Document of

The World Bank

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

cZ I9v-N#E

Report No. 6910-NIR

STAFF APPRAISAL REPORT

NIGER

SNALL RURAL OPERATIONS PROJECT

February 22, 1988

Agriculture DivisionSahelian DepartmentAfrica Region

This document has a reshicted dbitbuton and may be used by redpienb only In Me perormance ofthdir offici dutes. Its contents may Dt otherwie be dicosed wibout Wodd Bank authoizaton.

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

Currency unit = CFA Franc (CFAF)

US$1.00=CFAF 295

SYSTEM OF WEIGHTS AND, MEASURES

Metric System

GOVERNMENT FISCAL YEAROctober 1 - September 30

M0 CIJiciAL UIs ONLYABBRVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

BDIN Banque de D6voloppement de la Republique du Nigor(National Development Bank. of Niger)

CCCE Caisse Centrale de Coop6ration Economique(French Aid Loan Agency)

CCM4 Commission Centrale des March6s(Central Procurement Commission)

CDA Chef du district agricole(Agricultural extension agent at canton level)

CID Canadian International Development Agency(Agence Canadienne de Ddveloppement International)

OLD Conseil Local de D6veloppement(Local Development Council)

CLUsA Cooperative League of the USA

CNCA Caisse Nationale de Crddit Agricole(National Agricultural Development Bank)

CND Conseil National de Ddveloppement(National Development Council)

COTEAR Comitd Technique d'Arrondissement(District Technical Committee)

COTEDEP Comitd Technique de Departement(Provindial Technical Committee)

CPP Comptes Cheques Postaux(Postal Checking Accounts)

CRD Conseil Rdgional de Ddveloppement(Provincial Development Council)

CSRD Conseil-Sous-Rdgional de D6veloppement(District Development Council)

CVD Conseil Villageois de Devel9ppement(Village Development Council)

DDP Direction D6partementale du Plan(Provincial Directorate of Planning)

DDRM Direction de Ddveloppement REgional et desMicrordalisations(Directorate of Regional Development and MicrordalleatiorA)

Thi doument his a res ditbudon and may be ued by lsaoyaU ORh ,m Aof dte obla dodeo. Its cotles may not owW be discot WO ank uumL

-iii -

PAC Fonds d'Aide et de Coop4ration(French Aid Grant Agency)

YAOICP Food and Agriculture Organization/Cooperation Program(Organisation pour l'Alimentation et l'Agriculture/Programmede Coopbration)

FED Fonds Europeen de Developpement(European Development Fund)

FORPROSA Formation en Analyse de Projets au Sahel(Training for Project Analysis in the Sahel)

GV Groupement Villageois(Village Group)

IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development(Fonds International pour le Developpement Agricole)

INRAN Institut National de Recherches Agronomiques du Niger(National Agricultural Research Institute)

ISNAR International Service for National Agricultural Research(Service International pour la Recherche AgronomiqueAgricole)

NDR Ministere du Developpement Rural(Ministry of Rtural Development)

MHE Ministere de l'Hydraulique et de l'Environnement(Mlinistry of Water Resources and Environment)

XINAG/E Ministare de l'Agriculture et de l'Environnement(Ministry of Agriculture and Environment)

MP Ministare du Plan(Ministry of Planning)

MAA/H Ministare des Ressources Animales et de l'Hydraulique(Ministry of Animal and Water Resources)

NGO Non-Governmental Organization(Organisation Non-gouvernementale)

ONAHA Office National des Amenagements Hydro-Agricoles(National Irrigation Authority)

OPVN Office des Produits Vivriers du Niger(Grain Marketing Board)

PPF Project Preparation Facility

- iv -

(Mhcanism de Pinancement de la Preparation des Projets)

PST Postes, T6lephone et T4lecommunications(Post Offices)

8AL Structural Adjustment Lending(Program. d'Ajustement Structurel)

SCA Secr6taire G6n4ral Adjoint(Deputy Secretary General)

603 Statement of Expenditure

8B0 Small Rural Operations(Petites Operations de Developpement Rural ouNicror6alisations)

uLC Union Locale de Cooperatives(Local Cooperative Union)

UNC Union Nationale des CoopEratives(National Cooperative Union)

UNCC Union Nigerienne de Credit et de CoopEration(Nigerien Credit and Cooperative Union)

URC Union Rdgionale de CoopEratives(Provincial Cooperative Union)

USIC Union Sous-Regionale de Cooperatives(Distri,ct Cooperative Union)

- v -

NIGER

SMALL RURAL OPERATICNS PROJECT

STAPF APPRAISAL REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABBREVmATIONS AND ACRONYMS

DOCMENTS CONTAINED IN THE PROJECT FILE

CREDIT AND PROJECT SUMMARY

I INTRODUCTION

A. Project BackgroundS. The Rural SectorC. InstitutionsD. Sector Issues and StrategyZ. On-going Small Rural Operations

II PROJECT OBJZCTIVES AND DESCRIPTION

A. Objectives and Summary DescriptionB. Geographic CoverageC. Detailed FeaturesD. Environmnt Impact

III PROJECT COSTS AND FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS

A. Cost EstimatesB. Proposed Financing PlanC. ProcurementD. Disbursement

This report is based on the findings of an appraisal mlssion to Nlger inApril-May, 1987. Mission members Included Mesdames Noriko Imase(Zconomist/Leader), Jann Masterson (Operations Assistant), and Messrs.Francis Mody (Operations Assistant, Resident Mission), G4rard Ribilre(Agronomist, consultant) and Christian Hoche (Training Specialist,consultant). The consultant to the then Ministry of Water Resources andEnvironment, Mr. Nguyen Quang Trac also contributed to the appraisalmission. This report was edited and processed by Ms. Josephine Armar andMrs. JoAnne Nickerson.

- vi-

IV ORGANIZATION AND NANAGEMENT

A. Project ExecutionB. Financial Management, Accounts, Audit and ReportingC. Capital Replacement AccountsD. The Small Rural Operations Project CycleZ. TrainingF. Project Coordination and Implementation

V TECHNOLOGICAL AND PRODUCTION SPECIFICATIONS

VI FINANCIAL REgSULTS

A. Demand, Marketing and PricesB. Financial Implications for BeneficiariesC. Financial Implications for Governz*nt

VII BENEFITS AND ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

A. Project BenefitsB. Economic AnalysisC. Risks

vIII AGREEMENTS REACHED AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Annexes

2-1 Terms of Reference for Key Technical Assistance3-1 Project Costs by Component by Year3-2 Project Costs by Type of Expenditure by Year3-3 Estimated Schedule of Disbursements4-1 Organigrams6-1 Farm Budgets6-2 Government Project-related Cashflow7-1 Economic Costs, Benefits and Rates of Return

MaiDs

IBRD 20646IBRD 20647

-vii -

NIGERSMALL RURAL OPERATIONS PROJECT

DOCUMENTS CONTAINED IN THE PROJECT FILE

A. Background and PreRaration Documents Code

1. FAO/World Bank Cooperative Program, Niger Small Rural Operations DOS2S9Preparation Report (139185 CP-NER 10), December 19, 1985.

2. Dossiers des petites operations prepares par le Niger: D05254- projet de mise en valeur de la mare de Sanono- relance du perimetre d'Egergarazegren- projet de bas-fonds de Bouzae- amenagement de bas-fonds pour la pratique intensive des

cultures de contre-saison- projet appui aux maraichers d'Aouloumatt- projet de mise en valeur de la mare de Tiloa- projet fruitier et maralcher de Tombo- reprise des infrastructures hydrauliques du site CRD

a Hounitan- ddveloppement de la production agricole dans le village de

Karra- am6nagement et rEdynamisation de la coopdrativc de Bawadagida

3. Homont, F., Rapport de mission sur l'Etude des Circuits D0SS5Financiers, le 28 fevrier 1987.

4. DDRM/Ministry of Planning, Rapport de mission d'evaluation des D05256PPODR. Tama et Tara, mai 1986.

S. DDPA/Ministry of Planning, Evaluation finale des deux D05257sous-proiets de Tama, decembre 1986.

6. Direction de la Cooperation au Developpement et de l'Aide D05258Humanitaire Suisse/Direction de l'Alphabetisation et de laFormation des Adultes, Rapport de la mission coniointe d'dvalua.tion du proiet de soutien au programme national d'alphabdtioationdu Niger, juillet 1986.

B. Vorkini Papers

B.1 Les Ressources en Eau et l'Equipement Hydraulique, by consultanttlguyen Quang Trac.

B.2 Aspect Agronomique, by consultant Gerard Ribibre.

B.3 Mise en oeuvre des micror6alisations et formation, by consultantChristian Hoche.

- viii -

3.4 Gestion Financ1*re, by Francias Mody, (Resident Mission. Wlamey).

B.5 Analyse Economique, by Francis Mody.

3.6 Project Cost Tables.

- ix -

NIGER

SMALL i4RAL OPERATIONS PROJECT

CREDIT AND PROJECT SUMMARY

Borrowers Republic of Niger.

Beneficiarys Ministry of Planning.

Credit Amount: SDR 7.1 million (US$ 9.3 million equivalent).

Terest Standard, with a maturity of 40 years.

Proiect Descriltions The project would help the Government improve itsinstitutional capability to prepare, appraise,execute and evaluate small rural operations (SROs)as well as to provide effective exteneion servicesonce SROs become operational. The project wouldbe the first phase of a long-term national programto support the development of SROs. The projectwould finance equipment, vehicles and operatingcosts associated with preparationlappraisal/execution of SROs and improvement of extensionservices; training and technical assistance;investments such as bottomland improvements, smallirrigated perimeters, soil conservation andwatershed management, and social forestryincluding village tree nurseries and studies.Beneficiary farmer groups would contribute part ofthe investment costs, bear all operating costs andaccumulate savings to replace renewable assetssuch as pumps.

Proiect Benefitss The most important benefit of the project would bethe development of an institutional capability inNiger to make sound investment decisions for SROsand manage investment funds. By providingtraining for local staff and by stream-lining theorganizational structure of the project cycle, thelocal capacity for project preparation andexecution of SROs would improve. By clarifyingthe selection criteria and terms and conditions offinancing, the utilization of funds would berationalized and the total flow of externalassistance for this type of operation wouldincrease. In addition to the main projectbenefits, which are difficult to quantify, eachSRO would also have substantial benefits such asincreased income, better nutrition and protectionof the environment.

Project Risks: Firstly, low motivation and poor qualifications oflocal technicians may slow the pace ofdevelopment: this risk is expected to beminimized by substantial training, which hasalready been started, combined with theincreasingly effective authority of the Governors.Secondly, assets created under the project may notbe adequately maintained. This risk would bereduced by insisting on the cash downpayment formedium-term assets and by establishing *levelopmentcontracts to be signed by beneficiaries and localauthorities laying down obligations andresponsibilities. Thirdly, coordination withother donors and NGOs may prove difficult. Thisrisk vould be reduced by regular coordinationmeetings to be held by the Government and by theorganizational study to examine ways to harmonizeprocedures by various donors.

Estimated Costs: a/2 of

Local Foreign Total base costUS$ million

Support to technical services 2.4 ..4 3.8 25Training 0.8 0.4 1.2 8Project management unit 0.8 1.1 1.9 13BRO investment 3.2 3.1 6.3 42Studies (including PPF refunding) 0.6 1.3 1.9 12

Total base costs 7.8 7.3 15.1 100

Contingenciess physical 0.3 0.3 0.6 4price 2.0 0.3 2.3 15

Total project costs 10.1 7.9 18.0 119

a/ Inclusive of taxes and duties which are negligible.

Financing Plan: US$ million 2

Government 0.9 5IDA 9.3 52Switzerland (SF12.5 million) 7.8 43Total 18.0 100

- xi -

Estimated Disbursementss (US$ million)

FY88 FY89 FY90 FY91 FY92 FY93 FY94 FY95

Annual 0 2.5 0.9 1.2 1.6 1.5 1.1 0.5Cumulative 0 2.5 3.4 4.6 6.2 7.7 8.8 9.3

Economic Rate of Returns Bottomland Models 222Pump Irrigation Models 302

Mapst Nos. IBRD 20646 and 20647

NIGER

SMALL RURAL OPKRATIONS PROJECT

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Proiect Background

1.01 A small rural operations (SRO) project was first proposed by anIDA mission which visited Niger in August 1980. In October 1981, IDAapproved a credit advance of US$430*000 to the Government under the ProjectPreparation Facility (PPF) to support project preparation. A mission ofthe FAO/CP, the first in a series of FAO/CP and IDA missions, visited NigerIn February-March 1982 to assist the Goversment in identifying a projectfor possible IDA financing and make arrangements for its preparation.Three pilot operations were launched in mid-1982 by the Ministry of RuralDevelopment (MDR) with PPF funding. The PPF credit also financed operatingcosts of the Directorate for Regional Development and Microrealizations(DDRM), which was established at the Ministry of Planning (MP) in December1984 to assume coordinating responsibilities for SROs, as well asconsultant services and a nitional seminar on *micro-rdalisations' held atZinder in February 1985. FAOICP conducted a feasibility study based onselected model SROs, which was submitted in early 1986. While these threeoperations did not fully meet expectations, important lessons have beenlearned about the need for careful preparation with the beneficiarycommunity and effective follow-up by local staff. Subsequently, IDArequested that the Government prepare a work program consisting of a dozenor so SROo in conjunction with FORPROSA, the FAO training program forproject analysis.

1.02 The preparation phase was thus unusually long because ofdifficulties in deciding on an appropriate institutional framework and inchanging Government's perception that large-scale projects were moreeffective than small-scale projects. Preparation was finally completed atthe end of March, 1987 and an appraisal mission visited Niger in April-May.Based on ten SROs already prepared by local staff, the appraisal teamfocused on the harmonization of selection criteria and the terms andconditions of the beneficiaries' contribution, the organization andmanagement of the SRO project cycle, and local capability of preparation,appraisal, execution, and evaluation.

B. The Rural Sector

Resource Base

1.03 Niger is a land-locked country, bound by Algeria and Libya to thenorth, Chad to the east, Nigeria to the south, and Mali, Burkina Faso andBenin to the west. Niger's closest access to the sea is about 600 km fromits southern border. The country covers 1.27 million km2, of which 75? is

desert, 152 semi-arid and less than 102 suitable for crop cultivation. Thepopulation, estimated at 6.1 million in 1983, is growing at an annual rateof 3.01. It is among the poorest countries in the world, with a per capitaGNP of US$200 in 1985. Although agriculture remains the most importanteconomic activity and the principal livelihood of the population;accounting for about half of the GDP and about 202 of the country'sexpotts, the country is constrained by poor agricultural resources. Percapita availability of arable land with at least 600 mm precipitation, andper capita availability of irrigable land are only one third of the averagefor the Sahelian countries. About 102 of the land receives an average350-600 mm of rainfall, and about 12 of the land receives 600-800 mm ofrainfall; there is no area receiving more than 800 mm. Soils are generallypoor with little organic matter and poor capacity to retain nutrients.Rainfall is not only scant but also irregular, making Niger vulnerable todroughts. Rainfall during the last decade has been frequently belowaverage, although it is not yet known if this !ower average is a continuouslong-term phenomenon.

1.04 Nigerien agriculture is largely subsistence-based, producing lowvalue crops such as millet (supplying about 752 of the total cerealsproduction) and sorghum (providing about 202). The most important exportcommodity in the agricultural sector is livestock (cattle on the hoof)followed by cowpeas. With irrigated lands representing about two percentof the total cultivated area, the contribution of the irrigation subsectorto national agricultural production is limited.

1.05 Despite its meager resource base, Niger has traditionally beenself-sufficient in food production except during the severe droughtperiods. However, production has been increased to keep up with populationgrowth by shortening fallow periods and cultivating more marginal lands.The over exploitation of the vegetative cover caused by human and animalpopulation pressure has led to a decline of soil fertility and to soildegradation. As a consequence, traditional farming systems, based on longfallow periods as a way to generate soil fertility, are breaking down.This degradation of the environment has been further compounded by repeateddroughts.

C. Institutions

Local Government

1.06 The village (some 10,000 in total) is the basic territorial andsocial entity in Niger. Several villages make up a "canton' (of whichthere are more than 200), each governed by a chief who is elected by thechiefs of the villages concerned and receives a Government allowance. The35 districts ('arrondissements*) are legal entities and have autonomousbudgets funded from local fees and taxes, Government transfer payments andloans from the aCaisse des prets aux collectivites territorialesn. Thedistricts are governed by district Governors ('sous-pr4fets'), who reportto their respective provincial Governors. The seven provinces are thehighest administrative subdivisioas. These are governed by provincial

-3-

Governors (Oprofets0), appointed as the personal representative of thePresident.

1.07 The district and provincial Governors coordinate the Governmentservices in their area through technical committees under theirchairmanship ("comit6s techniques d'arrondissements' - COTEAR, "comitestechniques de departementsn - COTEDEP). The provincial Governors areseconded by a Secretary General and his deputy ("Secr4taire GeneralAdjoint' - SGA) who is the provincial Director of the MP. The SGA isspecifically responsible for all development activities in his province.

Development Society

1.08 The structure of provincial and district technical committees(COTEDEP and COTEAR) under the chairmanship of the provincial and districtGovernors is gradually being replaced by the Development Society ("Soci4tede Developpement"). The idea was first proposed by the President around1974 as an organization through which each member of the Societyconscientiously participates in the development of the country. TheDevelopment Society is a hierarchical structure of development councils (asstipulated in the ordonnance no.83-26 of August 4, 1983) at village("conseil villageois de developpement" - CVD), 'canton ("conseil local ded4veloppement" - CLD), district ("conseil sous-regional de dUveloppement' -CSRD), provincial ("conseil regional de d4veloppement' - CRD) and nationallevels (Iconseil national de developpement - CND). These developmentcouncils are presided by the village chief, the 'canton' chief, thedistrict and provincial Governors and the president of CND respectively.They are in charge of development activities from conception to decisionmaking and management. Their members consist of representatives ofcooperatives, Samarya (youth groups), social and professionalorganizations.

1.09 The Development Society thus calls for decentralization indecision-making and management of development activities from centralministries to provincirl and district authorities. Although the transitionof power to the local authorities has been slow and there still existcentralized administrative procedures (e.g., procurement), there are strongevidences that provincial Governors exercise more control over developmentactivities in their provinces than before. The proposed project wouldenhance the decentralization process by giving authority andresponsibilities to the provincial and district Governors and SGAs inmanaging an important SRO investment program.

Cooperatives

1.10 The cooperative movement is based on a system of collectivemembership covering villages, or sections of villages in the case of largevillages. Village groups (*groupements villageois' - GV) have been formedand 5-10 GVs are grouped into a cooperative. A GV is constituted by headsof households in a village or each section of a village. Since May 1984,irrsgation cooperatives which carry out marketing operations have also been

-4-

specifically recognized and are gradually managing their own financialoperations.

1.11 Cooperative unions ("unions locales* - ULC, Isous-rdgionales* -USRC, 'r4gionalesa- URC) are constituted at the different local andregional levels. The "Union nationale des cooperatives' (UNC) is thecooperative apex organization, officially covering 10,628 GVs, 1,167cooperatives, 213 ULCs, 40 USRCs and 9 URCs. It is the successor to the'Union nigerienne de credit et de coop4ration' (UNCC) which, since itscreation in 1962 until the late 1970s. gained a solid reputation forpromoting cooperatives. UNCC's cooperative promotion and inputdistribution activities were combined with, and often subordinated to,other functions such as the assembling and manufacturing of agriculturalmachinery, the management of development projects and the supply offoodstuffs to remote areas. UNCC became heavily indebted and was disbandedin 1984. Its successor organization UNC inherited a cooperative systemwithout an economic basis. UNC has a limited number of staff; fourofficials at headquarters, two at each URC, and one at each USRC. Most GVsand cooperatives are inactive due to the lack of common economic activitiesand of effective training of cooperative members. The proposed project mayindirectly help vitalize the cooperative movement by financing groupinvestments to be managed by village groups; such shared enterprises maywell become the catalysts of other group initiatives.

Government Technical Services

1.12 The main Government service agencies supporting SROs have beenthe Ministry of Planning (HP); the Ministry of Rural Development (MDR),which in 1985 was split into the Ministry of Agriculture (MINAG) and theMinistry of Animal Resources (MRA); and the Ministry of Water Resources andthe Environment (MHE). The latter three ministries were reorganized againin September 1987 into two ministriess the Ministry of Agriculture andEnvironment (MINAG/E) and the Ministry of Animal and Water Resources(MRA/H).

1.13 The MP is responsible for planning national and regional economicand social development. It draws up development plans, prepares investmentbudgets and reviews their execution, evaluates pre-investment studies, andcoordinates foreign aid. Three departments have a direct role in SROs:"Direction du developpement regional et des micro-realisations (DDRM)',"Direction de l'evaluation et de la programmation', 'Direction dufinancement des investissements". In November 1986, the MP reorganized andstrengthened provincial and district services. At the provincial levels,Provincial Directorates of Planning (Directions Departmentales du Plan -DDP) were created by regrouping Provincial Services of Planning and ofAnimation. Each DDP has the following services: 'le Service des Etudes etde lAm6nagement du Territoire' (Studies and Regional Land Management); OleService des Projets et Micro-rdalisations* (Small Rural Operations); IleService de la Statistique et de la Documentation' (Statistics andDocumentation); Ole Service du Developpement Communautaire' (CoamunityDevelopment) and "la Division Administrative et du Mat6riel"(Administration and Equipment). DDP is administratively under the

Secretary General of the MP but hierarchically under the Ministry of theInterior and Provincial Directors of Planning are Deputy SecretariesGeneral (SGAs). While the Secretary General of the Province assumes mainlyadministrative responsibilities, the SGA is responsible for coordinatingdevelopment programs in the province concerned and for control over theirimplementation. At the district levels, District Services of Planning(Oles Services d'Arrondissements du Plan") were newls created, consistingof Divisions of Studies and Programming; of Monitoring and Evaluation; andof Community Development. The District Services have not yet been wellstaffed and are presently staffed with former "animation* agents (Annex4-1).

1.14 Until recently the MDR was responsible for agriculture andlivestock production, research and extension. It .tlso managed farmertraining centers and supervised the public agencies which intervene inproduction (ONAHA), credit (CNCA), and marketing (OPVN). MDR had threeoperational departments: "Direction des services de l'agriculture',"Direction de l'elevage et des industries animalese and "Direction du genierural*. In September 1985 the first two departments became two separateministries, MINAG and MRA, and the last one remained a department of theMINAG.

1.15 The MINAG had five Directorates at the central level:Directorates of Agricultural Production (responsible for extensionservices, seeds production and cooperatives support); of Plant Protection;of Studies, Programming and Agricultural Statistics; of Rural Engineeringand of Administration and Pinance. These five Directorates are alsorepresented at the provincial levels. Agricultural services are providedat the district levels, dealing with plant protection, statistics andextension services. Below the district levels, there is little activity.There are extension agents at "canton" levels but they are immobile with nomeans of transport or operating costs. About half of the posts are vacant.Aside from externally financed development projects, extension services donot exist or have only limited activity and efficiency. In September 1987,the MINAG absorbed two Directorates from the former MHE, namely theDirectorates of Forestry and Fishery, to become the MINAG/E. Anorganizational structure of the new Ministry has not yet been officiallyannounced.

1.16 The KRA similarly absorbed two Directorates from the former MHE,namely the Directorates of Water Resources and Hydraulic Works, to becomethe MRA/H. The MRA/H also has an important role in supporting SROs, as itis in charge of livestock development as well as water resource inventoriesand hydraulic infrastructure.

1.17 Under the new structure of the Development Society, technicalservices participate in activities of development councils in a consultingcapacity. In practice, COTEAR and COTEDEP prepare documents of projectproposals to be submitted to respective development councils for approval.At the district levels where most of the preparation work is done,agriculture, forestry, livestock and planning staff are normally

-6-

represented. Rural Engineering (MINAG/E) and Water Resources (NRA/H) arerepresented only at the provincial level.

Financial Institutions

1.18 The National Development Bank of the Republic of Niger (BDRN) isthe main commercial and development bank with 11 branches locatedthroughout the country and in all provincial capitals. It collects around702 of all deposits and provides about 802 of all domestic loans to theeconomy. The financial health of BDRN declined dramatically in the early1980s due to the general economic slump, which resulted in a high level ofrepayment arrears on outstanding loans to both private and publicenterprises, and because of weak structures and management within the bankitself. Under the Structural Adjustment Lending (SAL), BDRN has beenrehabilitated with a view to consolidating its finances, improving itsprofitability and strengthening its management.

1.19 The National Agricultural Development Bank (CNCA) was establishedin 1967 from a service of UNCC to provide input supply and marketing creditfor the cooperative movement. CNCA had virtually no field representationand depended on UNCC staff to handle operations. CNCA has outstandingcredits of CFAF 7.5 billion (US$ 25 million), most of which are consideredunrecoverabJe. CNCA was forced to deviate from its original mandate andturned to prefinancing operating funds for some externally financeddevelopment projects and financing seasonal credits and operating deficitsof public enterprises, directing less than 20? of its resources to farmers.Also the lack of stringent criteria for credit allocation and repayment hasled to a high delinquency rate. Under SAL (para. 1.28), the Government hasstopped new credit operations of CNCA since the end of 1985.

1.20 Postal checking accounts ("comptes cheques postaux" - CCP) can beopened at post offices ("Postes, Telephone et Tel6covmunications' - PTT) inall the provincial and district capitals. CCP/PTT ar6 therefore the mostwidely represented financial institutions. CCP accounts are centrally-managed by the CCP Niamey office through PTT's network of telexes andtelephones. Although CCP does not provide overdraft facilities nor credit,it provides other financial services such as payment by checks, transfer offunds between different financial institutions and weekly statements ofaccounts.

Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)

1.21 More than 30 NGOs are active in Niger and each operates under anoperating agreement with MP (DDRM). Some 21 are members of the Private AidGroup which coordinates their programs and serves as a communicationschannel with Nigerien authorities. The SRO projects implemented by NGOsare put forward by local NGOs and/or Government staff. In order to beimplemented, an agreement is approved by the provincial Governor and DDRM.An executing agreement is then established at the district level betweenthe NGO, the responsible technical service and/or the district Governor.Usually a Government technical agent and an NGO staff member are jointlyresponsible for the implementation of rural works and both their signatures

-7-

are required to disburse funds from a special project account, which isopened at a local bank, usually BDRN. Accounting is generally handledcentrally by the NGO.

1.22 The NGOs financial means are limited, and project approaches,subproject selection criteria, responsibilities of beneficiaries, andinvolvement of Government and NGO staff vary considerably among thedifferent organizations. However, they have a privileged role inimplementing SR0s. Their contributions are recognized especially at theprovincial level where they are often approached directly for assistance.

D. Sector Issues and Strategy

Recent Policy Dialogue

1.23 The end of the uranium boom and the ambitious public investmentprogram have left Niger with a heavy foreign debt which reached 54? of GDPin 1983. Faced with deteriorating economic conditions, the Government hastaken various actions to reduce the domestic and external financialImbalances, which have been supported by IDF Standby arrangements andcomplemented with an IDA Structural Adjustment Lending (SAL).

1.24 The first phase of the adjustment programs in the agriculturesector concentrated on the areas where inefficiencies are most acute andwhere policy reforms would improve the country's budgetary and balance ofpayments' position. Specifically, the following four areas have beenaddressed: (a) grain marketing and pricing policy; (b) agricultural inputsubsidy; (c) agricultural credit; and (d) agricultural research.

1.25 Grain Marketing and Pricing Policy. One of the key agriculturalpolicy reforms relates to the operation of the cereals marketing andstorage agency (OPVN). In the past, OPVN intervened in cereals markets inorder to support producer prices, keep consumer prices down and minimizeprice fluctuations. The price stabilization operations were oftenineffective, yet very costly in terms of public resources. Under the SAL,the Government has decided to reduce OPVN's mandate to managing securitystocks only, which will contain no more than 80,000 tons of cereals. Thesystem of official price regulation for coarse grains has been abandonedand OPVN is to perform most of its buying and selling operations through atender system of competitive bidding.

1.26 The implementation of these reforms proved difficult during198586, partly because of the exceptional circumstances which prevailed.The severe drought of 1984 was followed by a bumper harvest in 1985 andtherefore a fall in cereal prices. This led OPVN at the end of 1985 tocontinue purchase operations, some of them at fixed producer prices,despite a record level of stocks due to late arrivals of food aid. At themid-term review of the SAL, the Government agreed on an action plan toimplement the agreed reforms by (a) no cereals purchase in 1986/1987 untilits stocks reach below the maximum level of 80,000 tons; (b) destockingthose cereals that run the risk of rapidly deteriorating; and (c) noannouncement of an official price for the 1986/87 crop year, not even an

*indicative price".

1.27 Agricultural Inputs. The reduction of subsidies for agriculturalinputs aims at encouragin-g efficient production of agricultural implementsand efficient use of agricultural inputs, while 1sssening the burden on thebudget. The Government abolished the subsidy on agricultural implements in1985 and is committed to gradually reducing rates of subsidization of otheragricultural inputs.

1.28 Agricultural Credit. Measures in the area of agricultural creditunder the SAL aimed at reducing the current system's (CNCA) financiallosses while a new system is being studied. The Government decided to stopnew credit operations of CNCA as from the end of 1985. Various studiesmade it clear that the limited demand for agricultural credit in Niger doesnot justify the existence of a specialized self-standing creditinstitution. The Government has, therefore, recently decided to create atask force to work out the details of another more cost effective system ofagricultural credit. Until such a system is established, agriculturalcredit would be provided only on a limited basis through existing projects.The proposed project would not provide seasonal or investment credit (para.2.06).

1.29 Agricultural Research. The future development of Nigerienagriculture largely depends on technological improvements which would makeits limited resource base more productive at a reasonable cost. Thestandard technical package for rainfed agriculture based on chemicalfertilizers, single cropping and animal traction does not respond tofarmers' constraints and priorities and has failed to be widely adopted.Extreme variations in micro-climates and soil conditions make it difficultto apply a standard technical package to large areas.

1.30 While the prospects for a significant technological breakthroughare not bright, progress can nevertheless be achieved in improving farmingsystems by a cautious adaptation of some modern techniques to local systemsand by inexpensive improvements in traditional agricultural techniques.The performance of the national agricultural research agency (INRAN),however, was disappointing. Its bias towards basic research neglectedurgently needed adaptive and farming system research. Recognizing the needto redefine INRAN's research priorities, the Government has initiated astudy, with assistance from ISNAR, to evaluate a current system ofagricultural research and establish a long term research program. Thedraft report was completed in July 1987.

1.31 Public Investment Strategy. An important component of theadjustment programs in the agriculture sector is concerned with thereorientation of the investment strategy for the rural sector. Thelong-term investment strategy hinges on the potential of agriculturalresources and on technological development. The Government has launched amajor rural sector study, financed by SPPF, to reassess the agriculturalpotential and a survey of the agricultural research system. Until thestudies are completed and can propose a long-term strategy, the Governmentinterim strategy consists of a pragmatic investment selection policy, aimed

at making the best use of existing technologies with maximum participationof the rural population, while supporting long-term technological researchfor an integrated agricultural/livestock/forestry system. The Governmentalso promotes improved cost recovery not only to reduce the burden on itsbudget but also to ensure sustainability of investment, by makingbeneficiaries more involved in decision making and responsible foroperation and naintenance of investments made.

Experience with Past Lending and Lessons Learned

1.32 Development efforts in the past decade or so have proven to beinadequate to increase the productivity of the agricultural resource base,or to even prevent further deterioration. The Bank has so far financedthree projects in rainfed agriculture (Dosso, Maradi I and II); and two inirrigation (Namarigoungou and Irrigation Rehabilitation); two in forestry(Forestry I and II); and one in livestock. In rainfed agriculture,although Maradi I was successfully concluded, both Dosso and Maradi II havehad implementation problems and failed to achieve the expected increase incrop production, largely because of inadequate technical packages underless favorable climatic conditions than a decade ago. While Dosso wasterminated at the closing date due to the weak management in place, MaradiII has been extended and reoriented to (a) encourage farmers' initiativeand participation and to make them more responsible for developmentactivities; (b) develop a village-based extension system; and (c)gradually reduce technical assistance and cut operating costs. Theexperiences of SR09 under the Maradi II project are described in para.1.41.

1.33 The Dosso project, approved by the Board in December 1979, becameeffective in February 1981 and was closed in June 1985 with only 162(US$3.2 million) disbursed out of the total credit of US$20 million. TheProject Completion Report (PCR) concludes that the impact of the Dossoproject on production increases was marginal and that adoption ofinsufficiently proven technical messages by farmers was very limited. Inaddition to the technical problems, the Dosso project suffered from a weakmanagement structure, which depended on the existing administrativeinstitutions, such as provincial services of technical ministries, UNCC andCNCA for project execution. The project manager was supposed to coordinatetechnical and financial activities of various government services involvedin the project, but his authority was never accepted by provincial chiefsof Government services. The PCR, however, points out some positive resultsof the project, in particular the development of bottomland for vegetableproduction, which apart from providing participating farmers with higherrevenues has contributed to set up methods and rules for similar operationsin other areas. However, most of the bottomland was rapidly neglectedafter the Dosso project wound up. This shows that land development is notsufficient to assure continuity of successful production. Institutionalarrangements are indispensable to provide beneficiaries with technicalassistance and advice over a number of years.

1.34 In irrigation, given the high costs of developing modernirrigation schemes, the less than satisfactory operation and maintenance

10 -

practices of the existing schemes and the limited surface wateravailability, priority should be given to rehabilitating the existingsystems and to developing small scale irrigation. The IrrigationRehabilitation project, presented to the Board in June 1985, aims atestablishing an effective system of operation and maintenance of theexisting infrastructure including improved cost recovery measures. Becauseof continuously declining world prices of rice combined with theappreciation of the CFA franc vis-&-vis the US dollar, and the latereaction of the Government to temporarily protect local rice by importduties, marketing of locally prodused rice is facing a serious problem atthe moment.

1.35 The major lessons learned from the past experiences are:

(a) Heterogenous soils and localized rainfall patterns make wideapplication of a single technical package difficult;

(b) Areas with good production potential exist but are quitelocalized and of a limited size;

(c) Consequently, it is necessary to establish a system which is moreflexible and cost effective than a large-scale productivityproject with heavy management structures to tap this localizedpotential;

'd) Participation of rural population in decision making, executionand maintenance is crucial, and self-help endeavors anddecentralization should be encouraged; and

(e) Services and advice provided to farmers by the publicadministration have to be upgraded.

Bank's Lending Strategy

1.36 IDA's lending program in the first half of the eighties consistedof an average of two projects per year amounting to about US$20 million.The program was small largely because of difficulties in projectpreparation. The strong policy dialogue that has developed over the lastyears between IDA and the Government has led to a substantial increase inlending. The total of the PY86 lending program was US$117.8 million tosupport structural adjustment program and operations in the health andtransport sectors, followed by the FY87 lending program of US$98.4 million.

1.37 The objective of the Bank's lending and economic and sector workprograms for Niger is to support the Government in its adjustment processand to address issues relating to long-term growth. To address the longerterm development issues, IDA assistance will focus on alleviating thecountry's severe resource constraints, with particular emphasis onincreasing agricultural production and human resource development, whilepromoting population control.

- 11 -

1.38 In rainfed farming at 600 mm/year or less, projects aimed atintensifying production through fertilizer and animal traction have failed(paras. 1.32 and 33). In recognition of these failures, an SPPF-financedrural sector study has been launched to reassess the agricultural potentialof the meager resource base and to devise measures to realize suchpotential. In addition, a survey of the agricultural research system iswell under way, aiming to prioritize research themes and to make theresearch institutions more effective, and this study is expected to lead toa research project. Meantime, the proposed project aims to make use ofexisting technologies where local conditions are favorable, albeit on asmall scale, to generate rural income, thus complementing the broader IDAstrategy. Moreover, the proposed project would strengthen the capabilityand credibility of technical staff of the public administration, whichwould lay a basis for the broader endeavors of improving agriculturalsupport services in the future. In addition to the proposed project, IDAis helping the Government prepare a rural resource management project whichwill attempt to address issues of land management and integration ofagriculture and livestock.

E. On-Going Small Rural Operations

1.39 The concept of an SRO project arises from frustration over thelimited success of past large-scale productivity projects. Recognizingthis, the Government organized a seminar in Zinder in November 1982 on theorganization of agricultural development projects and related policies, tosearch for new development approaches. The major thrust of therecommendations, proposed at the seminar and later endorsed by theGovernment, is a transfer of responsibility from parastatals tobeneficiaries, with the intention of implementing self-management ofdevelopment activities.

1.40 Local authorities and NGOs are carrying out SROs throughout thecountry. They have complemented the activities of regional and sectorialinvestment projects, and have helped to mitigate the food shortage causedby the recent 1984/85 drought by intensifying dry season crop production.Their activities, however, have been carried out according to manydifferent rules imposed by various NGOs. Furthermore, disappointed withthe failure of the large-scale productivity projects, major donors areincreasingly interested in this SRO approach. Three existing projects havebeen revised to include SRO-type activities (Diffa-CIDA, MaradiII-IDA/CCCE/IFAD, Niamey-USAID). FED and CIDA have units in DDRM to financeSROs. Other donors and NGOs are already involved in or are consideringgetting involved in SROs.

1.41 Under the reoriented Maradi II project (financed byIDA/CCCE/IFAD), a program of SROs ("Programme d'actions d'interAtcollectif") was initiated in 1985. Most demands have been so far for smallirrigation schemes for vegetable production from shallow wells andcooperative input banks, whiclb have proven to be reasonably successful.Since the start-up of the program, the Maradi project financed 198 wellsfor vegetable production, a number of them using portable pumps, 48 input

- 12 _

banks, 25 mill dehullers, and 15 cooperative retail stores. Beneficiariesdeposit 52 of the total costs as initial downpayment in a bank account andthe funds deposited are to be used to renew medium-term assets and/or tofinance other investments in the village. However procedures have in anumber of cases been distorted. Farmers have been urged, under pressure radministrative authorities or project management, to request SROs witlittle justification, without having been properly informed of theicommitments and of financial consequences. Downpayments have sometimesbeen made by the administration instead of the farmers and withdrawn assoon as investments were completed. Goods for retail stores have beenprocured by local officials at excessive cost. This illustrates theimportance of a relevant institution in order to closely monitor a programwhich should not proceed too rapidly. At the request of the Bank, theMaradi It project has discontinued new investments and concentrates uponimproving existing SROs. In the light of the Maradi project's experienceswith SROs, the proposed project would reinforce training for district andprovincial staff (paras. 2.15 - 2.17) and harmonize selection criteriaapplied by different sources of financing (para. 4.24).

1.42 In an effort to establish unified guidelines for SROs, theGovernment organized a seminar on the general rules of SRO operations inZinder in February 1985 (*Sdminaire de Zinder sur les regles aen4rales defonctionnement des micror4alisations") which defined the general selectioncriteria as follows:

(a) existence of organized basic structures for SRO implementation;

(b) physical and/or financial participation of beneficiaries:physical participation is mandatory in all cases; financialparticipation is required if renewable assets are involved;

(c) existence of capacity of technical and administrative advices andsupervision;

(d) conformity with the technical and financial capacity ofbeneficiaries (levels of technology adopted and sufficientfinancial resources to bear recurrent costs);

(e) capacity to sustain operation (replacement and reinvestment); and

(f) conformity with the national and provincial development strategy.

The above guidelines, however, are not yet specific enough for operationaluse. The seminar simply noted that specific criteria would be determinedby the nature of operations (productive, non-productive, etc.), by sectorand by objective of each operation. The proposed project is expected tohelp set up a unified approach (selection criteria, beneficiaries'participation, etc.) so that other donors could fund similar activities ina consistent fashion.

1.43 The Government and NGO staff have reported that considerabledemand for SROs exists, but that only a small part is articulated by the

- 13 -

communities in the form of concrete project proposals. As of June 1985 aninventory compiled by DDRM showed that about 400 SROs were either on-goingor submitted as proposals by local Government services and NGOs. Theinventory contains information for each project on location, type, cost,funding agency and status. Out of 400 SROs, around 180 were beingimplemented, 90 were under consideration for external financing and 130were awaiting financing or lacked project documents. Some 290 of the SROswere for agriculture; the main demand is for irrigation (30?), generalagricultural support (252), forestry (201), animal production and fishery(102) and various other activities including soil protection (152). Theexperience of DDRM suggests that some 80-100 SOs are requested annually.

II. PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND DESCRIPTION

A. Obiectives and Summary Descrintion

2.01 Proiect Obiectives. The proposed project would aim to develop alocal capability to prepare, appraise, execute, and evaluate small ruraloperations with active participation of the rural population as well as toprovide effective extension once SROs become operational. The projectwould strengthen the capabilities of the provincial and district technicalstaff who would assist farmers in the design, preparation and execution ofSROs. The project is seen as the first phase of a program of IDA supportfor SR0s which would eventually have a national scope. Although theproject is to finance productive investments (both in the short and longterms) in grant form, an increase in production is not in itself theprimary objective; rather, it is a result of a concerted effort to supportlocal initiatives by providing adequate technical advice and clearlydefined rules for financing. More than two-thirds of investments to befinanced under the project are consistent with four models which wereelaborated based on ten SROs prepared by Nigerien staff as well as on anexamination of requests in the DDRM inventory. The specific SRO modelswould increase crop, fruit and fuelwood production, enhance security ofproduction, generate employment, protect the environment and raise ruralliving standards.

2.02 Summary Description. The project would finance the followingspecific items during a seven and half year disbursement period:

(a) support to field technical services;

(b) training of local personnel and beneficiaries in projectpreparation, appraisal, evaluation and management;

(c) strengthening the management structure within DDRM (the DDRMunit) with the required technical and administrativo staff andlogistical support;

(d) development of bottomlands averaging 15-20 ha each for productionof cereals, root crops, vegetables, and fruits;

- 14 -

(e) construction and equipment of irrigation perimeters of an average18 ha each for production of vegetables, fruits and cereals;

(f) execution of soil conservation projects of about 150 ha each;

(g) establishment of village forest and fruit tree nurseries (thesewould be included in SROs (d)-(f) above or independent);

(h) execution of some 8ROs which have not yet been identified, suchas aquaculture and apiculture; and

(i) studies.

2.03 An investment program for the year zero prepared by beneficiarieswith assistance from technical staff includes eight bottomlands developmentfrom shallow wells (1 with portable pumps) and two small-scale irrigationschemes with storage and irrigation basins and PVC distribution pipes.Host of them have village nurseries for live fences and some erosioncontrol works (windbreaks). It is difficult to estimate how many SROs pereach model would be requested by beneficiaries. However, it is assumedthat around 45 bottomlands development, 15 small irrigation perimeters, 15soil conservation works, and 20 village forest and fruit tree nurserieswould be requested during a five year project implementation period. It islikely that one SRO would include more than one model.

2.04 Subproiect Selection Criteria. In order to be selected forfinancing under the project, SROs would have to meet the satisfactorycriteria, demonstrating that they:

(a) are directly productive farming activities in conformity with thenational and provincial development strategy;

(b) are financially self supporting;

(c) are within the project area;

(d) are requested by and are manifestly in the interest of a group orgroups of producers;

(e) can be easily maintained by beneficiaries; and

(f) are environmentally sound.

For SROs which are other than the models already identified, IDA wouldthoroughly examine the financ14l and economic viability of a representativemodel when such activities are requested for the first time (para. 4.21).

2.05 It is essential that a test of the beneficiaries' strongcommitment to maintain investments made by the project in grant form bemade. In addition to unskilled labor and locally available constructionmaterials (e.g. sand, gravels), beneficiaries would therefore have to makea downpayment on a Capital Replacement Account to be followed by anaual

- 15 -

payments if there are medium-term assets (motor pumps, animals etc) (para.4.16). Furthermore, beneficiaries would be required to reimburse the costsof materials financed by the project for the construction of wells (cement,iron, etc.). The reimbursement funds would be used for other investmentsto benefit those who did not benefit from the grant investment. Anexception to the reimbursement rule could be made, however, toself-standing erosion control works and village nurseries, benefits fromwhich are deferred, In these cases, physical contribution alone in theform of unskilled labor would suffice. Assurances were obtained duringnegotiations that the above selection criteria (paras. 2.04 and 2.05) wouldbe applied to SROs yet to be prepared as well as to unidentified SROs.

2.06 In spite of the absence of a reliable agricultural credit bank inNiger, the project would not finance seasonal or investment credit, giventhe small size of the subprojects, their wide geographic dispersion, andthe difficulties and costs which would be involved in supervising andrecovering the credit. Medium-term renewable assets would be provided tobeneficiaries by the Government on condition that beneficiaries contributeand initial downpayment, prior to start-up, on capital replacement accountsand pay an annuity thereafter. Agricultural inputs could be financed aspart of investment costs only for the first year if financial analysesindicate that revenues generated from operations would cover such annualexpenditures which beneficiaries are responsible for financing thereafter.Since grant financing for SROs would not substitute for individual shortterm or commercial credit, commercial activities such as livestockfattening programs, grain mills and village retail stores would not beincluded.

2.07 Tracks, schools, dispensaries and other non-productiveinvestments would not come under the scope of the project, in a deliberateeffort to (a) avoid duplicating existing national programs such as primaryhealth and education; (b) concentrate effort on production in light of thelack of productive investment opportunities; and (c) simplify thecoordination task.

B. Geoaraphic Coverage

2.08 Project actions would initially concentrate on selected districtsin the Niamey, Dosso and Tahoua departments. The selection of these threedepartments is based on (i) the criteria of opportunities of mobilizingscarce management resources (e.g. outside the already heavily organizedMaradi -IDAICCCE/IFAD and Zinder -CCCE/FAC projects); (i) demand (i.e.where potential beneficiaries would generate significant clusters ofrequests for subprojects); (iii) obvious sectoral concentrations (e.g.small-scale irrigation based on lift from surface water, bottomlanddevelopment, for which there is potential in all three departments); and(iv) localization of project actions within a reasonable radius from theDDRM unit in Niamey.

2.09 The phasing in of individual SROs is based on a graduallyincreasing capacity to identify, prepare and appraise operations. Thiscapacity would be strengthened under the project. In order not to disperse

- 16 -

efforts too thinly over wide geographic areas from the outset, projectactions would initially (during project years 1-2) mainly be implemented intwo districts in each department, increasing to three in PY3, for a totalof six districts in PY1-2 and nine districts in PY3-5. Over five years theproject would cover half of the districts in the three departments.

2.10 The selection criteria of the districts which have been proposedby the Government concerned a number of aspects which aret geographical(ease of access, climate, demographic pressure); administrative andtechnical (proximity to provincial capitals, coverage of technical staff);human (participation of population in previous projects, experience oftechnical and administrative staff in managing SROs); and economicdiversity of development potential (irrigated crops, livestock, small-scalerural industries). These criteria as a means of defining the core projectarea are satisfactory and the project could be implemented in the followingdistricts:

Province District

PYl-2 PY3-5

Niamey Tillaberi TillaberiFilingue Filingue

Say

Dosso Dogondoutchi DogondoutchiBirni-N'Gaoure Birni-N'Gaoure

Dosso

Tahoua Madaoua MadaouaBouza Bouza

Birni-N'Konni

C. Detailed Features

Support to Field Technical Services

2.11 Proiect Preparation/Appraisal. Provincial and district staff oftechnical ministries (MINAGIE and MRA/H, in particular), as well as the theMP, would play an important role in the identification, preparation,execution and evaluation of SR0s. They are poorly equipped with inadequatemeans of transport and little operating funds and are often inexperiencedin performing these functions. The project would therefore provide a4-wheel drive vehicle at each province and district as well as vehicleoperating costs. In order to strengthen field services, the project wouldfinance a development volunteer in each province, a total of three, (e.g.rural works advisors, community development trainers, etc.) to assist theSGAs who would be responsible for coordinating activities in theirprovinces. Vehicles for the provinces would be placed under theresponsibility of the SGAs of DDP and would be used jointly by development

- 17 -

volunteers, financial controllers and any provincial technical servicestaff who would provide technical assistance to SROs. Likewise, vehiclesfor the districts would be under the joint responsibility of the districtstaff working as a team (agriculture, livestock, forestry and planning).The project would also finance incremental office equipment. The terms andconditions of the services to be rendered would be specified in frameworkagreements between the DDRM unit and the provincial and districtdevelopment councils concerned (para. 4.10).

2.12 Extension Services. Technical support would be provided tofarmers through extension services after SROs become operational. Manyfarmers indeed are not familiar with irrigated crops. However,agricultural extension agents at ucantons levels ('chef de districtagricolel--CDA) often have no means of transport nor operating funds and donot visit farmers and yet are occupied with various administrative taskssuch as collecting agricultural statistics. At levels below that of theCDA, no extension agents are in place except for externally financedprojects.

2.13 Small scale irrigation would provide an opportunity to upgradeand revitalize extension services, given that technical improvements can beachieved more easily and faster on irrigated perimeters than in rainfedfarming. This would serve as a starting point to gradually improve otheractivities as well through better extension: erosion control, rainfedcrops, integration of agriculture and livestock, and better management ofland resources in general.

2.14 The project therefore would improve the efficiency of extensionservices, in the areas where SROs would be developed. All the CDAs inplace and contractual extension agents (12 in PYl-2 and 18 in PY3-5 to befinanced by the project) would be provided with transport (motor cycles),vehicle operating costs and training to improve their technical as well ascommunication skills. Vacant CDA posts would be filled as much as possiblethrough internal transfer. They would be regularly supervised by districtand proviacial agricultural staff along the principles of the Training andVisit system. Each contractual extension agent would ultimately provideextension advice to about three villages.

Training

2.15 Staff Training. A training program under DDRM's responsibility,executed by FAO and financed by Switzerland, has assisted in trainingNigerien staff on project analysis ("Formation en analyse de projets auSahel' -FORPROSA) since the end of 1984. The project is managed by aresident expert from FAO. At the request of DDRM, this training programhas concentrated since the end of 1986 on training sessions exclusively forlocal staff in the six districts where the SRO project would be implementedduring the first two years. The program consists of two training modules,the preparation of SROs and tCe other for their organization, monitoringand evaluation. Staff at the district level (two each from Agriculture,Forestry, Livestock and Planning) and some staff at the provincial level(Planning and Rural Engineering) participated in the module for project

- 18 -

preparation. To make the training more practical, participating teamsprepared the ten SROs of the project's year zero work program, which wouldbe financed with advances from the PPF.

2.16 Although the FORPROSA program has helped district staff indeveloping multidisciplinary team work and the ten SROs have provided agood basis for project appraisal, preparation suffered from a number ofshortcomingss

(a) SRO proposals often consist of a list of requests from villagers,without an analysis of technical feasibility and options norconsideration of the absorptive capacity of the villagers and theadministration;

(b) project documents lack information on proposed sites and theirenvironment due to the absence of base line data;

(c) analysis of agronomic aspects is usually insufficient; and

(d) coordination at district level remains unsatisfactory (e.g.,district staff did not consult the MHE to assess the long-termavailability of water resources for irrigation).

2.17 In spite of these shortcomings, it would be essential that theFORPROSA training program be continued considering the shortage ofqualified staff and the frequent staff transfer. However, the FORPROSAprogram has only modest human resources and cannot provide continuousfollow-up support to staff already trained. The project would complementthe FORPROSA program by financing short-term consultants to follow-up onlocal staff who have received initial training and by providing regularrecycling sessions.

2.18 Extension Agents Training. Training to improve technical aswell as communication skills would be provided to contractual extensionagents, CDAs, district chiefs of agricultural services ("chefsd'arrondissements de services agricoles") and provincial chiefs in chargeof extension services. Training would be provided through servicecontracts by locally available trainers from two agricultural and livestockschools, research .taff as well as short-term extensionconsultants/specialists. An extension specialist for a newly created postin the Bank's Resident Mission in Niamey would also assist.

2.19 Beneficiaries' Training. Literacy and management training forbeneficiaries would be indispensable to enable them to manage assetscreated by the project, and would be provided through service contracts byCLUSA (Cooperative League of the USA). The USAID-financed CLUSA projectaims to train trainers for cooperatives and to train members ofcooperatives and GVs. Former UNCC agents were trained to become'cooperative technical assistants' and subsequently trained about 400cooperative members in management and functional literacy. The projectwould finance services rendered by the CLUSA project in functional literacyand management training to beneficiary groups of the proposed project.

- 19 -

DDRM Unit

2.20 A unit would be set up in DDEM of the MP (the DDRM unit) whichwould include a Nigerien Project Coordinator, one local specialist inproject analysis and management, and one local accountant. The services ofan internationally recruited Financial Director would be financed duringproject implementation. The staff would be based in Niamey, but wouldspend much of their time in the field. The project would also financesupport staff in the DDRH unit (three drivers and one secretary), threelocal accountants at provincial levels, and one bookkeeper at each district(6 in PYl-2 and 9 in PY3-5). DDRM and DDP would provide the use ofexisting office space. The project would provide two four-wheel drivevehicles, two station wagons and office equipment for the Niamey office. Itwould also finance data processing services for monitoring and evaluationof ongoing SROs at DDRM.

SRO Investment

2.21 The specific locations of the sub-projects have not yet beenidentified, except for ten SROs already prepared for the year zero workprogram, since they will depend on the interest manifested by particularfarmer groups. The information about the extent to which SR0 will berequested corresponding to the four models described below is, of course,imperfect because their selection is based on ten SROs and on the existingSR0 inventory, which are believed, however, to reflect reasonably well amix of these rodels.

2.22 Development of Bottomlands/Swamps Forty five groups of producers(60 farmers per site on average) would be assisted to develop irrigationperimeters of around 15-20 ha each in bottomlands or swamps usually withpermanent surface water, drawing on shallow groundwater resources. Theproposed type of development is much in demand by producers, is technicallysimple, and a large number of suitable sites are available. Typically thistype of SR0 would involve two cement-lined open wells for each 1 ha areawith an average depth of lOm, of which 5m is under water; one storage andtwo metal irrigation basins per each well; 70m of PVC underground pipes pereach well connecting three basins; installation of one 'delou", liftingdevice with one ox per well; small agricultural tools; and agriculturalinputs such as seeds and fertilizers for the first yeaz only. In addition,it would typically include live fences to protect irrigation perimeters,plantation of windbreaks and village nurseries of plants for live fencesand windbreaks. The total construction cost per ha including skilled laborand the cost of transportation of materials, but excluding villagenurseries, is estimated at CFAF 1.5 million (US$5,080), of which about 40?is for the construction of the well. For illustration purposes, it isassumed that each family would cultivate 0.25-0.33 ha of irrigated land.Farmers would grow mostly sorghum and cowpeas with complementary irrigationand rice, groundnuts and fodder during the wet season, and cassava, maize,sweet potato, onions, and vegetables during the dry season. The choice ofcrops would, however, be left to the farmers. The project would financeconstruction materials, inputs, skilled labor and transportation whilebeneficiary groups would provide all the unskilled labor for well

- 20 -

construction, locally available materials such as sand and gravels, performall farming operations and bear all the operating costs from the secondyear.

2.23 Construction and Eauioment of Small-Scale Irrigation PerimetersFifteen groups of producers (72 farmers on average) would be assisted toconstruct and operate. small irrigation perimeters, using portablemotorpumps, averaging 18 ha each near urban centers. The typical modelwould consist of one cement-lined open well for 1.5 ha with an averagedepth of 10m, of which 5m is under water; installation of a 8 l/s capacitymotorpump for each 1.5 ha plot; construction of one storage and sixirrigation basins per well; 300m of PVC underground pipes connecting sevenbasins; small agricultural tools for cultivation and distribution of water;and agricultural inputs such as seeds and fertilizers for the first yearonly. Like bottomland development, it would include live fences,windbreaks and village nurseries. The total construction cost per haincluding skilled labor and transportation of materials, but excludingvillage nurseries, is estimated at around CFAF one million (US$3,390).Producers would have the same responsibilities as for the bottomlandsoperations. In addition, they would pay for the operation and maintenanceof their pumps and save for their replacement. Sites for this typa ofoperation would have to be chosen in relation to their easy access tomarkets because of the relatively high operating costs. The choice ofcrops would be left to the farmers, but the farmers would be expected togrow a greater proportion of high value crops such as vegetables to meettheir annual financial obligations.

2.24 Soil Conservation Operations This component would aim torehabilitate sterile areas where no cultivation is currently possible as aresult of erosion. The 150 ha SRO model would consist of constructing rockbunds which would allow more time for water infiltration and disrupt heavyrainwater flow. It would also consist of mechanized plowing to breakcompacted soils between rock bunds so that conditions become adequate togrow millet or sorghum. The project would provide the necessary design andsupervision services, and finance tractor rental costs for land preparationand donkey carts to transport rocks. The beneficiaries would provide asubstantial amount of labor to transport and construct bunds (8-10 days/haand 1200-1500 days per site). Investment costs per hectare are estimatedat CFAF 1,000 (US$54) excluding labor. Fifteen operations are expected tobenefit around 100 families.

2.25 Village Nurseries Hedges and tree windbreaks would be plantedto protect the agricultural areas and increase their productivity byreducing evapotranspiration. The establishment of 20 nurseries would befinanced to meet the tree requirements of the above models and to cater forother purposes such as tree plantation for dune stabilization and villageforestry. The experience of NGOs suggests that these nurseries can bemanaged by villagers who have previously been adequately trained. Themodel nursery would cover 2500 m2 which would be equipped with acement-lined well and udeloum. The cost per nursery is estimated at CFAF1.2 million (US$4,070). It would have a capacity of 50,000 plants annuallywhich would be sufficient for live fences and windbreaks for about 3

- 21 -

irrigation models (15-20 ha) and it would therefore be capable of supplyingother villages. The capacity of the nurseries and the selection of treeswould have to be adjusted to meet the requirements of the village concernedand demands for plants from other villages.

Unidentified Activities

2.26 The models described in the previous paragraphs, such as smallscale irrigations and soil conservation projects, are considered priorityactions, aiming to increase production and income on the one hand, and toprotect the environment on the other. SROs would, however, be an integralpart of village development programs and once these priority actions havebeen taken, other accompanying activities including livestock activities,input banks, and storage as well as other productive projects, such asaquaculture and apiculture, may emerge during project implementation. Theproposed project would therefore provide a large allocation of funds (about252 of total cost of sub-projects) to finance SROs which do not fall withinthe category of models already identified and appraised, following theprocedures specified for the SRO project cycle (paras 4.19-4.22).

Studies

2.27 The project would finance a number of studies to provide betterknowledge of physical environment and socio-economic conditions, such ascomplementary hydrogeological studies, monographs of selected areas,studies on land tenure, etc. These studies would be subcontracted to localor international consultants, the University of Niamey (e.g., monographs),the Rural Code Commission (land tenure) and NGOs. In addition, a majororganizational study with the objective of harmonizing the financingprocedures of SROs would be undertaken with the Swiss bilateral funds.

D. Environmental Impact

2.28 The project, through the financing of erosion control works andtree plantation, would have a beneficial effect on the environment. Theproject would help beneficiaries build simple works to minimize erosioncaused by violent run-offs. It would also finance tree plantations forsand fixation and wir,dbreaks, often as part of bottomland and small-scaleirrigation development.

III. PROJECT COSTS AND FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS

A. Cost Estimates

3.01 Total projeot costs, including contingencies as well as taxes andimport duties, which are negligible, for the five year implementationperiod (1989-1993), are estimated at CFAF 5.2 billion (or US$17.7 millionequivalent), with a foreign exchange component of 442. On the basis of thestandard disbursement profile for agricultural credit projects in allregions, it is projected that it would take 7 1/2 years to disburse theproceeds of the credit. Through the increase in price contingencies, this

- 22 -

would increase total project costs to CFAF 5.3 billion (or US$18.0million). Project costs are summarized below.

PROJECT COST SU MARY

Local Forolgn Total Local Foretgn Total X Foreign X Tot&lCFAF millton CFAF million exchange base cost

Support to technical services 716 402 1,120 2.4 1.4 3.0 se 26Training 289 le 846 0.8 0.4 1.2 81 8DORM Unit 228 838 682 0.6 1.1 1.9 80 18SRO Investment 969 907 1,658 8.2 8.1 6.8 49 42Studios(lnluding PPF refunding) 177 888 580 9.6 1.8 1.9 s8 12

Total baseline costa 2,819 2,184 4,458 7.6 7.8 16.1 46 1s

physical contingencies 97 98 t9o 9.8 0.8 0.6 49 4price contingencies So8 82 679 2.0 0.8 2.8 14 15

Total projcct costs 8,094 2,8e9 5,318 10.1 7.9 10.0 44 119

3.02 Unit costs are based on May 1987 prices, adjusted to November1987 -- the date of negotiations -- using an adjustment factor of 4? onlocal and 0.72 on foreign costs. Costs include physical contingencies ofIOZ on subprojects and office equipment and furniture. The total allowancefor physical contingencies amounts to 42 of base costs. Pricecontingencies, which amount to 152 of base costs or 13? of total costs,have been calculated at the following annual percentage rates:

Assumed price contingencies (in 2)

costs 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993

foreign costs 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.5 3.5 3.5local costs 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0

The price escalation factors follow forecasts of international inflationfor foreign supplied goods and services, and estimated annual inflation inNiger for local costs. Total contingencies amount to approximately 19? ofbase costs and 16? of total project costs. Cost estimates are detailed inAnnexes 3-1 and 3-2 and in the working paper, B.6.

3.03 Indicative Proaramming. It is assumed that, for the purpose ofdetermining project costs, the pace of preparation and financing of SROswould be as follows:

- 23 -

number of districts 6 6 9 9 9

number of ROs 2 2 2 3 3per district

total number of BROs 12 12 18 27 27 (96 in total)

B. Proiosed Pinancina Plan

3.04 In view of the Government's tight financial situation, it isproposed that its contributiot be limrited to the salaries of incrementalcivil servants, the provision of office space and utilities. It isestimated at US$0.9 million and would constitute about 52 of the totalcosts.

3.05 The Government of the Swiss Confederation would contribute SF12.5million, or US$7.8 million, as a grant. IDA would finance the remainingUS$9.3 million. The financing plan is thus as follows:

Financint Plan

US$ million (a)Government 0.9 5IDA 9.3 52Switzerland 7.8 43TOTAL 18.0 100

IDA and Switzerland would jointly finance. (502 each) all the disbursementcategories with the exception of category (8), the refunding of IDA's PPF.

C. Procurement

3.06 Given the limited number of SROs, their small size, widegeographic distribution and phasing over time, foreign firms are lesslikely to bid for contracts. However, orders for vehicles and equipmentwould be grouped whenever possible at the central or provincial levels.Any such grouped purchase order with a value in excess of US$100,000 (CFAF30 million) would be let after international competitive bidding followingIDA guidelines. For orders valued between US$100,000 and US$20,000 (CFAF 6million), competitive bidding in accordance with local procedures whichwere reviewed and found acceptable by IDA, would be employed. Localcompetitive shopping would be used for those valued under US$20,000 (CFAF 6million).

- 24 -

NIGERSMALL RURAL OPERATIONS PROJECT

PROCUREMENT METHOD AND DISBURSEMENTS

PROCUREMENT METHOD a/PROJECT ELEMENT ICB LCB OTHER N.A. TOTAL

COST

(US$ MILLION)

Civil works and supplies - 4.4 _ - 4.4(2.2) (2.2)

Vehicles 1.0 - - - 1.0(0.5) (0.5)

Equipment & furniture - 0.3 - - 0.3(0.15) (0.15)

Agricultural inputs 0 0.9 0.3 - 1.2(0.45) (0.15) (0.6)

Consultants' services - 2.5 - 2.5

studies and audits (1.25) (1.25)

Local personnel, training, - - 2.8 bI 2.1 El 4.9operating costs (1.4) (0.6) (2.0)

Goods and services for - - - 2.2 2.2unidentified SROs (1.1) (1.1)

Refunding of Project - - - 1.5 1.5Preparation Advance (1.5) (1.5)

Total 1.0 5.6 5.6 5.8 18.0(0.5) (2.8) (2.8) (3.2) (9.3)

aI Figures in parentheses are the respective amounts financed by the IDA credit.b/ Fuel to be purchased in bulk without taxes, and training.cl Personnel and non-fuel operating costs.

3.07 Until recently, all contracts of over CFAF one million (US$3,390)had to be approved by Primary Commissions at the level of technicalministries and then by the Central Procurement Commission (CCM). Moreover,provinces and districts could not procure without the authorization of thecentral ministries. Under the Public Enterprise Sector Adjustment Program,the Government agreed and has changed the procurement rules to (a) increasethe threshold below which contracts are not required, from CFAP one million

- 25 -

to CFAF five million; (b) create provincial procurement commissions; and(c) authorize provincial procurement commissions to launch, review andapprove procurement valued below CFAF 15 million. Procurement valued atmore than CPAF 15 million has to be approved b' CCH. These measuresalready taken are in line with the decentrali ed decision-making andfinancial management of the proposed project Agricultural inputstotalling US$0.9 million would be procured by LCB since such inputs wouldbe provided in small quantities to widely dispersed SRO sites, and onlyduring the initial year of each SRO. Animals valued at US$0.3 millionwould be provided by the villages concerned or purchased at local markets.LCB procedures have been adopted for procurement of construction materialsbecause the scope for grouping is limited, given the scattered anddispersed nature of the individual operations and small volumes to beprocured and in any one year about US$0.9 million would be spent, whichincludes the cost of skilled labor and transport as well as the cost ofconstruction supplies and materials. In order to speed up execution andmake district staff more responsible, procurement of goods for SROinvestment such as cement, iron rods and pumps would be carried out at thedistrict level as far as suppliers of such goods are available in thedistricts. District staff would receive technical assistance inprocurement practices from provincial staff and the DDRH unit.

3.08 Expatriate staff (including volunteers) and short-term consultantcosts amount to about US$1.4 million, including contingencies. Assuranceswere obtained at negotiations that consultants with qualifications andexperience acceptable to IDA would be recruited following IDA guidelines.A Financial Director and financial controllers in the provinces would berecruited through a package contract with an accounting firm preferablyrepresented in Niger and associated with a Nigerien firm.

3.09 Contract Review. Bidding documents for contracts estimated tocost the equivalent of US$100,000 or more would be cleared with IDA beforetendering, and recommendations for contract awards would be submitted toIDA for comments prior to award. This would cover about 6? of the totalestimated value of contracts for goods.

D. Disbursement

3.10 DA credit would be disbursed over 7 1/2 years in accordance withthe standard disbursement profile for agricultural credit in all theRegions and against the following categories:

- 26 X

US$ SDR 2 of totalexDenditures a/

(1) Civil works and supplies 1.8 1.37 1002

(2) Vehicles, equipment and furuiture 0.6 0.46 1oo0

(3) Agricultural inputs 0.45 0.35 1002

(4) Consultants' services, studies 1.15 0.88 1002and audits

(5) Operating costs 1.05 0.80 1002

(6) Training 0.4 0.31 1002

(7) Goods and services for 0.85 0.65 1002unidentified SROs

(8) Refunding of projectpreparation advance 1.5 1.14 1002

(,' Unallocated 1.5 1.14

TOTAL 9.3 7.1

aI Percentage of total expenditures for IDA financing. The totalexpenditures to be financed by external sources would be US$17.1million. IDA and Switzerland would finance 502 each of the totalexpenditures of categories (1) to (7).

Category (1) includes construction materials and supplies for wells,irrigation basins, soil conservation works, and tree nurseries. Category(3) for agricultural inputs includes fertilizers, pesticides, agriculturaltools and animals. Category (5) for operating costs includes the salariesof contractual local staff and vehicle operating costs. Category (6) fortraining includes service contracts with training institutions andsubsistence payments to training participants.

3.11 Disbursements for categories (1) through (6), for allexpenditures valued at less than US$20,000, would be made againstStatements of Expenditure (SOEs) certified by the Project Coordinator andthe Financial Director. The minimum amount for reimbursement for directpayments would be set at US$20,000. Accounting procedures for the projectwill be set up with PPF funding and would be designed to providejustification for SOEs for the project. The documentation of expenditureswould be retained by the project and made available for inspection by IDAduring project supervision. The MP would issue withdrawal applications.An estimated disbursement schedule for the project is shown in Annex 3-3.The closing date of the IDA credit would be June 30, 1996.

- 27 -

3.12 In order to expedite disbursements and ensure that funds for theproject are available when needed, the Government would open two specialaccounts (revolving fund); one for IDA and the other for Switzerland in acommercial bank in the name of the project. Immediately after crediteffectiveness, IDA and Switzerland would make an initial deposit of CPA?220 million each (US$0.7 mAllion equivalent) into respective specialaccounts. A total of CFAF 440 million would represent about four months'expenditure. The account would be used to finance the local and foreigncosts of eligible expenditures financed by IDA. The special account wouldbe replenished on a monthly basis or when it is reduced by a third,whichever comes first.

IV. ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

A. Proiecc Execution

4.01 The project would be executed by the DDRM unit, which would beestablished in the DDRM of the MP, with assistance from Governmenttechnical services, groups of producers and possibly NGOs. Proliferationof management units by various donors in the DDRM, however, is not an idealsituation (Annex 4-1). An organizational study would be undertaken withthe Swiss bilateral funds to analyze the existing organizational structureof DDRM, procedures of financing SROs by different donors and possibleoptions for harmonization of procedures, including an autonomous structureof a Rural Development Fund. The organizational structure of the projectwould be amended if necessary once the study is completed and a decision istaken by the Government in consultation with IDA.

Central Organization

4.02 The DDRM unit would retain ultimate responsibility for projectexecution, although decision-making would be decentralized in most cases tothe Provinces. The technical committee was created by larrdte* no.01/MPlDDRM of July 10, 1935 with representatives of nine ministries. Itsroles are to approve overall annual programs of SROs proposed by eachprovince, carry out financial arbitration if necessary, taking into accountthe regional balances and overall availability of funds, and ensure thecoordination of technical assistance required for the preparation andexecution of SROs through their provincial and district services.

4.03 The "Comit4 Interministeriel de planification et de mise enoeuvre des micrordalisations', created by "arrAte* no. 27 of September 28,1984, would be responsible for defining policies for SROs('microrealisations"). The technical committee would raise any questionspertaining to policy implication to the 'Comit4 Interminist4riel'.

Responsibilities of the DDRM Unit

4.04 The unit would be responsible for (a) diffusing information onproject selection criteria and procedures to be followed through toappraisal; (b) assisting technical services and villagers in subproject

- 28 -

preparation by issuing guidelines; (c) participating in appraisalcoordinated by DDP; (d) coordinating training activities; (e) monitoringprogress of SROs under preparation as well as under implementation andundertaking periodic evaluation of ongoing operations; (f) overallfinancial control and accounting; and (g) preparing annual progressreports which would include the consolidated project accounts and statementof the status of each Capital Replacement Account.

Responsibilities of Develogment Councils

4.05 Development councils at village, district, and provincial levelswould be a major decision-making structure. Proposals would be submittedto the development councils from the lower to higher echelons for approval.At each level, the presidents of the respective development councils wouldbe assisted by the technical services to prepare SROs. The Governmentwould take all necessary measures to grant authority to CRDs presided overby provincial Governors to approve their respective provincial program ofSROs. Once an SRO is approved, provincial and/or district technicalservices with the possible assistance of NGOs would be designated by theprovincial Governor to help the village implement the SRO. In addition,district Governors would be responsible for monitoring regular payments bybeneficiaries to the Capital Replacement Accc nts and bring attention incase of non-compliance for notifying the provincial Governors and the DDRMunit, in order that they take the necessary action.

Responsibilities of Administrative and Technical Services

4.06 The Provincial Director of the MP in his capacity as SGA to theCRDs would be responsible for coordinating and supporting SRO programs inhis province. His specific responsibilities are tos (a) diffuseinformation about the project; (b) make sure that selection criteria andterms and conditions of the beneficiaries' participation are met; and (c)make sure that provincial technical services provide adequate technicalassistance to the preparation/appraisal/execution of SROs.

4.07 Various technical services would be called on to helpbeneficiaries prepare SRO proposals at the request of development councils.District Governors would designate responsible technical services ascoordinators of SRO programs in their districts. The designated technicalservice wotuld have technical responsibility for the execution andsupervision of works and would report quarterly to the Project Coordinatoron progress.

Participation of NGOs

4.08 Given their long experience in SRO-type operations and widespreadpresence in the field, the NGOs' competence would be tapped as much aspossible for the execution of the project. Although it is up to the DDRHunit and the CRDs and CSRDs to decide what types of participation areneeded from NGOs, they could include technical advice to district staff,execution of SROs, training and execution of specific studies.

- 29 -

Responsibilities of Beneficiaries

4.09 The beneficiary groups would have to provide all the unskilledlabor required during construction and locally available materials;collect the cash to be deposited prior to the initial installation ofmedium-term assets, if any, and subsequently collect the annuity to bepaid; allocate land; devise and make operative rules for access to commongoods and services; and collect the cash andlor provide the labor foroperation and maintenance of shared facilities. Each group would maintainsimple accounts for common expenditures and receipts, and the technicalservices/NGOs would assist them as requested, using guidelines onaccounting procedures to be prepared by DDRM with PPF financing.

Contracts for SRO Execution

4.10 SROs would be executed according to the terms and conditionsspecified in the contracts. Two types of contracts are envisaged; (1) aframework agreement between the DDRM unit, and CRD and CSRD; and (2) adevelopment contract between the CSRD and the group of producers,representing the beneficiaries. The framework agreement would cover anoverall annual program for each province, and, based on the national policyconcerning rules and conditions for eligibility, would define therespective roles of the project, provinces and districts in technicalassistance, logistical support, supervision and training. It would alsomention the frequency and type of reporting required. The developmentcontract for each SRO, written in the local language, would defineresponsibilities between the local authorities (CSRD) and beneficiaries(group of producers). In particular, it would indicate the physical andfinancial contributions of beneficiaries, project contribution, managementmechanism, operating Lechanism of the Capital Replacement Account, etc.The Government is requested, as a condition of disbursement for civil worksand supplies, and agricultural inputs (categories (1) and (3)), to presentdrafts of the framework agreement and the development contract satisfactoryto IDA.

B. Financial Management. Accounts, Audits and Reporting

4.11 Project accounting would fall under the overall responsibility ofthe Project Coordinator. For expenditures other than direct investment ofSROs (vehicles, vehicle operating costs, salaries, training and studies),the Financial Director, together with a local accountant in the DDRM unitin Niamey, would be directly responsible for purchase, payment andbookkeeping. For expenditures related to the direct investment of SROs,whose financial management would be decentralized to the district andprovincial levels, the Financial Director would regularly supervise,ensuring that proper accounts are kept of each operation by a bookkeeper ineach district with assistance from financial controllers in the provinces,and ensure that adequate justification for expenditures is submittedregularly from the districts through the provinces to the DDRM unit. Hewould prepare SOEs and disbursement requests and consolidate annualaccounts.

- 30 -

4.12 In line with the decentralization of decision-making regardingSRO investments, financial management for expenditures directly related toSRO investment would also be decentralized to the district levels, theclosest level to the center of actions, i.e. villages. Secondary accountswould be opened in the name of the SRO program at each district, either atbranches of the BDRN or post offices (six accounts during the first twoyears and then nine accounts), and an advance would be issued for amountsequivalent to about three months' expenditures of district SRO programsfrom the central special account. An initial deposit to each secondaryaccount is estimated at around US$65,000. A district Governor and acoordinator of the district SRO program would cosign checks. Bookkeepersat each district financed by the project would keep receipts and invoicesand send them to the DDRM unit through provincial financial controllersevery month. Provincial financial controllers also financed by the projectwould regularly visit districts to ensure that funds allocated are used inconformity with their purposes and budget. Based on receipts and invoiceson the one hand and provincial financial controllers' ex-post evaluation onthe other, the DDRM unit would replenish district accounts.

4.13 The accounting system of the project would be established by aconsultant with PPF financing. Assurances were obtained at negotiationsthat the project establish and maintain separate project-related accountsin accordance with sound and accepted accounting principles and practices.It would be a condition of credit effectiveness that the project accountingsystem and procedures satisfactory to IDA would be established and that theFinancial Director would be recruited. Assurances were obtained atnegotiations that three financial controllers in the provinces andbookkeepers at each district would be recruited no later than October 1,1988.

4.14 The project-related accounts would be audited annually duringproject implementation by independent auditors acceptable to IDA andfinanced by the Project. Audited financial statements and reports, of suchscope and in such detail as IDA may reasonably request, would be submittedto IDA within six months of the end of each fiscal year. The auditor'sreport would include a statement on the adequacy of the accounting systemand internal controls, and whether or not IDA funds have been used fortheir intended purposes. The report would also confirm that SOEs submittedas justification for disbursement under categories (1) through (6) of para3.10 correctly reflect detailed records kept by the Project. Assurances onthe above were obtained at negotiations.

4.15 The Project Coordinator would be responsible for issuing annualprogress reports and submitting them to IDA, including budgeted and actualexpenditures, the progress achieved in the preparation and execution ofSROs, and the status of each Capital Replacement Account. He would alsosubmit to IDA in draft, for information, annual work programs and budgetsprepared by the provinces (para. 4.21). Within one year of the creditclosing date, the Project coordinator would be responsible for preparing aproject completion report which would summarize the project's performanceand evaluate lessons learned. Assurances on all the above were obtainedduring negotiations.

_ 31 -

C. Capital Replacement Accounts

4.16 One of the features of the project would be a replication of thegenerally successful precedent in Senegal, that medium-term assets would beprovided to groups of producers on condition that the producers contributeto the Capital Replacement Accounts at levels which would permit thereplacement of the assets instead of through medium term credit. The totalvalue of such assets (mainly pumps and animals for "delou') for the modelSROs at current prices would be about CFAF 150 million (US$480,000). Theuse of Capital Replacement Accounts would avoid delays while awaiting thereorganization of the agricultural credit system. This would avoid the useof commercial banks, which are reluctant to lend for rural equipment due tothe lack of adequate loan security and guarantees, and disappointingcollection performance cf medium-term credit. It would also contribute tosmall groups of producers becoming credit-worthy in the judgment of thelocal banking system. Closely supervised replenishment of CapitalReplacement Accounts would also ensure that the original medium-termequipment could be replaced. The DDRM unit would retain ownership of theassets which would be lent to producers while they build up enough savingsto be able to purchase the replacement assets if they are needed.

4.17 For each medium-term asset provided, the producer group wouldopen a Capital Replacement Account at the nearest branch of BDRN or postoffice; the withdrawal from such accounts would be made by the group withthe agreement of the district Governor. As a condition for receipt of theasset, the group would pay an amount of 5s of its delivered cost into itsCapital Replacement Account; this would be verified by the DDRM unit. Theasset would remain the property of the DDRM unit until the group has putsufficient funds into the account for its replacement. By that time thegroup would own the asset in full property. The development contractbetween the CSRD and the producer group would specify the amount of theannual payment and the date of payment. Assurances on the above wereobtained at negotiations. As an example, for a pump with a three-year lifespan, the procedure would be as followss an initial payment of 52 of thedelivered cost and an annual payment of one half of the estimatedreplacement cost would be made, except that for the first year the 5s downpayment would be deducted. An illustrative farm model shows that producerswould be able to meet this schedule of payments. In the case of animals,resale proceeds would normally buy new animals after three to four years ofuse. Funds accumulated in the accounts would therefore be used forrepurchase in case of mortality or for other purchases decided among thegroup, in agreement with district authorities.

4.18 The DDRM unit would examine at least twice a year the status ofeach Capital Replacement Account and in the case of delinquency, issue thenecessary instructions for all appropriate measures to be taken to ensurethat all arrears are paid promptly. Assurances on this were obtained atnegotiations.

- 32 -

D. The Small Rural Onerations Proiect Cycle

4.19 Identification/preparation. SROs would be identified bybeneficiaries, technical services, particularly extension agents or NGOs,in response to local needs for investment and the diffusion of informationon eligibility for funds. Identification documents would be prepared bypotential beneficiaries with the help of district staff and would besubmitted to CRD through CSRD to prepare annual provincial programs (para.4.21). Preparation would be undertaken by beneficiaries with the help oflocal technical services at district levels or NGOs. The DDRM unit wouldfacilitate the preparation process by providing detailed guidelines ontechniques and costs, holding training sessions, and undertaking frequentfield trips to review ongoing preparation. The development councils wouldenlist technical services as necessary to help beneficiaries prepare SROs.

4.20 Appraisal. Appraisal of the request would be undertaken attwo levels, namely by COTEAR and then COTEDEP coordinated by DDP with theparticipation of the DDRM unit. Appraisal would involve visits to the sitesof proposed SROs, discussions with potential beneficiaries, in particularto clarify their financial commitments, and reviewing technical andfinancial viability as well as ensuring satisfaction of selection criteria.SGAs are ultimately responsible for ensuring that selection criteria aremet. For financial analysis, appraisal would make sure that farm budgetsindicate that an SRO would generate enough cash flow to cover all theoperating costs and to sufficiently remunerate labor. If costs per ha are30X higher than those presented in para. 6.04, the DDRM unit wouldreappraise financial viability.

4.21 Apprcval. There would be two levels of approval; approval ofoverall annual provincial programs and approval of each SRO. Annualprovincial programs would be prepared, based on identification documentsand submitted to the DDRM and the technical committee by June 30 each year.The technical committee would approve provincial programs as a whole,taking into account the distribution among the provinces and the fundsavailable. Assurances were made during negotiations that the Governmentwould submit to IDA for information the annual provincial programs of SROsnot later than August 31 of each year. If the annual provincial programsinclude SROs which are other than the models identified, DDRH would submita representative model to the technical committee which invites localrepresentatives of IDA and the Swiss Development Cooperation to determinewhether the new model meets the selection criteria. IDA's approval of sucha new model would be a condition of disbursement for goods and services forunidentified SROs (category (7)). Once overall provincial programs areapproved, the district and provincial technical staff would proceed withfurther preparation and appraisal of each SRO. Once the final appraisalhas shown that the request is justified, it would be sent withmodifications, if any, to the CRD for approval. The CRD thus has the powerof final approval for each SRO in the province.

4.22 Execution and Monitoring. After an SRO is approved, districttechnical services would be designated by the district Governor to help thevillage implement the SRO with possible assistance from provincial services

- 33 -

and NGOs. A development contract between the CSRD and the beneficiarieswould be signed, specifying the technical and financial conditions ofexecution (para. 4.10). Coordination, monitoring and control would be thejoint responsibility of DDP and the DDRM unit.

E. Training

4.23 Given the existence of reasonably successfully run trainingprograms for regional planning and project analysis (FORPROSA) andcooperatives (CLUSA), and of underutilized agricultural and livestockschools and their trainers, the project would mobilize as much as possiblelocally available human resources through service contracts in order toprovide training and recycling. The project would finance short-termservices of training specialists to assess training needs and set uptraining programs. The project coordinator would be responsible forcoordinating training activities.

F. Project Coordination and Imlementation

4.24 It is important to harmonize principal rules and procedures to beapplied to SRO-type operations financed by all donors including theGovernment, otherwise different rules and procedures would confusebeneficiaries and technical service staff and would make implementationineffective. The organizational study to be financed by the Swissbilateral funds would improve coordination by examining and proposing waysto harmonize rules and procedures imposed by various donors. In additionto the study, the Government would convene regular meetings, at least oncea year, with local representatives of the donors involved in SRO-typeoperations, to discuss their investment programs, rules and procedures,evaluation of past activities, etc., with a view to better coordination andprogramming. Assurances on the above were obtained at negotiations.

4.25 Prior to effectiveness, the PPF advance would finance (a) theexecution of the year zero program of SROs already prepared by districtstaff; (b) the preparation activities of the first year program to befinanced right after project start-up; (c) the consultant services to setup an accounting system fir the project; and (d) the consultant services toset up a monitoring and evaluation system at DDRM. Presentation to IDA ofthe first year program of SROs to be financed after project start-up wouldbe condition of effectiveness. In addition, the Swiss bilateral fundswould finance the organizational study. Its terms of reference and theconsultant were agreed by IDA and initial work started in December 1987.Upon completion of the organizational study, the Government and IDA wouldreview the recommendations of the study and not later than December 31,1990, the Government would carry out those recommendations approved by IDA.Assurances on the above were obtained at negotiations. In addition, theGovernment would conduct a mid-term review not later than December 31,1990, and present the findings and recommendations of the review, includingthe suitability of rules and procedures and their effective application,quality of prepar.tion/appraisal/eva.uation of SROs, adequacy of training,and impact of extension services, to IDA for review and comments.

- 34 -

V. TECHNOLOGICAL AND PRODUCTION SPECIFICATIONS

5.01 Investment. The technical specifications for the model SROs aregiven in Working Papers B-1 and B-2 as technical guides. These guides areprepared to facilitate the selection of technical solutions, technicalpreparation of SRO proposals, and estimation of costs. The design andconstruction methods are simple so that beneficiaries would be able tooperate and maintain them. It is recommended that a pump be used to liftup water while digging so that the well-diggers can dig sufficiently deep(5m below water table), rather than using divers who would dig 2-3m belowthe water table, which is often not deep enough to provide water during thelast period of the dry season. In accordance with Government policy,costly metal fences to protect irrigation perimeters would be discouraged.Beneficiaries would have to keep animals away from irrigation perimetersuntil the live fences grow. A Od4loul with an ox or pumps would be used asa means of lifting water, rather than manual lifting, which although widelypracticed at the moment, is insufficient to meet water requirements.

5.02 Inputs. The production specifications for irrigated crops arebased on acquired experience with similar small-scale projects alreadyunder implementation in or close to the areas. There would be noinnovations in respect to input types, quantity, and production methodsunless technical service agencies present new evidence that changes werewarranted. The input requirements for each crop are presented in Annex6-1. These inputs, as well as pesticides, would be financed by the projectfor the first year due to the lack of formal agricultural credit, butthereafter would be financed by the beneficiaries out of their revenues.Inputs for the first year would be purchased in provinces or districts andtransferred to the beneficiaries, and subsequently would be purchaseddirectly by the beneficiaries, either from the "Centraled'approvisionnement" or from private traders.

5.03 Production Methods. Water would be lifted either by a Id6loul toirrigate a small plot of 0.5 ha each or by a pump to irrigate a plot of 1.5ha each. In both cases, water would be stored in a storage basin and bethen distributed to irrigation basins through underground PVC pipes. Fromirrigation basins, farmers would transport water in watering pots toirrigate. Although manual distribution of water is labor intensive, waterloss is much lt.as as compared with earth canals for gravity distributionand labor for water distribution would be made available by savings fromwater lifting by delou and pumps. Since these activities would beundertaken during dry seasons, the adequacy of labor would not be aproblem. Labor requirements for crop cultivation and irrigation arepresented in Annex 6-1.

5.04 Yields and Output Yield forecasts are based on acquiredexperience with similar small-scale operations. Incremental output underthe project would come from an extension of the cultivated irrigated areaand an increase in yields. Production of firewood would also increase as aresult of project actions. Yields, areas and production are presented inAnnex 6-1 and anticipated incremental outputs of the major crops at PYS areshown below.

- 35 -

ExRected Production of Maior Crops

Bottomland Model (15 ha) Pump Irrigation Model (18 ha)

crops incremental production incremental productionper perimeter (tons) per perimeter (tons)

onions 36 57cassava 60 -6sweet potatoes 29 -22vegetables 27 78fodder 24 17sugar cane 15sorghum 13 23potatoes -- 41

5.05 Improvement in Rainfed Farminz. Although SROs may not make adirect investment in rainfed farming, SRO investments in irrigated areaswould improve productivity in rainfed areas. With an increased productionfrom irrigated areas, farmers could afford to leave a part of their rainfedareas as fallow, and longer fallow periods would contribute to betterproductivity. Moreover, increased fodder production from fodder crops andby-products of cereals and cowpeas would facilitate an integration oflivestock and agriculture. Finally, extension agents who would be trainedand become more effective would give advice not only on irrigated crops butalso on rainfed farming as an integral part of farming.

VI. FINANCIAL RESULTS

A. Demand. Marketing and Prices

6.01 Demand. For the model operations, outputs would be eitheradditional supplies to the domestic market (vegetables, cereals) or exportsmainly to Nigeria (onions, cowpeas). Output volumes would be small both inaggregate and per perimeter or group of producers. Most of the perishablevegetables are likely to be consumed by the producers themselves, or besold in small towns close to the project sites that are presently poorlysupplied. However, too much concentration on the perishable vegetableswould quickly saturate small local markets and a balance between high valuebut perishable crops and low value cereals which can be stored has to besought. Although farmers are free to choose which crops to grow,agricultural services would give advice on crop composition based onmarketing and price information, as well as upon technical considerations.

6.02 Marketing. Producers would continue to sell directly to privatebuyers as at present, and therefore the project would not attempt toprovide any direct marketing support. Onions and peppers would usuallyfind ready export markets in Nigeria and the Ivory Coast. Tomatoes wouldbe sold in nearby local markets or are often dried on the farm for sale tothe Agadez and desert areas. Cassava, sweet potatoes and sugar canes wouldbe sold in nearby local markets.

- 36 -

6.03 Foodcrop markets in Niger are free from effective regulations andprices are competitively determined. All crops originating in the projectarea are traded within the country, and the quantities that are exportedare freely traded. Therefore, in subsequent economic analysis of theproject, observed market prices are assumed to be economic prices forregionally and locally traded crops. For rice, sorghum and maize, whichare internationally traded, import parity prices are used as economic aswell as financial prices. The assumed prices of the irrigated commoditiesat farm-gate, taking into account transport costs and losses, are set outbelows

Estimated Farm-Gate Prices of Haior Crops(CFAF/kg)

Commodity Financial and Economic Prices(1987)

onions 62cassava 52sweet potatoes 63vegetables 50fodder 10sugar cane 25sorghum 52potatoes 64maize 51paddy 70

B. Financial Imolications for Beneficiaries

6.04 Two farm models representing the characteristics of the modelSROs have been constructed to illustrate the anticipated impact of theproject on individual participants. The modals are detailed in Annex 6-1and summarized in the table below, with other financial features of theproject.

37 -

Financial Features

bottomland puMpdevelopment irrigation

specific operations no. 45 15

families per operation no. 60 72

cost per operation CFAF 23 million 18 millionUS$ 78,000 61,000

cost per ha CFAF 1.5 million 1 millionUS$ 5,080 3,390

cost per family CFAP 375,000 250,000US$ 1,270 850

net revenue per producer per yearwithout project CFAF 000/year 67 123with project ClAF 000/year 211 163

net revenue per man-daywithout project CFAF 250 268with project CFAF 568 473

C. Financial Imnlications for Government

6.05 Thereo would be no directly generated revenue to the Governmentsince none of the project outputs are comodities on which taxes are leviedwith the exception of onions (CFAF 1,100/bag). Beneficiary incomes would,however, increase by about 1001, thereby raising incomes and expenditureson consumer goods subject to indirect taxation. Incremental Governmentrevenue can therefore be expected to be significant. This effect cannot bequautified with much accuracy and therefore is not included in theGovernment cash flow in Annex 6-2.

VII. BENEFITS AND ECONONIC ANALYSIS

A. Proiect Benefits

7.01 The most important benefit of the project would be thedevelopment of an institutional capability in Niger for making soundinvestment. decisions for small rural operations and for managing investmentfunds. By providing intensive training for local staff and streamliningthe organizational structure of the project cycle, a local capacity ofproject preparation and execution of SROs would improve. By focussing onthe principle that beneficiaries manifest, both In cash and in kind, theirinterest in participation and by instituting Capital Replacement Accounts

- 38 -

for renewal of medium-term assets, the sustainability of operations wouldbe enhanced. By clarifying the selection criteria and terms and conditionsof financing, utilization of funds would be rationalized and the total flowof external assistance for this type of operation would increase.

7.02 The subprojects, the models of which have been identified in thecourse of preparation and appraisal, would also have substantial benefits.The project would benefit in total about 7,000 families, or 50,000 people.It does not follow that project beneficiaries would be among the poorest ofthe poor, since those who choose to take advantage of the investmentopportunities are likel1 to be among the more enterprising and innovativebeneficiaries. The recipients of project funds are likely to be eithergroups of similarly enterprising individuals or people organized andmotivated by a few, or even only one, entrepreneurial type. In the lattercase, the leader(s) would plausibly take a disproportionate share ofrevenues accruing and/or pay an unduly low share of the group'sobligations. Such rewards may nonetheless be a necessary incentive for theemergence of local leadership.

B. Economic Analysis

7.03 No attempt has been made to measure the main project benefitsstated in para 7.01. Economic rates of return have been calculated for twoprototype models. Direct investment costs based on standard specificationshave been compared with incremental output from a typical site. Basicassumptions are: (a) 10-20 year economic life depending on the type ofdevelopment and no residual values; and (b) villagers' voluntary labor forconstruction, cultivation and irrigation maintenance priced at CFAP300/day, the estimated opportunity cost of labor during dry seasons. Onthese bases, the economic rates of return for individual types ofsubprojects are summarized as follows and are detailed in Annex 7-1 andWorking Paper B-5.

Summary Results of Economic Rate of Return Calculations

rate of returnbase case

bottomland development 222pump irrigation 302

C. Risks

7.04 The technical risks associated with the proposed investments areminimal because they involve well-known and simple techniques. Theproject, however, faces a few other risks. First, low motivation and poorqualification of local staff may slow the pace of development. The risk isexpected to be minimized by substantial training, which has alreadystarted, combined with increasingly effective authority of the Governors.Second, assets created under the project may not be adequately maintainedbecause beneficiaries lose interest. Several measures are envisaged which

- 39 -

would reduce this risk under the proposed project. Intensive discussionbetween beneficiaries and field technical staff during identification andpreparation phases and a development contract between beneficiaries andlocal authorities laying down all the responsibilities and obligationswould ensure their commitment. In addition, works would be designed insuch a way that maintenance would not require skills, materials and toolsnot readily available at the village level. Finally, coordination withother donors and NGOs may prove difficult. This risk would be reduced byregular coordination meetings to be held by the Government and by theorganizational study to recommend how the harmonization of the rules andprocedures imposed by various donors would be achieved.

VIII. AGREEMENTS REACHED AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Sd1 During negotiations, assurances on the following major pointswere obtained:

(a) for selection of small rural operations to be financed, thecriteria would be that the project be:

(i) directly productive farming activities in conformity withnational and provincial development strategy; (ii) financiallyself-supportive; (iii) within the project area; (iv) requested byand manifestly in the interest of a group or groups of producers;sv) easily maintained by beneficiaries; and (vi) environmentallysound. Beneficiaries would have to make a downpayment of 5X on aCapital Replacement Account if there are medium term assets, andexcept for self-standing soil erosion control works and villagenurseries, would be required to reimburse costs of materialsfinanced by the project for wells construction (paras. 2.04 and2.05);

tb) consultants with qualifications and experience acceptable to IDAwould be recruited following IDA guidelines. (para. 3.08);

(c) the project would establish and maintain separate project-relatedaccounts in accordance with sound and accepted accountingprinciples and practices (para. 4.13);

(d) three financial controllers in the provinces and bookkeepers ineach district would be recruited not later than October 1, 1988(para. 4.13);

(e) the project-related accounts would be audited annually duringproject implementation by independent auditors acceptable to IDAand financed by the Project. Audited financial statements andreports of such scope and in such detail as IDA may reasonablyrequest, would be submitted to IDA within six months of the endof each fiscal year. The auditor's report would include astatement on the adequacy of the accounting system and internal

- 40 -

controls on whether or not TDA funds have been used for theirintended purposes. The report will also confirm that SOEssubmitted as justification for disbursement under categories (1)through (6) of para. 3.10 correctly reflect detailed records keptby the Project (para. 4.14).

(f) the Government would submit to IDA annual progress reportsincluding budgeted and actual expenditures, the progress achieveditn the preparation and execution of SROs, and the status of eachCapital Replacement Account (para. 4.15);

(g) as a condition for the provision of medium term assets, includinganimals, to any group of producers, the group would open and payinto its Capital Replacement Account an amount of at least St ofthe delivered cost of such assets, and such payments would beverified by the DDRM unit (para. 4.17);

(h) the DDRM unit would examine at least twice a year the status ofeach Capital Replacement Account and in the case of delinquency,is4ue the necessary instructions for all appropriate measures tobe taken to ensure that all arrears are paid promptly (para.4.18);

ii) the Government would submit to IDA for information annualprovincial programs of SROs not later than August 31 of each year(para. 4.21);

(j) the Government would convene regular meetings at least once ayear, with local representatives of the donors involved inSRO-type operations, to discuss their investment programs, rulesand procedures, evaluation of past activities, etc., in order toimprove coordination and programming (para. 4.24); and

(k) upon completion of the organizational study, the Government wouldreview with IDA the recommendation of the study and not laterthan December 31, 1990, the Government would carry out thoserecommendations approved by IDA (para. 4.25).

8.02 Conditions of effectiveness would be that:

(a) the project accounting system and procedures satisfactory to IDAbe established and that the Financial Director be recruited(para. 4.13); and

(b) the Government has presented to IDA the first year program ofSROs to be financed after project start-up (para. 4.25).

8.03 Conditions of disbursement would be that:

(a) for civil works and supplies, and agricultural inputs, theGovernment presents drafts of the framework agreement and thedevelopment contract satisfactory to IDA (para. 4.10); and

- 41 -

(b) for goods and services for unidentified SRoe, if annualprovincial programs include SROs which are other than the modelsalready identified, DDRM submits a representative model to thetechnical committee which invites local representatives of IDAand the Swiss Development Cooperation to assess the new model andensure that it meets the selection criteria (para. 4.21).

8.04 With the indicated assurances and conditions, the project wouldbe suitable for an IDA credit equivalent to SDR 7.1 million (US$9.3million) to the Republic of Niger.

-42 - ANNEX 2 - 1Page 1 of 2

NIGER

SMALL RURAL OPERATIONS PROJECT

DRAFT TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

A. Financial Director

1. Under the direction of the Project Coordinator, the expert wouldhave primary responsibilities for:

(a) establishing and maintaining separate project-related accounts byconsolidating the central and districts accounts;

(b) processing of tender documents and supervision of all procurementprocedures for expenditures not related to direct investments ofSROs;

(c) ensuring that proper accounts are kept of each district programof SROs by bookkeepers and that adequate justification forexpenditures is submitted regularly from the districts throughthe provinces to the project management unit;

(d) regularly supervising the financial controllers at the provinceswho would in turn carry out ex-post checking of expenditures madeat district levels;

(e) preparing withdrawal applications and Statements of Expenditureand maintaining disbursement records;

(f) monitoring secondary accounts at the districts and replenishingthem as necessary from the Central Special Account; and

(g) training a local accountant in the project management unit,financial controllers and bookkeepers.

2. The qualifications and experience of the Financial Director wouldbe:

(a) a post-graduate degree (or its equivalent) or membership in arecognized professional lobby evidencing formal knowledge ofmodern accounting theory and practice in accordance withgenerally accepted international standards;

(b) at least ten years' professional experience, preferably in acountry using the OCAM or French accounting plans in Africa;

(c) experience with data processing on computers; and

(d) fluency in French.

43 ANNEX 2-1Page 2 of 2

B. Development Volunteers (each in the Niamey, Dosso and TahouaProvinces)

1. Under the direction of the Provincial Directors of Planning,three development volunteers would have responsibilities for:

(a) assisting the Provincial Directors of Planning in coordinatingthe preparation/appraisal/execution of the Provincial SROprograms;

(b) providing technical assistance to district staff in preparationwork through frequent field visits;

(c) participating in appraisal of SROs; and

(d) identifying needs for complementary studies.

2. The qualifications and experience of the development volunteerswould be:

(a) a university degree in agronomics, regional economic planning orrural engineering as basic training;

(b) complementary training in cooperative management, ecology andpedagogy;

(c) five years' experience in rural development or planning; and

(d) fluency in French.

1116EROE1I O PEITITES OPER*IIOhS K KVELOPPIEUET E L_

Project CaqIpfiots by Year

totals Includlng Coitiapmpes totals Including Coati -gueiesUif ' 000l (US$ ' 001

1961/1989 1989/t990 190/1991 1991/92 1992/19J3 Total 1981/1989 1989/1990 t990/199t 1991/1902 1992/1993 Total*nsssionoxmt. 9s.:2sasu n::s.sXs 392:s::: ::::5: . nszsu ass:sss S::::sz.n san::::: cnn::: .s a::::::::: a:sx:s:: razz::z

A. PTIIES OPEIRATIONS DE DVELOPPENFXT ItUAL 306.488 3t9.51 424.7t4 626.8S1 653.265 2.333.0t8 1.041 1.084 1.440 2.125 2.214 7.909G. M7ITE Kt uStIO 140.318 08 ON8 Itt.U42 138.654 121.374 819.946 476 368 376 470 411 2.102C. APlUI AUX SEVICES TECNUIWES 2M5.095 1t0,147 29t 752 282.28 295. 65 1,285.478 865 S43 989 959 1.002 4.358D. PSUATION 101.232 85.14S 79.939 63.412 61.640 3S1,370 343 289 271 215 209 1.32tE. ETUDES 480.437 27,399 28. 608 29.996 31.572 5t8.012 1.56t 93 97 102 10t 1.959

Total PlUlECT COSTS 1.265.570 700.401 936,605 1.141.771 1.163.508 5.207.855 4.290 2.374 3.175 3.870 3.944 17.654_Ut-st _::s ___._. as.n_ _. .... Soso _ .s_s.g.. .. ... __ss .a.. ...... X__. . 2ah ... ____s. .. s.._ _ _ . _ _ _ . .

I b~st IS. 198? 21:20

I

NIGEhP80.8T DE PEIITES OPER6ATIONS Of DVEtOPPENENT RUAL

Sw ory Accoue ts bY Ywr

Totals Including Continrqg c." lotatl ll*tuding Contipmlie.sIFCrF 'oOtl UISS lo")

....... ... .. ... ........ .......... .. . .. .,,.,,.......................... ------------------------------------------

1981/1988 1989/1990 1990/1991 1991/1M 19992/1993 TotWl 191/1989 1989/1990 1990/1991 t1991 9M 19921t993 lotalsS*a.*s*tS zs.a *tus#%assta:.. ssszs ssssssssss sssssssas S tssssS. gstts2 xsttttst ss ts2sags alt2s:sss a.nsssnt .:ss.s.

1. INmSTHENT COSTS

A. GENtE CIVIt 202.257 210.424 289.609 306.338 297.532 1.306 .s0 688 713 982 1.038 I.009 4.430a. vtiNCUIES 107.377 - 70.298 79.010 15.636 313.252 364 - 238 271 IS9 1.091C. EqutouEtiul

N7OT1'SI 7.045 7. 155 7.289 7.46? 7.752 36.688 24 24 25 25 26 124EOttlPEtNtE BUREAU 24.985 - 7.133 - 32.118 85 - 24 - - 109

........ ....... .. ...... ... .. ........ .... ...... .... ... ....... ......... .. ... . .. .. .. ..... ...... ... ....

Sib-lotal EQUIPElENT 32.029 7. III 14.402 7.467 7. 752 68I so 109 24 49 25 26 233D. INUTS 6AgICOLfS 53. 191 55. 110 75. 1" 84.302 81.278 353. 049 80 16? 268 286 276 1. I97E. IMV&SISSNENITS NON I-DENTMIES 45.296 48.962 48.716 228.773 266.703 636,452 14 ts9 t6s 77S S04 2.157F. ASSISTANCE TECUNIUIt

......... ....... ...

ASSISTANCE TECMIUIf a LONG team 63.638 64.987 68.393 8. 490 71. 312 334.819 216 220 225 232 242 1. 13CONSULITNTS 47.285 28.9 73 29.569 10.178 S. 29 121.334 1SO 98 oo 35 t8 41t

.... ........ .. .... ................. ............. .......... ............. ..... ...... .... ..... . ......... .. ........ ... ... ... ... ......... ............ .......

S4-rotal ASSISTAICE TEOUI4UE 1 0.923 93.960 95.992 78.668 76.610 456. 153 376 319 325 267 260 1.546GC E1U1 S5 460.437 27. 9 28. 08 29.998 31.572 57S.012 1.561 93 97 102 l07 1. 95.v. ntSItlER s.s8t - - - sSst t9 * - * - s

............... .... ..... .... . ...... ......... .. . ... ... ... ... .. .......... ......... ... ... . .. . ... ... ... .. ... ..... ......... ........... ...

Total Im ESthENT COSTS 1.017.790 44t.009 626.795 A8S.486 817.083 3.716.184 3.450 1.495 2.12S 2.764 2.770 12.604.s4*3=s:t .. .... a ...s.........lsSZlttS ........&f . ..zA-SS ...3S SS....... *Az-...st ~a. .i.... .. *..4.....~ *.

It. RECtMN 1 COSIS cs............

A. PtNSONSit LOCAI. ....... ......

PERSONNI lOCAL IONCTIONAIRE It, 124 18. tSt 29.059 30.802 34. 6 129. 792 58 62 99 104 1I? 440PERSONNEL tOCAt CONTRACtUEt 43.339 45929 52.712 51,875 59.228 257.094 147 156 179 to6 201 872

S,tilolaI PERSONNEl IOCAt 60.463 64.091 81. 7 .677 93.884 31 6.886 20s 217 277 4 318 1.311s. FAtlS N FONCTIONNENENt VENICULES 61.483 85,459 t19.764 126.019 132.945 545.670 276 290 406 427 451 . 850C. IRMAS Of IINCTIOUINFmtN FOMItION 53. 947 56. 174 50.340 b3.234 56.342 270.036 1i63 9o 171 180 l9o jtS0. LIRES FrS DE FNClOUiINENI 22.333 23.488 27.103 28.146 30.138 131.610 76 so 92 97 102 446E. AUDIT 29.553 30.1t0 30. A32 31.S07 33. tl7 1ss. 48 too 102 lOs W08 1:2 527

.. .. ,___. .__. ... ...... _._,,_... - --.- , ....... .......... ............. ..... ..... _ ........... ....... _... .... ..... _. .. _._._._........_ . .... .... ...

total RicIJU1Nt t COStS 247. 779 259. 392 309.8tO 326.26b 346.425 1.489. 691 840 879 1. o0o . 106 1. 174 5.0bo.-. :s ... :S..# C.2St ::S:.s:. ::::::::.. .. ;..s:-s t. .s.Z .* .. s.s*hs: ssst:.s:. ::s..s.. ::: -ss:z:t Z-::;:-.: *sf:s;:

total PIOtcI COSIS 1.26b.570 700.401 936.605 1.141.771 t.163.508 5.207.855 4.290 2.374 3. t7b 3.870 3.944 11. 654*.. sa:m ssn*s st : g, as;.t: s ;sn.s3 .s8:*s s: t3t* t tt.:: 3;ns: sstss tZ,t.

t _veet 19. 1987 21 20

x

t4

- 46 - Annex-3-3

NIGERSMALL RURAL OPERATIONS PROJECT

Estimated Schedule of Disbursements

Fiscal yearlsemester Disbursements cumulative All Regions(ending on dates shown) Semester cumulative disbursement agricultural

credit profile (2)(US$106) (2)

FY 1988June 30, 1988 1/ 0 0 0 1

FY 1989December 31, 1988 2/ 2.2 31 2.2 24 4June 30, 1989 0.3 2.5 27 10

FY 1990December 31, 1989 0.4 2.9 31 19June 30, 1990 0.5 3.4 37 29

FY 1991December 31, 1990 0.5 3.9 42 40June 30, 1991 0.7 4.6 49 51

FY 1992December 31, 1991 0.8 5.4 58 61June 30, 1992 0.8 6.2 67 70

FY 1993December 31, 1992 0.8 7.0 75 78June 30, 1993 0.7 7.7 83 85

FY 1994December 31, 1993 0.7 8.4 90 91June 30, 1994 0.4 8.8 95 95

FY 1995December 31, 1994 0.3 9.1 98 99June 30, 1995 0.2 9.3 100 100

1/ Expected date of Board Presentations February 198821 Expected date of Credit Effectivenesss July 19883/ Includes refinancing of PPF (US$1.5 million) and initial deposit into Special Account

(US$0.7 million)

Annex 4-147 Page 1 of 3

Ir -~~~~~

L------<--111Eli @ L______Et§.IXl| g g g tj~~~~~UiiIIIi',~~~~

-48 -Annex 4-1Page 2 of 3

Id I

011 1~~~~

II@

I -

- 49 -Annex 6-1Page 1 of 4

FIN NWl ono 8

vithout rojict nith proJect A/et dry total et dry total

Ar cultivated by famr (1/100 h)rice 400 4.00sugar cm 0.50 1.50Idt potaton 1.50 3.50orghui/cpe 20.00caava 10.00 10.00onions 1.00 3.0sorghcowpa irrigate 12.00"izen. 4.00grounuts 3.00veetalein 3.00fodder 5.00total 24.00 13.00 24.00 25.00

Yields lkg/ha)ric s00 2500sar cone 9000 20000swet potatoe 10000 18000sorghu 400COpWS 150cassava 8000 19000mins. 1500 25000swghu irrigted 2500c.w"s irrigated 60Mize 2500gronnuts 1000.ebebles 15000

fodder 80

Production (kg)rice 32 0 0 100 0sugr cm 0 45 0 0 300set ptatoe 0 150 0 0 630sorghm 0 0 0 300 0CoUp" 30 0 0 72 0cassiva 0 800 0 0 1800oaions 0 150 0 0 750mize 0 0 0 0 100grdnuts 0 0 0 30 0vegtables 0 0 0 0 450fodder 0 0 0 400 0

Bross Value of Production ICFAF)rice 2240 0 7000 0sgar cane 0 1125 0 7500set potatoe 0 9450 0 39690orghum 4160 0 1600 0coop" 2400 0 5760 0casva 0 41600 0 93600

-50- Annex 6-1

Page 2 of 4

.1gm. 0 9300 0 46500.1:e 0 0 0 100grmgindhuts 0 0 2100 0vegtabls 0 0 0 22100fodd 0 0 4000 0

Total Orss Valt of PrWduction 300 61475 70215 34460 214NP0 249350

Productio Couts (CfAfl$"ds 1000 4044fertilizers 7a2pesticids 7350maintesnan and oparations bI 20 1U413total 3500 36033

bet Vainl of Production per Year (CFAF) 6615 211317

Labor Requirmoent landays)cultivation 29 44

ater lifting 119 65ater distribution 119 261total 267 372

Net Valu per W anday (CFAF) 250 5S8

ai Situation of fourth year since start-up of production.bi Without project: replacemnt of caleassm, cords, and mall tools.

With project: maintenance of & coment-lined aell, 'delou, irrigtion basins, PVC pipes,and anial and replacement of smull tools.

Annex 6* APage 3 ol! 4

FD UNmT MORL W liUlTIE

uithot orojKt oith project A/at dry total et dry totAl

_~~~~~~~ 0e . a..

rAS Cultivated by Ferw 11100 ha)sorghuu/cop 21.5 2.5sorgholcoupeas irrigated 15maie Scauava 10 4sut potatoes 7.5 2.5vegtable 2.5 2.5 3.5 7.5anio 1 1 I 3.5ptatoe 0.5 2.5foddr, 3total 25 21.5 25 25

Yieids (kg/ba)swrghe 400 1000coup"s 150 300i-gimu irrigated 2500

coupes irrigate 600maize .2500cassua 8000 16000"et potaton 10000 18000vegetables 000 7000 6000 15000onions 12000 15000 18000 25000potatoe lO00 25000fodder 6000

Production (kg)sorghum 0 40 0coupes 32 0 98 0

izn 0 0 0 125clssava 0 800 0 720snt potatoes 0 750 0 450vegetabie 150 175 260 1125onions 120 150 180 675potatoe 0 50 0 625fodder 0 0 240 0

Bross Valu of Prduction (CF*F)sorghum 4472 0 20800 0coupas 2580 0 7600 0"its 0 0 0 6375cassava 0 41600 0 3740sut potatoe 0 47250 0 28350vgetable 7500 6750 14000 56250onions 7440 9300 11160 54250pottoe 0 3200 0 40000fodder 0 0 2400 0

Total Grass Value of Production 2192 110100 132092 56160 22265 27625

Production Costs (CfAF)

- 52 -Annex 6-1Page 4 of 4

Mud. 1250 134fertilils 2500 1119puticun 7500mintance as operations 55421mrtization of pups 23125total 6750 11593

let Value of Prouction per Yar ICFAF) 123342 129

Labor .quilrumt (mndys)cultivation 49 water liftiq 204 5wter distribtion 204 275total 441 345

I 4

bt Value er PAlny ICFWI 248 473

ai Situation of fourth year since start-up of production.bi Nithaut projects rplpuhunt of calebasses cors ad sull tools.

Vith projeKt: muintunmce of a cuo nt-lined well, delou', irrigation basins, PVC pipesand animul diesl for a pup and replacment of small tools.

- 53 -

Annex 6-2

NICERSMALL RURAL OPERATIONS PROJECT

GOVERNMENT PROJECT RELATED CASH LO !/

PY0 PY1 PY2 PY8 PY4 PYs PY6-10 PY11-20 PY21-401987/88 1988/89 1989/ W 1990/91 1091/92 1992/98 1993/94- 1998/09- 2007/9-

197/09 2004/07

;oures/Inf lowIDA Credit 448 890 888 446 548 565 - - -

Swiss Grnnt - 890 888 446 648 668 - - -

Total 448 780 666 890 1,088 1,106 - - -

kppIi I.ti on/OutflowProject Net Costs k 448 628 700 937 1,142 1,164 886 886 886

Debt Servite IDAComitment chars &servico charges e/ - 16 18 18 19 20 20 10 8

PrincTpal payment !/ - - - - - - - 64 108

Total application 443 839 716 956 1,161 1,184 406 458 W0i

Surplus (deficit) 0 (69) (60) (86) (75) (78) (406) (458) (602)

I/ In current terms throughout the project, thereafter, In constant 1993 terms. Based on 6-year implementationscheduleF/ Prom 1908 onwords recurrent expenditures plus amortization' of vehicles over three years and motor cyclesover two yars

/ Standard IDA termsT iwo percent per year of the principal amount during PY11-20 and 4S per year during the remaining period.

- 54 -

Annex 7-1

NIGER

SMALL RURAL OPERATIONS PROJECT

ECONOMIC COSTS, BENEFITS AND RATES OF RETURN

A. Key Parameters used in Economic Analysis

Output Prices: (a) Economic prices of rice, sorghum and maize, are basedon the Bank's commodity price projection made onFebruary 5, 1987 up to 1995.

(b) Economic price oS firewood is estimated at CFAF 40/kgor CFAF 10,000/m as established in the Staff AppraisalReport of the Second Energy Project.

(c) All the other output prices (cassana, sweet potatoes,potatoes, onions, vegetables, sugar cane, cowpeas,groundnuts, and wood poles) are based on observedmarket prices, adjusted to take into accounttransportation and marketing costs and losses.

Input Prices: Assuming that Niger would import fertilizer frominternational markets, import parity fertilizer pricesare estimated for urea and TSP, using Bank's commodityprice projection made on February 5, 1987 up to 1995.For NPK, its import parity prices are estimated basedon urea, TSP and potassium chloride.

Labor: Opportunity cost of farm labor at CFAF 300 per dayduring off-peak dry season.

Replacementof equipment: Cement-lined wells: every 20 years; delou: every 10

years; irrigation basins and PVC pipes: every 10 years;pumps: every 4 years; agricultural tools: every 5years.

Costs: (a) With project costs include only direct costs ofinvestment and operations but exclude costs related topreparation/supervision and extension services providedby the administration.

(b) Without project costs include labor required to digtraditional wells every year.

B. Economic Analyses (see tables)

Model Bottomland

Model Pump Irrigation

Annex 7-1Page ' Ur 6

08/11/87 ECONO8IC ANALYSIS OF #ODEL BOTTWLAIID a/

PYO PYI PY2 PY3 PY4 PY5 PY6 PY7 PY3 P99 PYIO PYII PY12 P013 P014 PYIS PY16 PY17 PYlE PY19 PY20

A. BENEFITSProduction (kg)

rice 1920 0 3600 3600 3600 6000 6000 6000 6000 bOOO 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 b 0i b600 6000 6000sugar cane 2703 0 9000 9000 9000 18000 18000 18000 18000 18000 18 000 18000 18000 18000 19000 1800Q0 loQ 0sooo 1800l 18000sweet potatoes 9000 0 19000 18000 1900' 37800 37800 37800 37800 37900 37800 37800 37800 37800 37800 37800 37800 3780' 37800 37800 37800sorghuB 4800 0 13500 13500 13500 18000 18000 18000 18000 8000 18000 1000 18001 18000 18000 10000 18000 10000 18000 8000 18000

co*peas 1800 0 3600 3600 3600 4320 4320 437J 4320 4320 4320 4320 4320 4320 4320 4320 4320 4320 4320 4320 4320cassava 48000 0 90000 90000 90000 108000 109000 108010 1090000 10800 108000 108000 108000 100 000 108000 108000 108000 108000 10 8000 108000onions 9000 0 24000 24000 24000 45000 45000 45000 45000 45000 45000 45000 45000 45000 45000 45000 45000 45000 45000 45000 45000

maize 0 0 2700 2700 2700 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 600 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000groundnuts 0 0 960 940 960 18000 1800 1800 1800 IO 180 1800 1800 19008100 1800 1800 1800 1800 I OO 1800vegetables 0 0 12000 12000 12000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000

fodders 0 0 9000 9000 9000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000

firewood /d) 0 0 0 0 0 62 4 4 4 71 4 4 4 71 4 4 4 71 4 4 4

wood poles (no.) 0 0 0 0 0 480 0 0 0 480 0 0 0 480 0 0 0 480 0 u 0

Incremental Production (kg)

rice 0 -1920 1880 1680 1680 4080 4080 4080 4000 4080 4080 48 4080 4080 4080 4080 4080 4080 4090 4080 408O

sugar cane 0 -2700 6300 6300 6300 15300 15300 15300 15300 15300 15300 15300 15300 15300 15300 15300 15300 15300 15300 15300 15300

sweet Potatoes 0 -9000 9000 9000 9000 28800 29800 28800 28800 28800 288O0 28800 2M88O 28800 28800 28800 28800 28800 28000 28800 28000sorghum 0 -4800 8700 8700 700 13200 13200 13200 13200 13200 13200 13200 13200 13200 13200 13200 13208 1320 13200 13200 13200coupeas 0 -1800 1800 1800 1800 2520 2520 2520 2520 2520 2520 2520 2520 2520 2520 2520 2520 2520 2520 2520 2520

cassava 0 -48000 42000 42000 42000 60000 60000 60000 60000 60000 60000 60000 60000 60000 60000 60000 60000 600 60000 60000 60000onions 0 -9000 15000 15000 15000 36000 36000 36000 36000 36000 36000 36000 36000 36000 36000 36000 36000 36000 36000 36000 36000

oaize 0 0 2700 2700 2700 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000groundnuts 0 0 960 960 960 1800 1800 1800 1900 1800 1900 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1800 1900 1800

vegetables 0 0 12000 12000 12000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000 27000fodders 0 0 9000 9000 9000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000 24000

fireeood id) 0 0 0 0 0 62 4 4 4 71 4 4 4 71 4 4 4 71 4 4 4

wood poles (no.) 0 0 0 0 0 480 0 0 0 480 0 0 0 480 0 0 0 480 0 0 0

Prices (CFAF/kg)

rice 71 71 72 75 78 79 79 79 79 80 so 80 80e 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 0

sugar cane 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 75 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25sweet potatoes 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63

sorghum 56 52 54 58 63 63 63 63 63 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 64

cowpeas 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 79 75 79 79 79 79 79 79

cassava 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52onions 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 42 62 62 b2 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 62maize 55 51 53 56 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 b1 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61

groundnuts 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 65

vegetables 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 - 50 50 50fodders 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

firewood (CFAF/M3) 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 0000 10(00 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000wood poles ICFAF/no.) 500 500 500 500 NO5 500 500 500 50 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500

56 - Annex 7-'Page 2 of li

Incremental Benetits [ 000 CFAF)

rice 0 -136 121 126 131 322 322 322 322 326 326 326 326 326 326 326 326 326 326 326 326

sugar cane 0 -68 158 158 158 393 383 383 383 383 393 383 383 383 383 383 383 383 383 383 383

sweet Potatoes 0 -567 567 567 567 1814 1914 1814 1814 1914 1814 1814 1814 1914 1814 1814 1814 1814 1814 1814 1814

surghfi 0 -250 470 505 549 832 832 832 832 845 845 845 845 845 845 845 845 845 845 845 845

coupeas 0 -142 142 142 142 199 199 199 199 199 199 199 I 199 I 199 199 I 199 199 199

cassava 0 -2496 2184 2184 2184 3120 3120 3120 3120 3120 3120 3120 3120 3120 3120 3120 3120 3120 3120 3120 3120

onions 0 -559 930 930 930 2232 2232 2232 2232 2232 2232 2232 2232 2232 2232 2232 2232 2232 2232 2232 2232

maize 0 0 143 151 165 366 366 366 3b6 366 366 366 366 366 366 366 366 366 366 366 366

groundnuts 0 0 62 62 62 117 11? 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117 117

vegetables 0 0 600 600 600 1350 1350 1350 1350 1350 1350 1350 1350 1350 1350 1350 1350 1350 1350 1350 1350

fedders 0 0 90 90 90 240 240 240 240 240 240 240 240 240 240 2l0 240 240 240 240 240

firevood (CFAF/dl 0 0 0 0 0 620 40 40 40 710 40 40 40 710 40 40 40 710 40 40 40

wood poles CFAF/no.j 0 0 0 0 0 240 0 0 0 240 0 0 0 240 0 0 0 240 0 0 0

Total 0 -4217 5467 5515 5577 11835 11015 11015 11015 11942 11032 11032 11032 11942 11032 11032 11032 11942 11032 11032 11032

P. COSTS

WITH PROJECT

Investment 1000 CFAF)

Nells 130) 9273delous (301 1914 1914 1914 1740

oxen 130) 2400metal irrigation basins 190) 1980 1980PVC pipes (2100.1 4158 4158

agricultural materials 2100 2100 2100 2100

plants 565Total 22390 0 0 0 0 4014 0 0 0 0 10152 0 0 0 0 '3840 0 0 0 0

Operating Costs i1000 CFAF)

maintenance of works 0 955 955 955 955 9SS 955 955 955 955 955 955 955 955 955 955 9 955 955 955

fertilizersurea suantities (kg) 1785 1785 1785 1740 1740 1740 1740 1740 1740 1740 1740 1740 1740 93 93 93 93 °3 93

prices (CFAF/kg) 92 104 116 117 117 118 119 119 122 125 128 132 134 134 134 134 134 134 134

value 164 186 207 204 204 205 207 207 212 218 223 230 233 12 12 12 12 12 12

TSP quantities (kg) 490 480 480 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 720

prites (CFAF/kgl 80 82 84 86 87 88 89 91 91 92 92 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93

value 38 39 40 62 63 63 64 66 66 66 66 67 67 67 67 67 67 67 67

8PK quantities (kg) 5190 5190 5190 5820 5820 5820 5820 5820 5820 5820 5820 5820 5820 5820 5820 5820 5820 5820 5820

prites ICFAF/kgl 76 82 87 88 89 89 90 91 92 94 95 97 98 98 98 98 98 98 9B

value 394 426 452 512 518 518 524 530 535 547 553 565 570 570 570 570 570 570 570

total 1 000 CFAFI 597 651 6SS 778 784 787 795 802 813 831 842 861 870 650 650 650 650 650 650

seeds 242 242 242 242 242 242 242 242 242 242 242 242 242 242 242 242 242 242 242

oestlcides 401 401 401 441 441 441 441 441 441 441 441 441 441 441 441 441 440 441 441

Total Operating costs 3383 3383 3383 337B 3378 3378 3378 3378 3378 3378 3378 3378 3378 1711 1731 1731 1731 1731 1731

Labor isardavsl

we! constfuctior 3300Cultivatlon 2901 2901 2901 3153 3153 3153 3153 3153 3153 3153 3153 3153 3153 3153 3153 3153 3153 3153 3153

57 Annex 7-J.Page 3 of 6

water lifting 1641 1641 l41 1956 1956 1956 19-6 1950 1956 1956 1950 195t 1956 1956 1956 1956 1956 1956 1956water distribution 33128 1312.8 13128 1!648 15648 15648 S1o48 1548 1564e 15648 15648 15648 15648 15648 15048 15640 1564S 15648 15648tree plant. maint. 6 cutting 200 3 5 3 850 5O 5' so 83 IO 50 50 850 5v 50 50 850 50 50 5Ototal 3500 17673 17673 17673 21607 2-407 208107 208(07 21107 20807 20807 20807 2!607 20807 20807 20107 21617 20807 20807 20807

Value of Labor (at CFFSOO/eaondayl 1050 5302 5302 5302 6482 t242 6242 6242 6482 6242 6242 6242 6482 6242 6242 6242 6402 6242 6242 6242

TOTAL COSTS WITH PROJECT 23440 8685 8685 8685 9861 13634 9620 9620 9860 9620 19772 9620 9860 9620 7973 11913 8213 7973 7973 7973

WITHOUT PRDJECT COSTS ('000 CFAF)

Investient

traditional wells 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480 480calebasse & cords 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 i20 120 120 121 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120agricultural oaterials 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120total 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 720 721 720 720 720

Coerating Costs

Aaintenance of works 68 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 61 60 60 60 60 61 60 61 60seeds 60 60 60 60 60 60 t1 O1 60 to 60 60 60 613 60 60 60 60 60 60total 120 120 1201 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120 120

Labor (eandays)

well construction 040 840 840 840 840 840 840 840 840 846 940 840 840 840 040 841 840 840 840 840cultivation 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 20131 20131 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013water lifting 7158 7158 7150 7158 71S8 71S8 7153 7158 7150 7158 ?158 7158 7158 7158 7158 7150 7158 7158 7158 7158water distributior. 7158 7158 7158 7158 7158 7156 7158 71N6 7158 7156 7158 7158 7150 7158 7158 7158 7158 7158 7158 7158total 17169 17169 17169 17169 17169 17169 17169 17169 17169 17169 17169 Pl169 17169 17169 17169 171u9 17169 17169 17169 17169

Value of Labor (at CFAF300Ieanday) 5151 S151 5151 5151 5151 5151 5151 5151 51l1 S151 5151 5151 515I 5151 5151 5151 5151 5151 5151 511

TOTAL COSTS hWTHOUT PROJECT 5991 5991 599 5991 5991 5991 5991 5991 5991 5991 5991 5991 5991 5991 5991 5991 5991 5991 5991 5991

INCREMENTAL COSTS 17449 2694 2694 2694 3869 7643 3629 3629 -N69 3629 13781 3629 3869 3629 1982 5822 2222 1982 1982 1982

hET INCREMENTAL 8ENEFITS -21666 2773 2821 2893 7966 3372 7386 7386 8073 7403 -2749 7403 8073 7403 9051 5210 9720 9050 9050 9050

al Typical Werimeter of 15 ha, vith one well per O.S hi 130 wells) eoauloed with delou, 60 beneficiaries ;er oeriinter.

guess 0.2IRR

0.22

- 58 _Annex 7-1

08;12187 ECNIOM0C 4NALYSIS OF MODEL PUMP IRP1IAT:ON a! Page 4 of 6

PYO PYI PY2 P13 PY4 PY3 PYb PY? Pye Fv9 PflO P1ll PY12 0413 PY14 PyI PY;b P0!7 PvlO PYI9 PY20

A. BENEFITSProduction (kg)

s5rg0hus 0192 0 15120 15120 15120 2B8OP 28800 286OO 2880 2&8800 280 0 8 28800 29800 2seo8 28800 28800 28800 2880) 28800 28800 28800cowpeas 2322 0 43210 4320 4320 7020 1020 7020 7)20 71020 1120 7)20 7020 7020 7020 7020 7020 7020 7020 7020 7020eaaze o0 0 27v0 210 2700 9000 90 000h000 90 00 000 9000 9300 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 40 9000cassava 57600 o 81000 81200 81O80 51840 51840 50840 01840 51840 51840 51840 51840 51840 51840 52840 51840 51840 521840 51840 51840sweet potatoes 54000 0 43200 43200 43200 32400 32400 32400 32400 32400 32400 32400 32400 32400 32400 32400 32400 32400 32400 32400 32400vegetables 23400 0 48600 46000 48600 10 116 0 101160 10100 101100 101100 IQ1160 11100 10110b) 101100 liOltO 1h010 llbO1Q 0 101160 101160 10100Onions 19440 0 46800 40900 46800 70960 75960 759600 7590 75960 75Q60 '5960 71904 75900 75960 75960 7i960 75960 75960 75960 75960potatoes 3600 0 14400 14400 14400 45000 45000 45000 45000 45000 4000 S 45000 45000 4500' 45000 45000 45000 4S000 45000 40000 45000fodders 0 0 5400 5400 5400 17280 17280 1260 17280 17288 17280 17280 17290 17290 17280 17280 17280 17280 17280 17280 17280firewood (3) 0 0 0 o 0 ° b 9 9 9

7C 9 9 0 7b 9 9 9 76 9 9 9wood poles Ino.) 0 0 0 0 0 480 0 0 0 480 0 0 0 480 0 0 0 480 0 0 8

Ircreaental Production (kg)

scrgua -6192 8928 8s928 928 22608 22608 22608 22008 22608 22608 22608 22008 22608 22608 22608 22608 22608 22008 22608 22608coepeas -2322 1998 1998 1998 4698 4698 4698 4609 4698 4698 4698 4698 4698 4698 4698 4908 4048 4098 4608 0098maize 0 2700 2700 2700 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9 9000 91000 9 800 9000 QOO 9000 9000 9ooo 9000 9000cassava -57600 23400 23400 23400 -5760 -5760 -5760 -5760 -5760 -5760 -5760 -5760 -5760 -5760 -5760 -5760 -5760 -5760 -5760 -5760sweet potatoes -54000 -20800 -10800 -10800 -2160 -21600 -21600 -21600 -2i600 -21600 -21600 -22000 -21600 -21000 -21600 -21600) -21600 -21000 -21600 -21600vegetables -23400 25200 25200 25200 77760 77760 77760 77702 77760 77760 77760 77760 77760 77760 77760 77760 77760 77760 77760 77760onions -19440 27360 27360 27360 06520 56520 06520 50520 !6520 50320 56520 56520 56520 56520 50520 56520 50020 56520 50620 56520eotatoes -3600 10800 10800 10800 41400 41400 41400 41400 41400 41400 41400 41400 41400 41400 41400 41400 41400 41400 41400 41400fodders 0 5400 5400 5400 17280 17280 17280 17280 17280 17280 17280 17280 17280 17280 17280 17280 17280 17280 17230 17280fireawood (3) 0 o 00 66 9 9 9 70 9 9 9 76 9 9 70 9 9 9wood poles InG.) 0 0 0 0 480 8 0 0 460 0 0 0 480 0 0 0 480 0 0 0

Prices CFA0F/kg)

sor00us 54 58 63 63 63 63 63 b6 04 04 04 64 64 64 64 64 64 64 04 04Isepeas 79 79 79 79 79 70 79 79 79 70 79 -9 '9 79 79 79 79 79 79 79oaize 53 56 61 61 61 61u 01 01 1 61 b1 61 01 61 01 01 01 61 01 01cassava 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52sweet potatoes 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 63 03 63 b3 03 63 o3 63 63 63 63 03 03vegetables 50 50 50 S 0 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 S0 50 50 00 50Onions 62 62 62 62 02 62 62 02 02 02 0 62 02 62 62 02 02 02 62 62potatoes 04 64 64 64 04 04 b4 64 04 64 04 04 e4 t4 14 b4 04 04 64 64fodders 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9 , 10 10 10 10 10 20 00 10fireetood t3) 10op0 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10900 10000 109Q0 30000 iQ000O W100 1000 10009 10000i 10000 10000 100OO 100I0 10000

wnod poles ao. 0001 5009 00 500 SO00 50 SO 500 0 SQ0 500 00 50v 500 00 500 s0o so0 500 500 50

Incresental Benefits ('000 CFF4)

sorg0e -334 518 562 502 1424 2424 1424 144' 1447 1447 1447 1447 1447 1441 1447 1447 1447 1447 1447 1447cotweas -183 156 158 158 371 371 7' Pl 37 771 7-1 31 377 -71 3727371 371 371 371 371*aize 0) 151 165 15 549 549 S40 54q '49 54c 544 54 4 54 4 040 546 549 549 049 549

cassaia -2995 1217 1217 1217 -300 -300 -300 -30?Q -30 -3(j -3b -20 -70: -30. -'00 -300 -300 -300 -3bQ -300sweet potatces -3402 -0aO -68Q -680 -1061 -1301 -iS3A -13Di -1Et1 -1:09 -1 -$'1 -:131 -13b1 -13s1 -13t1 -1361

59 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Annex 7-13 9 - Page 5 of 6

vegetables -1170 .. 0 b 60 Ui fiO ZUs9e "as?6 3a0 3913 3se1 -97 3 K39 7255 38S8 'e 379e 3te -s883a 88uvuona -1205 16f6at 4a96 1

9o 504 3 TO SOi 3: J ;.1 3 4: 3S 4 .J4 3 i4 35.4 35p4 357 3504 3504 3504 35p4

potatoes -230 691 691 091 26S1 P £50 :5v 2:Sv 7:5$ 2: 0 -ci .:5 k :f50 Q 2655 .5 2654 2ss0 2650fodders 0 54 ' 54 173 173 17D 7 ! ! i73 1V3 !73 17 773 173 173 173 173 173 173firewood (.3) 0 0 0 t 660 90 9 j To ; 9 C1 4 91'v 4f" 7b$i 90 70 gowood poles (no.) 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 24t i 0 24 0 0 24f 0 9

Total -9521 5065 5123 !123 1179Q 10999 10999 l11i.l i92! 1211 :;021 11i1 11921 ! 1:1 111 1191: 11-21 11011 !1011 1!011

9. COSTS

IITH PROJECT COSTS ('000 CFAFi

Ioveitaen7

oel.s !12) 3709pumps (121 2442 2442 2442 2442 2442tetal irrigation basins (84) 1848 1848PYC Pipes f3600m1 7128 4128agricultural materials 1260 1260 1260 12M0plants 585

Total 16972 0 0 0 2442 1260 0 2442 0 10236 0 2442 0 0 12MO 2442 0 0 0

Operating Costs

*aintenance of works 0 492 492 492 492 492 492 492 492 492 492 492 492 492 492 492 492 . 492 492 492ipfiffE!Jting coots 0 3330 3330 3330 3330 3330 3330 333. 3330 3330 3330 3330 3330 3330 3330 3330 3330 3330 3330 3330urea ouantities [kg) 0 1890 1890 1890 1773 1773 1773 1773 1773 1773 1773 1773 1773 1773 1773 1773 1773 1773 1773 1773

prices (CFAF/kg( 92 104 116 117 117? 1 119 119 122 !25 izo 132 134 134 134 134 134 134 134value 174 197 219 207 207 209 211 211 21b M2 227 234 238 238 238 238 238 238 238

TSP Quantities (kg) 0 632 632 632 1005 1005 1005 1009 005 1QOS 1005 1005 1005 1005 1005 1005 1001 1003 1005 1005Prices (CFAF(kg( 90 82 84 96 87 8e 89 91 91 92 92 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93value 51 52 53 D6 87 88 8; 91 91 92 52 93 93 93 93 93 93 93 93

NPK quantities (6g) 0 7434 7434 7434 7596 7596 7596 7596 7590 7596 '596 759b 7596 7596 7596 759b 7596 7596 7596 7596Prices (CFAF/kg) 76 82 87 88 89 89 90 91 92 94 95 97 98 9& 98 98 98 98 l8value 565 610 b47 668 676 676 6B4 b91 699 714 722 737 744 744 744 744 744 744 744

total fertilizers 789 858 919 9i2 971 974 e84 994 1007 1028 1041 1064 1075 1075 1075 1075 1075 1075 1075seeds 902 902 902 1349 1349 134? 1349 1349 1349 1349 1349 1349 1345 1349 1349 1349 1349 1349 1349sesticides 524 524 524 540 540 540 540 540 540 540 4'; 540 540 540 540 540 540 540 540

Total Joerating Costs 6037 6106 6167 6673 6682 6685 60a5 nIOS $71S 6739 6752 6775 6786 6786 6786 6786 6786 6786 j786

Labor (eandays)

#ell construction 1320cultivation 4147 4147 4147 4669 4669 46e9 466o 4609 4664 4169 4669 46t9 4669 4669 4669 4669 4U9 4669 4669eater lifting 294 294 294 330 330 *30 330 330 33. 33 330 .30 33) 330 330 330 330 330 330esater distribution 17658 17658 17t58 19818 19S81 19818 1%l19 19818 19C18 19818 19081 19848 1110 19018 19816 19318 19818 19818 19818tree plant. saint. & cutting 206 3 3 3 902 102 102 toz 0 12 1 1Q 9t22 Q 02 102 192 7u2 102 102 102total 1526 22102 22102 22102 25719 24919 24919 24019 :.?19 24019 24919 2a919 2-71q 24915 24919 24919 25719 .4919 24919 24919

Value of Labor tat CFAF300/Iandayl 458 6631 '631 5s31 771 47? ;47Mt 475 771e 767 74t 74?6 b4i6 '.71 4?o '4Th '47t 7716 741o 7476 7-76

TOTAL COST$ WITH PROJECT 17430 12660 12737 12798 1631 15418 14160 14171 let2e 14193 24' 1 14226 17433 14Q2 142C2 15522 16944 1i26. 142t2 1422

Annex 7-]

W NITHOUT PRO8ECT COSTS ('000 tFAF) Page 6 of 6

c Inaestaent

traditional vells 288 288 200 288 288 288 288 288 288 288 2 28 288 28 S 288 288 288 288 288 288 286calebas'c & cords 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 ;44 144 144 i44agricultural materials 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144 144total 576 576 576 576 576 576 576 576 576 576 57b 57t 576 576 576 5'6 576 576 !76 576

Operating Costs

saintenance of works 3b 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 3b 3b 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36seeds 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 g0 90 90 90 90 90fertilizers 100 100 180 ISO 180 180 i80 180 180 l8O 110 180 10 180 I8O 180 ISO 18E 1o0 180total 301 306 306 306 308 306 306 306 306 306 306 30b 306 306 306 306 306 306 306 306

Labor lmandays)

veil construction 504 504 504 504 504 504 504 504 504 504 504 504 504 504 504 504 504 504 504 504

cultivation 3503 3503 3503 3503 3503 3503 3503 3503 3503 3503 3503 3503 3503 3503 3503 3503 3503 3503 3503 3503water lifting 14850 14850 14050 14850 14850 14850 14850 14850 14850 14850 14850 14850 14850 14S5O 14850 14SSP 14850 14850 14850 14850

water distribution 14850 14850 14850 14850 14850 14850 14850 14850 14850 14850 14850 14850 14850 14850 14850 14850 1480 14850 14850 14850total 33707 33707 33707 33707 33707 33707 33707 53707 33707 33707 33?07 33707 33707 33707 33707 33707 33707 33707 33707 33707

Value of Labor (at CFAF300jeanday) 10112 10112 10112 10112 10112 10112 10112 10112 101122 10112 10112 10112 10112 10112 10112 10112 10112 10112 10112 IO1i2

TOTAL COSTS 8ITHOUT PROJECT 10994 10994 10994 10994 10994 10994 10994 10994 10994 10994 10994 10994 0994 10994 10994 10994 10994 10994 10994 10994

INCREMENTAL COSTS 6436 1674 1742 1804 5837 4424 3166 3177 5868 3199 13457 3234 5939 3268 3268 4528 5950 3268 3268 3268

NET INCREMENTAL BENEFITS -15957 3391 3380 3319 5962 6565 7822 7835 8053 7812 -2445 7778 5982 7743 7743 6483 5971 7743 7743 7743

a! Typical periseter of 18 ha, one well per 1.5 ha (12 wells per periseter) equipped with a portable pUmp. 36 beneficiaries per perimeter.

guess 0.3IRR0.296081

_____________h___________________________________________ IBRD 20646

N I G E R _ _ ~ 1> s

SMALL RURAL OPERATIONS PROJECT I ,-. --.PROJET DE PETITES OPERA TIONS i AdiAt A ID.''

DE DEVELOPPEMENT RURAL A .iPROJECT AREA I i

ZONE DU PROJET

Projeo Aroon Year, 1.S5 Dl,trkt CopiRolb i *'\7 Zooo dovI Md,h, A 1.15 CIaf.Io d'Arrodendort/ J ,',Proliot Area, Year. 3 5 S7 Deporlmerent CopRtob, ,1\ t r/Zoo, do Pro/f, Ara,oo 3.1 Chef.lle, do Opo,ref * \.. \ \ ~_ dPa Rood, t Notional Capitol I . ' 'Rovhs Ponroeto,bs CeRb tbah ., \ *. |pitol. N. . iE-d.h Rood, __ D it,k RoBado,k AGADE2 ITRooltofr., Too,. lhNt d'A,rodi-t ....... .A..

- Trock,_ Dodoneer pood G! \ h i

Plto Ilrt |o Odd. ' * o---- pyo. M."~~~~~loOad'Pra a,,d orO/

11.0. Yakm--od, / W .

t M A L I ,¢4 r A H 0 /A A

k - fEy4 X ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~AI ' IGE 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.1

:to- MALI~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ NIGERA

IBRD 20647

N I G E R _._'.SMALL RURAL OPERATIONS PROJECT

PROJET DE PETITES OPERATIONS IDE DEVELOPPEMENT RURAL - 7 A 1 D F 1

COMPARISON OF ISOHYETS | i ICOMPARAISON DES ISOHYETES |

Iwe. ^ ;W4tt85 0 1... Copttol. j a700- lQhy WI MO14M1i., 968.7985 OlU.d,,i.w

behrcs h Ul 7 19511982 Dcpc.- to Cltw | ,MI'1951 ' I1982 C*51 d. e ,wo..

* i.A / IC=wl;t.f Bdt BO iorlt .hGA0Z.

M 71. ,. d. see

\ 2 0 0 X j" i /'-~~20

t B U F K I N ^^~~~~~~oporiw BoN I onR IAdo ds0EE aX

A 7

* * BILCAISTORS E N IN wR_

PASO IsLES 150 I? ŽN~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2irnA/~~~~~~~~~0Uo.dotO6.*#iLI6 w,dO.OO

'00~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~w.oO~ l ... too~o4 300~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.mpfd0.V7B..0.~7,ooo6..60

v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~- fo sw 7 awo.ow000