Appraisal of Ayangba Agricultural Development Project Nigeriadocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/408691468100140745/pdf/multi-page.pdf · Appraisal of Ayangba Agricultural Development

Report No. 1369a-UNI

Appraisal of Ayangba AgriculturalDevelopment Project Nigeria

May 20, 1977

Agriculture Projects DepartmentWestern Atrica Regional Office

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Document of the World Bank

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipientsonly in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may nototherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

Currency Unit = Naira (N)US$1 = N. 0.617

N I = US$1.62

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

Unless otherwise stated, all weights andmeasures in this report are metric.

1 metric ton = 0.98 long ton1 long ton

(= 2,240 lb) = 1.016 metric ton1 hectare = 2.47 acres1 acre = 0.405 ha1 kilometer (km) = 0.62 mile

ABBREVIATIONS

APEC Ayangba Project Executive CommitteeAPMEPU Agricultural Projects Monitoring, Evaluation and Planning UnitAPMU Ayangba Project Management UnitBPMB Benue Plateau Marketing BoardBSP Basic Services PackageCPDCET Centre de Perfectionnement pour le Developpement et la

Cooperation Economique et Technique of the French Aid MinistryDC Development CenterFDL Federal Department of LivestockFMARD Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural DevelopmentFMG Federal Military Government of NigeriaFSC Farmers Service CenterIAR Institute of Agricultural ResearchICCMU Igala Cooperative Credit and Marketing UnionIITA International Institute of Tropical AgricultureLBA Licensed Buying AgentLGC Local Government CouncilMANR Ministry of Agriculture and Natural ResourcesMOW Ministry of WorksNPMC Nigerian Produce Marketing CompanyNSMB Northern States Marketing BoardTHU Tractor Hire UnitWARDA West Africa Rice Development Association

FISCAL YEAR

April 1 - March 31

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE

AYANGBA AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Table of Contents

Page No.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .............................. i-iii

I. INTRODUCTION ........... .............................. I

II. BACKGROUND . .......................................... 2

- The Economy .......................... 2

- The Agricultural Sector ...... ...................... 2

III. THE PROJECT AREA ......... ............................ 6

- General .......................... 6

- Agriculture Area Farm Systems ...................... 7- Institutions and Farmers Services ............ 7- Development Plans ......................... 8

IV. THE PROJECT . .......................................... 8

- General Description ................. 8- Detailed Features (State Component) ............. 9- Detailed Features (Federal Component) ...... ........ 13

V. COST ESTIMATES AND FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS .... ........ 14

- Project Costs .................. .................... 14- Financing Arrangements ........... .. ................ 16- Procurement ................... ..................... 18- Disbursements .................. .................... 19- Budgets, Accounts and Audits .......... ............. 20

VI. ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT .......................... 21

- Organization ...................................... 21- Staffing ........................................... 21- Input Delivery and Credit Arrangements ..... ........ 22- Postproject Development ............. ............... 23

This report is based on the findings of an appraisal mission composed ofMessrs. van der Lugt, Pease, Draper (Bank), Reader, Hallgrimsson (Consultants),Tagoe (WARDA), Deprez (Trainee CPDCET) and Dalton (FDL expert).

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

Table of Contents (Continued) Page No.

VII. PRODUCTION, MARKETING, FARMER BENEFITS, ANDFINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR GOVERNMENT .... ........... 23

- Yields and Production ........ ...................... 23- Marketing and Prices ........ ....................... 24- Farm Benefits . ..................................... 25- Financial Implications for Government .... .......... 26

VIII. BENEFITS AND JUSTIFICATION ..... ...................... 27

IX. RECOMMENDATIONS AND AGREEMENTS REACHED .... ........... 28

ANNEXES

ANNEX I Project Area

A. DescriptionB. AgricultureC. InstitutionsD. State Development Plans

Table 1 Mean Rainfall DataTable 2 Summary of the Main Characteristics of the Soil Map UnitsTable 3 Population Estimates and Area Under CultivationTable 4 Estimated Staff Strength in the Project AreaChart 16363 Mean RainfallMap 12334 Soil Classification

ANNEX 2 Summary of Crop and Farm Development

A. Crop DevelopmentB. Farm Development

Table 1 Estimated Cropping PatternsTable 2 One Hectare Annual Crop BudgetsTable 3 Production BenefitsTable 4 Average Farm BudgetTable 5 Annual Crop Labor RequirementsTable 6 Production EstimatesTable 7 Extension Staff RequirementTable 8 Costs of Extension ServiceTable 9 Costs of Farm Development DivisionChart 16328 Farm Labor Profile

Table of Contents (Continued)

ANNEX 3 Livestock Development

A. GeneralB. Development Proposals

Table 1 Livestock Development Costs SummaryTable 2 Costs of Livestock Extension UnitTable 3 Costs of Poultry Rearing UnitTable 4 Idah Goat and Pig Farm Development Costs

ANNEX 4 Summary of Forestry Development

- General- Benue State- Development Proposals

Table 1 Summary of Forestry ActivitiesTable 2 Summary of Forestry Costs

ANNEX 5 Fisheries Development

A. GeneralB. Development Proposals

Table 1 Costs and Benefits of Bunded LagoonsTable 2 Costs of Fisheries Development

ANNEX 6 Civil Works

- General- Organization and Management- Road Development- Water Supply- Buildings- Project Costs

Table 1 Phasing of Road Construction and MaintenanceTable 2 Operating Cost of Plant and EquipmentTable 3 Schedule of Building CostsTable 4 Number of HousesTable 5 Engineering Department, Summary of CostsTable 6 Production Rates and Plant Requirements for Critical UnitsTable 7 Equipment Utilization and Operating CostsTable 8 Capital Costs of Plant and EquipmentTable 9 Housing and Workshop RequirementsTable 10 Staff Salaries and OverheadsTable 11 Cost of MaterialsChart 16365 - Agricultural Road Cross SectionMap 12373 - Federal Trunk Roads


ANNEX 7 Supporting Services

- General- Management and Administration- Seed Multiplication- Research- Training- Evaluation

Table 1 Costs of Management and AdministrationTable 2 Staff Likely to be Internationally RecruitedTable 3 Area Required for Seed Multiplication and ResearchTable 4 Seed PurchasesTable 5 Costs of Seed MultiplicationTable 6 Costs of ResearchTable 7 Costs of TrainingTable 8 Costs of EvaluationChart 16482 Organization ChartChart 16459 Start-up Plan

ANNEX 8 Commercial Development

A. GeneralB. Input DevelopmentC. Marketing Development

Table 1 Tentative Sites of Farmers Service CentersTable 2 Seasonal Crop Input Requirements (per crop)Table 3 Seasonal Crop Input RequirementsTable -4 Physical Requirements for Medium and Long-term CreditTable 5 Requirements for Medium and Long-term CreditTable 6 Costs of Commercial Services DepartmentAppendix 1 Clarification of Fertilizer Procurement Procedures

ANNEX 9 Agricultural Projects Monitoring, Evaluation,and Planning Unit (APMEPU)

A. BackgroundB. Proposals for Expansion and Development

Table 1 APMEPU, Summary of Costs and FinancingTable 2 APMEPU Staff CostsTable 3 APMEPU Vehicles and EquipmentTable 4 APMEPU Operating CostsChart 16429 - APMEPU, Organization Chart

ANNEX 10 Project Costs

Table 1 Summary of Project CosIts by FunctionTable 2 Summary of Project Costs by Expense Categories


ANNEX 11 Financing Arrangements

Table 1 Detailed Financing of State ComponentTable 2 Detailed Financing of Federal ComponentTable 3 Disbursement ScheduleTable 4 Illustrative Cash Flow of FMGTable 5 Illustrative Cash Flow of the State

ANNEX 12 Marketing and Prices

A. Market BackgroundB. Market OutlookC. Price Forecasts

Table 1 Forecast Farmgate Prices

ANNEX 13 Economic Justification

Table 1 Economic Costs and BenefitsTable 2 Sensitivity Analysis

MAP 12135R3 Nigeria Agricultural ProjectsMAP 12328 Project Area

Details relating to this project and to the Lafia Agricultural DevelopmentProject, which is being prepared simultaneously, are in a supplementary reportentitled Nigeria, Supplementary Annexes to Central Agricultural DevelopmentProjects (Report 1370a-UNI, dated May 31, 1977), which has not been dis-tributed but is available upon request. It contains the following annexes:

1. Agriculture in Nigeria2. Crop Development3. Farm Development4. Livestock Development5. Forestry6. Seed Multiplication7. Research8. Training9. Monitoring and Evaluation10. Organization and Management11. Marketing and Prices

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Summary and Conclusions

i. The Federal Military Government of Nigeria (FMG) has requested Bankassistance to finance an agricultural development project in Benue State. Theproject was identified by a Bank mission in June 1974, and prepared by con-sultants in late 1974. This report is based on the findings of an appraisalmission that visited Nigeria in May/June 1976.

ii. Currently industry and the urban population are becoming moredependent on the rural population for food and labor inputs as the gap betweenurban and rural incomes increases. FMG is trying to offset this by promotingagricultural development.

iii. Benue State produces a wide range of crops reflecting the suitabilityof soils and climate. Research organizations and farmers have demonstratedthat the use of improved seeds, fertilizers and insecticides produces substan-tial benefits. However, due to poor planning, managerial and financialconstraints, little has been done for the farmer.

iv. The project area (13,150 km ), representing some 1.5% of the totalland area of Nigeria, is centered around Ayangba in Benue State. It has apopulation of 1 million or about 1% of the total population of Nigeria(estimated at 75 million). Approximately 80%, 150,000 families, are engagedin agriculture with an average holding of 2.0 ha. Soils are declining infertility and internal inflation creates pressures to increase production.

v. The project would increase crop production through improved farmpractices and extension services; livestock development through improvedveterinary services and small stock; forestry development by establishing1,000 ha of fuelwood and pole plantations; and fishery development throughimproved extension services and 15 fishing lagoons. Infrastructural develop-ment includes 1,300 km of feeder roads, 180 wells and project headquartersin Ayangba. Seed multiplication, applied research, evaluation and trainingwould support project development, and commercial services would includeinput delivery through 30 Farmers Service Centers, credit facilities andmarket advisory services. In addition, the project would expand the Agricul-tural Projects Monitoring, Evaluation and Planning Unit (APMEPU) in Kaduna.

vi. The project would be managed by an Executive Committee and a specialManagement Unit under the State Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources(MANR). The Committee would be chaired by the Permanent Secretary of MANR.The semi-autonomous Management Unit, which would be responsible for implement-ing and operating the project, would be staffed through transfer of existingGovernment staff or direct recruitment. Deficiencies in specialized technical

- ii -

skilis and high level management staff, which are unavailable or in shortsupply in Nigeria, would be met through international recruitment.

vii. Project costs are estimated at US$114 million and a 20-year Bankloan of US$35 million is proposed, including 4.5-year grace period, whichis equivalent to the foreign exchange component; US$31 million would beonlent to Benue State and would finance 30% of the costs net of taxes. Theremainder of the Bank loan, US$4 million, would finance 40% of the Federalcomponent costs net of taxes.

viii. Vehicles, tractors, road-making equipment, other equipment,materials, fertilizers, insecticides and other farm inputs valued at US$13.4million, and vehicles and equipment of APMEPU valued at US$0.5 million, wouldbe procured through international competitive bidding in accordance with Bankguidelines for those contracts valued over US$75,000, and through competitivebidding in accordance with local procedures satisfactory to the Bank for con-tracts of less than US$75,000. For contracts under US$10,000 direct competi-tive shopping would be employed. Experience has shown that contracts forbuildings, houses and FSC complexes valued at US$11.0 million would not beattractive to foreign bidders due to dispersed locations, small size of con-tracts and competitiveness of local contractors; such contracts would beawarded on the basis of local competitive bidding. Construction of roads andwells would be undertaken by the project on force account, a practice that isproving successful on the Northern Agricultural Development Projects. A largepart of project costs would be for salaries, operating expenses, trainingcosts, nursery expenses and seed purchases valued at US$36.3 million, and forstaff costs and operating expenses of APMEPU valued at US$4.1 million, andunsuitable for competitive bidding. The services of consultants and expatri-ate staff valued at US$3.5 million for the State component and US$i.4 millionfor APMEPU would be obtained in accordance with procedures acceptable to theBank. An amount of US$43.7 million would be required for contingencies.

ix. The Bank loan would be disbursed over the five-year period, 1978-1982, as follows: State component: 100% of the total foreign exchange costsof directly imported vehicles, equipment and spare parts (or 70% of the costsof these items if locally procured) totaling US$3.6 million; 100% of the totalforeign exchange costs of directly imported equipment, furnishings and mater-ials (or 70% of the costs of these items if locally procured) totaling US$1.8million; 100% of the total foreign exchange costs of directly imported fertil-izer and insecticides (or 70% of the cost of these items if locally procured)totaling US$3.9 million; 100% of the costs of internationally recruited staff,including their salaries, allowances and recruitment costs, and of consultingservices and scholarships totaling US$3.5 million; 40% of the costs of build-ings and houses totaling US$ 3.3 million; 15% of the costs of local stafftotaling US$3.8 million; Federal component: 100% of the total foreign exchangecosts of directly imported vehicles and equipment for APMEPU (or 70% of thecost of these items if locally procured) totaling US$0.5 million; 100% of thecosts of internationally recruited staff including their salaries, allowancesand recruitment costs and of consulting services totaling US$1.4 million; 20%of the costs of local staff of APMEPU totaling US$0.4 million; and an unallocated

- iii -

amount of US$13.3 million. Retroactive financing as of November 1, 1976 ofup to US$550,000 is proposed for internationally recruited personnel and thepurchase of an aircraft. Disbursement of the Bank loan would be againstimport documentation, contracts and certified records of expenditure; thelatter would be scrutinized by Bank supervision missions and independentauditors.

x. The estimated principal direct benefits would be annual incrementalproduction from Year 5 onwards as follows: 92,000 tons yams, 100,000 tonscassava, 12,800 tons rice, 26,100 tons maize; 2,100 tons melon, 3,400 tonssorghum, 6,800 tons cowpeas and 1,100 tons benniseed. About 150,000 farmfamilies are expected to benefit, but the project would also benefit non-farming families in the area through better communications, water suppliesand marketing. Some one million people would one way or another receivebenefits from the project. Intangible benefits include infrastructure onwhich health and other social services could be developed, expansion of localtrade and the strengthening of institutions including the Local GovernmentCouncils and the State's Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources.The project's evaluation unit, under guidance of the Federal Ministry ofRural Development's Projects Monitoring, Evaluation and Planning Unit wouldsupport future Federal and State agricultural planning. Average farm incomesin the project area would increase by some US$160 from US$382 to US$546 perannum at full development.

xi. The economic rate of return is 27%; a 20% reduction in benefitsand a 20% increase in costs would reduce the rate of return to 16% and theproject would still be viable.

xii. On the basis of the assurances obtained during negotiations and setout in Chapter VIII, the project would be suitable for a Bank loan of US$35million.

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


I. INTRODUCTION

1.01 The Federal Military Government of Nigeria (FMG) has requesteda Bank loan to help finance an agricultural development project in Ankpa,Dekina, Idah and Bassa Local Government Council (LGC) areas of Benue State,and an extension and expansion of the Northern Projects Monitoring and Evalua-tion Unit established with the Northern Agricultural Development Projects.The project would have direct and indirect benefits for about one millionpeople living in the four LGC areas and would provide for important institu-tion building.

1.02 The project was identified by the Lagos Resident Mission in June1974, and a feasibility study was completed in March 1975 by consultants,recruited with World Bank assistance, financed by FMG. The project wasappraised in May/June 1976 of a mission composed by Messrs. van der Lugt,Pease, Draper (Bank), Reader, Hallgrimsson (consultants), Tagoe (WARDA),Deprez (Trainee CPDCET), and Dalton (FDL expert).

1.03 The first Bank loans for agriculture in Nigeria were for theWestern State Cocoa Project (1971, Loan 764-UNI, US$7.2 million), now physi-cally completed, and the Second Cocoa Project (1974, Loan 1045-UNI, US$20million), which is being successfully implemented in the former Western andMid-Western States. 1/ Following an identification mission in 1972 loanswere made for three integrated agricultural development projects in thenorth: Funtua Project (1974, Loan 1092-UNI, US$29 million), Gusau Project(1974, Loan 1099-UNI, US$19 million), and Gombe Project (1974, Loan 1164-UNI,US$21 million); Rice Project (1974, Loan 1103-UNI, US$17.50 million) inthe former East Central and South East States; 2/ Livestock Project (1974,Loan 1091-UNI, US$21.0 million); and three oil palm projects; NucleusEstate/Smallholder Oil Palm Project, Western State 3/ (1975, Loan 1192-UNI,US$17.0 million), Nucleus Estate/Smallholder Oil Palm Project, Mid-WesternState 4/ (1975, Loan 1183-UNI, US$29.5 million) and Smallholder Oil PalmProject, East Central State, 5/ (1975, Loan 1191-UNI, US$19.0 million). TheNorthern Agricultural Development Projects are being implemented successfully;the remaining projects have for various reasons been slow starters but areexpected to make up lost time as management gains experience. Most of the

1/ Following the creation of the new states, the project is now executedin Oyo, Ogun, Ondo and Bendel States, and project assets and liabilitiesare being divided accordingly.

2/ Now in three States: Anambra, Imo and Cross Rivers.3/ Now in Ondo State.4/ Now in Bendel State._/ Now in Imo State.

- 2 -

projects are encountering substantial cost overruns, due to rapid internalinflation (40% in 1975). However, Government is expected to allocate suf-ficient funds to meet these deficits. A further six agricultural developmentprojects and a potential forestry project were identified in October 1976.Two of the agricultural projects and the forestry project are expected to beappraised during FY78.

II. BACKGROUND

The Economy

2.01 The 924,000 km2 Federal Republic of Nigeria comprises 19 Statesand has a population of about 75 million. Average annual per capita incomeis estimated at US$327 (1975), but in rural areas it is only about US$60.In urban centers average income is much higher but unequally distributed.

2.02 Following a period of civil strife, rehabilitation, and consolida-tion, characterized by relative stagnation, economic growth generated byincreased public sector activities resumed in 1972. This was accompaniedby inflation, supply shortages and infrastructural congestions. Althoughprimary productive sector performance has been disappointing, the economycontinued to grow rapidly because of the phenomenal expansion of the servicesectors; from 1972-75 GDP rose at an average rate of 6.5% per annum. Nigeria'seconomic development has been increasingly dominated by oil, which by 1974accounted for 41% of GDP, 93% of export earnings and 82% of total Governmentrevenues, surpassing the agricultural sector in all areas except employment.The Third National Development Plan (April 1975 - March 1980) was budgetedat US$53 billion, but due to slippage the effective program is now projectedat US$32 billion. The plan has recently been reviewed by Government andgreater emphasis has been given to health, housing and agriculture.

The Agricultural Sector

2.03 General. Approximately 75% of Nigeria's population is dependenton agriculture, which accounts for about 28% of GDP, 5% of total exportearnings and 75% of non-oil exports. Agricultural production is almostentirely in the hands of smallholders whose levels of technology andproduction efficiency are low.

2.04 Cropping patterns vary within the country's main ecological zones.In the forest zones of the south, where rainfall is bimodally distributed overa wet season of up to eight months, the agricultural economy is largely basedon tree crops with annual staples providing subsistence and subsidiary income.In the Guinea and Sudan Savannah zones of the north, rainfall is monomodalwithin a six-month spread and production is based almost entirely on annualcrops. Between these two zones is an area known as the "middle belt," support-ing southern Guinea and transitional forest savannah vegetation and a mix ofannual and tree crops, though rainfall quantity and spread are inadequate forsuccessful economic exploitation of the latter. Little development attention

- 3 -

has been directed towards the "middle belt," which forms an important foodproducing reserve for the nation.

2.05 Growth of the agricultural sector has been disappointing, averaging1.3% per annum from 1970-75, equivalent to only half the average populationgrowth. This same period has been characterized by rapidly rising domesticfood prices as demand, resulting from population and income growth, out-stripped domestic supply, and by a marked decline in traditional agriculturalexport crops: N 309 million in 1970 to N 265 million in 1975. During thesame period total exports (including petroleum) increased from N 852 millionto N 4,848 million; importation of food and live animals over the same periodrose from N 60 million to nearly N 300 million.

2.06 Development Strategy. Government is acutely aware of the need toimprove performance in the agricultural sector and to invest the substantialrevenues from oil, a wasting asset, in order to expand and diversify therest of the economy in which agriculture is the dominant sector. In theThird Five-Year Development Plan, a total of N 2.2 billion has been ear-marked for the sector to support a targeted growth rate of 5%. The programincludes development of several major river basins for irrigation, dissemina-tion of modern farming techniques to smallholders, improved input distributionand marketing services and support for various integrated development projects.Rural development will be promoted with complementary investments in secondaryand feeder roads, rural eletrification, health and other social services.

2.07 Government's main short-term objective is to improve internal pricestability in basic fooderops and to ensure adequate food supplies to therapidly expanding urban centers. Against this background of assured domesticfood supplies, Government's longer-term objectives are to create a prosperousand efficient agricultural industry sufficient to reduce population drift tourban centers and to revive the role of Nigeria as an exporter.

2.08 Development Constraints. Undoubtedly, the main short-term develop-ment constraint in the sector is the lack of effective agricultural supportservices. Produce evacuation is hampered by lack of feeder roads, and manyfarmers have to travel long distances to the unevenly distributed and un-reliable sources of inputs.

2.09 Input demand, at the present highly subsidized prices, is highand unsatisfied; in many areas this has encouraged a thriving black market.However, within areas of relatively high consumption of purchased inputs,physical yields are invariably low and it is unlikely that economic via-bility, and indeed financial viability, would be achieved at economicprices. A greater effort is required, particularly by the agriculturalresearch institutions, to improve the analysis of technical, economic andfinancial aspects of farming innovations adapted to the different socio-ecologial conditions of Nigeria. This information is essential for theapplication of a sound input supply policy and the development of relevantdelivery systems that would support the adoption of modern farming tech-niques.

-4-

2.10 Agricultural development in Nigeria is taking place against abackground of rapid development in the non-agricultural sectors and risingstandards of education, both of which react against the poor returns tolabor and drudgery associated with traditional agriculture. This hasencouraged the drift of young people away from rural areas and has re-sulted in a sharp rise in wage rates for hired labor. Ultimately, a pros-perous agriculture industry, capable of reducing this drift, would onlybe achieved through application of advanced farming techniques which areparticularly adapted to larger farming units either group or individuallyoperated.

2.11 Government's development strategy takes full account of theseconstraints but the lack of the necessary planning and organization baseat either the State or Federal level prevents the application of success-ful remedies. Responsibilities of different ministries and departmentsremain uncoordinated while severe technical and managerial shortages continueto impede both planning and executive ability.

2.12 Agricultural support services remain almost entirely in the handsof the public sector, and present Government subsidy policies have served toremove commercial incentive for private sector participation. It is, however,quite clear that given Nigeria's size and massive development program, Govern-ment may need to progressively divest itself of responsibilities such asinput and produce marketing, thus requiring the creation of an economic frame-work appropriate to profitable intervention of private entrepreneurs in theagriculture service sector.

2.13 Bank Role and Sector Lending Strategy. Since 1971, the Bank hasbeen involved in ten tree or food crop projects (see para 1.03). During thistime, Government and the Bank have been able to review the progress of theseprojects, and together are generally satisfied with the approach adopted.In particular, the progress of the three northern projects (Loans 1092-, 1099-and 1164-UNI) has clearly demonstrated the advantages of planned agriculturaldevelopment implemented under a reformed administrative structure whichallows necessary State control while affording management full day-to-dayoperational autonomy. As a result, both Federal and State Governments areanxious to replicate this structure in other states in the Federation. Thereis also increasing interest in the role of the commercial sector in agriculturewhich is being actively pursued under these projects. As such, theseprojects are acting as catalysts of change on a much wider basis than mightinitially have been envisaged.

2.14 The very success of the projects has underscored and brought to theattention of the Federal Government some important economic and developmentissues that have to be taken into account in future Bank lending for agricul-ture. First, the unnecessary fertilizer and chemical subsidies in the lightof the huge developing demand threaten to have a serious fiscal impact whichwill erode the public resources which otherwise could be directed to other

- 5 -

more long-term agricultural investments. It is estimated, for instance, thatthe Funtua project alone could consume, at present subsidy levels, 100,000tons of fertilizer a year by 1980.. Overall, on conservatively estimated totalconsumption of 500,000 tons of fertilizer per annum in 1980, and on the basisof the present subsidy of N 120 per ton, the annual fertilizer subsidy billwould be about N 60 million (US$97.2 million). Government is now undertakinga review of these policies. Second, the current commercial bank interestrates at 5% are reflected in Government's agricultural farm lending policies.These low rates are due to a temporary liquidity situation, and it is difficultfor the Bank to press for increased interest while the current situation pre-vails. However, as in the ongoing projects, the commercial banking institu-tions are being encouraged to participate; the Bank's contribution to onfarmlending, particularly medium and long term, would be kept to a catalyticminimum--as proposed in this project. The above situation is unlikely toperpetuate itself, and will be kept-under constant review. Third, the needfor more stabilized farm commodity prices, particularly for foodcrops, hasbecome evident. Government is tackling this problem by establishing a seriesof crop-specific marketing boards that would establish floor buying prices;however, the latter is a new development and has yet to be properly tested.As Bank-supported projects mature, marketing problems are more apparent, andit is quite likely that before long the Bank may have to become involved inmarketing policies and infrastructure on a nationwide basis. Fourth, the lackof physical support infrastructure including feeder roads and farm servicecenters has caused serious bottlenecks in Government-sponsored programs,including Operation Feed the Nation and the National Accelerated Food Produc-tion Programs. On the other hand, the provision of such infrastucture in thenorthern projects has demonstrated its importance and is paving the way toparticipation of the private sector in serving agriculture. Finally, the lackof experienced manpower in the agriculture public administration is quiteprobably the major constraint to the planning and implementation of developmentschemes in Nigeria.

2.15 Resolving the above issues is a very difficult task that Governmentrecognizes and for which it expects the financial and technical support of theBank Group. For instance, Government has informally approached the Bank toreview the subsidy, interest rate and pricing policies, and consequently theforthcoming Economic Review of Nigeria intends to analyze the problems andmake recommendations under which a future Bank lending program would be devel-oped. The provision of physical infrastructure comprising roads, servicecenters, input distribution and improved extension systems forms a major com-ponent of the Bank's existing and proposed agricultural development projectsand constitutes the minimum development criterion to ensure an agriculturaltakeoff in any given area. As to management and administration constraints,the short-term solution adopted in Bank-supported projects in Nigeria isinternational recruitment and the establishment of special project managementunits. Yet the long-term solution necessarily involves the training ofNigerian management staff. To this end, at the request of Government, theBank intends to consider financing an Agricultural Management TrainingInstitute. Government views the Northern Projects Monitoring and EvaluationUnit created under the Funtua Agricultural Development Project (1092-UNI)

- 6 -

as a first step toward creating the planning and monitoring capability forrural development in the Ministry of Agriculture, and Government hopes toexpand it with Bank support with the proposed project.

III. THE PROJECT AREA

General

3.01 The project area (for details see Annex 1 and Map 12328 attached

to this report) covers 13,150 km2. 1/ It comprises the Ankpa, Dekina, Idahand Bassa Local Government Council (LGC) areas of Benue State. To the northand west, the area is bounded by the Benue and Niger rivers. The most prom-inent feature of the area is the Ankpa Plateau which rises to over 500 m. Thegently to steeply undulating Plateau descends into foothills, before levelinginto lowland plains. The area lies mostly within the Guinea Savannah zone andremnants of primary forests are now contained in forest reserves.

3.02 Rainfall, influenced by the Ankpa Plateau, varies from about 1,150 mmto 1,400 mm annually; on the Plateau it is generally higher and distributionis more bimodal. Rainfall commences in February but is not agriculturallyeffective until early April and increases to a peak in September. Sunlighthours and radiation are highest in the dry months, peaking in December at adaily average of 8.4 hours, and decreasing from April to a low of about 4.7hours in August. Mean air temperatures show a bimodal character: the highest

is 300C in March, declining to 210C or less in August; 270C in October. ThePlateau soils are derived from false bedded sandstones and upper coal measuresandstones interruped by widespread iron pan outcrops. Inherent fertility islow. These soils are strongly acid with low organic content and cannotsustain high yields. Marine shales outcrop in the lowlands, but cultivationis mainly concentrated on sandstone soils and medium-textured ferisols derivedfrom the Niger alluvium.

3.03 The area's population is predominantly of the Igala tribe. A not-able feature is a large but unquantified floating labor force which migratesannually to the western cocoa areas. No census figures are available, butthe area's total population (1980 estimate) is about 1 million. With about80% engaged in agriculture there are about 150,000 farm families cultivatingsome 300,000 ha.

3.04 Most transportation is by road and the road network is composed asfollows: Federal trunk roads 240 km, State roads 477 km, Local GovernmentCouncil (LGC) roads 395 km, and community roads 1,500 km. The road network is

1/ Although large this represents just about 1.5% of Nigeria's total area;just over 1% of Nigeria's estimated population live in the area (seepara 3.03).

- 7 -

sufficient but generally poor. Water supplies are generally unsatisfactory.However, a borehole scheme on the Ankpa Plateau is being rehabilitated andshould provide a reasonable water supply by mid-1977. Education and healthfacilities exist and will be expanded under the Third National DevelopmentPlan. Thiere is no electricity in the area, except private generators.

Agriculture and Farm Systems

3.05 Agricultural production in the area is mainly cereal, root andlegume supplemented by wild and planted tree crops, small stock and riverfishing. Subsistence smallholders using low technology predominate, andbush/fallow cultivation is generally practiced. Intercropping is commonto exploit a long growing season and to achieve two harvests through relaycropping and undersowing.

3.06 Yams, cassava, maize, millet and sorghum are the principal sub-sistence crops although rice is important in the lowlands. A large propor-tion of cash income is derived from yams. Wild oil palms throughout thearea provide oil for cooking and kernels as a cash crop. Other harvestedtree crops include citrus, sheanut, and cola. Plantation tree crops arerare and although the area is not suitable for modern plantation develop-ment, there is potential for further tree crop development around homesteads.

3.07 There is no integration of crops and livestock, the small localcattle population being in the hands of Fulani pastoralists. Small stocksurvive as scavengers around homesteads. The former trade route fromMakurdi to Idah has almost ceased to exist as cattle move now directly southfrom Makurdi. Stock estimates are: 10,000 cattle, 19,000 goats, 20,000sheep, and 4,000 pigs.

3.08 Fishing is an important industry along the Benue and Niger rivers.Swamp and flood areas which become inundated during the wet season providegood fish breeding and growing conditions. There are no communal forests, but

95% of Benue State's forest reserves, covering an estimated 1,600 km2, are inthe project area.

3.09 Land which is communal is allocated to community members accord-ing to customary usufruct. Cultivation rights usually include treefelling although certain species are protected. Responsibility for landallocation lies with LGC and is administered locally by village heads andchiefs.

Institutions and Farmers Services

3.10 The State's Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources (MANR)is responsible for agricultural development in the State, including forestry,fisheries and livestock. MANR has offices in Ankpa, Dekina, Oguma and Idah.Existing MANR staff and facilities in the project area would be incorporatedin the project (see para 6.05). The Ministry of Works is responsible for

-8-

civil works programs. The M'inistry of Trade, Industries and Cooperativesoperates a small-scale industry credit scheme which would also benefit agro-industries. The Registrar of Cooperatives supervises the cooperative movement.Local Government Councils exist and incorporate the traditional authorities inthe area.

3.11 There are 136 primary cooperatives in the area, but the coopera-tive movement has come to a standstill, as all are affiliated with the IgalaCooperative Credit and Marketing Union which has accumulated large debtsand which is being divided into three divisional unions to coincide with thelocal Government structure. More successful are the Farmers Councils, con-sisting of groups of 10-25 farmers, organized by the Roman Catholic Mission.There are presently 625 Farmers Councils grouped in 43 zones, the estimatedmembership being 10,000.

3.12 Farmers services and credit facilities in the area are minimal, asprior to the creation of Benue State the area was separated from its previousadministrative capital at Ilorin by the Niger river, causing serious communi-cation problems. As part of the newly-created Benue State, the area has asignificant role in State development, and through the project would developstrong institutional ties and services with the new capital at Makurdi.

Development Plans

3.13 The Third National Development Plan includes the following whichwill affect the project area: development of a steel complex at Ajaokuta;an east-west railroad which would link Ajaokuta with the main north-southrailroad; development of proven coal reserves at Okaba; establishment of anoil palm plantation at Alloma; a railroad bridge over the Niger at Ajaokuta(more bridges over the Niger and Benue are contemplated but are less certain);rural electrication and water supply for Ankpa, Dekina, Idah and Ayangba; andexpansion of health services and primary and secondary education facilities.

IV. THE PROJECT

General Description

4.01 The project would be carried out effectively over a five-year-period, 1978-1982; 1977 would be spent on start-up activities and expensesincurred during that year have been included in project costs. The projectprovides for a Basic Service Package for the area (crop development, roads,supporting services and commercial services), supplemented by additionallivestock, forestry, fishery, and water supply development, and would spe-cifically involve:

Production and Associated Investment

- Crop Development: increasing farm production through improvedfarm practices and expanded extension services and establishmentof farm advisory service;

- Livestock Development: providing veterinary services and improvinglocal small livestock;

- Forestry Development: establishing about a thousand hectares oftownship fuelwood and pole plantations;

- Fishery Development: improving and expanding fishery extensionservices and establishing 15 fishing lagoons.

Infrastructure and Support Services

- Infrastructural Development: improving 1,300 km of feeder roads;supplementing water supply through well construction and con-structing an administrative center at Ayangba;

- Supporting Services: establishing a project seed multiplicationfarm, improving applied research capacity; expanding the trainingcenter at Ochaja, and establishing an evaluation unit;

- Commercial Services: providing adequate input supply and creditfacilities through 30 Farmers Service Centers (FSC) and providinga market advisory service.

Institutional Support

- the Agricultural Projects Monitoring, Evaluation and PlanningUnit (APMEPU) financed under Loan 1092-UNI would be expanded.

The last component is not part of the agricultural development project inBenue State (referred to as State component) but is the responsibilityof FMG (this component is referred to as Federal component).

4.02 The project would be managed by the semi-autonomous Ayangba Proj-ect Management Unit (APMU), which would be responsible for implementingthe project. APMU would be responsible to the Ayangba Project ExecutiveCommittee (APEC) for budgetary and policy control (see Chapter VI).

Detailed Features (State Component)

Production and Associated Investments

4.03 Crop Development (for details see Annex 2). Farmers' crop yieldswould be increased through the improved technical production packages compris-ing: improved seeds, seed dressings, fertilizer and insecticides, supported

- 10 -

by a more intensive and better trained extension service. The major cropsaffected would be yams, cassava, maize, sorghum, cowpeas, benniseed andmelons. Of the total cropped area of 440,000 hectares, about 100,000 hectares(23%) would be improved. The proposed extension staff to farmer ratio wouldbe 1:500, resulting in an increase of extension staff from 54 at present to300 at full development. Smaller farmers would be encouraged to form groupsto enable them to make full use of farm advisory services, input deliverysystems and farm mechanization.

4.04 For larger units, farmed by groups or individuals, a special farmadvisory system would be developed to provide land-use planning, soil con-servation, tractor hire services, and crop rotation advice for proper long-term farm systems. FMG has recently awarded an aerial photography contractwhich covers the area and the results should be available for this purpose.

4.05 A small but inefficient MANR tractor service operates within theproject area. This would be incorporated into the farm advisory service,and would be decentralized with initially two tractors for each FSC. Mainte-nance and back-up facilities would be provided from headquarters. The projectwould support private and cooperative tractor ownership for which the commer-cial banks are willing to provide credit. To improve tractor use efficiency,the project would provide limited credit for land clearing. Both the clearingand tractor services would be charged at full cost to the farmers.

4.06 Livestock Development (for details see Annex 3). The projectwould establish a Livestock Development Division that would incorporate theexisting small and poorly-equipped veterinary service. The main objectiveswould be to improve animal health through compulsory inoculation campaigns,provide better cattle husbandry advice, upgrade small stock, and establishan improved poultry exchange scheme. The animal health component would beachieved through the use of project-equipped mobile inoculation teams, par-ticularly against rinderpest and bovine pleuropneumonia. The teams would alsohave responsibility for meat and hide inspection. The Division would providelivestock husbandry advice to those farmers interested in mixed farming toimprove general nutritional and management standards. Goat upgrading wouldcontinue at the Idah goat farm and the project would support trial breedingfor the adoption of improved species. A piggery in Idah would be supportedto produce improved gilts and boars for farmers' purchase. There is a strongdemand for improved poultry, and the project would operate three poultryrearing units with the objective of providing Rhode Island Red and WhiteLeghorn birds on a direct exchange basis with village birds. Unit rearingcapacity would be 4,500 pullets and 4,500 cockerels per annum.

4.07 Forestry Development (for details see Annex 4). The projectwould establish 1,000 ha of fuelwood and pole plantations in the vicinity ofmajor towns (Ankpa, Dekina, Oguma and Idah). Three nurseries would be estab-lished to provide seedlings, the main species being Eucalyptus and Gmelina.The nurseries would sell these seedlings at cost to farmers, as well as otherseedlings including oil palm, citrus and mango. It is estimated that the

- 11 -

farmer demand for fruit trees and forestry seedlings would be about 160,000per annum. MANR would assume postproject nursery management and LGC wouldmanage the fuelwood and pole plantations.

4.08 The project would expand charcoal production by encouraging theuse of traditional earth kilns and modern portable steel kilns. In addition,training courses for project staff and local woodworkers would be conducted.The project would support national forest species trials, assist in State-wide forest planning and would provide technical assistance to localsaxmnillers in the planning and extension of their operations. Financingfor the latter would come from the small-scale industries credit scheme.

4.09 Fishery Development (for details see Annex 5). Through bettertrained fishery extension staff, the project would provide improvements infishing technology that would have a considerable impact on catch. A fish-eries expert would be employed to advise the long-term planning and theimplementation of fishery development. A fisheries training center, witha capacity for 20 students, would be established at Bagana. Fifteen 30-acre,bunded lagoons, controlled by sluiee gates, would be constructed and oper-ated, on a licensed fee basis, as intensive fishing areas. The lagoons wouldprovide for better water control, breeding and growing habitats. Fishingstaff would promote improved, FAO-designed fish-drying kilns in an effort toimprove quality.

Infrastructural and Support Services

4.10 Road and Water Development (details at Annex 6). Six hundred andtwenty-five kilometers of LGC roads would be reconstructed and 675 km ofcommunity tracks would be improved to LGC standards. The roads would besimple 'Laterite roads supported by adequate culverting and drainage structures.Existing MOW and LGC road departments do not have the capacity to implementthe proposals. In view of this and the acute shortage of local contractingcapacity, and the probable lack of interest of foreign contractors (as con-firmed by the Northern Agricultural Development Projects), the project wouldundertake construction on force account using equipment and labor procuredwith project funds. The project would work closely with LGC to develop anadequate road maintenance unit that could be operated by LGC at the end of theproject period.

4.11 Existing well-digging crews would be reorganized and 180 new wellswould be constructed. Wells would be standardized, being 1.2 m in diameter,concrete lined, with the top raised 0.8 m above ground level. Handpumps andwellcovers will be provided. LGC would be responsible for their maintenance.

4.12 Buildings and Houses (details at Annex 6). A considerable numberof buildings and houses are required; these would be constructed by localcontractors (foreign contractors are not excluded, but are generally notcompetitive). The project would construct 34 senior, 48 intermediate, 129junior, and 252 traditional staff houses; office headquarters; two trainingcenters; a workshop complex; and 30 Farmers Service Centers. Designs success-fully developed by ongoing projects would be used where possible.

- 12 -

4.13 Seed Multiplication and Research (details at Annex 7). The projectwould improve the existing seed multiplication and research programs. A200 ha farm would be established at Ochaja to provide a nucleus for surround-ing outgrowers' multiplication farms (ultimately outgrower multiplicationwould cover 500 ha). Seeds would be sold to farmers through the project-established Farmers Service Centers (para 4.16). Investments would includefarm buildings, farm machinery, seed-cleaning equipment, etc. The farm wouldalso allow for demonstration and research. The project research componentwould confine its attention to applied research and would associate cLoselywith national and international research agencies. In particular, it wouldconcentrate on variety trials, soil fertility and farming systems trials,mechanization, minor crop trials, and, in association with the evaluationunit, would undertake farm management studies.

4.14 Training (details at Annex 7). A training unit would be establishedfor training staff and farmers. The existing training center at Ochaja wouldbe expanded to a 60-student capacity. Training under the project would beas follows: (a) staff: scholarships for senior staff, upgrading courses forvarious staff categories; residential courses for training agriculturalinstructors; and introductory courses for all project staff; (b) farmers:three mobile audio-visual training units (which would visit two villages perday); day courses at FSCs; short residential courses in the project trainingcenter; production of radio programs; a program to inform teachers aboutagricultural development; and a mobile home economics team.

4.15 Evaluation (details at Annex 7). Evaluation of project activitiesis important, particularly in an area where relatively little development haspreviously been undertaken. Consequently an evaluation unit would be esta-blished under the administrative control of the Project Manager but techni-cally responsible to the Agricultural Projects Monitoring, Evaluation andPlanning Unit, APMEPU, located in Kaduna. The evaluation unit, comprising50 enumerators and associated senior staff, would initially undertake abaseline survey, followed by mainline surveys at two-year intervals. Otherproject/management orientated surveys would be undertaken.

4.16 Commercial Services (for details see Annex 8). Adequate inputsupply facilities would be provided through strategically located FarmersService Centers. Each FSC would be located on at least 2 ha, and wouldcomprise a fertilizer store (400-ton capacity), other small stores, offices,houses for storekeeper and other FSC staff, and a shed for teaching purposes.FSCs would service farmers within a 15 km radius and would provide seasonalfarm inputs and equipment for cash or credit. At full development the annualthroughput of fertilizer and chemicals would be 19,000 and 470 tons respec-tively. A market intelligence and advisory service to promote better market-ing and storage would be developed. Ironsheet, bins, cement and brick-press would be provided on credit for construction of village stores. Theexisting MANR produce inspection division would be improved. When necessarythe project would promote market contracts between producers and buyers, andwould act as an agent against commission in such cases. The project would be

- 13 -

authorized to act as a Licensed Buying Agent for those scheduled crops tradedin the area.

4.17 Logistical Support. Logistical support would be provided in theform of automobiles, trucks, motorcycles, workshop and office equipment,weigh scales, livestock and crop handling equipment, etc. Staff supportwould include accountants, secretaries, clerical and store control personnelfunded under the project. Detailed requirements are at the relevant annexes.

Detailed Features (Federal Component)

Institutional Support

4.18 Agricultural Projects Monitoring, Evaluation and Planning Unit(APMEPU) (details at Annex 9). APMEPU, currently operating under the name ofNorthern Projects Monitoring and Evaluation Unit, was established at Kadunawith funds from Loan 1092-UNI (Funtua Agricultural Development Project).Because of functions not perceived at appraisal the unit has grown largerthan originally intended, and apart from playing a dominant evaluation role,it now provides technical supervision to the three northern projects; agron-omic and research support; and more recently, development of project stafftraining systems. The original funds allocated for a five-year period willbe fully committed by end-1977. Nigerian Government project planning capa-bilities are extremely limited, resulting in many States endeavoring toimplement unplanned and sometimes irrational schemes. Furthermore, FMG andthe States are over-reliant on outside consultants who at times draw updevelopment proposals that are inappropriate, and which, because of lackof local expertise, cannot be properly evaluated. Consequently, it is pro-posed, under the project, to expand APMEPU with the formation of a planningunit to provide nationwide support for agricultural development planning.This would result in a strong, functional field unit for the newly createdFederal Department of Rural Development. The additional funds providedunder this project would enable APMEPU to operate for a further five yearsand would include establishment of the planning section, international tech-nical staff, vehicles, an aircraft, equipment, local staff and operatingexpenses. The inclusion of a small aircraft (twin-engined, 6-9 seats) isjustified due to a growing demand by the existing three Northern AgriculturalDevelopment Projects, APMEPU, and the Livestock Project (components of thelatter are located throughout Nigeria); and the anticipated demand fromAyangba and Lafia projects, as well as two proposed projects (currently beingprepared) at Bida and Ilorin. A project aircraft would result in improvedlogistical support, particularly for the road and dam construction units;the provision of spare parts and services from commercial suppliers locatedat distant urban centers; better interproject communication among seniorstaff, resulting in a more rapid transfer of techniques and developmentsfrom one project to another; better control of ranching companies and grazingreserves by livestock project staff located in Kaduna; closer and improvedmonitoring, evaluation and planning services by APMEPU staff working fromKaduna; and more frequent visits by senior Government officials, of bothFederal and State agricultural ministries, to assess progress and become

- 14 -

more involved in the ongoing and future development operations of the proj-ects. Existing air charter services are extremely limited and costly, andon the basis of a minimum project demand of 150 flying hours per month, anaircraft is economically justified. The aircraft would be based at Kadunaand its movements would be coordinated and controlled by APMEPU. (Costdetails are included in Annex 9).

V. COST ESTIMATES AND FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS

Project Costs

5.01 Project costs for the period 1977-1982 are estimated at N 70.2million (US$114 million); if taxes and duties are excluded costs would beN 68.1 million (US$110.3 milion). The foreign exchange component would beN 21.4 million (US$35 million). State component costs, encompassing agri-cultural development in Benue State, are estimated at N 64 million (US$104million), of which foreign exchange would be N 19 million (US$31 million)or 30% of total costs. Federal component costs involving APMEPU are esti-mated at N 6.2 million (US$10 million), of which foreign exchange would beN 2.4 million (US$4.0 million) or 39% of costs.

5.02 Project costs are detailed in Annex 10 and summarized below:

- 15 -

SUMMARY OF PROJECT COSTS

Total Foreign Local Total Foreign Local---- N million ------ ------US$ million------

A. State Component (Annex 10)

Crop Development 5.0 0.8 4.2 8.1 1.3 6.8Farm Advisory Service /1 3.7 1.0 2.7 6.0 1.6 4.4Livestock Development 1.5 0.3 1.2 2.4 0.5 1.9Forestry Development 1.2 0.3 0.9 2.0 0.5 1.5Fishery Development 1.4 0.4 1.0 2.3 0.7 1.6Roads and Water Development 5.3 2.0 3.3 8.6 3.2 5.4

Management Administration 5.0 1.6 3.4 8.0 2.5 5.5Seed Multiplication 1.1 0.2 0.9 1.8 0.3 1.5Research 0.5 0.1 0.4 0.9 0.2 0.7Training 1.6 0.5 1.1 2.6 0.8 1.8Evaluation 1.8 0.4 1.4 3.0 0.7 2.3

Commercial Services 7.3 1.5 5.8 11.9 2.5 9.4

Subtotal 35.4 9.1 26.3 57.6 14.8 42.8

Incremental Seed 0.2 - 0.2 0.3 - 0.3

Incremental Fertilizer/Insecticides 3.4 2.4 1.0 5.5 3.9 1.6

Medium-Term Input Fund 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.8 0.5 0.3

Total Base Cost 39.5 11.8 27.7 64.2 19.2 45.0

Physical Contingencies 2.0 0.5 1.5 3.2 0.8 2.4Price Contingencies 22.5 6.7 15.8 36.6 11.0 25.6

Total Costs 64.0 19.0 45.0 104.0 31.0 73.0

B. Federal Component (Annex 9)

Base Costs 3.7 1.4 2.3 6.0 2.4 3.6

Physical Contingencies 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1Price Contingencies 2.3 0.9 1.4 3.8 1.5 2.3

Total Costs 6.2 2.4 3.8 10.0 4.0 6.0

C. TOTAL PROJECT COSTS 70.2 21.4 48.8 114.0 35.0 79.0

/1 Includes tractor hire services (40%) and land use planning.

- 16 -

5.03 If livestock, forestry and fishery development are excluded,the baseline costs (in constant 1976 terms) per farm family would beN 236. This can be compared with N 250, N 355, and N 400 per farm familyfor the Funtua, Gusau and Gombe Agricultural Development Projects res-pectively. 1/ The costs per farm family are lower than those for the LafiaAgricultural Development Project, reflecting substantial economies of scale.

5.04 Cost estimates are based on price data and quotes obtainedduring appraisal, updated to reflect end-1976 prices. Project costs includea 5% physical contingency. Price contingencies are calculated on base costsplus physical contingencies and allow for compounded increases based on thefollowing annual percentages: 1977, 20%; 1978, 15%; 1979, 12%; and 10% from1980 onwards. These estimates take account of the high internal inflation,40% in 1975, and of international inflation for imports. Cost estimates ex-clude the cost of land compensation for roads and building sites. In thosecircumstances where compensation payments are made, additional funds would beprovided by the State Government.

5.05 In order to facilitate Government financing and budgetary arrange-ments, the cost of staff salaries, allowances and administrative expenses hasbeen estimated on a gross basis, and includes existing insignificant Governmentexpenditures (less than 1% of total project cost). All other project costs areestimated on a strictly incremental basis.

Financing Arrangements

5.06 The financing plan is detailed in Annex 11 and summarized below.

1/ Based on revised supervision mission cost estimates in 1976 terms.

- 1 7 -

DETAILED FINANCING PLAN

State% Total IBRD Government

-- N million ------------

A. State Component

Development Investments

Houses/Buildings 11 6.8 2.0 4.8Vehicles 5 2.8 2.2 0.6Other Equipment/MIaterials 2 1.5 0.8 0.7Other Developments 1 0.6 - 0.6

19Operating Expenses

International Staff 4 2.2 2.2 -Local Staff 26 16.9 2.4 14.5Operating Costs 7 4.6 - 4.6

37Farm Inputs

Seed - 0.2 - 0.2Fertilizer/Insecticides 5 3.4 2.4 1.0Medium-Term Inputs 1 0.5 - 0.5

6

Unallocated 38 24.5 7.1 17.4

TOTAL STATE COMPONENT 100 64.0 19.1 44.9

FederalB. Federal Component (APMEPU) Government

International Staff 13 0.8 0.8 -Equipment 6 0.4 0.3 0.1Local Staff 19 1.2 0.2 1.0Operating Costs 23 1.4 - 1.4Unallocated 39 2.4 1.0 1.4TOTAL FEDERAL COMPONENT 100 6.2 2.3 3.9

C. Total Project 70.2 21.4 48.8

--------- US$ Million --------114.0 35.0 79.0

of which: State Component (91%) 104.0 31.0 73.0Federal Component (9%) 10.0 4.0 6.0

- 18 -

5.07 The Bank loan of US$35 million would be equivalent to the projectforeign exchange costs. The loan would be for 20 years, including 4.5 yearsgrace on repayment of principal. Part of the Bank loan (US$31 million) wouldfinance 30% of the State component costs net of taxes, and during negotiationsassurances were obtained that the amount would be relent by FMG to Benue Stateunder a subsidiary loan agreement between the Borrower and the State on termsand conditions satisfactory to the Bank. It was also agreed that the signingot a subsidiary loan agreement would be a condition of effectiveness. Theremainder of the Bank loan (US$4 million) would finance 40% of the Federalcomponent costs net of taxes.

5.08 The remaining funds N 44.9 million (US$72.7 million) for the Statecomponent would be financed through the State budget. However, the Statewould receive an FMG allocation of N 16 million (US$25.9 million), equivalentto 25% of project costs. During negotiations assurances were obtained thatnot less thlan N 16 million would be allocated in the FMG budget for thispurpose. FMG has already allocated N 9 million for the project under theThird National Development Plan (1975-1980) and the balance would be allocatedunder the Fourth Plan. The remaining funds N 3.9 million (US$6.3 million) forthe Federal component would be financed through FMG budget.

5.09 Farm inputs are costed on an incremental basis but fertilizersare sold at subsidized prices. Therefore in addition to the financing ofproject costs, an estimated N 5.3 million would be required to cover thesesubsidies. During negotiations, assurances were obtained that FMG wouldreimburse APMU for fertilizer subsidies no later than three months afterdelivery to project stores.

5.10 The project would be implemented during the five-year period1978-1982, but 1977 (Year 0) would be the start-up period, and expendituresduring Year 0 would be met totally by the State. To speed up project imple-mentation, key international staff have already been recruited; and it wasagreed that retroactive financing of up to US$400,000 would be made avail-able for recruitment costs and staff emoluments as of November 1, 1976 (whenrecruitment procedures were initiated). A further US$150,000 would be allowedretroactively for the purchase of an aircraft (para 4.18) to facilitate on-going project operations and to ensure timely implementation of Ayangba andLafia.

Procuremient

5.11 Vehicles, tractors, road-making equipment, other equipment,materials, fertilizer, 1/ insecticides and other farm inputs valued at aboutUS$13.4 million net of contingencies, and vehicles and equipment for APMEPUvalued at US$0.5 million, would be procured through international competitivebidding in accordance with Bank guidelines for those contracts valued over

1/ For further details clarifying fertilizer procurement, see Annex 8,Appendix 1.

- 19 -

US$75,000, and through competitive bidding and in accordance with local pro-cedures satisfactory to the Bank for contracts of less than US$75,000. Forcontracts under US$10,000, direct competitive shopping would be employed.Domestically manufactured goods would be allowed a 15% preference or theapplicable import duty, whichever is lower. Experience has shown thatcontracts for buildings, houses and FSC complexes valued at US$11.0 millionare not attractive to foreign contractors due to dispersed locations, smallsize of contracts and competitiveness of local contractors; such contractswould be awarded on the basis of local competitive bidding. Constructionof roads and wells would be undertaken by the project on force account, apractice that is proving successful on the northern projects. Constructionby force account is necessary due to the scattered nature of the works, theneed for fast and flexible construction, and the acute shortage of contractorsable or willing to undertake the work. A large part of project cost would besalaries, operating expenses, training costs, nursery operations and seedpurchases valued at US$36.3 million, and for staff costs and operating ex-penses of APMEPU valued at US$4.1 million, and are unsuitable for competitivebidding. The services of consultants and expatriate staff valued at US$3.5for the State component and US$1.4 million for APMU would be obtained inaccordance with procedures acceptable to the Bank. An amount of US$43.7million would cover contingencies.

Disbursement

5.12 The Bank loan would be disbursed during the five-year period1978-1982 as follows:

State Component

- 100% of the total foreign exchange costs of directly importedvehicles and equipment and spare parts (or 70% of the costs ofthese items if locally procured) totaling US$3.6 million.

- 100% of the total foreign exchange costs of directly importedequipment, furnishings and materials (or 70% of the costs ofthese items if locally procured) totaling US$1.3 million.

- 100% of the total foreign exchange costs of directly importedfertilizer and insecticides calculated incrementally (or 70%of the cost of these items if locally procured) totalingUS$3.9 million.

- 100% of the costs of internationally recruited staff, includingtheir salaries, allowances and recruitment costs, and of con-sulting services and scholarships totaling US$3.5 million.

- 40% of the costs of buildings and houses totaling US$3.3 million.

- 15% of the costs of local staff totaling US$3.8 million.

- 20 -

Federal Component

100% of the total foreign exchange costs of directly importedvehicles and equipment for APMEPU (or 70% of the cost of theseitems if locally procured) totaling US$0.5 million.

100% of the costs of APMEPU internationally recruited staffincluding their salaries, allowances and recruitment costs,and of consulting services totaling US$1.4 million.

20% of the costs of local staff of APMEPU totaling US$0.4 million.

Unallocated

An unallocated amount of US$13.3 million.

5.13 Disbursements would be fully documented. Disbursements against thecost of local staff would be against certified records of expenditures, thedocumentation of which would not be submitted to the Bank, but would beretained by APMU and APMEPU for review by supervision missions and theauditors.

Budgets, Accounts and Audits

5.14 Annual and quarterly budgets would be prepared by APMU for approvalby APEC. APMU would establish monthly cash flow statements which would besubmitted to APEC for monitoring, but would be authorized to operate on thebasis of these statements unless informed otherwise by the Chairman of APEC.APMU would prepare for prompt submission to the Bank quarterly and annualprogress reports including summaries of project expenditures and use offunds. Identical procedures would apply for APMEPU.

5.15 On the basis of the approved annual project budget, the State andFederal Governments would make appropriate budgetary allocations and there-after would make available to APMU all necessary funds quarterly and inadvance. Identical procedures would be followed by FMG for APMEPU. Duringnegotiations it was agreed that a project bank account would be establishedwith adequate funds as a condition of loan effectiveness.

5.16 APMU and APMEPU would keep adequate records to reflect, in accord-ance with sound accounting practices, their operations and financial posi-tion and would have these accounts audited by a firm of independent externalauditors acceptable to the Bank; the audited accounts and the auditor'sreport would be submitted to the Bank within four months of the end of thefiscal year. The project would maintain a central accounting system fromwhich would be drawn the project's consolidated statements. In addition,project activities identified as potentially self-sustaining commercial unitssuch as farm input supply would have separate sets of financial statementsprepared along commercial lines. During negotiations assurances were ob-tained that the requirements set out in paras 5.14, 5.15 and 5.16 would beestablished to the satisfaction of the Bank.

- 21 -

VI. ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

Organization

6.01 The project organization would be modeled on the three NorthernAgricultural Development Projects which so far have proved successful.The project would be executed by a largely autonomous and independent unitunder the State Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources (MANR); and itsorganization would consist of the Ayangba Project Executive Committee (APEC)and the Ayangba Project Management Unit (APMU). During negotiations it wasagreed that as a condition of loan effectiveness Benue State would publishin the Gazette a notice establishing APMU and APEC in a form and with powersand responsibilities acceptable to the Bank.

6.02 APEC would have full authority for project execution and wouldapprove budgets, appoint senior staff, deal with major procurement mattersand award all large contracts. APEC membership would include: PermanentSecretary, MANR (Chairman); one representative, each from the Ministriesof Finance and Economic Planning, Local Government, Works, and Trade, Indus-tries and Cooperatives; a representative of the Water Board; four representa-tives of the project area appointed by the Military Governor upon recommenda-tion of the LGC Advisory Committees; Chief Agricultural Officer; Chief Veter-inary Officer; Chief Conservator of Forests; Chief Fisheries Officer; ProjectManager; and the Project's Director of Administration (Secretary).

6.03 Project organization is detailed in Annex 7 and Supplement 10, andconsists of four major departments: Administration, Commercial Services,Development Services, and Engineering. In addition, an Evaluation Officer anda Stores Control Officer would be responsible directly to the Project Manager.

6.04 Relations with the local people would be maintained through fourLocal Advisory Committees. Membership of each advisory committee wouldinclude: the Chairman of LGC as Chairman; two representatives of LGC; re-presentative of the cooperative union; all District Heads; the four projectDepartment Directors; and a Senior Administration Officer (Secretary).

6.05 Except for the State forest reserves and the Alloma Oil Palm Estate,all existing MANR facilities would be brought under the control of APMU.

Staffing

6.06 A high level of management efficiency and technical competencewould be required as the project is both large and complex. Well-educatedand trained personnel are available in Nigeria but, because of fast economicgrowth particularly in the industrial sector, the creation of seven newStates, and the difficulty of employing personnel from other States, demand onavailable manpower is high. The most critical period will be the start-upyear and the subsequent two or three years of project implementation whenbasic structures have to be developed, systems tested and modified, and stafftrained at all levels. Although, where possible, qualified and experiencedNigerians would be recruited, many key positions would have to be filled

- 22 -

through inLevnational recruitment. Key project staff comprise the ProjectManager and -;- e Heads of Administration, Commercial Services, DevelopmentServices, and Engineering Departments, and during negotiations assuranceswere obtained that they would be appointed with qualifications, experienceand terms and conditions of service satisfactory to the Bank, and that staffappointments for the Heads of all Divisions (Annex 7, Table 2) would besuitably qualified and experienced and would be appointed by APEC in con-sultation with the Project Manager. Qualifications and job descriptions forall senior staff have been prepared and are in the supplementary annexes.

6.07 The Agricultural Projects Management Unit of the Bank's West AfricanRegion is assisting in recruitment and contract administration of internationalstaff, and is currently advertising for and recruiting staff for the project.Internationally recruited staff would be employed either under direct Govern-ment contract or seconded under standard World Bank secondment contract.Staff cost would be debited against the special prefinancing fund, establishedunder a memorandum of understanding of June 30, 1975, between the Bank andFMG, which will be replenished when the loan becomes effective.

6.08 Local staff recruitment and terms and conditions of employmentwould vary. Those employed by the State Government would be transferred tothe project; incentives including housing allowances and higher salary levelswould be provided. Other staff would be directly recruited and employed onthree-year renewable contracts. During negotiations assurances were obtainedthat Government would transfer adequate numbers of competent staff to APMU.

Input Delivery and Credit Arrangements

6.09 The project would be responsible for procurement, distribution andsale of fertilizers, seeds, insecticides, sprayers and other farm inputs andequipment. Distribution would be made through the Farmers Service Centers(FSCs), of which 30 would be built under the project (see para 4.16). Gener-ally five FSCs would be supervised and coordinated by a Development Center(DC).

6.10 An Assistant Agricultural Superintendent would be responsible forFSC operation and its staff, including a Storekeeper, Salesman and, as of Year3, a Marketing Assistant. DC staffing would involve an Agricultural Superin-tendent, a Sales Supervisor, a Marketing Advisor, and a Credit Officer andCredit Assistants. Marketing staff would build up during the project period,initially at DC level.

6.11 A radio link would be established with APMEPU in Kaduna to providegood communications and to make the project delivery system more effective.Internal project radio networks would link DCs with project headquarters and,through vehicle radios, with senior staff and road brigades.

6.12 Issues relating to fundamental policy questions, including subsidiesand interest rates, are referred to at Chapter II. Current Government policies

- 23 -

are unavoidable and have to be reflected at project level. Consequentlyat current fertilizer subsidy levels (80%), it is unlikely that seasonalcredit would be required, and where possible, sales would be on a cash basis,although deferred payment against a 10% price markup would be available forgroup orders. Medium to long term credit (maximum five-year loan) would beavailable to farmers and farmers groups, under advisement from the project'sfarm advisory service, for land clearing, sprayers, farm equipment and forstorage improvement. Farmers would pay a 10% service charge and in generalinterest rates would follow the Nigerian Agricultural Bank rate and would varybetween 5.5% and 9% per annum, with the specific rate to be charged in anyyear to be determined by APEC. Within the above parameters, the farm advisoryservice would determine the detailed terms of each loan. Where possible, andfollowing the lead of the ongoing projects, the commercial banks and NAB wouldbe encouraged to take responsibility for servicing the medium and long termcredit requirements as and when demand grows.

Postproject Development

6.13 There are two possible alternatives for postproject developmentafter 1982. A second phase project could be contemplated, in which case theproposed project organization would be continued. Alternatively, the projectunit could be partly dismantled and road and well maintenance could revertto LGC. The commercial department could be incorporated as a company toprovide inputs, credit and marketing services to farmers on a commercialbasis. The administration and development services departments could remainunder MANR or might conceivably be handed over to LGC. Indications from theongoing Northern Agricultural Development Projects are that State and FederalGovernments are aware of possible postproject development problems and aflexible approach is being taken early in the implementation cycle to testpossible solutions, and it is likely that the final outcome could, withsome modifications, be replicated for Ayangba. Assurances were obtainedthat before the end of the project period (1981) agreement would be reachedbetween FMG, the State Government and the Bank on the future of the project.

VII. PRODUCTION, MARKETING, FARMER BENEFITS, AND FINANCIALINPLICATIONS FOR GOVERNMENT

Yields and Production

7.01 Due to the complexity of cropping patterns throughout the projectarea, the expected incremental production is difficult to estimate. Fromresearch data and other information, yield potentials have been assessedand are presented as single crop hectare budgets in Annex 2. An estimated300,000 ha is cultivated in the area, 185,000 ha under full season crops, and165,000 ha under early and late season crops. Farmers grow a whole range ofcrops, the proportion changing annually depending on family and market needs.Production forecasts have been set, partly determined on the basis of goodfarmers' response in the Northern Agricultural Projects, and provide a logicalparameter within which input requirements and benefits are estimated.

- 24 -

Total area cropped annually would be 440,000 ha, of which 100,000 ha (23%) isestimated to give improved and advanced yields under the project. This coversthe major crops although development of other crops would not be excluded.Areas developed during the project period, estimated yields and incrementalproduction are summarized (for details see Annex 2) below:

Without /a Incremental /bProject With Project at Full Development Production

Traditional Traditional Improved Advanced Due to Projectarea yield/ area yield/ area yield/ area yield/ tons '000ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

'000 tons '000 tons '000 tons '000 tons

Full Season Crops

Yams 45.0 6.0 25.0 6.0 20.0 13.0 - - 92.0Cassava 60.0 5.0 45.0 5.0 10.0 10.0 5 15.0 100.0Rice 15.0 0.8 4.0 0.8 8.0 1.8 3 2.5 12.8

Early Season Crops

Maize 90.0 0.75 57.0 0.75 18.0 1.75 - - 6.5Melon 15.0 0.35 9.0 0.35 6.0 0.70 - - 2.1

Late Season Crops

Sorghum 22.5 0.60 16.5 0.60 6.0 1.20 - - 3.4Maize 75.0 0.60 57.0 0.60 18.0 1.75 - - 19.6Cowpeas 15.0 0.25 9.0 0.25 6.0 1.50 - - 6.8Benniseed 7.5 0.23 4.5 0.23 3.0 0.60 - - 1.1

/a All crop yields estimated at 'traditional' levels./b Net of seed supply and storage losses.

7.02 In the forestry plantations an eight-year cutting cycle isassumsd. Growth is estimated at 15 m /ha annually, which would produce120 m /hi, giving an estimated produce mix of 1,000 poles (4 m x 12 cm)and 80 m firewood. An average 30-acre fishing lagoon is estimated toyield 20 tons of fish annually. Benefits from poultry and livestockare insignificant and difficult to quantify at this stage.

Markets and Prices

7.03 Annual incremental grain and rootcrop production generated by theproject is expected, in Year 5, to reach 52,000 tons and 192,000 tons respec-tively. Though substantial this should be readily absorbed without a signif-icant impact on domestic priceq. Consumption in the area is expected toincrease but there are also nearby market outlets. Food supply and demandforecasts in Nigeria'indicate that with a rising market-dependent urban

- 25 -

population, foodcrop deficits of 1.2 million tons of grains and 2.5 milliontons of roots can be expected by 1985, unless present levels of productivityare increased. As a rule foodcrops such as those supported by the projectare traded through regular private channels. Marketing arrangements andfacilities although adequate would be further improved through projectactions.

7.04 Prices for various crops, detailed in Annex 12, are based onIBRD forecasts, or on retail value in Nigeria. Farmgate prices usedare forecasts for 1980 in 1976 constant terms summarized as follows:

Economic Financial1976 1980 1976 1980------- Constant 1976 Naira/ton --------

Yams (domestic retail) 74 67 68 61Cassava (domestic retail) 23 22 20 19Husk Rice (import substi-tution) 99 143.5 202.5 2/ 135.5

Early Maize 1/ (importsubstitution) 93 92 91 90

Millet (domestic retail) 103 99.5 95 92Melon (domestic retail) 310 291 288 268Sorghum (import substitution) 98.5 95 101.5 98Late Maize 1/ (importsubstitution) 97 96.5 95.5 94Cowpeas (domestic retail) 188 181 174 167Benniseed (export parity) 175 175 257.5 3/ 158.5

1/ Difference due to different estimates for storage losses.2/ Based on prices presently paid by millers.3/ Based on Marketing Board intervention price.

Farm Benefits

7.05 Typical farm models have not been prepared, as farm sizes andproduction patterns vary considerably. Direct benefits to farmers areevaluated from single crop budgets and overall benefits on the basis ofthese budgets and assumed adoption rates for various crops. Net returnsat actual farmgate prices per hectare and per manday resulting from theproposed technology improvements are summarized below (details in Annex 2):

- 26 -

IncrementalWithout Project With Project Return

Net Return Net Return Net Return Net Return Per IncrementalPer Hectare Per Manday Per Hectare Per Manday Manday____________________--------- Naira ----- …----------------------

Yams 274 1.6 612 2.4 4.5Cassava(improved) 95 1.1 190 1.5 2.4Cassava(advanced) 271 1.8 4.1Rice(improved) 157 1.4 346 2.2 4.2

Rice (advanced) 475 2.7 4.9

Maize (earlyseason) 65 1.0 145 1.5 2.7

Maize (lateseason) 55 1.0 151 1.7 2.8

Melon 94 1.3 184 1.7 2.3Sorghum 58 1.1 110 1.4 2.1Cowpeas 40 0.7 226 1.8 2.7Benniseed 57 1.3 147 2.3 4.5

7.06 Based on a hypothetical 2 ha farm that has a typical croppingpattern for the area, farm incomes would increase from N 236 (US$382) to N 337(US$546) or 43%. Per capita incomes (average family size estimated at 5.5)would increase from N 43 (US$70) to N 61 (US$99).

Financial Implications for Government

7.07 The project does not increase directly-generated revenue to Govern-ment as there are no taxes or cesses on farmers' produce. However, evidencefrom the ongoing projects suggests that considerable secondary economicactivity develops within the vicinity of the project, with the developmentof commercial servicing agencies and minor industries; and there is a markedincrease in consumer goods supply. Indirect Government taxation must there-fore increase considerably. Costs would be recovered where practical; forexample, tree seedlings would be sold at full cost, and levies would becharged for fishing the lagoons. During negotiations assurances were ob-tained that commercial charges reflecting full production costs (see paras4.07 and 4.08) would be charged for tree seedlings; fees would be levied forfishing the lagoons (see para 4.09); income from additional sales would covercosts of poultry units (see para 4.06), and cost recovery procedures for theabove and other FSC-supplied farm inputs would be reviewed annually with theBank. Cash flows for the Federal and State Governments are at Annex 11. Asexpected, substantial negative balances are accrued to both the Federal andState Government budgets. Certain reductions could be made if for examplefertilizer subsidies were reduced. However, generally these negative cashflows are typical of such a project, and under present Nigerian circumstances

- 27 -

can be justified as a means of transferring oil revenues to the rural popula-tion. In summary the State Government would provide an average of N 5.8million (US$9.4 million) per annum during the project development period, andthereafter N 3.0 million (US$4.8 million) annually, in order to maintain itsservices in the area. The Federal Government would provide, during projectimplementation, 25% of total project costs, N 2.5 million (US$4 million)annually, and a rising subsidy payment, leveling off at N 2.2 million (US$3.6million) per annum in the fifth year of the project. Servicing of the Bankloan, included in the above State Government cash flow, would peak at N 3.0million in Year 5, with a gradual decrease to N 1.7 million in Year 20.

VIII. BENEFITS ANID JUSTIFICATION

8.01 The project would in one way or another benefit some 150,000 farmfamilies by providing improved services and a means to improve farm incomes.Direct project benefits would be an annual incremental production at fulldevelopment of 92,000 tons of yams; 100,000 tons of cassava; 12,800 tons ofrice; 26,100 tons of maize; 2,100 tons of melon; 3,400 tons of sorghum; 6,800tons of cowpeas and 1,100 tons of benniseed; partly offset by a reduction inmillet output of 3,200 tons. At full development, fish catches are estimatedat 300 tons annually. Since most production would be traded locally, foreignexchange savings/earnings would be a modest US$9.0 million.

8.02 The project would have substantial secondary but largely unquanti-fiable benefits. The project area would benefit from infrastructure improve-ments including roads and water supplies. The development of farmer groupswould provide a better basis for economic farm support services, and theproject would strengthen the agricultural, technical, managerial, and planningcapabilities in the State.

8.03 The economic rate of return is estimated at 27%. Principalassumptions are in Annex 13, including the sensitivity analysis which showsthat the rate of return remains attractive even under adverse circumstances.A 20% reduction in benefits together with a 20% increase in costs reducesthe rate of return to 16%. Delayed benefits of one year result in a rateof return of 21%. The rates of return for forestry plantations and fisherylagoons are 10.4% and 22% respectively. If livestock, forestry and fisherydevelopment and research and evaluation are excluded, the rate of returnbecomes 35%. The high rate of return is consistent with similar ongoingprojects in northern Nigeria where farmer response has been good. High re-turns are due to minimal long-term farm investments, and to dramatic yieldincreases due to new, but relatively simple and low cost, technologicalintroductions applied to annual crops that currently have very low yields.Even so farmers' response estimates are difficult to assess accurately; how-ever, analysis shows that if project administration and service costs remainconstant, but response is lower than anticipated with a commensurate reduction

- 28 -

in farm inputs, the project would still be economically viable (12% economicrate of return) if the area under improved production were proportionatelyreduced from 100,000 ha to 40,000 ha.

8.04 Smallholder agricultural development projects are inherently andconceptually complex and full attainment of project benefits might con-ceivably be jeopardized by risks and uncertainties, particularly throughdelays in implementation and inadequate staffing. Risks due to technicalweaknesses are less, as the technical packages are fairly simple and basedon research data and experience obtained elsewhere in Nigeria. A majoradvantage for project implementation will be the experience to date withthe Northern Agricultural Development Projects.

IX. RECOMMENDATIONS AND AGREEMENTS REACHED

9.01 During negotiations assurances were obtained from Governmentthat:

(a) the loan would be relent by FMG to Benue State under asubsidiary loan agreement on terms and conditions satis-factory to the Bank (AR para 5.07; LA section 3.01(c)); 1/

(b) FMG would allocate in its budget not less than N 16 milliontowards the cost of the State component (AR para 5.08; LAsection 3.02);

(c) FMG would reimburse APMU for fertilizer subsidies nolater than three months after delivery to project stores(AR para 5.09; LA section 3.04 );

(d) budgetary, accounting and reporting procedures would besatisfactory to the Bank; that accounts would be auditedby independent auditors, and that the audited accountsand auditor's report would be submitted to the Bank withinfour months of the end of the final year (AR paras 5.14, 5.15and 5.16; LA sections 3.06 and 3.07; PA sections 3.02 and 3.03);

(e) the Project Manager and the Heads of Administration, Commer-cial Services, Development Services and Engineering would beappointed with qualifications, experience and terms and con-ditions of service satisfactory to the Bank (AR para 6.06;PA section 2.03(a));

(f) staff appointments for the Heads of all Divisions would besuitably qualified and experienced and would be appointedby APEC in consultation with the Project Manager (AR para 6.06;PA section 2.03(b));

I/ AR = appraisal report; LA = loan agreement; PA = project agreement.

- 29 -

(g) the State Government would transfer adequate numbers of com-petent staff to APMU (AP para 6.08; PA section 2.03(c));

(h) before the end of the project period (1981) agreement would bereached among FMG, the State Government and the Bank on thefuture of the project (AR para 6.13; LA section 3.05; PAsection 2.06); and

(i) commercial charges reflecting full production costs would becharged for tree seedlings, and fees would be levied for fish-ing the lagoons; that income from additional sales would covercosts of poultry units; and that cost recovery procedures forthe above and other FSC supplied farm inputs would be reviewedannually with the Bank (AR para 7.07; PA section 3.04).

9.02 During negotiations it was agreed that conditions of loan effec-tiveness would include:

(a) the signing of the subsidiary loan agreement between FMGand Benue State (AR para 5.07; LA section 6.01(b));

(b) Benue State establishing with adequate funds a projectbank account (AR para 5.15; LA 6.01(c)); and

(c) Benue State publishing in the Gazette a notice establishingAPMU and APEC in a form and with powers and responsibilitiesacceptable to the Bank (AR para 6.01; LA section 6.01(d);PA section 2.02).

9.03 It was agreed that as of November 1, 1976, retroactive financingof up to US$550,000 would be made for the appointment of key internationalstaff and the purchase of an aircraft for APMEPU (AR para 5.10; LA Schedule 1,para 4). The cost of international staff would be funded from the prefinanc-ing fund established under a memorandum of understanding of June 30, 1975between the Bank and FMG. This fund would be reimbursed from the loan accountfollowing effectiveness (AR para 6.07).

9.04 On the basis of the above assurances and conditions the projectwould be suitable for a Bank loan of US$35 million.

ANNEX 1

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Project Area

A. Description

1. Location. The project lies between latitudes 6 20' and 8 002' N andand longitudes 6 42' and 7051' E, occupying a total of 1,315,000 hectares.It comprises the whole of Ankpa, Dekina, Idah and Bassa Local GovernmentCouncil (LGC) areas 1/ containing a total of 20 administrative districts.To the north and west the area is bounded by the Benue and Niger rivers andthe southern boundary forms the frontier with Anambra State. The easternboundary adjoins Oturkpo division. The most prominent feature of the area isthe Ankpa Plateau which rises to over 500 m. The gentle to steeply undulatingtopography of the Plateau descends into the deeply dissected piedmont, beforeleveling once again into the lowland plains that border the Benue and Nigerrivers. Elevation at the rivers' confluence is 40 m.

2. Climate. The normal convectional rainfall of the area is slightlymodified by the Plateau, which occupies the southern half of Ankpa division,and the northeastern part of Idah division. Rainfall in the Plateau area isgenerally higher with a more distinct bimodal distribution. At lower eleva-tion northwards to the Benue river and westward to the Niger river, rainfalldecreases slightly and the bimodal pattern is less distinct. Very little rainfalls between November and January. Rainfall commences in February but it isnot agriculturally effective until early April after which it increases to apeak in September, and thereafter diminishes rapidly, and effectively ceasesby the end of October. There is a well-defined rainfall trough in the Plateauarea in late July and August. In the west and south a slight trough may occurin July/August. In the north and northwest a less defined trough gives a moremonomodal type of climate. Rainfall patterns are graphically presented inChart 16363 attached to this annex. Rainfall figures for stations in, orrelevant to, the project area are: Ankpa 1,366 mm; Dekina 1,198 mm; Idah1,266 mm; Lokoja 1,180 mm; and Abejukolo 1,210 mm. Details are in Table 1.The highest recorded annual rainfalls for Ankpa and Idah are 2,085 mm and1,772 mm respectively, while the lowest are 730 mm and 590 mm respectively.

1/ These four LGC areas formed the Igala province before the creation ofthe States.

ANNEX 1Page 2

3. Sunlight hours and radiation are highest in the dry months ofNovember to March with a December average of 8.4 hours. It decreases fromApril to a low of about 4.7 hours in August. Between July and September,average sunlight hours are about 5 per day. Mean air temperatures show abimodal character. The highest temperatures (300 C) are in March. With theonset of the planting rains, air temperatures begin to decline and reach alow of about 250 C or less in August. They then rise again to a high ofabout 270 C in October. Diurnal ranges in temperature vary between 100 C and250 C with the lowest in July and the highest in January.

4. Soils. The soils of the project area are derived from cretaceoussedimentary deposits of sandstones, mudstones and shales. They are generallyferruginous, free draining, low in available plant nutrients and stronglyacid (pH 4.5 to 5.5). Soil differences are mainly associated with topography.At higher elevations with rolling hills, the soil surface becomes coarse-textured and medium to large sheets of iron pans occur usually as cappings tomesas; at medium elevations coarse-textured soils are found overlying fine-textured, deep, well-drained horizons. No ironstone outcrops occur except inareas of very rolling topography. Generally, on the fairly level to gentlysloping land on which most of the farming is done, the soils are sandy anddeep with no ironstone concretions. On the flat flood plains of the mainstreams, deep, imperfectly-drained alluvial soils are found.

5. Very little cultivation is practiced on steep slopes. Farming isconcentrated on flat to moderately sloping areas and as a result there arevery few signs of erosion. Soil erosion is largely contained because of highsoil permeability and gentle relief, but farmers should be educated to ridgealong the contours. The high permeability of the soils, their low pH andorganic-matter content and high content of iron oxides make them poor in theirability to retain inorganic fertilizers and causes problems of phosphorousfixation; this would need to be carefully investigated during project imple-mentation to determine the most suitable method of fertilizer applicationand whether the use of non-acidifying fertilizers is advisable. The lowsoil organic-matter content and adverse soil temperatures at the onset ofthe rains could be improved by returning crop residues and vegetable matterto the soil, and disturbing the soil structures as little as possible. Yammounds are made this way by sandwiching vegetative matter between unbrokenslices of soil and capping the mounds with a grass mulch. Less care is taken,however, when preparing ridges for cereal crops. In this respect, minimumtillage practices could have an important role in the project. There aremany practical problems, however, in applying these techniques on a tropicalsmallholding, particularly in dealing with crop residues, using hand tools,and training farmers in herbicide application. In addition, yam mounds willstill need forming and subsequently breaking down into ridges.

6. A land resource survey of central Nigeria is currently being under-taken by the Land Resources Division of the UK Ministry of Overseas Develop-ment. This survey covers the project area and although an official report

ANNEX 1Page 3

has not yet been published, a soil classification map has been completed andis reproduced in Map 12334 attached to this annex. The related soil classifi-cation is in Table 2.

7. Ecology. Most of the Plateau area lies within the derived SavannahZone with remnants of primary forest which covered much of the area untilsome 40 years ago. The remaining areas of high forest, rich in commerciallyexploitable timber, are now largely contained within gazetted forest reserves,though isolated forest trees including Clorophora, Antiaris, Triplochiton,Nauclea and Khaya, are found on the cleared farms. Farm fallows revert to adense thicket in which Elaeis (oil palm), Anthocleista, Ricinodendron andChlorophora are found, although in many areas Eupatorium is the colonizer tothe exclusion of other species; the dominant tree, however, is the oil palm,both singly and in dense groves. A closed savannah woodland with Daniella,Lophira, Crossoptervx. Detarium and Terminalia latifolia is found on themore elevated lateritic soils.

8. To the north of the Plateau, roughly separated by the 1250 mm iso-hyet line, the area descends through steeply dissected foothills into theSouthern Guinea zone with open savannah woodland containing Uapaca spp.,Lophira lanceolata, Butyrospermum Parkii (shea nut), Detarium senegalense,Daniellia oliveri and Bridelia sp., with a light herb layer and fairly densecoarse perennial grasses. Along and near watercourses, remnants of oilpalm groves (Elaeis quineensis) and fan palm groves (Borassus aethippum)appear, usually as isolated trees. Where cultivation is intense there iswidespread inversion of Imperata (spear grass).

9. Population. People in the area are predominantly of the Igala tribethough Bassa Komo and Bassa Nge are numerically important in the lowlandareas of Dekina Division. Most of the population is concentrated in largenucleated villages with outlying hamlets, though temporary houses may be usedduring the growing season when distant fields are cultivated.

10. A notable feature of the population is a large, but unquantified,floating labor force which annualy migrates to the Western State cocoa grow-ing areas, attracted by higher wage rates than obtainable from farming. Dura-tion of absence can extend to 11 months and local shortage of farm labor isa common complaint from farmers, especially in less densely settled areas.

11. No recent population figures are available because the results ofthe 1973 census, although subjected to postsurvey evaluation, have not beenpublished and are not available for planning purposes. The only census fi-gures available are those for 1963, which show a total population of 684,880for the three divisions as follows: Ankpa, 264,877; Dekina,-188,703; andIdah, 231,300. Population estimates are, therefore, necessarily tentative.The 1973 population was estimated using a 2.6% growth rate, followed by a 2%growth rate for 1973-1980 to reflect migration from the area. On this basis,the area's total population is estimated at 1 million in 1980. With about80% of the population engaged in rural activities and a family size of 6 to 7the number of rural families would be about 150,000 by 1980, cultivatingapproximately 300,000ha (based on an average holding size of 2 ha). Detailsare in Table 3.

ANNEX 1Page 4

12. Services. General communications are unsatisfactory; there are notelephone links and postal services are unreliable. This problem is com-pounded by the area's unfavorable location in regard to general access tothe north and west. Indeed the Niger and Benue rivers represent a psycholo-gical as well as physical barrier to communication with the ferry crossing toLokoja taking at best over 1-1/2 hours and often ceasing for many days duringthe dry season when the river becomes too shallow for water transport.

13. The project area is served by road and river transport. Roads arethe most important transport modes both in terms of volume and provision ofaccess to inhabited areas. Connections between the project area and otherparts of the country are largely satisfactory towards the south and east,but the Benue and Niger rivers, forming about half of the area's border, areconsiderable obstacles to communications to the north and west. Two ferryservices, one at Lokoja and the other at Idah, link the road network in theproject area with that of western Nigeria, but there are no connections tothe north except via the bridge at Makurdi some 180 km east of the area.Transit traffic is therefore limited, and the main cattle routes to the southbypass the area. The Federal trunk road from Oturkpo to Lokoja passes throughthe project area and through Ayangba, where project headquarters will be lo-cated. Federal roads are well built, and adequately maintained, and the StateGovernment is engaged in an extensive improvement program to bring the Stateroads to bituminous surface standards. However, both those State roads arenot yet under this program and Local Government Council (LGC) roads are badlymaintained, and during the rainy season many roads are impassable. All trans-portation of goods by road is controlled by private transport firms or indi-vidual truckers. Bus services, largely unscheduled and operated by owner/drivers, provide passenger transport to most important villages when roadsare motorable. River transport is minimal and is virutally limited to servingthe road links across the Niger. The road network in the area is composed asfollows: Federal roads, 240 km; State roads, 477 km; LGC roads, 895 km; andcommunity roads, 1,500 km. For more details on roads and road development,see Annex 6.

14. Water supplies are unsatisfactory with most of the rural populationrelying on surface sources which are often distant and seasonal. Daily treksof several kilometers are not uncommon, and in some Plateau villages, wateris sold from private bowsers and commands high prices. Borehole schemes wereinstalled on the Plateau in 1960 but none are now operative while a largenumber, sunk between 1954 and 1965, have not yet been fitted with pumps anddistribution facilities. However, work is now underway to rehabilitate theseboreholes, and by end-1977 all 27 boreholes on the Plateau should be opera-tive. This should safeguard water supply in the Plateau area.

15. Education and health facilities are also rudimentary, though con-siderable expansion is planned under the Five-Year Development Plan and underthe program for Universal Primary Education.

ANNEX 1Page 5

16. There is no electrical distribution system though a Rural Elec-trification Program is included in the Third Five-Year Development Plan.

B. Agriculture

17. Farming Systems. The agricultural economy is based on cereal,root, and legume production with supplementary income derived from wild andplanted tree crops, small stock and river fishing. Production is entirelyin the hands of small cultivators using low technology and achieving theirsubsistence requirements and some surplus for sale from a varied range ofcrops and cropping practices.

18. Marked differences in cropping patterns are found in differentecological zones though production techniques are comparable. Intercroppingis commonly practiced, and farmers exploit the long growing season to achievetwo harvests through a system of relay cropping and undersowing of shortduration crops. Production systems are based on bush/fallow cultivation inwhich land is cropped for 4 to 7 years, then rested for 3 to 5 years. Inareas of dense population more continuous cultivation is practiced and fer-tility is supplemented by household wastes, small stock manure and vegeta-tive growth, principally Eupatorium odoratum, which is slashed and left fortermites to convert into humus.

19. Production is primarily oriented towards subsistence security. Poorsoil conditions, seasonal vagaries and low average incomes combine to createan environment in which technological adventure is highly risk discounted.

20. A few small surveys have been undertaken previously, but all lacksufficient scale or detailed breakdown of the the farming system to permit anyform of quantifiable assessment of the crop production complex. Considerableprimary data collection was undertaken by the preparation mission and ananalysis of 1963 air photographs and other data indicated an average farm sizeof about 2 ha.

21. Agriculture is considered a task for men. Practices vary with dis-tricts but women do not regularly work in the fields, their family role beingmainly confined to domestic chores.

22. Annual Crops. Cereal production is widespread, with maize, milletand sorghum occupying around 40% of the annual cropped area. Millet is mainlygrown as an early crop but is secondary in importance to early maize, most ofwhich is harvested as a green crop and finds a ready market. Late maize,grown almost entirely as a grain crop, is widespread in the Plateau zone butis replaced by tall sorghum in the piedmont and lowland areas. Rice is animportant source of food and cash income, and is grown on the lowland hydro-morphic soils where rainfall is naturally supplemented by lateral run-off.

ANNEX IPage 6

23. Root crops occupy a prominent position in the economy and a largeproportion of cash income is derived from the lucrative yam, though its culti-vation is restricted to the more fertile areas, where it is usually grownas the first crop of the bush/fallow rotation. Cassava is the basic staplefood and is widespread in all areas, often growing as an end-of-rotationcrop when fertility has been depleted to the extent that little else willgrow. Cassava is much valued due to its reliable yield and its suitabilityfor inground storage, thus serving as a secure food reserve which can beharvested as and when needs require. Cocoyam is commonly grown in the palmgroves of the Plateau zone and as a compound crop but is is not often traded.

24. Cowpeas are widely planted as an intercrop and are often grown inpure stand, particularly in the Plateau zone. Pigeon peas are widespread inthe piedmont zone, common on the Plateau, but only occasionally planted inthe lowlands. A diverse range of crops makes up the remainder: cotton,once a major cash crop, is now of minor importance; good stands of tobaccoare seen but usually in small compound plots; and bambara nuts, which sup-port a steady local trade, are an important crop in the Plateau zone.

25. Tree Crops. Wild oil palm groves occur throughout the Plateau zoneand provide a substantial source of income for Plateau farmers; oil is pro-cessed traditionally for domestic uses and trading, and kernels are sold toLicensed Buying Agents at gazetted inspection stations. Traditional process-ing is practiced since three 'pioneer' oil palm mills established by the NewNigeria Development Corporation have now closed down. Harvestings from otherwild trees such as shea and kola make small contributions to income. Planta-tion tree crops are not common, though some coffee, cocoa and improved palmhave been established. There is a thriving local trade in citrus.

26. Livestock Production. There is no integration of crop and live-stock farming in its true sense. The small local cattle population is en-tirely in the hands of Fulani pastoralists and although the cattle are wel-comed for their manure value during the dry season when they browse and feedon crop residues, the agriculturists have neither tradition nor interest inhandling cattle themselves. Small stock and poultry which are kept by mostof the agriculturists survive mainly as scavengers around the homesteadand adjacent lands.

27. The area lies entirely within the documented limits of Glossinadistribution and traditionally the cattle population consists almost entirelyof migratory herds, which cross the Benue during the fly-free dry season.The movement has now diminished, but during the last decade there has beena reduction in incidence of trypanosomiasis and a small sedentary herd nowremains throughout the year, confined to the lowland zone of the GuineaSavannah and the Benue flood plains.

28. There are no reliable statistics on cattle numbers in the area butthey are believed to total about 10,000 head. Small stock estimates are39,000 goats, 20,000 sheep and 4,000 pigs; poultry is common in most villages,but their numbers are unknown.

ANNEX 1Page 7

29. There was a trade route passing through the area coming via Makurdithrough Ankpa and on to Idah. There are no check points but some stagingposts have shelters for herdsmen and surface water available for livestock.From figures from the Idah check point it is clear that this route has beendeclining in importance and has presently almost ceased to exist. Since theend of the Civil War, the cattle can once more move due south from Makurdito the southern markets, and thus no longer pass through the project area.

30. Fishing. Fishing is an important industry along the Benue riverand Niger rivers. Little information is available on size and compositionof catches or on the numbers of full and part-time fishermen. The latter,however, are most common and many migrate to the Benue and Niger rivers duringthe dry season both from within and outside the State. The most importantfishing locations are in the swamp and flood areas which become inundatedduring the wet season to form perennial pools or shallow swamps with denseplankton population on which the fish thrive. Fishermen use a wide variety offishing gear, and techniques vary with the changing season. Much of the catchis sold as dried fish, for which there is a strong demand in markets withinand outside the area.

31. Land Tenure. Land is a communal asset and is allocated to communitymembers according to customary usufruct. Responsibility for allocation lieswith the Local Government Council (LGC) and is administered at the locallevel by village chiefs and headmen. The right to cultivate usually carriesthe right to harvest any economic trees, though the felling of certain speciesprotected under forestry legislation requires LGC permission and payment of ascheduled fee.

32. Land rights are inheritable and while in most areas cultivable soilis relatively abundant, it is rarely unclaimed. Inheritance is primogenitaryand present distribution is not entirely equitable, large families commonlybegging or hiring additional areas from more favourably endowed relativesand friends.

33. Land tenure does not constitute an important constraint to develop-ment, however, and a revision of tenure law is neither necessary at thisstage of development nor possible in the absence of specific Governmentpolicy. Certain aspects require clarification, however, such as ownershiprights for farmer planted tree species that are presently scheduled as pro-tected trees with felling revenues paid to the LGC. The project would alsoneed to monitor land settlement developments closely and to asist Governmentin long-term policy formulation.

C. Institutions

34. Some of the major institutions present in the project area, andtheir respective responsibilities, are described below. It should be notedthat Benue State is a new state and that Makurdi became a state capital only

ANNEX 1Page 8

in April 1976. All state infrastructure therefore has to be built up fromzero. A remarkable effort has been made, but most institutions are of ne-cessity new and in the process of settling in.

35. Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources (MANR). MANR isresponsible for State agriculture, livestock, and forestry development andits authority is directed through a Commissioner and Permanent Secretary tothe following divisions: Agricultural Services, Fisheries, Forestry, Pro-duce Inspection and Veterinary, with necessary administrative and accountingbackup. All divisions report directly to the Permanent Secretary. TheAgricultural Services Division incorporates a planning unit and has wide-ranging responsibilities including extension, irrigation, mechanization andfertilizer procurement and distribution. MANR would have responsibility forproject implementation, and existing technical. staff in the area involved indevelopment activities to be expanded by the project would transfer or beseconded to direct project administration, except for staff engaged in forestreserve management and the Alloma oil palm estate (for details see Table 4).

36. Ministry of Works (MOW). MOW is responsible for undertaking allState-financed public works programs. Maintenance operations within the pro-ject area are undertaken by divisional branches of MOW.

37. Ministry of Trade, Industry and Cooperatives. This Ministry admin-isters the Small Industries Credit Scheme which also provides finance foragro-industrial ventures. The scheme is expected to remain a continuingsource of funds for such acitivites. The Registrar of Cooperatives is re-sponsible for supervising the cooperative movement in the State. Cooperativesare not strong in the project area, but there is a strong farmer group move-ment. Government is keen to revive the cooperative movement, but has not yetdetermined whether the existing farmer groups should be incorporated.

38. Cooperatives and Farmer Groups. There are presently 136 primarycooperatives, with a combined membership of 9,000 in the project area, thatwere originally affiliated with the Igala Cooperative Credit and MarketingUnion (ICCMU). ICCMU has been divided into three divisional unions, butdividing assets and liabilities equitably still remains a problem.

39. The Roman Catholic mission has successfully sponsored group forma-tion in the area. The Farmers Councils are small groups (10-25 farmers) andcater to the basic needs of the community; overheads are minimal and farmershave confidence in their organizers' genuine interest in development. Thenetwork consists of 43 zonal committees, 625 Farmers Councils and about 10,000farmers.

40. Local Government Council (LGC). There are four areas, each adminis-tered by its own LGC, situated in the respective main towns of Ankpa, Dekina,Idah and Oguma. Each LGC is organized into functional departments, including

ANNEX 1Page 9

agriculture, livestock, forestry, health, and education, whose activitiesinterface with, and occasionally overlap, those of Government divisions andfield officers. LGC is supported by subordinate councils at district, townand village levels, and is responsible for tax collection, administration ofland allocation, well and feeder road construction and maintenance, buildingand staffing of some dispensaries and clinics, operation of traditional courtsand general augmentation of Government activities in the area. Coordinationbetween Government field officers and LGC is effected by the Resident, thesenior Government representative in the division, who is also responsible forsecurity.

D. State Development Plans

41. The Third Five-Year Development Plan (1975-1980) is ambitious andfar-reaching, though full implementation is uncertain. State planners, how-ever, are confident that all their proposals will be executed on schedule.The Development Plan's agricultural proposals for the area, including certainallied services embraced within the concept of integrated agricultural devel-opment, would be superseded by those contained within this report. Financialestimates for these superseded activities would form the basis of StateGovernment's contribution to project development costs.

42. There are some Development Plan proposals, not embraced by theproject, which could be of direct impact or relevance to it; these include:

a) the development of a steel complex at Ajaokuta whichwould be an important source of employment as well asfood demand, likely to be further enhanced by con-struction of a small industrial estate in the samearea;

b) the establishment of an oil palm plantation and asso-ciated mill at Alloma, Idah Division;

c) there are proven reserves of 60 million tons of coalat Okaba; further studies are being undertaken, butestablishment of a mining complex is likely;

d) a rail link will be made between Ajaokuta and themain north-south rail link; this will traverse theproject area east-west and link up with the main rail-road south of Makurdi;

e) construction of a railroad/road bridge over the Nigerat Ajaokuta. Two more bridges over the Niger arecontemplated: one at Idah and one at Lokojo. Anew road bridge at Makurdi is being constructed andthis seems to make it unlikely that plans to make

ANNEX 1Page 10

another bridge halfway between the confluence of theBenue and Niger rivers and Makurdi will soon materi-alize; and

f) rural electrification and water supply for Idah, Ankpa,Dekina and Ayangba.

NIGERIA

BENRE STATE


Mean Rainfall Tata (mm)

10-day ANKPA DEKINA IDAH LOKOJA ABEJUKOLO

periods Rainfall Cumulative Rainfall Cumulative Rainfall Cumulative Rainfall Cumulative Rainfall Cumulative

Jan 1-10 0.25 .25 1.78 1.78 3.81 3.81 .25 .25

11-20 3.30 3.55 .25 2.03 1.52 5.33 1.7(8 2.0321-31 3.05 6.60 1.78 3.81 3.30 8.63 2.29 4.32 1.7(8 1.r78

Febr 1-10 6.35 12.95 3.30 7.11 2.29 10.92 4.83 9.15 - 1.78

11-20 3.81 16.,76 4.83 11.94 5.59 16.51 2.29 11.44 3.05 4.83

21-28 8.64 25.40 8.38 20.32 4.57 21.08 5.o8 16.52 2.79 7.62

March 1-10 14.48 39.88 10.41 30.73 6.60 27.68 7.11 23.63 5.08 12.70

11-20 9.40 49.28 19.30 50.04 12.19 39.87 11.43 35.o6 15.49 28.19

21-31 24.89 74.17 11.18 61.21 15.75 55.62 24.13 59.19 27.69 55.88

April 1-10 31.75 105.92 26.42 87.63 34.54 90.16 32.51 91.70 28.70 84.58

11-20 39.37 145.29 43.18 130.81 28.70 118.86 29.46 121.16 38.86 123.42

21-30 50.80 196.09 31.50 162.31 43.43 162.29 37.85 159.01 38.35 161.80

May 1-10 51.56 247.65 41.15 203.45 43.69 205.98 45.72 204.73 32.51 194.31

11-20 63.50 311.15 40.64 244.og 49.28 255.26 48.01 252.74 48.77 243.08

21-31 54.61 365.76 53.34 297Y.43 60.71 315.97 58.93 311.67 46.99 290.07

June 1-10 77.64 438.40 57.65 355.09 58.93 374.90 59.94 371.61 45.46 335.53

11-20 64.26 502.67 56.90 411.99 60.71 435.61 55.88 427.49 54.86 390.40

21-30 57.91 56o.58 47.24 459.23 67.82 503.43 47.75 475.24 46.23 436.63

Jully 1-10 63.50 624.o8 44.70 503.94 56.90 560.33 53.85 529.09 57.65 494.28

11-20 57.40 681.48 56.13 560.07 61.'72 622.05 59.44 588.52 60.45 554.74

21-31 41.15 722.63 69.60 629.67 62.74 684.78 60.'71 649.22 61.47 616.20

Aug 1-10 39.12 761.75 34.29 663.96 51.31 736.09 39.62 688.85 73.91 690.12

11-20 43.43 805.18 27.18 691.13 46.74 782.83 60.96 749.81 60.71 750.82

21-31 74.42 879.60 65.28 756.41 69.60 852.42 67.82 817.63 64.77 815.59

Sept 1-10 92.71 972.31 68.83 824.65 90.93 943.36 69.og 886.71 69.60 985.19

11-20 92.96 1,o65.28 72.13 897.38 70.87 1,014.22 74.17 960.88 74.42 959.61

21-30 96.01 1,161.29 60.96 958.34 73.66 1,087.88 72.64 1,033.53 83.o6 1,042.67

Oct 1-10 76.71 1,238.00 76.96 1,035.30 58.42 1,146.30 59.44 1,092.96 60.45 1,103.12

11-20 44.96 1,282.95 59.18 1,094.49 51.31 1,197.61 48.51 1,141.48 60.20 1,163.32

21-31 47.50 1,330.45 43.68 1,138.17 37.59 1,235.20 26.67 1,168.15 27.18 1,190.50

Nov 1-10 19.56 1,350.01 19.81 1,157.99 20.57 1,255.77 7.87 1,176.02 2.28 1,192.78

11-20 6.86 1,356.87 8.38 1,166.37 2.79 1,258.57 2.03 1,178.05 11.68 1,204.47

21-30 2.03 1,358.90 5.33 1,1'71.70 0.76 1,259.33 0.76 1,178.81 - 1,204.47

Dec 1-10 2.54 1,361.44 4.32 1,176.02 0.76 1,260.09 1.02 1,179.83 5.59 1,210.06

11-20 3.81 1,365.25 .25 1,176.27 - 1,260.09 0.76 1,180.59 - 1,210.06

21-31 1.78 1,367.03 - 1,176.27 2.54 1,262.63 0.25 1,180.85 - 1,210.06

Source: An Agroclimatological Atlas for Northern Nigeria.

July 20, 1976

0- 0 '00 - .oO 00 '00

0 -� 00 '0 'oS '00 000 0 00, 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 0 00 5'0 00 0,0 0 0 0 000 0 0 00 0,00

0 0'0 0 0'0 00 00000000000 0 00 - 0 0 0,0 0 0 0 0 00 0-� 0,0 00 .00, 0,0, 0,0 0,0 0,0,00�0 00 00 00 '0 0 - 00 - 0,0 0 0000 00 00 0' 00 00, 00, 00- 0'0 00, 0 00 00' 00 00' o: 00000- CO Co0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 00, 00 '00, 0 00'00 00 0 00 '00 '00 '00 00 '00 '00 '00 00 '0000 0 00 0o�'00 00 'oo '000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0' 0 0,0 0 0 0 0,000 '-'0 0 -00,00,00,00,0 oO 0,00,0 0.OoO 00 -0 0,0 - � 0 00 0,0, .00 0,00,00,00,00,00,00,0,0,00,0,0 0- 0,0, 00 0,0 0000,00 0, 0,0 00,0

0.0 ! 2o 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .0'0 2.� Ooo 00 00 0 000 0 0 o'o 0 0 oo 000 00 000 OOo 0o0 00 o 0 000 00 00 Co 00 00 000 o2 2 00 00 0-0000 0 0 00 00 00 00 0000000 0000000000 00 0,0,0 0,0 0-0 0,0 0,00,0,0, 0,00 0, 0-0 0,00 0,00, 0,00 000 0,00 0,0 0,00 00, 0,00 0,0,0 0,0 00 0,0 000 0,0 0000000 0000 000 0 00 OCX OCX 000 000 000 00 000 '00 000 000 00 '00 00 '000 OCO 00 00 00 0>

'00, 00 000 0, 00 000 000 000 000 000 00 000 00 000 000 00 00 00 00000 0,0 00 0,0 0,0 0,000,0 0,00, 0, 0,0 0,00 0,00 0,o0 000 0,00 000,000-0 0,00 0,0o 0,0 0-0 0,0 a00, 0,00- -- � - -- -� -

0 0 '0 00 00 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0,0 0 0 0 0 0 .0 .0 .0 0 000000 0 .0 .0 '0 '0 0 0 0 0 0

0 C 0 0 0 00.0 2 0, 0,

0 00 0, 0,0 0,C 0, 0, 0 0 0 , 0 0, 0,0 0-0 : :: 2� 0 o C 0'0 ' 0 5 0 00 0 0

00 0,00 XC� � 2 2! 2': 0 2 00-00 0, 0.0 0-C 0, 0, 0.0 0 200-�0, 00 0, 00- 0 � --- 0-0---.---

0,�0, 0, 0,o 00 0 , 0 0, 0,0000 , ' , ' 0 ' ' ' 0�

20 00 0, 0, 0 20, 0 0- 0- 0, 0- 0' 0 0

og 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0

0 o 0 2 2 2 2 � go ggo0 '00 0 00 '00 0 '00 '0 0 o0- 0,00 0, 000, 0, 0,00 '0 0 '0 000 '0 '00.0 0 0, 0,0- 0,00,0,0 0-0 0. 0-0, 0, 0, 00 0 0 0 0 0- 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 o .o 0 0 0, *-o 0,

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '0 .0 0- 0 0, .0'0 '0 0 '0 '0 '0 '0 0 0 0 0 0'0 '0 '0 '0 .0 0,a a a a a a a a 0,0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 0

a -0-'.- - --0-- 0- -- - �5Z'�� 0, ____

0, 0 0, 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 000 000 �, 0 0 0 00,0,0,0,0,0, '00 '0�o 0,�, 5� 0 0 0 0 0

* 00,0 000 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, -0

0, 0- 0-

'00, a -� ___ ___ 0 7 do:!;

� 00.0 � X':'0 00.0 0'0'0 a!'0 00 020000000 00 0'0 0�'00 5,0.0

0000 000000, 0��02�0 � 00,0, &0 00,00,000 � 0-0 0C00� 0 000-0 00 0000,00,00-000 0-0

OO 0,0 0,00 0-OX 0000 0000 toOX C 0 0 , 0 0 �o 00j0 '000 oX �ooo0,'0'o '00 '0.0CC 000000 0,0,

I 0,000,0, I

ANNEX 1Table 3

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


1/Population estimates -and area under cultivation

A. Population 1963 (census) 1973 (2.6%) 1980 (2%)

Ankpa 264,877 342,385 393,290Dekina 188,703 243,921 280,187Idah 231,300 298,983 343,436

684,880 885,289 1,016,913

B. Rural Population 616,392 (90%) 813,530 (80%)

C. Rural Families 112,071 147,914(family size 5.5) 150,000

D. Area Under Cultivation 224,142 295,828(2 ha) 300,000

E. DensityTotal Area 13,150 km 52 77

1/ 1973 population census results are not available and the latest population,ddtaare from 1963. In the absence of any other reliable data the 1973 figure has beenarrived by using Nigeria's standard 2.6% growthrate; the 2% growthrate thereafterreflects the migration of labor to other areas.

ANNEX 1Tab]e 4

N I G E R I A

Benue State


Estimated Staff Strength in the Project Area -

Number Estimated

All 2/ I 43 Salaries

Agricultural Services (Staff Strength)

Principal Agricultural Superintendent - 1 - 1 3,700Higher Agricultural Superintendent 2 1 - 3 11,100Senior Agricultural Superintendent - - 1 1 3,700Agricultural Superintendent 1 1 2 4 11,600Agricultural Assistant 22 17 6 45 76,500

Produce Inspection

Produce Superintendent 6/ 2 2 1 5 14,500Produce Inspector 4 5 5 14 23,800Produce Examiner 2 3 7 12 15,600

Irrigation

Irrigation Superintendent 6/ 1 1 - 2 4,400Agricultural Assistant - 1 - 1 1,700Agricultural Instructor 1 1 - 2 2,600Irrigation Overseer - 5 - 5 5,000Tracer - 2 - 2 2,000Technical Officer - - 1 1 2,900Others 3 2 - 5 5,000

Engineering

Mechanical Superintendent61 1 1 1 3 8,700Assistant Superintendent - 3 1 - 4 8,800Mechanics 7 3 9 19 55,100Drivers - 7 8 15 13,500Operators (Tractors) 21 5 13 39 39,000Welders - - 2 2 2,600Others 6 4 - 10 10,000

Fisheries

Fishery Assistant - 1 8 9 15,300Fishery Overseer - - 1 1 1,300Boat Driver - - 1 1 1,000

TO T AL 339,400

1/ Ankpa 2/ Dekina 3/ Idah 4/ Total

5/ Tentative listing as the new MAnU9 was just in the process ofestablishing its staff strength. Staff under training notincluded.

6/ Or equivalent positions

NIGERIAAYANGBA AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Mean Rainfall

120 10 DAY TOTALS

100

I DAH

80 _ _ _ _ _ _ AANKA

A~~A

60 A,''

7N I~~~I

yJ/LOKJKOA

/ / ~~~~DEKINA

20

I /

Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June Jul. Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.

MONTHS

World Bank-16363

_______ _______ _______ _______ ______ _______ _______ _______ ______ ___ ___ _______ __IBRDI R 12233

B20 E GA

1 N

NIGERIA

i v.AYANGBA AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTAYlNGB- SOIL CLASSIFICATION _ ,

l , 1>t\ . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~O~F,.

ANNEX 2

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Summary of Crop and Farm Development

A. Crop Development

1. A detailed technical appraisal of production opportunities in theproject area is contained in Supplement 2, along with supporting economicanalyses and production estimates; a summary of the supplement's contents isoutlined below.

2. Cropping Systems. A wide range of crops is grown in the area cover-ing full season crops, which exploit most or all of the long growing seasonof over 200 days, and short duration crops, for which rainfed double croppingis possible. The principal crops are usually grown sole or as single dominantcrops with plots of scattered admixtures that exert insignificant competingeffects on principal crop yields.

3. Little technical crop improvement has been introduced into the areaand substantial scope exists for its development. Suitable technical packageshave been assembled by using research results from IAR and IITA, and fromobservation and field trials within the area. Although the project wouldactively pursue development of all crops in the area for which suitabletechnical opportunities exist, quantified analysis has been restricted toyams, cassava, rice, maize, millet, melon, sorghum, cowpeas, and benniseed.Estimates of areas presently planted to these crops are in Table 1, and asummary of the technical packages proposed is contained in Table 2.

4. Crop Budgets. Summaries of crop budgets under existing and proposedtechnology are contained in Table 2. Economic and financial translations ofthe physical budgets have been made using the commodity price forecastssummarized in Annex 12. Economic budgets have been calculated using theeconomic farmgate price forecasts and include a shadow price for labor ofN 1.00 per manday. Financial budgets have been calculated both at fullcost 1/ and actual farmgate prices, and are expressed in returns per hectareexcluding labor, and in returns per manday. Also included are incrementalreturns per incremental manday. An average farm budget has also been calcu-lated. This is based on a hypothetical farm of 2.0 ha (average farm size)using the cropping patterns in Table 1 and the adoption rates given inTable 3. The average farm budget given in Table 4 reveals an average without-project farm income of N 260 and a with-project farm income of N 400; theincrement would thus be N 140 (54% increase).

1/ Without taking into account price distortions and subsidies.

ANNEX 2Page 2

5. Labor Requirements. Labor availability is an important constrainton holding size and the impact of increased labor requirements under improvedtechnology must be taken into account. Annual labor requirements includedin the individual crop budgets have been expressed on a monthly profile inTable 5 and include all operations necessary to convert the planted cropinto the marketable form used as the basis of the farmgate price projectionsin Annex 12.

6. Production Development. New technology adoption rates have beenestimated and areas developed are presented in Table 3. The effect of con-tinuing labor constraints has been taken into account in making these projec-tions, and a decline in early season crop plantings is expected so that peakrequirements in the existing farm labor profile will not be increased.

7. Graphical presentation of farm labor profiles under existing andimproved technology is given in Chart 16328 attached to this annex. Thesehave been calculated for a hypothetical 2.0 ha farm using the croppingpatterns given in Table 1 and the adoption rates included in Table 3. Thegraphs show that with small reductions in early season crop plantings, theincreased labor demands of new technology improve labor distribution through-out the profile rather than raise peak requirments.

8. Estimates of economic production benefits resulting from the projectare included in Table 2 and have been calculated from the economic farmbudgets of Table 4. Physical production estimates net of shortage losses andseed requirements are given in Table 6.

B. Farm Development

9. Agricultural Services. Lack of reliable and adequate agriculturalservices is presently the main constraint on production. Technical dissemina-tion services are also inadequate but in any case have little relevance ifthe basic ingredients of technology cannot be purchased.

10. The project would, therefore, create a number of multifunctionalFarmers Service Centers (FSC) at which basic project field services would beclustered; suggested FSC locations are shown on Map IBRD 12328 attached tothis report. A total of 30 FSCs would be developed, each serving a hinter-land of up to 15 km radius; this density allows a reasonable balance to bemaintained between ease of access by farmers and economies of scale forcommercial services. Proposals for developing a sound and commercially-based trading network in the area are discussed separately in Annex 8.

11. General Extension. Responsibility for crop production would restwith a Crop Development Division which would provide extension field staffat the ratio of I to 500 farm families. On this basis, the following exten-sion staff (see also Table 7) would be required:

ANNEX 2Page 3

Title Grade Number

Senior Agricultural Officer SAO 1Agricultural Officer AO 3Agricultural Supervisor AS 6Assistant Agricultural Supervisor AAS 30Agricultural Assistant AA 60Agricultural Instructor AI 240

Extension staff would provide the main communication link between projectmanagement and farmers and would be responsible for advising farmers ontechnical and economic aspects of crop production; speedy disseminationof market intelligence information; providing a continual feedback of infor-mation to project management; and providing follow-up in field supervisionof farmers involved in the project's training program. Requirements for staffand farmer training are dealt with separately in Annex 7. In addition to theextension service, the Crop Development Division would also have a researchunit and seed multiplication unit; details on these units are in Annex 7.

12. Group Formation. Providing services to small farmers is frequentlyhampered by diseconomies of scale; some form of rural grouping is, therefore,essential if commercially-based services are to become viable and if projectsare to be replicated without making heavy demands on public funds. Everyopportunity would be taken to provide incentives to farmers to group andbulk their crop input requirements, and training and extension would largelybe directed towards group representatives in order to promote technicaldissemination between farmers. Important groundwork in group developmenthas already been started by the Roman Catholic Mission; there are presently625 Farmers Councils in the area with a total membership of about 10,000farmers.

13. Advanced Management. In order to promote advanced farm development,the project would include a separate and specialist Farm Management Divi-sion. 1/ The Division would specifically attend to large farmers and pro-gressive smallholder management groups who display sufficient technical andbusiness acumen to advance beyond the level of basic crop husbandry and yieldimprovements described in Section A of this annex; advanced farm developmenthas been shown to have an important role to play in the three NorthernAgricultural Development Projects, both in spearheading technologicaldevelopment and in attracting private capital into agriculture.

14. The Division would be responsible for operating the existing tractorhire unit (THU); land-use planning and layout of block farming areas; pro-viding investment, business and advanced production advice and assistanceto farmer groups, and for liaison with cooperatives and Farmers Councils.

15. Expansion of the THU would be limited to the equivalent of twotractor units per FSC and attention would be directed towards substantiallyimproving operating performance with a long-term objective of transfer toprivate ownership. Tractor deployment would center on areas most suitable

1/ For further details refer to Supplement 3.

ANNEX 2Page 4

for large-scale operation and would be utilized within the framework of farmsystem development involving sound land use planning, soil conservation anda sound rotation to ensure long-term maintenance of soil fertility. Thepresent charges on an acre basis would be replaced by hourly rates and ser-vices would be provided on a cash basis only.

16. Credit (see Annex 8, Table 3) would be provided for land clearingand for limited subsoiling and ripping operations available from surplusplant capacity in the Engineering Department. Credit for private ownershipof tractors would be sought from the commercial banks; this is proving par-ticularly successful in the three Northern Agricultural Development Projects.Farmers wishing to operate their own equipment would be assisted by theproject in preparing the necessary financial data.

17. The project would also closely monitor work at IAR and IITA on smallequipment and modified and minimum tillage operations, and provide fielddemonstrations to farmers as appropriate. The farm labor profiles shown inChart 16328 attached to this annex indicate that new technology could substan-tially modify the present labor peaks in the growing season; such changes willrequire close monitoring by field staff with supporting advice on both invest-ments to improve labor productivity and crop purchase and trading arrangementsinvolving haulage direct from the field.

18. Development Costs. Capital and operating costs of the ExtensionService and Farm Management Division are given in Tables 8 and 9.

Annex 2

Table 1

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Estimated Cropping Patterns

WITHOUT PROJECT WITH PROJECT% Hectares % Hectares

Full Season Crops

Yams 15 45,000 15 45,000Cassava 20 60,000 20 60,000Rice 5 15,000 5 15,000Other 1/ 5 15,000 5 15,000

Early Season Crops

Early Maize 30 90,000 25 75,000Early Millet 10 30,000 7.5 22,500Early Melon 5 15,000 5 15,000Other 1/ 10 30,000 10 30,000

Late Season Crops

Tall Sorghum 7.5 22,500 7.5 22,500Late Maize 25 75,000 25 75,000Cowpeas 2/ 5 15,000 5 15,000Benniseed 2.5 7,500 2.5 7,500Other 1/ 15 45,000 15 45,000

Total Cultivated Area 3/ 300,000 300,000

1/ Other crops include cocoyams, pigeon peas, groundnuts, bambara nuts, cottonand vegetables.

2/ As sole crop.3/ Full season plus late season.

All crops specified grown as sole crops or principal crops in crop mixtures.

June 29, 1976

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE

AYANGRA AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

One Hectare Annual Crop Budgets

Economic Financial ReturnsOutput Inputs Rcturns

0utput Sends Fertilicer Insecticide Labor Fully Costed Actual Parate PricesProduct Yiold 3/ CAN TSP NP Drensing Storage Per hectare Pe t.tl FrMnay __icremetal

------------- -- Kg ---------------- - Mandayn ---- ----------- Naira 2/…---- 5/i--------- ---------- 5----

Full Season Crops

Yams: Traditional Tubers 5,000 1,500 175 126.5 274 1.6 - 274 1.6Inproved Tubers 13,000 2,500 200 50 17.5 250 396 580 2.3 4.1 612 2.4 4.5

Cassava: Traditional Tubers 5,000 6,500 90 20 95 1.1 - 95 1.1Improved Tubers 12,500 6,500 130 100 190 1.5 2.4 190 1.5 2.4Advanced Tubers 25,000 10,000 200 100 50 150 128 211 1.4 1.2 272 1.8 4.1

Rice: Traditional Paddy 800 25 110 1 106 1.0 - 157 1.4 -Improved Paddy 1,800 43 100 50 0.15 155 69 208 1.3 2.3 346 2.2 4.2Advancedq Paddy 2,500 70 200 75 50 0.25 175 118 269 1.5 2.5 475.5 2.7 4.9

Early Season Crops

Maine: Traditional Stain 750 20 65 2 65.5 1.0 - 65.5 1.0Improved Grain 1,750 20 100 75 25 0.1 2.3 95 27.5 116 1.2 1.7 145 1.5 2.7

Millet: Traditional Grain 450 8 50 (6) 41 0.8 - 41 0.8

Melon: Traditional Seeds 350 1 70 31.5 93.5 1.3 - 93.5 1.3Improved Seeds 700 1.5 100 110 77.5 170.5 1.6 1.9 184 1.7 2.3

Late Season Crops

Sorghum: Traditional Grains 600 5 55 1.5 58.5 1.1 - 58.5 1.1Improved Grains 1,200 8 100 50 0.03 1.5 80 7 88 1.1 1.2 110 1.4 2.1

Maine: Traditional Grains 600 20 55 1 54.5 1.0 - 54.5 1.0 -

Improved Grains 1,750 25 100 75 25 0.1 2.5 90 40 122.5 1.4 1.9 151.5 1.7 -8

Cowpeas: Traditional Beans 250 10 55 (11.5) 40.5 0.7 - 40.5 0.7Advanced 4/ Beans 1,590 25 50 50 0.07 2.5 125 108.5 211 1.7 2.4 226.5 1.8 2.7

Bennineed: Traditional Grain 230 5 45 (5.5) 35.5 0.8 - 57.5 1.3 -

Improved Grain 600 10 100 50 65 14.3 69 1.1 1.7 147.5 2.3 4.5

1/ See Supplement 2 for detailed budgets.2/ Using projected 1980 prices expressed in 1976 constant Nairs t3I Kg of sets for yams, number of cuttings for cassava.4/ Budget includes spraying costs5/ Incr-emstal returnls per incremental Manday

April 14, 1977

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE

AYANG8 GCLUA EEOMN RJC

Production Eenefits

AREA DEVELOPED ECONOMIC BENEFTS -

Year 0 Year I Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 0 Year I Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

---------------------- '000 ha -'-0------- -- ---------------------- '00 Naira ---------- --------

Pull Season Crops

Yams Traditional 45 41 37 33 29 25 5,692 5,186 4,680 4,174 3,668 3,162

Improved - 4 8 12 16 20 _ 1,584 3,168 4,752 6,336 7,920

Cassava Traditional 60 60 59.9 59,4 57 45 1,200 1,200 1,198 1,188 1,140 900

Improved - - 0.1 0.4 2 10 - 10 40 200 1,000

Advaneed - - - 0.2 1 5 - _ - 26 28 640

Rice Traditional 15 14 12.5 10 7 4 15 14 13 10 7 4

Improved - 1 2 4 6 8 - 69 138 276 414 552

Advanced - - 0.5 1 2 3 - - 59 118 236 354

OThER 15 15 t5 15 15 15 - - - - - -

Earlv Seasn CroPs

Early Maize Traditional 90 88.5 87 78 68 57 180 177 174 156 136 114

Improved - 1.5 3 7 12 18 - 41 83 193 330 495

Early Millet Traditional 30 30 30 27.5 25 22.5 (180; (180) (180) (165) (150) (135)

Early Melon Traditional 15 14.5 14 13 11 9 473 457 441 410 347 284

Improved - 0.5 1 2 4 6 - 39 78 155 310 465

OTHER 30 30 30 30 30 30 - - - - - -

Late Season Crops

Tall Sorghum Traditional 22.5 22 21.5 20.5 18.5 16.5 34 33 32 31 28 25

Im,roved - 0.5 1 2 4 6 - 4 7 14 28 42

Late Maize Traditional 75 73.5 72 69 63 57 75 74 72 69 63 57

Improved - 1.5 3 6 12 18 - 60 120 240 480 720

Cowpeas Traditional 15 14.5 14 13 11 9 (173) (167) (161) (150) (127) (104)

Advanced - 0.5 1 2 4 6 - 54 109 217 434 651

Benniseed Traditional 7.5 7.0 6.5 6 5.5 4.5 (41) (39 ) (36) ((33) (301 (25)

Improved - 0.5 1 1.5 2 3 - 7 14 21 29 43

OT}ER 45 45 45 45 45 45 - - - - - -

TOTAL 11 - - - - - 7,815 8,613 10,018 11,742 14,007 17,164

Increment - - - - - 1,338 7,743 4,467 6,732 9,889

1/ Total does not include rounding errors or the economic benefits from 'Other Crops'

2/ Area multiplied by economic returns per ha (See table 2).

April 14, 1977

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


AVERAGE FARM BUDGET V/

A Y A N G B AWITHOUT PROJECT WITH PROJECT

Area Net Return 2/ Area Net Return _(ha) (N) (ha)

Full Season Crops

Yams - Traditional .300 82.35 .167 45.84Improved - - .133 81.40

Cassava - Traditional .400 38.0 .30C 28.5Improved - - .067 12.73Advanced - - .033 8.96

Rice - Traditional .100 15.7 .027 4.24Improved - - .053 18.34Advanced - - .020 9.51

Early Season Crops

Maize - Traditional .600 39.3 .3&0 24.89Improved - - .120 17.4

Millet - Traditional .200 8.2 .150 6.15

Melon - Traditional .100 9.35 .060 5.61Improved - - .040 7.36

Late Season Crops

Sorghum - Traditional .150 8.78 .110 6.44Improved - - .040 4.4

Maize - Traditional .500 27.25 .380 20.71Improved - - .120 18.18

Cowpeas - Traditional .100 4.05 .060 2.43Advanced - - .040 9.06

Benniseed - Traditional .05 2.88 .030 1.73Improved - - .020 2.95

TOTAL 235.86 336.83

Increment 100.97

(D- >ax

1/ Calculated by applying the average cropping pattern of each area tohypothetical average farm. Excludes returns from 'Other' crops.

2/ Actual farmgate prices (see Table 2).

April 14, 1977

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


ANNUAL CROP LABOR REQUIREMENT

(Mandays per Hectare)

Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May. Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Total

Full Season Crops

Yams Traditional 18 _ 5 10 15 15 17 25 20 25 25 175

Improved 20 5 15 20 15 15 22 30 34 43 31 250

Cassava Traditi-nal - - 12 14 14 14 6 10 10 10 - - 90

Improved - 16 27 22 17 17 11 10 - 10 - _ 130

Advanced - 16 32 24 18 18 12 20 - 10 - - 150

Rice Traditionial 5 - - - 10 30 15 10 10 10 13 12 110

Improved 10 - - - 20 35 20 15 15 12 18 10 155

Advanced 15 - - - 20 35 20 15 15 19 24 12 175

Early Season Crops

Early Maize Traditional - - 5 13 12 15 10 8 - 2 - - 65

Improved - - 5 16 19 15 18 18 - 4 - - 95

Early Millet Traditional - - 5 14 9 4 14 - 2 2 - - 50

Early Melon Traditional - - 10 2 5 5 5 10 10 23 - - 70

lmproved - - 10 5 10 5 8 17 15 40 - - 110

Late Season Crops

Sorghum Traditional 3 - - - - 12 7 10 5 - 10 8 55

Improved 5 - - - - 15 14 10 5 - 17 14 80

Late Maize Traditional - - - - - - 5 10 15 8 20 - 55

Improved - - - - - - 6 13 16 15 40 - 90

Cowpeas Traditional - - - _ - - - 15 10 5 16 9 55

Advanced - - - - - - - 25 19 14 - 67 325 H 3-

Benniseed Traditional - - - - - - - 13 10 - - 22 45 a x

Improved - - - - - - - 17 17 - - 31 65 U 9

1/ See Supplement 2 for detailed labor profiles for individual crops.

April 14, 1977

NIC-EEIA ANNEX 2

AYANGBA AGRICULTURAL D-TELOIMENT PROJECT Table 6

Pr: duction Estimates

Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year Year 4 Year 5…________ _______________________-( tOOO Tons ------- …------------------------

Fll1 Season CropsYeas

Gross Production 270 298 326 354 382 410- Storage loss 54 60 65 71 76 82- Seed retention 67 72 75 80 84 87- liet Productiorn 149 166 186 203 222 241

Cassava

Gross Production 300 300 300.5 304 320 400- Storage loss - - - - - -- Seed retention - - - -- let Production 300 300 300.5 304 320 400

Rice

Gross Pr.duction 12 13 14.9 17.7 21.t4 25.1- Storage loss - - - - -- Seed retenticn 0. .4 0.4 0.- 0.5 0.6 0.7- Net Production 11.6 12.6 14.5 17.2 20.3 24.4

Farly Season Croos,iaize

Gro:ss Producti^n 67.5 69 70.5 70.s 72 7L.3- Storage loss 6R. 6.9 7.1 7.1 7.2 7.4- Soodl retentioDn 1. 8 1.3 1.3 1.7 1.6 1.5- N.t Procdctior. 58. 60.3 6t.6 62.0 63.2 65.L

lillet

0r ss PrFductioi, 13.5 13.5 13.5 12.4t 11.3 1 0.1- StoraEe l-.s 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 o.5- Soeo retentiLin 0.2 _o C.2 0.? .? .

- N.t ac":- . 12.5 12.6 12.6 11.6 10. 0 I

-ross Pr ductinor c 5.' 5.6 6.0 7- St.rage lnss 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2- Seed retention- Net Prcduction .1 5.2 5.? 5.8 5.5 7.2

Late Season Cr^psS orghun

2ro.s Froduct' n 11.5 13.3 17 .1 t. ?5. 1t7O- St.rage lrsss 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 o. 0o- Seed retentirn 0.1 0.1 0.1 '.1 0.1 0.1- let Producti n 12.7 13.0 13.3 13.? 1t'.C 16.1

I aize

Groo s s 9 ;:du . 50 4:.6.7 48.5 ,1., 5 -5.- S6 r-'ge 'S7-3 2.3 7 A . 3.3- Seed retenti -. 1. 1.5 1.5 1.5 1. L.6- iet Productio- Lt.? 42.5 .,4.6 '?7. 5?.3 'c.s

Cowpeas

Oross Product-on 3.8 ? 5.c 5.3 2.2 11.3- Storage i ss 0. 0.L 0.5 0.6 0.9 1 .1- Seed reterti- 0 0.2 0.2 C.2 C.2 0.2- Net Prdu cti o 3.2 3.0 5.5 7.7 1 0.0)

3enniseed

Gross Producti3n 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.5 2.8- St^rage 1 ss - - - - - -- Seed retetian 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1- Net Pro *'ctirm 1.6 1.0 2.0 2.2 ?.? 2.7

April 14, 1977

ANNEX 2Table 7

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Extension Staff Requirement

UltimatelyGrade Required Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Senior Agricultural Officer SAO 1 1 1 1 1 1Agricultural Officer 1/ AO 3 3 3 3 3 3Agricultural Supervisor 2/ AS 6 4 6 6 6 6Assistant Agricultural

Superintendent 3/ AAS 30 20 30 30 30 30Agricultural Assistant 4/ AA 60 20 30 40 50 60Agricultural Instructor 4/ AI 240 20 60 120 180 240

1/ 1 in each Division2/ 1 for five FSC3/ 1 for each FSC4/ Extension staff to farmer ratio is 1:500 of the estimated number of farm families.

Thus 300 AAs & AIs are ultimately required.

ANNExI 2Table

NIGERIA

BNUJE STATE

AYANIGS AGRICULTUJRAL SPFBWP8IEBT PSO.SECT

Cost, of Etensiono Service 1

lFore Lo lochence LocalUnits OnLt Coats Year 0 year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year S Total 7. Costs Costs

A. Capital

BuildLgs. end Houses

Beolor Houses X/ No 30. (53) 90. 80.01 50 27. 63.0Intermdiate Houes N.IS 21.0 (7) 147.80 (2) 42.0 1880 25 47.3, 141.7Suojor Houses A/ ISo 14.0 (21) 294.0 (10) 140.0 434.0 25 100.5 325.5TreditionaI Houses 3/ N.o 4.0 (20) 00.0 (10) 40.0 (15) 40.0 (10) 40.0 (10) 40.0 240.0 10 24.0 2i6.0

Sebtota1l Houses 611.0 222.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 953.0 206.0 746.2

SEuiPMso

Typewriters 6/ so 05 (11) 5.5 5.5 60 3.3 2.2Calculators z17 ISo 0,6~~~~~~~~N (12) 4.8 4.8 60 2.0 1.9

Vsrious Office Furiture S/ Bet 1.0 (4) 4.0 (2) 2.0 6.0 40 2.4 3.6VenOus Office Furaiture it SeC 0.5 (20) 10.0 (10) 5.0 13.0 40 6.0 9.0Vanfouc Office FurniLture JQ/ Bet 0.9 (9) 7.2 7.2 40 2.9 4.3Enneasion Equipment fl/ Set 0.1 (40) 4.0 (50) __j (70) ~7.0 (70) 7.0 (70) 7.0 30.0 40 12.0 180.

Subtotal 35.5 12.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 60.5 29.5 39.0

Vehicles

fttoa-Shsel Drive 6.0 (2) 12.0 (4) 24.0 (2) 12.0 (4) 24.0 72.0 s0 37.6 14.4Pickup Trucks 4.0 (6) 24.0 (6) 24.0 40.0 00 50.4 9.6Moocoes 1/08(20) 16.0 (10) 8.0 (10) 8.0 (10) 8.0 (10) 8.0 40.0 60 20.0 19.2Bicyclea 11 0.2, - 20) 4.0l (40)) 8..L (60)) 12.0 (60) 12.0 (60) 12.0 48.0 40 19.2 20.0

Subtotal 12.0 68.0 16.0 32.0 68.0 20.0 206.0 144.0 72.0

TOTAL. CAPITAL COMM(A 625.0 325.5 68.0 79.0 115.0 27.0 1.237.5 300.2 057.3

B. Recurrent

Staff Seleriee 7J/

thief Agrooainis Hen-years 32.0 (0.3) 16.0 (1) 22.0 (5) 32.0 (1) 32.0 (1) 22.0 . 144.0 75 100.0 36.0frincips1 Agrioultos1 Officer 7.5 - (1) 7.0 (15 7.5 (1) 7.5 (1) 7.5 (1) 7.5 37.3 - - 37.5Agricaltera1 Aesisteot 1.7 (1) 1.7 (1) 1.7 (1) 1.7 (1) 1.7 (1) 1.7 (1) 1.7 10.2 - -10.2

Costfidential Secrtary 2.9 - () 2.9 () 2.9 () 2.9 () 2.9 (1 2.9 14. 5 14.5Senior Clerk 1.5 - (11) 1.5 ((11) 1.1 ((1) 1.3 (11) 1.5 (1)) 1.5 6.5 - -6.5Cler 1. (1 10 (2) 2.0 (2) 2.0 (2) 2.0 (2) 2.0 (1) 2.0 11.0 - -11.02i0eesenger 0 .8 (11) 0.8 (2) 1.6 (2) 1.6 (2) 1.6 (2) 1.6 (2) 1.6 8.8 8 .0Drivers . (2) 1. ( 2) 1.8 (2) 1.6 (2) 1.8 (2) 1.8 (2) 1.8 10.0 10.8Senior Agricultural Officer 60- (1) 6.0 (1) 6.0 (1) 6.0 (1) 6.0 (1) 6.0 30.0 -3.Agricultural Officer 4.9 (0) 24.5 (3) 14.7 (3) 14.7 (3) 14.7 (3) 14.7 (2) 14.7 00.0 - -980.

AgricultuAral uprvior1 /0 2.9 (4) 11.6 (4) 11.6 (6) 17.4 (6) 17.4 (6) 17.4 (6) 17.4 92.68 92.6

Superinteodent 21/ 2.2 (5) 11.0 (20) 44.0 (30) 66.0 (30) 66.0 (30) 66.0 (30) 66.0 519.0 -319.0Agricultural Assistant 1.7 (20) 34.0 (20) 34.0 (30) 51.0 (40) 40.0 (80) 85.0 (60) 102.0 274.0 3 74.0Agricultural lestrctor 0 1.3 (20) 26.0 (20) 26.0 (60) 78:.0 (120) 106.0 (28) 23.0 (240) 512.0 832.0 8302.0Secetr 17- (4) 6.8 (4) 6. (4) 6.8 (4) 6.6 (4) 6.8 34.0 3 4.0

Clerks 1.0 - 4) 4.04 ((6) 6.0 (6) 6.0~ (6) 6.0O (6) 61 8.0 28.0 - .2.

Me-Ssssger 0.8 - (8) 6. (10) 8.0 (10) 80 (10) 80 (10) 8.0 20.4 - -38.4

Drivers 0 5. (10) 9.0 (10) 9.0 (10) _8.0 (10) 9.0 (10) 8.0 45.0 - -45.1

Subtotal 128.4 215.3 313.7 408.7 503.7 366.7 2,134.5 10.0. 2,076.3

Allowaacee (75%) 15/ 84.5 158.0 211.3 282.0 353.8 425.0 1,492.9 157. 223.9 1,269.0

TOMA JAL1 A1I.AM!9S 212.7 348.3 520.0 691.2 857.5 991.7 3,627.4 531.9 3,295.5

Operat, OneExenses

Fou-whee O1rive An-lal 2.1 (2) 4.2 (6) 12.6 (6) 12.6 (6) 12.6 (8) 12.6 (0) 12.6 87.0 457. 30.2 37.0Pick UPs Annua 1.8 - (6) 10.8 (6) 10.8 (6) 10.8 (6) 10.8 (6) 10.8 54.0 457. 24.3 29.7Office Eopeo.es 16/ . - . ..- -. : . - -

Tors1 Qoeratla Costs 4.2 23.4 23.4 23.4 23.4 23.4 121.2 54.5 66.7

TOTAL BEQRBUNT (OTS (B) 216.8 32217 548.4 714.6 880.9 1.015,1 3.748.6 306.4 3.362.2

C. 082380 TOTAL A + A 039.9 698.2 616.4 795.6 985.9 1,042.1 4,086.1 766.6 4,219.5

j/ Inclding Senior staff of Crop evelopseet DivieLos; for ree...eob and seed sultipILcatianse Annen 7.1/ Fo Chief Agroemiet, PAO and SAO.

3/For AO and AS.15/ Fr AAS end Coofidential Secretrsy.

For AAs (ces be regarded as a lImp a-saloao to assist lee level staff With housing.6/sLx for DC and five far H.Q.(eeoretaries).* 1Lx fun DC sad foun for all senior staff at 0.Q./At DC level.

9/At POC levl.10/ For Six senior staff makerTs in H.Q. and three times mgac for supporting staff.11/ Extesion equipment tied to xteos.in staff (AA. and AIs).

:hi Will be boogh0 by Jocior staff mbesra thes,selves; project wIll provide loan s acco.rdane withcivil service regulatiLo; to build op revo1ving food allowance aade for One otoreycle initially for AAsaod one bicycle for AIs..

13)1 Css far each DC.R7/ Cone for each PSt.151 75% of local salaris..IT/ Coated .. der lspO ass for adninLstretian (Anne 7).KI:l Most arclulstaff presen.tly meployd is detailed h.es rather then over vaoicu tables;. therefore, na ated

roduoti. to ill oc-r .e tbie staff will bn ouploped ewea

October 27, 1976

I .-~~~~~~~. .. .. .. C .. a

L~~ ~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ . ... . .-. . .

- ~ ~ ~ ~ C~~~~~~ C 0 C C a a a a -~~~~~~.. .. ..

NIGERIABENUE STATE

AYANGBA AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTFARM LABOR PROFILE

50

30 L_ _ __ _POST PROJECT 1980

vo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4 1 .j% o ,/ . 1'

20~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0P

I PRE PROJECT 1976

0~~

FEB. MAR. APR. MAY JUN. JU L. AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC. JAN.

World Bank-16328

ANNEX 3

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Livestock Development

A. General

1. The project area has a sedentary cattle population of some 10,000head. In addition there are some 39,000 goats, 20,000 sheep and 4,000 pigsand large numbers of native poultry. Some migratory cattle owned by Fulanigraze in the Benue flood plains with the end of the rains and the departureof the tsetse fly. However, numbers are small since the Benue river has tobe crossed to get to the grazing areas and adequate grazing is generallyfound to the north, in the Lafia project area.

2. In the past, trade stock have used the area in transit to theattractive cattle markets of the south and east, traveling by way of Idah.However, with improved road and rail communications, numbers have beensteadily diminishing over recent years.

3. The project area lies in the Glossina belt though significant reduc-tion in infestation has been noted over recent years as a result of the workof the Tsetse Clearance Program. There are few suitable cattle in the areahaving a resistance to trypanosomiasis (N'Dama and Muturu) but MANR is operat-ing a N'Dama multiplication breeding ranch at Ruav outside the project area.

4. Prices for goat and sheep meat have increased over recent yearsreflecting a decreased availability of beef and an increasing populationhaving a rising demand for livestock products.

5. FMG has accorded a high priority to the development of the livestocksector and this is also reflected in the Benue State Government's budgetaryproposals for the Veterinary Division 1975-1980.

6. Despite many restrictions on expanding livestock production, thefundamental physical resources and technology are available. With an ex-panded applied extension input this considerable potential could beexploited.

B. Development Proposals

Livestock Extension Unit

7. All existing services of the livestock division within the areawould become the responsibility of the Livestock Extension Unit including

ANNEX 3Page 2

meat and hide inspection and handling, and compulsory inoculation programs.The latter would be undertaken by a mobile team of veterinary staff thatwould use approximately four strategically located FSCs as field bases.These would provide accommodation, drug storage, and refrigeration facili-ties.

8. The Livestock Extension Unit would provide specialist advice to anyfarmer wishing to undertake commercial livestock production. With a long-term objective of encouraging mixed farming it is intended that responsibilityfor routine management advice be gradually assumed by the General ExtensionServices supported by livestock advisers. Therefore, husbandry training forextension workers would be part of the training program.

9. A detailed summary of livestock development costs are in Table 1,and costs of the Livestock Extension Unit are given in Table 2.

Poultry Upgrading

10. There is a strong demand for improved poultry in the project areaand crossing with local birds has been successfully employed in the past.The objective would be to attempt a high degree of saturation with improvedcockerels and pullets throughout the project area so as to increase meat andegg production.

11. Most villagers keep a few poor quality chickens which exist byscavenging. Hens weigh about .75 kg - 1.5 kg and lay 60-90 eggs per annumworth about N 0.77 per egg. Local chickens fetch between N 2.50 to N 3.00in the market. Demand for poultry meat and eggs is high and MANR has recog-nized this demand by establishing poultry demonstrations and holding centersfor disseminating improved quality birds to farmers.

12. Improved poultry would be Rhode Island Red and White Leghorn, andboth cockerels and pullets would be available to villagers who:

(a) provide adequate management facilities for the improvedstock, as approved by poultry extension workers;

(b) agree to a complete 'flushing' of all existing cockerelsin exchange for improved stock.

Improved pullets will be available on the same exchange basis as cockerels,but only to those villagers residing in a village where a cockerel flushingexercise has taken place. Surplus cockerels will be fattened and sold by eachunit and surplus pullets will be retained as an egg-producing flock. Theearnings would be set against losses occurring in exchanging improved cocker-els and pullets for local cocks and hens. The poultry extension unit willensure that all poultry operating under the exchange flushing system continueunder a prophylactic regime against Newcastle disease, fowl pox and fowltyphoid.

ANNEX 3Page 3

13. There are six poultry rearing units at Ankpa, Dekina, Ayangba,Abejukolo, Alloma and Idah, but the project would reduce this to threeefficient working units. Day old, unsexed, vaccinated chicks would bepurchased from commercial hatcheries located in neighboring states whichcurrently supply Benue State's requirements. Chicks would be raised to fivemonths before exchange for village poultry, allowing a period of adaptationbefore sexual maturity. Unit rearing capacity would be 10,000 a yearenabling an output of 9,000 birds to be available for exchange to farmers,after allowing time for cleaning and disinfection between batches, given a10% mortality.

14. Pullet and cockerel distribution would be on an exchange basisthough a 20% bonus would be offered to villages that agreed to a completeexchange of either sex of local poultry. The high demand likely to be en-joyed by the program enables certain conditions of improved management (e.g.,water supply and supplementary feeding) to be a condition on those enteringthe scheme. All stock would undergo a minimum of two weeks limited freerange prior to release to enhance adaptation. All birds received by theproject during the exchange operations would be sold at prevailing marketprices possibly after a short fattening period on limited free range, duringwhich they would run with the next batch of exchange hens. No egg produc-tion per se would be undertaken but the unit would concentrate its effortson exchange and extension to increase survival and production of exchangedbirds.

15. Cost estimates are in Table 3.

Small Stock

16. Goats. Goats are owned widely throughout the project area and aremostly West African Dwarf or Fouta Djallon though some Sahel goats are alsokept. Goats do not receive any special treatment and graze and browse at willthough they are often tended by children to avoid damage to growing crops.Management is minimal. Liveweight varies from 20-25 kg and returns are fairlyconstant at N 30 per head. A goat breeding station was established at Idah inan attempt to introduce a larger breed into the area, but the majority rapidlydied from a pulmonary disease - 'Kata'. Under the project the Goat BreedingUnit at Idah will be supported by providing funds for the purchase of stockand equipment for the maintenance of investigatory work. Costs are detailedin Table 4.

17. Goats and sheep constitute a major component of the livestock inven-tory of Ayangba and while, at this stage, known lines of genetic improvementhave not yet been identified, some improvement in mortality reduction andanimal health could be expected from better husbandry techniques. The exten-sion service will concentrate on this aspect.

ANNEX 3Page 4

18. Sheep. Sheep are kept in Igala Region. Most are West African Dwarfsheep but some West African long-legged sheep also occur. They have a parti-cular value for slaughtering on ceremonial and religious occasions but donot represent an important element in livestock production. The market valueof a sheep is approximately N 30 each.

19. Pigs. Pig numbers in Ayangba are estimated at 4,000. A large pro-portion of the human population are Muslims and hence the demand for pig pro-ducts is not great. Nevertheless, pigs could play a useful role in convertingcertain crops into meat; notably, this refers to cassava and maize. The fewpigs which are owned by farmers in the area at present are black and rathersmall. They exist by scavenging and it is likely that their productivity islow.

20. It is proposed to support a Pig Breeding Unit so that improvedquality stock could be provided to farmers. Some demand exists from moreadvanced farmers for exotic pigs which are managed on an intensive basis.Improved pigs are unsuitable for free range farming techniques as conductedby most farmers in the area; the local pigs are good scavengers and thriftyunder the very basic management techniques employed.

21. Breeding boars and gilts would be sold to farmers at economic priceswhere a farmer had first provided suitable premises and had indicated thathe was prepared to maintain the improved stock under satisfactory managementconditions.

N!ICERIA ANNEX 3

AYANGBA AGRICULTUEAL DTTVEL DO2ENT PROJECT Tetic I

Livestock OrtepetoRqt COStBs- Somaro

(Naica '000)

Omit Foctr-g E-.cc-gtEmits Cost Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year F5 Ftal 0 Amouett Local Coert

A CAPITAL 'ovE

1. L-mt,rck E -rr i- 1, - -

B-Id -gs - Ho-si- 87 .0 57.0 - - - 144.0 - 35.1 108.0

cot iptent 7.9 5 1.0 - - - 14.2 - 6.9 7.0Welirles 6.D 24.8 8.0 - 6.0 20.0 64.8 I 50.9 139

Sbotoe- 100.9 87.1 9.0 - 6.0 20.0 223.0 42 92.9 130.1

0. Tocicrtr earlogUlEet

B,o Idli.g C - Housing - 66.0 - - - 66.0 - 12.8 53.2

Other - 20 - - - 220.8 - 55.3 165.5Egoilprirene - 't.2 - - - 4.2 - 1.7 2.5

r'et,Irel - 2.4 - - - - 0.4 - 1.4 1.0

Stbtoc-l - 293 _ _ _ 09.4 42 71.2 222.2

3. Cia- Cram ead Pi Fare

Buildin8s - Ho -eg 3 30.0 8 26.2

Otter -55 -- - - 5.5 - 1.0 4.2Tttsprm2t - - 2.8 - 1.9 0.9

reeiog Stork 01 .3 _ - 1.9 - - 1.9

Sdbcocel 44.9 - 0.3 - - 40.2 - 12.0 30.2

T-cl Capital Costs 100.9 425.4 9.0 0.3 20.0 561.6 31 17t.1 385.5

0. RECURRENT COSTS

0. Ctv-c-iktot -st -

StaEf Selectee 43.0 61.0 03.3 03.0 83.3 80.3 457.9 _ 29.4 428.5Ort.i,leo 4.9 12.7 12.7 12.0 1.7 12.7 68.4 - 30.8 37.t

S-reral fvicq ... 7 7 4 7.7 7.7 7.7 7.7 45.2 - 30.0 15.2

Svttorol 54.9 101.8 103.7 103.7 103.7 103.7 571.5 16 90.2 481.3

7. Potlctro Reenrin Emit

Staff al arces - 36.2 36.2 36.2 36.2 36.2 161.0 - 11.6 169.4

Taremsprrracc00 - 007 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.6 30.0 - 11.7 27.3

Cecerti Sr rms - 75.2 75.2 75.2 75.2 75.2 376.0 - 36.4 339.6LCs: Soles of P2olEry - 71.4) (71.4) (71.4) (71.4) 071.4) (357.0) - - (357.01

Subtotel - 40.8 47.8 47.8 47.8 47.8 239.0 - S5.0 179.3

0. ldeh Feat atnd P'ie Farm

Stoff Saloriet 9.4 22.8 2208 22.8 22.0 22.8 123.4 - 8.0 115.4Li-e-sok Cocci - 3.5 1.5 3.5 3,5 3.5 17.5 - 3.0 14.2

sqi pert Meintenance - 0.1 0.1 0.1 a.1 0.1 0.5 - 0.1 l.Less: Salt oF Pigs _ j(1.6) (1IS) (1.61 1.61 _1.6_ 18.08 - 7 (8.0)

S ial _9.4 4.6 4. 24.8 24.8 24.8 133.4 - 11.4 122.0

Total Rr r,,-rr I C-ss 6h.3 174.4

176.3 176.3 176.3 176.3 943.0 - 161.3 782.t

rotal Cap-iel iod ROcocreet Costs 165.2 599.8 185.3 176.6 182.3 196.3 L.2Q5.I - 332.4 1,168.1

ISb I>OJl00.00010-I0I0J >

000 0. CHO ' 0 H 0 C2teI Cs¢.0 o< 00 n= HO.. < o0cgYvHz{

00.0 -v O0O00 no 2 n= 32 '2 2 S|2 |2 822 288 0 | |2 < | 't= l

: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 00 0 o O O0000. O 0c H n0 .0 0. 0 00 , °I°<n1 =V =~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ =0 0 0 g '000.o0 H. e. 0 n 000

00 0.000 o n rt 2fi 00 00 0 0. 0 = n00o ls 0.c

n s rt Yr Y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 s s O O s O w M s to o _ > o e o n ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > ~~~~~~~~~~~ o 19 J0'OI H0~.o0.00 00 H o ,oa ono z0 o . o 0 o 0 ro 0 oo 0

0n o 0 00 0. C 10 008. 0 1.0 o . 0 COte 08 . 00 0 0 n0 -!;00 0 O82.8000000. H eo S0 'H 00. 00.,0 0 .0 .CO °

=e ~ oo 2 n -o0.0 CO10.200

2..0. 00 c . ^ ^ ^ A 0

0* e. 00 0 n... 0.000 00.0o0. ow1 w~v~ onn|| |]|sg| 0 0 0 0 0000 00_ 0000I |o soDo nwwnoooo 00 0 0.0 I A :.00 00 e0 | w~| , wOwl w- ., 00 s lt|2lI|

>S -0 0a0 *O.O00 0-0 r n 0.0 .- 0o' w 00-Cw -wnno

0e 0. 0.e 0.0w0.00o 0 NI_ I 0. WOCC 1.000 0.00W

°0. s v 88nI ~wo n| n :( s|Sac r

22 U C| l OI >w w _ o ePwwnw

0< 0 __ __00

v2 c 0.W IW00 00 .- 0000. l o 1 ov oo o I oo S|

0W 0.2A 0.0 0. .A 0 0 0.0..

11IP0 mjo 00 0. W000 0 Sr| Hsn~ P| oMon100 0.[ C oO 0 0. 0. o00000000 0. 0. o00 CO w0 0 co n00woo00n000o oo

[.~ ~wi gl o 1 11010 0.0 00 0. COt 0. 0..00 0- 0 00 0. 0. 00 0 0 0. 0.00 ra w

2~~| 82oI - nl }nv n>wWs| r>*ej

tts~~~~00 0.O.C000..0 CO 0.0 | 00.0.I wnnswv> wMw| M°|

NIGERIA ANINt 3

BENUE STATE

AYANGBA AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMNET PROJECT

Cost of Pooltry R-ekrig -it(N ' 000)

Uoit Foreign ExchaneooiLta Cost Yor O _Tar 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total 7, Auoont Local Cost

A. Capital Cooto

S. SaldioosJunior Hooting No 7.0 (3) 42.0 - - - - (3) 42.0 25 10.4 31.6Traditional Hoouing No 4.0 (6) 24.0 - - - - (6) 24.0 10 2.4 21.6Broodor H-oues 40 m2 No 3.5 (9) 31.5 - - - - (9) 31.5 25 7.9 23.6Grower - ooseo 75 =2 No 5.6 (30) 168.0 - - - - (30) 168.0 25 42.0 126.0Feed Store No 4.1 (3) 12.3 - - - - (3) 12.3 25 3.1 9.2Office/Store No 3.0 (3) 9.0 - - - - (3) 9.0 25 2.3 6.7

Sobttoal 286.8 - - 286.8 68.1 218.7

2. EquipmentPoultry Equipment 1/ Set 0.8 (3) 2.4 - - - - (3) 2.4 40 1.0 1.4Offiro Equipseot Set 0.6 (3) 1.8 - - - - (3) 1.8 40 0.7 1.1

Subto-al 4.2 - - 4.2 1.7 2.5

3. VehiclesMotroryrles 2/ No 0.8 (33 2.4 2.4 62 1.4 1.0

Total Capital Crete 293.4 _ _ _ 293.4 24 71.2 222.2

B. Eerront Costs

1. Staff SalariesPoeltry A-sietant -n-year 2.9 (3) 6.7 (3) 8.7 (3) 8.7 (3) 8.7 (3) 8.7 (15) 43.5 - - 43.5Laborers mae-year 0.8 (15) 12.0 (15) 12.0 (15) 12.0 (15) 12.0 (15) 12.0 (75) 60.0 . - 60.7

Subhotal 20,7 20.7 20.7 23)7 2087 103.5 - - 103.5

Allowarres ot 75% 3/ 15.1 15.5 15.5 15.5 15.5 77.5 15 11.6 65.9

Total Staff Salafies 36.2 36.2 36.2 36.2 36.2 181.0 11.6 169.4

2. TaroportationColletior (hired) 4/ ve-hile/year N020/kl 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 12.0 30 3.6 8.4Distributio= (hired) " NO.20 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.4 27.0 8.1 18.9

S.brotat 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 39.8 11.7 27.3

3. General SerioePurrhase Chirks 5/ per chicke N 0.45 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 67.5 - 67.5Feed for Five mooths N 2.10 59.7 59.7 59.7 59.7 59.7 298.5 10 29.9 268.6Varei-es, =ediratio. N 0.06 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 9.0 70 6.3 2.7Equip-eot Maiote-arre (57.) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 1.0 20 0.2 0.6

Sbtotal 75.2 75.2 75.2 75.2 75.2 376.0 - 36.4 339.6

lees: Solo of pellets 6/ 35.7 35.7 35.7 35.7 35.7 178.5 - - 178.5Sale of 3.7 3.7 35.7 35.7 33.7 178.5 - 178.5

Subtotal 71.4 71.4 71.4 71.4 71.4 357.0 357.0 - - 357.0

TOTAL RECUR8NT CODSTS 47.8 47.8 47.8 47.8 47.8 239.0 25 59.7 179.3

TOTAL CAPITAL AND RECURRENTCOSTS 341.2 47.8 47.8 47.8 47.8 532.4 25 130.9 461.5

1/ Brooder, rater troughs, feed era rd feed bins.2I Will be bought by poultry n-sis--rt. Pro)err will provide Soars ir eeerrdaoro sooth cii servlce regolavi-os: loly build up of

revolving food costed order pro/set roses.3/ Alloweces irelads provisior for motorrycle ope-teing rod the foreign echbage eorpo-nen is e-timated at 15, of total allorarees.

2/Trtportetloo of poultry to f-eres red fend to the nei will be door either by hired eros-port or by pro-jet -ehioles. Foodsare provided or hire hesis.

5/ Drv or wbhie' re d1lirered by suppliers.6/ All birds reared are assumed to be seebarged ith local village po-ltry ahibh havea marbee vale of N 2.50. IT prr.tee, sore

pullerr ray be reti-ned which oIlI yield a retu-r fron egg peed-cri-n is eddil-or tome eiproved pou1,ev nay be sold for -ebh oh-boroll -ai-e o-e thar N 2.30 per bird.

isiCEFRIS ANNEX 3Table

AYANGRA ACERICULTULA). DUEVELOP8ERU PROJECT

Idah Cost and Ffg Farm

D-osloenst Costs

(Raft 1002)

Unit ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Forign Exchange

Unite- Cos Teat U -Tea 1 heat 2 Tear 3 Tear 4 Year S Total Amount Lotal Costs

A. CAPITAL COSTS

Itteo-diste Soue-R N. 2110 - (U) 21.0 (1) 21.0 25 5.3 15.1-I-fe Reuse 21 Se ~ l4.0 (U) 14 0 - - ) _14. 0 2h 3 .5 1f.7

Subtota1 (SouRing) 35.0 35.0 R.U 26.2

Figgert 3/ N. 4.0 - (0) 4.0 (U) 4.0 25 LU0 2.0st-co No 0.5 - (11 0.5 - - (U) 0*5 10 T.l 0.4Fsddotk F-otitg NoS45 .ha.te. 4/ No 1.2 - I) 1.0 ---- (U) 1.0 20 0.2 0.0

Subtotal 3.5 - -- 5 1.3 4.2

Total B.ildiiog 40.5 ---- 4035 10.1 30.4

2. M-oblner & EnufiI-,,

St-las No 1.0 - (1) 1.0 -- - (U) 1.0 70 U.7 0.3V.eater...ry Equip-en 5et 1.0 - (12 1.0 .--- (1) i.U 70 U.7 0.3Notor-ytle 51 No 0.8 - (U) 0.8 .--- (I) o.8 60 U.N 0.3

Subtotl 2.8 - 2.8 1.9 0.9

3. Or..edio- St-tk

Suw 61 So 0.1 . (6) 0.6 (2) 0.2 - .8 - . 0.6Boar No 0.1 - (1) 0.1 -- (1) 0.1 -0.

20 .2

Coats 7, N. 0,01 (30) 0,9 - -- 09-- 0.9

Sobtotal -1.6 -0 .3 . 1.9

Total C-pUtal Costs 44.9 -- 0.3 45.2 - 12.0 33.2

0. NECTORENT COSTS

1. Staff Salaries

Fen Iase na-year 6.0 - (1) 6.0 (1) 6.U 51) 6.0 (1)l 6.0 (1) 6.0 (5)) 30.0 30.0FIO Msisst2.9 (1) 2.9 (1) 2.9 2) .9 (1) 2.9 (1) 2.0 (1) 2.9 (5) 17.4 -- 17.4

Clerk '' ' ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~0.9 (1) 0.9 (1) U.N (1) N.9 (11) 0.9 (1)) U.9 (1)) 0.9 (6) 5.4 -- 5.4Lahor ' '' ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~0.0 (2) 1.6 (4) 3.2 (4) 3.2 (4) 3.2 (4) 3.. (4) 3.2 (22) _17.6 1 0.4

S.bueta1 5.4 13.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 13. 7O.4 7 0.4

Alooesa 75T 9/ 4.0 9.8 9.8 9.9 9.8 9.8 5-3 0 15 0.0 45.0

Tota Staff Salaries 9.4 22.9 22.0 22.8 22.8 22.8 123.4 0.0 115.4

2. Line-tet Cests

Fig Food 3/ ToO5

0.25 (12) 3.0 (12) 3.0 (12) 3.f (12) 3.U (12) 2.0 (60) 15.2 10 1.5 13.5Co toin-y Redfit-o - - 0.5 U.S 0.5 0.0 2. 25 R . 0.7

Subtotal - - 5~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 17.5 3.3 14.2

3 . Equi4e-t oe:ntrant - -0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 o0 20 0.1 0.4

Securteut Snhtotal - ~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~9.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 26.4 141.1 11.4 132.0

Les: Sale of figs 1O/ No - __ (82) 1.6 (82) 1.6 (82) 1.6.L (92) 1.6 (82) 1.62~ (410) 8 2~ - - N.O

Total Ontur-e Coats 9.4 28.0 28.0 28.0 28.2 28.0 149.4 N 11.4 136.0

Total CapItl1 4 Reo..reotCtnts N~~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~~.4 72.9 28.0 28.0C 28 .3 28.U 194. 34 1.

1I 2/ .Sons noefgbidnsaa.fbebtpsiimede for hoosng for Ufar -anage an field s.s.stan-.3

7Tolri tyehon fr6swn I bea ad -ralng -- ko.~(Proisiet for outside padd-tk for dry sees and gnats wick efple shads -osreiesd pronisfe- for watr.,51 i011 be bought by fU-r.eatsg-r P-ojst will provide I me in at-rdano with ofofI ssrolost-guIatiosl only build-up efennoln ioN" fund teste u jatrnr tot . Y-4

t.' io eons bought Sn Teat I ad 2 piafet I er471 Tbite

0goats bouUbt 1-11ly to Ye- I

N A llo- -oss-ludn p-olin- for mtoryrle npera.tiogaod forign -h-bsgaos-p--a I fssni- tatd at 15, of totl all11- -a/ SonO~ 0.6 ton/ou..un reaing ste-k at 280 lbs/nn- Coen-ri-o 4:1 - sale eaight wafghk 0 lOIbs); boa 0.5 tee; ... undlng0U.4 net10/l Fighm-too youg stork sold so fa..me- One ftt-oing/b-ndfeg at 8 20 -se eeighlog 150 10. per -oiU

ANNEX 4

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Summary of FoFestry Development

General

1. The forestry sector plays a significant role in the Nigerianeconomy. Forest lands supply about 50 million cubic meters or 95% of thefuelwood used by the rural population. Over one million cubic metersof sawn lumber are used for both urban and rural area housing constructionand other purposes. Exports of high value--sawn lumber, veneer, plywoodand logs--were a significant source of foreign exchange earnings (aboutUS$10 million in 1974). However, because of increased demands, Governmenthas recently banned all exports of foreign products. Employment in thesector is estimated at some 18,000 persons. Organized agro-forestry farm-ing operations provide a significant source of family income for an esti-mated 10,000 farmers.

2. Forests cover about 119,000 square miles or about one third ofNigeria's total land area. Permanent Government-controlled forest reservesamount to 36,000 square miles out of this total. About 70,000 hectares ofplantation are reported to have been established, although actual areas areprobably below reported areas. Forest lands play a critical role in pro-tecting water catchment areas, regulating stream flow, protecting soils fromwinds and other erosion, providing a habitat for wild live resources andas an important reserve of land, some of high agricultural potential forfuture agricultural settlement.

3. About 70% of Nigeria's population relies on fuelwood as theirprincipal source of cooking and heating energy. In large areas of thecountry existing woodlands have been denuded and many farmers are forcedto utilize cattle dung as an alternative or to purchase petroleum basedfuels, e.g., kerosene. This is particularly difficult for families inthe lower income groups as they would have to spend a considerable part oftheir income on kerosene in order to ensure satisfactory heating and cookingof food supplies. Fuelwood plantations established on marginal lands notsuitable for agriculture could provide a cheaper alternative fuel as well asadditional benefits such as nut production, cattle fodder, building poles,and soil protection.

4. At the current annual rate of sawn timber consumption (about 1.5million cubic meters) the remaining high forest will last for approximately25 to 30 years. The number of sawmills operating in the country exceeds350. Rapidly rising do'nestic markets have resulted in a sharp reduction

ANNEX 4Page 2

of exported lumber in the last decade (from about 500,000 cubic meters in1966 to 200,000 cubic meters in 1972). In order to remain self-sufficientin future lumber supplies it has been estimated that some 100,000 hectaresof industrial saw log plantations (short rotation species) will be needed by1990 over and above the already established plantations.

5. Domestic pulp and paper consumption has increased dramaticallyfrom about 40,000 tons in 1966 to about 130,000 tons in 1975 and it isestimated to exceed 300,000 tons by 1985. One paper mill has already beenestablished and three new mills are planned but there is a critical shortageof raw material to supply existing and future mill requirements. An estimated100,000 hectares by 1985 will be needed to assure domestic self-sufficiency inpaper supply. If this program is not implemented, pulp and paper imports willbe costing Nigeria something in the order of US$150 million per annum bymid-1980.

6. Management of the forest reserves and control of the exploitationof nonreserve forest is the responsibility of the State Governments, butLocal Government Council staff control felling and collect revenue. Amajor function of the State Forestry Department has been the protection ofthe natural forests. In Nigeria, State Forestry Departments are seriouslyhandicapped in their ability to implement large development plans as theylack trained personnel and expertise in project planning and implementationof feasibility studies. However, on the positive side, many years ofresearch and development have already solved main technical and economicalproblems of plantation forestry.

7. Until 1971 the Federal Department of Forest Research located inIbadan provided technical information to the State Forest Departments andmanaged subprofessional training at the Ibadan Forestry School and tech-nical training at the Jos Forestry School. Also in 1971, a Federal Depart-ment of Forestry was established with the responsibility for developing anational program and coordinating forestry development in the States. In1976 the Department of Forestry Research was renamed the Federal Institutefor Forest Research which comes under the responsbility of the AgriculturalResearch Council. As such it is not directly linked with the Federal Depart-ment of Forestry which comes directly under the responsibility of FHARD.The Federal Department of Forestry is expanding its activities through thedevelopment of specialized divisions for planning, management, forest indus-tries, wildlife and conservation, extension and publicity, and a sawmilltraining center. Allocation of Federal funds for forestry development nthe States is now managed and monitored by the Federal Department of Forestry.Under the Third Development Plan (1975-1980) some US$144 million is budgetedfor forestry development.

Benue State

8. Forest resources include gazette reserves, community forest areas,and extensive areas of low volume savannahs in unallocated and private lands.

ANNEX 4Page 3

2and community forest areas 31 km , and together they cover about 4% of theland area of the State. There are no community forest areas in the Ayangbaproject area but 95% of the forest reserves is contained within the threeproject divisions. Ownership of these areas is vested in the State and notin the Local Government Council. The Northern Nigeria Timber Company (NNTC)Sawmill at Ochaja is the only large-scale forest industry in the State. Thereis a small sawmill in Makurdi and elsewhere minor exploitations are carriedout by pitsawyers. Since the embargo on exports in March 1976, the (NNTC)mill has increased sawmill production for the local market and is currentlyexploring the possibility of producing prefabricated housing units. Prelim-inary studies are also being undertaken into the prospects of establishing anintegrated particle board mill. The major emphasis of the State developmentplan is on timber plantations development and next on fuelwood.

Development Proposals

9. In the project area, the present savannah is generally sufficientfor local farm supply of rough poles and fuel for the immediate future.However, land has been cleared of trees for a radius of about five kilome-ters or more around the main townships and both poles and fuel are tradegoods commanding high prices (upwards of N 0.01/pound for firewood--US$20per cubic meter--and N 1.0 for a 12-inch pole of borassus). The projectwill establish pole/fuelwood plantations around the major township so as tosecure future supplies at a reasonable cost at these main centers. The tech-niques developed during the project would establish standards for forestrymanagement and would be used for extending this system to other areas in sub-sequent development phases. The operations would be carried out by projectstaff on land set aside and titled for forestry. Products from the projectplantation would be sold at economic stumpage prices so as to provide refi-nancing of replacement plantations. Under the project 1,050 hectares offuelwood/pole plantations will be established around Ankpa, Dekina, Idahand Oguma and suitable areas will need to be selected in consultation withthe Local Government Council and gazetted for forestry development.

10. The nurseries supplying the plantations would also raise seedlingsfor sale to farmers. This would include forest seedlings and also fruit treeseedlings, especially citrus, mango, coconuts and cashew. As there is somedemand, project nurseries would also sell seedlings for cocoa, coffee and oilpalm.

11. Use of charcoal in the project areas is confined to blacksmithsand laundrymen. Charcoal has a significant advantage over fuelwood and isconvenient for domestic fuel because it is easier to handle and store andcontains about double the heat value of well-dried wood. In addition, trans-port costs of charcoal are less than half those of firewood. There are goodprospects that charcoal would be adopted as fuel in the larger townships.The project would initiate charcoal production using both traditional earth

ANNEX 4Page 4

kiln and portable steel kiln methods to establish the industry in the area.The project also includes a provision for the services of a charcoal spe-cialist consultant to assist in setting up this component.

12. The project would also provide training courses to project staffand woodworkers (local small-scale sawmill operators and carpenters).

13. The project would assist in processing applications from small-scale forestry industries (sawmilling and carpentry) to the Small Indus-tries Credit Scheme which could provide credit to finance simple improvedtechnology, thereby substantially improving recovery rates, productivityand product quality.

14. The project would assist in the development of the nationalforestry program by supervising and extending introductory trials of treespecies in the project areas; assistance would also be provided at theState level in planning activities.

15. Forestry activities would be under the responsibility of a separatedivision in the Development Services Department. Because of severe staffconstraints, a forestry specialist would be recruited internationally underthe Ayangba Project. However, this specialist would work equally under theLafia Project.

16. For successful project implementation the following aspects wouldrequire detailed attention:

(a) Land for nurseries should be set aside.

(b) Forest tariffs are out of date and should be brought in linewith actual costs of growing forestry products.

(c) Tree seedlings should be sold to farmers at full cost andpresent prices should be raised to that level; projectaccounts would annually provide detailed information toassess the actual costs.

(d) Land acquisition for pole/fuelwood plantations would benecessary around Ankpa, Dekina, Idah and Oguma.

ANNEX 4NIGERIA Table 1

BENUE STATE


Summary of Forestry Activities

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total

Nursery Establishment (No.) 3 - - - - -

Nursery Production forPlantations ('000) 308 615 615 615 615 2,768

Fruit Trees for Sale ('000) 100 100 100 100 100 500Other Trees for Sale ('000) 75 75 75 75 75 375f

Subtotal 483 790 790 790 790 3,643

Fuelwood/Pole Plantations (ha)Ankpa - 50 100 100 100 350Dekina - 50 100 100 100 350Idah - 50 100 100 100 350

Subtotal - 150 300 300 300 1,050

Charcoal Development:Portable Kilns (No) 2 2

Introductory Species Trials(Plots) 1 1 1 1 1 5

Training Courses:Project Staff (Trainees) 12 12Woodworkers (Trainees) - 20 20 20 20 80

July 28, 1976

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Summary of Forestry Costs (N '000) 1/

/% Foreign Foreign LocalYear 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Costs Exchange Costs Costs

A. OVERHEAD AND ADMINISTRATION

Housing 179.0 - - - - 179.0 - 43.8 135.2Buildings 11.1 - - - - 11.1 - 3.1 8.0Vehicles 32.4 - - 15.2 10.8 58.4 - 46.5 11.9Equipment 4.2 - - - - 4.2 40 1.7 2.5Staff Salaries 3/ Y9.6 79.6 79.6 79.6 47.6 366.0 30 111.3 254.7Operating Costs 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 23.5 45 10.6 12.9

B. FORESTRY COMPONENTS

Nurseries Construction 39.4 - - - - 39.4 65 25.6 13.8Nurseries Operating 19.9 27.9 27.9 27.9 27.9 130.5 20 26.1 104.4Plantation Establishment

Surveys 0.3 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.7 2.9 - - 2.9Access Tracks & Firebreaks 1.4 2.7 2.9 3.0 3.3 13.3 18 2.4 10.9Land Preparation, Plantingand Cultural Operations - 44.4 95.4 105.2 108.3 353.3 3 10.6 342.7

Subtotal 1.7 47.7 99.0 108.8 112.3 369.5 13.0 356.5

Charcoal ProductionEquipment 2.4 - - - - 2.4 60 1.4 1.0Consultants 2.5 2.5 - - - 5.0 100 5.0 -

Subtotal 4.9 2.5 - - - 7.4 6.4 1.0

Training Courses 0.2 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 3.4 - - 3.4Introductory Species Trials 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 5.0 - - 5.0

GRAND TOTAL 377.1 164.2 213.0 238.0 205.1 1,197.4 288.1 909.3

1/ For full details see Supplement 5, Appendix 10.2/ No activities in Year 0.3/ Including in Years 1, 2, 3 and 4 expatriate salaries of N 32,000 annually.

October 18, 1976

ANNEX 5

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Fisheries Development

A. General

1. Nigeria, with a population of 75 million, is the largest singleconsumer of fish and fish products in Africa. However, both inland and seafisheries' potential remain comparatively unexploited. The fishing industryis an important component in food production for the project area. TheAyangba project has the Benue and Niger rivers as its northern and westernboundaries. It is estimated from records produced by the Fisheries Depart-ment that 26,000 metric tons of fish were harvested from these rivers andmarketed in the project area during 1975/76, as against 6,000-10,000 metrictons per annum between 1968/69 and 1974/75. Total value of the catch roseless dramatically from N 0.6 million in 1968/69 through N 5.0 million in1974/75 to over N 5.75 million in 1975/76. A 1966 FAO study estimated thetotal catch of northern fisheries at 30,000-50,000 metric tons per annum,of which two thirds came from 'fadamas' or flood plains. Demand for fishis high but availability becomes increasingly scarce as distance from therivers and fishing areas increases. The natural diet of the people consistsprincipally of starchy foods lacking in proteins, and including more f;shin the diet would play a valuable part in improving the nutrition of -iitpeople. Studies of the fishing potential of the Benue and Niger rivershave been carried out by FAO with UNDP financing, and information fromthese studies has assisted in preparing the fisheries component of theprojects.

2. Under the project it is proposed to:

(a) strengthen the Fisheries Department of the Ministry ofAgriculture in Benue State by providing the servicesof a fisheries expert who will be located in theAyangba project, and who will assist and advise theFisheries Departments of Benue and Plateau Statesin the long-term expansion and development of theindustry;

(b) establish a Fisheries Training Center at Bagana with acapacity of 20 trainees;

ANNEX 5Page 2

(c) construct and manage 15 bunded lagoons of approximately30 acres each; these will provide a fertile breedingand growing habitat for fish which, by single sluicegate control, will be operated as intensive fishingareas under close Fisheries Department control, backedby appropriate legislation;

(d) promote through fishery extension experts the use ofimproved fish drying practices, prototypes of whichhave been desigi±ed using ready-to-hand materials underFAO investigatory work in 1969.

3. FMG has developed plans to make an authority which would cover thefishing in the Benue and Niger rivers. Included are also proposals to pro-vide credit to fishermen and to provide marketing assistance for frozenfish. However, these proposals have not yet reached beyond the conceptionstage, but the project would liaise closely with any other developmentefforts for fisheries in the Benue and Niger rivers.

4. Although the demand for both fresh and smoked fish in the projectarea is high, supplies are not readily available except at well-developedlocalities close to the river, e.g., Makurdi and Idah. Inadequate communica-tions, poor processing and unsatisfactory marketing conditions are the majorfactors limiting extended sales. Nevertheless, fish is a popular ingredientin the diet when it is available.

5. Close to sources of catch, fish is sold fresh at prices rangingfrom N 0.50 to N 1.0 per kg. About 75% of the total catch is sold driedand smoked, and since the ratio of dried fish to fresh fish is approximately1:3, prices are comparable to fresh fish at N 2.00 to N 3.00 per kg.

6. The wide-ranging fishery practices carried out by local fishermenhave been designed over a long period of time and are effective. For themost part, fishermen are itinerant, fishing particular stretches of wateraccording to the season of flooding. However, a number of farmers do operateas fishermen in slack seasons in the farming year.

7. Fishermen use a wide variety of fishing gear and methods dependingupon the river flow, type of fish being sought, and upon the particularlocation of the fishing ground. Little improvement can be made to this gear.Canoes are generally adequately constructed using traditional methods.There is some demand for outboard engines, but since supplies are availableit is considered better that fishermen obtain their requirements by directpurchase. In general, provision of credit to fishermen is not favored, dueto their itinerant nature and inability to provide acceptable collateral.

8. Present methods of traditional fishing are uncontrolled and the useof overfine nets, dynamiting and poisoning are having a serious effect onlong-term fish stocks. A Fish Conservation and Management Act has beendrafted and had reached Executive Council level in May 1976, prior to being

ANNEX 5Page 3

scrutinized by the Solicitor General. This Act would provide the necessarybacking for fisheries staff to police the industry. However, there is cur-rently a severe manpower constraint within the Fisheries Department whichwould limit effective implementation of the Act. The output from the proj-ects Fisheries Training Center at Bagana should rectify this situation.

B. Development Proposals

Extension Services

9. The fisheries extension service would be considerably expanded andthe quality improved under the project. The extension service would have thebacking of a 'Fish Conservation and Management Act' to be enacted in BenueState. Credit facilities are not considered suitable to fishermen who aregenerally itinerant and can offer little substantial collateral. Assistanceto fishermen will, therefore, be directed at extending a knowledge of improvedtechniques by demonstration and on-the-spot training.

10. An expatriate head of the Fisheries Section would be responsiblefor conducting the training program, identifying lagoon sites, supervisinglagoon construction, and providing technical assistance to MANR. Althoughthe fishery expert would be engaged under the Ayangba project, he would alsobe responsible for supervising the small fishery component of the Lafiaproject and for technical assistance to Plateau State MANR.

11. Some scholarships will be provided under the project to trainpromising Nigerian extension staff overseas.

Fisheries Training Center

12. A center would be established at Bagana which is suitably locatedin the project area, having immediate access to the Benue river and from whichwork could readily be conducted along both the Benue and Niger rivers. Someexisting buildings would provide useful additional storage space for thefishery unit in Bagana. The expatriate head of the Fisheries Section wouldbe responsible for the design and conduct of the training program.

13. The broad pattern, to be detailed by the fishery expert, and thecurriculum of a fisheries training course 1/ would be as follows:

(a) species and behavioral characteristics of fish found inBenue and Niger rivers;

(b) fishing law;

1/ The course would train the equivalent of Agricultural Instructor in thefishery field.

ANNEX 5Page 4

(c) techniques of local fishermen;

(d) boat building;

(e) outboard engine maintenance and repair;

(f) nets, repair and usage;

(g) chemistry of river and 'fadama' waters;

(h) fish breeding and feeding habits;

(i) marketing;

(j) use of improved techniques in smoking and dryingfish;

(k) river behavior;

(1) bunded lagoon fishing;

(m) illegal methods of fishing;

(n) fisheries extension methods;

(o) commercial fishing.

Lagoon Fishing

14. The project proposes to develop and manage 15 bunded lagoons atsites to be selected along the southern bank of the Benue river between Baganaand Sintaku and along the eastern bank of the Niger river southwards to Idah.

15. The principle of establishing bunded lagoons was propounded in theFAO study in 1967 though information on their potential yield and managementis scanty. A lagoon consists of an area of land which may be immediatelyadjacent to the river or may be located at a low point set back some way fromthe river in the form of a network board. During the flood season, accessto these ponds is left open and fish are attracted into the lagoon by thepresence of greater food supplies than occur in the fast flowing river. Someadditional crop wastes, if suitable, can be distributed into the lagoon as afurther attraction for fish to enter.

16. The lagoon provides a spawning ground for the fish,-and at the fallof the river, sluice gates, controlling lagoon capacity, would be closed andthe fish thus impounded in the lagoon. Fishing of each lagoon would bestrictly controlled by a fisheries assistant who would act in conjunctionwith the traditional chief responsible in the area for managing the lagoonwith the aid of powers provided under the Fish Conservation and Management

ANNEX 5Page 5

Act. The fisheries assistant would provide technical assistance to fisher-men in the area particularly on matters of fishery management, harvesting,processing and marketing, rather than in fishing techniques, since veryeffective methods are currently employed. Each fisheries assistant in chargeof a lagoon would have his house sited nearby and would be equipped with acanoe and outboard together with a set of scales permitting accurate recordingof lagoon cropping performance.

17. Lagoon locations have yet to be determined, but financing for 15has been provided. Lagoon size may be variable, but in Katwina-Ala Division,northeast of the Ayangba project area, 9 such lagoons have been identifiedvarying in size from 420 to 20 acres. An average of 30 acres has beenassumed for project lagoons. Data provided by the FAO team on a limitednumber of sample lagoons indicate a yield of about 150 kg per acre per annum.Peak yields occurring over fishing festival have been as high as 4 tons froma small lagoon on a single day. Fisheries Department estimates are 1 ton peracre per annum. For project calculations, an estimated yield of 20 tons per30-acre lagoon per annum has been taken, having a value of N 14,000 per annum.Improved access to lagoon areas will play a major part in promoting theirdevelopment and exploitation through improved marketing prospects.

18. Users of lagoon fishing would pay a service charge of N 10 perannum to cover development and maintenance of lagoons; the number of userswould be limited by agreement between the fisheries assistant and the localchief. Bunding would be carried out using hand labor with clay-faced bunds.This method has proved satisfactory in an experimental lagoon at Lokoja.Provision for two sluice gates has been included.

19. Investment costs for bunded lagoons are estimated at N 2,500 -N 3,000. For details, see Table 1.

Improved Fish Drying

20. Particular benefits could be derived by local fishermen usingimproved but very simple drying kilns for fish drying. The FAO study notedthat the kilns have a two-fold increase in capacity, needed one-sixth ofthe fuel and one-third of the processing time. It also resulted in a uniformproduct of high quality. Farmers can derive considerable increased benefitsby using improved but very simple transport boxes which use chicken wire.It is proposed to promote the improved processing and marketing purely throughthe project fishery extension agents, with fishermen themselves providing allmaterials required which are inexpensive and easily obtained, e.g., old oildrums and chicken netting.

Cost Estimates

21. Costs are detailed in Table 2, attached to this annex.

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE

AYANGBA AGRICULTURAL DEVEIOPMENT PROJECTS

Costs and Benefits of Bunded Lagoons 1/(N 000)

Unit Costs Year I Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Onwards

A. Investments

Bunded LagoonsBund Construction 0.2 - (5) 1.0 (8) 1.6 (6) 1.2

Sluice Gates 0.5 - (10) 5.0 (16) 8.0 (12) 6.0 - -

Fish Scales 0.1 - (5) 0.5 (8) 0.8 (6) 0.6 - -

Fishery Assistant Canoes 1.0 - (5) 5.0 (8) 8.0 (6) 6.0 - -

Land Compensation 0.5 - (5) 2.5 (8) 4.0 (6) 3.0 - -

Subtotal 14.0 22.4 16.8 - -

Othet Capital CostsSenior Houses 30.0 (3) 90.0 - - -

Junior Houses 14.0 (5) 70.0 - (8) 112.0 (6) 84.0

DeLuxe Four-Wheel Drive 9.0 (1) 9.0 - - (1) 9.0 - -

Four-Wheel Drive 6.0 (2) 6.0 - - (2) 6.0 - -

Motorcycles 0.8 (5) 4.0 - (8) 6.4 (6) 4.8 - -

Subtotal 179.0 - 118.4 103.8 - -

B. Recurrent

Fishery Advisor 32.0 (1) 32.0 (1) 32.0 (1) 32.0 (1) 32.0 - -

Seniz Fishery Officers 6.0 (2) 12.0 (2) 12.0 (2) 12.0 (2) 12.0 (2) 12.0 (2) 12.0

Fishery Assistants 1.7 (5) 8.5 (5) 8.5 (13) 22.0 (19) 32.3 (19) 32.3 (19) 32.3

Clerks 1.0 (2) 2.0 (2) 2.0 (2) 2.0 (2) 2.0 (2) 2.0 (2) 2.0

DeLuxe Four-Wheel Drive 2.4 (1) 2.4 (1) 2.4 (1) 2.4 (1) 2.4 (1) 2.4 (1) 2.4

Four Wheel Drive 2.1 (2) 4.2 (2) 4.2 (2) 4.2 (2) 4.2 (2) 4.2 (2) 4.2

Bunded Lagoon Maintenance 21 _ (5) 5. (13) 13.0 (19) 19.0 19.0

Subtotal 61.1 61.1 79.7 97.9 71.9 71.9

C. TOTAL COSTS 2=4Q.1 75.1 220.5 218.5 71.9 71.9 Rate of Return

D. TOTAL BENEFITS _ _ 65.0 169.0 247.0 247.0 10 years 14.05%

15 years 19.95% ,20 years 21.45%

1/ Theoretically constructed on the basis of the 19 lagoons to bebuilt under the two projects.

2/ N 1,000 per lagoon (N 700 maintenance; N 200 outboard engine/boat; N 100 miscellaneous).

ANNX STable

NTIGEIA

BE-NUE STATE

AYANiGIA AGRICU2LTURAL DEVELOPTI8EN PFOJECIS

Costs oftste.sDveomn

(kIea '000)

Dolts UnitCosts Yoar Ynar I TYorD Deare 3 Dearn YeseS5 Total 7 os Cot

A. Capitol Costs

Boildi.gs

Seot- Staff Boosts I/ No 30.0 - (2) 60.0 - --- 6 .0 30 18.0 42.01ososodiet- St-ff flosse 2/ No 21.0 - (3) 63.0 - -- 6'3.0 205 15.8 40.2issio- ossos- 3/ So 14.0 - (2) 28.0 (1) 14.0 (3) 42.0 (3) 42.0 - 126.0 23 31.3 94.3Teaditioa-( Eosses 4' So 4.0 - (33 20.0 (2) 8.0 (3) 12.0 (3) 12.0 - 52.0 10 3.2 46.8

Traioiag Center

Clasaoo- No 3.0 -- (2) 10.0 --- 1D.I 30 3.0 7.0Lob-totor So 10.0 -- (1) 10.0 --- 18.0 30 3.0 7.0Worblsop No 1o0.-- (13 10.0 --- 11.0 30 3.0 7.0Dialog Rtos/Kitohan So 13.0 -. (1) 13.0 .- 13.0 30 3.9 9.1Dorsito-ies No 7.5 -. (2) 15.0 --- 15.0 30 4.3 10.5Toilet Ca-ilities So 2.0 .- (1) 0.0 .- 2.0 30 0.6 1.4R-e..ati- loom No 8.0 (l) 8. -_ R .0 30 2.4 3.6

Sobtotal1 171.3 90.0 34.0 54.0 - 369.0 90.9 200.1

DrToinia Eaail-at_s

Corpeory a-d M-h-ai-aI Toola 5.0 .- (1) 5.0 5 .0 60 3.0 2.0M.at_iela for lap-oolg Spying Kitlss 3.0 5 (1) 0.3 (13 0.5 (1) 0.0 (1) 0.0 2.0 40 0.6 1.2Classoo go d Laoaoy3.0 -- (3 3.0 --- 3.0 60 1.6 1.2N insgCaapo . . ( 13 2.0 -. (1) 7.0 14.0 60 6.4 5.6Trgiaiag loot and Cagior So 3.0 - (1) 3.0 - -. ) 3.0 6.0 50 3.0 3.0Wi-h aod Passer No 2.0 - (0) 2.0 - -- 2.0 60 1.2 0.8KitphsnFopit-or -vd Ut-nsis No 4.35 (1) 4.5 -. 4.5 60 2.7 1.8Dads aad lddiog No .4 -- (20) 8R.0 Q 8.0 20 1.6 6.4

Sabtot... 1 5.0 28.0 0.0 0.3 10.5 44.5 22.3 22.0

Sohol-hbipa

os-rdaaEatar-a Soholarhipa 3.0 .- (13 5.0 (1) 5.0 -- 10.0 100 10.0 -

Vehiole- nd Esoliment

"a'Io' Caor-lOso 9.0 - (1) 5.0 ( (1) 5.0 - 18.6 80 14.4 3.6por.WOheeO Doi-o elhiplos 6.0 - (4) 24.0 -- (4) 04.0 - 48.0 80 38.4 9.6P_r _oe Ca-ir- (Tr-iatag) 6.5 -- (1) 6.35 - (1) 6.5 13.0 80 10.4 2.6Sotortyolna 31 0.8 . (3) 2.4 (3) 2.4 (6) 4.8 (6) 4.8 -_ 14.4 60 8.6 5.8

Sab-ozi 35.4 8.9 4.6 37.8 6.5 93.4 01.8 21.6

Banded Lagooo

Boad Coesvoootloo- l1S5s/d at N 1.75/md Na 0.2 -- (33 0.6 (6) 1.0 (6) 1.2 - 3.0 - - 3.0Siir Gats_ 0.5 - 63 3.0 (12) 6.0 (12) 6.0 - 130 6 9.60

Cash So-st No 0.1 -- (3) 0.3 (6) 0.6 (6) 0.6 .1.5 75 1.1 0.4fisheries A-si--a's Canooaf0 Doboad So 1.0 -- (3) 3.0 (6) 6.0 (6) 6.0 - 15.0 50 0.5 7.5

Lood C-mpeas-i-o - N 15/a-- So 0.5 -- (3) 1.5 (6) 3.0 (6) 3.0 - 25 - 7 .5.oorI-- 8.4 16.8 t6.8 - 42.0 12.6 24.4

T0TAL CAPITAL COSTS -211.4 140.3 91.1 109.1 12.0 558.9 212.8 346.1

8. - -apes Costa

Fiaberte Advisor Maya- 32.0 . () 32.0 (1) 32.3 (1) 30.0 (1) 32.0 . 128.0 75 96.0 32.0Se-ior Flsh-i- Offiltt- 6.3 (1.) 6.0 ii) 6.0 (1) 6.0 (1) 6.0 (1) 6.0 30.0 - - 30.0Fiaberia Oopariat-dro- (toa-iaig) "4.9 -- (1) 4.9 (1) 4.9 (1) 4.9 (1) 4.9 19.6 - -19.6Finhania- Sope-inr-dent '3.27 (2) 2.4 (23 7.4 (2) 7.4 (2) 2.4 (2) 0.4 37.0 - -32.0

Fiaharia As-isont- 1. 7 (3) 3.1 (6) 10.2 (12) 20.4 (18) 30.6 (18) 30.6 96.9 -96.9

Artia... aaogSb5

. . () 26 (2) 2.6 (23 2.6 (2), 2.6 1041 0.4Cooka I .0 - 2) 2.0 (2) 2.0 (2) 0.0 (2) 2.0 8.0 8 .0Laboo- 0.8 .- (8) 6.4 (04) 11.2 (20) 16.0 (20) 16.0 49.6 - -49.6Clerks 1.0 - (2) 2.3 (3) 3.0 (3) 3.0 (3) 3.0 (3) 3.0 14.0 - -14.0

,w- ~~~~0.9 - (4) 3.6 (5) 4.5 (5) 4.3 55) 4.5 (3) 4.5 21.6 - -21.6

Sob-ot1 56.1 79.0 94.0 109.0 22.0 415.1 96.0 319.1

Soandard aof Proj-rtAll..-on (75%) 18.1 35346.5 ~ 5857.6 215.5 10 32.3 180.2

Sobto-a 74.2 114.3 140.5 166.8 134.8 830.6 - 108.3 582.3

Dp-rtiog aod Monttnasaoo

Bo-dŽoiataoa.. /7 123% Coesino...o.Cost te-ldi g Sla- Cites 2.1 --- 0.9 2.7 4.5 6.1 - - 6.1

etan Floor-Wheel Drtia 2.4 2 .4 2.4 2.4 2. 2.4 10.0 45 5.46.porioolDive Vehnla- 2.1 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4' 6.4 422.0 45 18 .9 00.1

Zeso.ot 1 Carrion 3.0 -- 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.3 14.0 45 6.53 7.1Ootboar Engi_n T-Trioirg 0.2 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 1.0 45 0.4 0.0oboarf Engia- i.goos A-ats. 0.02 0.6 1.8 3.0 3.0 8.4 45 3.8 4.6Sa ilSfia Mtinre--r (Trajniog Castr- 5% )--- 8.5 17.3 21.3 25.4 72.5 20 14.5 58.0Tra-iaig Caste- -Op-ranlg Coat..0, 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 4.0 00 0.8 3.2

Stofeona Payiteats 6/ - - - ~~~~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~12.0 12.0 12.0 10.0 48.0 . 48.

Subtotal 11.0 36.6 40.5 54.5 60.4 210.0 50.1 159.9

Total OoRero-t Coats 33,0 050.9 188.0 321. 195.2 840.6 1)8.4 860.2

0G50NS T0TAL(A + B) 066 202291 3041.218.3386.2 1,008.3

F-Do fotaries Advtao- gad Se-to Fisherti- Offi-e.2/ Por Fish-nies ap-iata-ad.-3/ Hoa_tig _Co itbari-s A-itao-t nalrolatnd at 50% ai-ir tn-d-rd; 50, traditi-anl.4/ T-radtito..l -tnd-rd hoaig Cor Artisan gad C-oa o-ly.5/ pill be to-ght by jani-o staff - per Fith-ri-a A-siatt.-6/ N l.fS per day ni adih N 1.40 gill he paid by eath stod-t to roe katp ogt - 340 days 0' 1.25 =N 595, say 600.

ANNEX 6

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Civil Works

General

1. Nigeria has in recent years experienced a very rapid increase inactivity in all branches of the construction industry. A large number ofindigenous and foreign firms are established in the country. Mlajor worksin the public sectors are ordinarily carried out by contract, with minorworks of a recurrent nature and maintenance works being done by forceaccount.

2. Between the project areas, there are some variations in localconstruction capacity and availability of labor. Although the Ayangbaproject area is a region of emigration, seasonal and permanent unskilledlabor is expected to be available, but the construction industry, evenin house construction, is not strong. Conversely, the Lafia project areais short of unskilled labor but the local construction industry for housingis well established. In none of the areas are there any local contractorscapable of undertaking road construction works, except for artisans con-structing minor drainage structures.

3. Major equipment for civil works is not manufactured in the country,and with the increase in construction activity in recent years, spare partsare particularly difficult to obtain. There is a shortage of skilledmechanics and equipment operators who command relatively high salaries.Materials are subject to long delivery times. The projects should thereforeprovide for initial purchase of buffer stocks of spare parts and materials.

4. Project development proposals for civil works consist of roadmaintenance and reconstruction, construction and rehabilitation of wells,and a large construction program of houses, office buildings and stores.

Organization and Management

5. All project civil works will be executed and administered bythe project's Engineering Department, headed by a Chief Civil Engineer.A Road Division will be responsible for road construction, a Water SupplyDivision for water supply for human consumption, and a Building Divisionfor housing, farm service centers and other building construction. Acentral workshop will provide central maintenance for all project civilwork activities.

6. The Roads and Water Supply Divisions will be headed by, respec-tively, an experienced Road Engineer and a Hydrologist. The Building

ANNEX 6Page 2

Division would be headed by a Building Supervisor, under immediate super-vision of the Chief Civil Engineer. The project's building constructionprogram would mostly be completed by Year 2. By that time the BuildingDivision would be abolished. Responsibility for houses and offices would,upon completion of construction, revert to the Housing Division in theAdministration Department. A single Hydrologist will be responsible forboth project areas, dividing his time about two-thirds to Lafia and one-third to Ayangba. The project workshop for maintenance of vehicles andheavy equipment would be headed by a very practical and experiencedWorkshop Engineer.

Road Development

7. General. An enormous amount of road construction is presentlyundertaken in Nigeria. As an indication, the Federal trunk road network(see Map 12373 attached to this annex) reveals the magnitude of the roaddevelopment undertaking. State road development plans have also increasedsubstantially. As a general rule, therefore, coverage by State and Federalroads is adequate, taking all construction plans into account. Maintenanceis more of a problem, not so much because of lack of funds, but mainlybecause of insufficient organization and lack of spare parts. Roads underLocal Government Council (LGC) and community control are, however, inade-quate in coverage and standards and are usually not motorable all yearround.

8. The road situation in the project areas can be summarized asfollows:

Ayangba

-- km -

Federal roads 240State roads 477LGC roads 895Community roads 1,500

9. The condition of the road network in the project area is one ofthe most important factors relating to the success of agricultural develop-ment. The extent of the network is with a few exceptions adequate but onlythe main Federal and State road links in the area receive proper mainte-nance. Consequently, all other roads are in an unacceptable condition.Transport costs outside the main road network are very high (up to 0.25per ton-km) and truckers are unwilling to risk their vehicles on many ofthe access roads to important agricultural areas. Traffic volumes on ruralroads vary greatly, but are generally light, estimated not to exceed 15vehicles per day on any of the Local Government Council (LGC) or communityroads. Because of the poor condition of all but the main network, trafficin the wet season is difficult if not impossible.

ANNEX 6Page 3

10. The Federal road network traversing the project area comprises194 km of the main Oturkpo-Lokoja road and an additional 46 km from Ejuleto Itobe recently taken over from the State Government for incorporation intothe Federal trunk road system. The extent and condition of the Federal roadsystem presents no constraint on proposed project activities.

11. The State roads in the project area comprise 477 km of asphalt,laterite and earth-surfaced roads. The extent of this network appears ade-quate, but construction standards (which are adequate) are not always followedand maintenance is quite poor in spite of sufficient funds. The State Ministryof Works (MOW) divisional headquarters are adequately staffed and equipped forfield operations, but equipment maintenance is poor, mainly due to the unsatis-factory spare parts supply situation. If more funds presently allocated tomaintenance were used to build up an adequate stock of spare parts, mainte-nance operations would improve considerably. It is therefore imperative thatGovernment ensure that (a) all funds allocated to maintenance be spent forthat purpose, and (b) equipment maintenance be improved and an acceptablelevel of spare parts stock be established.

12. The four LGCs in the project area presently have 895 km of roadsunder their responsibility. The extent of their network is not sufficient toensure motor vehicle access to all cultivated areas in the divisions. Designstandards are satisfactory, but only applied to a limited part of the network.Many roads cannot be used during the rainy season when bridges and culvertshave collapsed. There is no mechanized maintenance and the labor force onhand is insufficient (about one laborer per 5 km or about a third of require-ments).

13. The extent of the community track network is not precisely known,but is estimated at about 1,500 km. Tracks are only partially motorable evenin the dry season, and drainage works are almost nonexistent.

14. FMG plans to improve the Ejule-Itobe road in Idah Division to two-lane paved standards, but funds have not yet been allocated. The State Gov-ernment is presently upgrading the Ayangba-ldah road (166 km) to pavedstandards. The State improvement program covers bituminous surfacing ofanother 97 km of road in the area during the Five-Year Development Planperiod.

15. The project would undertake road construction and maintenance workson a total of 1,300 km of LGC and community roads. It is estimated that 625km of LGC roads will require reconstruction and an additional 675 km ofcommunity tracks will be improved to LGC standards. The road constructionand maintenance program under the project is detailed in Table 1. Roadmaintenance forms an important component of the project. Mlaintenance opera-tions would not be restricted to project roads and should commence at thestart of the project so as to avoid further deterioration of the presentlymotorable sections until improvement works are undertaken.

ANNEX 6Page 4

16. Execution. Several possible agencies were considered for programimplementation. There are no small local road civil engineering contractorsin the areas and major Nigerian or foreign agencies would not be attractedby the limited scope and long period necessary for road improvement.

17. At present, the State Ministry of Works (MOW) is hardly able toadequately maintain the roads for which it is responsible, and would not havespare capacity to execute the project's road construction program. The sameapplies also for Local Government Council road divisions, which are not mech-anized and generally have too low a labor force to ensure adequate labor/kmratios for maintenance, and would clearly not have any capacity to executethe program. This situation is not likely to change, although maintenanceresponsibilities might switch, on the basis of a road maintenance study by aconsultant to the Federal Ministry of Works. However, these recommendationscould be implemented only during project development.

18. The roads programs would therefore be undertaken directly by theproject, which would purchase equipment, construct workshops and engagestaff as required to carry out the works by force account.

19. Both construction and maintenance would be undertaken under theproject. For details, see Table 1. A limited emergency rehabilitationprogram would commence at the start of the project period to ensure thatroads do not seriously deteriorate until project improvement works areundertaken.

20. Road maintenance would form an important part of the project.The existing LGC road divisions would continue to operate their hand-labormaintenance gangs. In addition, mechanized maintenance (grading and re-surfacing) would be undertaken by the project. Close liaison would beestablished with the LGC roads divisions for joint planning of maintenance,and staff would be seconded from LGC to the project for training.

21. At the end of the project period, equipment would be handed overto the LGC. It is estimated that the equipment would have a remaining life ofabout two years. Adequate funds should be budgeted for staffing and replacingLGC equipment in the postproject development period so as to allow them toundertake the increased road maintenance responsibilities.

22. Standards. All road improvements under the project would be under-taken to the standards shown in the attached chart 16365. MIajor realignmentworks are not expected and earth works would be light, except on a few bridgecrossing sites. Lateritic material is available over the entire project areaand would be used for surfacing when required; an estimated 50% of the con-struction length would require surfacing.

23. The basic construction tool would be the motorgrader, which wouldbe used for shaping of formation, roadside ditch construction, and surfacing.Hard laterite outcrops would require a suitable bulldozer, which also would

ANNEX 6Page 5

be used for cleaning in bush and forest areas. Excavation, transport andplacing of surface material would be done by scraper, dozer, wheel-loader andtip-trucks. Operating lists of plant and equipment are listed in Table 2.

24. Drainage works would, except for side ditches, be done by handlabor. Cut-off ditches would be dug by hand, and culverts would be prefabri-cated concrete pipes and masonry boxes. Many small existing bridges wouldrequire renewal of timber decks.

25. Self-help by voluntary labor is widely practiced in the area forroad works, and the project would encourage this. The emphasis would be onproviding farm access tracks from the project roads, and the project wouldassist in alignment selection, and provide the modest amount of materialsrequired.

Water Supply

26. Water requirements of the rural areas are met from various sourcesdepending on village location. A number of villages are sited alongside,or within easy reach of, perennial rivers, the important ones being theNiger, Benue, Amara and Anambra; water is taken directly from these riversby bucket. Along the lowlands and plateau slopes, springs and hand-dug wells,some of which were dug by the Government and others privately, constitute amain source of water supply. All wells inspected were less than 15 m deep.Government wells are 1.2 m in diameter, concrete lined, and with the topabout 60 cm above ground level. Private wells are unlined, about I m indiameter and poorly finished, with the top barely above the ground level topermit direct re-charge from surface run-off. Water from all wells is drawnby buckets. On the plateau, the groundwater is too deep to be reached bytraditional hand-dug wells. Run-off during the wet season is small becauseof high soil permeability and many streams and rivers dry up during the well-defined dry season; villagers often walk several kilometers to the nearestperennial rivers or springs, while in some areas water is transported byprivate bowser and sold at high prices ranging from N 20 to N 25 per 100liters.

27. Twenty-seven water supply systems, providing water from boreholesto storage tanks and public standpipes, were installed around 1960 on theplateau, but some were never commissioned for lack of funds, and all but oneis now inoperative. The State Government has now embarked on a program ofrehabilitating these systems. Works are underway and are expected to becompleted by mid-1977. When completed, the Plateau area will be adequatelyserved by water supply. The depth of the boreholes varies from 50 m to

200 m, and hourly yield is on the average about 15 m .

28. There is no record of the number of hand-dug wells in the area,but it is estimated that some 60 wells have been constructed to date. Nohydrological information on the project area is available, and a surveywould be carried out under the project. This would concentrate on the low-

ANNEX 6Page 6

lands areas as the Plateau is not suited for wells. Under the project about180 wells would be constructed, so as to ensure adequate water supply in thelowland areas.

Buildings

29. Building requirements for project headquarters and extension centersconsist of staff housing, offices, workshops and stores. Building design wouldbe done under contract with local architectural firms, but standard designsexist already 1/ and would be used to the extent possible.

30. Implementation of the building programs must adapt to local condi-tions of the contracting industry. Contracting would be used whereveravailable and would be competitive in price and quality. Average size andcost of each type of unit are listed in Table 3. No price differential isestimated between contract and force account works. The estimated number ofhouses to be built is in Table 4.

Project Costs

31. Project costs are summarized in Table 5 and detailed in Tables 6to 11.

1/ Since the projects are similar to the Northern Agricultural DevelopmentProjects, most designs have already been made for these projects.

ANNEX 6Table 1

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Phasing of Road Construction and Maintenance

_n__t_r___t__ _ Maintenance

Year Type 1 Type 2 Total Routine Periodic

1 80 160 240 120 150

2 200 80 280 340 150

3 200 120 320 600 390

4 145 115 260 860 430

5 - 200 200 1,120 500

Following Years (1,570) (785)

TOTAL 625 675 1,300 3,040 1,620

1/ Reconstruction of existing LGC road.

2/ New consttuction or improvement of community road.

July 19, 1976

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Operating Cost of Plant and Equipment

Unit Cost Transport Unit Cost Fuel Lubricants Tyres Spares & TOTAL Foreign Foreign Local

ex Lagos to site on Site _ Filters _ Repairs _ _ Cost % Cost Cost

Motorgrader 150 h/p 50 2.0 52 2.33 0.59 1.01 2.80 6.73 40 2.69 4.04

Motorgrader 125 h/p 40 2.0 42 1.93 0.28 0.72 2.10 5.03 40 2.01 3.02

Wheel Loader 30 2.0 32 1.32 0.43 1.01 2.12 4.88 40 1.95 2.93

Agric. Tractor - - 7 0.61 0.14 0.28 0.20 1.23 50 0.62 0.61

Smooth Wheel Roder 8 tons 27 1.2 28.2 0.70 0.19 -- 0.77 1.66 30 0.50 1.16

Tipper 7 tons 11 - 11 0.86 0.11 1.09 1.52 3.58 50 1.79 1.78

Four-Wheel Drive 6 6 0.80 0.21 0.36 0.30 1.67 45 0.75 0.92

Pick up 1/2 ton 4.0 - 4 0.80 0.11 0.36 0.30 1.57 45 0.71 0.86

Concrete Mixer 2 - 2 0.16 0.05 -- 0.05 0.26 25 0.07 0.19

Water Bowser 4.5 m3 3.5 - 3.5 -- -- 0.04 0.06 0.10 50 0.05 0.05

Trailer 3.5 tons 1.5 - 1.5 -- -- 0.07 0.07 0.14 60 0.08 0.06

Water Pump 1.0 - 1.0 0.50 0.05 -- 0.08 0.63 15 0.10 0.53

Generator 2.5 kVA 1.0 - 1.0 0.62 0.15 -- 0.20 0.97 25 0.24 0.73

Hand Tools - 7.0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Dozer D-7 with Ripper 80.0 3.13 0.83 -- 8.16 12.12 40 4.85 7.27

Fuel Tanker 16.0 0.86 0.11 1.09 1.52 3.58 50 1.79 1.79

Scraper (Towed) 22.5 -- 0.20 1.40 1.10 2.70 50 1.35 1.35

Low bed Tractor 65 3.44 0.44 4.40 6.00 14.28 50 7.14 7.14

Scraper, Self Propelled, 150 h/p 50 1.68 0.56 1.56 4.00 7.80 50 3.90 3.90

0'

ANNEX 6Table 3

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Schedule of Building Costs

(N)

No. of Sub-Sub-Unit Unit Per

Sub-Unit Cost Unit Unit Cost

A. HOUSING

Senior Staff Houses m2 165 180 30,000Intermediate Staff Houses m2 140 150 21,000Junior Staff Houses m2 120 115 14,000Traditional Houses m2 - - 4,000

B. BUILDINGS

Office Building m2 100 1,500 150,000Workshop m2 75 400 30,000Fuel Depot - 5,000Parking m2 3 360Access Roads, including Drive-Ins km - - 12,000Electrical Supply km - - 5,000Sewage (septic tanks) No 100 _ 100Landscaping ha 125 - 125Fencing m - -7Water Supply m - 15Landing Strip m2 1 30,000 30,000Recreational Facilities (lump sum) _ - 50,000Guest House m2 165 240 40,000Design and Lay-out 3%

C. FARM SERVICE CENTERS

Store m2 75 255 19,000Apron m2 12 60 700Fencing m 7 400 2,800Equipment - 1,100Access Road - 1,200Lay-out 3.5%- - 1.200

26,000

Nov. 29, 1976

ANNEX 6

Table 4

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Number of Houses

Senior Intermediate Junior Traditional

Extension Staff 3 9 31 60

Farm Advisory 2 9 14 19

Livestock 1 3 8 10

Forestry 1 1 8 4

Fisheries 2 3 9 13

Civil Works 6 3 16 -

Management 6 3 12 9

Seed Multiplication 1 3 2 11

Research 1 3 - 3

Training 1 2 5 9

Evaluation 2 2 7 -

Commercial Services 8 7 17 114

34 48 129 252

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


1/Engineering Department, Summary of Costs -

Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 TOTAL Foreign Local

Housing 425.0 67.0 - - - - 492.0 130.8 361.2

Buildings 30.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 - - 90.0 22.5 67.5

Workshop Equipment - 47.4 15.6 15.6 0.8 0.8 80.2 52.0 28.2

Plant and Equipment - 810.4 41.0 42.0 91.0 31.0 1,015.4 848.9 166.5

Materials - 74.0 89.0 87.0 87.0 87.0 424.0 102.2 321.8

International Staff 66.0 96.0 96.0 96.0 96.0 30.0 480.0 360.0 120.0

Local Staff 54.6 348.3 370.3 371.9 355.4 348.8 1,849.3 118.9 1,730.4

Operating Costs of

Equipment - 161.2 168.5 177.8 174.5 174.7 856.7 375.1 481.6

TOTAL 575.6 1,624.3 800.4 810.3 804.7 672.3 5,287.6 2,010.4 3,277.2

1/ For details see Supplement 7, Appendix 1.

Ln a.

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Production Rates and Plants Requirement for critical Units

Average Dimension Length (km) Total Output Plant Hours

Type 1 Type 2 Type I Type 2 Quantity Rates Dozer Grader Loader Roller Tipper Scraper

1. Road Construction

Clearing open country orscattered bush 8 m 12 m 375 375 7,500,000 m2 5,000 m2/h 1,500 - - - -

Clearing medium bush 8 m 12 m 100 100 2,000,000 m2 3,000 m2/h 670 - -

Clearing heavy bush 8 m 12 m 100 150 3,000,000 m2 2,000 m2/h 1,500 - - - - _

Clearing forest 8 m 12 m 50 50 1,000,000 m2 1,000 m2/h 830 - - - - -

Topsoiling - 1,500 m3/km - 50 75,000 m3 50 m3/h 1,500 - - - - 1,500

Earthworks 3,000 m3/km 3,000 m3/km 40 50 270,000 m3 40 m31h 8,000 1/ - - - - 6,750

Shaping (subgrade) 8 m 8 m 625 675 10,400,000 m2 1,500 m3/h - 6,930 - - - -

Compaction (subgrade) 4 m 4 m 625 675 5,200,000 m2 500 m2/h - - - 10,400 -

Surfacing 4 m 4 m 440 470 3,640,000 m2 40 m3/h - _ 9,100 - 60,700

Compaction (surface) 4 m 4 a 440 470 3,640,000 m2 500 m2/h - - - 7,280 -

Shaping 4 m 4 m 440 470 3,640,000 m2 1,500 m2/h - 2,430 - -

2. Road Maintenance

Shaping - - - - 12,160,000 m2 1,500 m2/h - 8,130 - -

Resurfacing - - - - 64,000 m2 40 m3/h - - 1,600 - 10,700 -

TOTAL - - - - - - 14,000 17,460 10,700 17,680 71,400 8,250

Hours per year - - - - - - 2,800 3,490 2,140 3,540 14,280 1,650

Number of Units - - - - - - 2 2 1 2 7 1

Type 1: Improvement of existing LGC roadType 2: New construction and upgrading of community roads.

I/ Includes 1,250 additional hours for work at bridge embarkments.

July 19, 1976

* ANNEX 6

00.........

PIZ

l 8 C .- Ioo S Ta,le?

0.0 0 000,vo. .40 .0r0s

OO- ooooo 0 0

- -1 - - - - - -i - - - - - - -I -/ - -

I W 000000000000000000

400 - N_N 0 V , _00 004V1

IIW.

00 00 0 00 000 000

_l 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0

4, 0 O OO OO OO0. OO

0~ ~~~~~ -- .- 0 °00000000000 S00 f ^° ° g° °

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 00 0: 0) _N_s r< nN<r O[ ti ooo0000000000 0 . Q <wo

30o

z OI~~ ~~;Z -0t 4 e .-. 0

Coo 0000 000000 0000

:21 ~ ~ _1 _ a nr D l_u

I 0c.0_. r 0 _ a kum Neo

o o -P4 _ N0 0 i< O ONncr_t

400 _02- _ 0 _I N 14.S0r I g

8~~~~~~~~~4 o 000pNW H<c N-101 ~r _ 0J0)000 00.44. o 0S_rlv gOSOm

0o _4 _4 0 _l 00 0.4 N 0 0 44 _ o_

~~OO44~4O0430OC0..,O04) 0 ~ 1

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Capital Cost of Plant and EquiPment

Number of 1/ % Foreign Foreign Local

Units Year 1 - Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Exchange Cost Cost

Road Construction & Maintenance

Grader 125 hp 1 42 - - - 42 90 37.8 4.2

Grader 150 hp 1 52 - - - - 52 90 46.8 5.2

Dozer 2 164 - - - - 164 90 147.6 16.4

Scraper 1 50 - - - - 50 90 45.0 5.0

Wheel loader 1 32 - - - - 32 90 28.8 3.2

Agric. tractor 3 21 - - - - 21 90 18.9 2.1

Roller 2 56.4 - - - - 56.4 90 50.8 5.6

Tipper, 7 tons 7 66.0 - 11 - - 77 80 61.6 15.4

Water bowser 4 10 - - - - 10 90 9.0 1.0

Trailer, 3.5 tons 3 9 - - - - 9 80 7.2 1.8

Low-bed tractor 1 65 - - - - 65 90 58.5 6.5

Concrete mixer 2 2 - - - - 2 90 1.8 0.2

Fuel tanker 1 8 - - - - 18 90 16.2 1.8

4 wheel drive 6 36 - - 36 - 72 80 57.6 14.4

Pick-up 2 16 - - 8 - 16 80 12.8 3.2

Generator 1 1 - - - - 1 80 0.8 0.2

Water pumps 3 3 - - - - 3 80 2.4 0.6

Hand tools - 3 1 1 1 1 7 50 4.2 2.8

Radio equipment 8 4 - - - - 4 90 3.6 0.4

Spare parts stock - 62 - - - - 62 90 55.8 6.2

Subtotal 704.4 1 12 45 1 763.4 87 667.2 96.2

Water Supply developpent

Well sinking tools 8 6 - - - - 6} 60 3.6 2.4

Portable hand drills 2 2 - - - - 2 80 1.6 0.4

Drilling tools - 3 - - - - 3 80 2.4 0.6

Drainage pumps 2 3 - - - - 3 80 2.4 0.6

Generator 2 3 - - - - 3 80 2.4 0.6

Shallow resistivity equipmerit 1 4 - - - - 4 85 3.4 0.6

Hand pumps 180 50 40 30 30 30 180 70 126.0 54.0

Camping gear - 5 - - - - 5 50 2.5 2.5

4 wheel drive 2 12 - - 12 - 24 80 19.2 4.8

Pick-up 1 4 - - 4 - 8 80 6.4 1.6

Lorry 1 -8 - - 8 8C 6.4 1.6

Spare parts stock - 6 - - - - 6 90 5.4 0.6

Subtotal 106 40 30 46 30 252 72 181.7 70.3 t

TOTAL 810.4 41 42 91 3' 1,015.4 848.9 848.9 166.5 mc'

July 19. 1976

1/ Most Equipment will be ordered in Year 0 and delivered in Year 1; a few

four-wheel drives might be purchased in Year 0 rather than in Year 1.

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Housing & Workshop Requirements

N' 000

Unit X Foreign Foreign LocalUnits Cost Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 TOTAL Exchange Cost Cost

N'000

Wirkshop Requirements

(i) Main WorkshopWorkshop building & store No 30.0 30.0 - - - - 30.0 25 7.5 22.5Fuel storage 5.0 5.0 - - - - 5.0 60 3.0 2.0Overhead boists 1.0 1.0 - - - - 1.0 80 0.8 0.2Lubricating equipments 1.0 1.0 - - - - 1.0 80 0.8 0 2Welding equipments 1.0 1.0 - - - - 1.0 80 0.8 0.2Tyre equipment 1.0 1.0 - - - - 1.0 80 0.8 0.2Air compressor 0.8 0.8 - - - _ 0.8 80 0.6 0.2Jacks 0.8 0.8 - - - - 0.8 80 0.6 0.2Bunch Tools 4.0 4.0 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 5.6 80 4.5 1.1Hand tools 2.0 2.0 0 2 0.2 0.2 0.2 2.8 50 1.4 1.4Mobile workshop 14.0 14.0 - - - - 14.0 60 8.4 5.6Miscellaneous 2.0 2.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 2.3 50 1.4 1.4

Subtotal 30.0 32.6 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 65.8 30.6 35.2

(ii) Divisional vorkshopsWorkshop buildings No 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 - - 60.0 25 15.0 45.0Fuel storage 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 - - 15.0 60 9.0 6.0Overhead boists 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - - 3.0 80 2.4 0.6Lubricating equipment 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - - 3.0 80 2.4 0.6Tyre equipment l.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - - 3.0 80 2.4 0.6Jacks 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 - - 2.4 80 1.9 0.5Bunch tools 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 - - 6.0 80 4.8 1.2Hand tools 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 _ - 6.0 50 3':O 3.0Miscellaneous 2.0 _2Q 2.0 2.0 - - 6.0 50 3.0 3.0

Subtotal 34.8 34.8 34,8 - - .04.4 43.9 60.5

1oulsin and Other Buildings

Senior Staff Houses 30 (6) 180.0 - - - - - 180.0 30 54.0 126.0Intermediate Staff Houses 2/ 21 (3) 63.0 - - - 63.0 25 15.8 47.2Junior Houses 3/ 14 (13) 182.0 (3) 42.0 - - - - 224.0 25 56.0 168.0Field Shelters 5 _ (5) 25.0 - - - - 25.0 20 5.0 20.0

Subtotal 425.0 67.0 - - - 492.0 130.8 361.2

TOTAL 455.0 134.4 35.6 35.6 0.8 0.8 662.2 205.3 456.9

> 1

1/ For internationally recruited staff, building supervisors and deputy hydrologist. x2/ For roads foremen and workshop foremen. 'a

3/ For roads headmen, mechanics, surveyors and field superintendents.

ANNEX 6Table 10

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE

AYANGBA AGRICU.LTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Staff Salaries & Overheads

Unit Y Foreign LocalUnits Ccst Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year S TOTAL FE Exchange Costs

Chief Civil Engineer Manyear 36.0 (1) 36.0 (1) 36.0 (1) 36.0 (1) 36.0 (1) 36.0 - 180.0 75 135.0 45.0Building Supervisor 1/ 8.4 (2) 16.8 (2) 16.8 (2) 16.8 (2) 16.8 (2) 16.8 (2) 16.8 100.8 - - 100.8

Road Constructionand Maintenance

Road Engineer 32.0 (.5) 16.0 (1) 32.0 (1) 32.0 (1) 32.0 (1) 32.0 (.5) 16.0 160.0 75 120.0 40.0Workshop Engineer " 28.0 (.5) 14.0 (1) 28.0 (1) 28.0 (1) 28.0 (1) 28.0 (.5) 14.0 140.0 75 105.0 35.0Boads Foremen 4.9 (1) 4.9 (2) 9.8 (2) 9.8 (2) 9.8 (2) 9.8 (2) 9.8 53.9 - - 53.9Roads Headmen 2.9 (1) 2.9 (6) 17.4 (6) 17.4 (6) 17.4 (6) 17.4 (6) 17.4 89.9 - - 89.9Plant Operators 1.3 - (7) 9.1 (7) 9.1 (7) 9.1 (7) 9.1 (7) 9.1 45.5 - - 45.5Operator Assistants 0.9 - (7) 6.3 (7) 6.3 (7) 6.3 (7) 6.3 (7) 6.3 31.5 - - 31.5Drivers 0.9 (3) 2.7 (17) 15.3 (17) 15.3 (18) 16.2 (18) 16.2 (18) 16.2 81.9 - - 81.9Journeymen 0.8 - (1() 8.0 (10) 8.0 (10) 8.0 (10) 8.0 (10) 8.0 40.0 - - 40.0Carpenters 1.3 - (4) 5.2 (4) 5.2 (4) 5.2 (4) 5.2 (4) 5.2 26.0 - - 26.0Workshop Foremen 3.7 - (1) 3.7 (1) 3.7 (1) 3.7 (1) 3.7 (1) 3.7 18.5 - - 18.5Clerks 1.0 (1) 1.0 (2) 2.0 (2) 2.0 (2) 2.0 (2) 2.0 (2) 2.0 11.0 - - 11.0Storekeeper 1.7 - (1) 1.7 (1) 1.7 (1) 1.7 (1) 1.7 (1) 1.7 8.5 - - 8.5Mechanics 2.9 - (2) 5.8 (5) 14.5 (5) 14.5 (5) 14.5 (5) 14.5 63.8 - - 63.8Apprentice Mechanics 1.3 - (2) 2.6 (5) 6.5 (5) 6.5 (5) 6.5 (5) 6.5 28.6 - - 28.6Surveyors 2.9 (1) 2.9 (3) 8.7 (3) 8.7 (3) 8.7 (1) 2.9 - 31.9 - - 31.9Chainmen 0.9 - (6) 5.4 (6) 5.4 (6) 5.4 (2) 1.8 (1) .9 18.9 - - 18.9Laborers 0.8 - (40) 32.0 (40) 32.0 (40) 32.0 (40) 32.0 (40) 32.0 160.0 - - 160.0

Subtotal 97.2 245.8 258.4 259.3 249.9 180.1 1290.7 28 360.0 930.7

Water Supply

hydrologist 3/Deputy flydrologist 6.0 - (1) 6.0 (1) 6.0 (1) 6.0 (1) 6.0 (1) 6.0 30.0 - - 30.0Field Superintendent 2.9 - (2) 5.8 (2) 5.8 (2) 5.8 (2) 5.8 (2) 5.8 29.0 - - 29.0Foremen 1.7 - (8) 13.6 (8) 13.6 (8) 13.6 (8) 13.6 (8) 13.6 68.0 - - 68.0Clerks 1.0 - (1) 1.0 (1) 1.0 (1) 1.0 (1) 1.0 (1) 1.0 5.0 - - 5.0Drivers 0.9 - (4) 3.6 (4) 3.6 (4) 3.6 (4) 3.6 (4) 3.6 18.0 - - 18.0Laborers 0.8 - (24) 19.2 (24) 19.2 (24) 19.2 (24) 19.2 (24) 19.2 96.0 - - 96.0

Subtotal - 49.2 49.2 49.2 49.2 49.2 246.0 - - 246.0

Allowances (75%) 2/ 23.4 149.3 158.7 159.4 152.3 149.5 792.6 15 118.9 673.7

TOTAL SALARIES 120.6 444.3 466.3 467.9 451.4 378.8 2329.3 21 478.9 1850.4

NOVEMBER 1, 1976

1/ Later to cover senior staff in Engineering Department

2/ To reflect normal and project incentive allowances; 757 of local salaries.

3/ Internationally recruited under the Lafia project, but he will also work for the Ayangba project.

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Cost of Materials

% Foreign Foreign Local

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Exchange Exchange Currency

Road Construction & Maintenance

Cement 800 9!0 9.0 9.0 9.0 44.0 30 13.2 30.8

Concrete pipes 35.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 195.0 25 48.7 146.3

Timber for bridges 10.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 70.0 - - 70.0

Miscellaneous 6.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 46.0 50 23.0 23.0

Subtotal 59.0 74.0 74.0 74.0 74.0 355.0 24 84.9 270.1

Water Supply

Concrete 15.0 15.0 13.0 13.0 13.0 69.0 25 17.3 51.7

TOTAL 74.0 89.0 87.0 87.0 87.0 424.0 24 102.2 321.8

July 19, 1976 I-.


AGRICULTURAL ROAD CROSS SECTION

2.0 0|5 1.5 1.5 0.5 2.0

4%

===° ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 IN 4

0.40 W 7 5 -

I 8 .0 l__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

SPECI F ICATI ONS

CLEARING WIDTH 12mSURFACING ONLY WHERE DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER AND

THEN FULL COMPACTED THICKNESS AS ORDEREDOVER CENTRAL 3M TAPERING TO ZERO THICKNESS2M EITHER SIDE OF CENTER LINE.

DEGREE OF CURVATURE AS DICTATED BY TERRAIN.TURN-OUT DRAINS AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINES R.

World Bank-16365

IBRD 12373

2 ' _ - . _4 ._ K :1 0 1 2' T V A G T 9 7

Kair/ _. olo5Be N I G E R C H A D

N / I G E R 00 Io o,;

Koonogoro~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~Yo

BE.NI A A g oe no f ; /C' 0'\''

POl No .10 IOEJA ' ;UuX

Ntoa O

/ l&2/ ' ' ' i' ursu All WA\,.,

Worri g8OWERRI k *nee n;,K 0/ C A M(ER OON Stone bondor en

A 1' ' __-0

o

W,oO,fro,,2,treOjOr,,vr•e 6'__' \10-

2z' IC

ANNEX 7

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Supporting Services

General

1. The project's main development activities are concentrated on cropdevelopment and farm advisory services, livestock, forestry and fisheriesdevelopment, through its Development Services Department, and road develop-ment and, to a lesser extent, water supply through its Engineering Department.Commercial services (credit, input supply and marketing) to support these de-velopment efforts are detailed in Annex 8. In addition the following support-ing services will supplement project development:

- management and administration,- seed multiplication,

- applied research,- training, and

- evaluation.

These various supporting services are detailed below and in the supplements.

Management and Administration

2. Successful project implementation would require effective management. Anefficient administration department is required to organize the cooperation ofthe many people employed and the coordination of the deployed capital equip-ment. Costs of management and administration are in Table 1.

3. Project organization is explained in Chapter 6 of this report andas it is very similar to the Lafia project, is detailed in Supplement 10.Project organization is in Chart 16482 attached to this annex.

4. A major impact on ultimate project success will come from implemen-tation steps undertaken in the start-up period. A start-up plan is presentedin Chart 16459 attached to this annex.

5. A high level of management efficiency and technical competence wouldbe required to achieve project objectives, as the project is both large andcomplex. Project staff would be well trained, highly competent and flexibleto permit prompt project execution. Demand on existing manpower resources inNigeria is high and international recruitment will therefore be necessary. Alist of persons likely to be recruited internationally is in Table 2. Itshould, however, be noted that this is only a best estimate at the time ofappraisal, and that if qualified Nigerians are found within the recruitment

ANNEX 7Page 2

time framework 1/, they would not be excluded from filling these positions.Job descriptions for all major jobs are in Supplement 10.

6. Certain internationally recruited staff would work for two projectssince the size of the relevant component would not justify two expatriateexperts. These are:

- Hydrological Engineer- Fishery Specialist- Forestry Specialist- Livestock Specialist

The time spent by these single experts would not necessarily be dividedequally between the projects but would depend on the work to be executed underthe respective projects. In order to avoid difficulties in contracts theabove experts are recruited and paid under one project rather than beingofficially shared and paid under two projects.

Seed Multiplication 2/

7. As a system of seed production contracting already exists in thearea, the project would continue this practice, but the existing system wouldbe improved. Most of the seed production would be by contract farmers butthere would be a small project farm which would provide a nucleus for seedproduction and allow for applied research (see below). Under the project anarea of 200 ha would be needed for project seed multiplication and research(details are in Table 3). Seed purchases during the project period are de-tailed in Table 4.

8. A graduate trained 3/ in seed technology would head the projectseed multiplication program. His major task would be to ensure purity andviability of seed for sale to farmers. There are two aspects to the seedprogram: field production, and processing and storage. Field production willbe under the supervision of Agricultural Assistants (AAs) and AgriculturalInstructors (AIs). One AA and one AI would supervise seed production on theproject farm and one AA and two AIs would supervise 50 ha of contract farms.As estimated 500 ha of contract farms will ultimately be needed for the proj-ect. Processing and storage will be handled by a seed technologist, expe-rienced storekeepers and laborers.

1/ See start-up plan for major appointments in Supplement 10, Appendix 5for full details.

2/ For details see Supplement 6.

3/ Or to be trained early in Year 0 (three to six months).

ANNEX 7Page 3

9. Five year requirements will have to be contracted out of existingnational and State institutions such as the Yandev Farm Center, and no problemsare expected in obtaining the necessary quantities.

Research 1/

10. Except for research work carried out by agriculture faculties ofNigeria University, the major institutes involved in foodcrop research inNigeria are:

(a) The Institute of Agricultural Research. This instituteis attached to the Ahmadu Bello University and concen-trates mainly on crop research in the more northerlyareas of Nigeria.

(b) Federal Department of Agricultural Research. This islocated in Ibadan and its area of influence is mainlyin the former Western State. Its research activitiescover cereals such as maize and rice, foodcrops andgrain legumes.

(c) The International Institute of Tropical Agriculture.This institute is situated in Ibadan and is responsi-ble for research in the low altitude tropics throughoutAfrica. It is sponsored by the Consultative Group ofInternational Agricultural Research.

11. Because of the lack of properly organized applied research specifi-cally geared to the need of the project area, there is a need to establish anapplied research unit. This unit would be staffed by qualified and expe-rienced staff, but would maintain close links with existing research institu-tions and would limit its operations to applied research. Current nationaltrials undertaken in the project area would be incorporated in the projectresearch program and would receive improved supervision. Based on experiencewith the existing trials, the project research officer would make recommenda-tions to the research institutions for their improvement. The project wouldapply for participation in international trials such as those carried out byIITA, as well as continue to participate in national trials.

12. The project would concentrate on the following aspects, taking intoaccount especially the distinct ecological conditions of the project areascompared with those prevailing in the northern and southern areas of Nigeria:

(a) variety trials;(b) soil fertility studies;(c) farming system studies;


ANNEX 7Page 4

(d) mechanization;(e) minor crops (those not specifically part of the development

proposals of the project); and(f) farm management studies (carried out by the project's evaluation

unit with the cooperation of interested students of Nigerianuniversities.

13. Project research would be under the responsibility of a Senior Agro-nomist supported by a Soil Technologist and Agricultural Assistants for soilresearch. Applied research would be undertaken both on the project farm andon selected smallholdings. One farm manager would be responsible for theproject farm, supervising both seed multiplication and applied research work.The project would also participate in national and international researchschemes and would work closely with APMEPU's Chief Agronomist.

Training 1/

14. Training is of fundamental importance for the long-term success ofthe development proposals incorporated under the project. An experiencedtraining officer would therefore need a team adequately backed by resourcesto conduct a wide range of training under the project.

15. Adequate training facilities for Agricultural Assistants and Agri-cultural Superintendents exist already in Nigeria and diploma courses andcertificate courses are given at various Federal and State institutions includ-ing the Yandev Training Center. However, not enough training facilities existfor Agricultural Instructors and under the project a training center would beconstructed which would accomodate 60 trainees. Initially, training at thecenter would mainly be focused on Agricultural Instructors but later in proj-ect life other specialized staff and advanced farmers would attend residentialcourses at the center. The training team would consist of four instructorsand three field workers and would be under the supervision of the project'sChief Training Officer.

16. In addition to the training center, the project will provide trainingfor staff and for farmers.

17. Staff training will consist of the following elements:

(a) Senior staff training. Scholarships will be made available formanagement training for those senior staff who would benefit.

(b) Intermediate level training. Specialized training for projectstaff will be provided following review with the relevantdepartment heads. Close liaison would be maintained with othereducational facilities to provide this training, although shortcourses would be provided during inservice training.


ANNEX 7Page 5

(c) Introductory training will be held periodicallythroughout the years to provide new staff with thenecessary background information.

(d) Residential courses for extension workers. As ex-plained in paragraph 15, Agricultural Instructorswould be trained in the project's training center.

(e) Refresher courses. These courses would mostly betechnically oriented and would update staff members'knowledge.

(f) Specialized training. Specific training programs insuch fields as credit, forestry and fisheries would beundertaken in conjunction with the relevant departmenthead. Project training facilities would be availablefor this purpose.

18. Farmers training would consist of the following components:

(a) Mobile units. Farmers training would be carried outmainly at the village level by itinerant teams,consisting of a training instructor and a driverequipped with a loud speaker system, and audio-visualaids.

(b) Day courses. One-day courses would also be employedfrom Year 2. These courses would be held at farmersservice centers but would also include visits toprogressive farmers or demonstration plots.

(c) Residential training. From Year 4 it is envisagedthat one-week residential training would be providedto farmers in the project's training center andprovision for expansion of the training center hasbeen made under the project.

(d) Use of mass media. The Training Officer would inves-tigate ways and means by which radio and newspaperscould be used to provide information to farmers in theproject area.

(e) Training within the educational system. Specificeffort would be made to ensure that primary andsecondary teachers are made fully aware of projectgoals.

(f) Home economics. Provision has been made for the in-clusion of an itinerant home economics team later inthe project period (Years 4 and 5).

ANNEX 7Page 6

Evaluation 1/

19. The project covers a large area with a substantial population. Eva-luating production increases would therefore be a formidable task and wouldrequire a considerable resource input. The situation is aggravated by a con-siderable resource input. The situation is aggravated by the fact that theproject area consists of various ecological zones.

20. Project field evaluation units would be under the overall directionof APMEPU. Work plans would take into account APMEPU's experience so far withthe monitoring and evaluation of the three ongoing Northern Agricultural Devel-opment Projects. The project's Chief Evaluation Officer would coordinate withthe Project Manager to whom he is administratively responsible, determineproject priorities for evaluation, and establish a work plan in agreement withAPMEPU. The Field Evaluation Unit would be headed by a Chief EvaluationOfficer experienced in collecting and analyzing microeconomic data in a small-holder environment. In addition there would be a Senior Evaluation Officerand supporting staff (two Evaluation Officers, Senior Enumerators and Enumera-tors).

21. The Chief Evaluation Officer would liaise closely with the Head ofthe Development Service Department to determine how best to share the respon-sibility for data collection. 2/ The evaluation program would start early in1977 when, following initial orientation, a listing of all villages would bemade. This would be followed by a baseline survey carried out over fivemonths between end of 1977 and early 1978. Following this survey, and over afull cropping cycle beginning in February/March 1978, a detailed farm manage-ment study (mainline survey) would be instituted to record farmers' activities,farm inputs and outputs, etc. Costs of evaluation are detailed in Table 8.


2/ In Francophone West Africa extension staff have been used for data collec-tion but in English-speaking West Africa they have not, although there isno inherent reason why this could not be done.

22222 - 2 2222222222 2A�2222 � 22222222LC22g�A 22522 22222222 2�222

522�2 5 2252 �225LC�.222 2 A.ACA.AACI A CAACA LA CI AA.CAA I C

A A5C5 AA A L A � +Si C:YC AX4AAA.CCCAAAAAACAC5CACC 22? 5' C-.CAACCAACICA CA A CA

222k? A C. AA

A A A A

�

5A 2CC.

AACAAC

AAAA

S CA I A AACC CCC -. A�A A A AC AAAA

A-C 5 CC. A IA 2ACA C AAACA A A A 5 A

5AA CS CAA A.

A A CA -� A 222�Et�AA.AA I2�22�32 C A AAAA SAAAAA.AAAA5 2 LCA A A AS C

AC C A A.5AgAo�2g? - A55 AAC'j22

� 2 A A5A9 A A A� AC�CC A A

AriA

AA AAASA

AC AAA A

A A

IA AC JCS25

SijCAC.gtA.22 CA AAAA CCC A A A C A A A. A

A.CAAAAAC.AAA SCA.A 2 2 52CC2 22522 5 A A A C AK2

ACAA2AC �A5C � A A

IA. CA ACI 'CCC

AC.C. C C A A. A A A A

AA AAC CACaIA � A

A �A A AA IACC '2A A A A. A A A A.ACA.A.A.C.A.A.AC AC A A C A A. C A A AC A. A. A. C

A. A. A C A A A. A A A CA A C CC A A AC A A. A A C C ACA.CACAC A A C. A A A A A. A A A C A. CC A.

i �AA A A. A. A A.A.AAA.A.A.A.A.ACA.CA.A. A A. A A. A A A A. A.

5A :A9

2 5 C IC I A.[A.

A A A C C. A A. A A A A CCAA.A.A.A C A A AC A. A. �' 'C

AC ADAA A A C� CC. A A. A.A AA 2 25. 22 2 A. A.AA.A.A.AAAA.AA.A.A.ACC.A.A.A.A A.A.A.A.A.A.A.AA.AA A A. AA.A.A.A. A. A. A. A.

Si A CA A. A. A'A.C C C A A

A.

I 'CCC

ACAA.AA.AC C C C C" C 'AC AC A '�C A C' A A

CA. CC CCA.CCA.CCA.A.ACCC

AC C. C A. A A. A. A C A A. C A A. A. A. C.

22 A 'CA A 'CA. A A. C A. A.A. A.IA.ACACCC. CCC C C.ACAACC A A.CA.A A

CA A A A A �A. 21C.A.5 I.CCC (CCA.A A.I lACACACA. AACCAAA ACCCAAACC AC. AA.CA.A.A.CACCA. A. CC. C CACAA.A.C C

A A. C CCC C C2

C A 5 A.AA.A.AAA.AA.AA.AAAAA.A.A.A. A.A.A. AC AC. AC 2SC AA.CCCA.AA.CA.A.A.A.CCCA.CA.C C'CACAA.CA

C C ( Ci 'CCC C C'flCCC A CCCC ' IS CC

A- C. A 'A C' I C A. I AC-CC A.C.C A. C C CAC. A.CC IA

A A 5A A 5 2212252 �C A IAA.CA.AACC.ACCA.A.AC.AA A A C A A.CA.C-CC-'C A C 'CA. CA.A AC A A - . I . C C C C ACA C A C C C CA. I AC.IAA.A.C ACA.CAAC.CAA ACCCACCA A.IA.CCCACAC CC C I A. A. A AC IC

I A. C A. S : :2 2 12225 IA IC AA.AAACC (CC CCCCCCC C C

C I 0 A.A.AA.A.ACC -CACA C. C C [CCCLI i IC ICCCCCC*CCCC*CCC CA AC. AC C r A A CA. AC. CACACCA. A A. 22 A CA. A. Al

2 C CA. 29

I 2 A 2

CC. I I C C. �AA.AA.CACACCCAA. AC. AC AC A A C �C. C CC IA2212222 �C A. A2CDCA [ A CICA. [C- CS'C

C C

C C

A

I C C.

AA.ACA.AACCCA.ACCC

A A

C

A.

A. C I IAI I IA. A. C. CC C A A. A. C AA.AA.A.AA. C. C A C C C A

C ALA ACA. I C CC A. C AI A LA CCC C CA.A.A.'ACA.ACAA.AA CAC A.A.A.C.CACCC 2 A.A.A.A.A.C.C.

CA A. A. C.CA.A A. A VA "� F552A�52?52QC� LA A.A.CA.ACCCA.AACCC C AA.A.A. A. C'CC I A. C. I CA. A. C A. C A. ' ' C CAA.AAA.CA. CC.CCC A C.C.CC A. A.C.CCCCA. C.

A. A. C A. C AC C C CCCCCCCCCCCCCACC A. A C C A. A A A A C C C C A C C. A A.ACCA.CAC C C A. CCCC C. C CA CCC AC C CC-CC CCC AC 22 CC CA A. A C AC C. ICAf�I

C C I C C-. I C A. I A. I CCC C''C''''C A'' A.A. I A.C.A A. I A C C Al C 22 C CI CCC C ACA. C ' A. SI

C A. �C C CCC C C. A. C A A. AC CC I C CC AC C CA. CC

CA. I C C-C CC C :A )tCSKC'A. 5. 5� I A CA Ct

C A. FAA C A. CIA. C IC C.C' A. IA.A.A.A C C C C C I A. CIA.CCA.CA.A.CA.A.A.C'CCAA.CCACCCA.A. A. A. A A A.C A C C C I C A. C C A. CACCA. A. CAACCC.A.A.A. C CA.AA.CA.AAC-'A. C A C CC A CCACCA.AA C CACCA. CCC ACACA. C A A C C A CC CCCA. A

II II C. C C [CA. C C A. A A C C A A. A. C. A. C A A A. C CA.CA.CA.AC A C C C 'C C. C C CCA.A.A.C A A.A.2A.AC A A A A C C A. C. C C C C A C A A. AC A. C

ANNEX 7Table 2

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Staff Likely to be Internationally Recruited

Project ManagerHead of Engineering DepartmentHead of Development Services DepartmentHead of Commercial Services DepartmentChief AccountantRoads EngineerWorkshop EngineerFarm Management AdvisorChief AgronomistFishery Expert 1/Forestry Expert 1/Training OfficerEvaluation Officer(Hydrological Engineer) 2/(Livestock Expert) 2/

1/ Also to work for the Lafia Agricultural Development Project.2/ Recruited under the Lafia Project, but also to advise and work for

the Ayangba Project.

NIG1EIA

BWUE STATE

AYANGBA AGRiIaLTURAL DEVLO0ET PROJECT

Area Required for Seed Multiplication nnd Research (ha)

Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year b Year 5

SEED IULTIPLICATION

Rice 6 9 13 19 13Maize 6 12 25 26 21Melon 3 6 12 18 18Cowpeas 3 5 9 13 13Benniseed 1 1 1 2 2

Sub-Total 19 33 60 78 67

OTHER MULTIPLICATIONS

Yams 2 2 2 2 2Cassava 20 20 5 1

Sub-Total 22 22 7 7 7

RESEARCH AND EXPERIMENTS 20 30 5 LO 50

MISCELIANEC0S g/ 29 1 58 65 66

TOTAL AREA, REXQUIRED 90 130 175 200 190

]/ Details are in Supplement 6.j/ Including access, fallows etc. Basis about 50% area under cultivation.

tD>

(D X

J _,

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Seed Purchases 3/

Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5Seed Requirements 1/ ------------ '000 kg…---------------…--____________

Rice 45 80 125 195 285 190Maize 67.5 67.5 155 317.5 337.5 270Melon 0.75 1.5 3 6 9 9Cowpeas 12.5 25 50 100 150 150Benniseeds 5 5 5 5 10 6

Seed Purchases Price 2/ ----------------------------N '000--------------------------------

Rice 304 13,680 24,320 38,000 59,280 86,640 57,760Maize 135 9,112 9,112 20,925 42,862 45,562 36,450Melon 402 302 603 1,206 2,412 3,618 3,618Cowpeas 250 3,125 6,250 12,500 25,000 37,500 37,500Benniseed 386 1,930 1,930 1,930 1,930 3,860 2,316

Total 28,149 42,215 74,561 131,484 177,180 137,644

Incremental Costs 28,149 14,066 32,346 56,923 45,696 -

1/ See Supplement 8, Appendix 1. b

2/ 1.5 times financial market price (1980 in constant 1976 terms or if not available 1976 prices).See Annex 12. X

3/ All needed seed valued; no differentiation made between contract farms and project farm as costs(not separately costed in project) have to be made for the latter production also.

4 4

N4

.-4

-�j 42 .C2'.-.-.. 1 2 0 'N 2;>1 2 �4 -. "N- 4211 <4-

(�4((. 0044444 Nc' 4-4 4-4 .4 �4444 'Nj' .4,0

[1 <-� 4.440044J4j *,, 4 4 '4 '' 4 ' 4 '4 *l't -z1;i2

Ii no o 04-0 cocco. 4c0(N0 0 cc 0

04244 'ct 4>44 4'4

'N-�'0o t,,iii,l,,ii 444 444 44

Ill oo->4 o- o- oo c-� .- 411 LI v.34'.-i�$,i. -cn-tooll&iQ 4214''-4' " "' '-' I' 21 'N <>4N��'N "Il 7142

40 "tl"4

'N."i � J440444 'N '�I' �I ONtO 4-4 44 -440 444-i-n �L4- "N'N��j 2 c.sj<

004 4½-440

44'44N'N-'N 4444 - 4 '0 .- ccI CI 4-

'''j. '''''K''jW 111%

44044<-4-40'-�.00-4.->4�

& '7 � 'N<�I 21I 4

-4-444-0-4-4-4 - 4o-N.''.-. 0 ,4-4.-.4 44 4

4- -4-I 4424 I,2.'-..,I2 ,,,,, Of 04N'4½-.44 04044444-44 'N-"-'NI "-1% 4 2 %4%j 4-f

'7 4-i � I A 0-404-4'0-40 4.4.44 4

-j 4 4440l 421 � 4

'71 I"' I '2 I" "Ni '7 �4414- �1 �4-N444.--' 420-44-04.4 .�'N-.4j4N .�-4 4 'N

4 4

"4 01 0 'NO 0-��oI o 0" I 4 4-I 444 4-4-44-4--'N 4cr-c' 444 'NI -044-4 4010

44 I �'�'I - I I. 44�ItIj--*g II 0 . '-4 - -I -- ... " '-I. 4-

'7 21 2 0044n;I 4 -4 I '71 C.4

KNOVNc)-4'4

.O4 4

44

.44

-j � �I � ThA "KK

4�4 -4 4444 -44444,44444-44�4 000.44 .4-4-42 --

4�0 I 44 4414 4.

'N �. , 242-' i --. 1 .. ' O'4N0-----004-4444-'40N'N, 4- 4,0 -�4<4

4' InC'I 44

4-1< 04 0 l��l 44,44404.4-4.4-04 I..4j 4 4400 4

4' .444�4 . 00404-4,1'N.44.-00

'7 'N

CO 440 0 -'44-NC- .00000 04044-4-444 4404'Nt-4- -21 2 sw-I 42 . 4229%-it0424Sf '0 4. 4-4-004 �404'N 044-0.1 4 444

-4-44-44-44 ,-.0444.-.4>.4.14 .-. 4N

40 I 'N -<<<-4- 4- 4- <<4-I 'N1444- 4-4 , 4 44-44 -4 0 -4-40414 �I

Of0

0 22,2-22 04,,,' I I

I I 4

.4044 4 4-�4N 4

0000 4 -4040 44440 0444-4-4 -"-440-444-4 -404

4-44-004 444444 4040'N 4-4-4,0-4 -4.4.44440 -4 2

4' 4 '44

4 -4 -4' .444 -

42 44 t

I 4- 444-04444

el 4 4,

01 I - 4' 4-

414 4 40 44 I �N. 44 40'- 44 444 4 V24-'..' 44

'0 0 4 44 '7 44> 444414 I 0.- I4 -4 '4- 40 2 4.4 4 444 4 44

O 44 44 0- 4-4 -44-4 '.4 4-A 1 444 044

F -4 4 44 4424 444044 4�440 4 ,-N N 444N4.-4

0'400 4 4 444 4> 44 4400- 04444' 0 4 4 0 0

'74>4> 4 4444044,44 �4. < 4 o 'N ' 4444-4

4"14'"' oqr-o-�.cr. '7 "� '"''4' 4' 4444-44 �I �4 0 4 1- 44,-.44

'7442424 4C4044�0'444-4.44 '7 4>2 .c,$4 -

&144'7 4 t C-4>� 4'

0414444 4 440404-H 4-44444444 2N'7j 04444<4 070444.44 4444 44-44�4--4<44 I '04-444-''N-4 4.'Nt4-0t-'N.404.'N4'N4-4'44-0 44 44-4

11 4-414)41 144

ANNEX 7Tabie 6

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE

AYANGaA AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Costs of Research

Unit igreigc! ange LocalCosts Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Amount Costs

CAPITAL COSTS

HousesSenior Houses / 30.0 (1) 30.0 35.c 30 g.0 21.0Intermediate Houses 2 21.0 (3) 65.0 63.o 25 15.8 47.2Traditional Houses 31 4.o (3) 12.0 12.0 10 1.2 10.8

Subtotal 105.0 105.0 26.o '9.0

Vehicle sFour-Wheel Drive 6.o (2) 12.0 (2) 12.0 2h.O 80 19.2 4.8Pick-Ups 4.o (1) 4.0 (1) .o 8.0 80 t.4 1.6Motorcycles 9' o.8 (3) 2-4 2.L 6So i. 1.0

Subtotal 1i.4 16.0 34.4 27.C 7.4

EquipmentSoil Laboratory Equipment 2/ Lump Sum 5.0 5.0 80 4.o 1.0Sundry Equipment Lump Sum 3.0 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 4.2 50 2.1 2.1Typewriters 0.5 (1) 0.5 0.5 6S C.3 0.2Calculators c.4 (4) 1.6 1.6 6o L.o o.6Furniture 6J 0.8 (5) 4.0 _ __ 4.o0 40 1.6 2.4

Subtotal 14.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 15.3 9.0 6.3

TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS 137-5 0.3 0.3 16.3 0.3 151". 62.C 92.7

RECURRENT COSTS

Staff SalariesSenior Agricultural Officer 6.c (1) 6.0 (1) S.o ( 6.o (1) 6.o (1) 6.o 30.0 30.0Agricultural Superintendant 7/ 2.9 (2) s.8 (2) 5.8 (2) 5.8 (2) 5.8 (2) 5.8 29.0 29.0AA's 1.7 (3) 5.1 (3) 5.1 (3) 5.1 (3( 5.1 (3) 5.1 25.5 - 21.5Soil Technologist 3.7 (1) 3.7 (1) 3.7 (1) 3.7 (1) 3,7 (1) 3.7 18.5 - 18.5Secretary 1.7 (1) 1.7 (1) 1.7 (1) 1.7 (1) 1.7 (1) 1.7 8.5 - 8.5Clerk 1.0 (1) 1.0 (1) 1.0 (1) 1.0 (1) 1.0 (1) 1.0 5.0 - - 5.0

Drivers 0.9 (3) 2.7 (3) 2.7 3) 2.7 (3) 2.7 (3) 2.7 13.5 13.5Laborers 8/ 0.8 (1) 3.2 (4) 3.2 4) 3.2 (4) O2 (4) 3.2 16.0 - 16.0

Subtotal 29.2 29.2 29.2 29.2 29.2 146.0 146.0

Allowances 2/ 75% 21.9 21.9 21.9 21.9 21.9 109.5 15 16.4 93.1

Total Salaries 51.1 51.1 51.1 51.1 51.1 205.5 16.4 239.1

VrehIcle OperatingPour-Wheal Drise 2.1 (2) 4.2 (2) 4.1 (2) 4.2 4.2 (2) 4.2 21.0 45 9.1 11.5Pick-Ups 1.8 (1) 1.8 (1) 1.8 (1) 1.8 (1) 1.8 - ) 1.8 0.c 4i 4.1 -.9

Subtotal 6.0 6.o 6.c 6.o 6.o 30.0 t3.6 16.4

General ServicesConferences 12/ Lump Sm 5.0 5. 10.0 10.0 10.0 41.0 - - 4o.o

TOTAL RECURRENT 62.1 62.1 67.1 67.1 67.1 321.5 3500 291.5

TOTAL COSTS 199.6 62.4 67.1 8}.4 67.4 180.2 90.0 388.2

For SAO2 For AS's and Soil Technologist

F Por AA'sProject will make loans to AMA' to purchase motorcycles; initial purchases costed to build up revolving fondFor simple testing only, as existing laboratories would be used for major testsI Three senior staff members pius 60% to reflect office staff seedsone to supervise field trials; cne to supervis on project farmTo ork on research plots on proet ect farmPor normal civil service and additional project incentive allowances; 71% of local salaries

/ To travel to research institutes and organize research conferences in the project areas

(01.170 201

AYatf0To- 10,RI 00UR 001~C bo-.CT o~l Tta

.loCAoo Co,ooo 31 -~~~~~~~l I.- SS. (II - Y-1 y-,4 - , 10A

loAtoosA 5.0 101.0 0.0 - 12010. 1.

O.abo-oloooo 100~~~4. - 11004- -

-o0ohop I0 2 0.0 - -- 0

T,,r.ioo --9 15. -- ('~ 2. 101

R--toAt- oo 00 O .

00toooal . 00~~~~~~~~~~~~~7.0 - 17.1 10

0o-lNoolbo-1'e 0 0''l L.A 12) 1.1.0 - (a) 12.1~~~~~~ ~~2) 12. 4.00 A0 ~ 904 )

ToiInAoo/ 0. (2 00 (1 00(02 0 '

Oeoo totol Paso-lao,0.4 (0 09 00 01

AAAoooI 1':2 1 1 2 11

Clooooooao F sboootry .0 1'1 4. 0

S.b-Aoaootoloalo 1.1 271 1. 0

0eAoooOAAAA- o,T 0601 '01. (o9.A`l10 9

'hi~ - ig~fi E- J)52'lotooo 0.12 Oo1 1.' ( T L L,A,i-ff fi-e 2/Otre3 0.0 (0) )0 L0

'obTosat ~ ~ ~ ~ 2. 4 q11 M 106 A.91 100

LosOoo10oaoo l.o Is i 510 2' 1 0 1-

looso Ao ,lt.o 1.0 .4_ '1 C D ')'01' 0

Ct'Coa.. lAS) IC/er 2.0 (1) 0 .1 (1

OAeYP o-Aot o 'IT1

.1 1o1 ~ I 0 0 o 0 9 o. flo2 .1~ 1 ~

0000000 ca 2) 1 0~~~~~~~~) :1~2

000000, 0~~ ~ ~~~~~.0 117

00000 1.0 .1 ½'~ ~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 410I' -1

00000000 0? -1 o~~~~~~76 4. - M 2. L. 0 01. -117

T-1 49.ole L7 11'9 101 '. ~ 1'~Il. -

Aoatlo4looo240.1 ( I 0'90 ': '(I 4' 1 ,. 0 10

Tot,l Vo-I!o 40100007 -

L2do /Ctoto ' . ',ol s6 I 6

TOTAIO91I9t7 261.i '19S- 994 108 o-4 2'102 -7

11 Coaf-Lotolo o7ofrto-eo. .51 34. ~ ~ 5 ~ l.6`2~C ,:D.

21 Al00,. - fl-

-y Hs bo , ll Alo. b ,~S11 ib~f, -2/ Dlrtl

2001011100 oolotiog o-oot-oo -01 I 0 7011(1l..

li:/ 4 Tb kD0ioo-lo11Do-o0O1aootot-1-11a'a-ooo01o-ooootoo1 7101 7o'oo Ell. DI001100 .. oboogfo

ANNEX 7Table e

NIGERIA

SENUE STATE

AYANGbA AGNICULTU6AL DEVELOPMEhT PROJECT

Coet of Eoalcotcoo

Fo-eiao ENxhan-e LocalUnit Costs Year A YTer 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Toco Arou Ccost

A. CAPITAL. COSTS

Nooses

Sector (beets 1/ 30.0 (2) 60.0 - - - - - 60.0 30 18.0 42.0Irteroatarte Nooses Z/ 21.0 (2) 42.0 - - - - - 42.0 25 10.5 31.5J-nior Houses 14.0 (7) 98.0 - - - - - 98.0 25 24.5 73.5

SNbto5l1 200.0 200.0 53.0 147.0

Vehicles

Foor Whsal Drive 6,0 (4) 24.0 ( ' 3) 24.7 _ 48.0 80 38.4 9,6Pick-Up Vehicles 4.0 (2) 8.0 - - (2) 8 -_ 16.0 80 12.8 3.2

Sobtotal 32.0 - - 32.0 - _ 64.0 51.2 12.8

Ekuip,..t.

Typeriter- 0.5 (3) 1.5 - - - - - 1.3 60 0.9 0.6CRleularoes 0.6 (11) 6.6 - - - - - 6.6 60 4.0 2.6Office Furnlcire 4/ 0.8 (8) 6.4 . - _ 6.4 40 2.6 3.8FPilog Cabinets 0.3 (10) 3.0 (10) 3.0 (10) 3.0 (10) 3.0 - _ 12.0 60 7.2 4.8Se_rstary Eqoip_ et 2.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 3.0 50 0.3 1.3

SNbto-E 19.3 3.2 3.2 3.2 0.2 0.2 29.5 16.2 13.3

Coe eultants Z/ 5.0 (6) 30.0 - _ _ - - 30.0 100 20.0

TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS 281.5 3.2 3.2 35.2 0.2 0.2 323.5 150,4 173.1

S. kECUEENrT GOSTS

Sc ori to

Chief Erolcacioc Offloer 32.0 (1) 32.0 (1) 32.0 (1) 32.0 (1) 2.0 1) 32.0 - 160.0 75 120.7 40.0Secitr EOrloutEoo Sffi_or 8.4 ( 8. (1) 8 (1 .4 (1) .4 (1) 6.4 50.4 _ 50.4

Evaluation Officer 6.0 (2) 12.0 (2) (2 ) 12.0 (2) 12.0 (2) 12.0 (2) 12.0 72.0 - - 72.CStatoo Rocrer- tor 2.2 (7) 15.4 (7) 15.4 (7) 15.4 (77 15.4 (77 15.4 17) 13.4 92.4 - _ 92.4E__ ertors 1.3 (50) 65.03 (50) 63.0(50) 65.0 (50) 65.0 (50) 65.0 (S0) 60.0 390.0 - - 390.0Clorko 1.0 (5) 5.3 (5) 5.0 (5) 5.0 (5) 5.0 (5) 5.0 (5) 3.0 30.0 - - 30.0Soorofary 1.7 (1) 1.0 (1) 1.0 (1) 1.) (1) 1.7 (1) 1.7 (1) 1.7 10.2 - - 10.2Typists 0.9 (2) 1.6 (0) 1.8 (2) 1.6 (7 1.8 12)6) 1.8 (2) 1.8 (2) 8 0.8 10.8ltoeaotgors 3.6 8 7) 0.8 0.: (1) 0.8 (1) 0, (1 0.6 4.8 -_ 4.8Oriners .09 (6) 3.4 (6) 5.4 (6) 5.4 76) 6.4 (6) 5.4 (6) 5.4 32.4 - _ 32

S.btoNsi 147.5 147.5 147.5 147.5 147.5 115.5 853.0 - 120.0 733.0

All-..a..s _/ 753 86.6 86.6 86.6 86.6 86.6 86.6 519.6 15 77 .9 441.1

Total S-eiete 234.1 234.1 234 .1 204.1 234.1 202.1 1 ,372.6 197.1 1,174.V

Vehicle Opretti.,

Four Wheel DSin 2.1 (4) 8.4 (4) 8.4 (4) 8.4 (4) 8.4 (4) 8.4 (4) 6.4 30.4 45 22.7 22.7PIck-C

51.8 (2) 3.6 (2) 3.6 (2) 3.6 (2) 3.6 (2) 3.5 (0) 3.6 21.4 40 9.7 11.0

Scbtot-l 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 72.0 32.4 39.6

TOTAL EECURbEh'T 6/ 46.7 246.1 746.1 746.7 706.1 2214.1 1.444.6

737.0 12_]

TOTAL COSTS (A I b) 527.6 249.3 249.3 281.3 721 014.3 1,768.1 3(7.7 1,377.4

I/ Chiof aof sooior t-olo-tio- Officc.2/ Evl(oario_ Offiocer3/ Neoior OrEtoerotort rbooorrrrralofrsoprfgoof4/ Foor -eior officr doble fo pp ig -ff.3/ Noe-l cioil cervicr olloccoca and cddirioool pr-j-c i-e-cior allowtnco

estimated or 75 porceot of (oral salaries.61 Otfire supplies cos.ref - odor gareral a-1 ocance o-for a,dminitratioofndooagcoarr

(..to 7. Toble 1).7/ To _aolor initial -t op if --. ry.

Noo. 5, 1976

NIGERIABENUE STATE

AYANGBA AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTORGANIZATION CHART

|Anat Comm s5toutue a|

FMARDNa1ural .esau.ces (MANR;

PMASCh.irma -C--n-- -- - - -Unr

T F-~~~~~~~~~~ n.so.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i f_____-~ -- d;|

P Pron ec Ma _a |- - - - - - __ __ _ __r_ __ __ _

LandUaolrpmeu |Cropt

| D e p art m e nt |o r isrn D ea rme n A d re r S e e o m r D e A p e p ar Fen t ~ s t O O O r , e m n

{ ruleu Siurnr rurruvxin Mapp71islngllsllo

j Pubilc FelulloMnrketn Trator fincre Sendo cmmn

Pruduc lllroplFar

Adursury ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~d.

| Coordlnatang |~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Aoar

M Me-r of Pchr

World bank-16482

NIGERIABENUE STATE

AYANGBA AGRICULTURAL_DEVEL OPMENT PROJECTStart Up Plan

YEAHR 0- EAR I YEAR 2

1976 - ~ 1977 7-9-tR197

3 4 1 2 2 4 1 2 3 4 1 2

A REPORT PROCESSING

White, Cove ... .. .. . . .. .. -- - -- IBRD - - -- -

Yello C-1 ................ IBRR ----------

G .ee tC.- ..... ---- . BRD .......Negtiti.os-F----- -------- IMG1SGIBIRD ..........Appio-.l PFal Oooo- ,itt-----------FMO!SG -- ---- ---- --

BMAJOR APPOINTMENTS

Co-d-ieaton eti ARRoitm-e of

Read of Adm,ini-ri- )epattetet ---- SG ......- .. Pro

1eol Me-cag -----------t- -APMU ----------

Head of Eogine-ie-g De,partme .......t - .APMU -- ------ ---- - f

Chief Aoooot- ------- _ ... _ -- APMU -- ..... ---Heaid ef Adonitnaio-iii Deeaptt-,I..... _SG -------- ...

R,ijldiog SoRenoi-s------t - SG ....... I---------f

C ACCOMMODATION ANS LANDITemPotato Sift --- --------- - ~SO .......

S PRtOJECT ESTABLISHMENTVisit State Offiojoktto Nonteete.Agtioilteit D-seop-eo Peo,- -------- SGS--- ----

R,-ot of Then Fie,edg-------------SG 1--.......Edi,-------- ------- SG ---- -......

Reok Anooe-1--------------- SG--------. ------

Tt-nsfe P-itch tMbI-........ SO --- -------

EVALUATION Chte Eg, ato Offioe....i ......... APMU.. -------------

ReoiittnnEvooatogSteff -------- SG -------------------------

rr-eio-hEaio-ate f SIh-------....P----------- ------------------

8-aselee i S----------------p---------------------------------M-f1-in Sotoy ----------- - _ _P.---- --------------- ------------------

--eo-o--S-- - - - - - - - - p -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -

AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY ANC MAPPINGRt-tig of RiEt,ing PhEotvgta ...S ...... FMG-D .- --

Slpplv E-igtogSf,,pt------ ------ _ D .G---------Caetog-,ohio Co-i-si ---- -----t- - P-.....---- ---------

PURtCHASES AND TENDERIINGj

Aevde1,to --- v- --- -- --ent ----et_ P - ------ --- ---------

Af., F.n-- PPoo,pet.I- -- ~---- -- ----- -----------.....Aid -Aw eog. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . P/E [.. . . . . . . . . . . . - - -TEnote -to Pe. . ...nt .. . . . . . . P E - -- - - -- - ---e_. .. . ...g.. .

BdeAlio .. .. .. .. -- - - - - - - - - SP plEC t.-- - - . .. . - - _ . . . .. . . . . . . . .

BUILDINGS )Detige V- -vo Hootes - - - - - -- - - - - -- - -.. ..

P.....t .ion of Sites .. . . . _ - - - - - - P-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

D -og Office nod Othet ---i ---- -- P - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -

Coett-nimg A.,- - - - - - - - - - - - - - P-- - - - - - - - - - - -- --1- - - - - - -

C.otto-vo Fin-t,,d -- - - - - - - - -- Coettvg .. . . .j - - - - -- -- - - - - -- - - - -

FSe Ct on 9 of S- - - _ - - - - - - - - - -- - - . . . . . . . . . . . ..

FMD Fede,al D-o-et tet

APMU=Ageio-ior-1tPieotsI.Maag,me- Lied

P -PnIO

P/EC PI Pno' Evel-to emoe

WhoId Baek-16455

ANNEX 8

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Commercial Development

A. General

1. During project development, substantial quantities of crop inputswill be required and marketable surpluses generated. For the former, projectsuccess will depend on creating a structure which will remain as a permanentand viable unit on completion of the development phase while attention tocrop marketing must assure farmers of secure outlets for their crops in theface of the substantial increases in marketable surplus projected in Supple-ment 2. This aspect of development would be the responsibility of a Commer-cial Services Department in each project. The Commercial Services Departmentis divided into four divisions: Credit Division; Input Supply Division;Marketing Advisory Service; and Produce Inspection Division.

B. Input Development

2. Existing Services. All fertilizers consumed in Nigeria are importedwith the exception of some supplies of superphosphate from a recently openedplant in Kaduna (using rock imported from Togo); projected supply from theplant is expected to reach 40,000 tons per annum. A nitrogen plant is alsoproposed in the Third Five-Year Development Plan and could begin operationsduring project implementation.

3. Imported fertilizer procurement has been a State Government responsi-bility and the heavily subsidized official selling prices have varied betweenStates. Procurement has been sporadic and well short of demand, and this, to-gether with price differentials between States, has led to an active blackmarket trade and undesirable movement of fertilizers across State boundaries.All of these problems have been under review by FMG and proposals are beingconsidered for central procurement by a single Federal agency and distributionat uniform sale prices throughout Nigeria. At present State requirements arebeing met from Federal and State sources. A recent press announcement indi-cates that the following sale prices will be applied: urea N 2.00 per bag;sulphate of ammonia N 1.00 per bag; single superphosphate N 1.50 per bag; andcompound fertilizers N 2.00 per bag. Based on this publication a sale priceof N 1.50 per bag has been assumed for project fertilizers; compared withactual delivered prices, including storage and handling, this represents asubsidy level of around 80% in the central projects zone.

4. Until the Nigerian Agricultural Bank (NAB) was established in 1973,there was no specific financial institution in the agricultural sector apart

ANNEX 8Page 2

from the rather selective advances that were at one time available to cooper-ative members. Short-term financial requirements have to be met from othersources, usually on terms and conditions that fully reflect both the riskand the limited choice of sources. The value of seasonal credit extended inthis way is not known but quite an important proportion is found at familylevel, while the Tiv have a fairly highly developed traditional communalcredit system.

5. An NAB onlending scheme has recently been launched in the Ayangbaarea and is supervised by agricultural and cooperative staff. A flat interestrate of 5% is charged but onlending is restricted to 7% with liability restingwith the intermediary. This could well result in the consequent credit opera-tion being unviable because of inadequate spread to cover cost of money, risksand cost of lending and recovery. This position is exacerbated when credit isgranted for highly subsidized articles such as fertilizer. At current ferti-lizer prices and a 2% interest spread it would take a 33,000 bag turnover toachieve N 1,000 revenue, from which provision for bad debts and reserves wouldhave to be deducted before anything could be made available against adminis-trative costs. An NAB onlending scheme has also been proposed for PlateauState; but proposals to create a credit unit in MANR which would ultimatelybecome a cooperative bank have reached only the stage of a draft projectdocument for technical assistance by UNDP.

6. Development Proposals. Present Government policy on fertilizer sub-sididies does not provide any incentive for private input trading (except onthe black market) but in the long term, private sector participation must beexpected and permitted. 1/ Few advanced farming systems have the flexibilityfor seasonal changes from intensive to extensive production methods, and tech-nical improvement at farm level could rapidly reach a point beyond whichfarmers will be unwilling to advance unless backed by a reliable and regularsupply of farm inputs; this situation is likely to occur only against thebackground of an active and competitive private trading network.

7. Commercial development must therefore be compatible with thisrequirement and even Government-inspired networks must be structured accordingto commercial principles if future transfer to the private sector is to occur.These considerations have determined the input development structure proposedunder these projects.

1/ Although not targeted in time, the project's Commercial Services Depart-ment is designed and will operate in such a way that in the future itcan be detached (except for the Produce Inspection Division) from theproject organization and transformed into a separate commercially viablelegal entity (like the Farmers Finance Companies in the Upper RegionAgricultural Development Project in Ghana and the Agricultural Develop-ment Project in Sierra Leone).

ANNEX 8Page 3

8. Farmers Service Centers. Crop inputs would be supplied to farmersthrough a network of 30 Farmers Service Centers (FSC) located to achieve asuitable balance between throughput and access. The centers would be locatedwhere possible at principal towns already serving as important assembly pointsfor the farming community. Suggested locations are shown on the project mapsand Table 1. On average each center would serve a hinterland of up to 15km radius, a farming population of around 5,000 1/ farm families, and atfull development would have an annual fertilizer throughput of around 650tons. At this level, and with a 15% mark-up on the pre-store projected priceof imported fertilizer, the net revenue on turnover would amount to aroundN 15,000 per center per annum.

9. The basic FSC would consist of a covered store designed on a modulebasis to permit economy in initial. construction and to allow expansion on thebasis of throughput and demand. A standard 400-ton module has been used.

Assuming 4 m average height, 250 m2 floor area would provide enough space to

allow access to four separate stacks. Roof extension to provide further 60 m2

covered space woul.d permit loading and unloading to take place in all weather.The basic FSC would consist of a single module, with the volume of storagerequired being based on a turnover factor of about 2. 2/

10. Sales Organization. Input sales and delivery would be organized andpromoted by salesmen. 3/ A Sales Supervisor would be appointed for every fiveFSCs 4/ and would be responsible for supervising sales operations and ensuringthat accurate and up-to-date store records, trading accounts and movement sche-dules were maintained at each FSC. Deployment of sales staff would directlycorrespond with that of the general extension services with whom close liaisonwould be maintained concerning group development and forward estimates ofdemand.

11. Specific attention and incentives would be given to ensure that ad-ministrative overhead is kept to a minimum. In a scattered and small-scalefarming situation this would depend critically on achieving a sound grouping

1/ Ayangba has an estimated 150,000 farm families, and would have 30 FSCs.

2/ Not exactly 2 as seasonal. fertilizer use will, not be equal in early andlate season.

3/ As and when the Commercial, Services Department becomes a separate commer-cial entity, salesmen could be paid incentive salaries (linked to salesand credit performances.)

4/ As for agricultural extension where an Agricultural Superintendent over-sees five FSCs, one Sales Supervisor oversees five FSCs. These supervi-sion functions under the project are combined in Development Centers(DCs), each of which supervises and coordinates the operations of fiveFSCs.

ANNEX 8Page 4

structure at farm level so that supplies can be retailed in bulk. Responsi-bility for group formation would rest primarily with the general extensionservice. This, however, would need to be supported by suitable incentivesso that farmers can receive tangible benefits from group formation.

12. Ideally, these incentives would be provided in the form of discountsfor bulk purchases of inputs reflecting administrative savings over single bagtrading, although with Government's present fixed sale price policy, this isnot possible. However, this would be assessed annually by project managementand introduced as soon as feasible. 1/ Opportunities exist, however, for pro-viding bonus bags (say 10%) for purchase on a full lorry load basis (5 to 7tons) and for arranging delivery for purchase of a full lorry loads to vil-lages or nearest accessible point on motorable roads. 2/ Project managementin conjunction with other Project Managers would continually liaise withGovernment on the effects and implications of fertilizer price policy andreassess project policy accordingly. The Bank would be kept informed of anychanges in this field. Actual incentive policy to be used would be coordi-nated between the projects and agreed with the Bank.

13. Credit. At present levels of fertilizer subsidy there are no firmgrounds for supposing that seasonal credit would be a prerequisite to achiev-ing anticipated adoption rates for improved practices; rather, the greatestconstraint on widespread use of fertilizer is lack of availability with far-mers paying up to six times the official prices in order to secure supplies.Although seasonal cash problems undoubtedly exist, the indications are thatthis is at least as attributable to bad housekeeping as to other reasons, asituation that is not going to be improved, but probably aggravated, by in-creasing credit availability. Indeed, by very circumstance, this class ofborrower tends to be an avid credit seeker and poor repayer and a source ofpotentially bad business that is best avoided if other borrowers are not tobe penalized. Sales would, therefore, be basically on cash but normal trad-ing facility would be made for deferred payment against 10% mark-up for largergroup orders. Deferred payment arrangements would be strictly controlled andsubject to reference from the local authorities' extension staff.

14. Conventional credit operations would be restricted to medium (2-3years) and long-term (5 years) requirements and would be principally linkedto progressive farmers and management groups wishing to undertake advanced

1/ This clearly needs to be coordinated with the other agricultural projectsin Nigeria.

2/ The incentive in this case would be that a full lorry load would bedelivered free, while any other delivery would be at least at full cost.Thus sales from a truck in a village would be at say N 1.50/bag plustransport costs; sales at FSC would be at N 1.50/bag (but farmers wouldhave to arrange transport) and sale of 5 to 7 tons delivered at sitewould be based on N 1.50/bag.

ANNEX 8Page 5

farm development backed by financial analyses of the Farm Advisory Service.Components would include land clearing and scrubbing, ULV sprayers, inter-mediate technology equipment, tractors and implements, plus credit for storageimprovement; the latter is discussed in Section C of this annex.

15. As seasonal credit is not likely to be required to a large extent,credit staff would not be deployed at FSC level. Credit offices would beappointed at Development Centers (DC). Staff at the FSC level would notmake any credit decisions but would be involved in the administrative workon the basis of standard forms only. When project activities increase overtime more Credit Assistants would be appointed at DC level. Credit Assistantswould make a fixed number of visits (say one day a week for each FSC) to FSCs.The project credit system would be designed in such a way as to provideseasonal credit or cash sales for fertilizer. However, the seasonal creditoption would remain inoperative except for group sales, for the time being,until such time as actual prices for fertilizer make seasonal credit necessaryagain.

16. Credit and farm input delivery operations would be kept separate.For that reason, two separate divisions are proposed in the CommercialServices Department, but accounts would also be kept separate. There wouldbe a trading account, used for purchase of all farm inputs and replenishedimmediately either with cash obtained from sales, reimbursed for subsidies,or- from the credit fund. There would also be a credit account which creditoperations would go through.

17. The project's seasonal input requirements and costings are de-tailed in Tables 2 and 3 and requirements for medium and long term creditand costings are in Tables 4 and 5.

C. Marketing Development

18. The existing market structure for scheduled and food crops is des-cribed in Supplement 11. The Commercial Services Division would contain aMarketing Advisory Service with specific responsibilities for creating a moredisciplined and informed market structure in the area to cater for both exist-ing and incremental production.

19. Market Intelligence. There is no formal regional or national cropmarket intelligence service available to farmers. Uniform and accepted gradesexist only for scheduled crops, so although prices for other crops in indivi-dual markets will reflect quality and condition of offerings, as well assupply and demand, these prices cannot be related to a common standard. Theinformation that does circulate is liable to considerable distortion and deli-berate circulation of misleading news is not unknown. Such a situation notonly affects short-term marketing actions, but also delays or impairs plantingdecisions with possible adverse effects on both producer and consumer.

ANNEX 8Page 6

20. The project would, therefore, establish an efficient market intelli-gence service for farmers. Links would be established with main recordingcenters and particularly with market sections in other development schemes;direct and indirect contact would be maintained with large users such as feedmanufacturers and poultry producers, and a close liaison developed with theNational Grain Production Company. 1/ Prices and trends in main marketswould be regularly recorded and the resulting data circulated inside and out-side the project. Simple analysis work would be carried out, but the primaryemphasis would be to establish an efficient news recording and diffusion sys-tem. Weekly news sheets would be circulated to all FSC locations for prominentdisplay and all staff members working or traveling away from their stationwould be required to ensure they possessed up-to-date news prior to theirdeparture. Only experience will show how often fresh news should be dissemi-nated because too great a frequency could cause confusion; weekly should bequite sufficient, except perhaps at the height of the season.

21. Those handling market news would be essentially providers ratherthan interpreters of information, since the potential consequences of gratu-itously providing wrong market advice are too serious to be incurred unneces-sarily. Interpretation of market information would be strictly reserved forMarketing Advisors (see below) but advice would be confined to outliningpossible courses of action and likely consequences thereof, thus aiding therecipient in narrowing his choices of action.

22. Weights and Measures. While regular market users can possess con-siderable skill in visually judging the value of produce sold in an inconsist-ent range of volumetic measures, such standards generally provide an unhealthybasis for exploitation of the inexperienced and ill-informed and prevent dis-semination of market information in terms of any practically conceptualizedstandard. In addition, similar volumes of produce can vary substantiallyin weight due to pest infestation. 2/

23. Weights and measures regulations are now subjects of study bythe Federal Ministry of Trade and Industry with the objective of producingstandard volumetric measures throughout the country. The project wouldliaise closely with the Federal Ministry of Trade and Industry and wouldassist in implementing a two phase overhaul of standards within the projectarea. This would involve replacing all existing measures in main markets inthe project areas as a condition of obtaining trading licenses. Subsequently,and at main town markets, traders would be required to use approved scalescompatible with the previously-introduced volumetric measures. In this way,trading could continue by volume but would allow the purchaser to continuallyrelate volume to weight and pave the way to weight-based transactions followed

1/ See Supplement 11.

2/ A weevilled grain may occupy the same space as a sound grain but weighonly half as much.

ANNEX 8Page 7

by legal enforcement. These transitions would be supported by training atprimary and secondary school levels. The projects' involvement would be oneof support rather than first responsibility for implementation; the latterclearly rests and must remain with the regulatory authorities.

24. Crop Storage. Harvested cereals are usually stored at the farmon head or ear, in mud and stone rhumbus or raised woven basket-type struc-tures (aka) as well as in the roof space of huts and houses; cribs are alsofound, but are mainly used for early season crops. Insecticides are onlyinfrequently employed by farmers but are used by traders and cooperativeswith obviously varying degrees of effectiveness, although there is no reli-able indication as to actual dosage rates. Heat and smoke from hut fires,and those specifically lit under basket granaries, help to deter insectsand termites, but ratguards are unusual and losses due to rodents are re-putedly high. Farm storage capacity is generally related to estimated familyrequirements and this influences timing and volume of postharvest sales,particularly in "good" years. Marketing of surplus foodcrops tends to ex-tend over a long period, mainly to allow new season prospects to clarify;a fact that partially explains the long carry that seems to be necessarybefore full storage costs can be recovered, particularly for maize. 1/

25. There have been no storage surveys in the project areas and noquantitative information concerning losses is available. 2/ Climatic con-ditions are generally unfavorable for the early crops that are taken throughto grain, but the dry season allows the late crop harvest to reach safe mois-ture levels before the onset of the next rains. Where reasonable moisturecontent is achieved (up to 13%), grain appears to retain condition well, butquality may be adversely affected through damage by insects and rodents.Discussions with farmers indicated that losses from causes other than simpledrying out were probably less than might have been expected and on a twelve-month basis (although little if any grain will be stored that long) couldrange between 5% and 25%, the higher figure covering early crops and cowpeas.

26. Yams are extremely difficult to store satisfactorily, primarilybecause their metabolic activity continues after harvest and the natural ten-dency to sprout is accentuated by the warm humid conditions that occur through

1/ Price data from western states show that usually (five years out of six)maize has to be carried for more than five months before increases inmarket prices compensate for storage costs.

2/ Early in the project period, the Marketing Advisory Service would under-take indepth studies to determine storage capacity and provide storageloss information. The initial listing of villages in the project areafor evaluation purposes could also provide general data on storagecapacity. Further surveys could be based on this initial listing. Asstorage is part of the overall farm management decisions, storage surveysyT3ldst>tgfio;pogjgepr^ffte mainline surveys undertaken by the evalua-

ANNEX 8Page 8

most of the year. Weight and condition loss occur through dehydration, rotand decay, and has been recorded at 49% after five months in conventional barnstorage, 1/ although rather lower figures appear more usual; 2/ disease andphysical damage sharply reduce storability, as does exposure to the sun.Limewashing has been found to reduce losses over periods of up to 10 weeks,but to be ineffective thereafter. In general the lowest losses occur in soundtubers quickly stored in airy, shaded conditions. If these provisions are metthen the traditional pole-hanging storage method does not seem to have anysignificant advantage over shelf storage or even careful stacking. The natureof the plant, however, as well as climatic conditions, militates againststorage at farm level beyond April.

27. Because of the effect of store losses on farmers' returns and theproblem of reliably expressing them in absolute terms, relative figures ofweight loss have been used in calculating farmgate prices. These have beenderived from discussions with farmers, examination of new and old crop samplesand consideration of harvesting times and probable storage periods.

28. Cassava does not pose any problems since it stores well in theground. Rice is not susceptible to significant insoil damage, though rodentscan be a problem; however, surplus production could be quickly marketed byarrangement with the Rice Company, Jos; for benniseed also, rapid disposal tothe Marketing Boards would be possible.

29. Project assistance in farm storage would be confined to expandingand improving existing forms of farm storage. Storage insecticides have beenincluded in the improved and advanced farm budgets and this technology wouldbe an important dissemination operation for the general extension service.Credit assistance for storage would also be provided to farm groups who wishto assemble and bulk their surplus produce and introduce more elaborate stor-age techniques.

30. A standard 3 x 8 m basic storage unit is envisaged, timber framedand clad with weldmesh (for farm storage) or traditionally manufacturedbricks, and with corrugated iron roofs. 3/ Materials would be provided on

1/ 0. Olorunda and S.A. Adeyasi NSPRI Technical Report No. 7.

2/ 10% after three months and 20% or more after five months are reported byD.G. Coursey.

3/ Construction cost would vary according to type, which would depend onthe surpluses and requirements of each group. Common costs would includecorrugated roofing materials (N 150), timber (N 50), cement (N 150) andmiscellaneous supplies (N 50). Weldmesh cladding would add an extraN 150 to costs. For calculation purposes a credit component of N 500 hasbeen assumed.

ANNEX 8Page 9

credit by the project, which would also provide specialist assistance inconstruction (such as a mason). Unskilled labor would be provided by thegroups.

31. The projects would investigate alternative storage techniques duringimplementation. This would include polythene bag storage, particularly forearly season grains, 1/ fumigants such as aluminum phosphor tablets for insectcontrol, and the use of simple driers using predominantly local materials. 2/Additional pest control assistance would be provided to groups entering intomarketing contracts under the project.

32. Foodcrop Marketing. The project would provide a specialist market-ing service for groups wishing to extend their produce sales to wholesale andretail levels. The service would be provided on an agency basis and wouldinitially concentrate on establishing contracts and market outlets with insti-tutions; contact with institutions and supply contractors during appraisal,plus the present, often marked difference between farmgate and urban wholesaleand retail prices, indicate that response to the service would be high. Con-tracted produce would be backed by inspection and quality control to ensurethat minimum standards are maintained. An agency fee of 5% would be leviedfor the service with all handling and transport costs carried by seller orbuyer according to contract. Treatment, grading and bagging of produce wouldbe supervised by produce inspectors.

33. Scheduled Crop Market. Efforts would be directed towards improvingstatutory marketing arrangements in the area and helping producers achieve alarger share of the Nigerian Produce Marketing Corporation (NPMC) takeoverprice. Licensed Buying Agents (LBA) and their subagents in the area would besubject to approval by project management and arrangements would be made withthe Marketing Boards to ensure that these LBAs have access to sufficientworking capital, using a system of project-monitored advances if necessary.Project management would be given LBA status; while it is not intended thatthe projects should carry out any crop purchasing, such an appointment wouldmake this possible if circumstances warranted, 3/ and would permit sub-licensing of groups or other associations wishing and competent to carry outLBA duties. Such an arrangement would allow the projects to exercise a degreeof control over the marketing practices of such groups and greatly assist thetraining process.

1/ Tape sealings to create anaerobic conditions would prevent fungus spoil-age of high moisture grain.

2/ Such as that developed by J. A'Brook at Mokwa Research Station and des-cribed in Samaru Miscellaneous Paper No. 6, 1965, and Tropical StoredProducts Information No. 7, 1964.

3/ In the past LBA have achieved near-monopoly conditions it particularareas; under these circumstances suspension or dismissal in midseasonwould adversely affect farmers' interests.

ANNEX 8Page 10

34. Means of minimizing produce transport and handling after purchasewould be investigated with a view of reducing marketing costs. This could beachieved, for example, by selecting certain markets as Marketing Board holdingareas so that crops would be retained at point of purchase until required tofulfill a sale contract. The feasibility of individual groups negotiatingspecial prices with NPMC, as is now contemplated for "Estate"' producers, wouldalso be carefully evaluated.

35. Cooperatives. The Ayangba cooperative movement is still operatingthough financial problems are more serious. There are presently 136 primarysocieties, with a combined total membership of nearly 9,000, which were ori-ginally affiliated with the Igala Cooperative Credit and Marketing Union(ICCMU). The Union was divided into divisionally-based unions in December1975, but division of assets and liabilities, presently under review, is com-plicated by ICCIU financial status, for which independently-audited accountsup to December 31, 1974 revealed a cumulative loss on appropriation account ofN 645,000. Principal debts with commercial banks have been cleared by theBenue State Government; debts with loan defaulters, for which accurate recordsexist, are likely to become the responsibility of respective divisional unionswith trading deficits apportioned for repayment on a soft and extended termbasis.

36. The disappointing performance of the cooperative movement highlightsthe problem that can occur when a structure is imposed on a community. Earlysuccesses in foodcrop marketing resulted in overconfidence, inattentionto trading and handling essentials, and subsequent mismanagement and substan-tial losses. Many primary societies were also too small to be commerciallyviable 1/ and abilities were frequently inadequate for their aspirations.

37. - Government is keen to revise the cooperative movement but lastingdevelopment is likely to occur only if cohesive group formation is establishedat a very simple level. Projects activity would be primarily confined toestablishing a stable structure at this level, and services would be providedto any operational group, irrespective of structure. Against this background,avenues for advanced development should quickly become apparent; this in-cludes, but would not be exclusively confined to, cooperatives. However,cooperative staff already working in the area would work closely with theproject, and scope and possibilities for reviving and expanding the movementwould be actively pursued.

38. Crop Processing. Undoubtedly a number of opportunities would ariseunder the project for small-scale processing or other agro-allied industries.These would be examined and appraised by the Head of the Commercial ServicesDepartment, assisted as necessary by technical staff from other divisions and,

1/ Some primaries have less than 20 members.

ANNEX 8Page 11

where appropriate, by formal endorsement made to applications for finance fromcommercial banks or the Small-Scale Industries Credit Scheme. MarketingAssistants would have particular responsibility for assisting applicants aswell as for providing a follow-up service to borrowers.

39. Marketing Advisory Service. Marketing Advisors would be employed atDC level. A group of Marketing Assistants would be created during the firstthree years of the project and by Year 3 Marketing Assistants would be deployedat FSC level. Costs of Commercial Services are in Table 6.

ANNEX 8Table 1

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Tentative Sites of Farmers Service Centers l/

In Ankpa Division

1. Ankpa2. Ojoku3. Agaliga4. Agikeja5. Ogodu6. Oloku/Ofugo/Ogodu x - road7. Abejokulo8. Okpotala

In Dekina Division

9. Akande10. Etulekpo11. Okura12. Acharu13. Amdi14. Odu15. Ogura16. Gboloko

In Idah Division

17. Opakaga18. Onitcha Igo19. Adoru20. Angba - Ogoru Road21. Opogu22. Gwalawo23. Achokpa - Ejule Road

l/ Identified for construction in project Year 0 and 1. Actual site selectionwould be done by the Project Manager. Allowance in project costs has been

made for seven more, giving a total of 30 FSC. Identification based on factthat each farmer would be within about 15 km radius of a FSC.

June 8, 1976

ANNEX 8

NIGERIA Table 2

BENUE STATE


Seasonal Crop Input Requirements(Per Crop)

Year 0 fear 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Full Season Crops1/

YAMS, Fertilizer CAN Tons - 800 1,600 2,400 3,200 4,000MP Tons - 200 400 600 800 1,000

Yam Dressing Tons - 70 140 210 280 350

CASSAVA: Fertilizer CAN Tons - - - 40 200 1 000TSP Tons - - - 20 100 500MP Tons - - - 30 150 750

RICE Fertilizer CAN Tons - 100 300 600 1,000 1 400TSP Tons - 50 137.5 275 450 625MP Tons - - 25 50 100 150

Insecticide Dressing Tons - 0.15 0.425 0.85 1.4 1.95

EARLY MAIZE: Fertilizer CAN Tons - 150 300 700 1,200 1.800TSP Tons - 112.5 225 525 900 1.350MP Tons - 37.5 75 175 300 450

Insecticide Dressing Tons - 0.15 0.3 0.7 1.2 1.8Storage Tons - 3.75 7.5 17.5 30 45

EARLY MILLET - - -_ _

MELON: Fertilizer CAN Tons - 50 100 200 400 600

SORGHUM: Fertilizer CAN Tons - 50 100 200 400 600TSP Tons - 25 50 100 200 300

Insecticide: Dressing Tons - 0.015 0.03 0.06 0.12 0.18Storage Tons - 0.75 1.5 3 6 9

LATE MAIZE: Fertilizer: CAN Tons - 150 300 600 1,200 1,800TSP Tons - 112.5 225 450 900 1,350MP Tons - 37.5 75 150 300 450

Insecticide: Dressing Tons - 0.15 0.3 0.6 1.2 1.8Storage Tons - 3.75 7.5 15 30 45

COWPEAS: Fertilizer CAN Tons - 25 50 100 200 300TSP Tons - 25 50 100 200 300

Insecticide: Spraying '000 1 - 2.5 5 10 20 30Dressing Tons - 0.035 0.07 0.14 0.28 0.42Storage Tons - 1.25 2.5 5 10 15Batteries Sets

BENNISEED: Fertilizer CAN Tons - 50 100 150 200 300TSP Tons - 25 50 75 100 150

1/ CAN: calcium ammonium nitrateMP: muriate of potashTSP: triple superphosphate

NIGERIA

BENUE STATN

AYANGBA AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPfENT PR0JECT

Seasonal Crop Input Requirmuents y(Naira)

Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

PHYSICAL

Fertilizer CAN Tons 1,375 2,850 4,990 8,000 11,800TSP 350 737 1,545 2,850 4,575MP " 275 575 1,005 1,650 2,800

Insecticide: Yam Dressing " 70 140 210 280 350Dressing Kg 500 1,125 2,350 4,200 6,150Storage Kg 9,500 1,900 40,500 76,000 114,000Spraying '000 1 7.5 5 10 20 30Batteries Sets 120 240 48o 960 19440

FINANCIAL

Fertilizer CAN N tooo 2/ 198 410.4 718.6 1,152 1,699.2TSP to 2/ 60.2 126.8 265.7 490.2 786.9MP n 2/ 34 71 124.1 203.8 345.8

Insecticide Yam Dressing " 3/ 73.5 147 220.5 294 367.5Dressing u 31 6.5 14.6 30.6 54.6 80Storage " 3/ 8.1 16.2 34.4 64.6 96.9Spraying " 3/ 4.8 9.5 19 38 57Batteries " 3/ 0.4 0.8 1.7 3.4 5.0

TOTAL COST 385.5 796.3 1,417.6 2,300.6 3,438.3-Incremental Cost 4/ 385.5 410.8 621.3 883.0 1,137.7

1 Excluding improved seed which are costed in Annex 7.2/ To avoid double counting; costed without project costs such as administration, etc., since this is

covered under commercial services: CAN 1144; TSP N172; and MP N123.5. >3/ Project store prices used and not farmgate prices.4/ Foreign Exchange 70%. D X

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE

AYANGBA AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS

Physical Requirements for Medium and Long Term Credit

Cost per Repayment L A F I AUnits Unit(N) Period Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Outflows

Medium Term Credit

1. ULV Sprayers No 15.20 2 100 200 500 1,000 1,600

2. Small farm Equipment No 150.00 2 100 250 250 250 250

Long Term Credit

1. Land Clearing ha 100 5 250 500 500 500 500

2. Subsoiling & Ripping ha 15 5 150 150 150 150 150

3. Tractors & Implements No 10,000 5 5 10 10 10 10

4. Crop Stores No 500 5 50 150 150 150 150

d x4- co

NIGERIA ANNEX 8Table 5

BENUE STATE

AYANGBA AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMNT PROJECT

Requirement for Medium & Long Term Credit 1/

Naira

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5____________-_-_-------- Naira----------------------------

Outflows

Medium Term Credit

ULV Sprayers 1,520 3,040 7,600 15,200 24,320Small farm Equipment 15,000 37,500 37,500 37,500 37,500

Subtotal 16,520 40,540 45,100 52,700 61,820

Long Term Credit

Land clearing 25,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000Subsoiling and Ripping 2,250 2,250 2,250 2,250 2,250Tractors & Implements 50,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000Crop stores 25,000 75,000 75,900 75,000 75,000

Subtotal 102,250 227,250 227,250 227,250 227,250

Total Outflows 118,770 267,790 272,350 279,950 289,070

Inflows

Medium Term Credit

ULV Sprayers 760 2,280 5,320 11,400 19,760Small farm Equipment 7.500 26,250 37.500 37,500 37.500

Subtotal 8,260 28,530 42,820 48,900 57,260

Long Term Credit

Land clearing 5,000 15,000 25,000 35,000 45,000Subsoiling & Ripping 450 900 1,350 1,800 2,250Tractors & Implements 10,000 30,000 50,000 70,000 90,000Crop stores 5,000 20,000 35,000 50,000 65,000

Subtotal 20,450 65,900 111,350 156,800 202,250

Total Inflows 28,710 94,430 154,170 205,700 259,510

Increment Fund Required 90,060 173,360 118,180 74,250 29,560

1/ Foreign Exchange 60% (farm equipment 80; clearing and subsoiling 45; tractors 80 and stores 30).

July 27, 1976

OHHH H H PHO OHHH OO O O O O H O HH. S~O H 0 0 H H H " P O 00 '

OP ~~PH0'H p P.'H ¼ H H 8 H'¼ IP ~ 2

8882 - ~~~ ~~~~~-' - -- -- H-P 0 00

--- -------~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'~-OO P " H. '" .' '¼ "~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ C o 8~~~~~ .. . 8. . . .<

H .'. tH~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ H 8 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ . K....

r~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~p11--11-I11

"HP P0.080 C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .... I .. ... .. p.. .. ... P - - 0 0000.'OCOO OOHHHH H 0000-'.-OHC'H 00.-HO.'.' 00~~~~~~~~~ 00-0 000000r .-. ~,~ QPOIH .8A 00<00'v I ~ . ....~0-00 00 0 0 0 0H < 0 C I0-<O ...'00 -CO O.'.- 00 00 HH 0 OCOH 0 00

ANNEX 8Appendix I

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Clarification of Fertilizer Procurement Procedures

During negotiations the question of fertilizer procurement wasdiscussed in light of the Federal Government's establishment of a FederalFertilizer Board, and it was understood that the following options couldbe pursued, namely;

(a) that the projects could procure their own fertilizer onthe basis of International Competitive Bidding (ICB), inwhich case the Bank would reimburse 100% of the foreignexchange cost if procured internationally or 70% of totalcost if procured locally. Where such procurement takesthe form of locally manufactured fertilizer, then the 15%preference clause in regard to bid evaluation would apply.In the event this option is exercised, the Government wouldreimburse the project the full amount of any subsidies in-volved which result from the cost to the projects of fer-tilizer so procured and from the price at which the proj-ects are required to sell to farmers;

(b) alternatively, the projects could procure their fertilizerrequirements through the Federal Fertilizer Board by exer-cising either of the following options, namely:

(i) the Federal Fertilizer Board, with the assistanceof the projects, would prepare the relevant tenderdocuments based on the projects' requirements andplace tenders for procuring such fertilizers onICB basis. In this case, the Board would sell thefertilizer it has procured under ICB to the projectson the basis of the ongoing subsidized price set byFederal Government. The Bank would then reimburse100% of the cost to the project so long as the costis less than the foreign cost of fertilizer;

(ii) the projects may procure their fertilizer from theFederal Fertilizer Board without necessarily doingso on the basis of ICB, in which case the Bank wouldnot reimburse the project against the cost of anyfertilizer so procured.

ANNEX 8Appendix 1Page 2

The decision regarding the form of procurement to be used would be jointlymade by the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, and therespective project Executive Committee, no later than August 1 of the yearpreceding the planting season.

ANNEX 9

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Agricultural Projects Monitoring, Evaluation and Planning Unit

(APMEPU)

A. Background

1. The appraisal report 1/ for the Funtua Agricultural DevelopmentProject proposed the establishment of an evaluation and monitoring unit toanalyze the development of the Funtua (Loan 1092-UNI), Gusau (Loan 1099-UNI),and Gombe (Loan 1164-UNI) Agricultural Development Projects. 2/ Its mainfunction was to be one of evaluation, specifically to:

(a) guide project management;

(b) establish project goals and schedule project activities;

(c) measure effectiveness and efficiency of project activities;

(d) inform state and national governments and others of changesstemming from project activities;

(e) enhance knowledge of the rural development process for futuredevelopment planning; and

(f) permit the continuous reappraisal of project goals and assump-tions underlying project design and to allow for progressivemodification of project objectives and structures.

2. It was originally proposed that the evaluation section would becontracted to consultants, probably the Ahmadu Bello University at Zaria(north of Kaduna). However, for various reasons, including a rather poorresponse from the University, the evaluation was undertaken on a direct basisby the Federal Department of Agriculture (FDA). A unit known as the NorthernProjects Monitoring and Evaluation Unit (NPMEU) was established in July 1975in Kaduna comprising the Head, Senior Statistician (Deputy Head) and aSenior Economist, together with supporting staff. At the time of NPMEU'sestablishment, the field evaluation units to be established under each ofthe Northern Agricultural Development Projects were not in operation and

1/ Report 345a-UNI, dated Sept. 6, 1974, Appraisal of Funtua AgriculturalDevelopment Project.

2/ Collectively known as the Northern Agricultural Development Projects.

ANNEX 9Page 2

NPMEU took on the responsibility of hiring and training the field enumer-ators. Baseline surveys were undertaken at the Funtua and Gusau projectsearly in 1976 by the now fully operative project evaluation teams. Sub-sequently, the first mainline survey was initiated at Funtua and Gusauprojects, and a baseline survey at the slower-starting Gombe project.

3. Although there have been some problems, the surveys are proceedingsatisfactorily and data are being processed. To date there have been twomajor criticisms:

(a) the evaluation process may be too sophisticated to yieldresults that can be utilized quickly by project management;and

(b) the unit, which relies heavily on expatriates, may not beable to perpetuate itself.

4. The evaluation and subsequent analysis are both intensive andsophisticated. This is justified because the projects under implementationare large and the first of their kind in Nigeria. The information resultingfrom project evaluation will not only benefit the ongoing projects, but willalso provide a firm data base for numerous new projects to be developed inNigeria; its cost (about 3% of total project cost) 1/ can be more than justi-fied especially since it is proposed that NPMEU would be expanded into themain rural development planning unit of the Federal Mfinistry of Agricultureand Rural Development (FMARD). Following the recent creation of the FederalDepartment of Rural Development (FDRD), NPMEU will be under FDRD ratherthan FDA, under which it was originally established.

5. Some of the criticism regarding the direction of evaluation hasgood grounds and in recent Bank supervision missions a major effort has beenmade to ensure that evaluation methods will allow analysis of project-specificproblems. This would be done by including special questionnaires that can beanalyzed for project management information. If quickly evaluated, answersto, for example, such questions as the extent of early planted cotton couldprovide management with valuable data to support the season's pest controlcampaign. In the future, greater efforts will be made to involved the uni-versities in rather special short-term surveys that do not involve mass enu-meration, but have specific problem analysis that can be undertaken by asmall team of specialized personnel.

6. Because of the impressive development rate of the projects and NPMEUitself, it is easy to forget that the unit has been operating for only alittle more than a year, and is not yet fully staffed. However, more quali-fied Nigerian staff are expected to join the unit, and within a few years wewould expect the unit to be operated mainly by Nigerians.

1/ See Funtua appraisal report: estimated cost of the evaluation unitwas N 850,000, against total base cost estimates of that project,N 20,721,000.

ANNEX 9Page 3

7. From its first inception, NPIEU has taken care to avoid interfer-ence in project execution, the latter being entirely a State responsibility,but apart from its main evaluation functions, it has provided importantsupport to the three Northern Agricultural Development Projects. This supportincludes:

(a) Agronomic Services. A special agronomic section was estab-lished under NPMEU to provide the evaluation section withagronomic expertise in such matters as measuring biologicalyields and analyzing general environmental factors affectingproduction and subsequent data collection. The section alsoprovides project management with vital agronomic support by:

(i) coordinating and advising farmers on annual croprecommendations;

(ii) assisting the development of training programs;

(iii) acting as a source of new techniques: in this respectthe section has been extremely useful in developingultra low volume insect spraying techniques;

(iv) advising the projects on new crop varieties, researchneeds, and development of field trials; and

(v) liaising between the research institutes and the projects,being particularly responsible to research requirementfeedback to the Institute for Agricultural Research atSamaru.

(b) Training Services. This section has only been established inAugust 1976. It has become increasingly clear that the projectsneed advice on developing training programs and the techniquesto be employed. The section will be responsible for:

(i) establishing training needs on each project;

(ii) developing training programs, organizing courses andselecting trainees for both project staff and farmers;

(iii) developing special management support courses for seniormanagement staff;

(iv) testing and introducing new extension aids such as audio-visual and video-vision techniques;

(v) locating and preliminary selection of professional Nigerianstaff for specific posts required by project management;and

ANNEX 9Page 4

(vi) establishing a series of brochures and lectures, aimedparticularly at university graduates, to focus on theobjectives and implementation of ongoing and futureprojects, with the objective of recruiting more qualifiedNigerian staff.

(c) Communication Support. Due to its central location at Kaduna,NPMEU has played a vital communication role in the projectradio and telex communication network. Mluch information hasbeen shared between projects through the network, resulting inquicker implementation and lower costs.

B. Proposals for Expansion and Development

General

8. FDRD intends to develop NPMEU as an important agency for the devel-opment of integrated agricultural projects. This would mean that NPMEU wouldhave the responsibility for servicing the Ayangba and Lafia AgriculturalDevelopment projects and any other major project developed with or withoutBank assistance. Further, NPMEU would expand to include a project planningsection that would draw on evaluation and other data and would henceforthcarry primary responsibility for planning future agricultural projects (ex-cluding tree crops) in Nigeria. NPMEU would be developed to ensure betterand wider dissemination of information, and would expand its role of inter-project communication. During the next five years, NPMEU should, wherepossible, remain a highly efficient but relatively small organization. Itwould continue to be dependent on internationally recruited staff, but astaff training program would be established to ensure sensible replacement offoreign staff by properly trained and adequately remunerated Nigerian person-nel. In its expanded role, NPMEU would work closely with State Governmentstaff to assist in the development of State agricultural planning units. Tothis end, NPMEU would be renamed Agricultural Projects Monitoring, Evaluation,and Planning Unit (APMEPU) and would continue to be directly responsible toFDRD.

9. The funds remaining under Loan 1092-UNI for APMEPU would be drawndown prior to utilizing additional funds provided for APMEPU under thisproject.

Detailed Proposals

10. The project would finance the continued and expanded development ofAPMEPU; specifically from 1978/79 to 1982/83 it would provide:

(a) technical assistance in project evaluation, planning andtraining totaling 22 manyears;

ANNEX 9Page 5

(b) local support staff;

(c) vehicles, including a twin-engined aircraft, and equipment;and

(d) general operating expenditures.

The total cost for APMEPU would be N 6.1 million of which N 2.5 millionwould be foreign exchange costs. Part of the proceeds of the Bank loanwould finance internationally-recruited staff at US$1.4 million, importedvehicles, aircraft and equipment at US$0.5 million; and a small percentage(10%) of local staff and operating costs at US$0.4 million; US$1.4 millionwould be unallocated. Full details are in Tables 1 to 4.

11. Technical Operations of APMEPU. The unit would undertake thefollowing:

(a) Project Monitoring

(i) development of a suitable data recording system so thatall significant aspects of project implementation arefully and regularly recorded;

(ii) liaison with project management to ensure that suitablefinancial records are maintained to allow for accuratecostings of physical development;

(iii) dissemination at regular intervals to Federal and Stateagencies of relevant information obtained from (i) and(ii) above; and

(iv) advising project management on desirable policy changesresulting from APMEPU's monitoring activities.

(b) Evaluation of Project Development Actions

(i) design and execution of evaluation programs during andafter project execution to measure the effectivenessand efficiency of project actions, changes in produc-tion, gross and net incomes of project farmers, andchanges in general economic activity within the projectarea;

(ii) design and execution of surveys to provide problem-specific information for project management after con-sultation with project management and field evaluationunits;

(iii) design and execution of specific surveys to measureeffects of project development on the nonagricultural

ANNEX 9Page 6

sector resulting directly and indirectly from projectactivities, viz. changes in volume and type of business,in employment, in social and economic indicators;

(iv) guidance to management in regard to project objectives,design and phasing of activities based on results obtainedfrom evaluation analysis;

(v) liaison with other organizations involved in evaluatingsimilar rural development projects, e.g., the Institutefor Agricultural Research (IAR) at Samaru and the AhmaduBello University at Zaria; and

(vi) processing, analysis and report preparation relating tothe activities and results of evaluation.

(c) Project Planning

(i) in conjunction with the relevant State and Federalauthorities APMEPU would identify and plan new agri-cultural rural development projects (other than treecrop projects);

(ii) preparation of detailed feasibility studies for reviewand approval by State and Federal authorities with atleast two major studies completed annually; and

(iii) training of Nigerian staff to prepare such studies.

(d). Agronomic Services

(i) provision of technical advice related to project crops,including a feed-in to projects of latest applicabletechnical advances, and interpretation at project leveland for farmer consumption of proven research information;

(ii) preparation of formal annual crop recommendations;

(iii) assistance in developing project staff and farmer trainingcourses;

(iv) design and layout of research and field trials withinproject areas;

(v) liaison with research institutions to ensure that researchprograms can be designed to fit project needs;

(vi) liaison with commercial organizations in regard to researchand technical innovations applicable to the projects; and

ANNEX 9Page 7

(vii) assisting the evaluation program in collecting detailedinformation regarding crop yields, cropping patterns andproduction trends.

(e) Training Services

(i) assessment of training needs for both projects and APMEPUstaff;

(ii) development at all levels of appropriate training coursesfor project staff and farmers;

(iii) arranging the logistics of training courses, identificationand selection of trainees and trainers;

(iv) assessing efficiency of training systems, provision ofback-up services to trainees and posttraining evaluation;

(v) development of new training techniques and training aidsincluding video and audio systems;

(vi) assessing effectiveness of project extension systems tofarmers and advising on possible improvements;

(vii) developing special senior management training schedules; and

(viii) at project request assist in finding and selecting pro-fessional Nigerian staff.

12. APMEPU Organization. The unit would be part of the Federal Depart-ment of Rural Development (FDRD), and the head of the unit would be responsi-ble to the Director of FDRD. The unit would continue to operate in Kadunaand would consist of evaluation, project planning, agronomy, and trainingsections, supported by administrative, accounts and information services.

13. APMEPU would be advised by an informal steering committee composedof relevant project managers, representatives of IAR, IITA and NISER, 1/ andselected Federal officials. The steering committee's main function would beto advise on the technical and national policy issues related to or arisingfrom project planning and implementation.

14. APMEPU would have its own bank account which would be subject, asnow, to full independent annual audit. Each year APMEPU would prepare inadvance an annual budget for approval by the Director of FDRD. On the basisof the approved budget, FDRD would deposit funds for APMEPU's operations inAPMEPU's bank account quarterly and three months in advance. APMEPU staffappointments would be subject to the approval of FDRD except for those morejunior positions to be delegated to the discretion of the head of the unit.

1/ Nigerian Institute of Social and Economic Research.

ANNEX 9Page 8

15. Other Operational Features. Apart from those technical operationsoutlined in paragraph 10, APMEPU would:

(a) continue to act as a communication center for individualprojects, with proportionate costs reimbursed by the projects;

(b) own and operate a twin-engined aircraft, with operating costsshared by participating projects; APMEPU would be responsiblefor aircraft control and usage sharing;

(c) establish and operate a data bank for collecting relevant proj-ect information; APMEPU would also operate a processing bureauto ensure timely and rapid dissemination of information; and

(d) APMEPU would coordinate the scheduling of official visitsto projects.

16. The head of APMEPU would have overall responsibility for allAPMEPU's activities; but he would delegate specific responsibilites to sectionheads who would on the whole enjoy relative autonomy in their technicalactions. The deputy head of APMEPU would assist the head with overall policyand administration, but would also have specific responsibility for APMEPUinformation services and interproject communications. Details for the organ-ization are outlined in the chart attached to this annex.

17. Project field evaluation units would continue to be administeredby the respective project management units, but as now would receive techni-cal direction from APMEPU, with APMEPU having responsibility for finalanalysis and data complilation.

NIGERIA

AYANGBA AGRICU3TIPAL l!EVELOPMENT PROJECT

AGRICULTURAL PROJECTS MONITORING EVALUATION AND PLANNING UNIT

Summary of Costs and Financing

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Foreign Local Disbursement Schedule

…-----------------…--------------------…Naira '000-… ___ - _

A. Costs

International Staff Salariesand Consultants 237.0 237.0 201.0 97.0 61.0 833.0 656.0 177.0

Local Staff Salaries 204.5 219.5 253.5 265.5 265.5 1,208.5 155.5 1,053.0Equipment 276.5 21.0 18.0 43.0 21.0 379.5 290.9 88.6Operating Costs 366.2 203.2 230.2 368.2 203.2 1,371.0 343.5 1,027.5

Total Base Costs 1,084.2 680.7 702.7 773.7 550.7 3,792.0 1,449.5 2,346.1

Physical Contingencies (51) 54.2 34.0 35.1 38.7 27.5 189.5 72.0 117.5Price Contingencies 1/ 330.1 328.8 457.4 633.7 555.1 2,305.1 875.9 1,429.2

Total Costs 1,468.5 1,043.5 1,195.2 1,446.1 1,133.3 6,286.6 2,393.8 3,892.8

B. FinancingN' 000 ---- US '000----

International Staff/Consultants 237.0 237.0 201.0 97.0 61.0 833.0IBRD 100% 237.G 237.0 201.0 97.0 61.0 833.0 833.0 1,349.5 1,400

Equipment 276.5 21.0 18.0 43.0 21.0 379.5IBRD 100% CIF or 85% Local 235.0 217.8 15.3 36.6 17.8 322.5 322.5 522.4 500PMG 15% 41.5 3.2 2.7 6.4 3.2 57.0

Local Staff Salaries 204.5 219.5 253.5 265.5 265.5 _,208.5IBRD 20% 40.9 43.9 50-.7 53.1 53.1 241.7 241.7 391.5 400FMG 30% 163.6 175.6 202.8 212.4 212.4 966.8

Operating Costs 366.2 203.2 230.2 368.2 203.2 1,371.0FMG 1007 366.2 203.2 230.2 368.2 203.2 1,371.0

Unallocated 384.3 362.8 492.5 672.4 582.6 i 46

IBRD 382 2/ 146.0 137.9 187.2 255.5 221.4 948.0 948.0 1,535.8 1,500FMG 238.3 224.9 305.3 416.9 361.2 1,546.6

Total 1,468.5 1,043.5 1,195.2 1,446.1 1,133.3 6,286.6

Of Which: IBRD 658.9 436.6 454.2 442.2 353.3 2,345.2FMG 809.6 606.9 741.0 1,003.9 780.0 3,941.4 2,345.2 3,799.2 3,800

1/ Calculated over base costs and physical contingencies. -' 'aPercentages used: Year 1: 29%; Year 2: 46%; Year 3: 62%; Year 4: 78%; Year 5: 96%.

2/ Same percentage (38%) as in base costs.

C,C C? q0Wi=| = g ¢; @@| < e D O o y n t > F ' ffi O oz rF ° Y $ = Y Y v) @ tc {} B t 9 th ^ 8 = = x C = a M O O Y~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-.~, , C, CCndt,~n

Y ~ ~ 0>SZ>;Oo^"£¢g=&:eS""q¢ *a>< "S=r=O2<<riSNa<<S=

-C OC - -.=c¢==8H~$333~D=* t=M#

= Do, b=t Wt ber£ £

CC CC ;;CC =C CO v°C 0C C? CC, v0° g

< ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~C CCC? C .2D~~~~~~~C 0f s aN

0 = nCC 0 O 0n 0 C000 0OCOLN

a~~~~~~~~~ s,

D0 - 0 00000 0 0X 0 0 0 0 00 0. 0 0000 0 0000 0~ 0 loI0 wr~~s

0 C ooo oCo oN o 0 o oooooo ooo .

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2 2W l-0 _0 _ _0 0E_ __ HN_ _>q _91

oo @ o ooooo oo o~~~~~ oNco 2 Co o oooo00 o oo00 o 09

0' - - 0 0 wS >olw OOOO o , sooswwFws < 0? ! 0000 s o0 ooo oo 0o ooooC o? CJ oooC

WOs i o oFo°O~° °Fsu o- °00. .O00.0.00. o 2o9wnoO|t1

CC° N 00 CC °F o 09 OC 0O O 0 ° CFF~ - 000sW o |= .0 Cw

_0.0000,_0_0_000_ 0 0 N 00C 0 0000 g C 00000 _ C CC ___

0000 ~ 0 0 00000 0 00 0 000 0 0000 .0 _0 0 __,_, _ woww inU oO @O 0 0Foo O*00 00 N0 O 0<ONNN o11 ° .oosw|

.0 0 . 0'0 - 0 0 0 0 00 C 0 0=o0 0n O104

O O OM 000s00 0 000 0 0000 0 000 0000 0 000000000 |

NIGERIA

AYANCBA AGRICULTURAL DEVEWPMENT PROJECTS

AGRICULTURAL PROJECTS MiONITORING, EVALUATION AND PLANNING UNIT (APMEPU)

Vehicles and Equipment(Naira '000)

No. of Unit Foreign Exchange LocalUnit Units Cost Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total % Amount Cost

Administrative and Overheads Section

Saloon Cars No 8 6.0 (2) 12.0 (2) 12.0 _ (2) 12.0 (2) 12.0 48.0 80 38.4 9.6Office Equipment No 2 1.5 (2) 3.0 - - - - 3.0 60 1.8 1.2Twin Engined Aircraft 1/ No 1 100.0 (1) 100.0 - - - - 100.0 100 100.0 -House Furnishings No 2 8.0 (2) 16.0 - - - - 16.0 40 6.4

Subtotal 131.0 12,0 - 12.0 12.0 167.0 146.6 20.4

Evaluation Section

Four-Wheel Drive Vehicle No 2 9.0 (1) 9.0 - (1) 9.0 - - 18.0 80 14.4 3.6Office Equipmen, No 1 1.5 (1) 1.5 - - - - 1.5 60 0.9 0.6Professional Equipment No 1 1.0 (1) 1.0 - - - - 1.0 70 0.7 0.3House Furnishings No 1 8.0 (1) 8.0 - - - - 8.0 40 3.2 4.8

Subtotal 19.5 - 9.0 - - 28.5 19.2 9.3

Agronomy Section

Four-Wheel Drive Vehicle No 2 9.0 - (1) 9.0 - - (1) 9.0 18.0 80 14.4 3.6Station Wagons No 4 4.0 (2) 8.0 - - (2) 8.0 - 16.0 80 12.8 3.2office Equipment No 1 2.0 (1) 2.0 - - - - 2.0 60 1.2 0.8Professional Equipment No 2 1.0 (2) 2.0 - - - - 2.0 70 1.4 0.6House Furnishings No 2 6.0 (2) 12.0 - - - 12.0 40 4.8 7.2

Subtotal 24.0 (1) 9.0 _ 8.0 9.0 50.0 34.6 15.4

Training Section

Saloon Car No 1 6.0 (1) 6.0 - - - - 6.0 80 4.8 1.2Four-Wheel Drive Vehicle No 1 9.0 - _ (1) 9.0 - - 9.0 80 7.2 1.8Professional Equipment ND 1 1.0 (1) 1.0 - - - 1.0 70 0.7 0.3Training Equipment No 1 5.0 (1) 5.0 - - - - 5.0 60 3.0 2.0

Subtotal 12.0 - 9.0 - - 21.0 15.7 5.3

Planning Section

Saloon Cars No 2 6.0 (1) 6.0 - - (1) 6.0 - 12.0 80 9.6 2.4Four-Wheel Drive Vehicles No 2 9.0 (1) 9.0 - - (1) 9.0 - 18.0 80 14.4 3.6Pick-ups No 4 4.0 (2) 8.0 - - (2) 8.0 - 16.0 80 12.8 3.2office Equipment No 2 1.5 (2) 3.0 - - - - 3.0 60 1.8 1.2office Equipment No 2 1.0 (2) 2.0 - - - - 2.0 60 1.2 0.8Professional Equipment No 4 1.0 (4) 4.0 - - - - 4.0 70 2.8 1.2Survey and Drawing Office Equipment Set 1 30.0 (1) 30.0 - - - - 30.0 70 21.0 9.0Dlouse Furnishings NO 2 8.0 (2) 16.0 - - - - 16.0 40 6.4 9.1House Furnishings No 2 6.0 (2) 12.0 _ - - - 12.0 40 4.8 7.2

Subtotal 95.0 - - 23.0 - 113.0 74.8 38.2

TOTAL VEIIICLES AND EQUIPENT 276.5 21.0 18.0 43.0 21.0 379.5 290.9 88.6

1/ Assumes no duties levied as plane will be used for agricultural development projects.

NIGERIA

AYANCBA AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

AGRICULTURAL POJECTS MONITORING EVALUATION AND PLANNING IT (APMEPU)

Operating Costs

(Nei- '000)

No. of Urit Foreign Exchange

Unit Units Cost Year 1 Ystr 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Cost Local Cost

Naira

Administrait-ot aod Odthead Section

Offico Exposos p.a. 10.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 58.0 58.0

Office Supplies p.a. 3. 3.0 .E 3.0 33.0 4.0 4E 6.0 9.0

House Rental 1/ p.a. 18 9.0 (6) 54.0 _ (61 54.0 (6) 54.0 - 162.0 162.0

Offi- Rntal p.a. 5 20.0 (1) 20.0 (1) 20.0 (1) 20.0 (1) 20.0 (1) 20.0 OOE.E 100.0

Vehirle EoR-ing 2/ p.a 20 2.0 (4) 8.4 (4) 8.4 (4) 8.4 (4) 8.4 (4) 8.4 42.0 45 i8.9 23.1

Aircraft Operating per hosrs '000 7.5 60.0 (1.5)90.0 (1.5)90.0 (1.5)90.0 (1.5)90.0 (1.5)90.0 450.0 50 225.0 225.0

Loss Charges to Oth-rs 3/ 60.0 60.0 60.0 60.0 60.0 300.0 300.0

Net A, ccref Operating 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 150.0 225.0 (75.0)

Subsi teonc and Traveling per -an year 20 2.0 (4) 8.0 (4) 8.0 (4) 8.0 (4) 8.0 (4) 8.0 40.0 40.0

Subtotal 133,4 81.4 135.4 135.4 81.4 567.0 44 249.9 317.1

Evaluttion Section

Office Supplies 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 30.0 40 12.0 18.0

HEuee Rental p.a. 12 9.0 (3) 27.0 (3) 27.0 - (3) 27.0 (3) 27.0 108.0 - - 108.0

Vehicle Running 4/ p... 10 2.4 (2) 4.8 (2) 4.8 (2) 4.8 (2) 4.8 (2) 4.8 24.0 45 10.8 13.2

Sousistence and TrrvoliIg p.a. 10 2.0 (2) 4,0 (2) 4.0 (2) 4.0 (2) 4.0 (2) 4.0 20.0 - _ 20.0

Subtotal 41.8 41.8 41.8 41.8 41.8 182.0 13 22.8 159.2

Agronomy Section

Office Supplies 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 15.0 40 6.0 9.0

H000c Retal p.a. 6 9.0 - (3) 27.0 - - (3) 27.0 54.0 - - 54.0

.ouse Rental p.a. 12 6.0 (6) 36.0 - - (6) 36.0 - 72.0 - - 72.0

Vehicle Rnnoing 5/ p.a. 15 2.0 (3) 6.6 (3) 6,6 (3) 6.6 (3) 6.6 (3) 6.6 33.0 45 14.9 10.1

Snhoisten.- and TraIollog p.s. 15 2.0 (3) 6.0 (3) 6.0 (3) 6.0 (3) 6.0 (3) 6.0 30.0 _ - 30.0

Subtotal 51.6 42.6 15.6 51.6 42.6 204.0 10 20.9 183.1

Training Se-tio-

Office and Training sllppli.. 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 25.0 40 10.0 15.0

House Rental p.a. 4 6.0 (2) 12.0 - - (2) 12.0 - 24.0 - - 24.0

ROutse 0e1al p.a. 3 9.0 - - (3) 27.0 - - 27.0 27.0Vehirle Ounniso 6/ p.a 10 2.2 (2) 4.4 (2) 4.4 (2) 4.) 42) 4.4 (2) 4.4 22.0 45 9.9 12.1

Subsistonce and Traveling p.-. 5 2.0 (1) 2.0 (1) 2.0 (1) 2.0 (1) 2,0 (1) 2.0 10.0 _ -_ 10.0

SRbtotal 23.4 11.4 38.4 23.4 11.4 108.0 18 19.9 88.1

Planning Section

Office aod Drawing Supplies 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 30.0 40 12.0 18.0

House Ren-tl pa. 12 9.0 (6) 54.0 - - (6) 54.0 - 108.0 - - 108.0

Uoose -- tntl 12 6.0 (6) 360 - - (6) 36.0 - 72.0 - - 72.0

Vehicle unning 7/ p.a. 20 2.0 (43 8.0 (4) 8.0 (4) 8.0 (4) 8.0 (4) 8.0 40.0 45 18.0 22.0

Snbsistence and Tranoling p... 30 2.0 (6) 12.0 (6) 12.0 (6) 12.0 (6) 12.0 (6) 12.0 60.0 - - 60.0

Subtotal 116.0 26.0 26.0 116.0 26.0 310.0 10 30.0 280.0

Total DperitiIg Co-ts 366.2 203.2 230.2 368.2 203.2 1371.0 25 343.5 1

1/ 3 yrs in advance -- could be reduced if Fcderal ho-ss-g provided -- i-clodiog bosses services.

2/ Saloon arn - 30,000 kb at 0,07/ko.3/ Fstimated at 2/3 horne by various projects for one of aircraft. deluxe.. E-r-heel drivet 30,000 kh at 0.08/kh.

4/ Deluxe fo- r-obeol drives, 30,000 km at 0.08/kb.3/ 2 stetion wago-s, 30,000 at 0.07 km a.d deluxe four-whool drive 30,000 kb at 0.08, average 2,200,

6/ One salno1 30,000 at 0.07/Ik aRd delu-e fonr-wheel drive 30,000 kh at 0.08, average say 2,200.

7/ One saloon at 30,000 ut 0.07: one del... fo-r-wheel drive 30,000 at 0.08/ko and 2 pick ops at 30,000 at 0.06; thIs average 2,000.


FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT (FDRD)AGRICULTURAL PROJECTS MONITORING EVALUATION

AND PLANNING UNIT (APMEPU)ORGANIZATION CHART

DIRECTOR

FDRD

STEERINGCOMMITTEE

HEAD |

APMEPU |

l ~~~~DEPUTY HEAD

| ~~~INFORMATION SERVICES DAA POESNADMINISTRATION & ACCOUNTS MUNITRN AN INTE BAK BREA

_ i ~~~~~~~~~~~~PROJECT COMMUNICATIONS

AGRONOMY EVALUATION PROJECT PLANNING TRAINING

mRECOMMENDATIONSI I CENSU SURVGEYSMIDNIFCTINMAAEMN

FARM MANAGEMENT PREPARATION PERSONNEL4 SURVE~~~~~~~~~~~~~YS ~~~I DENTI F ICATION

-| TRAINING l |OPINION SURVEYS p-|EXTENSION AIDS|

TECHNOLOGY PROBLEM SPECIFIC L INTER-PROJECT

H DISSEMINATION | m SURVEYS rc q n SEMINAR

lMONITORING OF| ECONOMIC INDICES

PROJECT FIELD _EVALUATION UNITS

World Bank-16429

)UPTEX I(,Table 1

NIGERIA

:3ENUE STATE

AYANGSBA AGRIC -TURAL DEVELOP.ENT PFFOECT

Summary of Project Costs by Function

Ref erence

Table Year O Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 To,tal Foreign Local

Crop Development 2.2 839.9 698.2 616.4 795-. 995.9 1,042.1 4,996.1 766.6 4,219.5

Fanm Aivisory Service 2.9 659.2 401.8 621.0 665.3 545.2 469.3 3,1(i.P 992.4 2,669.L

Livestock Development 3.1 165.2 599.8 185.3 176.6 152.5 196.3 1,100.5 5s 1165.1

Forestry Developmoent 4.2 377.1 i64.2 -'11.0 238.r 205.1 1, 197.4 232. 1 09.

Fishery Developmenot 5.1 -96.6 091.2 269.i 530.4 212.2 1,5993. 591.p 1,OOs .Roads and Water Developnent 6.2 s_s.6 i,624.3 900.4 810.3 5o4.7 672.3 1,281.6 2,010. 4 3,277.?

Management and Admainistration 7.1 581.1 1,272.1 59c.0 so4.4 488.4 370.4 3,9o. 1, 015. 2,o9g.(Seed Multiplication 7.5 200.6 255.4 i56.s 204.8 185.2 167.2 1,167.7 259.2 929*EResearch 7.6 - 199.6 62.4 67.4 53.4 67.4 4sos. 92.0 583Training .7 117.9 462.5 263.4 255.1 934.6 198.5 1,616.6 E12 0 ,104.6

Evaluaoioo 79. 527.6 249.3 249.3 231.5 2L6.5 214.5 1,768.1 5007 1 P72 4

Cormercial Services 3.4 146.1 1,966.1 1,2159 -. 4 1,121.5 I,0s6.5 7,267.6 1,474.C 1zSubtotal 4,115.2 8,705.S s,46,1.2 S,459.53 1,59.7 4,871.4 543.14.1 8.q 97.7 2 6 o 4

Other Overheads i/ 10.2 3.7 106.7 235.7 271.1 290.5 297.0 1,212.1 rCo.4 600 0

Tncremental Seed 7.4 28.1 14.c 32.3 s6.9 4s .7 177.0 177. 0Incremental Fertilirer/Inoecticides 5.2 - L31.s 1110.8 621.3 8a3.0 1,157.7 5. o.o, 4 2 14 C31. 2Mediem Tenm Input Fund q,3 - 90.1 17i.4 113.2 74.2 29.6 485.s 291.3 1'2i;4

TOTAL BASE COST 4,i45.o 9,299.5 6,316.2 6,511.; 6,252.9 6,sss.7 39,461.1 1s,Pn4 2 27,6<6.q

Physical Contingencies (28) 207.5 465.o 515.3 325.6 542.c 516.3 1,977.1 590. 1 352

Prioe Contingencies 451.2 2,531.8 5,050.7 11259.3 5,612.5 6,1P6.4 2P, 511 6,766.R 15,729.1

TOTAL PROJECT COSTS 4,737.5 12,196.6 9,682.7 11,076.8 12,88.0O 13, 053. 63,99q0.5 19,il. 6 14, 3

M Mainly maiotenance 05 Project Assets.

ANNEX ISTa-ble 2

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE

AYANGBA AGRICULTURAL DNEELOPMENT PROJECT

Summary of Project Costs (State Component) by Expense Categories

(Syaira 000)

ReferenceTable Year 0 Tear l Year 2 Year 3 Year 1 Year S Total Foreign Local

A. Capital

HousesExtension Service 2.8 611.o 222.C 40.0 4. 4o0.0 - 953.0 206.8 746.2Farm Development 2.9 399.0 122.0 - - - - 521.0 121.9 399.1Livestock Development 3.1 87.0 126.0 - -1i*o 56.7 186.3

Factory Development 4.o - 179.0 - - - 79.0 43s.9 155,0

Fisheries 5.1 - 171.0 22.0 4.c s4.o 0301.C 70.5 230.5Civil Works 6.2 425.0 67.0 - - - - 492.0 135.6 561.2Management 7.1 237.0 1i4.o 26.0 - 147.0 lis.4 331 6Seed Multiplication 7.5 aa.o 57.0 6.c 12.0 - - i65.o 36.2 12a.3Research 7.6 - 102.0 - lE- 102.0 6.o 79.0Training 7.7 51.0 105.0 i6.o - 1.0 - 176.0 4o.6 137.4

Evaluation 7.8 200.0 - - - - - 200.0 53.0 147.0Commercial Services 8.L 222.0 531.0 175.0 101.0 24.0 - 1,029. 208.7 LLi

Subtotal 2,320.0 1,901.0 292.0 210.0 122.0 - 4,84s.o 1,110.4 3,73L.6

Other BuildingsLivestock Development 3.1 - 226.3 - - - - 226.5 56.6 169.7Forestry Development 4.2 - 11.1 - - - - 11.1 3.1 6.0Fisheries Development 2.1 _ - 6-.0 - 68.o 20.4 L7.6

Civil Works 6.2 30.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 - 90.0 22.2 67.5Management 7.1 75.0 502.0 80.0 - 66o.o 1l5.0 s4s.oSeed Multiplication 7.5 10.0 20.0 - 30.0 6.o 24.0Training 7.7 - 75.0 - - 27.0 100.0 30.0 70.0Commercial Services -L- 220.0 260.0 760.0 254.0 s46.o

Subtotal 115.0 1,375.4 425.0 20.0 27.0 1,962s.4 487.6 1,177.6

VehiclesExtension Service 2.6 12.0 68.o 16.0 32.0 68.o 20.0 216.o 144.o 72.0Farm Development 2.9 50.0 69.6 111.4 135.0 6c.o i6. o 442.0 367,4 '.6Livestock Development 3.1 6.o 27.2 6.0 - 6.o 20.0 67.2 22.3 14.9Factory Development 4.2 32.1 15.2 -o0. 58.4 L6.5 11.9Fisheries Developme-nt 5.1 35.L 8. 9 4.6 37.8 6.s 93.4 71.6 21.6Civil Works 6.2 - 6l1..L 41.c 42.0 91.c 31.0 1,0ls.4 848.9 i66.sManagement 7.1 37.0 L8.0 - 37.0 18.0 - 110C.0 6.o 22.0

Seed Multiplication 7.5 25.6 24.o 2.4 25.6 i6.0 - 93.6 72.6 20.8

Research 7.6 - i8.4 - - i6.o 344,h 27.0 7.4Training 7.7 12.0 59.6 o5 3 12.0 46.8 27.2 166.2 132.3 33.9Evaluation 7.8 32.0 - - 52.0 - - 64.c 51.2 12.8Commercial Services 8.4 31.6 15l10 69.o 38.8 87.6 77.c 4s2.2 345.9 1092

Subtotal 186.2 1,314.0 28s.C 359.2 462.6 208.8 2,612.8 2,24o.1 267.7

Other EquipmentExtension Service o.8 - 35.2 12.0 7.0 7.O 7.0 68.s 29.2 39.0Farm Development 2.9 41.0 133.7 22.9 49.9 4.8 4.9 267.1 111.3 145.8Livestock Development 3.1 7.9 12.3 1.0 - - - 21.2 10.5 10.7Forestry Development 4.2 - 6.6 - - - 6.6 3.1 3.4Fisheries Development 2.1 - 2.0 28.0 0.2 0.2 1C.2 44.s 22.1 22.0Workshop Equipment 6.2 - 47.4 15.6 15.6 0.8 0.8 80.2 22.0 28.2Management 7.1 2.0 125.0 15.2 1.6 i.6 1.6 116.5 99.5 45.1Sced Moltiplication 7. - 3155 2.0. 1.3 1.3 1.3 36.0 2o.a 14.2Rese-rch 7,6 14.1 0.3 0.5 0.5 0. 15.5 0,5

Training 7.7 - 24.o 5.5 - 27.0 - 36.o °6.:Evaluation 7,8 9.2 5.2 3.2 3.0 0.2 2 29.5 16.2 13.3C^mneroial Ser-ices 8.4 - 94.4 _S.6 72.0 - - 596 0 121.6 76.4

Subtotal 73.4 s6o.5 i64.5 154.4 43.s 26.6 1,022.9 56s.l 457I 8

M1aterialsCivil Works - - 1L.0 89.o 67.o 67.C 424.o 102.2 321.R

Subtotal - 74.o 89.0 87.0 85.0 87.0 424.C 102.2 5f1.8

ConsultantsFarm Development 2.9 30.0 - - -- - 3.0 30.0 Foreotry Developeet 4.2 - 2.2 2.2 - - - s.o s.oEvaluation 7.8 30.0 - _ _ - - 30.0 30.0

Subtotal 60.0 2.5 2.2 - - - 6s.o 6s.o

ScholarshipsFishery Development 2.1 _ - 2.O 25.0 10.0 1..OTraining 7.7 - 21.0 21.0 27.0 27.0 - 96.0 6c.o 36.C

Subtotal 21.0 o6.o 32.0 27.0 - 106.0 70.0 36.o

/ Including charcoal equipmert.Plant and related equipment.

ANNEX 10Table 2Page 2

Soamary of Project Costs (State Component) by Expense Categories, (Costinned)

(Naira 000)

Table Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year S Total Foreign Local

B. Recurrent

,nternational StaffESteasbon Service 2.8 16.,o 32.C 32.0 32.0 32.0 144.0 108.0 56.OFarm Development 2.9 16.o 52.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 - 144.0 108.C 36.0Forestry Development 4.2 _ 52.0 32.0 32.2 52.0 - 129.0 96.0 32.0Fishery Development 5.1 3 52.0 32.0 52.0 52.0 - 128.0 96.0 52.0Civil Oorka 6.2 66.o 96.0 96.0 96.o 96.0 20.0 41o.0 i60.0 12C.0Management 7.1 82.0 100,0 100.0 100.0 100.0 - 482.0 %61.5 120.5Training 7.7 32.0 32.C 52.0 32.0 52.0 _ 160.0 120.0 4o.oEvaluation 7,R 32.0 32.0 32.0 52.C 32.0 - 16C.0 120.0 4o.oCommercial Services 8.4 18.0 _6. 36 36.o i6 -_62.0 121.5 110.8

Subtotal 262.2 1424.0 424.0 124.0 424.0 50.0 1,988.O 1,1491.0 497.o

Local StaffExte-oi_r ServLce 2.9 196.7 317.3 493.0 659.2 825.5 991.7 3,L85.4 223.9 3,259.5Farm Develp-et 2.9 131.5 282.4 355.7 409.3 4093. 409.3 2,030.5 130.5 1,900.0Livestock Development 3.1 52.4 140.7 142.3 115.3 142. 1i42.5 762.3 L90 715.3Forestry Development 4.2 - 47.6 47.6 47.6 47.6 47.6 258.0 15.5 222.7Fishery Deveiopment 5.1 - 42.2 82.3 108.8 1341.8 t14.8 so2.6 32.53 4Sy,Civil Works 6.2 54.6 548.3 530.3 371.9 35.54 548.8 1,849.3 118.9 1,700.4Yanagement 7.1 87.9 185.3 211.4 211.4 211.L 211.4 1,118.R 71.9 I,0146.9Seed allviplictton 7.5 67.7 105,4 122.0 144.6 1114.6 144.6 728.9 46.9 682.0Research 7.6 - 51.1 51.1 51.1 51.1 51.1 b55.5 i6.4 239.1

Training 7.7 17.7 8o.9 95.2 95.2 99.8 99.8 458.6 51.4 457.2Evaluation .78 202,1 20 1 202.1 202.1 202.1 202.1 1,0212.6 77.9 1,134.7Commsercial Services 8.4 168,2 578.2 808.7 886.o 29023 905.9 4,2_4.9 273.2 3,975.7

Slbtotal 978.P 2,5R4.S 3,011.7 5,529.2 3,527.8 1,697 ,4 ,919.4 1,D87.6 1E,9P1.8

Vehiclt peratihg C-otaExtensio Service 2.8 4.2 23.4 25.4 23.1 23.4 25.4 151.0 54.5 66.7Farm Development 0.9 11.7 39.1 79.1 39.1 39.1 39.1 207.2 93.5 115.9Li-otlock De-rloment 3.1 4.9 20,5 20.5 20.5 20.5 20.5 107.4 42.5 614.9F.oretry Development 4.2 - 4.7 L.7 4.7 L7 4.7 23.5 1o.6 12.9Fishery Development 1/ 5.1 11.1 15.1 16.3 17.5 17.5 77.11 34.8 42.6Civil rlotks 6.2 - 161.2 168.5 177.R 174.5 174.7 856.7 575.1 418.6Olaosgeoso

t7.1 7.2 17,4 17.4 17.4 17.11 17.4 14.2 42.4 51.5

Seed Molltiplictis n 7.5 9., 17,7 21.3 21.3 21.5 21.5 112.2 E5.8 5S.7Res-arch 7.6 - 6.C 6.o 6.C 6.o 6.o 30.0 13.6 16.1Trae nirg 7.7 4.2 16. *7.9 27.9 30.0 30.0 136.8 61.6 75.2Evallaaisa 7.8 10 � 2 .0 12.0 I8.O 12.0 12.0 72.0 32.4 59.,Comenrcial Services 8.4 6,3 5.6 75.6 .6 .6 364.5 169.1 195.4

Subtotal 59., 5S4.6 431.5 L42.0 442.0 142.2 2,2C2.1 987.4 1,219.7

General p CstsLivestck DeveloPment 3.1 .0. 15.2 13.5 15.5 13.5 13.5 74.2 69.8 14.4Fishery Devel,pnest 5.1 - - 21.1 51.2 57.0 42.9 132.6 15.5 117.3Office Expenses 7.1 50.0 14o.o i140.0 140.0 140.0 14n.0 750.0 120.0 630.0Training 7.7 1.0 40o.O 41.o 4i.o 411.0 4.0 20S.0 _ 205.0

Subtotl 28.o 193-2 216.0 225.7 251.5 237.4 1,168.9 205.1 956.7

Ove_rheads

BOilding Ms - 73.0 171.3 192.9 19.8 204.5 841.5 sot.8 336.EVehicle Mna2atnance .3.7 50.0 55.7 42.9 42.9 42.9 198.1 - 198.1Equip-eat '4ainteaance 5d J 3.7 31-7 39.2 _47.6 _49. 172.7_ 103.6 69.1

Subtotal 3.7 106.7 258.7 275.7 290.3 297.0 1,212.1 608.4 603.7

C. Other DeveL-pments

Breeding itork 3.1 - 1.6 - 0. -_ 1.9 _ 1.9Forestry N-rseries 1.2 - 58.5 27.9 27.9 27.9 27.9 1149.9 51.7 115.2Fore,tty Plo,tatbots 11.2 1.7 47.7 99.0 icO.8 112.5 569.5 13.0 356.5Forestry Traisieg Courses 4.2 _ 0.2 o.8 0.8 o.8 o.8 5.4 - 5.14Forestry Trials 4.2 _ 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 5.0 - 5.0Buded lagoons 5.1 - 9.14 36.8 i6.q 9 42.C 17.6 201.4Research Conferences 7.6 _ 5.0 5.0C 10.0 10.0 51.0 4o.o - 40.o

,ubtDtal 67s. 90.8 15s.8 165.53 15.0 631.7 82.5 549.4

S. FarD Inputs

Incremental '.eed 7.4 28.1 14.o 52.3 1n.9 45.7 - 177.0 - 177.CIncremesooel Fertilizer/Insecticides 8.2 - 350.5 o10.9 621.15 887.0 1,157.7 3.38.8 2,107.2 1,L031.Medito,-Term Inpu,t Fend 8.3 - 90.1 175-.4 113.2 714.2 29.6 485.2 091.5 L91.2

ShtotoaL 28.1 489.6 616.5 796.9 1,002.9 1,167.5 4,101.5 3,698.5 1402.8

TOTAL BASE COSTS 4,14s.o 9,299.8 5.316.2 6,sli.0 6,852.9 6,s35-7 59,461.5 11,304.6 27,656.9

-Including bhot cDeratisg.2/ Three percett of bouses and buildings after year of construction on cosslative assets.5J Two percent of ormulative vehicle costa (until year 3 when replaceme-so take place>) level after year 3.14 Five percent of cs-snlative co-ts of equipment year after purchase.

ANNEX 11

Table 1

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Detailed Financing Plan (State Component)

Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Disbursement Schedule

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Naira '000- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -U.S.$ 000- - -

Houses and Buildings 2,435.0 3,276.4 720.0 230.0 149.0 - 6, 810. 4

IBRD (40%) 243.5 1,310.6 288.0 92.0 59.6 1,993.7 1,993.7 3,229.8 3,300.0Government 2,191.5 1,965.8 432.0 138.0 89.4 4,816.7

Vehicles 186.2 1,314.0 285.0 359.2 462.6 208.8 2,815.8

IBRD (100% CIF) - 1,116.9 242.3 305.3 393.2 177.5 2,235.2 2,235.2 3,621.0 3,600.0Government 186.2 197.1 42.7 53.9 69.4 31.3 580.6

Other Equipment/Materials 73.4 634.5 253.5 241.4 130.5 113.6 1,446.9

IBPD (100% CIF) - 380.7 152.1 144.8 78.3 68.2 824.1 824.1 1,335.0 1,300.0Government 73.4 253.8 101.4 96.6 52.2 45.4 622.8

International Staff/Consultants/Scholarships 322.0 447.5 452.5 456.o 451.0 30.0 2,159.0

IBRD (100%) 322.0 447.5 452.5 456.0 451.0 30.0 2,159.0 2,159.0 3,497.6 3,500.0

Local Staff 978.8 2,384.5 3,011.7 3,329.2 3,527.8 3,687.4 16,919.4

IBRD (152%) - 357.7 451.7 499.4 529.2 553.1 2,391.1 2,391.1 3,873.6 3,80c.0Government 978.8 2,026.8 2,560.0 2,829.8 2,998.6 3,134.3 14,528.3

Operating Costs - /Overheads 121.5 685.5 886.2 943.4 963.8 976.6 4,577.0

Government 121.5 685.2 886.2 943.4 963.8 976.6 4,577.0 - -

Other Developsent Costs _ 67.8 90.8 155.8 165.3 152.0 631.7

Government 67.8 90.8 155.8 165,3 152.0 631.7 -

Incremental Fertilizer/Insecticides - 385.5 410.8 621.8 B83,0 1,137.7 3,438.8

IBRD (100,% CIF or 70%) 269.8 287.6 435.3 618.0 796.4 2,407.1 2,407.1 3,899.5 3,900.0Government 115.7 123.2 186.5 265.0 341.3 1,031.7

Incremental Seed 28.1 14.o 32.3 56.9 45.7 - 177.0

Government 28.1 14.0 32.3 56.9 45.7 - 177.0 -

Medium-Term Credit Fund _ 90.1 173.4 118.2 74.2 29.6 485.5

Government 90.1 173.4 118.2 74.2 29.6 482.5 - _ _

Unallocated 642.5 3,296.8 3,366.s 4,564.9 5,955.1 6,703.2 24,529.0

IBBD (30t) - 989.0 1,010.0 1,369.5 1,786.5 2,010.9 7,165.9 7,165.9 11,608.7 11,60o.oGovernment 642.5 2,307.8 2,326.5 3,195.4 4,168.6 4,692.3 17,363.1

TOTAL 4,787.5 12,596.6 9,682.7 i1,o76.8 12,808,0 13,038.9 63,990,5 3_000.0

of which: IBRD2 565.5 4,872.2 2,884.2 3,302.3 3,915.8 3,636.1 19,176.1Government :/ 4,222.0 7,724.4 6,798.5 7,774.5 8,892.2 9,402.8 44,814.4

I/ 12R5 is not retroactively financing in Year 0 except for international staff.?/ Vehicle operating and other operating.)/ For purposes of this schedule Federal and State Goversssent costributions are taken together.

Assuming signing in December 1977 and thus 25% would be eligible for Bank financing.5/ Assuming signing in Decesber 1977: thus 75% needs to be retroactively financed.

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Detailed Financing of Federal Component 21

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total -------- US$ '000--------

------------------------------------ Naira '000--------------------------------------

International Staff/Consultants 237.0 237.0 201.0 97.0 61.0 833.0 1,349.5 1,400

IBRD 100% 237.0 237.0 201.0 97.0 61.0 833.0

Equipment 276.5 21.0 18.0 43.0 21.0 379.5

IBRD 100% CIF or 85% Local 235.0 17.8 15.3 36.6 17.8 322.5 522.4 500

FMG 15% 41.5 3.2 2.7 6.4 3.2 57.0

Local Staff Salaries 204.5 219.5 253.5 265.5 265.5 1,208.5

IBRD 20% 40.9 43.9 50.7 53.1 53.1 241.7 391.5 400FMG 80% 163.6 175.6 202.8 212.4 212.4 966.8

Operating Costs 366.2 203.2 230.2 368.2 203.2 1,371.0

FMG 100% 366.2 203.2 230.2 368.2 203.2 1,371.0

Unallocated 384.3 362.8 492.5 672.4 582.6 2,494,6

IBRD (38%) 1/ 146.0 137.9 187.2 255.5 221.4 948.0 1,535.8 1,700

FNG 238.3 224.9 305.3 416.9 361.2 1,546.6

Total 1,468.5 1,043.5 1,195.2 1,446.1 1,133.3 6,286.6

Of whichIBRD 658.9 436.6 454.2 442.2 353.3 2,345.2 3.799.2 4,000FMG 809.6 606.9 741.0 1,003.9 780.0 3,941.4

1/ Same percentage as in base costs, and rounded.

2/ For details, see Annex 9 and Supplement 15.

ANNEX 11Table 3

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Disbursement Schedule

US$ '000

FY '78 second half 5,400

FY '79 first half 3,500










35,000

NIGERIA

AYANGBA AGRICULTURAL DEVULOPENT PROJECT

ILLUSTRATIVE CAIN PLOW (Federal G-overnment)

(N '000)

Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 00 Year 11 Yea 12 Yea 13 Yea 14 Year 15 Years~ 16-20

CBRUD Lean I/ 36 5 .2 5,331.1 3,320.8 3,756.5 4,358.0 3,989.4 -- - - - - - - - -

Tae- 2/ 244 939 289 3.6 243.9 217.1 109.4 10. 0. ,3. 63 36.3 56.3 56.3 56.3 56.3 56.3

TOTAL CASH TUICO 849 6 6.15.0 3.609.] 3990.1 4 601.9 4 206.3 109. 102.4 105_4 03550456.335.3 656.3636.366.3 56.3 56.

CShi OUTFLOWAPIEUF Ceers 3/ - 1,468.5 1,043.5 1,195.2 1,446 .1 1,333.1 - - - --- - - - - -

FMG2 SOube...ni- to State 4/ 1,197.0 3,076.0 2,342.0 2,443.0 3,010.0 3,013.0 637.5 675.0 412.0 600.0 3314.0 334.0 334.0 334.0 334.0 334.0 334.0

Irpen Subsidy 5/ - 73 3 .7 486.5 806.7 1,476.8 2,265.5 7,265.5 2,263.5 2,265.5 2,365.3 2,265.5 7,265.5 2,265.3 2,265.5 2,265.5 2,269.3 2,265.5

TBRl Lean (State) 563.5 4,872,2 2,804.2 3,302.3 3,915.0 3,636.1

1102 Lean Repeynees b/ F%8

Censet-et fee - 17,6 12.6 9.4 6.0 2.7 --- ----

Terer-t - 28.8 95.8 135.6 174.3 --- -----

Priim pal - - - - - 361.5 3__48.3 334.3 320_.3 306.3 293.3 279.3 766,3 252.3 238.3 224.7 12.0

TOTAL CASH OUTFLOW 1 76' 5 9968 6840 8079 1037 1019 32.3 32.8 ,9.8 ,71.8 2,892.8 2,878.8_ 2.865,8 2,.851,6 2,837.8 2,823.8 2,269.5

Uerpl-u(DUeitrl (9135 (3,5721 (3,2557 (4,181) 5,435) (6,409) (3,141) (3,112) (3,092) (3,068) (7,836) (2,0233 (2,810) (2,7963 (2,7823 (7,768) (2,713)

ts be ret free FYLT budget.

AssuepLiees: I/ 1002 Lean Secludes bth Federl and State (eepee-n,

2/ Fur dotesle e Anne 13,Tabln I3Y.Fo details e A--iex 9, Table I

4Oreses275" sif Projectout.3i 02; Federl Generenet subsidy for f-rtilicer inputs.

6/ S$4.0 nill-e at 8.75. for 20 years aith 4.5 year gra- fen prie-ipal.

Repayments raleelted en basis ef level prniplrpaymet ertbod.

NIGERIA

AYANGBA AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT0

ILLUSTRATIVE CASH FLOW (State Governent)

(N '000)

Years

-Year 5 -Year 1 Yea-r 2 -Year 3 Year 4 -Year 5 -Year 6 -Year 7 Yea-r 8 -Year 9 -Year 10 -Year 11 Year 12 -Year13 -Year 14 Year 15 16--20

CASH INFLOW

IBRD Lean I/ 565.5 4,872.2 2,884.2 3,302.3 3,915.8 3,636.7 --- -------

Farmers Credit Repayments:1. medium tern - 8.2 28.3 42.8 48.9 57.2 ---- -- ----

2. long ternm 20.4 65.9 115,4 156.8 202.3 - -- -------

Input Subsidy 2/ - 233.7 486.5 886.7 1,476.8 2,265.5 2,265.5 2,265.5 2,265.5 2,265.5 2,265.5 2,265.5 2,265.5 2,265.5 2,265.5 2,265.5 2,265.5

13MG Subvention 3/ 1,197.0 3,076,0 2.342,0 2,643.0 3,018.0 3,013.0 657.5 650 120 0.0 340 354.0 334.0 334.0 354,0 354.0 334.0

Total Cash Inflows 1,762.3 8,200.5 5,807.1 6,986,2 8,616.3 9,174,7 2,903.0 2,891.0 27877.5 2,865.5 2,600.5 2,600.5 2,600.5 2,600.5 2,600.5 2,600.5 2,608.5

CASH OUTFLOW

Hose Buildings 2,435.0 3,276.4 720.0 230.0 149.0 - - - - - - - - - - -Vehicles & Eqaip-et 259.6 1,948.5 538.3 600.6 593.1 322.4 - 4/ - - - - - - - - - -Intornational8, Local Staff Salary 1,300.8 2,852.0 3,464.2 3,785.2 3,978.8 2,717.4 1,840.0 - 1 84.0. 1,840.0 1,840.0 1,035.0 1,033.0 1,035.0 1,033.0 1,035.0 1,035.0 1,035.0Ovorheads/Uma1located/Others 764.0 4,050,1 4,343.5 5,664,1 7,084.2 7,831.8 710.0 -/ 660.0 610.0 560.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0

Subtotal 4,259.4 12,107.0 9,046.2 10,279.9 LL,805.l 11,87 3.6 2,550.0 2,500.0 2,450.0 2,400.0 1,335.0 1,335.0 1,335,0 1,535.0 1,335.0 1,555.0 13,55.0

Farmers Credit

Medium term - 16.5 40.5 45.1 52.7 61.8 - - - - - - -

Long tans- 102.2 227.2 227,2 277.2 227.2 ---- -- ----

Subtotal - 118,7 267.7 279,3 279.9 289.0 - -- -------

Fertilionrs - 292,2 608.2 1, 101.4 1,84,6.0 2,831.9 2,531.9 2,831.9 2,831.9 2,830.9 -'53 8 9 S~ 2,53 .01624. 2,831.9 2,831.9 2,931,3Seeds 6 / 28.1 14.0 3 2 .3 56.9 45.7 - - - - - -------

T-sctlcidos 6i - 93.3 9f,9 116.1 1,484.0 151.8 - - - .

Sohtotal 28.1 399.51 73 5 .3 1,7283,4 2,01(0.1J. 7,903.7 2,831.32',,831.9 2,631.9 2,831.9 2,831.9 2,831.9 2,831.9 2,131.9 2,8131.9 7,831.9 2,631.9

1080Repye

C-enitmetn fee 7/ 71.9 139.6 183..0 81.4 56.6 ---- ------

Soeoo / 74,7 ',aZS.4 728.0 1,971 55): -- - - - - - - - - -Prioc;palS/ - - - - 2,936.4 - 2 ,844.0 7,733.0 7,621.0 2,509.0 7,397.0 2,285.0 2,173.0 2,062.0 1,949.0 1,838.0 1,390.0

sobtota1 96.6 615.4 831.0 1.098.4 1-416-4 2 936.4 2-844-0 2.733 0 2 621 n 2 509.0 7 397-0 2 78.? 7 062? 0 1 949 0 3 ,9.

Total Cooh outflow 4,884.0 1,324.1 10,900.0 12,941.0 15,542.0 18,101.0 8,2245.0 8,066.0 7,0.0 ,4. ,64.0 6,452.0 6,340.0 6,729.0 6,116.0 6,005.0 3,556.0

Surplus (Deficit)to ho cot from budget ara (3,177) (5,031) (5,093) (5,949) (6,976) (8,926) (5,323) (5,174) (5,026) (4,876) (3,964) (3,857) (3,740) (3,629) (3,516) (3,405) (2,336)

1/ 08$ 31 million at 8.75% for 20 years with 4.5 years of grace for principal.2~/ Repr-esnte 507 of if-tilfo orinpot rosts.3/ PFMG subc tionro oqoals 257. of project costs.4/ lor1udes cro p de-elopmeot roots (entension, of,), and roo t farm advisory serice. 100% until year 9

and 507. thereafter.5l Tnclodes cost to maint.io aset- ceae by project, ood trulning/evaluatioo costs

reducd to nero is year 10.6/ Incremental costs only.7/ At 3/4 of 1% per on-omn0 ondishursed amont. e8/ See fistotno 1.-9/ tI-Iodes principal and interestL payments; calculated or level principal payment basis.

ANNEX 12

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Marketing and Prices

A. Market Background

1. Official market support and intervention in Nigeria has been largelyconfined to a narrow sector of export (or scheduled) crops while fooderopshave been traded almost entirely within the private sector. The scheduledcrops have traditionally provided a major source of income for farmers but,since the end of the Civil War, increasing urbanization and substantial risesin oil-originated income have led to marked increases in domestic food pricesrelative to those of the export crops, which have declined both in absoluteareas planted and in proportion of the non-industrial crops marketed throughthe statutory system.

2. Scheduled Crops. Responsibility for scheduled crop marketing lieswith the Nigerian Produce Marketing Company (NPMC), initial purchases andassembly being performed through a series of franchise operations negotiatedbetween NPMC and the various marketing boards. Actual buying is carried outby Licensed Buying Agents (LBA) at gazetted buying stations and traded produceis subject to quality control by the Project Inspection Service of Federaland State Agricultural Ministries.

3. The project area is presently served by the Northern State MarketingBoard (NSMB) while the remainder of Benue State is served by the Benue PlateauMarketing Board (BPMB). 1/ Guaranteed buying prices are uniform throughoutthe country and are fixed annually by the Head of State advised by theTechnical Committee on Produce Price Fixing. LBA incentive is provided by aBlock Buying Allowance plus a transport differential on a fixed ton/kilometerbasis.

4. Since 1973, FMG has introduced a series of reform measures aimed atrevitalizing the statutory system. Attention has been focused both on stabi-lizing domestic food prices and on improving producer returns on scheduledcrops by abolishing produce taxes and substantially improving guaranteed prices;the latter now more closely resemble domestic demand rather than exportparity, and trading losses incurred by the statutory system are carried bysubventions from FMG. Average guaranteed prices over the last six years areas follows:

1/ This situation has resulted from the reorganization of States earlier inthe year.

ANNEX 12Page 2

Naira per Ton

1972/73 1973/74 1974/75 1975/76

Benniseed 106.5 122.9 176.3 264.0Groundnuts 82.9 - 176.6 250.0

Soya beans 49.2 51.3 65.0 99.0Seed cotton 134.8 141.0 198.2 298.0Palm kernels 64.4 65.9 139.2 150.0

5. Further restructuring of the Marketing Boards has resulted from thecreation of additional states earlier this year. NPMC and the existing Market-ing Boards will be phased out and a price fixing authority and seven CommodityBoards (cocoa, groundnuts, cotton, palm produce, rubber, grains, and rootcrops) will be established. A system of floor prices will be introduced.

6. Foodcrops. Due to the extensive nature of both supply and demand,foodcrops are marketed through a large number of somewhat unconnected markets.Most are efficient in themselves but, in the absence of an effective marketintelligence service, prices can vary substantially within and between areasof production and consumption.

7. These problems are exaggerated by goods being sold by volume ratherthan weight. Standard measures vary in size between different areas andlargely conceal the effects of pest infestation on volume/weight ratios.Storage is carried out mainly on the farm, and since production is stilllargely subsistence oriented, production surplus may not be released ontothe market until prospects for the coming season can be appraised; pro-nounced seasonal price movements are frequently the result.

8. Government intervention into this sector has been restricted tostrategic grain purchases but total volume stored is presently insignificant.Expansion is proposed under the Third Five-Year Development Plan, and consi-deration now being given to more direct intervention with guaranteed minimumprices provided for all the major foodcrops.

9. Crop Inputs. Supplies of fertilizers are presently procured andhandled by State Ministries of Agriculture though proposals are being devel-oped for procurement through a Central Federal Agency. Distribution is madethrough Ministry of Agriculture field offices on a heavily-subsidized, fixed-sale-price basis. Delays in importation and internal transport have resultedin sporadic and untimely distribution, and supply over the last three yearshas been minimal.

B. Market Outlook

10. Supply and Demand. IBRD forecasts of food supply and demand inNigeria indicate that programs to stimulate foodcrop production would beeffective import substitution. With a rising urban and hence market-dependent

ANNEX 12Page 3

population, fooderop deficits are projected at 1.2 million tons of grainand 2.5 million tons of roots by 1985 if present levels of labor produc-tivity per head of rural population are maintained. Government is now givingconsiderable attention to stimulating foodcrop production through OperationFeed the Nation, the National Accelerated Food Production Program and variousState development projects. However, the food deficit position is expected towiden with increasing reliance on imported food.

11. Incremental grain and root crop production generated by the projectis expected to reach 52 thousand tons and 192 thousand tons respectively by1982. Though substantial in absolute terms, the increase should be readilyabsorbed into the economy with no significant impact on domestic marketprices.

C. Price Forecasts

12. Domestic retail prices have been collected from a range of marketcenters and related back to farmgate level by deducting market overhead, localtransport and assembly costs. Prices have been checked by discussions withextension staff, farmers' associations, large farmers and supplies contractors.

13. With growing dependence on food imports, domestic food prices areexpected generally to follow those of the world market and, where possible,IBRD forecasts have been used to derive future farmgate price levels. Benni-seed is an important scheduled crop in the area, and in the absence of IBRDforecasts, current NPMC export price estimates have been used but pegged togeneral IBRD forecasts for oil seeds.

14. A summary of farmgate prices is given in Table 1 and is presentedin terms of economic prices, financial prices fully costed and financialprices at market level, the latter representing the difference between guar-anteed or domestic price levels and those derived by considering current andprojected world market prices. A more detailed description of the domesticmarketing system and assumptions used in price forecasting are contained inSupplement 11.

NIGERIA

PLATEAU STATE


Forecast Farmgate Prices 1/

(Expressed in 1976 Constant Naira)

Economic Financial at Factor Cost Financial at Market PricesBasic Units 1976 1980 1985 1976 1980 1985 1976 1980 1985

Annual Crops

yams Domestic Retail Tons 74 67 67 68 61 61 68 61 61

Cassava Domestic Retail 23 22 22 20 19 19 20 19 19Rice Import Substitution 99 143.5 143.5 91 135.5 135.5 202.5 - -

Early Maize Import Substitution 93 92 92 91 90 90 91 90 90Early Millet Domestic Retail 103 99.5 99.5 95 12 92 95 92 92Early Melon Domestic Retail 310 291 291 288 268 268 288 268 268Sorghum Import Substitution 98.5 95 94.5 101.5 98 97.5 101.5 98 97.5

Late Maize Import Substitution 97 96.5 96.5 95.5 94 94 95.5 94 94Cowpeas Domestic Retail 188 181 181 174 167 167 174 167 167Benniseed 2/ Export Parity 175 175 225 158.5 158.5 208.5 257.5 2/ - -

Crop Inputs

Calcium Ammonium Nitrate Importation Tons 134.5 150.5 154 150 165.6 169 30 3/ - -

Triple Super Phosphate Importation 156 183 188.5 171 198 203.5 30 3/ - -

Muriate of Potash Importation 124 127 126 139 142 141 30 31 - -

Seed Dressing 4/ Importation kg. 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15Yam Dressing S/ Importation 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2Storage Dressing 6/ Importation 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1Sprays 7/ Importation ha 13.5 13.5 13.5 13. 5 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5

1/ See Supplement 14 for details of calculation.2/ Represents guaranteed purchase price by marketing boards after deducting assembly costs.

3/ Represents Government subsidized fertilizer prices.4/ Basis Aldrex T.5/ Basis Aldrin 2.5.{/ Basis Gammalin A.71 Basis Endosulfan; total per hectare includes sprayer depreciation and battery costs.

July 27, 1976

ANNEX 13

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE


Economic Justification

1. Costs and benefits used in calculating the economic rate of returnto the project are given in Table 1. The project's rate of return is 27%.Table 2 shows the results of the sensitivity analysis.

2. The following assumptions and methods were used in calculating costand benefit streams:

(a) Project life: Project life is assumed to be 21 years (start-upyear; five project investment years during which developmentactivities will be initiated and substantially completed, and15 subsequent years). No residual value is attributed afterthe project period.

(b) Project costs:

(i) project costs during the investment period are identicalto those in Annex 10;

(ii) price contingencies have been excluded but project physi-cal contingencies have been included during the projectdevelopment period;

(iii) identifiable taxes and duties have been excluded;

(iv) incremental economic costs have been used and anyexisting Government expenditure in the area is notincluded;

(v) since APMEPU's services are shared by other projects,only 25% of APMEPU's costs have been charged to thisproject during the project's development period;

(vi) costs of extension, farm advisory services and managementand administration have been assumed to remain at 100% ofYear 5 level until Year 10 and 50% from Year 10 onwards;on the basis that in the later period of the project'slife farmers will require less support to maintain outputat projected levels;

(vii) costs of seed multiplication have been assumed at Year 5level throughout the remainder of the project life;

ANNEX 13Page 2

(viii) costs of livestock extension have been discontinuedafter Year 5;

(ix) costs of maintenance of pole and fuelwood plantationsand fishing lagoons have been inlcuded during the life ofthe project, but other forestry and fishery extension costshave not been taken into account after Year 5;

(x) costs of road maintenance have not been taken intoaccount as it is assumed that these are offset by addi-tional road benefits;

(xi) costs of training and evaluation have been assumed togradually decline to zero in Year 10, and no furtherresearch costs have been taken into account after Year 5;

(xii) farm labor in the farm budget economic return calculationshas been shadow priced at N 1.00 per manday compared withan estimated rural wage rate of N 1.40 per manday; thisadjustment reflects the seasonal nature of onfarm wagelevels in the project area;

(xiii) fertilizers in the farm budget have been valued at economicprices reflecting the deduction of taxes and profits in thehandling of these inputs.

(c) Project benefits:

(i) for the purposes of the projects economic cash flow analysis,net incremental production benefits have been included, i.e.,net economic margins for various crops as described inAnnex 2 have been multiplied by the relevant acreagesunder these crops;

(ii) economic farmgate prices are based on 1980 projections in1976 constant terms (based on IBRD forecasts for rice,maize and sorghum, and on retail value of Mlarketing Boardprices for other crops);

(iii) the values of yams, cassava, millet, melon, and cowpeas arebased on local consumption; the values of rice, maize andsorghum are based on import substitution, and the valueof benniseed is based on export parity;

(iv) no benefits for livestock development have been.taken intoaccount;

ANNEX 13Page 3

(v) forestry benefits are based on the stumpage benefits ofpole/fuelwood plantations 1/; and

(vi) fishery benefits 2/ are based on increased catches fromlagoons.

3. Based on these assumptions the project's overall rate of return is27%. The rate of return is relatively insensitive to changes in costs andbenefits; a 50% increase in costs would result in a rate of return of 16% anda 50% decrease in benefits in a rate of return of 9%; a simultaneous 20%increase in costs and 20% decrease in benefits would result in a rate of re-turn of 16%. A one-year delay in project benefits gives a rate of return of21% and a two-year delay gives a rate of return of 17%. Project sensitivityhas been further tested to slower than assumed farmer adoption rates forvarious crops; the project continues to be economically viable (12% ERR)even when the area under improved production is proportionately reduced from100,000 ha to 40,000 ha.

4. A separate rate of return has been calculated for the fuelwood/poleplantations, and for the bunded lagoons. The rates of return are 10.4% and22% respectively. In addition, a rate of return has been calculated for theBasic Services Package (BSP) provided under the project. This calculationtakes only crop production benefits into account and excludes the costs oflivestock, forestry and fishery development, research and evaluation (bothproject and APMEPU). 3/ The resultant rate of return was 35% for the BSPprovided under the project.

1/ For detailed forestry ROR calculations, see Supplement 5.

2/ For detailed fishery ROR calculations, see Supplement 6.

3/ Conversely, it includes all items marked in Table 1 (and as physical con-tingencies are about equal to identifiable taxes, neither has been recal-culated for the BSP calculation exercise.

NIGERIA

BENRIE STATE


Economic Costs and Benefits

Referenc Y Year 10

Table!- Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 19 Year 20

Economic Costs

* Crop Development A 2.8 839.9 698.2 616.4 793.6 995.9 1,042 1 2' 1,000.0 1,000.0 1,000.0 1,000.0 500.0 500.0* Farm Advisory Service A 2.9 659.2 701.8 621.0 665.3 545.2 469.3 2/ 470.0 470.0 470.0 470.o 235.0 235.0

Livestock Development A 3.1 165.2 599.8 185.3 146.6 182.3 19653 O - - - - -

Forestry Development A 4.2 - 377.1 164.2 213.0 238.0 2051 -1/ 9.0 9.0 9.0 12.6 12.6 12.6Fisheries Development A 5.1 - 296.6 291.2 269.1 330.4 212.2 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5

* Roads and Water Development A 6.2 575.6 1,624.3 800.4 810.3 804.7 672,3 1/- - - -* Management and Administration A 7.1 581.1 1,272.7 590.0 5o4.4 488.4 370.4 370.0 370.0 370.0 370.0 185.0 185.0* Seed Multiplication A 7.5 200.6 256.4 156.5 204.8 183.2 167.2 165.o 165.o 165.0 165.0 165.0 165.0

Research A 7.6 - 199.6 62.4 67.4 83.4 67.4* Training A 7.7 117.9 462.3 268.4 235.1 334.6 198.3 V 200.0 150.0 100.0 50.0

Evaluation A 7.8 527.6 249.3 249.3 281.3 246.3 214.3 210.0 210.0 210.0 210.0* Commercial Services A 8.4 446.1 1,966.4 1,455.9 1,215.4 1,127.3 1,056.5 - - - - -

* Other Overheads A 10.1 3.7 106.7 238.7 275.7 290.3 297.01/ 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0

Subtotal 4,116.9 8,810.2 5,699.7 5,715.0 5,850.0 5,i68.4 2,734.5 2,684.5 2,634.5 2,588.1 1,408.1 1,408.1

Physical Contingencies A 10.1 207.3 465.o 315.8 325.6 342.6 516.8 - - - -

APMEPU Evaluation L/ S 15 - 367.1 260.9 298.8 361.5 283.3 -

less Taxes 3/ (284.4) (593-9) (288.9) (253.6) (243.9) (217.1) (109.4) (107.4) (105.4) (103.5) ( 56.3) ( 56.3)* less Today': Expenses S A 1.4 (520.0) _2-) (520.0) (520.0) (520.0) (520.0) (520.0) (520.0) (520.0) (520.0) (520.0) (520.0)

TOTAL COSTS 3,519.8 8,528.4 5,467.5 s,565.8 5,790.2 5,031.4 2,105.1 2,057.1 2,009.1 1,964.6 831.8 831.8

Benefits

livestockp/ S 4Fisheries S 5 - - - 39.0 117.0 195.0 195.0 195.0 195.0 195.0 195.0 195.0Forestry s 6 - - - - - - - - - 175.0 175.0 175.0Crops 8/ A 2.3 - 1,338.0 2,743.0 4,467.0 6,732.0 9,889.0 9,889.0 9,889.0 9,889.0 9,889.0 9,889.0 9,889.0

- 1,338.0 2,743.0 4,506.0 6,849.0 10,084.0 10,084.0 10,084.0 10,084.0 10,259.0 10,259.0 10,259.0

i/ A = Annex; S = Supplement.| See Supplement 15; 25% of APMEPT costs charged to this project.4/ Estimated at 5% of vehicles, 10% of other equipment, 10% of houses and buildings, and 20% of vehicle operating costs; after Year 5 estimated at percentage of total as calculated

in Year 5.| See Annex 1; present salaries amount to 9399,000; add 30% for other costs.

w No livestock development benefits taken into account, as component is very small and it is very difficult to relate benefits to improved veterinary services.2/9N13,000 per bunded lagoon (N14,000, less an estimated 300 man-days and allowance for some other fishermen costs).7 Although theoretically not correct, stumpage benefits of a eight-year cutting cycle have been averaged from Year 9 to 20.2/ Economic margins as calculated in farm budgets multiplied by estimated cropping patterns, rather than commercial costs on cost side and incremental benefits on benefits side.2/ At 100% until Year 9 and so, thereafter.12/ Not further costed.f/ Costs related to pole/fuelwood plantations, including average stumpage costs and maintenance from Year 9 estimated at N3.4/ha./ Maintenance costs of bunded lagoons (about 91700/lagoon/annum).3 No maintenance costed, as these are assumed to at least equal selling of road benefits not taken into account. Ha.

14/ Gradually reduced until zero in Year 10.

N/ ot continued, as a margin vehicle which should cover commercial costs has been included in farmgate prices of inputs. - i/ Mainly maintenance of assets created by the project.

April 14, 1977

NIGERIA

BENUE STATE

AYANGBA AGRICULTURAL DEVELPMENT PROJECT

Sensitivity Analysis

RoR RoR AssumedCost Benefits Overall Project Basic Services Package Overhead Adoption Rate (BSP) RoR

(area development)

100 100 26.75 34.55 K K 34.55

110 100 23.85 30.95 K 90% 30.35

120 100 21.35 27.95 K 80% 26.85

130 100 19.15 25.35 K 70% 23.25

140 100 17.35 23.05 K 60% 19.75

150 100 15.65 21.05 K 50% 16.15

K 40% 12.45

100 90 23.55 30.65 K 30% 8.75

100 80 20.25 26.65

100 70 16.85 22.45

100 60 13.25 18.15

100 50 9.35 13.65

F-.

110 90 20.85 27.35

110 80 17.75 23.65

120 90 18.55 24.55

120 80 15.65 21.05

April 14, 1977

' 3~~~4, 777 OKc "t !P7 X

B.ENlh \ . ? -- 0 ry h A 7W777777777' 7

{ 0 0 0 0 \ ; 0 X ' > OKTO N :>-. s

r~~~~~ ~~ ( fEA Xn$y ,;0t 7t'WR_

- - E P @ 4 ; ~ ~~~~~ A E N G U -A Q Z J / 1 . . 'S C9,1E90U E G 0 S J Q +~~ . !,9 u 0.__ o/i i 1

| . BXg t of B >nvn E E(AN G E LG ' f ° j U U dlF6g%~;: l= . .:',.!S- L--h:

* / ~~¢ C \0|1 Ae / y Qidi 0;, jf R . EYJY;... "{hC

="'s Cs ' '4 V < At0250 , f 'w_ .000 C o A

J . /// o Brnzi = _i

8BRD12328

[~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~F L r T EA l

LOKOa( 7' Al8) IM 18

/ l~;'.j 5018C8 20R7 dG, ..k.E L.I

/ e / D t K I N \ , r r - F \0--S

P'R c1.d F d R \

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~iIZI Ioa , , 0 /~I Str ba\ aa, e

\,\ < t 1 9 | AIIomoO PolmPrse L ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.DStoosroboordas,s J P< _

X \ \ > > t EARNISE59 CECEN-ER; T LL;H.sM ii~~~~~~o:9959 SaOas ; ' 779000E

9 l 2 / M I t E b .A L A ~~~~0 0 70 0 50 so I U,57 I _

Appraisal of Ayangba Agricultural Development Project Nigeriadocuments.worldbank.org/curated/en/408691468100140745/pdf/multi-page.pdf · Appraisal of Ayangba Agricultural Development

Documents