MEASURING RESULTS OF IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT: THE EVALUATION OF COMPLETED IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN THE PHILIPPINES Nick Baoy Pilipinas Monitoring and Evaluatiuon.

MEASURING RESULTS OF IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT: THE EVALUATION OF COMPLETED IRRIGATION PROJECTS

IN THE PHILIPPINES

Nick BaoyPilipinas Monitoring and Evaluatiuon Society

Email: [email protected]

INTRAC/PSO/PRIA Monitoring & Evaluation ConferenceSoesterberg, The Netherlands

15 June 2011

PHILIPPINE AGRICULTURE SECTOR: A QUICK OVERVIEW

• Total agricultural area : 9.6 million ha (32% of total land area)

• Share of agriculture in GDP: 18%

• Share of agriculture in total employment: 35%

• GVA share of crops in agriculture: 50%

• Total rice production in 2010: 15.8 million mt

• Total rice imports in 2010: 1.8 million mt

PHILIPPINE IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT: QUICK FACTS

• Total irrigation potential: 3.1 million ha (32% of total arable land)

• Total area served by irrigation: 1.4 million ha

• Share in irrigated area by type of system:

– National systems: 49%

– Communal systems: 39%

– Private systems: 12%

• % of rice produced in irrigated areas: 76%

IRRIGATION PROJECTS EVALUATED

Project Total Area, ha

A - CMIPP 16,879

B - TGISRP 3,218

C - PDDP 7,836

D - BHIP-1 4,140

E - BHIP-2 5,300

F - BRISRIP 11,954

AB

C

D

EF

SIGNIFICANCE OF EVALUATED PROJECTS

Project % share in totalirrigated area

% share in total rice production

A - CMIPP 2.5 0.78

B - TGISRP 0.5 0.15

C - PDDP 1.2 0.11

D - BHIP-1 0.6 0.15

E - BHIP-2 0.8 0.12

F – BRISRIP 1.8 0.47

Total 7.4 1.8

OBJECTIVES OF EVALUATION

• Examine the performance of six completed projects funded by yen loan

• Identify issues that need to be addressed to improve project performance

• Suggest measures to enhance project effectiveness and sustainability

KEY EVALUATION QUESTIONS

• Were the projects able to expand the irrigated rice area?

• Were the projects able to increase rice production in target areas?

• Did the projects contribute to the increase in farmers’ income?

Collect & review project documents

Clarify project results framework

Formulate rapid assessment plan

Consult withproject stakeholders

Planning Phase

Assessment Phase

Action Planning Phase

Implementassessment plan

Analyze data &assess performance

Present findings toproject stakeholders

Formulateaction plan

PrepareRIPPA report

RAPID IRRIGATION PROJECT PERFORMANCEASSESSMENT (RIPPA) FRAMEWORK

Output OutcomeACTIVITIESINPUTS OUTPUTS OUTCOME IMPACT

• Labor• Equipment• Technical assistance

• Construction/ rehabilitation of irrig facilities• Institutional development• Supply of equipment

• Operable irrig system• Functional water users groups• Improved system O&M

• Increased irrigated area• Increased rice production• Improved irrigation service

• Increased farm income• Improved living standards• Self-sufficiency in rice

TYPICAL RESULTS CHAIN OF IRRIGATION PROJECTS

SOME PARTICIPATORY TOOLS USED IN RIPPA

• Mapping

• Transect walk

• Interviews (focused, group, key informant)

• Structured problem/solution analysis

• Participatory action planning workshop

• Triangulation and cross-checking

KEY EVALUATION FINDINGS

• The projects succeeded in expanding the irrigated rice area.

• The projects increased average rice yields in target areas.

• The projects contributed to the increase in farmers’ income.

• Due to operational issues, most projects failed to achieve cropping intensity targets.

PROBLEM TREE: BHIP-I

Target irrigated area (4,740 ha) not achieved

Insufficient water at Malinao dam

Inefficient water distribution

Water conveyance losses

Some leveled lands remain un-irrigated

Low amount of rainfall

Dam not reservoir type

Degradation of watershed

Non-compliance with CCPP

Unlined/very long MFDs

Incomplete MFDs/SFDs

Insufficient water in DS

ISF collection target is not

achieved

Cropping intensity target is not achieved

Defective WD structures

Weak IA policy enforcement

Illegal turn-outs

Damaged canal structures

Lack of SFDs

Illegal checks/ impoundments

Institutional issues

Lands higher than canal

PROBLEM TREE: BRISRIP

Target irrigated area (11,954 ha) not achieved

Low river discharge

Water can’t reach some areas

Flooding in the downstream

Sugarcane areas are excluded from LIPA

Degradation of watershed

Low rainfall (e.g. El Nino)

Non-compliance to WDD schedule

ROW problems

Lack of drainage outlets

Sugar lands are not irrigated

Sugarcane farmers are not

IA members

ISF collection target is not

achieved

Cropping intensity target is not achieved

Lack of terminal facilities

Inefficiencies in water mgt

Farmers unable to build ditches

Siltation of drainage canal

Flooding during high tides

Excessive water offtake/diversion

Institutional issues

No control over crop conversion

Weak IA policy enforcement

ISSUE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS(1) Low river discharge arising from degraded watershed & low rainfall

• Coordinate with PENRO re Bago River Watershed Mgt• Promote Water Saving Technology (WST)• Continuous review of CCPP/WDD

(2) Water cannot reach some areas due to lack of terminal facilities and inefficiencies in water management

• Assist IAs/TSAGs in constructing on-farm facilities • Settle ROW problems • Strengthen IA policy enforcement • Strictly implement WDD schedule• Promote WST

(3) Flooding in downstream due to lack of drainage outlets, siltation of drainage channels & tidal flows

• Construct additional drainage outlets/channels• De-silt clogged drainage channels• Build pumping station/check structures for seawater

(4) Sugarcane areas are excluded from LIPA as farmers do not avail of irrigation service during WS

• Include sugarcane lands in LIPA even if irrigated only during DS• Review ISF collection policy for lands served by project facilities but not availing of irrigation service

ACTION PLAN: BRISRIP

Issue/ProblemPlanned Solution/

Countermeasure

Actions Taken by Concerned Unit

in NIA

Actions Planned in 2011

Actions Planned up to 2012 & beyond

Estimated Budget

Requirement

Budget Source and Status

Expected Results (e.g. Hectares

Developed/Restored)

1              

2              

3              

4              

5              

6              

7              

8              

9              

10              

ACTION PLAN TEMPLATE

SOME INSIGHTS ON RIPPA

• Quick structured method for assessing project outcomes and identifying post-project issues which could feed into periodic and more formal evaluations

• Commitment among stakeholders in addressing

project issues is promoted by participatory evaluation approaches

• Attribution of observed changes/results becomes a challenge in evaluating projects that have long been completed.

Thank you!

Salamat po!

Dank u wel!