Land Improvement Project
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Performance Uzbekistan: Land Improvement Evaluation Report Project Independent Evaluation Raising development impact through evaluation Performance Evaluation Report February 2021 Uzbekistan: Land Improvement Project This document is being disclosed to the public in accordance with ADB’s Access to Information Policy. Project Number: 37536-013 LoanProject Numbers: Numbers: 2245 40296-013 and 2246 and 45299-001 GrantLoan Numbers: Number: 00802245 and 22464 IndependentGrant Number: Evaluation: 0080 PE-843 Independent Evaluation: PE-xx NOTES (i) In this report, “$” refers to United States dollars. (ii) For an explanation of rating descriptions used in Asian Development Bank evaluation reports, see Asian Development Bank. 2016. Guidelines for the Evaluation of Public Sector Operations. Manila. Director General Marvin Taylor-Dormond, Independent Evaluation Department (IED) Director Nathan Subramaniam, Sector and Project Division, IED Team leader Garrett Kilroy, Senior Evaluation Specialist, IED Team members Jerome Jovellanos, Associate Evaluation Officer, IED Elizabeth Li-Mancenido, Evaluation Analyst, IED In preparing any evaluation report, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Independent Evaluation Department does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area. The guidelines formally adopted by IED on avoiding conflict of interest in its independent evaluations were observed in the preparation of this report. To the knowledge of the management of IED, there were no conflicts of interest of the persons preparing, reviewing, or approving this report. Abbreviations ADB – Asian Development Bank BISA – Basin Irrigation System Authority DMF – design and monitoring framework EIRR – economic internal rate of return GEF – Global Environment Facility GIS – geographic information system ha – hectare HGME – Hydrogeological Melioration Expedition IED – Independent Evaluation Department M&E – monitoring and evaluation MAWR – Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources NDVI – normalized difference vegetation index O&M – operation and maintenance PCR – project completion report PIU – project implementation unit PMO – project management office PPER – project performance evaluation report PPTA – project preparatory technical assistance t – ton TA – technical assistance WCA – water consumers’ association Currency Equivalents At Independent At Appraisal At Completion Evaluation (26 June 2006) (31 March 2015) (December 2019) SUM1.00 = $0.000817 $0.000401 $0.000105 $1.00 = SUM1,223.78 SUM2,490.48 SUM9,505.38 Contents Page Acknowledgments v Basic Data vi Executive Summary vii Chapter 1: Introduction 1 A. Evaluation Purpose and Process 2 B. Expected Results 2 Chapter 2: Design and Implementation 4 A. Rationale 4 B. Formulation 5 C. Time, Cost, Financing, and Implementation Arrangements 5 D. Technical Assistance 6 E. Procurement, Consultants, and Scheduling 7 F. Safeguard Arrangements and Gender Action Plan 8 G. Loan Covenants, Monitoring, and Reporting Arrangements 8 H. Policy Framework 9 Chapter 3: Performance Assessment 11 A. Relevance 11 B. Effectiveness 13 C. Efficiency 18 D. Sustainability 19 Chapter 4: Other Assessments 23 A. Development Impact 23 B. Asian Development Bank Performance 24 C. Executing Agency Performance 25 Chapter 5: Overall Assessment, Issues, Lessons, and Recommendations 26 A. Overall Assessment 26 B. Issues 26 C. Lessons 27 D. Recommendations 28 Appendixes 1. Design and Monitoring Framework 31 2. Chronology of Policy Events Relating to Farm Restructuring, 2006–2017 36 3. Geographic Information System Remote Sensing Assessment of Cotton and Wheat Lands in the Project Areas 40 4. Results of Focus Group Discussions 47 Acknowledgments This evaluation was prepared by a team of staff and consultants from the Independent Evaluation Department (IED) of Asian Development Bank. The team was composed of Garrett Kilroy (team leader), Jerome Jovellanos, and Elizabeth Li-Mancenido. The team was assisted by consultants Rodolfo Palencia Jr. and Isroiljon Hakimjonov. As part of the evaluation capacity development component of the study, Akmal Ochilov from the Ministry of Investment and Foreign Trade, Government of Uzbekistan also supported the mission and study as on-the-job trainee. Shimako Takahashi (Evaluation Specialist, IED) and Alfred Heuperman (independent consultant), provided valuable contributions as peer reviewers. This evaluation report was prepared under the overall guidance of Marvin Taylor-Dormond, Director General, IED and Nathan Subramaniam, Director, Sector and Project Division, IED. The team would like to thank Asian Development Bank staff at headquarters and the Uzbekistan Resident Mission for their assistance. We also appreciate support from the Government of Uzbekistan, in particular, the Ministry of Water Resources; Ministry of Agriculture; Ministry of Investment and Foreign Trade; district offices of the Basin Irrigation System Authority and Hydrogeological Melioration Expedition; hokimiyats (local governments) in the three project provinces of Bukhara, Kashkadarya, and Navoi; and the various stakeholders, including farmer beneficiaries, who made themselves available during the mission. IED retains full responsibility for this report. Basic Data Uzbekistan: Land Improvement Project (Loans 2245 and 2246, and Grant 0080) Borrower: Republic of Uzbekistan Executing Agency: Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources At Appraisal Actual Key Project Data ($ million) ($ million) Total project cost 79.18 105.20 ADB loan amount 60.20 52.90 Borrower counterpart 15.58 49.80 GEF grant amount 3.00 2.50 Key Dates (Loans) Expected Actual Appraisal 18 March–30 March 2006 Loan negotiations 31 May–5 June 2006 Board approval 24 July 2006 Loan signing 27 September 2007 Loan effectiveness 26 December 2007 9 November 2007 Loan closing 31 March 2013 30 September 2015 Key Dates (Grant) Expected Actual GEF approval 9 January 2008 Date of financing agreement 21 August 2008 Grant effectiveness 21 August 2008 Grant closing 31 March 2013 30 September 2015 Mission Data Type of Mission Number of Missions Number of Person-Days Inception 1 10 Review 9 83 Midterm review 1 23 Project completion review 1 6 Independent evaluation 1 9 Project Performance Report Ratings Development Objectives Implementation 31 July 2006–31 December 2006 Satisfactory Satisfactory 1 January 2007–31 December 2007 Satisfactory Unsatisfactory 1 January 2008–31 December 2010 Satisfactory Satisfactory 1 January 2011–31 December 2012 Potential problem Potential problem 1 January 2013–31 March 2015 On track On track ADB = Asian Development Bank, GEF = Global Environment Facility. Executive Summary The Land Improvement Project aimed to improve agricultural land quality and productivity in the project area. The project targeted nine districts in Bukhara, Kashkadarya, and Navoi provinces, covering 162,300 hectares (ha) of land experiencing severe land degradation, a major constraint on agricultural development in Uzbekistan. Overall, the evaluation assessed the project successful. The project resulted in significant reductions in soil salinity that have continued to diminish since project completion. Shallow groundwater tables have been significantly reduced, indicating that another problem, waterlogging, has been addressed. The evaluation found that expected yields of 3.0 tons/ha for cotton and 3.5 tons/ha for wheat were largely being achieved in the project areas. These yields represented 93% of the target for cotton and 147% of the target for wheat. The productivity of the project areas was also increased by bringing underutilized command areas into use. Policy reforms on cotton and wheat procurement prices, improved land tenure, and deregulation of production have been achieved; and the new government strategies for agriculture and water resources will provide a basis for further progress. The division of the Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources into two separate ministries reinforced the need for cross-institutional coordination and harmonization to sustain the project achievements. The project was less than efficient due to project readiness weaknesses, which resulted in delays and cost overruns. While the drainage network in the project areas is now functioning well, irrigation inefficiencies remain a concern, and require greater attention to improve the resilience of the command areas to projected climate impacts on water availability. This evaluation offers three recommendations. The Asian Development Bank should: (i) continue to support the government’s nascent agricultural and water management strategies to ensure they are complementary, and implemented in an integrated manner; (ii) improve the resilience of the agriculture sector by supporting projects in Uzbekistan that address water use inefficiencies and improve water productivity; and (iii) support better institutional efficiency, coordination, and data management of water resources for agriculture through technical assistance and policy dialogue. Evaluation Purpose and Process Bank (ADB) programmed for delivery by the Independent Evaluation Department in 2021. This project performance evaluation report The project was financed by two ADB loans (one (PPER) presents the findings of an independent from ordinary capital resources and one from the evaluation of the Land Improvement Project in Asian Development Fund). The total project cost Uzbekistan. It assesses the project’s contribution at appraisal