssociation, would be prepared by September 30, 1980.

Project Implementation

2.32 The success of the proposed community forestry program would dependlargely upon an efficient organization with suitably trained and equipped staffacting in full cooperation with rural people. To achieve these objectives,the project would expand and strengthen CFW through transfer from productionforestry to CFW of two rehabilitation divisions (responsible for degradedforest areas); establishment of one new community forestry circle and two newcommunity forestry divisions (para 4.01 and Charts 20399, 20400); and creationof special support units, including establishment of four units responsiblefor publicity at the village level, a monitoring unit, an evaluation cell anda planning, information and reporting unit. It is anticipated that no foreignconsultants would be employed under the project.

- 29 -

2.33 Annual planting targets (para 2.04) have been geared to the rate atwhich CFW can recruit and train staff. With nearly 35% of all operationalstaff already in position, 17 of 19 divisions operational and three of fourcircles established, the build up of field staff required to implement theplanting program does not pose difficulties except for ACF, some of whichwould be provided by emergency appoinl:ment (see para 4.11). Staff require-ments are detailed in Annex 7, T-2, T-5 and T-7 and shown below:

Project StaEf Requirements

Additional Total at FullExisting Required Development

Addl CCF - 1 1CF 4 3 7DCF 18 7 25ACF 3 69 72ER 134 295 429EF 464 980 1,444PA 343 438 781

Housing and Transportation for Staff

2.34 Much of the success of CFW's activities would depend on regular andfrequent visits by EF and ER to village panchayats, individual farmers, andsupervision of other plantations scatt:ered over wide areas. It is, therefore,vital that field level staff and their supervisors live near their work andthat they are sufficiently mobile to enable them to function effectively. Atpresent, housing for rent in rural areas is limited and staff often live farfrom their work and rely on public transport. GOG housing policy would con-tinue to encourage the use of rented accommodation wherever possible. Sincerental property is not available in all areas, the project would providehousing for about 50% of project staff. Assurances were obtained at negotia-tions that GOG would ensure that field staff would live in the area assignedfor their operations and for this purpose would provide housing or rentallowance as necessary. Design standards and cost estimates were reviewedduring project appraisal and the mean cost of housing for field level staffwould be about Rs 14,300 (US$1,663). Designs would be in accordance withexisting government standards which apply to all government departments.Apart from a new CFW headquarters building, all other office buildings wouldbe rented. For this purpose, and for office furniture and equipment, fundswould be provided under the project. Housing requirements are given below anddetailed in Annex 7, T-3.

- 21

Housing Requirement-. (numbers)

Unit Cost Project YearCate, . (Rs '000) 1 2 3 4 Total

Senior FieLd Staff 70.0 6 4 2 1 13Senior Field Staff 60.0 12 12 12 1 37Senior Administrative Staff 50.0 1 1Field Staff (Junior Grade) 17.2 76 76 76 5 233

Field Staff (Junior Grade) 16.2 306 304 304 67 981

Field Staff (Assistants) 8.6 264 264 263 22 813

2.35 The project would also provide for additional equipment andvehicles at headquarters, divisional and circle levels, motorcycles for ER

and bicycles for EF and Protection Assistants (PA). Motorcycles and bicycles

would be sold on credit to staff who wish to purchase them. The table below

summarizes vehicle requirements, further details of which are given in

Annex 7, T-3.

Incremental Requirements of Vehicles (numbers)

Project Year

Category 1 2 3 4 5 Total

Cars 4 1 54-wheel drive 17 5 1 23Trailers 6 2 8Vans 11 3 14Buses 6 6Tractors & Trailers 27 20 21 11 11 90Water Tankers 27 21 21 11 11 91Trucks 27 21 21 10 11 90Motorcycles 180 93 91 59 69 492

Bicycles 612 203 229 238 386 1,668

2.36 Project support would be provided by the four communications units,

a monitoring unit, an evaluation cell, and a planning, information and report-ing unit. Under the project, funds would be provided for staff, operatingcosts of the units and a limited amount of equipment and instructional aids,including the making of films required for staff training and public informa-tion. A bus would be provided for each communications unit which would also

be used for staff training trips. Assurances were obtained at negotiations

that two Communications Units would be established, no later than September 30,1980 and two additional units by September 30, 1981.

2.37 The Public Relations Unit, located at Ahmadabad, would be headedby DCF, under the CF Planning, Information and Reporting. The Unit would be

responsible for receiving visitors and providing information to the public.

Assurances were obtained at negotiations that this unit would be formed by

September 30, 1980.

-2

2.38 The project would support a planned program of increased stafftraining which woluld include regularly scheduled inservice training (para4.07) and preservice training (para 4.10), expansion of training facilitiesand provision of fellowships. In order to carry out the training activities,the project would provide additional staff, buildings, vehicles, equipmentand course support (see Annex 7, T-4 for cost details).

Expansion of Training Facilities

2.39 Existing hostel and classroom facilities would be expanded atRajpipla to accomraodate 40 additional trainees. Two additional instructorswould also be provided, including one in extension/communications. Facilitiesat Kakrapur would also be expanded to accommodate an additional 60 trainees.This would increase total capacity to 360 trainees annually. An instructorin extension commtnications would be added to existing staff. A DCF wouldbe provided at State headquarters to coordinate staff training activities.

Fellowships

2.40 Since Gujarat would profit by the exchange of information with otherstates and countries, short duration fellowships for domestic (12 man months)and foreign (8 man months) study would be provided under the project. Inaddition, selected staff would attend short courses and training workshopssponsored by GOI Directorate of Agricul]tural Extension, Extension EducationInstitute (Anand) and various other organizations and universities to developextension techniques in community forestry. Under the project, a total of 40man months of fellowships would be funcded for attendance at these courses andworkshops; they would be attended primarily by ACF, DCF and members of thecommunications and research units. Twc, one-year domestic fellowships in ex-tension techniques would be provided to selected staff members who would thenbe assigned to the forest training schools at Rajpipla and Kakrapur as instruc-tors. Two, two-year overseas fellowships for project economists would alsobe provided. CFW staff sent overseas for study tours would remain within CFWfor at least three years, and those ser.t for two-year overseas training wouldremain within CFW for at least five years after their return.

Monitoring and Evaluation

2.41 A Monitoring Unit would be established. It would test experimentaldesigns for project implementation, assess villager acceptance of communityforestry activities, determine survival percent of the farm forestry compo-nent, and carry out a mid-term evaluation of the project (para 4.15). AnEvaluation Cell would be set up under the Director of Evaluation, GeneralAdministration Department, GOG (para 4.16).

- 23 -

III. COST ESTIMATES AND FINANCING

A. Cost Estimates

3.01 Project costs are estimated at USS76.0 M, of which US$3.6 M wouldinvolve foreign exchange expenditures. Duties and taxes included in totalcosts are estimated at US$2.3 M. Details of costs, summarized below, are inAnnex 7.

Summary Cost Estimate

Foreign% of Exchange /b

Component Rs M US$ M /a Base Cost US$ M

Project OrganizationStaff 112.70 13.10 20.6Operating Costs 21.54 2.50 3.9 1.0Vehicles and Equipment 30.00 3.49 5.5 0.9Buildings and Housing 30.76 3.58 5.6

Subtotal 195.00 22.67 35.6

Training and Fellowships 8.21 0.96 1.5 0.1

Research and Seed Testing 3.67 0.43 0.7 0.1

PlantingsVillage Woodlots /c 97.42 11.33 17.8Reforestation of DegradedForests 52.54 6.11 9.6

Afforestation of PrivateForest Lands 1.90 0.22 0.3

Strip Plantings 146.64 17.05 26.8Maintenance of Past Plantings 4.74 0.55 0.9

Subtotal 303.24 35.26 55.4 1.0

Farm Forestry 29.70 3.45 5.4

Stoves and Cremation Facilities 4.50 0.52 0.8

Monitoring and Evaluation 3.30 0.38 0.6 0.1

Total Base Costs 547.62 63.67 100.0 3.2Physical Contingencies 22.50 2.62 4.1Price Contingencies 83.47 9.71 15.3 0.4

TOTAL 653.59 76.00 119.4 3.6

/a US$1 = Rs 8.6/b Foreign exchange cost = operating costs 40%, vehicles 25%, equipment 30%,

plantings 3%./c Including costs of labor.

- 24 -

3.02 Cost estimates are based on actual costs for similar nursery, plant-ing, and protection techniques and on findings of the mission during appraisal.Physical contingencies have been added at rates of 10% for housing, researchand seed testing, and of 5% for nurseries and plantings to meet unforeseenexpenditures. Price contingencies totalling 15% of base costs, calculated inaccordance with Bank estimates of future price movements in India, 1/ are alsoincluded.

B. Proposed Financing

3.03 An IDA Credit of US$37.0 M, representing 50% of total project costsnet of duties and taxes, is proposed:

Project Financing

Local SupportPanchayats GOG/GOI IDA Total

US$ M 3.5 35.5 37.0 76.0% 5.0 47.0 48.0 100.0

The Credit would be made to GOI on standard terms and would be channelled toGOG on GOI's terms and arrangements for development assistance to the States.Written confirmation of GOG financial arrangements for the project has beenreceived by the Association.

3.04 In order to ensure an early start to the project, and speedy andeffective implementation thereafter, retroactive financing, not exceedingUS$0_5 M, would be provided from June 1, 1979 to date of credit signing fornursery expenditures incurred to provide planting stock and advance work onland preparation and plantation protecIion necessary for the 1980 plantingseason, which starts in July. Retroactive financing would also cover addi-tional staff who need to be in place by the start of the planting season andpurchase of equipment and vehicles required for staff involved in tree planting.

C. Procurement

3.05 Direct plantation works (US$38.7 M), including nursery expenditures,planting, protection works, and farm forestry would be scattered over a widearea and would be carried out over different periods of time. Therefore, con-tracts following competitive bidding would not be practical. Nursery works,including the production of seedlings, would be carried out under force accountby CFW. Land preparation, planting and maintenance for village plantationswould also be carried out by CFW with varying degrees of participation fromvillage panchayats (para 2.07). However, some materials such as fencing wire,tools, and fertilizers would be procured under local competitive bidding (LCB)

1/ Currenitly estimated at an annual rate of 5% p.a.

- 25 -

procedures which are satisfactory. Contracts for civil works (costingUS$3.7 M) would be small and widely dispersed in time and place and, therefore,would not be suitable for international competitive bidding (ICB) and would belet following LCB, advertised locally, or by force account and in accordancewith established GOG procedures that are satisfactory to IDA. Design andsupervision of housing and building construction would be carried out by GFDor Public Works Department (PWD). Vehicles (US$2.7 M) would be purchased overthree years and, as adequate maintenance and availability of spare parts wouldbe of paramount importance, this would necessitate purchase of locally madevehicles of types already used by Government departments. Thus, procurementwould be by LCB under existing government procedures which are acceptable toIDA. Imported research equipment would be required in small lots and wouldnot, therefore, be suitable for procurement under ICB procedures. These itemsand other miscellaneous equipment (US$1.0 M) would be bulked whenever possibleand procured through LCB except where valued at less than US$20,000 when theywould be purchased by prudent shopping through usual trade channels. Stovesand crematoria (US$0.5 M) would be built under force account. The balance ofproject costs (US$29.4 M) would be staff salaries and related expenditures(US$16.3 M), training (US$0.7 M), and contingencies (US$12.4 M).

D. Disbursements and Audits

3.06 Disbursements under the Credit would cover:

(a) 55% of expenditures for civil works (US$2.30 M);

(b) 100% of foreign expenditures for imported equipment,or 70% of locally procured vehicles and equipment(US$2.9 M);

(c) 55% of direct planting expenditures (US$21.4 M).

(d) 55% of total staff salaries of CFW (US$7.90 M);

(e) 100% of the cost of training (US$0.70 M);

(f) 55% of costs of stoves and crematoria (US$0.3 M); and

(g) unallocated (US$1.5 M).

Direct planting expenditures include: nursery costs (including farm forestry);land preparation; planting; protection and maintenance of plantings.

3.07 Disbursements for all force account work, salaries, local training,civil works contracts costing less than Rs 100,000, and other procurementinvolving expenditures of less than Rs 50,000 for vehicles and equipment forwhich it would not be practical to submit documents, would be against state-ments of expenditures certified by the Addl. CCF of CFW. Full documentationwould be required for all other disbursements. For the purpose of disburse-ments against statements of expenditure, GFD's institutional and staffing

capabilities, as well as budgeting, accounting, internal control and auditing,are adequate and satisfactory.

3.08 Assurances were obtained at negotiations that GFD would keep separateaccounts of expenditures made under the project. These would be auditedannually for each fiscal year in accordance with sound auditing principlesconsistently applied. GFD accounts would be audited not later than ninemonths after the end of the financial year, and the audited reports submittedpromptly to IDA. Certificates of expenditures would be audited at least onceevery year and the reports furnished to IDA. Such reports would show, interalia, that the funds withdrawn were used for the purpose intended, that goodshave been received or work performed, and that payments have been made.

IV. ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

Community Forestry Wing

4.01 The project would strengthen the existing Community Forestry Wing(CFW) of Gujarat Siate's Forest Department (GFD). To handle increased adminis-trative responsibility, an Addl. CCF, would be appointed who would be directlyresponsible to CCF for all community forestry affairs. To cope with increasedplanting and maintenance programs, one new community forestry circle (making4 altogether) and two new community forestry divisions (making 17 altogether)would be created. Assurances were obtained at negotiations that the Addl.CCF and supporting staff would be appointed and the new circle and two newdivisions created by June 30, 1980. In addition, two territorial divisions(Dohad and Himatnagar) presently concerned with reforestation of degradedforests would be transferred to CFW. Thus, there would be 19 communityforestry divisions covering the whole Si'ate (Chart 20400 and Map IBRD 14323)In addition, three new support units would be created within CFW, each headedby a CF: one responsible for planning, information, reporting, public rela-tions and preparation of a follow-up project; one for training, research andcommunications; and one for operations. A separate evaluation cell would beset up in project year 3 under the Director of Evaluation, General Administra-tion Department, GOG.

4.02 At full development, organizat:ion at the divisional level woulddepend on whether the division is responsible for reforestation of degradedforests as well as the the establishment: of village woodlots and strip plant-ations. Each DCF would be assisted by t:wo or more ACF: one responsible forvillage woodlots, the second for strip plantations and, where required,additional ACF responsible for reforestation dependent upon the acreageto be planted and maintained (Chart 20399).

4.03 At the lowest level of administration, PA would be used for super-vision of planting and forest protection in reforestation of degraded forests

- 27 -

where casual labor is employed. Where permanent l1ubor is employed, this laborwould be responsible for forest protection. For the first three years afterplanting, the EF would supervise the protection of village woodlots, there-Pftp" one PA per 120 ha would be employed for protPcticn purpCses. In stripplantations, EF would supervise protection for the first four years; there-after one PA per 50 ha would be employed for protection purposes.

4.04 ER and EF would be responsible for maintaining liaison with thetaluka and village panchayats and for implementing the planting program. ERand EF, who would thus be the main forestry extension agents, would receivespecial training in extension techniques and community relations.

Project Coordination

4.05 Coordination of community forestry activities with programs ofother government agencies at state and district levels would be achievedthrough committees described below. In addition, CFW field staff would beinstructed to work closely with officers of other government departmentsin day-to-day activities.

(a) The State Policy Review Committee would be establishedto ensure coordination between the various departmentsinvolved and to determine overall policy. It would beexpected to meet once every year and would be chairedby the Minister for Forests. Members would include:Secretaries for Home Affairs and Finance; Secretary forAgriculture, Forests and Cooperation Department; Secre-tary for Labor, Social Welfare and Tribal Development;Secretary for Public Works; Secretary for Panchayat,Housing and Urban Development; Inspector General ofForests; Chief Conservator of Forests and representativefrom Western Railway Authority. Addl CCF (CFW) wouldact as convener and secretary of the committee.

(b) District Forest Committees would be established under theproject, comprising the Collector, who would be chairman;President of the District Panchayat, DDO, and representa-tives from government departments covering public works,irrigation, railways, agriculture and animal husbandry and,when appropriate, the Tribal Area Administrator. The DCF(also referred to as the Divisional Forest Officer) wouldact as convener and secretary. The committee's main taskwould be to prepare annual district plans for the establish-ment of village woodlots. It would also coordinate theactivities of the various departments concerned, review pro-gress, identify constraints to project implementation andsuggest remedies, advise on how to improve village and pan-chayat participation, particularly in expanding the communityself-help concept, and advise on the stove and cremationfacilities components. The committee would meet at leastonce every four months.

- 28 -

Assurances were obtained at negotiations that the above committees wouldbe established by June 30, 1980.

4.06 Village level committees would not be set up as village panchayatsalready 'nave agricultural production committees which, with the assistanceof ER and EF, would also be able to deal satisfactorily with communityforestry affairs.

Inservice Training;

4.07 Regular staff training is central to maintaining skills in forestry,forage, soil and moisture management. To this end, each DCF would, in con-sultation with his staff, identify for each four-month period the mostimportant knowledge and skills to be communicated to villagers by ER and EF.These "impact points" would be the sub ject of subdivisional inservice train-ing sessions, run under the guidance oi DCF, assisted by circle and othersupport staff, the forest research unit:, and State forestry schools. Toassist the DCF, one officer would be assigned to coordinate training activ-ities. This practically-oriented training would emphasize the knowledgenecessary to carry out program objectives and demonstrate extension method-ology and techniques.

4.08 Full day training sessions, held every four months, would be sched-uled for groups of 30 to 40 EF and ER. These sessions would concentrateon not more than five "impact points". 1/ Not more than one-third of eachsession would be devoted to lectures as emphasis would be placed on thepractical application of knowledge gained and group discussion.

4.09 Since the knowledge required by community foresters would includemethods of communicating with villagers, existing ER and some EF would receivetraining at the Extension Education Institute (Anand) in extension methods.For newly recruited staff, extension and communication methods would be addedto the curriculum at the Forest Ranger Training School in Rajpipla (para 4.12)and the Foresters and Forest Guard School at Kakrapur (para 4.13) and twoinstructors in extension methods would be provided under the project for thispurpose.

Preservice Training

4.10 The project would require the following new staff to be recruited 2/and trained: 3/

1/ If more than five "impact points" need to be covered, it is suggestedthat the interval between training sessions be reduced.

2/ Senior staff positions (DCF and above) would be filled by transfer andpromotion. Allowance for replacement of those promoted to higher ranksis provided.

3/ In addition to training for new staff, a backlog exists of staff pre-sently in position who have not yet: received training. Training for330 PA would be delayed until project years 4 and 5. A continuoustraining program would be required throughout the project period.

- 29 -

Posts to be Filled ByDirect Promotion from

Staff Level Recruitment Lower Rank

ACF 51 25ER 215 105EF 727 358PA 796 -

Curriculum for each level of staff trained at the Ranger and Foresters schoolsat Rajpipla and Kakrapur would be adapted to the needs of community forestry.

4.11 Assistant Conservator of Forests. Candidates for these posts wouldbe trained at the Indian Forest Colleges operated by the central government.As these institutes provide training on an all-India basis, it is anticipatedthat only 30 positions would be allotted to Gujarat. However, 51 graduatesare needed in order to meet project needs. To meet the shortfall, emergencyappointment of agricultural and science college graduates would be authorized.They would then undergo six months of practical training in forestry at theState Forest Ranger School (Rajpipla) and, subject to passing an examination,be appointed as ACF. Persons appointed as ACF under this procedure would notbe eligible for promotion until they had completed the regular ACF trainingcourse at the college located in either Dehra Dun or Byrnihat.

4.12 Extension Rangers would be trained at Rajpipla and out-of-stateat institutes located at Chandrapuri (Maharashtra), Coimbatore (Tamil Nadu),Korseong (Assam). Recruits would receive one year of training (two years atKorseong). Newly recruited agricultural and science college graduates wouldcomplete the one year ER course. Beginning in 1980, approximately 240 train-ing positions would be available annually. No training at these instituteswould be given to Foresters who are promoted to ER (approximately 33% ofincremental positions).

4.13 Extension Foresters would be trained at the Foresters and ForestGuard School located in Kakrapur. Recruits would receive eight months oftraining. Guards promoted to EF would be given a six month course at thesame institution. Approximately 240 EF can be trained each year.

4.14 Protection Assistants would also be trained at the Foresters andForest Guard School in Kakrapur. This training would be started in the fourthyear of the project following expansion of facilities. Training for thisstaff category is of less priority than that of those discussed above asmost positions would be filled by direct appointment followed by on the jobinstruction.

Monitoring and Evaluation

4.15 Because project concepts are somewhat innovative in nature andwould require adjustment in the course of project execution, a strong Monitor-ing Unit (MU) is essential. MU would be under the direct control of Addl. CCF

- 30 -

(CFW) and would he headed by a CF who would be assisted by an experiencedsociologist, an economist, and the head of the field survey team, and backedby a data processing unit headed by a statistician. Field subunits would belocated at each of four circles and be comprised of one survey supervisor andfive survey assistants. MU staff would carry out spot checks in the field toverify the accuracy of data and quali:y of work. MU, by visits to samplevillages, ad hoc studies, surveys or village case studies, would assess thereceptivity of villagers to the project, and progress made in fostering localinitiative. In particular, MU would follow up closely on implementation ofvillage schemes, assess their effectiveness and promptly inform managementabout findings and suggest improvement:s for further replication. Continuationof the farm forestry scheme would be decided following an interim projectevaluation to be carried out jointly by GOG and IDA at the end of project year3. Finally, using data made available by the accounting unit, the economistwould monitor planting and protection costs. Assurances were obtained atnegotiations that MU would be established by June 30, 1981, that an officerof CF level would be appointed to heac. MU, and that a work program would besubmitted to IDA for review no later than December 31, 1981.

4.16 At the end of project year three, an Evaluation Cell (EC) would beestablished to carry out an interim evaluation of the project. EC would beadministered by Director of Evaluation, General Administration Department,GOG. MU and GFD would be obligated to provide the records and data requestedby the EC for independent evaluation and the formulation of recommendationswhich would be passed to the Addl. CCF for discussion and implementation.Assurances were obtained at negotiations that EC would be established nolater than December 31, 1982 and that GOG would submit a work program to IDAfor review no later than June 30, 1983.

Public Information-

4.17 Since the support and participation of the rural population areprimary requisites for project success, a DCF (Communications) would coordi-nate four Communications Units (para 2.36) set up to encourage participation.One unit would be established in each of the four circles, each headed by anACF, and would complement a small existing unit based at Vadodara which wouldserve as headquarters. Each unit would be responsible for publicity, organiz-ing orientation tours, preparation of instructional material and training aidsand introduction of more efficient wood burning stoves and cremation facilities.

V. PRODUCTION, MARKETING AND FINANCIAL RESULTS

Yields and Production

5.01 The main products of project forest plantations would be: fuel-wood, building poles, leaves and pods, animal feed, and edible fruits.Subsidiary products would include timber, from the felling of avenue shadetrees, edible mahuda flowers, oilseeds, tree gum and bidi leaves. Summariesof yields and production are provided below and detailed in Annex 1, T-3 andAnnex 4, T-5.

- 31 -

Estimated YieldsL and Production

Yields /b Totalat full development Production

Product m ton/ha/year '000 m ton

Fuelwood 3.40 14.40 9,900Poles (timber) 0.66 5.44 1,370 = 86,200 polesBamboo 0.48 3.62 870 = 192,200 polesTimber 0.75 350 = 500 m3

Leaf fodder 1.72 9.00 2,200Fruits 1,810Oilseed 0.80 180

/a Data provide the range of estimated yields from a fully planted haof pure plantation.

/b Range of estimated theoretical yields from a pure plantation of thesespecies at the densities and cutting cycles adopted in the project;data provided for purposes of comparison.

Sharing of Produce between Villagers

5.02 The sharing of produce between villagers would vary according tothe type of plantation and method of establishment.

(a) Village Woodlots: Under both schemes harvesting of fuelwood,poles, bamboo, and timber would be undertaken by villagers forwages and organized by the village panchayat, under the super-vision of CFW staff. Sufficient major forest produce would besold to meet outstanding debts. Whether the balance of thepanchayat's share of fuelwood, poles, bamboo, and timber isdistributed free or sold would be up to each panchayat to decide.However, under both schemes TDO would assist panchayats inarriving at an equitable scheme, taking into consideration theneeds of the landless and poorer sections of the community.The CFW would provide statements of accounts to the panchayatat the end of the third year following woodlot establishmentand thereafter within 30 days on request of the panchayat. Underthe Self-help Scheme, the village panchayat would retain allprofits. Under the Supervised Village Scheme, gross valueof major forest produce would be split 50:50 between CFW andthe village panchayats (para 5.06).

(b) Strip Plantations: Villages with strip plantations passingthrough their lands would be allowed minor products free ofcharge. Leaf fodder and fruit collection would be organizedand supervised by the village panchayat under the guidance

- 2,2 -

of CFW staff. All other produce from strip plantationswould be the property of CFW and harvested and marketedby them. However, net profits from the sale of fuelwood,poles, bamboo, timber, etc. would be split on a 50:50 basisbetween CFW and the taluka concerned in the case of planta-tions alongside roads and canals and on a basis still to bedetermined for railside plantations. TDO would distributenet profits equitably between the panchayats in his talukaand the profits would be credited to the panchayat.

(c) Reforestation of Degraded Forests: Where reforestation isdone by casual labor under CFW supervision (para 2.14),tribal people and villagers traditionally have rights tofree collection of minor products from forest reserves andthese rights would continue under the project. Harvestingwould be done by FLCS and net profits split 80:20 betweenCFW and FLCS. Where reforestation is done by a stabilizedlabor force, the labor would be given first preference toforest produce traditionally collected free of charge. Netprofits would be shared 80:20 between CFW and permanentlaborers.

(d) Afforestation of Private Agricultural Lands: Grass and minorforest produce would all beLong to the owner. Poles, bambooand small timber, not required by the owner for his own use,would be harvested and sold by CFW on the owner's behalf.After deducting direct costs and advanced payments (para2.15), 100% of net profits would be retained by the owner.

Assurances were obtained at negotiations that GOG would, by June 30, 1980,agree with the Association on the format and content of model contracts forthe establishment of village woodlots and afforestation of private lands (seeProject File, Items 4, 5 and 6).

5.03 Fuelwood, poles, bamboo, and timber from all areas but villagewoodlots and degraded forest reforested by casual laborers would be marketedby GFD either from roadsides (in the case of roadside plantations) or fromsale depots through the current practice of auctions. FLCS/GFD would beresponsible for marketing products from degraded forest areas reforested withcasual labor.

5.04 Both GSFDC and KVIC would continue to handle the marketing of non-edible oilseed (para 1.34). GSFDC/KVIC representatives located in strategicvillages collect and pay for the seed brought in by villagers, which is thentransported for storage and processing; into soap, etc. by small locally-ownedenterprises that obtain credit for equipment and working capital from KVIC.

5.05 Minor forest produce such as gum, bidi leaves, doli and mahudaflowers are purchased from villagers and tribal people by the GSFDC which alsohelps tribal people set up cooperatives to process these products further.In view of the acute shortage of forest products, no marketing difficulty isforeseen for any of the products generated by the project.

- 33 -

Cost Recovery

5.06 The benefits expected from the project are considerable and, there-fore, it would be in the interest of GOG to recover as much of its investmentas possible. Under the Self-help Village Scheme, the direct costs of planting(excluding seedlings) incurred by CFW are minimal (Annex 3, Tables 2 to 4)and amount to between 1% and 8% of the expected value of major forest produce.Therefore, for administrative convenience and to provide added incentive tovillage panchayats to participate in the scheme, no cost recovery would be madeand the village community would thus benefit from 100% of the produce of thewoodlot. The situation is different, however, under the Supervised VillageScheme where all direct costs incurred by CFW would be recovered from villagepanchayats, except for seedlings (which are fully subsidized by Government forall community forestry activities). In addition, a management fee of 25% ofdirect costs would be charged and cost recovery phased over the life of theplantation (30 years) and bear a 10% interest rate. To ensure such costrecovery, CFW share of major produce would be approximately 50% of the harvestat each cut (Annex 3, Tables 2, 3 and 4). Since, however, villagers underthis scheme can collect minor forest produce at all times, the proposed sharingarrangement would leave the village community with between 60 and 68% of totalbenefits. It was agreed at negotiations, that not later than September 30,1980, GOG would prepare and furnish to IDA for its comments, proposals forsharing major forest produce or revenue derived from its sale. Thereafter,GOG would implement these proposals with such modifications or additions asagreed with IDA.

5.07 On the basis of the sharing arrangements described above and in para5.02, the project's financial rate of return to Government would be 5%; i.e.,the return would pay off Government investments in the project (includingstaff and officer recruitment) in 34 years and yield a 5% interest rate onsuch investment. The corresponding cost recovery index 1/ for the projectover the entire period (34 years) would be 51%, if recovered at 10% interestrate (Annex 3, Table 1). This index is considered satisfactory, given thatthe project would provide employment to a disadvantaged section of the popu-lation, meet some of the basic needs of rural communities, and yield substan-tial indirect benefits by improving the environment since the costs of advi-sory services (e.g., agricultural extension) are generally not recovered frombeneficiaries.

VI. BENEFITS, JUSTIFICATION AND RISKS

Benefits

6.01 The increase in forest produce expected under the project wouldbenefit all of the State's population, but enhanced employment opportunitiesand the right to gather free fodder, fruit and other minor produce wouldfavor the rural poor.

1/ Ratio of NPV of financial return to Government to the NPV of financialcosts of Government.

-- 34 -

6.02 Fuelwood, Small Timber and Ocher Forest Produce. From projectyear 10, the average annual production of fuelwood from project villagewoodlots would be 386,000 m tons of which 45% would be utilized by ruralpeople. Annual project output of fuelwood would be sufficient to satisfy theneed of about 2.5 M people at the current annual consumption level of 165 kgper capita. In addition, an average of 4.8 M poles and large bamboos wouldbe produced annually. Fruit production would be sufficient to provide 10 kgannually for 6 M people. The greater abundance of fodder would also resultin additional milk production of about 2 M liters annually at no significantadditional cost.

6.03 Conservation of Fuelwood. The introduction of some 10,000 improvedstoves and 1,000 crematoria would result in savings of at least 15,800 m tonsof fuelwood annually. (Annex 4, T-8).

6.04 Employment. Over the five year project implementation period,105,440 ha of idle or underutilized land would be brought into productive use,largely through use of labor 1/. In total, 38.4 M man days would be requiredfor project activities, equivalent to 2.5,600 people fully employed for fiveyears. In practice, most forestry operations would be concentrated over a twoto three month period each year, and thus, from the first year, would actuallyemploy at least 100,000 temporary laborers annually. This would mainlybenefit the disadvantaged sections of the population since most manual jobssuch as digging pits and trenches are normally done by them.

6.05 Environment. The major environmental impact of project plantationsis expected to be on soil conservation and, in some cases, restoration ofsoils. Nearly all of the tree species to be planted are indigenous and 20%of those to be planted in arid areas have the ability to fix atmosphericnitrogen. In arid areas of western and northern Gujarat, plantations wouldassist in arresting wind erosion. In alkaline areas in the east of the Stateand wetter areas of the south and east, soil stabilization by tree roots,accumulation of leaf litter and reductiDn of the impact of rain on the soilwould restrict run--off and, in hill areas, reduce siltation of rivers. Onvillage common lands, the protection of soil within plantations from over-grazing and trampling would improve water percolation of the soil, restoreground vegetation and increase the percentage of perennial grasses. Stripplantations along roadsides, which have frequently suffered locally severesheet and gulley erosion arising from run-off from the road surface, wouldhelp prevent further damage.

6.06 Project production of more than 10 M m ton of fuelwood over thenext 30 years would result in the diversion to agricultural land of consider-able quantities of cow dung and vegetable waste, which would otherwise havebeen used for cooking. Other beneficial effects of the project plantations,especially strip planting, are shade for road users and nesting, feeding androosting sites for birds.

1/ Labor represents 72% of direct planting expenditures.

- 35 -

6.07 Negative effects of project plantations are expected to be few.Recent research in India, under the direction of the Forest ResearchInstitute (Dehra Dun), has confirmed that Eucalyptus hybrid plantations grownon short rotations can cause depletion of certain soil nutrients. Provisionhas been made for project plantations of this species to be evaluated underthe research program (para 2.30) and for remedial measures to be taken, ifrequired.

Economic Rate of Return

6.08 The return of the project to the economy has been calculated foreach planting component, excluding farm forestry (the costs of which comprise3% of total project costs), and for the project as a whole, including the costof technical support, but excluding research. The farm forestry component hasbeen excluded from the analysis because of lack of data (para 6.13). Onlydirect benefits have been quantified. To obtain the incremental benefitstream, foregone benefits from existing fodder or fuelwood production havebeen deducted in all planted areas from the forecast project output.

(i) in all rainfed areas, foregone benefits would be meagergrass production resulting from continued overgrazing.It has been estimated that "with project" grass produc-tion would be at least equal current grass yields becausecutting would replace grazing and net incremental grassproduction would therefore be nil.

(ii) in irrigated areas, "without project" grass output could besubstantial. The project would therefore lead to a loss ofactual or potential grass production which has been quanti-fied to 10 m ton per ha (canalsides) and 25 m ton per ha(irrigated village lands).

(iii) in degraded forest lands, "without project" production hasbeen taken as existing fuelwood production (0.2 m ton/ha/year). Grass growth with and without project would be thesame.

(iv) in private agricultural lands, the opportunity cost of usingthe land under the project has been equated to the economicvalue of the cereal harvest (estimated at Rs 250/ha/year).

6.09 Efficiency Pricing. Key assumptions and adjustments made in theeconomic analysis of the project in efficiency prices are as follows:

(a) Economic Cost of Unskilled Labor. The shadow wage rate forlabor in domestic prices is best reflected in the freemarket wages, which vary during the year. During theplanting and harvesting seasons (June, July and October,November), there is virtually full employment. At thistime, the observed wage rate equals the minimum wageof Rs 5.5/man day; this rate has been applied to projectlabor employed in those months (30% of total project

- 36 -

labor). In the period of November to April, when thebulk of project activities would take place (70% of requiredlabor), the observed wage rate is about Rs 3/man day. Theeconomic cost of project labor, estimated as a weightedaverage of prevailing rates during peak and low labordemand, is Rs 3.75/man day or 68% of the financial cost.No shadow wage rate has been applied to skilled labor.

(b) Border Price Ratios. Different conversion factors havebeen used for the major categories of project expendi-tures to reflect the different degrees of distortionthey are subject to in the Indian economy in relationto international (border) prices:

Category % of Project Cost Conversion Factor

Unskilled labor 43 0.84 /aStaff Salaries 23 0.82 /bMaterials 15 0.70 /cVehicles and Equipment 6 0.70 /cBuildings 7 0.75 /dOthers 6 0.80 /e

/a Consumption Conversion Factor at the critical consumptionlevel.

/b Consumption Conversion Factor at the average consumptionlevel.

/c After exclusion of local taxes (12% on average) andmultiplication by the Standard Conversion Factor (0.80).

/d Construction Conversion Factor as calculated for GujaratReport No. 1943a-IN.

/e Standard Conversion Factor (SCF).

(c) Output Prices. Fuelwood, poles and minor forest produce havebeen considered as non-traded goods. Their financial prices,multiplied by the Standard Conversion Factor (SCF) 0.80, havebeen estimated to represent t:heir economic value. Milk has beenconsidered as a traded commodity because two internationallytraded commodities, skim milk and butter oil, are used to re-constitute a milk substitute. The economic price of milk(Rs 1.21/1) 1/ used in the analysis was derived from theprojected CIF price of this substitute adjusted for handling,transportation, and reconstitution charges and productioncosts (in turn adjusted by the SCF). Prices of all above-

1/ As calculated in National Dairy Project Report No. 1964-IN.

- 37 -

mentioned commodities except milk have been assumed to remainconstant in real terms at their 1978 level (Annex 3, T-10).

6.10 Economic Net Present Value. Since the project components are notindependent, a separate economic rate of return (ROR) for each component can-not be calculated. The overhead costs do not vary with the size of any par-ticular component. However, as indicated in Annex 4, T-1 by the net presentvalue (NPV), each component would make a positive contribution. The farmforestry component was not included in this analysis, but it is reasonableto assume that NPV for this component would be positive. Over 34 years, atefficiency prices, the overall ROR would be 17.0%. The economic NPV, dis-counted at 10%, would be Rs 297.8 M (US$34.6 M), or 99% of costs in presentvalues. Net present values and sensitivity analysis for each component arepresented in Annex 4, T-1.

6.11 Economic Analysis of the Introduction of Wood Saving CremationUnits. The analysis presented in Annex 4, Table 8 indicates an overall RORof at least 15% for this component. It also indicates that the introductionof such units in one village or in groups of villages would be economicallyviable for a population of 1,500 or more.

Project Risks

6.12 The project faces no major risk in terms of an unsatisfactory rateof return since the ROR could withstand huge cost increases (up to 100%),substantial price drops (up to 50%), or large losses, such as destruction bylivestock (up to 50%), each of which is improbable. Cost estimates are basedon actual costs of past plantings. Forest products are becoming increasinglyexpensive as a result of the ever growing shortage. Protection of projectplantings would be no more risky than the methods previously used with a largedegree of success on similar plantings.

6.13 There is a risk that the free distribution of seedlings might leadto excessive waste. Statistics regarding the survival rate of trees distri-buted to the public are not reliable. For this reason, the project monitoringunit would continuously monitor the actual survival rate through spot checks(para 2.18), and would study the overall impact of the free distribution.Based on these factors, GOG and IDA would jointly review the merits of freedistribution of seedlings in project year 4.

6.14 Another risk might be that the proposed target of 2,300 villageswilling to participate in the Self-help Scheme might not be met. Therefore,special care has been taken to provide adequate incentive. Under the Self-help Scheme, village panchayats would receive 100% of all woodlots benefits,and would also retain control of the use of such benefits. Furthermore, CFWwould give priority to those villages which are willing to participate underthe scheme.

6.15 There is also the risk that better-off people in the village, beingthe more powerful, would be the major beneficiaries of woodlot produce. Thisrisk has been recognized and, therefore, steps would be taken to minimize suchrisks. CFW staff and project CU would inform villagers of their rights. The

- 38 -

TDO would assist the panchayats in arriving at equitable distribution of forest

produce among villagers. In particular, he would recommend that a fixed per-centage of poles and small timber be distributed at concessional rates to the

weaker sections of the village who need these for house improvement. Finally,MU and EC would carry out spot checks and would evaluate the social impact ofthe village woodlot schemes.

6.16 Overall risks are low. Nevertheless to optimize the objectives ofthe project, particularly with regard to community activities and the impactof the free distribution of seedlings, an interim evaluation of the projectwould be carried out in year 4 to draw lessons for future activities of theprogram.

VII. RECOMMENDATIONS

7.01 During negotiations, assurances were obtained that:

(a) about 9,200 ha of village woodlots would operate underthe cormmunity Self-help Scheme so that villages involvedwould accept full responsibility for establishment manage-ment and harvesting of said woodlots (para 2.07);

(b) full time laborers required to live in degraded forestareas would be ensured adequate facilities, i.e., watersupply and be given materials for home construction(para 2.14);

(c) improved stoves (10,000) woulld be built and demonstratedin at least 2,300 villages lhat select to establish wood-lots under the community SeLf-help Scheme (para 2.27);

(d) cremation facilities would be provided both in urban areas(200) and in villages (800) that establish village woodlotsunder the community Self-he:Lp Scheme (para 2.28);

(e) a research program judged satisfactory by IDA would beprepared by September 30, 1980 (para 2.31);

(f) field staff, including PA, EF and ER would live in ornear areas assigned for theiLr operations and for thispurpose would be provided housing or rent allowancesas necessary (para 2.34);

(g) two Communications Units would be established not laterthan September 30, 1980 and two additional units bySeptember 30, 1981 (para 2.36);

(h) the Public Relations Unit would be established not later

than September 30, 1980 (para 2.37);

- 39 -

(i) GFD would keep separate accounts of expenditures made underthe project to be audited annually for each fiscal year, inaccordance with auditing principles consistently applied.GFD accounts would be audited not later than nine monthsafter the end of the financial year, and the audited re-ports submitted promptly to IDA (para 3.08);

(j) the Additional CCF in charge of CFW, and supporting staff,would be appointed and the new circle and two new divisions

would be created by June 30, 1980 (para 4.01);

(k) the State Policy Review Committee and District ForestCommittees, would be established by June 30, 1980(para 4.05);

(1) a Monitoring Unit would be established no later thanJune 30, 1981 and would be headed by an officer ofCF level and would submit a work program to IDA forreview no later than December 31, 1981 (para 4.15);

(m) an Evaluation Cell would be established not later thanDecember 31, 1982 and, submit a work program to IDA forreview no later than June 30, 1983 (para 4.16);

(n) GOG would agree with the Association by June 30, 1980on the format and content of contracts for the estab-lishment of village woodlots and afforestation ofprivate lands (para 5.02); and

(o) Not later than September 30, 1980, GOG would prepare andfurnish to IDA for its comments, proposals for sharing majorforest produce or revenue derived from its sale. Thereafter,GOG would implement these proposals with such modificationsor additions as agreed with IDA (para 5.06).

7.02 In order to prepare for the 1980 planting season, it is recommendedthat there be retroactive financing of up to US$0.5 M to cover nursery, staff,equipment and vehicles expenditures from June 1, 1979 until the signing of theproposed project (para 3.04).

7.03 With the above assurances and conditions, the project would besuitable for an IDA Credit of US$37.0 M on standard IDA terms. The Borrowerwould be the Government of India.

November 20, 1979

GOUJARAT CO04MMUITY FORESTRY PROJECT

Cp.neaiao of Plantation Models - Design,s. Etobith-at sod Maincensc

Plantation Models

C SI~~~~~~~~1 SEC IV V VI VII Vill IS 0

Category of Plantation ROADISDE ROADSIDE RAILSIDE RA ILS IDIE CAN1ALSIDE VILLAGE LANDS VlIAGE 1ANI5 VILIAGE lAND DEGRADED FORESTPIAELR(MalkE)

L-satlon aS-anhnrs/Ktoth Malolod GaJeret Sao-aehtra/Kitnh Mainland GoJarat stenewide statewide S-nrahtrs/Kstnh Mainland GJerat Mainland Gojarl-anetlato

(ErrEgatad) (Irrigated)

J-ni.diction G5G 0O Railways gB-d, GOD Rol-oys Boad, MI5 GOG Village Panhay-t Villoge Poonhayt Village Pancheyst Foret Dept. 00 rvt

Area cc In planted (1 y-.r) 13,000 ha. 18,600 he. 1,400 he. 2,000 ha. 2,000 h.. 2,080 he. 168050 ha. 17,760 ha. 30,000 a ,0 e

PLA ITATION DESIGN fo atn-/ha fotTo fo %o ToO %of Tot Y.o bE

are steno/ha nra stes/ha a a tac/e aces/h.t.ho ra see/a a steno/he area stne/ha area at-aha area stel/hean aenh

Rain P-edoct

ShadeA. Iodine 267. 82 97. 27

oth-n heds app. l1 7%. VS 34% 112

1. 497 0c hale 17. 91 3%. 45 Sly. 83 57. R3 447. 1,112 157, 333 20% 333 10%4 167

nie.pos io pp. 1 43% 276 30%. 107 90% 999 hOC. 666 457. 500 217. 278

E-noyptos hyb. 90% 137 L147. 226 2%. 83 15% 230 50%1 1,250 60%. 1,333 10% 167 40%. 666

T. grandiecis. pole/ foal app. a./

04. ho E ,5

b.habos 27. 13 5%. 55 3% 69 37. 20 2%/ Ii 'VA 30 013

D.ttlioa. 87/. 51 157. 167 37. 69 37. 20 2% 30 12%4 90 2%4

niec. f-oit pp.~'

197. 116 257. 156 50% 116

Ziaph-e app. -(22 120) /2) (20)' (20) (30)

rain pp. L/

/50%.) (50%) 10(%)

ToteD aton/ha (averag) 641 661 1,165 1,221 2,500 1,822 1,156 1,267 MO ,2

PIANTATIOM ESTABLISHMMNT4 MAINJTENANC0E

Principal pronentine Banhe & wire- non 2071 B-eto nine Bnbno I e se f 20% lnbon 6 cite 7C% Machon wits Trench& lien hedge Trenh & Ien Tran.. 6A Ies Robbie call Re eo ec

l.tetseoa fenc 301% lie hedge dtcho- teen 30% lien hedge Deane30%7 lIve hedge Watchmen hedge Wenatne- hedge Wtne-

Land prepartion pleating 907. pits Ch5co2) 90%. pEns (45.2n

290pnChc

290%. pita (45c-

2) 90% pust (45_2)79000%ppus (45cc 2 100%. pita (45c- 2 100% ppin.(l45e22 1007% pIts (30cc 1 10% pEtsit (3Scn2 I

10% nande 10% -oodo 10%, -oods 10%. c-nd 10%. cods 600 r.n. gradonis/hs 90. stakes

large polypota large polypote large polypota large polypots large polypois asial pelypois' noa pelypota snai polypets snal polypots 10% polypots

aat-ricg/ Irigation partIal irlggaton aPpprt wateing partial irrigatioo ePppt wa.teing irrigated irrigatd non nos noenn

Fire traiag Yes Yns Ys yes nnoasooye

W-seing/bsating-op W5o6 / B-p.ap2 W al / B-opn SslW. / n-ope . aWl / B-sps.2 Wfs6

/ B-opn 2 asIC6 B-ope2 WSni / 0-opo) Wel /0B-spa? Wsh / O-ops.2 ao -p

/ ether sheds specIes Models 0 & II): oninly Alhienia 1eIbsk; C..dia dichotoon; M.Aigf-r iodics; Peltonho-o p a.ce Ia; Tacaildos indico

1/ nisceilannoos foelood specIe,: (Models 6 lEO): esfnlyAoaciatortilla; Albiezia Salebbc; t~ron..ni.a~ l Modls II, IV06 VIlI): eninly Acscia nilotici; Anodea

tortilla; Ahibizzi Iled..; DDglIbb-ia aino.

11-.e...nos pole/foeloo.d species (Models IX ): Anec.iL cateo.ho; .Aeia totillia; Albiesa lebbeck; Da1bernia siseoc; visce, rnnl-lo Coron pnlents; Gcelina arborna; tLeescoroendnlica; Madhoca indice; Tectona ara-dia.

d/caolnosfrot species (Models VI, VII & OuST -ilyO lCordia dichotoe; Madhoas iedica; Moriaaa oelifero; Plthscolbuiiindulce; ISyion cunie.

___

4gross and i.Sge species (Madels VI, Vi0 & VlIl): caiely Cenc.hroncilianio; Dicha-thion annolat; Madinas settee; PennnE2tonjp-poreo; Snhiee serene; Trifolion i-eadelias.

INDIA


Plantation Planning Targets

Plantation Plantation TargetsCategory Model Yea.r Year Year Year Year Total %

1 2 3 4 5----------- hectares-------------------

Strip Plantations 35

RoadsideSaurashtra & Kutch 1 1,400 2,400 3,000 2,900 3,300 13,000Mainland Gujarat II 2,400 3,300 4,600 4,000 4,300 18,600

Subtotal 3,800 5,700 7,600 6,900 7,600 31,600

RailsideSaurashtra & Kutch III - - - 600 800 1,400Mainland Gujarat IV - - - 1,000 1,000 2,000

Subtotal - - - 1,600 1,800 3,400

Canalside (Statewide) V 200 300 400 500 600 2,000

Village Woodlots 36

Irrigated VI 240 480 720 720 720 2,880Rainfed (Saurashtra & Kutch) VII 1,920 2,640 3,360 4,080 4,800 16,800Rainfed (Mainland Gujarat) VIII 2,400 2,880 3,600 4,080 4,800 17,760

Subtotal 4,560 6,000 7,680 8,880 10,320 37,440

Reforestation of DegradedReserve Forest 28

Full-time Labor Scheme IX 500 750 1,000 1,250 1,500 5,000Casual Labor Scheme IX 5,500 5,250 5,000 4,750 4,500 25,000

Subtotal 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 30,000

Afforestation of PrivateForest Lands X 200 200 200 200 200 1,000 1 ,

TOTAL 14,760 18,200 21,880 24,080 26,520 105,440

14 17 21 23 25 100

Farm Forestry Seedlings Millions 25 26.3 29.6 32.9 36.,2 150

UJU'RAT COTMME ITY FORESTRY PROJECT

Cmparison of Pla-satio- Models - Yteldr

(N.B. For the purpose of comparisom, a11 yields pot hectare refer to the barvyst fron pure plantation. of trees at the denitties isdicated)

Prodoct Species - Modelr - Stems/ho St.s/ho Year of R.rv-st Yieldu/tree- m of Poles d/ YieIe/ha________ ci~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~e cY2 s3- MAIa

1. Cross Fodder satoral grass 1, II, III, IV I every year 0.2

Ox I every year 0.4

V I every year 0.6

so,,n grass VIE I every year 1.0

VIII I every year 1.5

sown *egumes VI I every year 5.0

2. Icaf Fodder koo-b-vol I, III, VII 1667 1333 4 5-14, 17-20, 23-26 4.0 5.34 pods II, IV, VIll 1667 1333 4 5-14, 17-20, 23-26 5.0 6.6

V 2500 2000 3 4-5, 8-10, 13-1518-20, 23-25 5.5 11.0

VI 2222 1 777 3 4-5, 8-10, 13-15, 6.2 11.018-20, 23-25

misc. fNel I, II 667 533 4 5-10, 13-20, 23-30 4.0 2.1

spp. III, IV, VIES 1111 888 4 5-10, 13-20, 23-30 2.5 2.2VII 1111 888 4 5-14, 17-20, 23-26 2.5 2.2

3. Fuel..od eucalypto 1, III, Vil 1667 1333 8 14, 20, 26 14.0 18.7 22.0 6.3

II, IV, VIII 1667 1333 8 14, 20, 26 16.0 21.3 25.1 7.1

V 2500 2000 5 10, 15, 20, 25 16.0 32.0 37.6 13.9

VI 2222 1777 5 10, 15, 20, 25 20.0 35.5 41.8 14.0

koo-baval I, III, VII 1667 1333 8 14, 20, 26 30.0 40.0 58.6 9,0 (.

II, IV, VIII 1667 1333 8 14, 20, 26 40.0 53.3 78.4 12.1

V 2500 2000 5 10, 15, 20, 25 36.0 72.0 105.9 21,2

VI 2222 1777 5 10, 15, 20, 25 40.0 71.1 106.5 20.9

misc. fuel 1 667 533 10 20, 30 65.0 34.6 45.5 4.6

app. 11 667 533 10 20, 30 70.0 37.3 49.1 4.9

I1I 1111 .888 10 20, 30 45.0 40.0 52.6 5.2

IV, VIII 1111 888 10 20, 30 55.0 48.8 64.3 6.4

VI1 EEEE 888 8 14, 20, 26 40.0 35.5 45.5 7.0

seen I, 11 100 80 30 replant 60.0 4.8 6.8 1.3

other shade .pp. 1, II 100 80 30 replant 330.0 26.4 39.8 1.3

!-1 tr-np VIl, Vill 625 500 30 replant 150,0 75,0 104.2 3.e

VI 625 500 30 replant 200.00 100.0 13h.9 46(,

pA4r/f-l Opp. I 68( 544 1S 30 1f0.0 38.1 54.3 3.8

4. Tliber ane 1, 11 10;1 80 30 replant 0.4 32.0 1.3

y -

Yields/haProd.et Spectei - Memdla - Ste.. /h. stens/ha Y-r of 11orve.t Yteld,/tree No. of Poles

pl-ated .. r-ivirg fIrst th-chfte- kg. o3| m.t. m 3/ ct c2 c3 c4 sc Al5. Poles eooolyptas I, III, VII 1667 1333 8 14, 20, 26 19.2 106 1066 i066 1066 6.3

II, IV, VIII 1667 1333 - 8 14, 20, 26 21.3 1066 1066 1066 1066 7.1v 2J00 2000 5 10, 15, 20, 25 32.0 1600 1 6C0 1600 1600 , 1A l 33.1VI 2222 1777 5 10, 15, 20, 25 28.4 1422 1422 1422 1422 1422 1' C

bOb.oos 11 167 133 10 20, 39 1.90 to K: 78 156 234

5.08 M: 420 720 960

IV 278 222 1i 20, 30 6.19 to K: 135 270 40514.16 Ms 690 1197 1596

V 278 222 6 9. 12, 15. 18, 21 3.1%5 1 M. 200 401. 601 860 80V24, 27, 30 1O.a6 M: 401 601 801 1001 1001

VI 156 124 6 9, 12, 15, 18, 21 1.77 to K: 113 225 338 450 45024, 27, 30 6.11 M: 225 338 450 563 563

VIII 156 124 10 20, 30 1.86 to K: 75 150 2254.79 M4: 389 666 888

IX 120 96 8 12, 16, 20, 24, 28 1.44 70 K- 57 1145 171 171 1713.70 M4: 305 522 696 696 696

x 178 142 8 12, 16, 20, 24, 28 3.00 t0 K: 258 516 774 774 7748.70 M: 147 252 336 336 336

teok X 1600 1280 11 15, 30 600 680 680 1.0

polslfael npp. IX 680 544 15 30 163 103 3.5

6. Edible Fruits greftea hor 1, I1I 2 2 3 every ye.r to 15 12 0.024II, IV 20 20 3 every year tv 15 15 0.300VIII 3n in I every -eer tso so 0. n VI 20 20 3 evejy yea- to 15 20 0.400

sO-SgO- VII, VIII 625 50C 3 4-8 years 10 5.09.20 years IS 7.521-30 yeses 30 15.0

VI 625 500 3 4-8 yenrs 15 7.59-20 years 20 10.021-30 yearn 35 17.5

other fruits VII, VIII 625 500 8 9-20 yesre 10 5.021-30 yeore 20 10.0

VI 625 500 8 9-20 yesee 5 7.5T1-30 yeers 25 12.5

.hade tree- 1, 11 100 80 8 9-20 ye..r 10 0.821-30 yeor. 20 1.6

7. Edible Flo,re mehudd VIII 625 500 8 every year 20 10.0IX 680 544 8 9-15, 22-30 yeore 20 10.8VI 625 500 8 -vcry yoor 25 12.5

8. Oil Seeds neem 1, II 100 80 8 9-20 yo.rs 3 0.2421-30 yeor. 10 0.80

9. C.. b..vol ,1 11 667 533 6 7-13, 16-20, 26-30 0.2 0.107T--oril bhval III, IV, Vil 1111 888 6 7-10, 16-20, 26-30 0.2 0.178

10. Bidi Loso-t tirru IX r-no 100 1 every yeor 2.5 0.250(r.tur.lly

occurriog)

ai Species: See An-ec 1, T-2 for scIentifIc 0405s.

b/ Modelr: 1: Roadoide, S-oraohtra/Kucth; 11: Roadaidc, Gai jlrd Iojsrot; III: Ra.iiode, Saraehtr./Kutch; IV: Reillidc, vi.nl..d Gujarnt; V: C.nalslde, i-rlsated;VI: viligoe land, Irrigated; VII: Vill0g1 Isnd, a4.r-vhtr./KVt,hi VIII? Village Iavd, vlinl.nd CGJorat; IXI; Der-ded foren-, m lniond aji.r.t; XI Privat. for-et Dlrge listrio

c/ YVvldo/troo; Viyldo/tree in Veo are ve-ighr, air dry.d/ Yleldt of Poles: (I) KM: M-l b-oboh Illol- s:o

M~ ioooovl booboo '.lob: ccaloocs o:ri<coo)(2) cl to o

4: n-mbers of .olen pr-d-cad at first, 0e-ond, third Sod fourth cuts.

tc: number of polo. produced at -obsoquo- cots.*"'5Al: -vo -3annUl t1-r-trit cover -col --boclIon of wood (fucl.o-d, *Imber .ad polos) *o opproprlte.v

,Ai.NrX 1*j z v .~~~~~~~~~~aL e 445

INDLA

GUJURJAT COG{MNITY FORESTRY PFxOJECT

Properties and Useu of Tree and Other fpecies in tbe Project

c - .* v ctt 9 ~~~~ t ~~ C ' r' r 5 4, C 4 4, 0 4 44 .,5 4

Sciz,tifin Name Cozzn Na..e r t 4 -' a ° t6 a t- 4, C4 . - e o 4- *t

4cav5a c-S-chu ~k'h4ir X X X X X XAcscia zLlotics bPv.l X X X X X X X XAcsza tf cilfsi lsreeli bev-l X X X X X XAIbi-z,* .bbe4', sir.s X X .X X X XAz,ditzzcht ndt0 -a ne.. .' X45 X X - X XA-rb-s_ _ . - .Katas (baboo) X X XC-rdia dtchocora gund X X ' X X

2A-Ibae- "Laoosisso X X X X X X XD-:d,-jtLf seA s Gene,Nmeu vel (b- boo) X X X

.tos c-,tmelh noh rIot tiru X X x x XFAeCe1VDt-i hybrid by.ote hybrid x X x x xAcacin ot-riii Israeli baval xxd x x X X

AYbiezts te,bec'c ~ irs x x x x x x A"eslfct. n- dira neven X X X X X

.L.- w2nd IH: acr->ha t t k bav b) X x X

Cpc-dadih! r. k"-b,vd1 x x x x xx

R.dh.,. i,,di- rthd X XX X

t4 lbe*tssi -o Issor yg x K X K K

Ptth--o.ob-ut le1e g.r.a .. 1si X X X X X

ioserots n t-lifi-1 g.ndo b.V1I X X XSv tum u-~ii jetimn X X X X XTecvtona hybrdi. tere X X X X2i7VDh,Qs sao. bor X X X X X _yr#fts

(b) SUBSIDIARY AND FAM9 FORESTRY SPECIES

Ailanthus pia,.3 krdu,o X X

Co~ ... 54, .r Cr so e,,fl K

io,.mLc, L e ight e * gugal X X Klt-br pgl irnsts MOani pad.r X X X X

Lad,ro.roei p-d Viflor. bond.ra X X X-tgifer. iedita mag X X X -X X

JN-tl'kar. hex-adra rayan X X X X Xithous 2bei dhetur; -lberry X a X K X X

paltorherur Ct3rocarpur peltophorun X X X X

Pr .o.os eLctflro khijdo X X X X X XSP.tt.Roa emoe, teNrPltree X X X X

T-,t2d-s indic. tmli; t-drind X X X X XXX

(c) GRASSES AND LFARME RS

Adr-ogtusn spp X

Css-h- a aie'slol- dhrKm-n XC-Sehru. -stte i i sr,X

Dich-aithtum 'eiuhst zuizvo X X

1--eiLo finnat uaai adar K

I5ciL- laxXlm X

lsai-urs sildL-s Xlfedic.gr indi- maego -l T-ig.ted KrK

N,ni-kona ,tid.rdle XPel hetoo ,cere.one- - Nepier gra.o (hybrr d) X IrrKgKtKd r-Scoi , nervosun sanyr X KX

7--d.nt .- thecto lxid

Tsreif e- al-nrt Xee X KlKiKtK

Terifoltu in Lxldrinu besei;tmrnd X X Iriae Kra

INDIA

GUJARAT COMffINITY FORESTRY PROJECT

Plantation Model I - Roadside - Saurashtra and Kutch (1 ha)

Years 0 1 2 3 4-7 8 9 10 11-13 14 15 16-19 20 21-25 26 27-29 30Unit

Unit Price

Costs Rs

Nurserv 312 62Lind Preparation 308 - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Protection 1548 99 149 - - - - - _ _ - - _ _ _ _Planting 520 304 71Othe Is 887 283 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125

Sub-Total 3575 748 345 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125

Cress ProductPuc I wood mt - - - - 3.7 - 14.4 - 3.7 - - 18.1 - 3.7 - 32.8

Pole No - - - - - 88 - - - 88 - - 88 - 88 - - PTimber m

3- - - - - - - - - _ _ _ - _ _ - 26.4 OC

Grass mt 0.3 (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3) (0.3)Leaf Fodder nit - - - - 1.2 1.2 0.9 0.9 0.2 1.2 0.9 1O 1.2 0.5 1.2 0.9 0.9Bor mt - 0.024 0.024 0-02t6 0.024 .024 0.024 .U024 0.024 0.024 -.024 0.024Othcr Frvits Mr. - - - 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9Neem Secds jut _ _ _ _ _ 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66

Cross Taconi(1) Produce for Sale

Yuelxood Rs/mt 135 - - - - - 499 - 1944 - 499 - - 2433 - 499 _ 4428P'ole Rs/iI4 9 - 792 - - - 792 _ _ 792 - 792 792Tinber Rs/m 250 - - - - - - - - - - - 6600

Sub-Total 1291 1944 1291 3225 1291 11820

(2) Produce for Villa ersGrass KS st 10 3 - - - - - -Leaf Fodder Rs/mt 10 - - _ * 12 12 9 9 2 12 9 10 12 5 12 9 9Poer Rs/mt 750 - 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18Other Fruits Rs/mt 500 - _ _ _ _ 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 450 450 450 450 v. Noee. Seeds Rs/rt 500 - - - - 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 330 330 330 330

Sub-Total 3 18 18 18 30 340 327 327 320 340 327 310 312 785 792 789 789 > -Sub-Total excluding Cress - 18 18 18 30 340 327 327 320 340 327 310 312 785 792 789 789

*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

INDIA

GUJANAT C0O1'NITY FORESTRY PROJECT

Plantationi Model II - Roadside Mainland QOjarat (I ha)

Years 0 1 2 3 4-7 8 9 10 11-13 14 15 16-19 20 21-25 26 27-29 30Unit Price

Costs RsNtesery 322 48 - - - - - - - -

La-d Penparation 318 - - - - - -

Protection 1389 101 134 - - - - - - - - - - -

Pl.nting 536 325 73 - - - - -_ -_ _ _

Others 129 35 - - - _ -Sub-Total 2694 509 207 - - - - - - - - - - - -

4-Gr-ss Product

F:cluoqd mt - - - - 4.34 - 10.5 4.34 - 14.4 4.34 41.

Poles No. - - 145 - - 14- 145 - 145 -_

Loo',ooo - yS tan No,- - - 24 N- 4 - - 72

iazboos - Manvel NO. - - 173 - - _ - 297 - - 396

Other Fruits mt - - 0.9 0 9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.8 1. 1.8 1.B

nor Mnt - .3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0. .3---

Neem Suds Mte - - .066 .066 .066 .066 .066 066 .066 220 220 .220 220

Lear Fodder Mtt - - 0.8 0.8 .6 .6 .1 .9.6 .7 .9 .32 .6 .6 .6

Gtrotss T lcooc()ilrodoce for Sale

Fuelwood fr RslMt 135 586 _ 1418 506 20030 586 _ 5603

Poles Rs/No. 9 1305 305 1305 1305 -

Baroboos - KataB Rs/No. 9 - - - - - 216 - - - - 432 *- 648

Banboos - MancVOl Rs/NQ. 1,25 - -_ _ 1 216 - _ - 371 - - 1,95

Sub-Total 2891 1850 1690 4111 1691 0.4o

(2) Prodbuce for Villagers 18178I.,af Foddcr Io /MtO - 8 8 6 6 1 8 6 7 8 30 (Lot Ri/tt 750 225 225 225 225 225 225 225 225 - - - -

Other Fruits s /Mt 500 1450 450 450 450 450 430 450 450 900 900 907 q(9'

Seeds Na/nt 500 330 3130 330 330 330 330 33 0 110 2 9101 110o _117 I I!

sub-Totul 225 23'3 1013 1011 1011 2006 1013 1061 287 5('8 11)13 1016 IWO lot)

INDIA

GUJARAT COP2I17YTY PORESTRY PROJECT

Flantation Model II - Railside - Seurashtra and Kutch (1 ha)

Years 0 1 2 3 4_7 8 9 10 11-13 14 15 16-19 20 21-25 2G 27-29 39Unit Price

Costs RsNureery 567 113 - - - - - - - - -Land Preparation 560 - - - - - - -_ _Protection 1546 99 149 -Planting 945 552 128Others 887 283 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 175 125Sub-Total 4507 1047 402 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 IZ5

Crouq ProductFuelwood mt - - - - 2.9 - 35.95 - 2.9 . - 38.85 - 2.9 - 35.95Poles No _ _ - - 53 - - . 53 - - 53 - 53Bar mt .024 .024 .024 .024 .02024 24 .024 .024 _ , - _ _ _Teaf Fodder mt - - - 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 - 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 .8 2.0 2.0 2.0

Cro6s Incomne(1) Produce for Sale

Fuelwood Rs/nt 135 392 4 3 392 - - 5245 _ 392 - 4853Poles Rs/No 9 477 - - - 477 - - 477 - 477 -Sub-Total 869 4853 869 5722 869 4853(2) Producee for Villaters2 Lep lu ddor Rs/mt 10 - 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 B 20 20 20Bor Rsn/mt 750 18 18 18 18 18 18 I1 18 _- - _ -_Sub-Total 38 38 38 38 38 18 38 38 20 20 8 20 20 20

,4>t' I

I

INDILA

GUJMUT CIO(UTY FORESTRY PERJECT

Plantation )¶odel IV - Railside - Mainland CuJarat ( 1 he)

Unit Price Years 0 1 2 3 4-7 8 9 10 11-13 14 15 16-19 20 21-25 26 27-29 30

Cos ts Rs

Nursery 595 119 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Laud Preparation 587 - - - - - - - - - - -

Protection 1389 99 134 - - - - - - -

Planting 990 579 134 - - - - - - - - -

Others 129 33 -

Sub-Total 3690 Ti3 268

Gross ProductFuelwood mt - - - - 5.84 - 29.31 - 5.84 - - 35.15 - 5.84 - 29.31

Poles - No _ _ _ 160 _ _ _ 160 - - 160 - 160 - -

Bamboo - Katas No - - - - - - 105 - - - 210 - - - 315

Bamboo - Manvel No - - _ _ - _ 512 - - - - 963 - _ _ 12S4 '

Bor mt - - ,3 .3 .3 .3 .3 .3 .3 .3

Leaf Fodder Mat _ _ _ 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 _ 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 .88 2.2 2.2 2.2

Gross Income(1) Produce for Sale

Fuelwood Rs/mt 135 - - - - 788 - 3957 - 788 - 4745 - 788 - 3957

Poles Rs/No 9 - - - - 1440 - - - 1440 - - 1440 - 1440 - -

Bamboo - Katas Rs/No 9 - - - - - 945 - - - - 1890 - - - 2835

Bamboo - 2nvVel1Rs/No 1.25 _ 640 - - - - 1204 - - 150 0

Sub-TOtal 2228 5542 22 9279 2228 8352

(2) Produce for Villtero2E:it o6dTder V Rs/mt 10 - - 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 8.8 22 22 22

Bor Rs/Mt 750 225 22 5 225 225 22 22 2

Sub-Total hi - 247 247 YU W7 247 F5 22 -8. TY 22 22

INDIA

GUJARAT COM.IIINIY FORESITRY PROJECT

Years 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7-8 9 10 11 12 13-14 15 16-17 18 19 20 21 22-23 24 25 26 27 28-29 30U -t Price

Costs R.Nursery 1218 243 - - - - - - - - - -Land Preparation 1203 - -- - - - - - - - -_ _ _ _Protection 1389 99 134 - - - - - - - -_ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _Planting 2028 1185 275 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -_ _ _ _Others 250 250 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 5 1 125 5 1 125 125 125 125 125 125 125

Sub-Total 6088 1777 534 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125

Gross Productsr--G- -d - - - - 48 0 - - 48 - - - 48 - - - 48 - - - 48 - - - -Peles mt- -- --- - - - - - - - - - -_ _ _ _ _ _- Bmboos- Katas No. - … … … … 89 9 198 _ _ 297 - 396 _ 396 _ _ 396 _ 396 _ _ 396 - 396Bsmb- s _.-Inl No. _… … … …198 - 297 _ _ 936 - 495 - 495 - - 495 - 495 - - 495 - -Le of Fodder mt 5 5 5 - 5 5 5 - - 5 5 - 5 5 5 - 5 5 5 - - 5 5Crass mt 18 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 -8 8 8 8 8 8 8

Gross IncomcProduce for SaleFPuluoud Rn/nt 135 _ _ _ _ - 6480 _640 0480 6480 - - - 6480 - - - -P,les RstNo 9 - - - - 7200 - - 7200 _ _ 7200 - - - 7200 - - - 7200 - - - -bomboos - Katas R./Ne 9 … …… - 891 - 1782 - - 2673 - 3564 _ 3564 _ - 3564 _ 3564 - _ 3564 _ 3564Bamboos - Manvel Rs/No 1.25 3 _… …247 - 371 _ - 495 _ 619 - 619 6 _ 619 _ 619 - -19 9 - 619

Sub-Ttotl - - 13680 1138 - 2153 136800 3168 - 17863 4183 - 13680 4183 - 4183 13680 - 4183 - 4183

Prod.ce for Cel1eutionLPuef FddEr Rs/nt 10 - - - 50 50 50 - s0 50 50 - - 50 5' - 50 50 50 - 50 s5 50 - - so soGrass (Sncrec,ental) Rn/mt 10 _ (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) (10 (100) (100) (100) (100) (105 (1005 (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) (100 (100) (100) (100)

Sub-Total - (100) (105) (55) (50) (30) (100) (50) (50) (50) (100) (100) (50) (50) (100) (50) (50) (50) (100) (50) (50) (50) (100) (100) (50) (50)

S~~~~~~~b-T.tal' 'Wo WE~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1

INDIA

R L GUJARATCOMMUNITY FORESTRY PR0J8CT

Plantation Model Vl - Village Woodlot (Irted)t= Whope of G

Years 0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7-S 9 10 11 12

Unit Price

Costs R.Nursery 641 128 -

Land Preparation 659

Protection 374 50 50

Planting 1069 577 201

Others 367 250 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125

Sob-Total 3110 1005 376 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125

Gross ProductFoeluoud mt - - - - - 32 - - - 32 - -

Poles No _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Bamboos (Katas) No . _ -_ _ 29 59 - - 88

Banboos (Manvel) No - - - - - - 59 - 88 - _ 117

Bor mtlot 01 - - ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4

Other Fruits mt 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92

Leaf Fodder mt 1.7 1.7 - - 1.7 1.7 - -

Grass 35 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

Gross Income

(1) Produce for SaleFuelwood Rs/mt 135 - - - - - 4320 - - - 4320 - -

Poles Rs/No 9 - -

Bomboos (Katas) Rs/No 9 - - 261 - 531 _ _ 792

Booboos (Manvel) Rs/No 1.25 _ _ _ _ _ _ 74 I 1 _ 146

Sub-Total , - 4320 335 - 641 4320 _38

(2) Prodoce for CollectionS.c Rs/mt 710 3 00 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300

Other Fruits Rs/mt 100 - - 90 90 90 90 460 460 460 460

Leaf Fodder Rs/mt 10 - _ _ - 17 17 - - 17 17 - -

Grass Rs/mt 10 ,350 100 105 10 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Sob-Total 350 100 100 400 507 507 490 490 877 077 860 6

Sub-Total Incremental (250) (250) (50) 157 157 140 140 527 S27 510 510

Years 13-14 15 16-17 18 19 20 21 22-23 24 25 26 27 28-29 30

Unit Price

Costs Rs

NurseryLand PreparationProtectionPlantingOthers 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 1_225 125 125

Sob-Total 125 125 125 125 125 125 1.25 125 125 125 125 125 125 125

Gross Product 32 32 18.6

FUelwood Mt - 32 - - -32 -- 2 - - - 1.

Poles NO - - - - - - -

Booboos (Kata) No - 117 - 117 117 - 117 117 117

Baoboos (Man-el) No - 146 - 148 _ - 146 - 146 - - 146 - 146

Bot Mt: 0.4 0.4 - - - - - ---- - --

Other Fruits mt 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 1.84 1.84 1.84 1.84 1.84 1.84 1.84 1.84

Leaf Fodder mt 0.8 1.7 - - 0.7 1.7 - - 1.7 1.7 - - - -

Grass 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10


Fuelwood Rs/nt 135 - 4320 - - - 4320 - - - 4320 - - - 2511

Poles Rs/No 9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Bamboos (Xatas) Rs/No 9 1053 - 1053 - - 1053 - 1053 _ - 1053 - 1053

Baoboos (Manvel) Rs/No 1.25 - 182 - 192 182 - 182 - - 182 - 182

Rub-Total - 5555 - 1235 - 4320 1.235 1235 4320 1235 - 74

(2) Produce for CollectionBut Rs/mt 750 300 300 - - - --- -- - --

Other Fruits Rs/mt 501 460 460 460 460 460 460 920 920 920 920 920 920 920 920

Leaf Fodder Rs/mt 10 8 17 - - 17 17 - - 17 17 - - - -

Grass Rs/Mt 10 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Sub-Total 868 877 560 560 577 577 1020 1020 1037 137 1020 1020 1020 1020

Sub-Total Incremental 518 527 210 210 227 227 670 670 670 670 670 670 670 670

INDIA

GWARAT cOI4 TY FORESTRY PROJECT

Plantatton tiodel VIT - Village Wovdlot ( Rainfed)

Saurashtra and Kutch (1 ha)

Years 0 1 2 3 4-7 8 9 10 11-13 14 15 16-19 20 21-25 26 27-29 30

Unit Price

Costs RsNursery 405 81 - - - - - - - - - - - - -Land Preparation 416 - - - - -Protection 374 50 50 - - -Planting 675 364 127 - - -Others 63 - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Sub-Total 1933 495 177

Gross ProductFuelsood Mt - - - - 25.8 - 25.8 - - 25.8 - 25.8 - 18.75Poles No - - - - 107 - - - 107 - 107 - 107 -Fruits mt - - - .125 .125 .750 .750 .750 .750 .750 .750 .750 1.375 1.375 1.375 1.375 tnLeaf oadder MAt - - - 2.06 2.06 - - *.3, Z.U6 - 1.03 2.06 .82 2.06 - -Grass m5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0

Gross Income(I) Produce for Sale

Fuel.ood Rs/mt 135 - - - - 3483 - - - 3483 - - 3483 _ 3483 - 2531Poles Rs/No 9 - - - - 963 - - - 963 - - 963 - 963 - -

Sub-Total 4446 4446 4446 2531

(2) Produce for VillagersOther Fruits Rs/mt 500 - - - 62 62 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 687 687 687 687Leaf Fodder R.s/mt 10 - _ _ 21 21 - - 14 21 - 10 21 8 21 - -

Sub-Total -U3 1 387753_9 6 ;Z 56887 687

_x

INDIA

GUJARAT COHUIIIY FORESTRY PROJECT

Plantation Model VIII - Village Woodlot (Ralnfed)

mainland Cularat (1 ha)

Years 0 1 2 3 4-7 8 9 10 11-13 14 15 16-19 20 21-25 26 27-29 30unit Price

Costs RsNursery - 447 92 - - - - - - - - - - _ - _ _Land Preparation - 460 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _Protection - 374 50 50 -Planting - 746 402 140 -Otber. - 63 - - - - - - - -- -----

Sub-Total 2090 544 190

Gross ProductFuelwood Mt - - - - - 13.9 - 12.21 - 13.9 - - 26.1 - 13.9 - 26.2Poles No - - - - - 426 - - _ 426 - - 426 - 426 - -Bameboos - Katas No - _ _ _ _ _ - 18 - - - 36 - - - 54 UB=amboos - Mnanvel No - - - - - - - 100 - - - - 171 - - - 228Bor mt - - - .45 .45 .45 .45 .45 .45 .45 .45 - - - -Other Fruits at _ _ _ 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 1.14 1.14 1.14 -

Leaf Fodder mt - - - - 1.22 1.22 .55 .55 .45 1.22 .55 .89 1.22 .49 1.22 .55 .55Grass at 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

Gross Income(I) Produce for Sale

Fucelood RN/at 135 - - - - 1877 - 1648 - 1877 - - 3523 - 1877 - 3537Poles Rs/No 9 - - - - 3854 - - - 3834 - - 3834 - 3834 -Bamboos - Katas Rs/No 9 - - - - - - 162 - - - - 324 - - - 486Ba.boos - Manvel Rs/No 1.25 - - - - - - 125 - - - - 214 - - - 285

Sub-Total 5711 1935 5711 7895 5711 4308

(2) Produce for Villagerabor Rs/mt 750 - - 338 338 338 338 338 338 338 338 - - - - -Other Fruits Rs/at 500 - - 55 55 55 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 570 570 570Leaf Fodder Rs/at 10 _- - 12 12 6 6 50 12 6 9 12 5 12 6 6

Sub-Total 393 EF 9 644 644 688 650 644 309 312 575 582 576 6S.b-Total 70-5 '40-5 -C"-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

INDIA

GUJARAT COMttUNITY FORESTRY PROJECT

Plantation Model IX - Reforestation of Degraded Forests

ranch Mahals, Bh*ruch, Vadodara, Valsad

Years 0 1 2 3 4-7 8 9-11 12 13-14 15 16 17-19 20 21423 24 25-27 28 29 30Unit Price

Costs RsNursery 280 56 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Land Preparation 84 - - - - -Protection 275 - - - --- - - - - - - ---Planting 356 175 104Others 472 - - - -- - - - - --- -- -

Sub-Total 1467 231 104

Gross Product

I-cra .. t.1 ueh,-4 at 0.2 - - - - - -- - 38 --- - -- -38Poles No - - - - - -- - 163 - - - - -- 163 .camboo-Katas No 57 -_ _ 57 114 - - 171 - 171 171 171 - -Bamboo -Manvel No 305 - 522 - 696 - 696 - 696 _ 696 - -


Fuelwood Rs/mt 135 - - - 5144 - - - - - - - - 5144Poles Rs/No 9- - - - - - - - 1467 - -- - - - - - 1467Bamboo Katas Rs/No 9 - - - 513 1026 - 1539 - 1539 _ 1539 - 1539 - -Bamboo Manvel Rs/No 1.25 381 - 652 - 4 870 - 670 - 870 _ 8706

Sub-Total 894 1678 6611 2409 2409 2409 2409 6611

INDIA

GUJARAT COMHUNITY FORESTRY PROJECT

PlantatioU Model X 6f(Otrestation of Private Land - Pangs Diatrict (1 ba)

Years

Unit Price 0 1 2 3 4-7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15 16 17-19 20 21-23 24 25-27 28 29 30

Costs RsNursery 147 29 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ -

Protection 100 - - - - - -

Land Preparation 71 - - - - - -

Planting 469 236 137 - - - -

Others 326 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 2501113 515 387 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 2250 250 50 250 250 5 250 250

Gross ProductPoles mt - - - - - - - 600 - - 680 - - - - - - - - 680

Bamboos - Katas No - - - - 255 - - - 510 - - 765 - 765 - 765 - 765 - -

Bamboos - Manvel No - - - - 147 - - - 252 - - 336 - 336 - 336 - 336 - -


Poles Rs/at 9 - - - - - - - 5400 - - 6120 - - - - - - - - 6120

Bamboos - Katas Rs/No 9 - - - - 2295 - - - 4590 - - 6885 - 6885 - 6885 - 6885 - - @

Bamboos - Nanvel Re/No 1.25 - - - -184 - - - 315 - ___ 420 - 420 - 420 - 420 -

Sub-Total 1.25 - -905 6120 7305 7305 7305 7305 6120

11!

- 56 -

ANNEX 2Page 1

INDIA

GUJARAT COMMUNIT'Y FORESTRY PROJECT

Project Approval, Procurement, Disbursements and Audit

Project Approval

1. Before an expenditure is sarnctioned and the necessary funds appro-priated, a Project Report, based on the Staff Appraisal Report, would be pre-pared by GFD and submitted for approval by the Planning Ministry, through theSecretary, Agriculture, Forests and Ccoperation Department. Commitment isthen made by the State by agreeing to allocate funds for each of the fiscalyears of the project period.

GOG Annual Budget

2. The cyc:Le of events covering the preparation and approval of theannual budget is:

(a) preparation of Proposed Estimate for a fiscal year in Julyof the preceding year;

(b) approval. of the Proposed Estimate by the Ministry of Financein April. of the fiscal year; when approved, the budget iscalled the Sanctioned Estimate and it forms the authorityfor release of funds;

(c) revision. of the Sanctioned Estimate in July of the fiscalyear based on performance during the first quarter of thefiscal year; the document is then approved in January ofthe fiscal year and becomes t:he Revised Estimate; and

(d) submission and approval of the Final Statement of Excessand Savings on the budget in February of the fiscal year;when approved, this statement. becomes the Latest Estimate.

3. The Proposed Estimate is prepared for each division by the Divi-sional Forest Officer from targets agreed with each range under a division.Divisional estimates are consolidated at the office of the circle and sub-mitted to the Addl. CCF for consolidation of all CF estimates. At Addl. CCFlevel, there is an Accounts and Disbursements Cell with an Accounts Officerresponsible for finialization of CFW estimates and allocation of funds tothe lower levels.

- 57 -ANNEX 2Page 2

4. Budgetary allocation is made under two heads: Plan (dealing withdevelopment expenditures) and Non-Plan (dealing with maintenance expenditures.Plan funds are allocated for each project, with detailed allocation againstitems of expenditure.

Procurement and Disbursements

5. Procurement and disbursements would be as follows:

(i) Plantation Works, including nursery, land preparation,planting, protection and maintenance, would be carriedout by force account and disbursements would be madeagainst statements of expenditures;

(ii) Vehicles, Equipment and Material. Contracts would belet following local competitive bidding, advertisedlocally and in accordance with local procedures thatare satisfacatory to IDA. Since individual contractswould not be available for "rate contracts", 1/ acertified list of suppliers, description of item andprice would be sufficient for disbursement. Further,disbursement against procurement involving expenditureof less than Rs 100,000 for vehicles, equipment andmaterial for which it would not be practical to submitdocuments may be permitted against statements ofexpenditures.

(iii) Civil Works. Contracts are awarded to contractors bylocal competitive bidding or undertaken under forceaccount by GFD whenever no contractor has been forth-coming or whenever bid prices are unreasonable. It issuggested that civil works not in excess of 30% of thetotal of civil works financed out of the proceeds of theCredit may be carried out by force account; contracts forthe remainder of the civil works should be let on thebasis of local competitive bidding. In addition, dis-bursements for petty contracts costing less than Rs100,000 for which it would not be practical to submitdocuments may be against statements of expenditures.

(iv) Staff Salaries and Training. Disbursement would be againststatements of expenditures.

1/ Rate Contracts. For most standard items used by several governmentdepartments, the government, through its agencies, enters into "ratecontracts" which specify the prices and suppliers of equipment andmaterials. Rate contracts are awarded after competitive bidding andare usually valid for a specified time period. (Bids are submitted insealed envelopes, opened simultaneously, and evaluated by a governmentcommittee).

- 58 -

ANNEX 2Page 3

Project Accounts

6. The basis of accounting (standard objects of expenditure referredto in GOG circular of July 29, 1978) by GOG will have to be revised in con-formity with the Bank's requirements so that expenditure heads are in con-formity with the chosen disbursement categories. In addition, progressreports on physical implementation, which will be important documents formonitoring project progress and for verifying disbursement applicationsagainst statements of expenditure in respect of planting cost, should beso framed as to be. comparable with the statements of expenditures preparedfrom the financial records.

59 - ANNEX 3Table 1

INDIA


Financial Costs and Returns to GOG(Rs M)

YEAR COSTS RETURNS NET RETURNS

1 80.3 -0.1 - 80.52 93.3 -0.3 - 93.63 110.9 -0.4 -111.34 115.9 -0.5 -116.45 128.8 1.9 -126.96 25.3 3.8 - 21.67 13.9 5.6 - 8.38 9.0 22.3 13.39 8.0 27.4 19.4

10 8.0 32.7 24.811 8.0 40.1 32.112 8.0 56.3 48.413 8.0 31.6 23.714 8.0 45.1 37.215 8.0 59.1 51.116 8.0 77.5 69.517 8.0 73.1 65.118 8.0 77.8 69.819 8.0 53.0 45.020 8.0 44.7 36.721 8.0 42.2 34.322 8.0 52.2 44.223 8.0 59.8 51.924 8.0 78.3 70.325 8.0 16.2 8.226 8.0 28.1 20.127 8.0 34.6 26.628 8.0 52.3 44.329 8.0 42.8 34.830 8.0 98.7 90.831 8.0 86.2 78.232 8.0 97.9 89.933 8.0 89.6 81.634 8.0 94.8 86.9

Financial ROR 4.7%Present Value of Costs at 10% 452.3Present Value of Returns at 10% 229.6

Cost Recovery Index at 10% 229.6 , 50.7%452.3

The net returns to Government were calculated on the following basis.

Produce GOG Share

Fodder, Fruit, Bor, Seed 0%Fuelwood? Poles, Bamboes, Timber

Strip Plantations (Models I-V) 40% (equivalent to 50% of net profit)Village Woodlots (Models VI-VIII) 35%Degraded Forests (Model IX) 80%Private Forests (Model X) lOX (equivalent to lOOX of net profit)

60- ANNEX 3Table 2

INDIA


Cost Recovery - Model VI - Village Woodlot (Irrigated)

Whole of CSujarat (1 ha)(Rs)

Self-Help SupervisedScheme Scheme

() a! b/(1) PV- of Gross Revenue (Incremental- )

Fuelwood/Poles 8,295 8,295Collect:ed Produce 1,927 1,927

Subtotal 10,222 10,222

(2) Imputed Value of Panchayat Contribution 3,065 -

a!(3) PV-/ of Government Outlay

Direct Costs 881 3,946

Technical Assistance 2,075 2,075Subtotal 2.5 6,021

a!(4) PV-/ of Government Outlay on Direct

Costs, Excluding Seedlings 122 3,187

(5) Cost Recovery Objective: (6):(4) = 100% 125%

(6) PV of Returns to CFW 122 3,983

(7) CFW Share of Fuelwood/Poles 1% 48%

(8) Recommended CFW Share (for convenience) 0% 50%

(9) Value of Produce Recovered by CFW in PV(from (1)) 0 4,147

(10) Cost Recovery Index: (9):(3) = 0% 69%

(11) Rent Recovery Index: (9):(1) = 0% 49%

(12) Return to Village PanchayatMain Forest Product 8,295 (100%) 4,148 (50%)Imputed Value of Panchayat Contribution 3,065 -0-Net Return to Village Panchayat 5,230 (+26%) 4,148

a/ PV - Present Value at 10% interest.b/ The revenue appears small in relation to non-irrigated models because

the "without project" production iwhich was taken at 35 m ton of grass/hahas been excluded.

-61 - ANNEX 3Table 3

INDIA


Cost Recovery - Model VII - Village Woodlot

Saurashtra and Kutch (1 ha)(Rs)


(1) PV-2 of Gross RevenueFuelwood/Poles 4,420 4,420Collected Produce 2,090 2,090

Subtotal 6,510 6,510

(2) Imputed Value of Panchayat Contribution 1,495

(3) PV- of Government OutlayDirect Costs 805 2,300Technical Assistance 2,075 2,075


(4) PV-/ of Government Outlay on DirectCosts, Excluding Seedlings 368 1,863

(5) Cost Recovery Objective: (6):(4) = 100% 125%a!

(6) PV- of Returns to CFW 368 2,329

(7) CFW Share of Fuelwood/Poles to ensure (6) 8% 53%

(8) Recommended CFW Share(for convenience and incentive) 0% 50%


(10) Cost Recovery Index: (9):(3) = 0% 50.5%

(11) Rent Recovery Index: (9):(1) = 0% 34%

(12) Return to Village Panc-hnaat-bMain Forest Product (1) 4,420 (100%) 2,210 (50%)

Imputed Value of Panchayat Contribution (2) 1,495 0Net Return to Village Panchayat 2,925 (+32%) 2,210

a/ PV - Present Value at 10% interest.b/ Plus the value of collected produce.

- 62 - ANNEX 3

Table 4

INDIA


Cost Recovery - Model VIII - Village Woodlot

Mainland Gujarat (1 ha)(Ms)


(1) PV-/ of Gross RevenueFuelwood/Poles 6,810 6,810Collected Produce 3,761 3,761

Subtotal 10,571 10,571

(2) Imputed Value of Panchayat Contribution 1,672 -

a!(3) PV-/ of Government Outlay

Direct Costs 823 2,495Technical Assistance 2,075 2,075


a!(4) PV-/ of Government Outlay on Direct

Costs, Excluding Seedlings 349 2,021

(5) Cost Recovery Objective: (6):(4) = 100% 125%

a!(6) PV-/ of Returns to CFW 349 2,526

(7) CFW Share of Fuelwood/Poles to ensure (6) 5% 37%

(8) Recommended CFW Share (for convenience) 0% 50%


(10) Cost Recovery Index: (9):(3) = 0% 75%

(11) Rent Recover. Index: (9):(1) = 0% 32%

(12) Return to Village Panchayat b/Main Forest Product (1) 6,810 (100%) 3,405 (50%)Imputed Value of Panchayat Contribution (2) 1,672 0Net Return to Village Panchayat 5,138 (+50%) 3,405

a/ PV - Present Value at 10% interest:.b! Plus the value of collected produc.e.

INDIA


Economic Analysis - Results(Rs M)

NPV as % of Switching Values a/

PV Costs PV Ben. NPV Present Costs Costs Benef£ts

Roadside Planting inSaurashtra & Kutch 49.1 52.6 3.5 7.1 + 7.2 - 6.7

Roadside Planting inMainland Gujarat 52.8 112.7 59.9 113.4 + 113,4 - 53.1

Railside Planting 10.6 13.1 2.5 23.6 + 23.6 - 19.1

Canalside Planting 10.6 34.2 23.6 222.6 + 221.4 - 68.9

Village Woodlot- Irrigated 8.6 34.4 25.8 300.0 + 298.5 - 74.9

Village Woodlot inSaurashtra & Kutch 30.9 92.1 61.2 198.0 + 197.6 - 66.4

Village Woodlot inMainland Gujarat 34.5 156.9 122.4 354.8 + 355.2 - 78.0

Forest Rehabilitation 27.5 93.8 66.3 241.1 + 240.8 - 70.7

Afforestation ofPrivate Land 2.2 7.6 5.4 245.4 + 255.4 - 71.9

Subtotal 226.8 597.4 370.6 163.0 - -

Overhead Costs 72.8 - -

Total Plantings -including Overheads 299.6 597.4 297.8 99.4 + 99.4 - 49.8

vfS

a/ The switching value is the value of the variable tested for which the NPV discounted at 10% is zero. It may be p interpreted as the value of the variable tested for which the project would be uneconomic.

-64 - ANNEX 4Table 2

INDIA


Sensitivity Analysis

I. Sensitivity Analysis on Present Value

Appraisal Switching %Variable Value Value Change

Benefits fromFuelwood 218.3 -79.5 -136Poles 134.8 -163.0 -221Bamboo - Katas 50.9 -246.9 -585

- Manvels 24.8 -273.0 -1,201

Timber 5.4 -292.4 -5,551F-odder -11.3 -309.1 +2,633Fruit 107.6 -190.3 -276Bor Fruit 5,.1 -240.7 -521Seed 9.9 -287.9 -2,995

Total Benefits 597.5 299.6 -50

Costs

Material 40.3 338.1 -739La6or 103.9 401.7 +287Other 2.1 299.9 +14,527Staff 80.7 378.5 +369Overheads 72.7 370.5 +409

Tota' Costs 299.7 597.4 +100

II. Sensitivity Analysis on ROR

Benefits Down 20% Down 50% Lag 1 year Lag 2 years

Costs 17.0 14.5 10.0 15.3 14.0Up '!0% 15.0 12.7 8.4 13.6 12.4Up 50 12.7 10.6 6.5 11.5 10.6Up 1005 10.0 - - - -

INDIA

GUJARAT CoHMWflTY FOREsTRY PROJECT

Copts mod Denefits Stream at Market Prices(ReM

Years ----------------------- C O S T S --------------------- ------ --------------------------------- B E N e F I T S ----------- ---------_------------_---_________---_______

Material Labor Other Staff Overhead Total Fuel Poles Bamboo. Bambooa Timber Fodder Fruit Bor Seed- Total Increment-l

(Bat..) (MAnvela) Fruit

1 8.6 22.9 0.1 8.7 32.7 73.0 u0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 -0.4 -73.4

2 12.9 34.6 0.2 12.9 27.1 87.8 -0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 -0.7 -88.5

3 16.6 45.7 0.3 17.7 26.0 106.3 -0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -0.6 0.2 1.4 0.0 0.5 -105.8

4 19.2 53.9 0.4 22.2 15.8 111.5 -0,6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -0.6 0.4 3.4 0.0 2.6 -108.9

5 21.6 61.3 0.4 26.4 14.5 124.2 1.5 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 -0.6 0.9 5.9 0.0 11.0 -113.2

6 0.0 20.7 0.3 8.3 0.0 29.2 3.2 5.8 0.2 0.0 0.0 -0.4 1.3 .8.4 0.0 18.6 -10.6

7 0.0 7.4 0.3 7.4 0.0 15.1 4.9 8.4 0.4 0.1 0.0 -0.2 1.9 11.3 0.0 26.8 11.7

8 0.0 2.4 0.3 6.5 0.0 9.2 18.8 24.2 4.1 2.5 0.0 -0.1 3.7 11.3 0.3 64.9 55.7

9 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.2 23.9 29.6 4.7 2.6 0.0 -0.1 6.8 41.3 0.6 79.5 71.3

10 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.2 34.3 28.7 6.0 3.0 0.0 -0.1 11.2 11.3 1.1 95.4 87.2

11 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.2 44.0 35.7 5.8 3.6 0.0 -0.2 15.9 11.3 1.4 117.4 109.3

12 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.2 54.2 42.2 14.2 8.1 0.0 -0.3 23.6 11.3 1.9 155.1 147.0

13 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.1 30.4 10.2 12.2 6.5 0.0 -0.5 26.6 11.3 1.9 98.6 90.5

14 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.1 47.7 26.0 11.4 6.5 0.0 -0.4 26.6 11.3 1.9 130.9 122.7

15 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.2 50.1 34.2 9.9 4.5 0.0 -0.4 26.6 11.3 1.9 138.0 129.8

16 0.1 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.2 56.7 41.3 21.4 10.0 0.0 -0.3 26.6 9.8 1.9 167.4 159.2 a%

17 0.1 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.2 62.4 47.2 12.8 5.7 0.0 -0.3 26.6 8.0 1.9 164.3 156.1

18 0.1 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.2 67.4 51.9 14.1 5.9 0.0 -0.2 26.6 5.4 1.9 172.9 164.7 1

19 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.2 37.0 19.9 15.1 6.1 0.0 -0.3 26.6 2.9 1.9 109.2 100.9

20 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.1 24.9 18.4 25.2 12.4 0.0 -0.2 26.6 0.0 1.9 109.1 101.0

21 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.1 35.0 25.6 16.5 7.8 0.0 -0.2 29.4 9.0 2.4 116.5 108.3

22 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.1 46.2 33.8 18.2 8.6 0.0 -0.2 33.3 0.0 3.2 143.1 135.0

23 o.0: 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.1 57.1 37.9 17.7 9.2 0.0 -0.3 38.4 0.0 4.3 164.3 156.2

24 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.1 65.4 42.6 30.0 15.0 0.0 -0.5 40.9 0.0 5.2 198.7 190.5

25 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.1 1.5 3.3 15.1 6.1 0.0 -0.6 46.9 0.0 6.3 78.6 70.4

26 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.1 16.5 21.0 12.8 5.7 0.0 -0.4 46.9 0.0 6.3 108.7 100.6

27 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.1 22.6 28.2 14.1 5.9 0.0 -0.2 46.9 0.0 6.3 123.8 115.7

28 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.1 28.6 34.5 25.7 11.4 0.0 -0.1 46.9 0.0 6.3 153.4 145.2

29 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.1 32.9 38.7 12.8 5.7 0.0 -0.2 46.9 0.0 6.3 143.0 134.9

30 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.1 94.6 42.7 16.8 7.8 14.5 -0.3 46.9 0.0 6.3 229.4 221.3

31 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.1 77.2 10.0 18.6 8.5 23.1 -0.5 40.8 0.0 5.7 183.5 175.3

32 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.1 '2.2 10.0 18.9 9.0 29.9 -0.5 32.6 0.0 5.2 197.2 189.1

33 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.1 98.7 10.0 9.9 3.6 28.0 -0.6 22.1 0.0 3.0 174.6 166.5

34 0.0 2.4 0.3 5.5 0.0 8.1 7.s5 10.0 10.9 4.0 28.7 -0.7 11.5 0.0 1.6 173.5 165.4 '

ROR at Market Prices - 13.37

NOTE: Totals may not add due to rounding,

INDIA


Costs and Benefit Streams at Efficiency Prices(Re M)

Years - Ec onomic Costs --------------------- --------------------------------------------- Eco nom ic Benefits -----------------------------------------

Material Labor Other Staff Overhead Total Fuelwood Poles Bamboos Bamboos Timber Fodder Fruit Bor Seed Total Net(Katas) (Manvels) Fruit

1 6.0 12.8 0.1 7.2 25.8 51.9 -0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.1 -53.02 9.1 19.4 0.2 10.6 21.6 60.9 -0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.7 -62.53 11.6 25.6 0.2 14.5 20.7 72.6 -0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -1.9 0.1 1.5 0.0 -0.8 -73.54 13.4 30.2 0.3 18.2 12.7 74.8 -0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -2.0 0.4 3.6 0.0 1.3 -73.55 15.1 34.3 0.3 21.6 11.6 82.9 1.6 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 -2.2 0.9 6.3 0.0 9.5 -73.46 0.0 11.6 0.2 6.8 0.0 18.6 3.5 5.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 -1.5 1.2 9.0 0.0 17.7 -0.97 0.0 4.1 0.2 6.1 0.0 10.4 5.3 7.5 0.3 0.1 0.0 -0.7 1.8 12.0 0.0 26.4 15.98 0.0 1.3 0.2 5.3 0.0 6.8 20.4 21.5 3.6 2.2 0.0 0.3 3.5 12.0 0.2 63.8 56.99 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 25.9 26.3 4.1 2.3 0.0 0.1 6.5 12.0 0.6 77.8 71.710 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 37.1 25.5 5.3 2.7 0.0 -0.3 10.8 12.0 1.0 94.0 87.911 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 47.6 31.8 5.2 3.2 0.0 -0.8 15.2 12.0 1.3 115.5 109.412 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 58.6 37.5 12.6 7.2 0.0 -1.2 22.7 12.0 1.8 151.2 145.113 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 32.9 9.1 10.8 5.7 0.0 -1.6 25.5 12.0 1.8 96.2 90.214 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 51.6 23.1 10.1 5.7 0.0 -1.6 25.5 12.0 1.8 128.3 122.3 a'15 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 54.2 30.4 8.8 4.0 0.0 -1.5 25.5 12.0 1.8 135.2 129.1 i '16 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 °.0 6.0 61.3 36.7 19.1 S.8 0.0 -i.0 25.5 10.5 i.6 i62.6 156.617 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 67.5 42.0 11.4 5.0 0.0 -1.0 25.5 8.5 1.8 160.6 154.618 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 72.9 46.1 12.5 5.2 0.0 -0.8 25.5 5.8 1.8 169.0 162.919 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.1 40.1 17.7 13.4 5.4 0.0 -1.1 25.5 3.1 1.8 105.9 99.820 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 26.9 16.3 22.4 10.9 0.0 -0.7 25.5 0.0 1.8 103.2 97.221 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 37.9 22.8 14.6 6.8 0.0 -0.6 28.2 0.0 2.3 112.0 106.022 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 50.0 30.1 16.2 7.5 0.0 -0.6 31.9 0.0 3.1 138.2 132.223 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 61.8 33.7 15.8 8.1 0.0 -1.2 36.9 0.0 4.1 159.1 153.124 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 70.8 37.8 26.7 13.2 0.0 -1.7 39.3 0.0 5.0 191.1 185.125 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 1.6 2.9 13.4 5.4 0.0 -2.1 45.0 0.0 6.1 72.3 66.226 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 17.9 18.6 11.4 5.0 0.0 -1.5 45.0 0.0 6.1 102.5 96.427 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 24.5 25.1 12.5 5.2 0.0 -0.9 45.0 0.0 6.1 117.5 111.428 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 30.9 30.7 22.8 10.0 0.0 -0.2 45.0 0.0 6.1 145.4 139.329 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 35.5 34.4 11.4 5.0 0.0 -0.6 45.0 0.0 6.1 136.7 130.730 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 102.3 38.0 15.0 6.9 13.5 -1.1 45.0 0.0 6.1 225.7 219.631 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 83.5 8.9 16.6 7.5 21.4 -1.7 39.2 0.0 5.4 180.8 174.832 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 99.7 8.9 16.8 7.9 27.8 -1.9 31.2 0.0 5.0 195.4 189.333 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 106.8 8.9 8.8 3.2 25.9 -2.2 21.2 0.0 2.8 175.5 169.434 0.0 1.3 0.2 4.5 0.0 6.0 116.3 8.9 9.6 3.5 26.7 -2.6 11.1 0.0 1.5 175.1 169.0

ROR at efficiency prices = 17.0% O

NOTE: Totals may not add due to rounding

INDIA

OUJARAT CONHUNITY FORESTRY PROJECT

Proiect Output

('000)

Bamboos

Years Fuelwood Polas Ratas Hanvels Timber Leaf Fruit Bor Fruit Seed

(m ton) (No) (No) (No) (W3) Fodder (m ton) ( ton) (M ton)

1 -1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0

2 -2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0

3 -3.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.3 1.9 0.0

4 -4.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.0 0.8 4.5 0.0

5 X1- 3 64. 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 43.4 1.8 7.9 0.0

6 .3.8 649.4 26.8 53.8 0.0 63.3 2.6 11.2 0.0

7 3.2 934.2 43.6 87.7 0.0 88.2 3.8 15.0 0.0

8 139.5 2693.2 453.5 1981.1 0.0 116.2 7.3 15.0 0.5

9 177.1 3293.3 517.1 2081.4 0.0 107.4 13.6 15.0 1.2

10 253.8 3188.7 661.8 2433.3 0.0 96.9 22.4 15.0 2.1

11 325.8 3971.1 645.7 2900.5 0.0 83.5 31.7 15.0 2.8

12 401.2 4688.9 1576.2 6516.7 0.0 72.7 47.2 15.0 3.8

13 225.5 1134.2 1353.0 5210.9 0.0 60.1 53.1 15.0 3.8

14 353.7 2893.2 1262.8 5160.9 0.0 61.7 53.1 15.0 3.8

15 371.2 3797.8 1105.1 3598.7 0.0 60.6 53.1 15.0 3.8

16 420.2 4587.4 2381.5 7966.0 0.0 76.0 53.1 13.1 3.8

17 462.4 5249.9 1421.6 4546.3 0.0 76.9 53.1 10.6 3.8 -4

18 499.1 5762.9 1568.5 4729.9 0.0 83.5 53.1 7.2 3.8

19 274.4 2208.2 1675.8 4863.9 0.0 74.8 53.1 3.9 3.8

20 .184.3 2043.7 2802.2 9912.7 0.0 84.3 53.1 0.0 3.8

21 259.5 2848.5 1830.6 6202.5 0.0 88.4 58.7 0.0 4.8

22 342.5 3758.2 2026.2 6845.7 0.0 90.2 66.5 0.0 6.4

23 423.1 4215.9 1970.5 7395.0 0.0 72.6 76.8 0.0 8.5

24 484.6 4728.9 3336.7 12034.0 0.0 57.3 81.8 0.0 10.4

25 11.3 364.7 1675.8 4863.9 0.0 43.0 93.7 0.0 12.7

26 122.3 2328.4 1421.6 4546.3 0.0 63.4 93.7 0.0 12.7

27 167.5 3133.3 1568.5 4729.9 0.0 81.6 93.7 0.0 12.7

28 211.8 3838.2 2854.8 9107.1 0.0 101.7 93.7 0.0 12.7

29 243.4 4295.9 1421.6 4546.8 0.0 87.2 93.7 0.0 12.7

30 701.0 4748.7 1870.9 6227.5 58.1 71.8 93.7 0.0 12.7

31 572.1 1114.0 2068.9 6827.1 92.4 53.7 81.6 0.0 11.3

32 682.7 1114.0 2100.2 7188.7 119.7 48.9 65.1 0.0 10.4

33 731.4 1114.0 1105.5 2868.2 111.8 42.5 44.1 0.0 5.9

34 796.6 1114.0 1205.6 3200.7 114.9 29.3 23.1 0.0 3.1

Total 9897.3 86177.5 43952.6 148627.2 496.9 2204.9 1616.2 195.3 177.8

- 68 -ANNEX 4Table 6

INDIA


Financial and Economic Prices

Financial Economic ConversionUnit Price Price Factor

Fuelwood a/ Rs/m ton 135.00 182.00 0.8Poles Rs/piece 9.00 10.00 0.8Bamboo Katas Rs/piece 9.00 10.00 0.8

Manvels Rs/piece 1.25 1.40 0.8

Small Timber Rs/m 250.00 290.00 0.8Bor Fruit Rs/m ton 750.00 1,000.00 0.8Other Fruit Rs/m ton .500.00 600.00 0.8Neem Seeds Rs/m ton 500.00 600.00 0.8Fodder and Grass Rs/m ton 10.00 35.00 1.0

a! Detailed estimate of fuelwood price is in Annex 4, Table 7.

_ 69 -ANNEX 4Table 7

INDIA


ROR Calculations

Estimate of Fuelwood Price

Rs/mt

(1) Fuelwood retail price 325.0 a/in main marketplace (Ahmadabad)less overheads and transport (average 100 km, 80.0by 5-ton truck including loading andunloading Rs 5.5)

less Profits 20.0

(2) Price at depot 225.0 b/less transport (average 20 km, by bullock cart 37.0including loading and unloading Rs 5.5)less overheads 10.0less weight reduction due to drying 15.0less harvesting costs (felling & billetting) 13.0

(3) Stumpage price 150.0Economic stumpage price, i.e.,

including profits 20.0adjusting labor by its economic price 12.0

(4) Economic Stumpage price 182.0

(5) Financial Stumpage price 135.0used in project calculations was obtained by

reducing (3) by 10% on the assumption thatAhmadabad market enjoys a 10% price premiumon average.

a/ Actual February 1979 price.b/ Actual auction prices (February 1979) in Forest Department Depot between

Rs 205 and Rs 246 for Eucalyptus.

ANNEX 470 - Table 8

INDIA


Benefits and Justification - Wood Saving Units

Assumptions

- mortality rate 15 per thousand- proportion of Hindu population: 80%- average size of village, where unit would be intalled:2,000 people

- amount of wood saved per cremation: 160 kg.- economic price of fuelwood: Rs 18 0/m ton- economic cost of cremation unit: Rs 4,000- life of cremation unit: 15 vears

Economic Streams

Years Costs Benefits Net BenefitsRs

1 4,000 349 (3,651)

2-15 - 699 699

N.P.V. - 4,973R.O.R. 15%

Crossover Value

The crossover value of benefits, i.e., the value which makesNPV equal 0, is 27%. One can therefore conclude that the installa-tion of cremation facilities would be a viable proposition invillages or groups of villages with a population of 1,460(73% of 2,000) or more, say 1,500.

The ROR on similar inve-tment in urban areas where greater usewould re made of the unit would clearly be higher than 15%; the largerthe P 2uli' on of the town the higher the ROR.

Estimates of fuelwood saved as a result of efficient wood burning stovesand redesigned cremation units are:

Annual,Amount of Proportion of Total TotalWood -'consumed in Wood Expected Number of WoodTraditional Units to be Saved in Improved Saved

Item (kg) Improved Units Units (m ton)

Stoves b/ 1,000 50% 10,000 5,000

Cremation Unit- rural areas c/ 9,600 40% 800 3,072- urban areas d, 96,000 40% 200 7,680

15,752

a/ Fuelwood or fuelwood equivalent.b/ 0.26 m3/person per year; average household 5.5 persons; 1 m3 = 0.7 m ton.c/ used on average 24 times a year (village of 2,000 people).d/ used on average 240 times a year (townL of 20,000 people).

71 - ANNEX 5Table 1

INDIA


Schedule of Estimated IDA Disbursements(US$ M)

IDA Fiscal Year Disbursement -------and Semester Semester Cumulative

FY801st2nd 0.2 0.2

FY811st 0.8 1.02nd 1.0 2.0

FY821st 2.0 4.02nd 3.0 7.0

FY831st 3.5 10.52nd 4.0 14.5

FY84Ist 4.5 19.02nd 5.0 24.0

FY851st 5.0 29.02nd 5.0 34.0

FY861st 3.0 37.0

Estimated Effective Date April 1, 1980.Estimated Closing Date December 31, 1985.

ANNEX 6--72 -

INDIA

GUJARAT COMMWNIIY FORESTRY PROJECT

Implementa.tion Schedule

Pre Proiect'Project Project Project.ProjectPre-Bloard Effective- Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

|Preser,tatiorl ness I 2 3_41 2 3 41 1 2 3 411 2 3 41 2 3 4

ORGANIZATIONAL UNITS

New Circle and 2 DivisionsCommunicationsPublic RelationsMonitoring Unit and ProgramuEvaluation Cell ______

Research Unit and ProgramPlanning, Information and Rteporting

STAFF APPOINTMENT

Additional CCF CF ________Other Staff

CIVIL WORKS

Offices and Workshop iHouses

VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT

Cars, Jeeps, VansMotorcycles, BicyclesTractors, Trucks __

Office EquipmentOther EquipmentUniforms ______

TRAINING AND FELLOWSHIPS

Preservice _

InserviceStudy ToursInternationalTraining Curricula ____________ _____.Training for Panchayats _______

RESEARCH AND SEED

Civil WorksStaff Operating Expendituree;

MONITORING AND EVALUATION

Monitoring International StaffEvaluation CellVehicles and Equipment _ lOperating Expenses ._|__

PLANTING

Models I-IIModels III-IVModels V-X _Farm Forestry 1_1__

-73- ANNEX 7Table 1

INDIA


Summary Prolect Costs(Rs M)

* _ _ _________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1/Component* Years 1 2 3 4 5 Total F.E. Costs

Proiect Organization

Staff Costs (T-2) 13.99 18.35 23.04 26.81 30.51 112.70 -Operating Costs (T-2) 3.41 3.98 4.42 4.72 5.01 21.54 8.62Vehicles & Equipment (T.3) 11.20 5.86 5.80 3.45 3.69 30.00 7.89

- Buildings & Housing (T-3) 10.29 9.56 9.41 1.50 - 30.76 -

Sub-total 38.89 37.75 42.67 36.48 39.21 195.00 16.51

Training and Fellowships (T.4) 2.54 1.45 1.23 1.50 1.49 8.21 0.90

Research and Seed Testing(T.5) 0.39 1.38 0.74 0.58 0.58 3.67 0.68

Plantings (T.6)

Village Woodlots 9.47 15.10 20.49 24.22 28.14 97.42 2.92Reforestation of 9.17 10.37 11.00 11.00 11.00 52.54 1.58Degraded Forests

Afforestation of private 0.22 0.33 0.40 0.45 0.50 1.90 0.06agricultural lands

Strip Plantings 12.69 21.92 30.65 37.75 43.63 146.64 4.40Maintenance of 3.65 1.09 _ 4.74 .14

Past PlantingsFarm Forestry 4.96 5.21 5.86 6.51 7.16 29.70 .89

Sub-total 40.16 54.02 68.40 79.93 90.43 332.94 9.99

Stoves and Cremation (T.7) 0.03 0.67 1.13 1.32 1.35 4.50 -Facilities

Monitoring and Evaluation (T.8) 0.92 0.70 0.79 0.89 3.30 0.51

Total Base Cost 82.01 96.19 114.87 120.60 133.95 547.62 28,59

Physical Contingencies 3.54 4.17 4.94 4.74 5,11 22,50 -and Rounding

Price Contingencies 2.12 7.57 15.49 23.69 34.60 83.47 2.84

GRAND TOTAL 87.67 107.93 135.30 149.03 173.66 653.59 31.43

I/ Foreign Exchange = Operating Costs (40%), Vehicles (25%), Equipment (30%), Plantings (3%).

* Reference is given to detailed cost tables for each component.

- 74 -

ANNEX 7

INDIA Table 2Page 1

GUJAEAT TOITY FORESTRY PROJECT

Pro1ect Organization Staff and Other OPerating Costs

Unit Cost *E.U I YEAt 2 YEU 3 YEA 4 YEAR 5

A STAFF COSTS R low0 No Cost No Cost No Cost No Cost No Cost Total Cost

(1) State R Q

(a) Head Office

Addl CCF 29.0 1 0.029 1 0.029 1 0.029 1 0.029 1 0 029 ( 0.145DCP 25.0 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 0 125

Personnel Officer 18.0 1 0.018 1 0.018 1 0.018 1 0.018 1 0.018 0.090

Office Superintendent 14.0 1 0.014 1 0.014 1 0.014 1 0.014 1 0.014 0.070

Office Superintendent(Accounts)14.0 1 0.014 1 0.014 1 0.014 1 0.014 1 0.014 0.070

Read Clerk 11.0 1 0.011 I 0.011 1 0.011 1 0.011 1 0.011 0.055

Accountant 7.0 4 0.028 4 0.028 4 0.028 4 0.028 4 0.028 0.140

Clerk 6.0 2 0.012 2 0.012 2 0.012 2 0.012 2 0.012 0.060

Stenographer Grade 1 12.0 1 0.012 1 0.012 1 0.012 1 0.012 1 0.012 0.060

Stenographer Grade II 11.0 1 0.011 1 0.011 1 0.011 1 0.011 1 0.011 0.055Stenographer Grade 111 7.0 2 0.014 2 0.014 2 0.014 2 0.014 2 0.014 0.070

Typist 6.0 2 0.012 2 0.012 2 0.012 2 0.012 2 0.012 0.060

Messenger 4.0 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 0.080

Driver 6.0 2 0.012 2 0.012 2 0.012 2 0.012 2 0.012 0.060

Watchman 4.0 1 0.004 1 0.004 1 0.004 1 0.004 1 0.004 0.020

Junior Engineer 12.0 1 0.012 1 0.012 1 0.012 1 0.012 1 0.012 0.060

Sub-total (1) (a) 0.244 0.244 0.244 0.244 0.244 1.220

(b) Planning. Inforation & Raportint

b.1 Planningt & lRaortiji

CF Planning 27.0 1 0.027 1 0.027 1 0.027 1 0.027 1 0.027 0.135DCF Plarning 25.0 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 0.125

ACF Reporting 19.0 1 0.019 1 0.019 1 0.019 1 0.019 1 0.019 0.095

Dist. Inspector of LandRecords 14.0 1 0.014 1 0.014 1 0.014 1 0.014 1 0.014 0.070

Statistical Officer 15.0 1 0.015 1 0.015 1 0.015 1 0.015 1 0.015 0.075

Statistical Assistant 11.0 2 0.022 2 0.022 2 0.022 2 0.022 2 0.022 0.110

Draftsman 13.0 1 0.013 1 0.013 1 0.013 1 0.013 1 0.013 0.065

Surveyors 8.0 6 0.048 6 0.048 6 0.048 6 0.048 6 0.048 0.240Stenographer Grade 1I 11.0 1 0.011 1 0.011 1 0.011 1 0.011 1 0.011 0.055

Stenographer Grade III 7.0 1 0.007 1 0.007 1 0.007 1 0.007 1 0.007 0.035

Typist 6.0 2 0.012 2 0.012 2 0.012 2 0.012 2 0.012 0.060Accountanc 7.0 1 0.007 1 0.007 1 0.007 1 0.007 1 0.007 0.035

Drivers 6.0 3 0.018 3 0.018 3 0.01B 3 0.018 3 0.018 0.090

Messenger 4.0 1 0.004 1 0.004 1 0.004 1 0.004 1 0.004 0.020PA (Orderly) 4.0 3 0.012 3 0.012 3 0.012 3 0.012 3 0.012 0.060

Sub-total b.1 0.254 0.254 0.254 0.254 0,254 1;270

b.2 Public Relation Unit

DCF Public Relations 25.0 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 0.125

Stenographer Grade III 7.0 1 0.007 1 0.007 1 0.007 1 0.007 1 0.007 0.035

Driver 6.0 1 0.006 1 0.006 1 0.006 1- 0.006 1 0.006 0.030

PA (Orderly) 4.0 1 0.004 1 0.004 1 0.004 1 0.004 1 0.004 0.020

Sub-total b.2 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.210

b.3 Phase 1I Proiect Preparation

Forest Economist 25.0 - - - 1 0.025 1 0.025 0.050

ACP 19.0 - - - 1 0.019 1 0.019 0.038Ranger (Survey) 13.0 _ - - 1 0.013 1 0.013 0.02b

PA (Orderly) 4.0 - - - 2 0.008 2 0.008 0.016

Surveyor 8.0 - - - 4 0.032 4 0.032 0.064Draftsman 13.0 - - - 1 0.013 1 0.013 0.026

Stenographer Grade III 7.0 - - - 1 0.007 1 0.007 0.014

Accountant 7.0 - - - 1 0.007 1 0.007 0.014

Driver 6.0 - - - 1 0.006 1 0.006 0.012

Messenger 4.0 - - - 2 0.008 2 0.008 0.016

Sub-total b.3 0.138 0.138 0.276

Sub-total (1) (b) 0 296 0.296 0.296 0.434 0 434 1,756

- 75 - ANNEX 7Tabl1e 2Page 2

Unit Cost YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5Rs '000 No Cost No Cost Ho Cost No Cost No Cost Total Cost

(c) Training, Research and Comunication Unit

c.l H Q Staff (RMqPPola)

CF 27.0 1 0.027 1 0.027 1 0.027 1 0.027 1 0.027 0.135ACF 19.0 1 0.019 1 0.019 1 0.019 1 0.019 1 0.019 0.095DCF Training 25.0 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 0.125

DCF Research 25.0 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 0.125DCF Communication 25.0 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 0.125

Office Superintendent 14.0 1 0.014 1 0.014 1 0.014 1 0.014 1 0.014 0.070

Head Clerk 11.0 1 0.011 1 0.011 1 0.011 1 0.011 1 0.011 0.055

Accountant 7.0 1 0.007 1 0.007 1 0.007 1 0.007 1 0.007 0.035

Stenographer Grade II 11.0 1 0.011 1 0.011 1 0.011 1 0.011 1 0.011 0.055Stenographer Grade III 7.0 3 0.021 3 0.021 3 0.021 3 0.021 3 0.021 0.105

PA (Orderly) 4.0 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 0.080Driver 6.0 4 0.024 4 0.024 4 0.024 4 0.024 4 0.024 0.120Messenger 4.0 1 0.004 1 0.004 1 0.004 1 0.004 1 0.004 0.020

Sub-total c.1 0.229 0.229 0.229 0.229 0.229 1.145

c.2 Comnunication Units (Circle a Q)

ACF (Sociologist) 19.0 2 0.038 4 0.076 4 0.076 4 0.076 4 0.076 0.342

Ranger (Audiovisual) 13.0 2 0.026 4 0.052 4 0.052 4 0.052 4 0.052 0.234

Ranger (Villagers' training) 13.0 2 0.026 4 0.052 4 0.052 4 0.052 4 0.052 0.234

Lady Social Worker (Stoves) 8.0 2 0.016 4 0.032 4 0.032 4 0.032 4 0.032 0.144

Artisans 4.0 10 0.040 20 0.080 20 0.080 20 0.080 20 0.080 0.360

Typist 6.0 2 0.012 4 0.024 4 0.024 4 0.024 4 0.024 0.108

Drivers 6.0 8 0.048 16 0.096 16 0.096 16 0.096 16 0.096 0.432Cleaner 5.0 2 0.010 4 0.020 4 0.020 4 0.020 4 0.020 0.090

PA (Orderly) 4.0 2 0.008 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 0.072Messenger 4.0 2 0.008 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 0.072

Sub-total c.2 0.232 0.464 0,464 464 0.464 2.088

Sub-total (1) (c) 0.461 0.693 0.693 0.693 0.693 3.233

Sub-total (1) 1.001 1.233 1.233 L.57 1,371 6.209

(2) CIRCLE H 0

CF (Operation) 27.0 4 0.108 4 0.108 4 0.108 4 0.108 4 0.108 0.540ACF (Planting) 19.0 4 0.076 4 0.076 4 0.076 4 0.076 4 0.076 0.380PA (orderly) 4.0 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 0.060

Deputy Engineer 18.0 4 0.072 4 0.072 4 0.072 4 0.072 4 0.072 0.360Junior Engineer 12.0 4 0.048 4 0.048 4 0.048 4 0.048 4 0.048 0.240Asat Draftsman 6.0 4 0.024 4 0.024 4 0.024 4 0.024 4 0.024 0.120

Statistical Officer 15.0 4 0.060 4 0.060 4 0.060 4 0.060 4 0,060 0.300Statistical Assistant 11.0 4 0.044 4 0.044 4 0.044 4 0.044 4 0.044 0.220Office Superintendent 14.0 4 0.056 4 0.056 4 0.056 4 0.056 4 0.056 0.280Accountant 7.0 8 0.056 8 0.056 8 0.056 8 0.056 8 0.056 0.280

Clerk 6.0 4 0.024 4 0.024 4 0.024 4 0.024 4 0.024 0.120

Stenographer Grade II 12.0 4 0.048 4 0.048 4 0.048 4 0.048 4 0.048 0.240Stenographer Grade III 11.0 4 0.044 4 0.044 4 0.044 4 0.044 4 0.044 0.220Typist 7.0 4 0.028 4 0.028 4 0.028 4 0.028 4 0.028 0.140Driver 6.0 8 0.048 8 0.048 8 0.048 8 0.048 8 0.048 0.240Messenger 4.0 12 0.048 12 0.048 12 0.048 12 0.048 12 0.048 0.240Watchman 4.0 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 0.080

Sub-total (2) 0.816 0.816 0.816 0.816 0.816 4.080

(3) WORKSHOP

Foreman 7.0 2 0.014 2 0.014 2 0.014 2 0.014 2 0.014 0.070Lathe Operator 7.0 2 0.014 2 0.014 2 0.014 2 0.014 2 0.014 0.070Mechanic 7.0 2 0.014 2 0.014 2 0.014 2 0.014 2 0.014 0.070Welder 7.0 2 0.014 2 0.014 2 0.014 2 0.014 2 0.014 0.070

Helper 4.0 2 0.008 2 0.008 2 0.008 2 0.008 2 0.008 0.040Driver 6.0 2 0.012 2 0.012 2 0.012 2 0.012 2 0.012 0.060

Sub-total (3) 0.076 0.076 0.076 0.076 0.076 0.380

- 76 -ANNEX 7Table 2Page 3

Unit Cost YEAR I YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5Rs '000 No Cost No Cost No Cost No Cost No Cost Total Cost

(4) DIVISIONAL HO

(a) Field StaffDCY 25.0 19 0.475 19 0.475 19 0.475 19 0.475 19 0.475 2.375ACF 19.0 10 0.190 26 0.494 43 0.817 53 1.007 64 1.216 3.724Ext. Ranger 13.0 183 2.379 247 3.211 316 4.108 357 4.641 401 5.213 19.552Ext. Forester 8.0 452 3.616 685 5.480 969 7.752 1232 9.856 1444 11.552 38.256Protection Assistant 4.0 330 1.320 403 1.612 483 1.932 567 2.268 744 2.976 10.108

Sub-total 4(a) 7.980 11.272 15.084 18.247 21.432 74.015

(b) Planning StaffRanger 13.0 19 0.247 19 0.247 19 0.247 19 0.247 19 0.247 1.235Typist 6.0 19 0.114 19 0.114 19 0.114 19 0.114 19 0.114 0.570Stat. Assistant 11.0 19 0.209 19 0.209 19 0.209 19 0.209 19 0.209 1.045Surveyor 8.0 19 0.152 19 0.152 19 0.152 19 0.152 19 0.152 0.760

Sub-total 4(b) 0.722 0.722 0.722 0.722 0.722 3.610

(c) Office StaffHead Clerk 11.0 19 0.209 19 0.209 19 0.209 19 0.209 19 0.209 1.045Stat. Assistant 11.0 19 0.209 19 0.209 19 0.209 19 0.209 19 0.209 1.045Accountant 7.0 38 0.266 38 0.266 38 0.266 38 0.266 38 0.266 1.330Stenographer Grade III 7.0 19 0.133 19 0.133 19 0.133 19 0.133 19 0.133 0,665Office Clerk 6.0 21 0.126 21 0.126 21 0.126 21 0.126 21 0.126 0.630Clerk for Field Ranger 6.0 183 1.098 247 1.482 316 1.896 357 2.142 401 2.406 9.024Driver (Car) 6.0 19 0.114 19 0.114 19 0.114 19 0.114 19 0.114 0.570Driver (Truck Tractor) 6.0 92 0.552 133 0.798 175 1.050 196 1.176 218 1.308 4.884Cleaner (Truck Tractor) 5.0 92 0.460 133 0.665 175 0.875 196 0.980 218 1.090 4.070PA (Orderly) 4.0 19 0.076 19 0.076 19 0.076 19 0.076 19 0.076 0.380Messenger 4.0 19 0.076 19 0.076 . 19 0.076 19 0.076 19 0.076 0.380Watchman 4.0 19 0.076 19 0.076 19 0.076 19 0.076 19 0.076 0.380

Sub-total 4(c) 3.395 4.230 5.106 5.583 6.089 24.403

Sub-total (4) 12.097 16.224 20.912 24.552 28.243 102.028

Total (1) + (2) + (3) + (4) 13.990 18.349 23.037 26.815 30.506 112.697

(B) OTHER OPERATING COSTS:

(i) Vehicle Running Expenses

Cars 0.020 8 0.160 8 0.160 8 0.160 8 0.160 8 0.160 0.8004 91D Vehicles 0.012 33 0.396 33 0.396 33 0.396 34 0.408 34 0.408 2.004Publicity Vans 0.030 2 0.060 4 0.120 4 0.120 4 0.120 4 0.120 0.540Staff Vans 0.020 9 0.180 12 0.240 12 0.240 12 0.240 12 0.240 1.140Motorcycles 0.004 198 0.792 278 1.112 365 1.460 416 1.664 473 1.892 6.920Break down Van 0.010 2 0.020 2 0.020 2 0.020 2 0.020 2 0.020 0.100Bus 0.040 2 0.080 4 0.160 4 0.160 4 0.160 4 0.160 0.720

Sub-total (i) 1.688 2.208 2.556 2.772 3.000 12.224

(ii) Office Expenses 1.100 1.125 1.150 1.175 1.200 5.750

(iii) Travellins Expenses 0.400 0.450 0.500 0.550 0.600 2.500

(iv) Maintenance of Buildings 0.120 0.100 0.110 0.120 0.110 0.560

(v) Meals for Villagers under Training 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 0.100 03500

TOTAL (B) 3.408 3.983 4.416 4.717 5.010 21.534

- 77 -AoŽN EX 7Tabl.e 3

INDIA Page I

GUJARAT C0O4DJNITY FORESTRY PROJECT

Project Organization - Buildings & Housin_- Vehicles & Equitoent

(R 1M)

kzisting so Unit Cost HARI Y141 2 TM 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 TOTALR_ _000 No 00st No Cost No Cos t No Coat No Cost it- Cost

(1) Building 6 Housint

(a) Addl CCF Office 300.0 1 0.300 (-) - C-) _ (_) _ C-) _ 1 0.300

(b) Housing (excluding Iajpiple) s/

DCZ 70.0 (3) 0.210 (2) 0.140 (2) 0.140 (1) 0.070 (-) - (B) 0.560ACF 60.0 (8) 0.480 (8) 0.480 (8) 0.480 (-) - (-) (24) 1.440

ER ~~~~~~~~~17.2 (70) 1.204 (70) 1.204 (70) 1.204 (5) 0.086 () - (213) 3,698EF 16.2 (300) 4.860 (300) 4.860 (300) 4.860 (67) 1.085 () (967) 15.665PA 8.6 (250) 2.150 (250) 2.150 (250) 2.150 (18) 0.155 (.3 - (768) 6.605

(e) Mousing (Rajpipl Conservancy)

DCF 70.0 (3) 0.210 (2) 0.140 () - (.) . (-) - (5) 0.350ACP & equivalent 60.0 (4) 0.240 (4) 0.240 (4) 0.240 (1) 0.060 (-) - (13) 0.780ER 17.2 (4) 0.069 (4) 0.069 (4) 0.069 () - (-) . (12) 0.207EF 16.2 (6) 0.097 (4) 0.065 (4) 0.065 (-) - (-) - (14) 0.227

PA 6 equivalent 8.6 (10) 0.086 (10) 0.086 (10) 0.086 (4) 0.034 (-) - (34) 0.292Office Staff Category III 50.0 (1) 0.050 (-) - (-) - (-) - -) - (1) 0.050

Category II 17.2 (2) 0.034 (2) 0.034 (2) 0.034 (_) _ (-) - (6) 0.102Category 1 8.6 (4) 0.034 (4) 0.034 (3) 0.026 (-) . (-) - (11) 0.094

(d) Garage 17.2 (5) 0.066 (-) - (-) - (-) - (-) - 0.086

(a) Workshop Shad 60.0 (2) 0.120 (-) - -) () - () - 0,120

Sub-total Civil Works Ig,230 9.3.354 1.490 - 30,576

Lend Cost 0.060 0.055 0.055 0.010 - 0.180

Total 8uildiu4 and Housine 10.290 9-402 1.500 _ 30.756

(2) Vehicles

(a) General

Cars (Addl Cl h Cr) 4 32.5 (4) 0.130 (-) - (-) - (-) (-) - (4) 0.1304 WD (PieldDC? & ACF) 16 48.1 (9) 0.433 (-) - () - (1) 0.048 (-) - (10) 0.481Trailor for 4 WD 1 3.1 (2) 0.068 () - (-) - (-) - (-) - (2) 0.068Vans (Addl Cl & CP Office) - 40.0 (4) 0.160 (3) 0.120 (-) - (-) - (-) -- (7) 0.280Breakdown Van (Worksho) - 100.0 (2) 0.200 (-) - (-) (.) _ (-) - (2) 0.200

Tractor with Voter Pump (Rng"e) 38 50.0 (27) 1.350 (20) 1.000 (21) 1.050 (11) 0.550 (11) 0.550 (90) 4.500Trailor for tractor 38 10.0 (27) 0.270 (20) 0.200 (21) 0.210 (11) 0.110 (11) 0.110 (90) 0.900Tanker 37 9.0 (27) 0.243 (21) 0.189 (21) 0.189 (11) 0.099 (11) 0.099 (91) 0.819Truck - 110.0 (27) 2.970 (21) 2.310 (21) 2.310 (10) 1.100 (11) 1.210 (90) 9.900Motorcycle (Ranger or equivalezt) 18 7.2 (180) 1.296 (80) 0.576 (87) 0.626 (51) 0.367 (57) 0.411 (455) 3.276Bicycle (Forester & PA) - 0.4 (612) 0.245 (203) 0.081 (229) 0.092 (238) 0.095 (386) 0.154 (1668) 0.667

Sub-total 7.365 4.476 4.477 2.369 2.3 21,221

A/-New houaing is provided for

1/3 of OCF1/2 of ER2/3 of EFAll PA

A,;ŽEX 7Table 3

-78 ?age 2

Buildings & equipment Exisiting No Unit Cost YEAR 1 _ YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 TOTAL(2) Vehicles (continued) Rs '000 No Cost No Coat No Cost No Cost No Cost No Coast

(b) Field Co sunication Units

4 WD (for Sociologist) - 48.1 (4) 0.192 (-) - (-) - (-) - (-) - (4) 0.1924 WD with trailor

(for lady Social Worker) - 51.2 (4) 0.205 (-) - () () () - (4) 0.205Van (for Audiovisual Ranger) - 40.0 (4) 0.160 (-) - (-) - (-) - (-) - (4) 0.i60Bus (for Villager training) - 100.0 (4) 0.400 (-) (-) - (-) - (-) - (4) 0.400

Sub-total 0 9 7 - - 0.957

(c) Public Relation Unit

Van 40.0 (1) 0.040 () - (-) _ () _ C-) _ (1) 0.040

Sub-total Vehicles 8.36; 4.476 4 477 2.369 2.534 22.218

(3) Equipment

(a) Office Eguioment

Typewriter 19 2.5 (32) 0.08(t (-) . (_) _ (1) 0.003 (-) - (33) 0.03Electronic Typevriter - 10.0 (1) 0.01 (-) - C-) _ (-) -) (1) 0.010Eleccronic Stencil Machine - 30.0 (1) 0.03(0 -) * (-) _ (-3 () (1) 0.030Duplicating Nachine - 5.0 (23) 0.115 C-) _ (-) _ (-) - (-) _ (23) 0.115Calculators - 0.5 (15) 0.075 (-) _ (_) _ (-) * (.) _ (15) 0.075Office Purniture 0.S0I4 - - 0.020 - 0.520

Sub-total 0.81C! - - 0.023 - 0 33

(b) Other £euipment

Water pump (for nurseries) 36 8.0 (139) 1.112 (94) 0.752 (87) 0.696 (54) 0.432 (64) 0.512 (438) 3.504fortable Water pump(for

canal plantings) - 2.0 (20) 0.04C (30) 0.060 (30) 0.060 (35) 0.070 (45) 0.090 (160) 0.320Sprayer - 0.5 (175) 0.08E (94) 0.047 (87) 0.043 (54) 0.027 (64) 0.032 (474) 0.237Workshop Equipment - 0.075 0.020 0.020 0.025 0.020 0.160Cartographic Equipment - 0.010 0.005 - - - 0.015Set Audiovisual Equipment - 50.0 (4) 0.20C (-) - (-) - (-) - (-) - (4) 0.200Uniforms 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 2.500

Sub-total 2.025 1.384 1.319 1.054 1.154 6.936

Sub-total Eouioment 2. 135 1.384 1.319 1.7 1.154 7.769

TOTAL (1) + (2) + (3) 21.438 15.417 15.205 4.946 3.688 60.743

Physical Contingencies(10% on (1) 1.029 0.956 0.941 0.150 - 3,076

22.516 16-373 16.146 5.096 3.688 63.819

June 1979


INDIA

GUJARAT COM NITY FORESTRY PROJECT

Training and Fellowship Costs(Rs M)

Unit Cost YEAR I YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 TOTALRs '000 No Cost No Cost No Cost No Cost No Cost No Cost

(1) CAPITAL COSTS

(a) Buildings

Forest Guard School, Kakrapur

Hostel (60 trainees) 300.0 1 0.300 - - - - - - - - 1 0.300Classroom 40.0 1 0.040 - - - - - - - - 1 0.040

Range Forester College, Rajpipla

Hostel (40 trainees) 300.0 1 0.300 - - - - - - - - 1 0.300Classroom and laboratory 100.0 1 0.100 - - - - - - - - 1 0.100

Sub-total (1) (a) 0.740 - - - - - - - - - 0,740

(b) Vehicles Equipment & Furniture

Bus a/ 100.0 2 0.200 - - - - - - - - 2 0.200Audiovisual Equipment b/ 20.0 2 0.040 - - - - _ - _ 2 0.040Duplicating Machine 5.0 2 0.010 - - - - - - - - 2 0.010Furniture c/ 70.0 1 0.070 - - - _ - - - 1 0.070Typewriter -/ 3.0 2 0.006 - - - - - - - - 2 0.006Uniforms 0.3 199 0.060 198 0.060 198 0.060 359 0.108 359 0.108 0.396

Sub-total (1) (b) 0.386 0.060 0.060 0.108 0.108 0.722

(c) Operatine Costs

Bus e/ 30.0 2 0.060 2 0.060 2 0.060 2 0.060 2 0.060 10 0.300

Sub-total (1) (c) 0.060 - 0,060 - 0.060 - 0.060 - 0.060 - 0.300

(d) Incremental Staff

Rajpipla Instructors

D C F 25.0 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 0.125A C F (Ext Communication) 19.0 - - 1 0.019 1 0.019 1 0.019 1 0.019 0.076Typist 6.0 1 0.006 1 0.006 1 0.006 1 0.006 1 0.006 0.030Driver Bus 6.0 1 0.006 1 0.006 1 0.006 1 0.006 1 0.006 0.030A A 4.0 2 0.008 2 0.008 2 0.008 2 0.008 2 0.008 0.040Cleaner 5.0 1 0.005 1 0.005 1 0.005 1 0.005 1 0.005 0.025

Kakrapur Instructors

A C F (Ext Communication) 19.0 - - 1 0.019 1 0.019 1 0.019 1 0.019 0.076

Sub-total (1) (d) 0,050 - 0,088 - 0.088 - 0.088 - 0.088 0.402

Total (1) (a to d) 1,236 - 0.208 - 0.208 - 0 2116 - 0,256 2.164

(2) TRAINING COURSES

(a) CoursesACF 21.0 11 0.231 10 0.210 10 0.210 10 0.210 10 0.210 51 1.071Ext. Ranger 11.0 43 0.473 43 0.473 43 0.473 43 0.473 43 0.473 215 2.365Ext. Forester 1.8 145 0.261 145 0.261 145 0.261 145 0.263 146 0.263 727 1.309PA 1.8 - - - - - - 160 0.288 160 0.288 330 0.576

Sub-total (2) (a) 0.965 0.944 0.944 1.234 1.234 5.321

(b) Individual Study Tours

Social Forestry man month 2.6 3 0.008 3 0.008 3 0.008 3 0.008 - - 12 0.032Extension Communications mau month 2.5 10 0.025 20 0.050 10 0.025 - - 40 0.100Instructors in Extension

Communications f/ year 40.0 2 0.080 - - - - 2 0.080

Sub-total (2) (b) 0.113 0.058 0.033 0.008 - 0212

(c) International Training

Project Economist year 100.0 2 0.200 2 0.200 - - 4 0.400Social Forestry man month 15.0 2 0.030 3 0.045 3 0.045 a _ _ _ 8 0.120

Sub-total (2) (c) 0.230 0.245 0.045 - - - - - 0.520

Total (2) (a to c) L308 - 1.247 - 1.022 - 1.242 - 1.234 - 6.053

GRAND TOTAL I + 2 2.544 - 1.455 - 1.230 - 1.498 - -l.-90 - 8.217

./ One each for Rajpipla and Kakrapur.

.b/ Audiovisual kit consisting of overhead projector,slide projector, 8 mm movie projector, screen,casette recorder, megaphone, blackboard, flannel board and chart board. Stencil duplicator.

cl Furniture Kakrapur Rs 40,000; Rajpipla Re 30,000.d/ Typewritere/ Buses for Rakrapur and Rajpipla.f/ Instructors in Extension Communications at Kakrapur and Rajpipla will be trained EEI Anand for a

period not to exceed 1 year. Includes special travel allowance to visit other Indian Training Institutions.

- 80 -

INDIA ANlNEX 7

GIJAPAT COOIII F0REST lROJECTTable 5

Reech and Sed Tei Costs

Unit Cost YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 TOTALRs No Cost No Cost No Cost No Cost No Cost No Cost

(1) CAPITAL COST

(a) Buildinus & Housing

Buildints

Institute 500,000 - - 1 0.500 - - - - - - 1 0.500

Field Stations 33,300 2 0.067 1 0.033 - - - - - - 3 0.100Seed Stores 22,900 2 0.046 2 0.046 - - - - - - 4 0.092

Sub-total (a) 0.113 0.579 - - - - 0.692

(b) Equipment

Institute _- - 0.080 - 0.160 - - - - - 0.240Field Station - - 0.060 - 0.060 - - - - - - - 0.120

Seed testing 0.030 - 0.030 . - - 0.060

Jeep 48,200 - - 2 0.096 - - - - - - 2 0.096

Trailer 3,100 - - 2 0.006 - - - - - _ 2 0.006

Motor Cycles 7,200 - - 1 0.007 - - - - - - 1 0.007

Sub-total (b) - - 0.090 - 0.279 - 0.160 - - - - - 0.529

Total CaPital Cost - _ 0.203 - 0.858 - 0.160 - - - - - 1.221

(2) OPERATIXG COSTS

(a) Staff Cost

Institute

Scientific Staff 16,000-19,000 - - 4 0.068 4 0.068 4 0.068 4 0.068 4 0.272ACF Seed testing 19,000 - - 1 0.019 1 0.019 1 0.019 1 0.019 1 0.076Research Assistant 12,000 - - 1 0.012 1 0.012 1 0.012 1 0.012 1 0.048Laboratory Staff 6,000- 8,000 - - 2 0.014 2 0.014 2 0.014 2 0.014 2 0.056

Field Station

Ranger 13,000 2 0.026 4 0.052 4 0.052 4 0.052 4 0.052 4 0.234Forester 8,000 5 0.040 10 0.080 10 0.080 10 0.080 10 0.080 10 0.360Res. P.A 5,000 2 0.010 4 0.020 4 0.020 4 0.020 4 0.020 4 0.090

Sub-total - - 0.076 - 0.265 - 0.265 - 0.265 - 0.265 - 1.136

(b) Other operating Costs

Institute

Office - - - - 0.036 - 0.036 - 0.036 - 0.036 - 0.144

Laboratory - - - - 0.010 - 0.010 - 0.010 - 0.010 - 0.040

Travel Allowances - - - - 0.030 - 0.030 - 0.030 - 0.030 - 0.120

Vehicles 0.028 - 0.028 - 0.028 - 0.028 - 0.112

Field Station

Adm. & Res. Plot - - 0.090 - 0.120 - 0.180 - 0.180 - 0.180 - 0.750Travel Allowances - - 0.008 - 0.016 - 0.016 - 0.016 - 0.016 - 0.072

Vehicles - - 0.008 - 0.016 - 0.016 - 0.016 - 0.016 - 0.072

Sub-total - - 0.106 - 0.256 - 0.316 - 0.316 - 0.316 - 1.310

Total Operating Costs - - 0.182 - 0.521 - 0.581 - 0.581 - 0.581 - 2.446

Total (1) + (2) - - 0.385 - 1.379 0.741 0.581 0.581 3.667

Physical Contingencies - - 0.011 - 0.058 - - - - - - 0.069

GRAND TOTAL - - 0.396 - 1.437 - 0.741 _ 0.581 - 0.581 - 3.736


INDIA Page I

GUJARAT COMKUNITY FORESTRY PROJECT

Planting CostsFRs TM)-

Ha No YrAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 TOTAL

(a) Roadside (Saurashtra and KutEb) 13,000

Model I

Materials 2.765 4.864 6.164 6.062 6.892 26.747

Labour 2.234 4.754 6.825 7.541 8.572 29.926

Others 0.006 0.010 0.014 0.013 0.014 0.057

Sub-total 5.005 9.628 13.003 13.616 15.478 56.730

(b) Roadside OMain Land Guiarat) 18,600

Model II

Materials 2.670 3.815 5.326 4.739 5.045 21.595

LAbour 3.785 6.282 9.223 9.043 9.510 37.843

Others 0.010 0.015 0.022 0.020 0.020 0.087

Sub-total 6.465 10.112 14.571 13.802 14.575 59.525

(c) Railside (Saurashtra and Kutch) 1,400

Model III

Materials -- - 1.306 1.822 3.128

Labour - 1.393 2.406 3.799

Others - - - 0.005 0.006 0.011

Sub-total - - 2.704 4.234 6.938

(d) Railside (Main Land Gularat) 2,000

Model IV

Materials - - - 1.330 1.441 2.771

Labour - - - 2.353 3.070 5.423

Others - - - 0.007 0.009 0.016

Sub-total - - - 3.690 4.520 8.210

(e) Canal Banks Model V 2,000

Materials 0.366 o.602 0.815 1.029 1.247 4.059

Labour 0.848 1.574 2.255 2.904 3.562 11.143

Others 0.003 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.010 0.034

Sub-total 1.217 2.182 3.077 3.941 4.819 15.236

(f) Village (Irritation) Model VI 2,880

Materials 0.103 0.236 0.376 0.413 0.424 1.552

Labour 0.643 1.493 2.427 2.750 2.889 10.202

Others 0.002 0.006 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.037

Sub-total 0.748 1.735 2.812 3.173 3.323 11.791

(g) Rainfed village (Saurashtra and Kutch)

Model VII 16,800

Materials 0.481 0.782 1.007 1.233 1.456 4.959

Labour 3.216 5.248 7.107 8.752 10.398 34.721

Others 0.014 0.021 0.028 0.033 0.039 0.135

Sub-total 3.711 6.051 8.142 10.018 11.893 39.815

(h) Rainfed village (Mainland Gularat)

Model VIII 17,760

Materials 0.656 0.951 1.182 1.362 1.591 5.742

Labour 4.341 6.340 8.325 9.625 11.291 39.922

Others 0.018 0.025 0.033 0.037 0.043 0.156

Sub-total 5.015 7.316 9.540 11.024 12.925 45.820

82 - A7NEFX 7

Table 6Page 2

Ha 14o YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 TOTAL

(i) Reforestation of Degraded Forert.30, 000

Model IX

materials 1.254 1.494 1.494 1.494 1.494 7.230

Labour 7.518 8.658 9.282 9.282 9.282 44.022

Others 0.030 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.174

Sub-total 8.802 10.188 10.812 10.812 10.812 51.426

Additional Invstenet Butt 600

Materials 0.250 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0,750

Labour 0.050 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.150

Sub-total 0.300 0.150 0.150 0.150 0.150 0.900

Wells 60

materials 0.006 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.018Labour 0.064 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.192

Sub-total 0-070 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.210

Total - Reforestation 9.172 10.373 10.997 10.997 10.997 52,536

(j) Afforestation of Private Land 1,000

Model I

Materials 0.006 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.044Labour 0.164 0.216 0.243 0.243 0.243 1.109Others 0.050 0.100 0.150 0.200 0.250 0.750

Sub-total 0.222 0.325 0.402 0.452 0.502 1.903

(k) farm Forestzy Plants 150 M

materials 2.056 2.153 2.422 2.690 2.960 12.281Labour 2.80B 2.952 3.322 3.691 4.060 16.833Others 0.100 0.105 0.118 0.132 0.145 0.600

Sub-total 4J64 5.210 5.862 6.513 7.165 29.714

(1) Maintenance of Past Plantings

Materials 0.248 - - - - 0.248Labor 3.402 1.085 - - - 4.487Others

Sub-total 3.650 1.085 - - - 4.735

Total Materials 10.863 15.034 18.923 21.795 24.509 91.124Total Labor 29.073 38.659 49.066 57.634 65.340 239.772Total Others 0.233 0.324 0.417 0.501 0.582 2.057

Total (a) to (1) 40.169 54.017 68.406 79.930 90.431 332.953

Physical Contingeciees (57) 2.008 2.701 3.420 3.996 4.522 16.647

Grand Total 42.177 56.718 71.826 83.926 94.953 349.600

INDIA


Stoves and Crematoria Costs

Unit ________________________________Y E A R S

Cost 1 2 3 4 5 Total

(Rs) Unit Cost Unit Cost Unit Cost Unit Cost Unit Cost

Stoves 50 500 0.025 1,500 0.075 2,500 0.125 2,500 0.125 3,000 0.150 0.500

Cremation Facilities 4,000 - - 150 0.600 250 1.000 300 1.200 300 1.200 4.000

Subtotal 0.025 0.675 1.125 1.325 1.350 4.500 1

Physicalcontingencies (5%) 0.001 0.034 0.056 0.066 0.068 0.225

Total 0.026 0.709 1.181 1,391 1.418 4.725

H 1

INDIA

GUJARAT CORMNITY FORESTRY PROJECT

MonitorinR and Evaluation Costs

Unit Cost YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5R '000 No Cost No Cost No Cost No Cost No Cost Total Cost

(1) Capital Costs

(a) Vehicle

Car 32.5 - - 1 0.033 - - 1 0.0334 W D Vehicle 48.1 - - 3 0.144 - - _ _ _ _ 3 0.144

Motorcycles 7.2 - - 12 0.086 4 0.029 8 0.058 12 0.086 36 0.259

(b) Equipment

Typewriter 2.5 - - 7 0.018 - - - - - - 7 0.018Calculators 0.5 - - 7 0.035 - - _ _ _ 7 0.035Miscellaneous 0.002 0.001 - - 0.003

Total Capital Costs 0,318 0.030 0.058 0.086 0.492

(2) Operating Costa

(a) Staff Costs

C F Monitoring 27.0 - - 1 0.027 1 0.027 1 0.027 1 0.027 0.108

Forest Economist 25.0 - - 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 0.100Read Survey Teas 25.0 - - 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 1 0.025 0.100Sociologist 19.0 - - L 0.019 1 0.019 1 0.019 1 0.019 0.076Survey Supervisor 12.0 - - 4 0.048 4 0.048 4 0.048 4 0.048 0.192

Survey Assistant 11-0 - D 0.0ue i 0.132 16 0.176 20 0.220 0.616 1

Stenographer Grade II 11.0 - - I 0.011 1 0.011 1 0.011 I 0.011 0.044 COStenographer Grade III 7.0 - - 1 0.007 1 0.007 1 0.007 1 0.007 0.028Accountant 7.0 - - 1 0.007 1 0.007 1 0.007 1 0.007 0.028Typist 6.0 - - 5 0.030 5 0.030 5 0.030 5 0.030 0.120

Driver 6.0 - - 4 0.024 4 0.024 4 0.024 4 0.024 0.096

P.A/Mesaenger 4.0 - - 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 0.064Statistical Officer 15.0 - - 1 0.015 1 0.015 1 0.015 1 0.015 0.060Statistical Assistant 11.0 - - 5 0.055 5 0.055 5 0.055 5 0.055 0.220

Sub-total 0.397 0.441 0.485 0.529 1.852

(b) Other Operating Costs

Vehicle running expenses

Car 20.0 - - 1 0.020 1 0.020 1 0.020 1 0.020 0.080Jeep 12.0 - - 3 0.036 3 0.036 3 0.036 3 0.036 0.144Motor Cycle 4.0 - - 12 0.048 16 0.064 20 0.080 24 0.096 0.288Travelling Allowances

Professionals 4.0 - - 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 4 0.016 0.064Others 2.0 - - 12 0.024 16 0.032 20 0.040 24 0.048 0.144Office running expenses - - 0.060 0.060 0.060 0.060 0.240

Sub-total - - 0.204 0.228 0.252 0.276 0.960 6|

Total Operating Costs - - 0.601 0.669 0.737 0.805 2.812 C _

GRAkD TOTAL - - 0.919 0.699 0.795 0.b91 3.304

- 85 -

INDIAGUJARAT COMMUNITY FORESTRY PROJECT

Proposed Organization Chart

EVALUATION CELL SECRETARY,(UNDER DIR. OF EVALUATION, AGRICULTURE, FORESTSAND STATE POLICY

G ENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPT.) _1 COOPERATION DEPARTMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE

CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION. _ FORESTS - - - - - - -_ COMMITTEE

l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~CONSERVATOR, RESEARCH

ANDWORKING PLANS

.ASILVICULTURIST DDITIONAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR_ _ Z r ~~~~~~OF FORESTS, COMMUNITY FORESTR _

CONSERVATOR OF FOESS l OSRATOR OF FORE'STSTRAINING, RESEARCH & < ~ _PLANNING, INFORMATIO0N

COMMUNICATIONS L MONITORING ACCOUNTS & & REPORTING_ UNIT .DISBURSEMENTS

| RELATIONS | | PROJECT PREPARATION

| DCF l l DCF l l DCF

| RESEARCH ||COMMUNICATIONS || TRAININGi

r4 DIVISIONAL |r5 DIVISIONAL ||5 DIVISIONAL ) IIINAL

| FOREST 1 FOREST FOREST FORESTI OFFICERS OFFICERS OFFICERS OFFICERS

Bhuj ~~~~Ahmadabad Amreli BharuchPalanpur & Gandhinagar Bhavnagar ValsadMahesana Godhra Jamnagar VadodaraSurendranagar Nadiad Junagadh Surat & Dangs

IRi Reforestation of Degraded Himatnagar Rajkot Dohad (R)Forest Divisions Himatnagar (R)

World Bank - 20400

INDIAGUJARAT COMMUNITY FORESTRY PROJECT

Organization Chart: Community Forestry Field Staff

Divisional Forest Officer(Deputy Conservator of Forests)

Asistant Conservator of Forests Assistant Conservator of ForestsStrip Plantations 19 Districts Village Woodlots 19 Districts

200 ha 240 ha

Extension xtensn

Dri ver & ForesterCleaner 25 ha 25 ha 2h Oa2h

Using Permanent Labor ~~~~~~~~using Casual Labor 1 District

Extension Ranger Exten in I ExtesoRR RanerLaterFarm Forestry 19 Districts I 20 haeagr40h

50 _ 3 ha 50 ha 50ha20 ha200 ha 2 4 0 60 ha40…L-__ - - -

Similar to (c) Similar to (dS Similar to (dl

Tractor .EEtesinnsionSon|

Driver & Forester 1 Million Forester Cleaner 1 Ml Pa Plants 100 Ha

Similar to It)

Protection

| | Assitant CoservatD of Forets | | ssistan Conservtor ofsorestst

40ha L Oh. 40-0 ha 48- 0

Wold Bank 20399

- 87 -

INDIA

,, GUJARAT COMMUNITY FORESTRY PROJECT

Funding, Planning and Implementation LinkagesFor Village Woodlots

r secrtaryfoi Funds r Government | FundsSecretary for Fud GoenetSecretary for

General Administration of AgricultureGujarat Agiutr

I District Additional

Collector CCF

Planning,Information

I' ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~and Reports

Consolidated District Annual Conservancy

District List Forest Capacity sgggsgug | n

(a) Coordinates aet

(b) Determines Priorities argets

(c) Selects Village Panchayats

District Panchayat Divisional Forest Officer

*~ Consolidated -

Taluka List

_ _ LiaisonTaluka Panchayat f - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - xtension anger

- ~~~~~~~~~~Annual * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~District.j jj f Applications Plan E

Liaison ,

Village PanchaYat - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - Extension Forester

Self Supervised

Help ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~SVillageScheme

Scheme

Funds

lItttUllhhlt Planning

www"X wrA ImplementationPartial Implementation

World Bank-20398

-88 - ANNEX 8

Page 1

INDI:A


A. Reference Material Available in

South Asia Regional Information Center

Forest Department, Gujarat State. State Forestry Project for WorldBank Assistance, Annexes and Supplement (August 14, 1978)Gujarat, India.

Forest Department, Government of Gujarat. Draft Rolling Plan, 1978-79to 1982-83. (undated) Gujarat, India.

Department of Information, Government of Gujarat. Years of Achievement -

Forests, pp. 20. Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India.

Ford Foundation Research Study. Gujarat Economy 2001 AD, A Study inPerspective (1977). Sandar Patel Institute of Economic andSocial Research, Ahmedabad, India.

B. Material Available in Project File

Item 1 Planting Program Required to Meet Gujarat's Fuelwood Needs byYear 2000.

Item 2 Development of Community Forestry in Gujarat.

Item 3 Panchayat Organization.

Item 4 Proforma Agreement for Village Woodlots: Self-help Villages.

Item 5 Proforma Agreement for Village Woodlots: Supervised Villages

Item 6 Proforma Agreement for Afforestation of Private (Malki)Agricultural Lands.

Item 7 Calculation of Cremation Facility Requirements.

Item 8 Plantation Protection.

IBRD 1432275 JUNE 1979

IN D IA 25-

' 14 GUJARAT COMMUNITY FORESTRY PROJECTP A K I S T A N STATE FORESTS

I*5 t '~ E<:: tf T t-> t 1 g e :'@ltr4,5 - G2tDHIN§ ., -' - FOREST REGIONAL BOUNDARIESIANA SKAN HA

-' / t.O ' STATE FORESTS

(500 150OHYETS OF MEAN ANNUAL RAINFALL lu-en

t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ KANN OF KUTCH7 I. r ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~RIVERiS

JAMNAGAR,4Y t ; - 4 tSvD ( ljMAHESAkA (..eeo

T C H I e~~~~MAHSANDISTRICT BOUNDARIES

/ [ = ( - R A J K O T _ y 'if- 'g11- iX: 9 \ST S A N O BOUNDARIES

, : , , Itr / e ,, -G OHIN -, -: ITSAN BOUNDARIES

'h '- -= r'b? , L MEI iB A R 0 2 1 - ,' ''pKLMTR

AMleLI~ ~~ D/ :0 \; \(X sA t¢tNDIA

;~ >\ \' i--R '"?if -; ' 'RS'RS' il-N'ANCH MAHAA~A MA DA,D

ofIe edSttfz trptft wz t s ethdrt eomi tSue n ~ the ?1 :; 0- Ml u

(/01' 0 shtSURENDRANAGAR ym pH Et DA do h 1 o

70 ~ ~ 2 LA 9< 00\, :; :V iLNA

u~~~ A R,d~~~~~~F-' 0v D

RAJKOT )VDOA,0

B H C KLMTR~, ~IU-R ~ AMRELI HA t OETR

jOU~~~~~~~~~~~ 1, BHA NAG R 02) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~75'

JUN AGADH U. n.Sf f.Spun,ee ,a~tCne

V A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ( ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~ BFUTAN0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~h I ' AKISTAN ~ $'~-ju"

AMREEI D 001

DAMSAIVO,A IND I A

20' DaaeRaRet teadSyteWrdeastffeuu,et ath e.a,tn 020' Aatst Sa

h,daesret. -t On tp de n- -tply, -,the pat of he Wud1 Bank end to

SI LANKA

IBRD 14323I ~~~~~~~JUNE 1979

2,5 INDIA25

4 GUJARAT COMMUNITY FORESTRYP A K I S T A N 4 PROJECT

y....<.? ~~~~~~~~~~T ...~~~~~~) 0FO PROPOSED COMMUNITY FORESTRY WORKSHOPS

J'-1 5~~~~~~~~~~~~~fli PROPOSED FOREST RESEARCH ANDI SEED CElNLUR

~~~ 'N Palonpur. / .$ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~COMMUNITY FORESTRY DIVISION BOUNDARIES

* 1 60 'NO ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FOREST CIRCLE BOUNDARIES

.,y *. A ~~~~~~~~COMPMUNITY FORESTRY DIVISION HEADQUARTERS

COMMUNITY FORESTRY CIRCLE HEADQUARTERS

5g -~~~~~~~~7'~~~~~ -~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ COMMUNITY FORESTRY STATE HEADOUARlERS

MchesancA A U COMMUINITY FORESTRY TRAINING CERTERR

~~ H~~~~motnogor ~~~~~~RIVERSBK ,-~~~~~~~~~~~~~.. ~~~~~~~~~ *.' ~~~~~~~~~ RANN OF KUITCH

7 S *~~~~~~~~~ f/ Y -.-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~STATE ROUNDARIES

S.- V'N S, - -ITERNATIORAL BOUNDARIES

AhA

Jf ~~~~~~~~~~~Surendranogar k D

I' ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I ~~~~~~Nadiod

r? Roikot T,Vadodorc N '0

BN havnagar/ BaBB 9 5 B

0 \ Amreli.9Rpio75

Q PAKISTAN I RH~~~~~~~I TN A ..

P~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-

N D IA AnIROR

200 '5 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' ~~~~~~~~20' .I

Public Disclosure Authorized INDIA STAFF PROJECT REPORT ...

Documents

Transcript of Public Disclosure Authorized INDIA STAFF PROJECT REPORT ...