Document of The World Bank
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Public Disclosure Authorized Report No. 16688
IMPLEMENTATIONCOMPLETION REPORT
Public Disclosure Authorized INDIA
MAHARASHTRACOMPOSITE IRRIGATION m PROJECT (CREDIT 1621-IN) Public Disclosure Authorized JUNE 17, 1997
Agriculture and Water Operations Division Country Department II South Asia Region Public Disclosure Authorized
This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. CURRENCYEQUIVALENTS
Currency Unit = Rupees (Rs) Atappraisal(1985)US$1 = RsI2.0 CompletionYear (1996) US$1 = Rs 35.3
WEIGHTS AND MEASURES
1 metre (m) = 3.28 feet (ft) 1 kilometre(km) = 0.62 miles (mi) 1 hectare (ha) = 2.47 acres (ac) 1 millioncubic metres (Mm3) = 804 acre-feet (ac-ft) 1 cubic foot per second (cfs or cusec) = 0.0283 cubic metres per second (m3/s) 1 kilogram(kg) = 2.2 lbs (lb) 1 metric ton (t) = 2,205 pounds (lb) 1 thousandmillion cubic feet (TMC) = 28.317 mlllion cubic metres (Mm3)
FISCAL YEAR OF BORROWER
April I - March 31
Vice President MiekoNishimnzu Director : Robert S. Drysdale DivisionChief/Manager Shawki Barghouti Staff Member N K. Bandyopadhyay FOR OFFICIALUSE ONLY IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT
INDIA
MAHARASHTRA COMPOSITE IRRIGATION HI PROJECT (CR. 1621-IN)
Table of Contents
P RE F A CE ...... i EVALUATION SUMLIvARY.1i
PART I: PROJECT IMPLEMENTATIONASSESSMENT ...... 1 A. PROJECT OBJECTIVES ...... B. ACHIEVEMENTOF PROJECT OBJECTIVES...... 4 C. MAJOR FACTORS AFFECTINGTHE PROJECT...... 10 D. PROJECT SUSTAINABILITY ...... 12 E. BANK PERFORMANCE...... 13 F. BORROWERPERFORMANCE ...... 14 G. ASSESSMENTOF OUTCOME...... 17 H. FUTURE OPERATION...... 17 I. LESSONS LEARNED...... 18
PART II: STATISTICALTABLES ...... 21 Table 1. Summary of Assessments...... 2...1.21 Table 2: Related Bank Loans/Credits...... 23 Table 3: Project Timetable...... 24 Table 4: Loan/CreditDisbursements: Cumulative Estimated and Actual...... 24 Table 5: Key Indicators for Project lnplementation...... 25 Table 6: Key Indicators for Project Operation...... 26 Table 7: Studies Included in Project...... 26 Table 8A: Project Costs...... 27 Table 8B: Project Financing...... 27 Table 9: Economic Costs and Benefits...... 28 Table 10: Status of Legal Covenants...... 29 Table 11: Compliancewith OperationalManual Statements...... 33 Table 12: Bank Resources: Staff Inputs ...... 33 Table 13: Bank Resources: Missions...... 34
APPENDICES
1. Mission's Aide Memoire 2. Economic and FinancialAnalysis 3. MiscellaneousTables 4. Economic RehabilitationProgram 5. Borrower's EvaluationReport This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performanceof their official duties. Its contents may not otherwisebe disclosed without WorldBank authorization.
IMPLEMENTATIONCOMPLETION REPORT
INDIA
MAHARASHTRA COMPOSITE IRRIGATION PROJECTIII (Cr. 1621-IN)
PREFACE
This is the Implementation Completion Report (ICR) for the Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project III (MCIP III) in India, for which Credit 1621-IN in the amount of SDR 164.2 million (US$160 million equivalent) was approved on July 16, 1985 and made effective on March 13, 1986. The project was approved for restructuring on April 3, 1993, at which time the credit was revised to SDR 132.2 million (US$128.8 million equivalent).
The Credit was closed on December 31, 1996, five and a half years later than the original closing date of June 30, 1991. Final disbursement took place on February 20, 1997 and the revised Credit amount was fully disbursed.
This ICR was prepared by an FAO/CP mission' which visited India from November 29 to December 16, 1996. It was finalized by Mr. N. K. Bandyopadhyay, Irrigation Engineer in the Resident Mission in India, and Mr. Jean-Pierre Baudelaire, Consultant and former Task Manager, and reviewed by Mr. Ridley Nelson, Principal Agricultural Economist, Agriculture and Water Operations Division, and Ms. Kazuko Uchimura, Project Adviser, Country Department 2, South Asia Region.
The ICR mission coincided with the final supervision mission2. It is based on a review of the Staff Appraisal Report of the original project, the consultants' feasibility study of the restructured project, legal documents, supervision reports and project files, as well as field investigations and discussions with Bank staff and officials of the Irrigation, Agriculture, Public Works, and Revenue and Forests Departments of the Government of Maharashtra (GOM). The implementing agencies had prepared their own progress reports from which the mission was able to draw considerable information regarding physical and financial progress of the works The mission visited five of the six subprojects (Majalgaon, Upper Penganga, Kukadi, Bhima and Krishna) and held discussions with project-level officers of the implementing agencies, and participating farmers, collecting considerable information on project performance. Borrower's comments have been taken into account and a Borrower's Evaluation Report is in Appendix 5.
I Messrs. W.J. Sorrenson(Agricultural Economist, Mission Leader), G.S. Schokman(Irrigation Engineer, Consultant)and S. Sarkar (Agronomist,National Consultant).
2 Messrs.N.K. Bandyopadhyay (Task Manager, SA2RS) and I.U.B.Reddy (R&R Specialist, SA2RS).
ii
IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT
INDIA
MAHARASHTRA COMPOSITE IRRIGATION PROJECT III (Cr. 1621-IN) Evaluation Summarv
Introduction
1. The Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project III (MCIP III) initially provided for the completion of the Jayakwadi and construction of the Majalgaon schemes. These schemes, located along the Godavari river in West Maharashtra, are to cover an area of about 300,000 ha. At restructuring, in addition to the continuation of the remaining works of the Jayakwadi and Majalgaon subprojects, construction works for four new subprojects (Kukadi, Bhima, Krishna, and Upper Penganga) were added.
Project Objectives
2. The main objective of the original and restructured project was to substantially raise agricultural production and farmers' incomes by improving the use of the poorly drained black cotton soils and the available water in the reservoirs of the subprojects. This objective was to be achieved through: (a) the completion of irrigation works and on-farm development works; (b) the stimulation and promotion of agricultural development; and (c) the introduction of improved operations and maintenance (O&M) practices. Additional measures introduced at the restructuring stage were: (a) the economic rehabilitation of project-affected persons (PAPs); (b) technical assistance to ensure the sustainability of the schemes; (c) establishment of water users' associations (WUAs) to be responsible for water management, maintenance and cost recovery; and (d) the modernization of canals.
3. Command Area. Of the total of 733,000 ha of culturable command area (CCA) in the subprojects included in the original and restructured project, the CCA under the project was limited to 227,800 ha3 according to the availability of water.
4. Components. The original project included the following components in the Jayakwadi subproject: (a) completion of the irrigation systems (distributary and minor canals); (b) completion of the main and link drains; and (c) development of three special distributaries (SDDs); and the following components in the Majalgaon subproject: (a) completion of main canals including lining; (b) construction of distributary and minor canals; and (c) construction of the main and link drains. In the two subprojects, the components include : (a) the construction of field and drainage networks; (b) land shaping; (c) rural roads; (d) equipment for land shaping; (e)
3 Jayakwadi,88,000 ha; Majalgaon,58,000 ha; Kukadi,20,000 ha; Bhima,28,000 ha; Krishna,10,800 ha; and UpperPenganga, 23,000 ha. iii strengthening the monitoring and evaluation unit; (f) technical, agricultural extension, and research support; and (g) training, studies, study tours and consulting services.
5. At restructuring, besides the continuation of the on-going works in Jayakwadi and Majalgaon subprojects, civil works in the four new subprojects were similar to those provided for in the original project. In addition, the project included: (a) modernization of reservoir headworks in the four new subprojects; (b) service roads; (c) establishment of WUAs; (d) modernization of water control including volumetric water supply and canal automation; (e) review of farmer water rights; (f) continuation of the training program; (g) technical assistance for the development of an O&M management system; (h) the economic rehabilitation of PAPs; (i) new studies - environmental impact assessment (EIA) and environmental management plan (EMP), management information system (MIS), plans of operation and maintenance (POM), and evaluation of the water resources of the Godavari river basin; and (j) designation of a Dam Safety Review Panel (DSRP).
6. Loan Covenants. Covenants were included to promote achievement of project objectives within the time frame of the project. The most critical covenants included: (a) adequate budgetary provision and timely release of funds; (b) establishment and continuation within the Agriculture Department (AD) of two new agricultural districts to implement the agricultural program; (c) taking such actions as necessary to strengthen the Command Area Development Authority (CADA); (d) an economic rehabilitation program; and (e) specific studies prescribed under the restructured project. Covenants (a) and (c) were complied with after a delay of over three years. Covenants (b), (d) and (e) were partially complied with.
7. Evaluation of Project Objectives. The project's main objective was clear and appropriate. Although the concept was sound, the design of the project was biased more on construction of civil works and did not adequately focus on the required supporting activities needed to improve agricultural production. SAR targets of the civil works program were unrealistic given past experience on budgetary allocations and problems of project management. The restructured project appropriately included new features and financing to correct the deficiencies identified under the original project and added measures to provide for the improvement of the sustainability and the economic rehabilitation of PAPs of the subprojects. The components included under the restructured project were well-defined and the revised implementation targets were realistic. The Staff Appraisal Report (SAR) clearly defined organization and management at the farm level and, at restructuring, funds were provided and targets were specified.
Implementation Experience and Results
8. At restructuring,the project was expectedto cover about 227,800 ha. At closure of the credit, about 210,000ha were providedwith irrigationfacilities and the achievementin irrigated cropped area has averaged 36 percent of the areas preparedfor irrigation. There were signs of water shortage in the subprojectslocated in the Godavaribasin, whereas the three subprojects located in the KrishnaRiver basin appearedto developnormally, except for Bhima, due to delays in the constructionof a major structure. The constructionof civilworks, which started at a slow pace due to procurement problems and inadequate funds, progressed satisfactorilyachieving about 90 percent on major works and about 86 percent on on-farm development(OFD) works. iv
The progress on service and rural roads, and the formation of a small number of viable and effective WUAs, has been quite satisfactory. Although the targets for the formation of WUAs were achieved, many of these WUAs are not yet fully effective. Maintenance of irrigation infrastructure continues to be a major issue. Funding constraints and the indifferent attitudes of Irrigation Department (ID) staff and farmers are major factors influencing the implementation of an effective maintenance program. Unless the automated canal system introduced on a pilot basis is better developed, and proper maintenance is carried out, particularly below the level of the branch canals, the advantages of the system will not be realized.
9. Progress on the economic rehabilitation program (ERP) and the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Environmental Management Plan (EMP), and Plan of Operation and Maintenance (POM) studies, included under the restructured project, has fallen well behind schedule. The studies were to be completed before December 31, 1996 but only started in late 1996 and specification of the ERP component was finalized in early 1996. Agricultural development got off to a poor start mainly due to non-provision of funds under the original project. However, with the inclusion of a special provision at the time of restructuring, a specific program was eventually agreed to between ID, AD and the Bank. An achievement of about 83 percent of the agricultural development component was recorded at the end of December 1996.
10. Project Impact. Agricultural production at the end of disbursement has been much below what was anticipated. The main reasons for this have been limited availability of water and incomplete infrastructure4 . The situation in the future is not likely to change substantially unless major modifications are made by: (a) the ID in optimizing the allocation of available water to all dams under its jurisdiction within a river basin; and (b) by the ID staff, WUAs and farmers in terms of water management at scheme level. Although below SAR estimates, significant increases in farmers' incomes were achieved in the project command areas which have benefited from canal water or groundwater recharging as a result of MCIP III.
11. Economic Rates of Return (ERR). The ERRs, estimated at appraisal, restructuring and at implementation completion, are tabulated in Part I, para 39. The re-estimated ERRs are much below appraisal and restructuring estimates (except in the case of Kukadi) and range from -2 percent to 15 percent. The overall project ERR is estimated at implementation completion at 7 percent. Due to a lack of data on water availability during project implementation, future scheme performance (especially irrigation intensities) and the ERR estimates should be considered indicative.
12. Project Sustainability. Presently, O&M funding levels for infrastructure controlled by ID are well below requirements; many WUAs routinely desilt and clean canals; confusion exists on who is responsible for the maintenance of the structures within the WUAs' command areas; and inadequate technical advice is provided to the WUAs by the ID staff. There are few visible signs of any improvement in funding levels, although the Government of Maharashtra (GOM) accept that present levels of O&M funds are inadequate. In its Ninth Five-Year Plan, GOM are proposing to increase the level of O&M funding based on actual requirements of individual irrigation schemes. Intensive on-site training for ID field staff and WUAs on periodic and
4 Limitedwater availabilitycould be due to inherentscheme design problems where the areas preparedfor irrigation over-extendwater availableand/or poor water managementby the ID and farmers. v preventivemaintenance activities are required, which would not only reduce maintenancecosts but also contribute immenselyto the optimum use of the scarce water resources. Also, the formation of scheme-level and basin-level committees, which were not included in the restructuredproject, would significantlycontribute to improvingwater allocationand sustaining irrigationinfrastructure. Unless the above actions are taken and an effectivemaintenance system is firmlyin position,the sustainabilityof the projectwould be uncertain.
13. Actual Project Cost and Financing. The original project costs, inclusive of physical and price contingencies, were estimated at US$322.7 million. At the time of restructuring, the total project cost was re-estimated at US$310 million, including contingencies and the IDA credit at SDR 132.2 million (US$178 million) was to finance 57 percent of the revised total project costs. Actual project expenditure up to December 31, 1996 is estimated at US$368.3 million (see Table 8A). The credit was fully disbursed at US$187.7 million, representing 51 percent of the estimated expenditure up to December 31, 1996 and 40 percent of the estimated final project cost including the balance works.
14. Key Factors Relating to Achievement of Project Objective. The major factors affecting the limited achievement of the project's objectives of substantially raising agricultural output and farmers' incomes are- (a) inadequate budgetary allocation and timely release of funds, delays in the appointment of key staff to CADA (ID II) during the first three years, procurement issues in the award of contracts for major civil works, and weak project design which resulted in a reformulation exercise ending with restructuring the project; (b) limited available water during the construction period, poor system management and a greater expansion into high water-demanding crops (bananas and sugar cane) than envisaged in the design cropping patterns5 ; and (c) a limited adoption of effective water management and O&M procedures.
15. During the restructured project period, civil works construction continued satisfactorily, although land acquisition and contractual problems adversely affected the construction of a few major works on the main canals. Whilst ID concentrated on civil works construction, insufficient effort was made to expedite the implementation of the ERP component and studies related to EIA, EMP, the evaluation of water resources of the basins where the subprojects are located and finally, the POMs for the subprojects. The poor progress resulted in Bank supervision missions giving unsatisfactory ratings for implementation progress and development objectives.
16. The performance of ID II on maintaining works has generally been unsatisfactory, and there has not been any turnover of the maintenance of structures to WUAs other than the cleaning and desilting of canals. ID II staff did not repair irrigation infrastructure suffering from deferred maintenance before turnover to WJUAsas was envisaged in the restructured project, not because of a lack of funds, but because of a lack of coordination and cooperation between themselves and ID I. It is also apparent that training program did not focus adequately on maintenance.
17. Not identifying before appraisal a detailed agricultural component involving the AD contributed to the initial slow progress in increasing agricultural production. During the latter part of the restructured project period, a provision of funds (included at the time of restructuring)
5 It has been suggestedthat rainfallduring the constructionperiod (1986 to 1997)has beenbelow average but no statisticalevidence has beenavailable to the ICR missionto demonstratethis. vi and an agreed program of work between ID and AD, resulted in satisfactory progress, albeit in small portions of the MCIP III command areas.
18. Performance of the Bank. The SAR dealt comprehensively with factors related to the achievement of the project objectives. However, inadequate project preparation work reflected in the design weaknesses identified in the second year of implementation, particularly on the drainage network, the SDDs and the agricultural development component, indicate a less than satisfactory performance of the Bank during the initial project implementation period. However, during the reformulation exercise culminating in the restructured project, the Bank's contribution was very useful. The Bank was directly responsible for preparation of a package of measures to ensure the economic rehabilitation of PAPs, environmental sustainability of infrastructure and future environmental management in the operational phase, establishment of viable and effective WUAs, and the modernization of water management. Supervisions were carried out regularly. While the Bank's actions to resolve constraints on construction were useful, efforts to expedite the implementation of the agriculture and ERP components and studies were not effective until late in the project. The Bank's reporting on O&M and the poor performance of areas actually irrigated compared to those provided with irrigation infrastructure was not sufficient.
19. Performance of the Borrower. The Borrower's performance in the identification and preparation of the original project was satisfactory in works related to planning and design of irrigation systems and structures. However, the performance on supporting activities, the design of drainage networks, and land shaping, was less than satisfactory. Reformulation was resorted to in the second project year. Construction of civil works, after a very slow start, progressed very well in the latter period and continued satisfactorily during the restructured project period. The Borrower's performance related to the ERP component, as well as with implementing important studies (EIA, EMP, POMs, and water resources evaluation), was unsatisfactory due to excessive delays in commissioning them. Its performance in O&M of systems was poor and institutional arrangements at farm level were less than satisfactory, although good progress was made in the formation of a small number of successful WUAs. Initially, coordination between the ID and AD was unsatisfactory, but in the latter years of the restructured project the situation improved and coordination between the two departments was satisfactory.
20. Project Outcome. The project's outcome is rated satisfactory with respect to civil works construction (irrigation and roads), the recognition of the importance of WUAs in O&M and in irrigation agriculture extension. However, in terms of present agricultural achievements (irrigated areas), progress on the ERP component, studies included at restructuring, and the generally less than adequate maintenance of irrigation infrastructure, the outcome is unsatisfactory and expected results are yet to materialize.
Summary of Findings, Future Operations and Key Lessons Learned
21. Plans for Future Works and Operation. The GOM has committed itself to the following program of action to complete the project: (a) ID to complete the balance civil works over a period of three years ending in FY1999/2000, and the studies by the end of FY1997/98; (b) the Rehabilitation Department to carry out the implementation of the approved plan for the ERP in three years subject to the availability of funds; (c) the AD to continue the agricultural development program for a further three years from available State funds; and (d) the PWD to vii complete the rural roads program over a period of two years. With respect to civil irrigation infrastructure, as there are indications that water supply may be insufficient to feed the developed command areas of the subprojects in the Godavari river basin, GOM should concentrate on completing main and branch canal infrastructure which supply water to the areas where OFD works have been completed, and prepare operational plans to remedy the problem to the extent possible. Until water availability is confirmed through additional studies on water resources, actual cropping patterns adopted by farmers, canal operation, and all works to further expand the command areas, should be suspended. In addition, training program in maintenance for ID field staff and farmers should be included. Funding levels for O&M remain at the same level, although the GOM's Ninth Five-Year Development Plan proposal to increase funds for O&M based on individual scheme needs is an encouraging sign.
22. Lessons for Future Projects. The lessons learned from the project are classifiedas follows:
Water Resources Availability and Management
(a) Unless the adequacy of water supply and the proper management of the existing systems is ensured, expansion of irrigation facilities to new areas in the CCA of the subprojects should not be taken up.
(b) The financing of future water resources development projects in Maharashtra and elsewhere in India should be preceded by: (i) the issuance of a state water policy defining the state priorities and institutional reforms, (ii) the preparation of a state water management plan defining the availability and management of water resources on a river basin basis; (iii) the identification of the rehabilitation requirements of the existing operational irrigation infrastructure prior to considering further developments; and (iv) the consideration of private sector groundwater development to increase the efficiency of irrigation.
(c) The cropping patterns used in designing the subprojects were quite different from those currently followed by farmers, especially in Majalgaon. Careful consideration is needed as to whether water should be spread thinly over the areas where irrigation infrastructure has been created, as a means of drought protection, or spread over smaller areas to enable development into higher value, thirsty crops. The optimum economic strategy would vary from subproject to subproject depending on the extent and condition of existing irrigation infrastructure, the effectiveness of WUAs in managing water, and on the irrigation water responses and economics of alternative crops.
(d) The usefulness of the Pilot Project for Dynamic Regulation (canal automation) is questionable if the Majalgaon command continues to face water shortages, due to limited water availability and the poor maintenance of the canals (minors and field). Water allocations to this command need to be reviewed within the framework of the Godavari basin water resources management studies and a proper POM needs to be prepared and implemented in order to test the feasibility and sustainabilityof canal automation in India. Furthermore, the pilot activities should be continued for at least three more years. viii
Operation and Maintenance
(e) No new projects should be considered for financing unless an effective and sustainable O&M system covering both the construction and operational periods is agreed upon and implemented.
(f) To improve the performance of ID II field staff and WUAs in O&M, it is recommended that: (a) more intensive training (classroom and site) in preventive and periodic maintenance activities be given to ID II field staff and WUAs; (b) the technical supervision of WUAs should continue even after turnover of maintenance to them; and (b) an effective supervision schedule for Section Officers, and canal inspectors, be introduced with high level staff monitoring their activities.
(g) Farmer involvement in O&M activities is critical to the sustainability of the project. In order to ensure that O&M activities are performed satisfactorily by farmers, WALMI should carry out more training, particularly on maintenance (preventive and periodic) at farm sites and not only in classrooms, taking groups to areas where severe deterioration is apparent.
Water Users' Associations
(h) The responsibilities between ID I and ID II for rehabilitating the structures turned-over to WUAs needs to be clarified, and the WUAs involved in these activities to ensure a sense of ownership.
(i) The effectiveness of WUAs should be judged not only in terms of financial and water management, but also in terms of their ability to maintain the structures turned-over to them.
(j) The ID II, which is responsible for the formation of WUAs, should recruit either institutional specialists or NGOs to work as a team with its own engineering staff while preparing the rehabilitation and O&M plans prior to turn-over of irrigation structures to farmers.
(k) Once WUAs are formed throughout a scheme command, there is a need to form a scheme-level committee which would negotiate the allocation of water at the beginning of each season with the ID II. Special training will be required for this which should also be taken up under future projects.
Irrigated Agriculture
(1) In future, the Bank should ensure that, in all new projects providing irrigation facilities to traditionally rainfed areas, an agricultural component with a separate budget is included in the project from the outset. ix
(m) The ongoing extension work in the subproject should continue for another three years to ensure a better uptake of irrigated agriculture by project beneficiaries and a more efficient use of water at the farm level
Economic Rehabilitationof ProjectAffected Families
(n) An ERP component must be backed by a detailed action plan prior to project implementation. Such components must have a separate allocation of funds and be regularly monitored.
General
(o) The quality of project preparation is a major consideration for successful project implementation. The review of technical aspects are as important as the other social, economic, and financial aspects.
(p) Complex Bank-financed irrigation projects should include provision for a mid- term review to be carried out by a team of specialists not connected with the project, and the monitoring of project implementation should not be confined to only physical and financial progress, but should also include irrigation performance and impact on agricultural production.
(q) To improve coordination between the various implementing agencies involved in an irrigation project, a project-specific coordination committee, chaired by the Secretary of Finance, is needed. Funds should be allocated directly from the Ministry of Finance to the agency responsible for a project component.
(r) Special arrangements need to be agreed with the Borrower prior to project implementation to ensure that national and, particularly international, consultant firms are recruited in a timely manner. 1
IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT
INDIA
MAHARASHTRA COMPOSITE IRRIGATION PROJECT III (Cr. 1621-IN)
PART I: PROJECTIMPLEMENTATION ASSESSMENT
A. PROJECTOBJECTIVES
Statement of Project Objectives
1. Original Project. The main objective of the Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project m (MCIP M) was to substantiallyraise agriculturalproduction and farmers' incomes by improvingthe utilization of poorly drained black cotton soils and the available water in the command areas of Jayakwadi and Majalgaon reservoirs. These two subprojects were initially under the Maharashtra CompositeIrrigation Project I (MCIP I - Cr. 736-IN) and initiatedin mid-1977. MCIP m was to: (a) complete irrigation works and on-farm development in the Jayakwadi command; (b) stimulate and promote agricultural development in all of the command area (200,000 ha); (c) advance the development of the associated Majalgaon command (100,000 ha) completing its first segment of 24,000 ha; and (d) introduce improved O&M practices. Major emphasis was to be shifted away from large infrastructure works to on-farm development, water management and agricultural production practices, so as to trigger a self-sustainedprocess of agricultural growth. Issues already identified to be adversely affecting the achievements of the expected benefits were to be addressed under the project. These included: (a) better land management(drainage, land shaping, tillage); (b) better water management (appropriate distribution systems down to the farms, reliable and timely supply, and meticulous O&M of the systems); and (c) improved support services and incentives to the farmers (farmers' organization, training, input supply, equipment, technical advice, appropriate crops, and marketing outlets). Althoughthe primary objectivewas increasedagricultural production, there was no specific componentinvolving the AgriculturalDepartment (AD). A special services component,which was to have included intemational technicalassistance in agriculture, was not put under the control of AD and consequentlywas not implemented.
2. Project Components. In the Javakwadicommand, major works included: (a) the completionof irrigation systems (distributaries and minors) on about 45,000 ha; (b) completion of main and link drains on about 153,000 ha; and (c) construction and/or rehabilitation of rural roads on 537 km. Command Area Development Authority (CADA) works included: (a) constructionof field channels and structures and field drains on about 68,000 ha, and field channel protection on about 102,000 ha; (b) development of three Specially Developed Distributaries (SDDs) on about 7,300 ha; (c) land shaping over an area of about 128,000 ha; and (d) technicalsupport to farmers on the entire 200,000 ha of the command.
3. In the Majalgaon command major works included: (a) completion of constructionof the first 100 km of the main canal, includingdistributaries and minors, liningand structures estimated to cover about 57,000 ha; and (b) main and link drainage network and rural road network covering the first 2 segment of about 24,000 ha. CADA works included: (a) constructionof field channels, structures, field drains, land shaping and technicalsupport to farmers on about 24,000 ha; (b) the development of one SDD serving about 4,000 ha; and (c) preliminary promotion programs for farmers on the rest (76,000 ha) of the command.
4. Common programs. for both the Jayakwadi and Majalgaonsubprojects, included: (a) equipment for land shaping, telecommunicationand monitoring;(b) strengtheningthe monitoring and evaluation unit within the project; (c) agriculturalextension and research support; and (d) training, studies, study tours and consultingservices.
5. Restructured Project. Between about 1987 and 1992, the project was restructured to take account of the scarcity of water and make use of additionalrupee funds availablefrom the credit due to the devaluation of the rupee vis-a-vis the SDR. In early 1987, the Bank advised GOM that as certain components at appraisal had been founded upon inadequate informationor analysis, with a view to reformulation of the project, additional studies were needed. These were: (i) drainage; (ii) land shaping; (iii) rural roads and canal service roads; (iv) deferred canal lining; (v) pilot distributaries; (vi) additional system simulation; (vii) agricultural development;(viii) volumetric water supply to water users' associations (WUAs); and (ix) feasibility studies of subprojects partially completed under the Bank-financedMCIP II (Cr. 954-IN) project. While retaining the main objectives, the restructured project aimed to expand the scope of the project by including:(a) investmentson water distributionand drainage networks in four additional subprojects which were included in an earlier Bank-financed MCIP II; (b) an economic rehabilitation program (ERP) of project-affected persons (PAPs) with special emphasis on consultation with PAPs and their participation in designing a compensation package; (c) inclusion of features to ensure environmental sustainability and sound future environmentalmanagement in the operationalphase; (d) establishmentof WUAs to be responsible for water management,maintenance, and cost recovery through an extension program designed to create farmer participation and involvement;and (e) modernizationof water management. Other objectives included: (a) the development of a management system for O&M; (b) the inculcation of an O&M culture amongst subprofessional staff at the field level and farmers; (c) development of areas compatibleto the available water resources; (d) studies to improve performance of the project and to ensure its sustainability,and at the same time to improve the performance of ID staff, (e) training of project staff and farmers; (f3 establishmentof an MIS to monitor and report on project activities; and (g) an effective organizationand managementto implementthe project.
6. Project Changes after Appraisal. Of the total 733,000 ha of CCA of the six subprojects incorporated in the restructured project, the command area included in the project was restricted to 227,800 ha according to water availability.This consisted of Jayakwadi 88,000 ha, Majalgaon 58,000 ha, Kukadi 20,000 ha, Bhima 28,000 ha, Krishna 10,800 ha and Upper Penganga 23,000 ha
7. In line with the reassessed availabilityof water, the Majalgaon command area was reduced to 58,000 ha; lining of distributary canals with a capacity less than 3 m3/s was deferred, the rural road component was reduced to 344 km and the four SDDs were dropped as these were deemed impractical,non-replicable and would duplicatethe research being done by universities. Instead of the SDDs, CADA concentrated on pilot area proportional rotational water supply operations. Several covenants were revised. These related to economic rehabilitation,designation of a Dam Safety Review Panel (DSRP) to review all the dams and related structures in the project area, preparation of Environmental Management Plans (EMPs) for each command area under the project and the establishmentof WUAs which would recover water charges. 3
8. The restructured project included: (a) completion of the ongoing Jayakwadi and Majalgaon irrigation and drainage works, includingassociated rural roads which were part of the original project; (b) completion of irrigation and drainage works and associated rural roads on four additional subprojects - Kukadi (100,000 ha), Bhima (113,000 ha), Krishna (81,000 ha), and Upper Penganga (139,000 ha) which were previouslypartially developedunder MCIP II; and (c) buildings, vehicles and equipment, studies, training, dam safety measures, economic rehabilitation,rural roads and bridges, and economic development.
9. The changes at restructuring for the Jayakwadicommand were as follows: (a) the area covered by the main and link drains was reduced to about 72,000 ha and about 5,500 ha respectively;(b) sub- surface drains to cover an area of about 13,500 ha were added; (c) the rural roads program was reduced to 310 km; (d) field channel protection was reduced to about 93,000 ha; (e) on-farm development (OFD) coverage was increased to 88,000 ha; (f) the SDDs were replaced by the Pilot Proportional Distributaries(PPDs) covering an area of 620 ha; (g) the land shaping area was reduced to about 32,000 ha; (h) constructionof 572 km of service roads; (i) establishmentof about 10 WUAs; (j) constructionof buildings; and (k) modernizationof the Paithan left and right bank canals including distributaries were added.
10. Changes at restructuringunder the Majalgaon commandwere as follows:(a) the constructionof about 150 km of service roads; (b) the main and link drainagenetwork was reduced to 15,500 ha; (c) the rural road network was reduced to 34 km covering the total command area of 58,000 ha; (d) field channelprotection and on-farm developmentworks to cover the entire command area of 58,000 ha; (e) the SDDs were replaced by the development of about 30 minor canals in accordance with the principles of volumetric water supply, and about 30 WUAs were to be established on these minor canals; (f) land shaping was reduced to about 6,200 ha; (g) operationof the Majalgaon main canal up to km 100, and the Ganga Masala branch canal over its entire length, both on the principles of dynamic regulation; (h) technical support to farmers and a preliminary promotion program to cover the command area of about 58,000 ha; and (i) updating the baseline socio-economicsurvey for PAPs and their economic rehabilitation.
11. Works and Services. For the four new subprojects these were to include: (i) modernizationof six dams, 3 powerhouses and a tank; (ii) constructionof about 468 km of the main and branch canal system; (iii) upgrading the existing canal system for about 225,000 ha; (iv) partial lining of the distribution network for about 62,000 ha; (v) on-farm development works including main and link drains on about 85,000 ha and sub-surfacedrainage for about 15,900 ha;; (vi) construction of 144 km of service roads, 380 km of rural roads and 23 bridges; (vii) pilot operation land shaping and conjunctiveuse covering an area of about 4,000 ha; (viii) constructionof buildings; (ix) establishment of about 10 water user associations;and (x) carrying out baseline socio-economicsurveys for the preparation of the ERP for PAPs.
12. Traiinng. Equipment. TechnicalAssistance and Studies. The restructured project provided for: (a) training, at WALMI (Aurangabad) and the State Agricultural Universities, in water management and agricultural practices for farmer leaders in the project area, as well as CADA and ID staff, (b) technicalassistance to project officersfor advisoryservices; and (c) special studies in the areas of canal automation, radio telecommunication networks, volumetric water supply, farmers' water rights, environmentalimpact assessment (EIA) and EMP, and preparationof future projects. The project also provided for: (a) construction equipment; (b) vehicles for construction and O&M; (c) radio communicationsystems for the control and monitoringof canal systems; (d) agro-meteorologicaland hydrometeorologicalnetworks; (e) provision of office technology for management, monitoring and 4 evaluation of the project; and (f) strengthening of Maharashtra's hydrological measurement and analysis capabilitiesthrough: (i) the provisionof equipment; and (ii) the carrying out of a study in the Paithan catchment area of the GodavariBasin.
Evaluation of Project Objectives
13. The project's main objective was clear and appropriate. However, the design of the project did not adequatelyestimate water availabilityand the practicabilityof carrying out land shaping with heavy earth moving equipment. In addition,it did not focus, nor sufficientlyclearly define and make adequate financial provision for, critical activities such as water management, agriculturalproduction practices and sharing of O&M responsibilities between the GOM and farmers, necessary to trigger a self- sustained process of agriculturalgrowth. This was clearly demonstratedby the need to restructure the project.
14. The SDDs proposed under the project were designed accordingto the warabandi system, which was not implementablein locations where the Shejpali system is used. Accordingly,these had to be dropped. A concerted effort by the Bank and project managementwould have been required to ensure success. The design and implementationprocedures of the civil works program were relatively simple. However the SAR targets were unrealistic, given earlier experience on budgetary allocations and problems associated with project management (delays in posting of senior staff).
15. The restructured project, besides the introduction of measures to adjust the environmentaland economic rehabilitationcomponents to meet the guidelinesand policies of the GOM and the Bank, in- line with the India Irrigation Subsector Review (Report No. 9518-IN of 20 December 1991), appropriately included new features and financing to correct the identified deficiencies. The componentswere well defined and implementationtargets were realistic. Appropriately,emphasis was placed on environmentalsustainability.
16. According to the SAR, farmer organizationswould be set up at three levels' Outlet Committees (OCs) at the level of chaks; Water UtilizationCommittees (WUCs) at the level of minors; and Canal Advisory Committees (CACs). No targets for these were set. At restructuring,targets (specified in the legal agreement) were set for the formationof WUAs, and no emphasis was placed on the upper tier (above WUAs) and the lower tier (chaks).
B. ACHIEVEMENTOF PROJECT OBJECTIVES
Overall Achievement
17. The project ran into delays soon after inceptionin the appointmentof key personnel and funding. From the start emphasis was placed by the ID on construction with little attention being given to capturing optimal benefits from the infrastructurecreated (irrigatedcropped area being much less than the available area) and to the sustainabilityof the investment (inadequate maintenance and a limited number of effective WUAs throughout the project command areas). Of the 210,170 ha of command area provided with irrigationfacilities at the end of December 1996, the irrigated cropping intensity at credit closure has averaged 36 pcercent compared to the appraisal target of 175 percent at full development. Hence, limited progress has so far been made in achieving the main objective of increasing agricultural production and farmers' incomes. This result is similar to the findings of 5
Maharashtra Water UtilizationProject Completion Report (PCR)6 where in the Jayakwadi command the seven-year average cropping intensityduring project implementationwas 20 percent compared to the SAR target of 113 percent.
Physical Achievements
18. Except for the construction of major works, which considerably exceeded SAR targets (see Table 5), progress on other componentsof the project has been below expectation.ERP, environment, special studies and technical assistancehave shownlittle progress due to excessive start-up delays.
19. Irrigation Works. The total culturable command area (CCA) of Jayakwadi and Majalgaon to be achieved under MCIP mIwas estimated at 146,000 ha in the SAR. The four subprojects included at restructuringaccount for a further 81,800 ha making a project total of 227,800 ha. By December 31, 1996, irrigation potentials were created through the completionof the main and distributionnetworks and OFD works to the six subprojects totalling210,170 ha, 92 percent of the target.
CulturableCommand Areas and Areas Providedwith IrrigationInfrastructure Area Provided with Total ConunandArea Irrigation Faclities Subproject ConmuandArea Under MCIP HI at Credit Closure
Jayakwadi 200,000 88,000 84,600 Majalgaon 100,000 58,000 55,530 Kukadi 100,000 20,000 18,470 Bhima 113,000 28,000 20,400 K(nshna 81,000 10,800a/ 11,480 UpperPengarga 139,000 23,000 19,650 Total 733,000 227,800 210,170
a/ Accordingto the GOM'scomments dated May 1997on the draftICR, the commandarea of the Krishnaproject was increased from 10,800 ha to 14,000ha. Thishad notbeen brought to the attentionof the ICRmission.
20. The overall progress on dams and canal works implementedby the IrrigationDepartment I (ID I) is estimated at about 90 percent. The progress on QFD works, implemented by the Irrigation Department 11(ID I1), on Majalgaon,Kukadi, and Bhima varied between 87 percent and 100 percent, while on the remaining subprojects(Krishna and Upper Penganga) the progress was unsatisfactory(60 percent). Physical targets and achievementsare summarized in Table 5.
21. Buildings. Buildings in Kukadcand Krishna have been completedwhile the progress at Bhima was 50 percent.
22. Rural and Service Roads. At the time of the ICR mission in December 1996, about 678 km of service roads, 776 km of rural roads and 6 bridges were completed7 .
6 ReportNo. 125/91CP-IND 90 CR, FAO/WorldBank CooperativeProgram dated 28 October1991, Credit 1383-INand Loan 2308-IN. 7 Accordingto GOM(their comments of May 1997on the draftICR) 11 of the 22 bridgeswere completed by 31 December1996. 6
23. Water Users' Associations. A total of 193 associationshave been registered (276 percent of the target of 70 after restructuring) and irrigation infrastructure has been handed over to 71 associations. The associations registered,and the ones which have accepted responsibilityfor all O&M activities, are not necessarily in the subproject command areas, which was not a requirement of the restructuredproject.
24. Improved Water Management. Under the original project, the Pilot Proportional Distributaries(PPDs) equipped and operated on the area proportionalsystem of rotationalwater supply (RWS) were established (this replaced the SDDs) to demonstrate the comparativebenefits over the existing Shejpali system. In 1990, plans were finalized and implementationcommenced, but delays occurred due to the reformulationexercise.
25. The Pilot Project for Dynamic Regulation (PPDR) began in 1994 and was to be commissionedin late December 1996, financedjointly by IDA and a French grant. PPDR included the Majalgaon main canal commanding 58,000 ha, the Ganga Masala branch canal (commanding about 11,000 ha) and minor canals (2 lined and 2 unlined taking off the branch canal commanding about 2,000 ha). All civil works and installationof equipment have been completed. The sophisticated system is operationalfor regulatingthe main and branch canals. Maintenanceof the computer program used to dynamicallyregulate the main and branch canals is still dependent on the French consultants who have installed the system.
26. In the opinion of the mission, the pilot activitiesshould be continued for at least three years to test the feasibility and sustainabilityof canal automation in India, given its potential importance for raising the efficiencyof water use. The assistance of the internationalconsultant should be withdrawn before the end of the pilotperiod extension.
27. Dam Safety Review Panel (DSRP). Under the origmal project, the Dam Safety Directorate was to inspect and report on the condition of the Majalgaon Dam once a year and the Paithan Dam once every five years. The Directorate fulfilled these obligations as required. In 1990, the Bank requested the GOM to establish an independentpanel, and reiterated in early 1994, its request for the formationof the panel as per the Bank's guidelines. The GOM eventuallyestablished an independent DSRP in May 1994. A one-time report of the DSRP was submitted in June 1995 and the panel's report was accepted by the GOM in August 1996. The safety measures includingrehabilitation works on all 9 dams of the project, were estimated to cost about Rs.960 million. Iniplementation of the program has been initiated.
28. Agriculture. Two new command area agriculturaldistricts were to be established. These were to be staffed by additional Village Extension Workers (VEWs) so as to raise the ratio of VEWs to farmers from 1:1,200 to 1: 800. However, no progress was made in this direction because of the inadequacy of the proposal. The SAR made provision for intemational agricultural consultants to prepare an agriculturalcomponent for on-farm demonstrations,adaptive research and training of staff and farmers. There was apprehensionon the part of the AD to get involved and no consultants were contracted. Apart from the technical assistance, no other funds for agriculture were included in the SAR. In the restructured project, the lessons learnt during the initial years of MCIP Im were capitalized upon. Although progress was initiallyquite slow, eventually a specific program of work was agreed by the ID, AD and the Bank. Consequently,funds were provided by GOM through the project to conduct about 30,618 crop irrigation demonstrationsites (for which an achievement of 43 percent was realized), 3,947 drip and sprinkler irrigation demonstration sites were established (43 percent achievement), 52 multipurpose Agricultural Technology Dissemination Centers were built 7
(100 percent achievement)and 223 training programs were conducted for the AD staff and farmers against a target of 131. However, against an approved outlay of about Rs. 190 million, 56 percent achievementwas obtained by October 31, 1996, with an anticipated achievementof 83 percent up to December 31, 1996.
29. Areas benefiting from increased canal water are much below expectations mostly due to inadequate water supply during the project constructionperiod. However, it is encouragingthat where canal water is being received, cropping intensities are mcreasing as well as crop yields. Mission findings mdicate that in areas where adequate water is available,the speed of switchingfrom rainfed to irrigated agriculture and realizing irrigationpotential is faster than was predicted in the SAR and in the feasibility studies of the four additional subprojects (seven years as opposed to twelve years). However, shortages of water appear to be restricting the expansion of actual areas irrigated and crop yields. There is some evidence of rechargingof groundwater in the project areas and the number of dugwells in all project command areas has increased during MCIP JR. There has been a positive agricultural production impact to the increased extension. It is important that the agricultural componentis continuedfor at least 2 to 3 years more in order to consolidatethe efforts so far made.
30. Economic Rehabilitation8. Affected persons to be economically rehabilitated under the restructured project were not affected by MCIP III itself, but by dams which had been constructed under previous projects By the time MCIP m started, the affectedpersons had alreadybeen resettled, but unsatisfactorily The purpose of the EconomicRehabilitation Program (ERP) carried out under the restructured project was mainly to rehabilitate these affected persons. The Maharashtra Project Affected Act, 1986, laid down clear policies and rules for rehabilitation,which Maharashtra agreed to follow under the project. The Agreement Amending the Development Credit Agreement stated that the economic rehabilitationwill be accordingto this Act. At the time of restructuringthe conditionsfor implementing this Act were discussed and agreed upon. These included the preparation of: (a) a house-to-housesocio-economic survey to be carried out m all project schemes except Jayakwadi which had been resettled much earlier, and (b) on the basis of the survey, Maharashtra was to frame a specific economic rehabilitationimplementation plan of the restructuredproject. Whereas the socio-economic surveys were completed, Maharashtra took much time in issuing the project specific plan. Finally, a Government Order was issued in January 1996 with a detailed economic rehabilitation policy and action plan which was endorsed by the Bank. Out of the four activities envisaged under this component,only civic amenitieshave commenced. So far 18 percent of physical progress (162 out of 905 new facilitiesto be created) and 33 percent of financialprogress (about Rs. 125 millionout of Rs. 378 million) have been achieved. Implementationof the other three components (housing, irrigation and income generation)is yet to commence. Funds earmarkedfor 1996/97for these three activitiesare yet to be placed with the DivisionalCommissioners. Though 70 percent (10 out of 14 positions) of the professionalstaff created for exclusiveimplementation of this program are in position,the key position of Deputy Secretary is yet to be filled. Updating the list of eligible PAPs for individual schemes, and recruitment of non-governmentorganizations (NGOs) for the implementationof income generation activities,have not been completed. No effortshave been made so far to finalize the terms of reference (TOR) and appointmentof consultantsfor Monitoringand Evaluation(M&E).
31. Training. A total of 125 courses were conductedat the Water and Land Management Institute, Maharashtra for ID and AD staff, farmers, WUA office bearers and NGOs. Some 2,482 staff and 2,844 farmers and NGO representativeswere trained under the program. WALMI is fully equipped with modern facilities to carryout the training envisaged under the project. Training staff have several
8 SeeAppendix 4 for detailsof the ERP. 8 years of experience in the required disciplines. To date the main thrust has been on the training of project staff on all engineering aspects and to a lesser extent on O&M. With regard to WUAs, the emphasis was to train the office bearers on all aspects of financeand managementand to a lesser extent in O&M. The courses were mainly through classroom lectures with a minimallevel of field work. However, between Apnl 1993 and November 1996, 130 ID staff were given training in canal maintenance by WALMI. In addition, 226 graduate and diploma engmeers received five months intensivetraining at WALMI, which includedcanal maintenanceas one of its topics.
32. Since 1994/95regular trainingin water managementwas carried out at the Rahuri and Parbhani State AgriculturalUniversities. Attendanceby ID staff fell below targets. The foreign training program was not realized smce availablefunds were diverted for other purposes. Farmers' training, including rallies and educationaltours, are reported to have been undertakenby AD staff.
33. Equipment, Technical Assistance and Studies. The project financed equipment and vehicles for construction,O&M, radio communication,agro-meteorological and hydrometeorologicalnetworks, and office technology for management, monitonng and evaluation. The restructured project also provided technical assistance for the preparation of: (a) a water resources management plan in the Godavari nver basin; (b) plans of operationand mamtenancefor all project schemes; (c) environmental impact assessment and plans for project schemes located in the Godavari and Krishna River basins; (iv) a Management Information System (MIS); and (v) socio-economic surveys for the economic rehabilitationof PAPs. All equipment and vehicles have been procured after some delay. However, except for the MIS and socio-economicsurveys of PAPs, all other studies could not be completed by credit closure due to considerabledelays in recruiting national,and particularly,international consultant firms.
34. The studies included in the onginal project and not connected to the reformulation exercise were completed prior to restructuring. The status of all studies, includingthose added at the time of restructuring,is shown in Table 7.
Objectives of Sector Policies
35. Sector policies relevant to the project include: (a) optimization of the full potential of the availablewater in the reservoirs; (b) water managementof the system from the reservoir to the farms; (c) implementationof an effective and practical O&M program, including sharing of physical and financial aspects between GOM and farmers; (d) increasing of water charges to a level commensurate with actual O&M costs; (e) increasingirrigated agriculturalproduction; (f) the ERP of PAPs; and (g) environmentallysustainable irrigation infrastructure. These sector policies remain to be translated into concrete action in the future since only limited success has been achieved in MCIP HI towards their implementation. Water charges have been increased but not to levels compatible with the cost of O&M. The functioningof a small number of WUAs is improving and the coordinationbetween AD and ID staff has improved. These are positive signs for the development of irrigated agriculture in Maharashtra.
Institutional Development Objectives
36. A workable managementsystem for O&M is now being evolved with the organizationof WUAs and the sharing of responsibilitiesbetween the GOM and farmers. At the time of restructuring, it was decided to focus efforts on the formationof WUAs at the level of minors. This decision was taken as a result of: (a) the poor results that the ID was experiencingin the formationof OCs in the MCIP HI 9 project; and (b) the positive results which were emergingfrom the pilot efforts of forming WUAs with the assistance of NGOs in the Mula command of the Maharashtra Water UtilizationProject (MWUP). The rnission visited a number of WUAs and it was encouraging to note that in a number of cases, where members of the associations had been trained through the project, and where turnover of infrastructureto farmers had occurred, good results are being achieved. These WUAs were effectively managing the distribution of water among their members, successfully collecting water fees and controllingtheir associations' finances, as well as organizingthe desilting and cleaningof canals. The principle of volumetric supply had been successfullyintroduced. Although OCs were dropped at the time of restructuringbecause they were not functioning,it is desirable to maintain these committees in an informal manner at the outlet level to facilitatethe distributionof water among all outlet users. The mission has concludedthat the project has successfullypiloted a small number of WUAs consolidating the principlesof participatoryirrigation management (PIM) which were initiatedin the Mula scheme of the MWUP.
37. A critical factor is a concern for maintenance,which is still not fully appreciated by field staff and farmers The training programs have improved the capabilityof high and mid level staff of ID and AD, but have had little impact on field staff. One of the observationsmade in the supervisionreports was that ID staff concentratedmore on constructionactivities and the expansion of irrigationnetworks well beyond the availablewater resources, at the expense of the already developed areas which are not serviced with a reliable and adequate water supply. The objective of the restructuringwas to address this point. However, this perspective appears to be contmuing. Studies of the Godavari and Krishna River basins would improve the operationof existingschemes and assist in the preparation of future projects.
38. Data collection and reporting improved considerably as a result of the establishment of the MIS. Experience gained from the constraints confronted in the coordination of the project's implementing agencies will be valuable in improving institutional aspects of future projects.
Economic Rate of Return
39. The re-estimated ERRs at project completion,compared to those at appraisal and restructuring, are tabulated below. The underlyingassumptions and informationsupporting the analyses are given in Appendix 2.
Economic Rate of Return (ERR) Subproject (%)
SAR Restructuring ICR Jayakwadi 29 15 Majalgaon 13 5 Kukadi 5 5 Bhima 17 -2 Krishna 18 5 UpperPenganga 9 -2 Overall Project 7
40. It should be emphasised that, due to the limited data available to the ICR mission relating to water availability, a number of uncertainties had to be incorporated in the re-estimated ERR computations, especially relating to future irrigated areas, so that the results should therefore be 10 considered as indicative. However, poor initial project design and slow project start-up, significantly reduced benefiting areas, cost overruns, funding constraintsfor O&M, and focus on constructionat the detriment of system performance and maintenance, are consistent with low project performance. Consequently,the reduction in the ERRs comparedto those estimated at appraisal and restructuringare not unexpected/ The project has, however, had a positive impact on agricultural production and farmers' incomes in the areas where water has reached. Similar results were obtained in the PCR of the MWUP 9. The overall project is estimated by the missionto have an ERR of 7 percent. The higher ERR of the Jayakwadi subproject is due to the fact that primarily only OFD works were completed during MCIP mII;earlier investmentwas treated as sunk costs and thereforeignored.
Sensitivity Analysis
41. Potential economic benefits are not expected to be realized as foreseen in the SAR and at the time of restructuring. Major reasons for this are: (a) inadequate water availabilityduring the project constructionperiod; (b) lower agriculturalbenefits; and (c) higher costs per additionalhectare irrigated, than were anticipated. Sensitivitytests were carried out to examine the impact of: (a) increasingfuture areas irrigated where it was assumed that from the year 2000/2001 100 percent irrigation intensity would be obtained; (b) increasing agricultural production (+25 percent and +50 percent); and (c) reducing project costs (-25 percent and -50 percent). Details are provided in Appendix 2.
42. For all of the sensitivitytests carried out, only the Jayakwadi subproject yielded an ERR above 12 percent (the ERR ranged from 15 percent to 26 percent). The ERR of the Majalgaon subproject increased to 14 percent when irrigation intensities were raised to 100 percent from the year 2000/2001 as against lower percentages foreseen by the ICR mission and 175 percent foreseen in the SAR In all other cases tested in Majalgaon and in the other four subprojects (Upper Penganga, Kukadi, Bhima and Krishna), the ERRs remained below 12 percent, ranging from -0.7 percent to 10 percent. ERRs of all subprojects were more sensitive to reductions in project costs than to the samne percentage increases in agriculturalbenefits.
Farm Incomes
43. Incomes estimated in the SAR and by the ICR mission for representativefarms under without- project rainfed conditions are compared to those under with-project irrigated conditions at full development in first quarter 1997 prices. For Jayakwadi,farm incomes are re-estimated by the ICR mission to increase from about Rs.12,600 to Rs.58,700 compared with about Rs.23,000 to Rs.85,700 at appraisal. In the case of Majalgaon, farm incomes are re-estimated to increase from about Rs.11,900 to Rs.69,300 compared with an increase from Rs.11,300 to Rs.115,800 at appraisal. Farm incomes at the time of re-evaluationfor the other four subprojectsincluded at the time of restructuring are detailed in Appendix 2. These range from about Rs.6,600 to Rs. 12,600 under present rainfed conditions,to between Rs.49,200 to Rs.69,300 under fully developedirrigated conditions.
C. MAJOR FACTORSAFFECTING THE PROJECT
44. Local Currency Depreciation. The depreciationof the Rupee against the SDR had a major effect on the project enablingfour additionalsubprojects to be includedin MCIP Im.
9 ERRsestimated in the SARand PCR respectively were: Jayakwadi (47% and 7%);Puma (36% and -16%);and Khadakwasla(19% and 5%). 11
45. Implementation Record and Delays. The non-completionof some major construction works (aqueducts, regulators and drainage crossings, canal excavation in rock, and lining) was caused by: (a) objections to acquisition of land and prolonged litigation; (b) objection by villagers to blasting operations in close proximityto their villages; (c) shortage of blasting materials for rock excavation; (d) delay in the approval by GOM to go ahead with the construction of Hanga Aqueduct; and (e) unexpected delays with the contractor working on the constructionof the Ghod Aqueduct under the Kukadi subproject and the resultantdelay in re-mobilization.
46. Factors GenerallySubject to Government Control. The original project was initiallydelayed two years, primarily due to the late appointmentof the Chief AdministratorID II (CADA), other key positions, and insufficientbudgetary allocations. In 1986 (one year after start) GOM, advised by the FAO/CP and with the concurrence of the Bank, started a reformulationexercise to improve project performance whlch was affected by: (a) problems in project design associated with availability of water, drainage, SDDs and agricultural development;(b) poor coordinationbetween implementing agencies and untimely release of funds, particularlyduring the first three years; and (c) inadequate budgetary allocationfor O&M works.
47. Factors Generally Subject to Implementing Agency Control. The following factors had a direct influenceon project progress by the implementationagencies. For ID I: (a) overestimationof the water available10; (b) slow procurement particularly on LCB contracts; (c) unsatisfactoryquality standards in concrete works of major structures and canal lining; (d) concentrationon construction while neglecting the maintenanceof completed infrastructure;(e) delays in repairing completed works prior to handing over to 1D II; (f) disagreementwith the Bank on conditionsin the major works tender documents; (g) conflictbetween ID I and ID II in taking over completed project works for operation; (h) weak agriculture input during the period of the original project; and (i) low priority given to the implementationof the ERP component and ELA,EMP, and POM studies. Most of the construction- related issues which impeded progress initiallywere resolved in the latter years of the project resulting in satisfactory ratings for constructionof major constructionworks. ID II was responsible for OFD works, O&M of the operational phase of completed works, the formation of WUAs and the implementation of the water managementprogram.
48. The AD had practicallyno input in the original project. This was due to the non-provision of funds by GOM and the definition of a program of work. A conflict between ID and AD appears to have been the main reason for the cancellationof the SDD componentwhich was elaboratelydesigned during the preparation phase of the original project. Delays in road works were mainly due to disagreement between ID, PWD and the Bank on the reduction of the scope of work. After much delay the issue was resolved by the PWD agreeingto undertake some of the roadwork with their own funds. Delays in completing the socio-economic surveys, the preparation of the resettlement and rehabilitation plan, and the GOM's slow issuance of a Government Order (GO) were contributing factors to the unsatisfactorystatus of the ERP component. Poor progress of the ERP componentwas also due to: (a) an earthquake in the State of Maharashtra and the Bombay riots which caused a diversion of funds in the early 1990s; (b) untimelyresolutions to decide on the implementingagencies for the four activities;(c) lack of effectivecoordination; (d) delay in recruiting NGOs; and (e) failure to appoint a monitoringand evaluation agency. These constraints were addressed and resolved towards
10 This is a debatable issue, since simulation studies have indicated sufficient water in all schemes except Majalgaon. However,scheme performance data collectedby the ID during MCIP III suggeststhat there couldbe a problemof water availabilityespecially in the three subprojectsin the GodavariRiver basin (Jayakwadi,Majalgaon and UpperPenganga). 12 the end of December 1996 by the issuance of a rehabilitation policy and action plan for persons affectedby previous projects.
49. Project Cost and Financing. The project costs, inclusive of physical and price contingencies, were estimated at appraisal at US$322.7 million (Rs.3,872 million)in 1985 prices. An IDA credit of SDR 164.2 million (US$160 million equivalent)was to finance about 50 percent of the total costs and the remaining expenditures were to be met by GOM. At the time of restructunng, the total project cost, including physical and pnce contingencies, was re-estimated at US$310 million (Rs.8,622 million) in 1992 prices and the IDA credit at SDR 132.2 million (US$178 million equivalent). At this time, SDR 32 million was cancelled from the credit and retroactive financing remained at SDR 9 million11. The new credit amount was to finance 57 percent of the revised total project costs. Actual project expenditure up to December 31, 1996 is estimated at US$368.3 million (Rs.10,011 in current Rupees), and included the estimated cost of the balance works programmed up to March 31, 2000, at US$438.3 million (Rs 12,471.50 millionin current Rupees)'2 . Including the cost of the balance works, the actual project cost is 136 percent and 141 percent of the SAR and restructured project cost estimates, respectively. The cost overrun is in part due to the devaluation of the Rupee against the US$, which allowed an expansion of constructionworks included in the project. The credit was fully disbursed on February 20, 1997 at an amount of US$187.7 million, representing 51 percent of the estimated expenditure up to December 31, 1996 and 40 percent of the estimated final project cost includingthe balance works.
50. The loan disbursements by category of expenditure were as follows: works 95.2 percent; equipment, vehicles and materials 1.9 percent; incremental staff salaries 0.5 percent; consultancy services and training 2.4 percent.
D. PROJECT SUSTAINABILITY
51. Sustaining mcreased agriculturalproduction and farmers' incomes depends on several factors, including: (a) availabilityof adequate water and the management of this water; (b) effective operation and maintenanceof the headworks, irrigationand drainage systems; and (c) viable and effective WUAs and the formationof scheme-leveland basin-levelcommittees.
52. As at December 31, 1996, irrigation facilitieshave been provided for about 92 percent of the MCIP m project commandareas. The balance area depends on the completionof the major aqueducts, rock excavation of a limited reach of main canals and the OFD works within the reach of the incomplete main canals. As the availabilityof water is limited, GOM with its own funds should first complete all works on the main and branch canals which supply water to the areas where OFD works are completed
53. Limited availabilityof water is reflected in the shortfallsin the irrigated cropped areas compared to the areas prepared for irrigation in the period 1988 through 1996 (see Appendix 3, Table 10). Records indicate an average irrigation intensity of 36 percent (Appendix 3, Table 8). Concems regarding water management up to the chak outlet resulted initially in the implementationof pilot proportional distributaries (PPDs), and the one at Majalgaon was further improved by introducing measures to provide the control by Dynamic Regulation (PPDR). So far the results have been
" TheBank rejected a requestfrom GOM to increaseretroactive financing to US$15million.
12 SeeAppendix 3, Table1. 13 promising in that optimum use of the water availablefrom the reservoirs could be achieved through effective control of flows particularlyin the main canals. However, the success of the operation will hinge criticallyon the maintenanceof the minor canals and the developmentof a system which can be operated and maintainedwithout external support. A minor canal completedin about 1994 is showing signs of deterioration due to the lack of maintenance, but this could also reflect problems in construction.Several temporary rock boulder checks were observed at chak outlets, control gates were damaged,beds were silted up and canals, especiallyat the tail reaches, were overgrown. Overall, there is doubt whether the expected increase in production would be achieved and, even if it is, it seems likely that poor maintenanceof the irrigation and drainage infrastructure would result in the increases not being sustained. Project sustainabilitymust thereforebe considered uncertain.
54. A critical factor to ensure sustainability is an effective and viable maintenance program particularly in areas where farmers are responsible for maintenance. As yet, WUAs formed a few years back are not aware of their maintenanceresponsibilities for structures, apart from the desilting and cleaning of canals, nor are they aware of what maintenance of structures within and below the minors'3 entails. The inculcationof an O&M culture in the lower level ID field staff has not been achieved. It is also a concern that training programs have not focused sufficientlyon O&M. Funds for O&M of the network to be maintamedby the government are based on outdated norms and require estimatingon needs-based assessments. Records indicate that such an assessment has been made (a few years back). However, GOM recogmze that present levels of O&M funds are inadequate and in their Ninth Five-Year Plan they have proposed increases in O&M funding in line with the actual requirementsof individualirrigation schemes. This proposal will need to be translated into an effective action program which would need to take into account turnover to farmers of maintenance responsibilities.
E. PERFORMANCEOF THE BANK
55. Identification and Preparation. The Bank was closely involvedin earlier projects where many of the problems experienced in this project were identified. The PCR for MCIP I (dated November 1984) drew attention to the slow uptake of irrigationby farmers and considerableefforts were made to improve this in the MWUP (Credit 1383-IN and Loan 2308-IN). Despite this, the problem persisted mainly due to the unreliabilityof the water supply to farmers' fields. The weaknesses in the design of MCIP El[ identified in the second year of implementation,specifically on the drainage network, the SDDs and agriculturaldevelopment, could have been avoided if the Bank had made a greater effort to supervise their preparation The Bank became heavily involved in the reformulationexercise and in finalizing the scope of the restructuredproject. It was responsiblein arrangmg the services of FAO/CP to provide advice and assistance during the reformulation exercise, and for providing an effective package at restructuring.Bank (Headquarters and Resident Mission) staff worked closely with ID and AD staff of the GOM and with GOI staff on policy matters. Given the Bank's awareness that O&M funds were allocated on outdated norms and that some works required rehabilitation, a special provision for canal upgrading was made.
56. Appraisal. The performance of the Bank in appraising the project was deficient. This judgement is based on the need, which arose after a year, to reformulate the project. Despite the statement in the SAR that ample water was available, there was insufficient. The project was
13 The missionrecognizes that underthe restructuredproject, all structuressuffering from deferred maintenance wereto be repairedbefore turnover to WUAs. However,these works, which were to be fundedby the project, werenot carriedout apparently because of a lackof cooperationand coordination between the ID11 and ID I. 14 reformulated over a three year period and finalized by a supervision mission m close co-operation between Bank staff, consultantsand GOM. The measures taken were adequate to prepare an effective package.
57. Supervision. Twelve supervisions (the last in November/December 1996) were carried out during the period of the original and restructured project not including the period 1991/92 through 1993 when actions by the Bank and the GOM were mainly centered on restructuringthe project. All supervision missions were manned by specialistsin the required disciplines and comprised a mix of Bank Headquarters and Resident Mission staff and consultants. In the early years, the continuous pressure applied by the Bank on the posting of key staff to the CADA organization resulted in an improvement in management performance. Problems were identified and detailed in supervision reports and, as most of the problems persisted and continuedto plague the early stages of the original project, the Bank realized that the project had to be restructured. However, because of diverging views within the Bank on whether the project shouldbe restructured or the credit cancelled, the restructuring process dragged along for quite some time. When it was finally decided that the project could be restructured, and that the savings resulting from the devaluationof the rupee against the dollar could be used for financingthe completionof the ex-MCIP II subprojects, it took another two years to prepare the feasibility studies and to complete the restructuring process. During the restructured project implementation,the Bank issued a threat to suspend disbursementsm October 1995 because the ERP component had not been initiated by the Borrower. At credit closure implementationof measures specific to the environmentalstudies and ERP are in their infancy14 . In the identificationof inadequate budget allocations, quality of civil works, and the supervision of the improved water management component, specificallythe PPDR, the Bank's involvement was very useful. However, supervision missions concentratedon ongoing civil works, and did not pay enough attention to the maintenanceof completed works for which a special provision had been made. Correspondencerelated to O&M in project files refer to an O&M report submitted to the Bank in compliance with a condition m the project agreement. No positive action or follow up was taken on the findings and recommendationsin the report. As regards WUAs, achievementnumbers are detailed but the quality and performance of these associations, and actions to be taken to resolve problems, are not specified. Though supervision missions reported the areas which were being irrigated comparedto areas made available for irrmgation, no specificaction was taken.
F. PERFORMANCEOF THE BORROWER
58. Preparation. ID prepared the originalproject taking account of commentsin the Bank's Aide- Memoire dated 19 May, 1984, and the findingsof the PCRs for MCIP I and II. GOM, advised and assisted by FAO/CP, with monitoring and guidance by the Bank, prepared the restructured project. The four new subprojectswere prepared by internationallyrecruited consultants It was agreed that the preparation and design of the original project was weak on aspects other than constructionof irrigation works. The restructured project rectified the deficienciesof the originalproject and was also adjusted to conform to the Bank's guidelines and policies on environmental and economic rehabilitation aspects. The Borrower performed well in the preparation, includingdesigns, tendering, procurement, and, with the improvementin project management,the restructuringwas approved by the Bank.
14 Thisthreat resulted in the formulationof an ERP policyin January1996. By this stageit was toolate to havea significantimpact on the implementationof the ERP componentsince most of the outstandingcredit was already committedto completingirrigation works. 15
59. Implementation. Performanceof the Borrower during the first two years of the original project was unsatisfactory. Funds fell well below the required amounts. Management was weak resulting from delays in posting key staff to the project. Tenderingfor major civil works was adversely affected due to GOI and GOM reluctanceto conformto the Bank's guidelines. GOM's decision to defer lining of canals with a capacity less than 3 m3/s, and to also reduce the scope of the rural roads component, were objected to by the Bank and further delayed implementation. While constructionof major civil works was carried out at a slow pace during the originalproject period, with improvementsin project management and funding and procurement issues resolved, durmg the restructured project period the performance of the Borrower improved. However, the Borrower's performance on the institutional development of O&M, environmental studies and preparation of POM was unsatisfactory. Its recognition of the importance of WUAs was highly satisfactory,but too much attention was given to meeting targets for their formation at the detriment of improving their effectiveness and farmer turnover.
60. Quality Control. Performancewas mitiallysubstandard. No special organizationunder the ID was set up although constant and effective checks on major works were required. Supervision missions regularly commented on the deficiencies. During the latter part of the original project, and throughout the restructured project, a separate and independentorganization under the ID was set up. Standard tests were carried out and units of this organizationwere operated on site at major aqueducts, drainage structures and regulators. Strict control measures were exercised. However, there was room for improvement in compaction of concrete to obtain a better finish. The construction of the widely scattered minor OFD structures supervised by ID II were carned out to the required standards. Earthworks, and precast lining in field channels, were however substandard. The precast lining was very poor and signs of severe dilapidationeven after only one year of operation are visible. The ID should explore the possibility of carrying out selective lining with rectangular in situ brick lined construction as it appears that even after several years of experience in the manufacture of precast concrete sections, the product is very substandard The quality of lining of the mam canals is good. Lining by mechanical methods is far superior to that by manual operation in that the finish and constructionjoints are superior. Maintenanceis reduced as constructionjoints are spaced further apart resulting in less weed growth and reduced seepage losses.
61. Operation and Maintenance. Though the responsibilitiesof ID I and U) II appear well defined, in practice there are problems particularlyin the coordinationof their respective activities,and the Borrower's performancein O&M is unsatisfactory. Currentlythe ID is responsiblefor maintaining all irrigation ifrTastructure from the headworks down to the field canal outlets to the chaks. The department is now in the process of handing over to WUAs, the O&M of irrigation systems covering an area of about 400 ha usually coming under mnor canals. Operationalactivities managed by WIUAs are covered satisfactorily. The distributionof water to WUAs on a volumetric basis are also carried out to the required standard. Preventivemaintenance of structures down to the chak level is not carried out due to funding constraints and the lack of an effective maintenanceplan. Periodic maintenance is not carried out on a needs-based assessment. In addition, a lack of either preventive or periodic maintenancehas caused operational infrastructurepreviously managed by the ID I, to deteriorate to a state that rehabilitation is now required. One of the shortcomingsof the Borrower was not to avail itself of the use of the special funds made availableunder the project to rehabilitate or upgrade the irrigation structures during the restructured project implementationperiod. This would have taken care of the maintenanceneeds of completed structures prior to their turn-over to WUAs. In addition, no provisionwas made for the maintenanceof the structures duringthe constructionperiod. 16
62. It was noted that: (a) lined sections are illegally broken to get water onto farms; (b) leaks developedaround outlets and drops, and lack of attentionfor long periods caused the complete collapse of these structures; (c) clearing of shrubs around structures have not been carried out; (d) on fully lined main and branch canals extensive growth of shrubs were observed at constructionjoints left unattended for several years; (e) headwalls of gated structures have been damaged and control arrangementsare damaged or missing; (f) farmers have constructedtheir own check structures thereby causing erosion of the channel bed; (g) field channels recently completed are being destroyed completelyor partially to facilitate mechanical ploughing; and (h) drainage network systems are not maintainedsatisfactorily and have returned to their originalovergrown condition.
63. Studies. The EIA, EMP, POM and river basin studies which should have been completed during the restructured period have only recently commenced. The major reason was inordinate and unjustified delays in recruiting national, and particularly international, consultant firms to carry out these studies.
64. Economic Rehabilitation Component. Although priority was to be given to the implementationof the economicrehabilitation component of PAPs, a plan was finalized as late as early 1996, and to date except for some work on the provisionof civic amenities, compensationpayments to PAPs have not commenced.
65. Progress and Audit Reports. Satisfactoryprogress reports were regularly submitted to the Bank and audit reports were submittedwith minimaldelays.
66. Agricultural Development. During the original project, performance was unsatisfactory. However during the restructuredproject period, the Borrower provided a separate allocationof funds, and this created an interest in AD. The results in terms of increased agricultural production and farmers' incomes have been quite impressive, but need to be consolidatedif they are to have a wider and sustainable impact on agriculturalproduction within the project command areas.
67. The poor utilization of the irrigation potential created can be due to a number of reasons: (a) scarcity of water; (b) project design limitations where the demand for water exceeds the water available; (c) willingnessof farmers to take-up water; (d) farmers' reliance on nver lifts and wells; (e) incompletescheme works preventingwater flow; (f) water managementpractices adopted by ID staff and farmers; and (g) cropping patterns adopted, especially the use of high water demanding crops. Discussions with farmers, WUAs and ID field staff suggested that, especiallyin Majalgaon and Upper Penganga, limited water availabilityhas definitely been restricting the area irrigated and this seems to be the core problem. The reasons why water is not being regularlysupplied to all of the areas where OFD works have been completed as part of the project appear to result from poor and inequitable system management whereby the canals located in the upper reaches of irrigation systems continue to receive more water than those located at the tail end where the project was being implemented. Corrective action, based on the ongoing POM studies, needs to be taken to improve the prevailing situation. Unless this is done, the economic returns of the subprojects will continue to be lower than originallyexpected.
68. Steering Committee. A Steering Committee was to be established and maintained thereafter, for promotion of agricultural development and was to be headed by the Secretary of the ID. The committee was to meet once every three months (the minimum being six months). The first meeting was held in 1985. As the SDDs were dropped, the activities of the committee ceased and in 1991 a new Steering Committee was created to monitor implementationof the project, and specifically the 17
PPDs and the volumetric RWS There is no record of the activitiesof the committee. Judging from the progress of these studies, it is presumed that the committee had some influence on the results obtained. However in matters of O&M, WUAs and overall project coordination,the committee's performance appears to have been unsatisfactory
69. A coordinating committee organized at the level of the GOM's Ministry of Finance has the responsibilityfor the review of all externally financed projects. This high level committee served no useful purpose to resolve the inter-agency issues which impeded implementationof MCIP III. Had there been a project-specificcoordinating committee, chaired by the Secretary of Finance and manned by high level staff of each of the ministriesand departmentsimplementing the project, fimely action to resolve several issues which retarded progress could have been taken.
70. Compliance with Covenants. During the original project all dated covenants at restructuring were substantiallycomplied with, after a delay of several years. At credit closure all dated covenants for the studies and ERP componentincluded in the restructuredproject were not compliedwith.
G. ASSESSMENT OF OUTCOME
71. The project's outcome with respect to civil works (irrigation and roads), and recognition of the importance of WUAs in O&M and irrigation agriculture extension, is rated satisfactory. However in terms of present agricultural achievements, slow progress on economic rehabilitation of the ERP component and the EIA and EMP studies, as well as the poor conditionof the operational irrigation infrastructure, the outcome is unsatisfactory. The reason for the low ranking is the low irrigated cropped areas averagingabout 36 percent at Credit closure, lack of progress in farmer turnover and the less than satisfactoryperformance of ID field staff in providingtechnical supervision to WUAs, and the continuing low funding levels for O&M leading to the need for rehabilitation due to deferred maintenance. In addition, the objectives of equitable, predictable and reliable irrigation supplies to all farms according to the dependable reservoir supply have not been realized in the completed command areas, especiallyin the Godavari basin subprojects.
H. FUTIIRE OPERATION
72. The following actions would be required to complete the project and to ensure it is operated in such a way that its objectives are achieved: (a) completionof remainingmajor civil works required for supplying water to the command areas where OFD works have been completed; (b) a realistic assessment of water supplies from the storage reservoirs and the area that could be irrigated; (c) EIA and EMP studies and the measures to be implemented;(d) the preparation of an effectivePOM; (e) a training program for ID field staff and farmers focused on maintenance activities; (f) a continuing program for organizingviable and effectiveWUAs; (g) provision of adequate budgetary allocationsfor O&M of infrastructureto be maintainedby the ID; (h) completionof the studies; (i) a continuationand consolidationof the agriculturaldevelopment program for three more years; and (j) completion of the ERP component.
73. The GOM has submitted to the World Bank a plan of action for the period January 1997 to March 2000 to complete the balance works on irrigation infrastructure,roads, bridges and agriculture, as well as to complete the studies and the ERP component referred to in the previous para (see Appendix 3, Tables 4 and 6). 18
I. LESSONS LEARNED
74. The lessons learned from the project are classifiedas follows:
Water Resources Availability and Management
(a) Unless the adequacy of water supply and the proper management of the existing systems is ensured, expansion of irrigation facilities to new areas in the CCA of the subprojects should not be taken up.
(b) The financing of future water resources development projects in Maharashtra and elsewhere in India should be preceded by: (i) the issuance of a state water policy defining the state priorities and institutional reforms, (ii) the preparation of a state water management plan defining the availability and management of water resources on a river basin basis; (iii) the identification of the rehabilitation requirements of the existing operational irrigation infrastructure prior to considering further developments; and (iv) the consideration of private sector groundwater development to increase the efficiency of irrigation.
(c) The cropping patterns used in designing the subprojects were quite different from those currently followed by farmers, especially in Majalgaon. Careful consideration is needed as to whether water should be spread thinly over the areas where irrigation infrastructure has been created, as a means of drought protection, or spread over smaller areas to enable development into higher value, thirsty crops. The optimum economic strategy would vary from subproject to subproject depending on the extent and condition of existing irrigation infrastructure, the effectiveness of WUAs in managing water, and on the irrigation water responses and economics of alternative crops.
(d) The usefulness of the Pilot Project for Dynamic Regulation (canal automation) is questionable if the Majalgaon command continues to face water shortages, due to limited water availability and the poor maintenance of the canals (minors and field). Water allocations to this command need to be reviewed within the framework of the Godavari basin water resources management studies and a proper POM needs to be prepared and implemented in order to test the feasibility and sustainability of canal automation in India. Furthermore, the pilot activities should be continued for at least three more years.
Operation and Maintenance
(e) No new projects should be considered for financing unless an effective and sustainable O&M system covering both the construction and operational periods is agreed upon and implemented.
(f) To improve the performance of ID II field staff and WUAs in O&M, it is recommended that: (i) more intensive training (classroom and site) in preventive and periodic maintenance activities be given to ID II field staff and WUAs; (ii) the technical supervision of WUAs should continue even after turnover of 19
maintenance to them; and (iii) an effective supervision schedule for Section Officers, and canal inspectors, be introduced with high level staff monitoring their activities.
(g) Farmer involvement in O&M activities is critical to the sustainability of the project. In order to ensure that O&M activities are performed satisfactorily by farmers, WALMI should carry out more training, particularly on maintenance (preventive and periodic) at farm sites and not only in classrooms, taking groups to areas where severe deterioration is apparent.
Water Users' Associations
(h) The responsibilitiesbetween ID I and ID II for rehabilitatingthe structures turned- over to WUAs needs to be clarified, and the WUAs involved in these activities to ensure a sense of ownership.
(i) The effectiveness of WUAs should be judged not only in terms of financial and water management, but also in terms of their ability to maintain the structures turned-over to them.
(j) The ID II, which is responsible for the formation of WUAs, should recruit either institutionalspecialists or NGOs to work as a team with its own engineering staff while preparing the rehabilitationand O&M plans prior to turn-over of irrigation structures to farmers.
(k) Once WUAs are formed throughout a scheme command,there is a need to form a scheme-level committee which would negotiate the allocation of water at the beginningof each season with the ID Il. Special training will be requwredfor this which should also be taken up under future projects.
IrrigatedAgriculture
(1) In future, the Bank should ensure that, in all new projects providing irrigation facilities to traditionallyrainfed areas, an agricultural component with a separate budget is includedin the project from the outset.
(m) The ongoing extension work in the subproject should continue for another three years to ensure a better uptake of irrigated agriculture by project beneficianes and a more efficientuse of water at the farm level.
Economic Rehabilitation of ProjectAffected Families
(n) An ERP component must be backed by a detailed action plan prior to project implementation. Such components must have a separate allocationof funds and be regularlymonitored. 20
General
(o) The quality of project preparation is a major considerationfor successful project implementation. The review of technical aspects are as important as the other social, economic,and financialaspects.
(p) Complex Bank-financedirrigation projects should include provision for a mid-term review to be carried out by a team of specialistsnot connected with the project, and the monitoringof project implementationshould not be confined to only physical and financial progress, but should also include irrigation performance and impact on agriculturalproduction.
(q) To improve coordinationbetween the various implementingagencies involved in an irrigation project, a project-specific coordination committee, chaired by the Secretary of Finance, is needed. Funds should be allocated directly from the Ministryof Finance to the agency responsiblefor a project component.
(r) Special arrangements need to be agreed with the Borrower prior to project implementation to ensure that national, and particularly international, consultant firms are recruited in a timely manner. 21
PART I: STATISTICALTABLES
Table 1: Summary of Assessments
A. Achievementof obiectives Substantial Partial Negliaible Not Aplicable (4) (4) (4) (4) Macro policies [Z [LJ Fl Sectorpolicies P r] [I Financialobjectives El El [f Institutionaldevelopment l ElI El Physicalobjectives E E EE Povertyreduction El E El Genderissues E E El Othersocial objectives El El E i Environmentalobjectives E] El El Publicsector management E E El Privatesector development l l F] Other(specify) El E E
B. Projectsustainabilitv Likely Unlikely Uncertain (4) (4) (4
Hi~11 C. Bank Rerformance satisfactory Satisfactory Deficient (4) (4) Identification LJA E Preparationassistance El El [f Appraisal E El Supervision El El 22
Ih1h D. Borrowerverformance satisfactor Satisfactorv Deficient
Preparation
Implementation FT]
Covenant compliance Z [W
Operation (if applicable) D [ E
H2thlI Highly E. Assessmentof outcome satisfactor Satisfactorv Unsatisfactorv unsatisfactor El (l E() I01 C: E [2- 23 Table 2: Related Bank Loans/Credits
Loan/credit title Purpose Year of approval Status
Preceding operations
I.Maharashtra Irrigation I Project (Cr. Inigation developmentof the second stage (about 1977 Closed 736-In) 100,000 ha) ofthe Jayakwadi/Majalgaon river basin. PCR issued 1984
2. Maharashtra Irrigation II Project Financing of a five year time slice of a composite 1979 Closed PCR (Cr.954-IN) US$452.9 million programme of six new Irrigation schemes(Bhirna, issued 1987 Krishna, Kukadi, Upper Penganga, Upper Wardha and Warna). Pilot Farmers' Project.
3. Maharashtra Agricultural Extension Agricultural extension. 1981 Project (Cr. 1135-IN)
4. Maharashtra Water Utilization To mcrease effective use of available water in Jayakwadi 1983 Closed PCR Project (Cr.1383-lN, Ln. 2308-IN) and other schemes. issued 1995
5. National Agricultural Extension To strengthen the T&V extension system,to improve the 1984 Closed PCR Project (Cr.1523-lN)US$65.6 million capacity of central agencies to provide training and issued 1994 guidance to the states, and to finance special studies.
6. Second Agricultural Extension To improvethe coverage, depth and quality of extenson 1985 Closed PCR Project (Cr. 1569-IND) US$49.0 services of the States of Haryana, Gujarat, and Kamataka issued 1994 million and to assist the state of Jammu and Kashmir in the improvementand reorgamisationof agricultural extension. 7. Pilot Project for Watershed To: (a) develop, on a watershed basis, and through the use 1983 Closed PCR Developmrentin Ra&fed Areas of appropriate organization and management syste, issued 1995 (Cr.1424-lN) US$31 milhon suitable technologies for increasing and stabilizing crop and forage yields, as well as the production of fuelwood and timber in selected rainfed faunng areas; and (b) defne technical criteria, adnunistrativeprocedures and investmentlimits useful in replicatingwatershed developmentactivities in other areas.
FollomwngOperations
1. National Water Managemntr Project Increase agriculhturaloutput providing farmers with more 1987 Closed PCR (Cr. 1770-lN) US$14 mnillion reliable & predictable irrigated water. issued April 1996
2. National Agricultural Extension Introduce T&V system in Himachal Pradesh and Uttar 1987 Ongoing Project III (Cr.1754-1N) US$85 Pradesh; further strengthen the reorganised agricultural million extension and linkages between extension & research in Assam. 24
Table 3: Project Timetable
Steps in project process | Date planned Date actual/ l ______latest estimate Identification(Executive Project Summary) 1977 1977 Preparation 1983 1983 Appraisal N.A. September1984
Negotiations 1985
Board presentation July 16, 1985 Signing December 5, 1985 Effectiveness March 13, 1986 Preparationfor restructuring 1987 to 1992 Bank's of approvalof the restrucred project June 8, 1993 Projectcompletion June 1990(original) December31, 1996 December31, 1996 (restructured) Credit Closing June 30, 1991 Extendedtwice up to June (original) 1993 December31, 1996 December31, 1996
Table 4: Credit Disbursements: Cumulative Estimated and Actual (US$ million) Financial Years (FY)
FY87 FY88 FY89 FY90 FY91 FY92 FY93 FY94 FY95 FY96 FY97
Appraisal esfimate 25.50 59.30 99.50 133.50 156.40 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0 Actual" 4.22 12.44 17.19 25.77 43.24 51.15 58.46 91.48 128.86 177.99 187.74 Actual as % of 17 21 17 19 28 32 37 57 81 111 117 estimate Dateof final 20 February 1997 disbursement
Sourcedfrom FACT (Financialand Cost Application).Actual disbursements incorporate the SDR 32 millioncancelled from the Credit in 1992. 25 Table 5: Key Indicators for Project Implementation
Esfimate Actual
Key Implementation Indicatorsl/ Unit Restructured Revised Cumulative % of Revised Target Target(1994/95) Achievement Target 1. Culturable Command Area 000 ha 227.S0 227.S0 210.17 92 2. Modernizationof Headworks % 100.00 100.00 99.00 100 3. Main Canals (a) Earthworks 000 m3 18,169.00 19,073.00 17,344.00 91 (b) Lining 000 m2 6,437.00 6,320.00 4,711 00 75 (c) Structures Nos. 894.00 896.00 777.00 87 4. Branch Canals (a) Earthworks 000 m3 4,665.00 4,910.00 4,070.00 83 (b) Lining 000 rn2 2,686.00 2,524.00 1,662.00 66 (c) Structures Nos. 560.00 566.00 400.00 71 5. Distributary Canals (a) Earthworks 000 rn3 15,208.00 15,835.00 14,848.00 94 (b) Lining 000 rn2 3,636.00 3,587.00 3,361.00 94 (c) Structures Nos. 13,891.00 14,719.00 12,967.00 88 6. Minor Canals (a) Earthworks 000 rn3 8,806.00 9,914.00 8,726.00 88 (b) Lining 000 r2 3,256.00 3,251.00 3,123.00 96 (c) Structures Nos. 5,701.00 6,377.00 4,731.00 74 7. Vehicles and Equipment % 100.00 100.00 100.00 100 8. Upgradation of Existing Canals 000 ha 200.00 215.08 163.04 76 9. Main and Link Drains 000 ha 160.75 141.47 141.47 100 10. Sub-Surface Drains 000 ha 17.76 15.89 15.89 100 11. Field Canals 000 ha 230.70 230.37 208.58 91 12. Selective Lining 000 ha 197.98 198.15 164.85 83 13.Land Shaping and ConjunctiveUse 000 ha 50.02 50 02 35.56 71
14. Service Roads 2/ km 1,140.00 866.00 678.00 78 15. Rural Roads 2 km 1,140.00 837.00 776.00 93 16. Bridges Nos. 23.00 21 00 6.00 29 17. Buildings Rs M 77.32 76.72 62.34 81 18. Vehicles and Equipment Rs M 91.16 91.16 73.33 80 19.Water Users Associations Nos. 70.00 70.00 193.00 276 20. Economic Rehabilitation Rs.M not estimated 583.81 0.00 0 21. Civic Amenities RsM not estimated 343.10 139.60 41 22. Studies Rs M 82.52 82.54 31.92 39 26
Estimate Actual Key Implementation Indicators' Unit Restructured Revised Cumulative % of Revised Target Target(1994/95) Achievement Target 23. DSRP-Repairsand Safety Measures RsM 203.50 0.00 0 24. Agricultural Development Rs M 190.00 190.00 157.00 83
" For the main canal systems,the SAR estimated 9 MN3 of earthworks, 12 Mm2 of lining and 1,200 structures. These quantities were exceeded by 400%, 7% and 1,470% respectively. 2 SAR estimated 250 km of service roads and 657 km of rural roads. The quantities were exceeded by 171% and 18% respectively.
Table 6: Key Indicators for Project Operation
(Not Applicable)
Table 7: Studies Included in Project
Purpose as defined Studies & Surveys at appraisal/redefined Status lmpact of study
1. Specially Developed Aimed at triggering a process of Abandoned after the second The pilot area-proportional Distributaries (SDD) agricultural development in the year as deemed impractical, rotational water supply project area non replicable and was (RWS) replaced the study. duplicating existingresearch programmes.
2. Refining Cultural Practices To determine cost effective methods Cancelled as it would No impact and improve farmer income. duplicate research programmes being carried out inthe country.
3 Develop and test fanning To improve farmer income. - do- No impact systems
4. Study of border length To find out the a cost effective Cancelled as being carried out None method of land shaping. at WALMI and the universities.
S. Design and test animal drawn To improve tillage operations using As research is widely carried None equipment appropriate technology. out in the country, the study was not taken up.
6. Developing correct operating To improve water management and Completed and review was No record ofthe findings nor regimes for the distributary O&M. carried out by GOM in 1988. any improvement in water network management or O&M. 7. Land shaping criteria Production of a manual to facilitate Completed. The revised manual with the land shaping, mclusion of Bank's comments was useful in land shaping operations.
8. O&M cost study To assist in costing maintenance on Compleed. Report sent to the The outdated norms are still a needs based assessment and the Bank but no record of being used for budgetary revision of the outdated norms used acceptance ofthe report purpose and no useful for budgeting. purpose was served by the study.
9. Monitoring of resettlement Monitoring ofthe economicand Completedin October 1987. The study was accepted by and rehabilitation social progress of PAPs settled in the GOM and used for design 27
Table 8A: Project Costs
Appraisal Estimate Actual Estimate1 1 Item Rs. million US$ million Rs. million US$ million Major Works (ID I) 2,334.4 194.5 6,059.4 206.8 CADA Works (ID II) 999.9 83.3 1,446.3 60.4 Common Programmes: - Special Development Distributaries 88.2 7.3 - Technical Services/Studies 32.3 2.7 58.7 2.6 - Vehicles and Equipment 69.5 5.8 77.9 4.6 - Establishment 347.9 29.0 1,568.4 70.6 - Buildings 41.6 1.6 - Training 70.7 2.1 - Dam Safety 5.5 0.2 Resettlement and Rehabilitation 139.6 2.0 Rural Roads and Bridges (PWD) 375.5 12.5 Agricultural Development (AD) 167.0 4 9 Total Project Costs 3 ,872.2 " 322.71/ 10,010.6 21 368.3 21
" Includes physicaland price contingencies. 2v Up to 31 December1996.
Table 8B: Project Financing
Appraisal Estimate Actual/Latest Estimate" (US$ million) (US$ million) Source IDA 160.0 187.7 2' Other External Sources 0 o 3/ Borrower - GOM 162.7 180.6 Total 322.7 368 3
" Up to 31 December1996. v Sourcedfrom FACT(see Table 4) 3 No co-financinginstitution, although French Aid supportedthe pilot dynamicregulation activitiesin the Majalgaonsubproject. 28
Table 9: Economic Costs and Benefits
AppraisalEstimate ICR Estimate
Rainfed Irrigated Rainfed Irrigated Farm Incomes(Rs per 4.5 ha farm) II/ Jayakwadi 23,020 85,720 12,590 58,680 Majalgaon 11,280 115,770 11,920 69,270 Upper Penganga 6,570 57,120 Kukadi 8,220 52,160 Bhima 10,260 49,230 Krishna _ __ 16,650 78,460
AppraisalEstimate ICR Estimate EconomicRates of Return(%/o) Jayakwadi21 18 and 29 4' 15 Majalgaon21 13 5 Upper Penganga31 9 and 11 5 -2 Kukadi3' 5 5 Bhima3/ 17 -2 Krishna3 ' 18 5
UnderlyingAssumptions Project Life 40 years 40 years StandardConversion Factor 0.8 0.9 ConstructionConversion Factor 0.7-0.8 0.9 UnskilledLabour 0.66 financialprice 0.9 financialprice
" Firstquarter 1997 prices. 2' At appraisal. 3' At restructuring. 4/ Newarea and MCIP l/GOM portion respectively. s' RBC an 0-110 andkm 0-177 respectively. Table 10: Status of Legal Covenants
Original Revised Covenant Present fulfilment fulfilment Descriptionof Agreement Section type status date date covenant Comments 202(a) T OK Plan, design,construct, operate and maintain worksunder part A Complied and B of project accordingto standards/criteriasatisfactory to IDA and provideadequate funds for O&M. 2.02(b) T OK Plan, designand implementland shapingaccording to criteria Complied satisfactoryto IDA. 2.02(c) M OK 12/31/85 11/30/86 Train project staff and furnishschedules to IDA for Complied review/comments. 2.02(eXi) M OK 12/31/93 3/31/95 GOMshall reviewand update with the assistanceof consultants, Complied lists of PAPsexcept Jayakwadi. 2.02(eXii) E OK 09/30/93 12/31/94 GOMshall reviewand update its regulationsdealing with Complied 04/02/96 entitlementof PAPsexcept Jayakwadi, including civic amenities, financialassistance for housing,land and incomegenerating schemes. 2.02(f) M OK 06/30/93 03/31/95 GOMshall strengthenR&R units at district level, includingthe Complied 04/02/96 appointmentof a SeniorOfficer of a suitablerank with necessary administrativeand financialpowers for each commandarea except Jayakwadi. 2.02(g) M OK 12/31/93 12/31/94 GOMshall prepare with assistance of experiencedconsultants Complied 04/02/96 acceptableto the associationand in close consultationwith PAPs, rehabilitationplans in consistentwith the act; such plans shall set out proposedincome generating schemes, eligibility criteria and submitto the associationfor reviewand approval.
206 T NYD Take measures to minimiserisk of malaria and other water- Necessaryactions are being relateddiseases in the projectarea. taken to minimisethe risk of malaria & water- related diseases in respect of Jayakwadi& Majalgaon. 2.08 T OK 12/02/96 GOMshall take all necessaryremedial measuresrecommended by Complied. Original Revised Covenant Present fulfilment fulfiltment Descriptionof Agreement Section type status date date covenant Comments the DSRPthrough the existingDam SafetyOrganization. 2 09 T OK GOMshall carry out the PaithanCatchment area of the Godavari Complied Basin Studyunder Part L(ii) of the project in accordancewith TORs and scheduleagreed with the Association 2 10 T SOON 06/30/96 GOM shall completethe studies under Part D.2 of the project Complied. Studies are (exceptas providedin Sec. 2 11)and furnishthe results of the entrusted to Consultantwhich studies to the Associationfor reviewand comments. are in progress. 2.1l(a) M SOON 12/31/95 GOM shall prepare, in accordancewith the TORs and schedule Complied, except appointment agreed with the associationand furnish for reviewand comments, of consultantsfor POM for environmentalimpact assessment and managementplans under Jayakwadiand UPP. Part D.2 of the project, for each of the commandareas under Part A,B,G,H,Iand J of the project 2 1l(b) M OK Initiatethe implementationof such plans, and monitorsuch Complied. implementationthrough the MIS establishedunder Part E of the project. 3 01 F OK Maintain separate recordsand accounts and furnish copiesof The Statement of Expenditure accountsand financial statementsas soon as available,but not (SOE) for 94/95 are already later than 9 monthsafter end of the year sent. The SOE for 95/96 are being sent shortly
3.02 F OK FurnishAudit Reportto IDA immediatelyfollowing finalization. The Statement of Expenditure (SOE) for 94/95 are already sent The SOE for 95/96 are being sent shortly. 3.03(a) M SOON 06/30/94 Proposed GOMshall completethe establishmentof the WaterUsers' Target for establishingWUAs 06/30/96 Societiesunder the project in accordancewith the procedures is 80. and responsibilitiessatisfactory to the Association. Societiesregistered are 193. Societieshanded over to beneficiariesare 71. 3 04 A F NC Reviewand, if required,revised levels of water chargesevery Not complied two yearscommencing not later than Dec. 5, 1987,to cover averageO&M costs and portion of investmentcosts commensuratewith repaymentcapacity of farmers 3 04 B M OK Wherever half the farmerson a distributaryrequest water, make Complied supplementarykharif irrigationavailable to such farmers. Original Revised Covenant Present fulfilment ftdfilment Descriptionof Agreement Section type status date date covenant Comments 3.04 C F OK 12/31/86 Conduct study and determineannual amount for O&M costs. Complied 3.05 F OK 04/01/87 On April I of each year, make annual budgetaryallocations to Complied coverO&M costs. 3.06 (a) F OK GOM shall take all suchaction as shall be necessary, including Complied provisionof fuids for carryingout throughCADA the land shapingof farmers' fields.
3.06(b) F OK Makeadequate arrangements for the recoveryof the funds that Complied may be lent. 3.07 F OK 12/31/86 Conductstudy to assess loanrepayment capacity of farmers for Complied land shapingand, if necessary,revised lending terms.
Schedule2 M OK 10/31/93 10/31/94 Update furnishto the Association,for its review and comments,a Complied para (a) detailedwork plan for carryingout parts C, D, E, l, K and L of the projectand thereaftertaking into account the Association's comments,if any, to implementsuch plans H Schedule2 M OK 06/30/93 GOMshall appointand thereaftermaintain within its AD a Complied para (bXi) qualifiedand experiencedofficer of SDADO level as Water ManagementSpecialist in suchT&V cluster of the project area. Schedule2 M OK 06/30/93 12/31/94 Strengthenexisting agriculture extension services at the district Complied para(bXii) level in the projectarea with adequate staff including an assistant to the PrincipalAgriculture Officer at each district. Schedule2 M OK 06/30/93 GOMshall appointand thereaftermaintain within its ID a Complied (c) ConmmandArea DevelopmentAdministrator of the SE level in each commandarea, each with qualificationsand responsibilities acceptableto the Association.
Schedule2 M OK Establishsuitable farmer's organisationspursuant to a plan Complied (d) satisfactoryto GOMand IDA to promoteactive participating fanners in O&M of system,land shapingand maintenanceof the Onginal Revised Covenat Present fulfihment fiilfihment Description of| Agreement Section type status date date covenant Comments serviceroads. Schedule 2 M SOON Cause CADA to carry out required improvement and Fanners are being trained for| (e) modification in irrigation system within two years of O&M activities. Required commissioningof each Distributary m consultationwith improvementand modifications farmers' organization. in irrigationsystem is being carried out beforehanding over systemto societies. 33
Table 11: Compliance with Operational Manual Statements
Statement numberand title Describeand commenton lack of compliance 1. OMS 2.25 Cost RecoveryPolicy The GOMdid not complywith this OMS which emphasisesthe importanceof recovering the full cost of O&M of irrigation schemes. 2. OMS 2.36 EnvironmentalAspects of Bank Work The GOMdid not complywith this OMS which emphasisesthe importanceof environmentalaspects. The EIA and EMP studiesincluded at restructuring were not implementedbefore Credit closure.
Table 12: Bank Resources: Staff Inputs 1/
Stage of Planned Revised Actual project cycle l Weeks US$'000 Weeks US$'000 Weeks US$'000 Preparationto nr 2/ nr nr nr 30.5 59.0 appraisal l Appraisal nr nr nr nr 48.5 91.0 Negotiationsthrough nr nr nr nr 7.9 15.2 Board approval Supervision 45.0 48.4 49.6 45.4 464.3 467.5 Completion 15.0 51.4 11.1 34.6 7.2 28.2 TOTAL 60.0 99.8 60.7 80.0 558.4 660.9
1/ Data extractedfrom FACTas of 10 March 1997. 2/ nr = no recordsavailable. 34
Table 13: Bank Resources: Missions
Perfornance rating Stage of projectcycle Month/ Number Days m Specialised hnplemen- Develop- year of Seld staff Skills tation ment Types of peesons represented'5 status objectives problems6 |
1 7 Through appraisal _
Appraisalthrough' Board approval
Supervision3
Sept85 1 I1 IE(3),A(3)RE(I),P I I F,M ______S(l),S(I) ______
2 ~ April 86 5 19 IE(l),RE(l),PS(l), 3 2 F,M ______|F(l),A(l)
3 Nov. 86 n.a na na na na | a
4 Sept.87 1 7 IE(l) 4 2 F,M
5 May 88 6 8 IE(2),A(l),RE(l), 4 2 F,M S(l), DE!(l) ;~~~~ T I = =_ 6 Oct.88 2 o0 1E(2)I 3 2
7 June 89 |6 I5 I|E(2),PE(2),PA(1), 2 I I P,T,EA !__ _ ! !CA(l) ! !
8 Dec. 89 5 11 EE(2),PIE(I),RE(1) | 2 1 T,EA
9 July90 3 7 EE(2),RE(l) 12 lI F,TA,
10 Jan.91 5 [51 I E(2),RE(l),A(l), 2 1 M,F,P,TA, .l | | l | ~~~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~ARS(I)|EA i I Aug91 5 4 | PIE(1),E(1),RE(1), i 2 1 1 C,M,F,P,TA =l = | = | S(l) j _ _ _ _ EA 12 Dec.93 6 13 PIE(I),E(I),RE(l) 2 1 C,FP,T,TA, = I = | = | PE(I),RR = I = S, E 13 Dec. 94 4 23 PIE(l),IE(l),RE(1), S S C,P,T,TA,S, |l l l | | ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ARS(I)|EA 14 Nov. 95 4 5 | PIE(l),IE(l),S(l), U | S | C,PT,TA,
- - 1A(l) 1 . S,EA 15 Aug.96 6 11 | PIE(l),IE(I)A(l), U | U | C,P,TTA, = = = J_gRR(1),RE(1),CE(1) [ _ _ _ S,EA
16 Dec.96 2 12 IE(I),RR(1) n.a n.a | a
Completion Dec.96 3 12 ] E(l),IE(l), A() I I I
'5 PIE=Principal hTigationEngineer, IE=LrrigationEngineer, PA=Projectadvisor, CA=Chief Agriculturlist, A= Agriculturalist A=Agriculbre ResearchOfficer, RE=Roads Engineer, F=Fmancial Analyst, S=Sociologist, RR=Resettlementand Rehabilitation Specialist, DE=DrainageEngineer, PS=ProcurementSpecialist, E=Econonist, CE=ConstructionEngineer 16 F=Finacial, M=Management, P=Procurewent, TA=Technical Assistance,C=Legal Covenents, S=Studies, EA=Environmental, T=Training 7 No records available on FACT as at 10 March 1997. 35
IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT
NDIA
MAHARASHTRA COMPOSITE IRRIGATION PROJECT III
{CR. 1621-lN)
APPENDIX1
MISSION'S AIDE-MEMOIRE
A. Introduction
1. An FAO/World Bank Cooperative Programme (FAO/CP) mission comprising Messrs. W.J. Sorrenson (Agricultural Economist, Mission Leader), G.S Schokman (Irrigation Engineer) and S. Sarkar (Agronomist), visited India from 29 November to 16 December 1996 to review the implementation performance of the Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project III (MCIP III) and prepare its Implementation Completion Report (ICR). As required by Bank regulations, the FAO/CP mission coincided with the last supervision mission for the project by Messrs. N.K. Bandyopadhyay (Task Manager) and I.U.B. Reddy (R&R Specialist), from the World Bank, Resident Mission, New Delhi. After initial discussions with staff of the Resident Mission in New Delhi, the mission visited Maharashtra from 2-13 December. Field visits were made to five of the six subprojects included in MCIP III (Majalgaon, Upper Penganga, Kukadi, Bhima and Krishna). Discussions were held with farmers and concerned field officials from the Irrigation, Public Works, Agriculture and Revenue and Forests Departments. The mission also visited the Water and Land Management Institute (WALMI) in Aurangabad.
2. A wrap-up meeting was held in Bombay on 13 December 1996 to discuss this draft aide-memoire. The meeting was chaired by Mr. R.G. Kulkarni, Secretary Irrigation Department and was attended by Mr. M.D. Pendse, Secretary Irrigation, CAD, and other staff concerned with the project of the Departments of Irrigation, PWD, Agriculture and Rehabilitation.
3. This draft Aide-Memoire summarises the findings and preliminary conclusions of the ICR mission, and is subject to confirmation of Bank and FAO/CP management.
4. The mission wishes to express its appreciation for the excellent assistance and hospitality extended to it in Maharashtra.
B. The Project
5. The MCIP III project was appraised in 1985. Implementation started in December 1985 and the project was to be completed in June 1991. Subsequently, the project was extended twice on a twelve month basis to 30 June 1993 and in April 1993 approval was granted to restructure the project with a revised closure date of 31 December 1996. 36
Project Objectives
SAR
6. According to the SAR the main objective of the project was to substantially raise agricultural production and farmers' incomes by improvingthe utilisation of black cotton soils and available water in two commandareas (Jayakwadiand Majalgaon). These subprojects were funded under the MCIP I project (Cr. 736-IN)which was initiated in mid-1977. MCIP III was to: (a) complete irrigation works and on-farm developmentin the Jayakwadicommand; (b) stimulate and promote agricultural development in all of the command (200,000 ha); (c) advance the development of the associatedMajalgaon command (100,000 ha) completing its first segment of 24,000 ha; and (d) introduce improvedO&M procedures. Major emphasiswould be shifted away from large infrastructure works to on-farm development, water management and agricultural productionpractices, so as to trigger a self-sustained process of agriculturalgrowth.
RestructuredProject 7. While retaining the main objectives of increasing agricultural productivity and farmers' incomes, the restructuredproject aimed to expand the scope of the project by including: (a) investments on water distribution and drainage networks in four additional incomplete subprojectswhich were included in an earlier Bank financed project (MCIP II - Cr. 954-IN); (b) an economic rehabilitationprogramme for families who had been earlier affected when the dams were constructed for the Majalgaon,Upper Penganga, Kukadi, Krishna and Bhima subprojects'; and (c) to improve project performanceand environmentalimpact.
ProjectComponents
SAR 8. Major Works:
(i) In the Jayakwadicommand completionof irrigation systems(distributaries and minors), main and link drains and the constructionand / or rehabilitationof 537 km of rural roads within the Jayakwadi command; and (ii) in the Majalgaon command construction of structures along km 0-67 of the main canal, construction of the main canal between km 67-100 including lining and structures,distributaries and minors along the first 100 km of the main canal, main and link drains and 120 km of rural roads in the first segment of the command.
9. On-FarmDevelopment Works:
(i) In the Jayakwadi command, construction of structures, field channels and drains, the development of three special distributaries (SDDs), land shaping
Economicrehabilitation in the Jayakwadicommand had been completed earlier. 37
and technical support to farmers in the entire command; and (ii) in the Majalgaoncommand, construction of structures, field channels and drains, the development of one special distributary (SDD), land shaping and technical supportto farmers.
10. On-FarmDevelopment Works:
(i) Equipment for land shaping, telecommunication and monitoring; (ii) strengthening the project monitoring and evaluation unit; (iii) agricultural research and extension support; and (iv) training, studies, study tours and consultancyservices.
RestructuredProject 11. As per the restructuring mission findings, the project was to be restructured to complete the ongoing irrigation and drainage works and associated rural roads in the Jayakwadi and Majalgaon commands as per the SAR. The Majalgaon command area was reduced from 100,000 ha to 58,000 ha in line with the reassessed availability of water and the Kukadi command (100,000 ha), Krishna command(81,000 ha), Bhima (106,000 ha) and Upper Penganga (140,000ha), were added'.
12. ConstructionWorks. In order to complete works in all 6 subprojectsthe following construction works were included: (i) 570 km of main and branch canals; (ii) distributary networks on 103,580ha; and (iii) main and link drains on 78,000ha.
13. On-Farm DevelopmentWorks. Across all 6 subprojects constructionof: (i) field channels and drains on 106,000ha; and (ii) land shapingon 32,150ha.
14. Rural and Service Roads. Constructionand / or rehabilitationof: (i) 836.6 km of rural roads; and (ii) 757 km of service roads.
15. Water User Associations. The establishmentof WUAs was included in the project at the time of restructuring.Some 80 WUAswere to be formed and handed-overin the subproject command areas (not necessarily within the project affected areas). Associations were to be responsible for water management,the maintenanceof irrigationworks from the level of minors and for the collection of water fees on a volumetric pricing basis from all farmers within the command area of the concerned minors. The developmentof WUAs was to be achieved through an extension programmedesigned to create farmer participationand involvement.
16. Agriculture. A detailed agriculturalcomponent was to be prepared and carried out to support agriculturalextension and demonstrationplots for improvedwater management.
1 Theseareas have been obtained from the project supervision reports and include areas already developed, to be developedunder the project and to bedeveloped in the future 38
17. Economic Rehabilitation. The economic rehabilitation programme was to cover the needs of some 36,000 project affected persons (PAPs) through: (a) the provision and upgrading of basic civic amenities in 218 villages (roads, water, street lighting, schools, community centres, sanitary units and other facilities); (b) the provision of financial assistance - Rs 15,000 and Rs 10,000 for agricultural and non-agricultural families respectively for upgrading of their housing; (c) the provision of tube well lift irrigation facilities to those PAPs not having access to adequate irrigation; and (d) income generating schemes for the landless PAPs living below the poverty line of up to Rs 18,000 per family to be implemented with the involvement of NGOs.
18. Environment. This component was included to ensure environmentally sustainable infrastructure and subsequent operation, including the actions and Environmental Management Plans for all of the subproject command areas. Initial implementation of the Plans was to be undertaken not later than 31 December 1995. The hydrological measurement and analysis capability of the ID was to be strengthened through the provision of additional equipment and technical assistance for a pilot water resource study in the Godavari Basin up to the Paithan dam.
19. Technical Assistance, Training and Studies. Special studies and modernisation were to be funded including volumetric water supply to WUAs, canal automation and a review of farmer water rights.
20. Project Management. This component was added to strengthen project management through the establishment of management information systems and office technology, training and tightened administrative procedures and staff reinforcement to expedite procurement.
Project Costs
21. The total cost of the MCIP III project inclusive of physical and price contingencies was estimated at appraisal at US$ 322.7 m (Rs 3,872 m). IDA credit was for SDR 164.2 m (US$ 160 m). At restructuring the total project cost, inclusive of physical and price contingencies, was re-estimated at US$ 310 m (Rs 8,662 m) and the IDA credit at SDR 132.2 m (US$ 128.8 m). At this time SDR 32 m was cancelled from the loan and retroactive financing was increased from SDR 9 m to SDR 15 m.
C. Mission's Findings
Evaluation of Project Objectives
22. The project objectives were clear and important considering that in the past ID, with IDA support, had focused its efforts almost exclusively on the construction of surface irrigation infrastructure. The widening of the project scope at restructuring to shift focus of attention away from construction to: (a) ensuring optimum utilisation of the infrastructure created in the commands; and (b) sustainability of the investment; was timely and appropriate in view of the performance of the project at that point in time. Furthermore, it was in-line with the India Irrigation Sector Review (Report No. 9518-IN of 20 December 1991). 39
Achievement of Project Objectives
23. Disbursements initially were very slow. Despite an original closing date of 30 June 1991, disbursements at 28 February 1993 were SDR 40.3 m (only 24% of the original credit). This low disbursement performance was due not only to the weak original project design (as noted at the time of restructuring) but also to the large devaluation of the Rupee against the SDR. Slow disbursement was overcome by the time of restructuring and disbursement performance picked up thereafter.
24. According to SAR, major emphasis was to be shifted from large infrastructure work to on-farm development, water management and agricultural production practices, to trigger a self-sustained process of agricultural growth. Initially project efforts focused on construction. Increasing water use efficiency and actual areas irrigated, as well as the maintenance of irrigation structures, were all neglected.
25. At restructuring the scope of the project was substantially revised to: (a) improve project performance through the economic rehabilitation of PAPs; (b) include environmental management and sustainability features; (c) establish WUAs; (d) complete works in four subprojects included in MCIP II; (e) reduce the command areas; and (f) improve project management and performance. However, once again the main focus was found to be on the construction activities.
26. Except for the construction of major irrigation works and roads (90% and 110%' complete respectively in financial terms), progress of all other components has been slow. A number of components, especially R&R, environment, special studies and TA, have hardly got off the ground. Furthermore, the areas of new irrigation have been much below expectation. Therefore, the main objective of substantially raising agricultural productivity and farmers' incomes through increasing the area irrigated, and the efficiency of water use, has not yet been realised at the expected level.
27. Credit under the project will be fully disbursed on, or shortly thereafter, 31 December 1996.
Implementation and Major Factors Affecting Project Performance
Irrigation Works2
28. Irrigable Command. The culturable command area (CCA) estimated at appraisal (1984/85) was 300,000 ha and was re-estimated at restructuring at about 227,800 ha. The Jayakwadi and Majalgaon subprojects account for 146,000 ha and the additional four subprojects included at restructuring account for a further 81,800 ha. By December 1996 about 182,000 ha of on- farm development (OFD) works were completed giving an overall physical achievement of 80%.
1 Mainly due to excess quantities. 2 The areas quoted refer to the targets as at the time of restructuring the project. 40
29. The re-estimated (at the time of restructuring) CCA of Jayakwadi, about 88,000 ha, was achieved by 1991/921. By mid December 1996, irrigation potentials were created through the completion of OFD works on the remaining subprojects as follows: (a) at Majalgaon, 55,457 ha out of the targeted 58,000 ha (97%); (b) at Upper Penganga, 19,631 ha out of 23,000 ha (85%); (c) at Bhima, 15,921 ha out of 28,000 ha (57%); (d) at Krishna, 7,309 ha out of 10,800 ha (68%); and (e) at Kukadi, 8,960 ha out of 20,000 ha (45%).
30. Given the constraints of land acquisition, objections by villages in close proximity to blasting operations, the extensive rock excavations in the main canal systems, inordinate delays in the award of tenders and the subsequent contract management issues for the major aqueducts, the progress achieved is highly commendable. Progress on OFD works implemented by ID II is satisfactory. Delays in achievement of targets is mainly attributable to the requirement that OFD works should commence only after the go ahead decision is given by ID I.
31. Irrigated Cropped Area. Preliminary analysis of data supplied to the ICR mission indicates that the overall progress so far achieved in terms of increased area irrigated has been disappointing and is much below target. Of the total area of 227,800 ha to be brought under irrigation as a result of project-related works, the maximum area which has actually been irrigated is 69,409, accounting for 30% of the total area2. Achievement between subprojects has varied markedly. Mission estimates indicate that the areas actually irrigated, expressed as a percentage of the areas where OFD works have been completed, range from 45% to 97%. Major factors responsible for this poor and varied performance are: (i) OFD works start only when substantial completion is achieved in construction works, which set back progress in cultivation; (ii) the long rotations and limited quantities of water being supplied to farmers, primarily because of a shortage of water in the reservoirs especially in 1995; and (iii) farmers' reliance on river lifts and well irrigation and their reluctance to take up canal water unless they can be certain that water will be supplied both reliably and in sufficient quantity3.
32. Construction (Irrigation) 4. By mid December 1996, the overall progress on dams, and canal works implemented by the construction division of the ID (ID I), is estimated at about 90%. Jayakwadi has been fully completed with the remaining subprojects varying between 77% to 90%. The construction of the OFD works is the responsibility of the O&M division of the Irrigation Department Il (ID 11). With the exception of Krishna, where the achievement is about 65%, the remaining subprojects have reached completion varying from 87% to 100%. Progress of each subproject is described below:
Although the restructuring was approved in 1993, reformulation commenced in 1987 and the estimate of 88,000 ha was confirmed in 1990.
2 Thefigure of 69,409ha is the sum of the maximumareas which have actuallybeen irrigatedin any one year in eachof the subprojects.
3 Farmersdo prefer to use canal water, if it is available,because it is less costly than river lifts or well irrigation.
4The targetsfor the constructionworks are as detailedin the SARor laterat the time of projectrestructuring. 41
33. Jayakwadi. Prior to 1984/85,all works on the dam and the main and branch canals were completed. Under MCIP III the following works were needed to be carried out: (a) the distributariesand minors on about 45,000 ha; (b) the main and link drains covering about 153,000 ha; (c) OFD works on about 88,000 ha - increasedfrom 68,000 ha; and (d) land shaping on about 128,000 ha. Prior to the commencementof the restructuredsubproject, in 1992/93,all works on the distributary network commanding 88,000 ha and the OFD works for 84,671 ha were completed. Land shaping on a reduced area (128,000 ha to 32,000 ha) was completed in 1994/95.
34. Majalgaon. Works under the original MCIP III project included: (a) on the main canal, the constructionof 116 structures along km 0 to 67, and earthwork, lining and structures between km 67 and 100; (b) constructionof the distributarynetwork on about 58,000 ha in the reach km 0 to 100; (c) constructionof the drainagenetwork on the first segment covering an area of about 24,000 ha; (d) construction of on-farm development works comprising the field and drainage networkon about 24,000 ha; and land shapingon about 24,000ha.
35. Out of a total length of 100 km of the main canal, earthwork on about 2 km and 14 structures are incomplete,about 90% of the branch canal is complete and 80% of the distributary network commanding58,000 ha has been completed. Substantialcompletion has been achieved on field canals and drains with selective lining reaching about 77% of the estimated target. The land shapingprovision was reduced from 24,000 ha to 6,200 ha. Due to problems associatedwith loan arrangementsand farmers' reluctanceto accept this development,only about 1,000 ha have been completed.
36. Upper Penganga. Works include: (a) the modernisation of the Isapur dam; (b) constructionof main and branch canals of about 220 km; (c) upgrading the existing distributary canal system covering an area of about 25,000 ha; (d) constructionof partially lined distribution networks covering an area of about 23,000 ha; (e) constructionof buildings;(f) construction of OFD works (includingmain and link drains) covering about 23,000 ha; and (g) pilot land shaping operations and conjunctiveuse covering about 4,000 ha.
37. Modernisation works of the dam are substantially completed, and the remaining works are expected to be completed by the end of December 1996. On the Isapur Left Bank Canal (ILBC) 57 km have been fully completed and on the remaining 24 km about 70% of earthworks,50% of lining,and 40% of structureshave been completed. In the Isapur Right Bank Canal (IRBC), work is in progress on the entire length (Km 0 to 115). By mid December an overall achievementof 60% is estimated. The incompleteworks are located in the reach outside the proposed subproject area of 23,000 ha, and as such do not affect the target of CCA to be achieved under the subproject. The length of branch canals on both main canals to be developed is estimated at 223 km. About 80% of earthworks,47% lining, and 60% structures have been completed. The overall progress on 107 km of distributarycanals is about 70%. Under OFD, the achievementon field canals and selective lining is 87%, whilstthat of main and link drains is 3%. Subproject staff did not consider this work necessary. This should be studied in depth and technical reasons given for the omission. Land shapingwas not carried out as farmers were not interested in getting loans to carry out the work. Conjunctive use on about 4,000 ha was not implementeddue to delay in obtainingreports and certificatesfrom the governmentorganisation responsiblefor groundwaterexploration. 42
38. Kukadi. The works included: (a) modernisation of the Dimbhe and Manikdoh dams, and Visapur tank; (b) construction of 127 km of main and branch canals; (c) upgrading the existing canal system covering an area of about 65,000 ha; (d) construction of partially lined distribution networks covering an area of about 20,000 ha; (e) construction of main and link drains and field canals covering about 20,000 ha and sub-surfacedrains covering about 500 ha; and (f) provisionof pilot land shapingand conjunctiveuse covering an area of about 4,000 ha.
39. Modernisationworks on the two dams including the preventive works specified by the Dam Safety Review Panel (DSRP) and works on Visapur Tank have been completed. About 132 km of main canals on the right and left banks of the Dimbhe, Manikdoh, and Yedgaon reservoirs were to be constructedunder the subproject.About 98% of earthworks and structures and 88% of lining have been completed. About 50% of earthworks in 12.5 km of the Ghod Branch Canal is completed. The major works to be completed are: (a) the Ghod Aqueduct located in the Dimbhe Right Bank Canal, and rock tunnelling in this canal is about 75% complete; and (b) construction of Hanga Aqueduct located at km 74 of the Kukadi Left Bank Canal commenced in October 1996. The reason for the delay was the late approval to go ahead with the work as there was an alternative to use the Visapur Tank as a pick up reservoir. The distributarynetwork for about 15,000ha out of the target of 20,000 ha has been completed. OFD works covering about 17,700 ha has been completed.About 75% of the drainage system, 108% of the sub-surface drains, and 66% of target for land shaping and conjunctive use have been completed.
40. Bhima. Works included under the subprojectsare: (a) modernisationof Ujani Dam and powerhouse; (b) construction of main and branch canals over a length of 63 km; (c) upgrading existing canal system over an area of 85,000 ha; (d) construction of partially lined distribution networks covering about 28,000 ha; (e) construction of field canals and drainage covering an area of 28,000 ha; and (f) provision of pilot land shaping and conjunctive use covering an area of 4,000 ha.
41. Modernisationof dams has been completed. Althoughabout 10% of the earthworks on the main and branch canals have yet to be carried out, quantities based on targets at restructuringhave exceededby about 30%. Structureshave been completed and 75% of lining is complete. Earthworks have exceeded the targets by about 10%, and 81% on the distributary canals and minors. For completionof these canals, about 10% and 50% of earthworksare still to be carried out. Structures on these canals have been completed, whilst lining has yet to be providedto about 14%. The progress on field canals is estimated at 83%, while the provision of drainage facilities has been completed. No land shaping and conjunctive use on the pilot area of 4,000 ha have been carried out.
42. Krishna. This subproject provides for: (a) modemisationof the Dhom and Kanher dams; (b) construction of about 58 km of main and branch canals; (c) upgrading the existing canal system covering an area of 50,000 ha; (d) construction of partially lined distributary networks covering about 14,000 ha; (e) construction of main and link drains and field canals covering an area of 14,000 ha, and sub-surfacedrainage to an area of 1,000 ha; and (f) provision of pilot land shapingand conjunctive use covering about 4,000 ha. 43
43. Modernisation works have been completed. Earthworks in the main canal over 65 km (7 km in excess of the restructuring target) have been completed. Structures are estimated at 86% completion and lining at 71%. Earthworks on the distributary network including minors have been completed with quantities exceeded by about 20%. On the distributary canals, 15 structures out of a total of 669 (the target), have yet to be completed, whilst on minors 1,413 structures have been completed as against a target at restructuring of 1,296. In distributaries, lining has been completed with an excess of about 70%. In minors, lining is estimated at 93%. Upgrading of existing canals is substantially completed, whilst the drainage system works are fully completed. The progress on field canals is poor and estimated at 54% with selective lining on the completed canals exceeding by about 50%. As in the case of Bhima, no work has been done in land shaping and conjunctive use.
44. Buildings. Under the original MCIP III project no provision was made for buildings. At restructuring, funds were provided for buildings for both ID I and ID II. In Kukadi and Krishna all buildings have been completed, whilst at Bhima 50% completion was achieved. There was no provision for buildings at Upper Penganga.
Rural and Service Roads'
45. Under the original MCIP III project, provision was limited to the construction of rural roads. On the restructured project, in addition to rural roads in the new subprojects, service roads were included in all subprojects, and a number of bridges was provided for the new subprojects. A total of 727 km of rural roads (subsequently modified to 837 km) and 757 km of service roads together with 21 bridges for the rural roads were included. PWD is responsible for implementing the rural roads programme and the implementation wing of ID II implements the service roads programme. Details with progress for each subproject are given below:
46. Rural Roads. The programme includes: (a) Jayakwadi, 445 km; (b) Majalgaon, 34 km; (c) Upper Penganga, 39.5 km with 11 bridges; (d) Krishna, 65.5 km with 2 bridges; (e) Bhima, 95.5 km with 4 bridges; and (f) Kukadi, 100 km with 3 bridges. In the six subprojects, out of 779.5 km of roads and 21 bridges included in the implementation programme, 776.5 km (93%) and 6 bridges (29%) have been completed. The poor progress on bridges is attributed to constraints during the preparation and processing of tenders and contract management.
47. Canal Service Roads. The programme includes: (a) Jayakwadi, 572 km; (b) Upper Penganga, 45 km; (c) Krishna, 26 km; (d) Bhima, 81 km; and (e) Kukadi, 27 km; and (f) Majalgaon, although the SAR provides for 150 km, the work was not included under a separate 2 item . Out of 757 km in the six subprojects, 679 km (90%) have been completed.
l Since many revisions were made after appraisal and restructuring, the targets are as per the final revisions given in the progress reports of ID and PWD.
2 Presumablythe work was included under embankmentconstruction. 44
Quality of Civil Work Construction.
48. Quality of concrete works in major structures carried out by ID I and PWD is of a high standard. Quality control tests were regularly carried out. There is room for improvement in compaction of concrete to obtain a better finish. The works carried out by ID II are widely scattered necessitating strict supervisionto achieve high standards. The ID II staff provide this service satisfactorily as evident from the high standard of concrete and rubble masonry work. However,there is room for improvementon liningand earthworks.
Water Users' Associations(WUAs) 49. Under the original project, agreement was reached with the GOM, that it would establish farmers' organisations in the project command areas in accordance with a plan satisfactoryto GOM and the Bank (schedule2 (i) of the Project Agreement). The SAR proposed the formation of Outlet Committees (OCs) to manage O&M of the channel system below the chak level. The next level was to be Water Utilisation Committees(WUCs) to be organised for each minor. The highest tier was to be Canal Advisory Committees(CACs) with jurisdiction over an area of up to 40,000 ha. The mission's observation made during limited field visits confirmed that minimal progress has been achieved in this field. Following unsatisfactory progress the restructuredproject includeda covenant in the legal agreement specifyingtargets for the formation of WUAs. Eighty associationswere to be formed, 30 in Majalgaonand 10 each in the other subprojects.
50. A total of 193 associationshave been registeredand irrigation infrastructurehas been handed over to 71 associations. The associations registered,and the ones which have accepted responsibility for all O&M activities, are not necessarily in the project command area. The associationsthat have been handed-overinclude: (a) 18 at Jayakwadi;(b) 4 out of the required 30 at Majalgaon;(c) I in Upper Penganga out of 10; (d) 17 out of the required 10 in Kukadi; (e) 18 out of the required 10 in Bhima; and (f) 13 out of the required 10 in Krishna.
51. Limited field visits indicatedthat farmers' conceptionsof maintenancewere limited to the desilting and clearing of canals, one time activitiesduring a season. No preventive action is taken to repair structures once deteriorationcommences. Lined sections are illegally broken to get water on to farms. Leaks, mainly at drop structures,are not arrested in time and eventually cause structuralcollapse. In minor canals under the control of WUAs, structureshave deteriorated to such an extent that major rehabilitationwork is needed before effective water managementcan be carried out.
52. Field canal systems in areas controlledby WUAs, and in areas controlledby OCs, are in a very bad state of disrepair. In most cases the canals, which were completed to acceptable standards, are now small waterwayswith uncontrolledflows. Farmers and some field level ID staff appear to accept the situationas normal.
53. As a priority, ID staff shouldstop further registrationof associations,and concentrate on improvingthe performanceof 10 associationsat each subproject. 45
54. Despite the weaknesses noted above, the mission did visit some WUAs which are very effectively distributing water within their command areas and successfully collecting water fees from farmers.
Improved Water Management
55. Due to scarce and unreliable water resources in the river basins where the subprojects are located, particularly the Godawari River Basin, in addition to carrying out a study of the water resources of this basin, the restructured project included a component for operation of the Majalgaon main canal up to km 100, and the Ganga Masala branch canal over its entire length, based on "principles of dynamic regulation". Following this, the Pilot Project Dynamic Regulation (PPDR) exercise was implemented on the Majalgaon Right Bank Canal. Existing control structures were improved to operate automatically. Initially the main canal is to operate under constant volume conditions and eventually to shift on to a controlled volume method. It was envisaged that volume controls would be effected in the branch and minor canals and existing structures were improved and new structures constructed. The pilot project incorporated the provision of controls on the main canal for about 58,000 ha, the branch canal for about 11,000 ha and minor canals covering an area of 2,000 ha.
56. The mission was impressed with the operation of the automatic system on the main and branch canals. One important issue though is the cleaning of these canals (silt and rock falls) and it is essential that a schedule of maintenance activities be prepared and implemented effectively. The mission visited one minor which supplied water to about 700 ha. The condition of this minor was found to be very substandard. Given that the infrastructure was completed over the last two years, this is a matter for concern and should be addressed immediately if the pilot operation is to be sustained.
57. It is important that in future the formation of viable and effective WUAs, including the education of farmers to maintain and safeguard GOM investments, should be carried out to ensure sustainability.
Operation and Maintenance
58. Currently the ID is responsible for maintaining all irrigation infrastructure from the headworks up to the field canal outlets to the chaks. The department is now in the process of handing over to WUAs the O&M of irrigation systems covering an area of about 400 ha per association, usually under a group of minor channels. Operational activities are covered satisfactorily by department staff and farmers within the chaks.
59. WUAs effectively carry out water distribution operations within their area of responsibility. However, maintenance is problematic. Preventive maintenance by ID staff is not carried out mainly due to funding restrictions, although limited periodic maintenance, such as repairs to structures and desilting, are carried out by departmental staff. The mission observed minors and field canals completed a few years back in a severe state of disrepair in all five subproject areas. A major rehabilitation effort would be necessary to bring the system to an 46
operational condition to ensure optimal use of the scarce water and reduce excessive runoff into the drainage system.
Agriculture
60. SAR contemplated the creation of two new command area agricultural districts to be staffed by specific Village Extension Workers (VEW) assigned to the two subproject command areas so as to raise the ratio of VEWs to farmers from 1:1200 to 1:800. However, no progress was made because: (a) a detailed programme of work was not prepared for conducting on-farm demonstrations, adaptive research and training of staff and farmers; (b) there were no funds allowed for in the original project for the agriculture work; (c) there was apprehension on the part of the AD to get involved; and (d) there was a lack of effective co-ordination between the ID and AD.
61. In the restructured project the lessons learnt during the initial years of MCIP III were capitalised upon. Although progress was initially quite slow, eventually a specific programme of work was agreed to between the ID, AD and the Bank. Consequently funds were provided by the GOM to conduct 30,618 crop demonstrations (for which 105% achievement was realised), 3,947 drip and sprinkler irrigation demonstration sites were established (43% achievement), 52 multipurpose Agricultural Technology Dissemination Centres were build (100% achievement) and 223 training programmes were conducted for Agriculture Department (AD) staff and farmers (target 131). Against an approved outlay of about Rs 190 m, 56% achievement was obtained up to 31 October 1996 with an anticipated achievement of 83% up to 31 December 1996.
62. Although no specific data have been received from the AD regarding increases in cropping intensity and crop productivity in the project affected areas, the mission will analyse data obtained from the ID and from its field visits and interviews with farmers and AD field level staff. While the areas benefiting from increased canal water are much below target, where water is being received, cropping intensities are increasing as well as crop yields. Preliminary analyses indicate that the speed of switching from rainfed to irrigated agriculture is higher than was predicted in the SAR and in the feasibility studies of the restructured project. While farmers use canal water conjunctively with tube and open well water, shortages of water are definitely restricting crop yields. The overall impact on agriculture will therefore be restricted in the project affected areas unless more water can be supplied from the project. The mission will allow for increases in irrigated area once OFD works are completed, as well as for the recharging of ground water reserves from canal water in the command areas. Full benefits will only be realised if more water is made available and water use efficiency is raised. There has been a positive impact to the increased agricultural extension effort in the project areas and the mission was pleased to note that during the restructured project period, the co-operation between the ID and AD staff showed a marked improvement. GOM should ensure though that extension efforts funded through the project are kept up for at least 2-3 more years.
EconomicRehabilitation 63. The main aim of includingthe economicrehabilitation component (ERP) at the time of restructuringwas to assistthe GOM to improvethe welfare of persons previouslyresettled due 47
to the dam investments made in the early 1970s. The ERP component was included to address GOM inadequacies in the execution of R&R programmes. It was considered that the restructured project ERP could serve as a model for possible further use elsewhere in Maharashtra.
64. Retrofit socio-economic surveys were carried out during 1994/95to find out the number of PAPs residing in the resettlement villages and their living standards. Against the total number of 36,084 who were originally affected, only 22,168 PAPs (61.4%) were identified at the time of conducting the survey. Based on the survey findings and subsequent rehabilitation action plans, the GOM brought out a Government Order (GO) in January 1996 detailing its economic rehabilitation policy; which was subsequently endorsed by the Bank. The ERP was to be implemented over a three year period from January 1996 to December 1998 with a budget of Rs 960 m (US$ 27.42 m).
65. Implementation of this component is well behind schedule and is yet to pick up momentum. Out of the four activities envisaged under this component, only civic amenities have commenced. So far 18% of physical progress (162 out of 905 new facilities to be created) and 7% of financial progress (about Rs 2 m out of Rs 382 m) have been achieved. Implementation of the other three components (housing, irrigation and income generation) is yet to commence. Funds earmarked for 1996-97 for housing, irrigation and income generation activities are yet to be placed with the Divisional Commissioners. Though 70% (10 out of 14 positions) of the professional staff created for exclusive implementation of this scheme are in position, the key position of Deputy Secretary is yet be filled. Updating the list of eligible PAPs for individual schemes and recruitment of NGOs for implementation of income generation activities, are pending completion. No efforts have been made so far to finalise the TOR and appointment of consultants for Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E).
66. The mission is of the view that project implementation needs to be considerably speeded up by: (a) placing adequate funds for all activities with the Divisional Commissioners; (b) filling up the vacant staff positions including the key position of Deputy Secretary; (c) finalising the recruitment of NGOs; and (d) selecting the M&E agency to monitor implementation progress.
67. The major reasons why implementation progress has been slow are:
(a) Non-availability of funds. The ID and Rehabilitation Department (RD) failed to decide over who should fund the various rehabilitation activities - housing, income generation and irrigation. The ID is willing to finance only the civic amenities, as these were in accordance with the State Act on rehabilitation and are being implemented by the ID. According to them all other activities should be financed out of the RD's funds since these are being implemented by them. On the other hand, the RD do not have any funds and they feel it is the responsibility of the ID, since they are responsible for displacement and it should form part of the overall project cost. All the activities included under the ERP are consistent with the Amended Development Credit Agreement dated 8 June 1993. This problem should be sorted out by the GOM and the necessary funds transferred to the RD for its implementation. 48
(b) Lack of effective co-ordination. The delay in appointing a Deputy Secretary, who would be the key person in the implementation of the ERP, has impeded the co-ordination and guidance of staff at divisional and project level. There is also no follow-up from the senior level staff at the divisional level. As a result, the implementational preparation activities at project level have slowed down considerably.
(c) Delay in recruitment of NGOs. The appointment of NGOs for implementation of the income generation activities has been pending for over eight months. In spite of there having been no objection on the part of the Bank for the recruitment of five NGOs, no action has been taken to finalise their contracts.
(d) Failure to appoint a M&E agency. The appointment of a M&E agency is essential to monitor implementation progress and guide the NGOs and other persons involved in the implementation process. The failure to initiate the process of appointing a M&E agency has delayed the completion of various preparatory activities such as updating the list of eligible PAPs for individual schemes, issuing identify cards, finalising the details of the irrigation and income generation components, and providing guidance to the staff involved in its implementation.
Studies and Training
68. Studies. To ensure the introduction of an effective management information system, environmentally sustainable investments, and efficient irrigation management in the different subprojects, it was envisaged that the following important studies would be carried out under the project: (i) Development of a Management Information System (MIS); (ii) Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) study and the preparation of a Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for the Krishna Basin subprojects; (iii) an EIA Study and the preparation of an EMP for the Godavari Basin subprojects; (iv) a Water Resources Study in the Godavari Basin up to Paithan Dam; (v) the development of a Plan of Operation and Management (POM) for the Kukadi subproject; (vi) the development of a POM for the Krishna and Bhima subprojects; and (vii) the development of a POM for the Godavari Basin subprojects. The following is the current status of these studies:
(i) Management Information System (MIS). Tender was invited on 16 August 1994 and a contract was awarded to M/S CMC Ltd. Pune on March 24, 1995 at an estimated cost of Rs 7.796 m for the development of 24 MIS modules. Almost all the modules have been finalised by the Consultant and are being tested. A draft final report has been submitted by the Consultant and is under review by the GOM. The Consultant has also trained 80 officials on basic awareness and 21 officials in an advanced course in computer applications during the period 8 July to 6 November 1996. Expenditure incurred up to 30 September 1996 is Rs 5.0 m.
(ii) EIA and EMP studies for subprojects in Krishna Basin. Tender was invited on 21 November 1994 and a contract was awarded to M/S Acres International 49
Ltd. Canada on 10 September 1996 at an estimated cost of Rs 9.28 m with a reduced scope of work from what was contemplated in the original proposal. The Consultant has submitted the Work Plan which was approved by the GOM on 30 November 1996. Expenditure incurred up to 30 September 1996 is Rs 0.36 m.
(iii) EIA and EMP studies for subprojects in Godavari Basin. Tender was invited on 10 October 1996 for this study and a contract was awarded to M/S _ ERM, London, on 10 September 1996 at an estimated cost of Rs 10.8 m. The Consultant has submitted the Inception Report and first Progress Report which are under review by GOM. No expenditure has been incurred up to 30 September 1996.
(iv) Pilot Studies of Water Resources in Godavari Basin up to Paithan Dam. Tender was invited on 13 June 1994 and a contract was awarded to M/S WAPCOS, New Delhi on September 22, 1996 at an estimated cost of Rs 11.0 m. The Consultant has submitted the Inception Report which is being reviewed by GOM. Expenditure incurred up to 30 September 1996 is Rs 2.2 m.
(v) Studies of POM for Kukadi Project. Tender was invited on 20 March 1996 and a contract was awarded to M/S SMEC, Australia on March 22, 1996 at an estimated cost of Rs 25.68 m The Consultant has submitted the Inception Report and the first Progress Report which have been approved by GOM. Expenditure incurred up to September 1996 is Rs 8.41 m.
(vi) Studies of POM for Bhima and Krishna subprojects. Tender was invited on 21 August 1996 for this study and a contract was awarded to M/S CES, New Delhi on 25 March 1996 at an estimated cost of Rs 6.67 m. The Consultant has submitted the Inception Report and the first Progress Report which have been approved by GOM. Expenditure incurred up to 30 September 1996 is Rs 2.8 m.
(vii) Studies for POM for subprojects in Godavari Basin. Tender was invited on 9 August 1996 for this study. The contract for this consultancy has not yet been awarded.
69. The mission notes that it was contemplated that these studies would be initiated before 31 December 1995, and completed before Credit Closure on 31 December 1996. Since they have only just been initiated, realisation of the objectives included at the time of project restructuring to improve the performance of the infrastructure created and its environmental impact, has not been realised.
70. The main reasons for delays in completing the studies are: (i) the inability of GOM to take prompt decisions on the tenders. GOM has taken between 7 to 27 months to award a contract after invitation of tenders; and (ii) according a low priority to this work, preferring instead to concentrate efforts on the completion of physical works. 50
71. Training. The following training components were included in the project.
- WALMI. Under MCIP III an amount of Rs 75 m was provided to WALMI for conducting training in land and water management'. A total of 125 courses were conducted for ID and AD officials, farmers, WUA office bearers and NGOs. Some 2,482 officials and 2,844 farmers and NGO representatives were trained under the programme. Up to November 1996 expenditure totalled Rs 64.55 m.
The mission was impressed with the modem facilities that are available for training and the overall performance of the Institute. However, there is a need to place more emphasis on the maintenance of major and OFD irrigation works and on practical oriented training in the field.
- Agriculture Department. Since 1994/95 regular training in irrigation water management was conducted at the Rahuri and Parbhani State Agricultural Universities. Attendance by ID staff, especially from Kukadi, Bhima and Krishna subprojects fell below targets. The foreign training programme was not realised since available funds were diverted for other purposes. However, farmers' training, including rallies and educational tours are reported to have been undertaken by AD staff.
Project Sustainability
72. Project sustainability will be dependent on several factors. These are: (a) the availability of adequate water in the reservoirs to conform to the criteria of 75% dependability; (b) effective management of the available water; (c) effective preventive and periodic maintenance of the headworks, the main and branch canals, the distributary networks inclusive of the minor canals, the drainage network and finally the field canal systems at the outlet to the chaks. This will be dependent upon the GOM ensuring increased and adequate funds for maintenance and in improving the capability of ID staff to prioritise and supervise maintenance work; and (d) completing outstanding works (after Credit closure) programmed up to 31 March 2000 - see attached summary operational programme.
73. During the project period, Jayakwadi subproject was operational for several years. However, inadequate water supply in the reservoir is reflected in the excessive shortfalls in the cropped areas for the period 1991/92 through 1995/96. The dependability criteria has failed over the last five years. This factor is a major concern as the expected benefits cannot be achieved.
74. Concerns regarding water management up to the outlet to the chak resulted in the implementation of the Pilot Project for Dynamic Regulation (PPDR). So far the results have been promising in that optimum use of the water available from the reservoirs could be achieved through effective control of flows particularly in the main canals. However the success of this operation will depend on the maintenance of the minor canals.
I WALMI,Maharashtra, was established in 1980for capacitybuilding in an integratedapproach to water and landmanagement. 51
75. The most critical factor to ensure project sustainability is an effective maintenance programme particularly in areas where farmers are responsible for maintenance. The mission's findings on the effectiveness of the WUAs to carry out maintenance activities clearly indicate that sustainability of project works is very much in doubt.
76. As at December 1996, irrigation facilities have been provided for about 80% of the project area. The balance areas is dependent on the completion of the major aqueducts, rock excavation of a limited reach of the main canals and the OFD works within the reach of the incomplete main canals. These works need to be completed using GOM funds.
77. One other aspect relating to project sustainability is that it will be important that the GOM, through the AD, maintain agricultural extension efforts in the project affected commands for 2-3 more years. This will ensure that farmers successfully switch from rainfed to irrigated agriculture, make good use of the infrastructure created and will be in a position to pay the full operational and maintenance costs of the water supplied to them.
Assessment of Outcome
78. The project's outcome with respect to the construction of civil works (irrigation and roads) is rated satisfactory. However in terms of present agricultural achievements, performance of WUAs (with the exception of operational activities), R&R and O&M, it is clearly unsatisfactory. The reasons for the adverse ranking are: (a) the low cropped area averaging about 30% throughout the project period; (b) the less than satisfactory performance of ID field staff in providing technical supervision; (c) the continuing low funding levels for O&M leading to deferred maintenance; and (d) the technical, managerial and funding limitations of the WUAs to maintain infrastructure. In addition, the objectives of equitable, predictable and reliable irrigation supplies to all farms according to the dependable reservoir supply (75%) have not been realised in the completed command areas
79. The original project envisaged a shift from large infrastructure to OFD works, water management and improved agricultural production practices, so as to trigger a self sustained process of development. Whilst OFD works were emphasised, and at a later stage to assist in improved water management the PPDR was taken up, the services of the AD were not effectively utilised until very late in the project. Initially no project funds were allocated for the agriculture component and a detailed work programme and responsibilities were not defined. At the time of restructuring, funds were earmarked for the agriculture component, but valuable time was lost in defining a programme of work. Throughout the period of the original project, co-ordination between the ID and AD could have been much better.
Future Operations
80. The financial programme for completing the civil works by ID 1, ID II, and PWD, as well as the agricultural development component, R&R, studies and the recommended repairs and safety measures by the DSRP have been furnished by the GOM following the wrap-up meeting in Bombay (see attached summary). The cost of the balance works programmed to be completed by 31 March 2000 total Rs 2,470.86 (US$ 70 m). The outstanding irrigation works, studies and dam 52
safety measures total Rs 1,588.77 (US$ 45 m). No provision has been made to continue the agriculture component beyond 31 March 1997. According to the AD representative at the wrap- up meeting, the ID should provide the necessary funds for these project-related activities which have been supported to date by the project. The cost of the balance work of the R&R component is estimated at Rs 787.31 m (US$ 22 m), which according to the GOM will be executed as per the availability of funds. PWD work is programmed for completion before 31 March 1998 at a cost of Rs 55.52 m (US$ 1.6 m).
Lessons Learned
81. The main lessons learned from the project are as follows:
(a) The unsatisfactory performnance on the low cropped areas as against the available CCA, is mainly due to the unreliability of water supplies and insufficient water resources in the basins. Until an in depth study is carried out in the two major basins affecting the subproject areas, no further expansion of OFD works should be implemented, and no further extension of main canals should be taken up.
(b) Funds for O&M are based on norms which need updating and should be substantially increased to ensure effective preventive and periodic maintenance of the infrastructure under the control of ID. The circle at Aurangabad has worked out the detailed requirements based on actual needs. An updating is required and followed up by a critical look by the GOM.
(c) An immediate survey is needed to identify the rehabilitation needs of all infrastructure mainly on the minors and field canals'. To safeguard the vast investments made in the irrigation subsector, a rehabilitation project should be prepared. No new projects should be taken up until the operation and maintenance of existing projects are improved.
(d) to resolve the problem of poor maintenance of the field channel system, it is suggested that: (a) ID staff responsible for the formation of associations be given intensive training in preventive and periodic maintenance activities; (b) an effective supervision schedule for Section Officers, and Canal Inspectors, be introduced and higher level staff should monitor the activities; (c) during the formation period, maintenance activities should be detailed not in class rooms b,ut at field sites. This could be done at handing over. The groups could be taken to sites where infrastructure is in a severe state of disrepair; (d) the thrust of the training courses at WALMI should be directed more towards preventive and periodic maintenance and should be carried out at site.
(e) The effectiveness of the unit responsible for the formation of WUAs should not be judged on the numbers formed, and tumed-over to farmers, but on the
The infrastructureto be assessedis limitedto existingworks completed prior to the commencementof MCIP Ill. 53
effectiveness of the associations not only on financial management and operational aspects, but also on maintenance aspects. It is important to have a follow up programme to ensure that all requirements are achieved.
(f) Studies should be accorded their much needed priority. Delays experienced on previous Bank funded projects continue to plague current projects. More stringent covenants should be included and management of the Borrower and Bank should closely monitor progress and take early action to ensure that target dates are met.
(g) To optimise the use of available water supplies, the PPDR is being implemented. The benefits from this pilot project can only be derived if the distributary network to be eventually managed by farmers is operated and maintained to the required standards. Government involvement in the maintenance of infrastructure in areas where the system is introduced should continue until farmers are able to appreciate the importance of O&M.
(h) In order to facilitate timely implementationof an agricultural component in an irrigation project, there is a need to have a separate budget allocation for the component which should be a part of the project cost. Moreover, to ensure effective co-ordination between the AD and the ID, a Project Co-ordination Committee of high level officials is needed, with funds passed directly from the GOM Finance Department to the AD. The component should be closely monitored and evaluated by the AD and the Project Co-ordinationCommittee.
(i) Although implementationof the ERP is at an early phase the following lessons can so far be drawn: (i) an R&R programme must have a policy delineated by the State Government detailing the various activities to be carried out, budget allocations, scope and involvement of NGOs, institutional mechanisms, and monitoring and evaluation procedures; (ii) any project incorporating an R&R component should have an exclusive budget earmarked for R&R which should be a part of the overall project cost and passed directly from the GOM Finance to the Rehabilitation Department to facilitate timely implementation; and (iii) regular monitoring is critical for timely and successful implementation.
D. Follow-up
82. The mission will return to Rome and prepare a draft ICR, in accordance with World Bank guidelines, for submissionto the IDA before 28 February 1997, which will then transmit the draft ICR to the borrower for comment. 54 INDIA: MaharashtraComposite Irrigation Project III ImplementationCompletion Report Appendix 1: Mission's Aide-Memoire
Attachment 1: Financial Program of Balance Works of MCIP III
Cost of Programme Programme for Work Balance 1/97 to 3/97 Work _1997-98 1998-9 19-2000 (Rs Million) ID-I 1132.24 110.85 693.43 167.74 160.22 ID-I 202.43 30.27 113.64 36.50 . 22.02 PWD 55.52 8.06 47.46 0 R&R 787.31 30.00 250.00 250.00 257.31 Agri. Extn. Programme 39.26 39.26 - - Studies 50.60 24.10 26.50 - Implementationof DSRP 203.50 32.80 130.70 40.00 Recommendations
Total 2470.86 275.34 1261.73 494.24 439.55 55
IMPLEMENTATIONCOMPLETION REPORT
INDIA
MAHARASHTRACOMPOSITE IRRIGATION PROJECT III
(CR. 1621-IN)
APPENDIX2
ECONOMICAND FINANCIALANALYSIS
A. INTRODUCTION
General
1. This appendix details the economic re-evaluation of MCIP Im carried out by the ICR mission. It compares the methodologyand the results of the SAR, in the case of the Jayakwadi and Majalgaon subprojects, and those of the consultant's feasibility study for the remaining subprojects which were included at the time of restructuring. In addition, the impacts of the project on farmers' incomes have been re-estimated and are compared to those which were anticipated in the SAR at the time the originalproject was formulated.
2. Agricultural Benefits. MCIP Im was designed to provide irrigation to previously rainfed areas and to raise agricultural production in areas already commanded through improving irrigation facilities, drainage, landshaping and water management. Since the project focused excessively on construction of irrigation infrastructure to the detriment of improved water use efficiency, the ICR mission concludedthat project benefits are confined to the areas which have been, or will be, irrigated as a result of the MCIP m project. No benefits could therefore be attributed to improved water management in the subproject command areas outside of those directly associated with the MCIP Im project which were already being irrigated prior to MCIP m.
3. Two types of agriculturalbenefits were quantified.The first is those associated with canal irrigation and the second those associated with groundwaterrecharging from canal water.
(a) Canal irrigation benefits. Here benefits are confined to areas in the subproject commands which have actually been irrigated as a result of project works from the start of the project up to the latest availabledata for the 1995/96 season. Future canal irrigated areas in each subproject have been projected by the mission based on actual performance since the start of the project. 56
(b) Dugwell irrigation. Benefits from groundwater recharging have been assessed for each of the subprojects'. The quantificationof these benefits is based on historical data on the number of dugwells in the subproject command areas included in MCIP m.
4. The agricultural benefits quantified are based on present and future crop budgets and cropping patterns, under both rainfed and irrigated conditions, which have been reassessed through detailed field work by the ICR mission. Irrigationpotential in project benefitingareas is assumed to be reached at a faster rate than was projected in the SAR, viz. seven years as opposed to twelve years.
5. Past Irrigation Performancein the Subprojects. The actual areas irrigated have been considerably below the areas which have been supplied with irrigation infrastructure and have fluctuated widely (see Appendix 3, Table 7). In Appendix3, Table 8, the actual areas irrigated in each year are expressed as a percentage of the areas available for irrigation in each respective year. These percentage figures provide a performance rating for each of the subprojects. Ratings have averaged 16% in Majalgaon, 17% in Bhima, 19% in Upper Penganga, 37% in Jayakwadi, 64% in Kukadi and 65% in Krishna. Overall, performancehas been disappointing. Kukadi and Krishna have consistently performed the best over the most recent seasons, while Jayakwadi has performed much better than Majalgaon,Bhima and Upper Penganga.
6. Future Scenarios. Two possible future scenarios were defined - a 'likely" and an 'bptimistic" Both of these scenarios are based on actual areas irrigated up to 1995/96, for which data are available. They differ with respect to the projections of future areas irrigated. In the 'likely scenario," the future areas irrigated are calculated by considering the areas which are planned to be created up to the end of the balance works in 1999/2000 and assume that the average subproject-wise achievement in areas actually irrigated up to 1995/96 will continue. In the case of the 'bptimistic scenario" again the planned expansion in the areas created through the balance works are considered, but in terms of future achievementsin areas irrigated two assumptionshave been made: (a) for the subprojects which have performed reasonably (Jayakwadi, Kukadi and Krishna) it is assumed that 100% of the areas created up to the end of the balance works would be supplied with irrigation water from year 1999/2000; (b) for the other subprojects which have performed poorly, it has been assumed that only 50% of the areas that will be created will be irrigated from 1999/2000.The 'likely"scenario was adopted as the base case since it is considered to most likely reflect future performance which should be realizable provided the project is completed and the ID and WUAs adopt sensible O&M plans.
l Seepagelosses from canal water are significantin all of the subprojectswhich recharge wells below command areasof the canals. Seepageoccurs since all fieldchannels and a greaterpart of the minorsare unlined. 57
7. Project Capital Costs. Nominal historicalworks-related project costs' bear little relation to the real costs since inflation diminishesthe purchasing power of the Rupee. To make cost figures more representativeof the real resources used in the subprojects,each year's Rupee cost was converted into first quarter 1997 Rupees before summing them. The Wholesale Price Index for India was used for this purpose (Appendix 2, Table 1). Actual expenditureson irrigation works up to December 31, 1996 have been used (Appendix 3, Table 3). In addition, the estimated costs of balance works have been includedin the re-evaluationwhich are detailed in Appendix3, Table 4.
8. O&M and Cost Recovery. Funds are insufficient to properly maintain irrigation infrastructure both off-farm and on-farm. Currentlythe standard norm used for O&M is Rs.90/ha. The ICR mission considers this totallyinadequate. Mission estimatesrange from Rs. 1,470/ha to Rs. 1,955/ha in financial prices2 . These were convertedinto economic terms by applying a conversion factor of 0.9. Currently irrigation water charges3, depending on the crop grown, range from Rs. 100/ha to Rs.200/ha in kharif, Rs.150/ha to Rs.300/ha in rabi, Rs.300/ha to Rs.800/ha for the hot weather season, to Rs. 1,750/ha for perennial crops (Appendix3, Table 9). There is therefore a need to substantially raise water charges if full recovery of O&M costs is to be realized. In the economic re-evaluation, water charges are ignored since they are a transfer payment. O&M costs are includedwhich are based on the mission's estimates of the real costs of O&M required to ensure that the canal irrigation infrastructure created in the project-affectedcommand areas is adequatelymaintained.
9. Sunk Costs. As in the SAR and the feasibility study, all costs associated with the provision of irrigationfacilities in the subprojectsconcerned, which had been incurred before MCIP , have been treated as sunk costs and consequentlyignored.
B. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
SAR Economic Analysis
10. Basic Assumptions. Tradable farm outputs and fertilizerwere valued at border equivalent prices based on internationalprices, while the non-tradableoutputs and most farm inputs were adjusted from financial prices to economic values by the standard conversion factor (SCF) of 0.8. Unskilled labour was priced at two-thirds the financial price. For civil works, a variety of conversion factors were used ranging from 0.7 to 0.8 and for equipmentthe conversionfactor used was 0.8.
1 Equipment,vehicles, studies, training, rural roads,bridges, and rehabilitationand resettlementof PAPs,were excludedfrom the projectcosts for the purposeof the economicre-evaluation because these itemsare generaland cannotbe directlyattributed to each of the subprojects. 2 Jayakwadi, Majalgaon and Upper Penganga Rs.1,955/ha; BhimaRs. 1,643/ha; Krishna Rs.1,612/ha; Kukadi Rs. 1,470/ha.
3 Thesewere last revisedin July1994. 58
11. Results. The economicrates of return calculated in the SAR, over a forty year time span, were:
Jayakwadi - MCIP I and GOM portion (78,650 ha) 29% Jayakwadi- new area (68,000 ha 18% Majalgaon - km 0-30 (24,000 ha) 13% 12. Accordingto the SAR, the risks that farmers' responses to irrigationmay not be adequate, and yield levels would be below those anticipated,would be minimized,through: (a) the provision of landshaping and improved system operation methods which would ensure all farmers including tail- enders would receive reliable water supply; and (b) placing emphasis on increasing agricultural productivity through SDDs, technical support to farmers, research and development, and monitoring and evaluation.
Feasibility Study Economic Analysis
13. Basic Assumptions. Most basic assumptionsused in the feasibilitystudy are not explicit in the Consultant's report. Border parity prices were calculated for all crops for which World Bank forecasts were available and for fertilizer. For the remaining crops and farm inputs 'appropriate" factors were applied to their respective financial prices to reflect their economic values. A shadow wage rate was used equivalentto 80% of financialrates.
14. Results. The followingeconomic rates of return were calculated:
Kukadi - base case (167,401 ha) 5% Bhima - base case (134,140 ha) 17%0 l Krishna - base case (62,990 ha) 18% Upper Penganga - RBC km 0-110 9% Upper Penganga - RBC km 0-177 11%
15. The low ERR calculatedfor the Kukadi subproject was attributed to its relativelyhigh cost and lower cropping intensities due to water shortages. The consultants concluded that the Kukadi subproject should not be financed and that alternativesneeded to be considered capable of supporting higher cropping intensities.
ICR EconomicRe-evaluation
16. Basic Assumptions. Tradable farm outputs and fertilizerwere valued at border equivalent prices based on internationalprices (Appendix 2, Table 2) while the non-tradable outputs and farm inputs were adjusted from financialprices to economicvalues by the standard conversion factor (SCF) of 0.9. Farm labour and project costs (both capital and O&M) were also adjusted by the SCF of 0.9. 59
17. Crop Budgets. The detailed crop budgets on which the re-evaluationrests are provided in Appendix 2, Tables 15-34.
18. Farm Models. The farm models specifiedfor each of the subprojects which were used to quantifythe impact of the project are given in Appendix2, Tables 3 to 8.
19. Benefit and Cost Streams. The detailed benefit and cost streams for each of the subprojects are provided in Appendix 2, Tables 9 to 14. Details relating to the derivation of the flows are footnoted.
20. Summary of Results. The recalculated economicrates of return for the base case ('likely scenario") over a forty year time span, were:
Jayakwadi - (88,000 ha) 10% Majalgaon - (58,000 ha) -8% Upper Penganga - (23,000 ha) -11% Kukadi - (20,000 ha) 3% Bhima - (28,000 ha) naI Krishna - (10,800) 4%
21. Sensitivity Analysis. The following sensitivityanalysis tests were undertaken in the re- evaluation:
Increased areas irrigated. A major assumption of the re-evaluationrelates to the projected future irrigated areas. Hence a 'bptimistic"scenariowas specifiedin which the future irrigated areas in each of the subprojects were set equal to the maximum areas in any year which have been achievedup until 1995/96 (see Appendix 3, Table 1 for details). These ranged from 7% to 65% of the irrigated areas created. The re- estimated ERRs are given below:
Base Optimistic
Jayakwadi - (88,000 ha) 10% 19% Majalgaon - (58,000 ha) -8% 7%0l Upper Penganga - (23,000 ha) -11% -2% Kukadi - (20,000 ha) 3% 4% Bhima - (28,000 ha) na -12% Krishna - (10,800 ha) 4% 4%
For this subprojectthe net benefitflow was negativein all yearsso that an ERR couldnot be calculated. 60
Increased incremental agricultural production. The incremental agricultural benefits have been assessed by the ICR mission through detailed field analysis. They are based on what has actually occurred in the project command areas. The agriculturalcomponent was delayed. Essentiallyit got off the ground only in the last two years before credit closure. However, its results over this short period of time have been impressive, although they have been confined to relatively small parts of the project command areas. Unfortunately,it seems that this good work will not be replicatedto other command areas since the componentwill most likely not continue following credit closure. Had the agriculture componentbeen successfully launched at the start of the project, and irrigationwater supplymore reliable, there is no doubt that farmers' switches to irrigated farming, and hence their responses in terms of increased production, could have been greater. Changes in the ERRs if agricultural benefits were increasedby 25% and 50% are shown below:
Base +25% agric. +50% agric. benefitsbenefits Jayakwadi - (88,000 ha) 10% 16% 22% Majalgaon - (58,000 ha) -8% -2% 1% U. Penganga - (23,000 ha) -11% -7% -5% Kukadi - (20,000 ha) 3% 5% 7% Bhima - (28,000 ha) na na na Krishna- (10,800) 4% 6% 8%
- Reduced project costs .The project was not an overly expensive undertaking in terms of cost per hectare created (US$2,284/ha). However, since the actual areas irrigated have been much below those created, the real costs per hectare irrigated are much higher. If the maximum area irrigated in any one season is used after project restructuring (45,876 ha in 1994/95),the costs work out at US$9,555/ha due largely to the fact that costly infrastructure was created but not fully utilised due to a shortage of water and inadequate water managementpractices. The major cost item was canal lining- especiallyof the main canals. Excessive lining was carried out and costs could have been reduced significantly had selective lining been done. Also there was a cost over-run, which in dollar terms was 41%, some of which was due to the devaluation of the rupee against the dollar during project construction. The 'likely" scenario was re-calculated for two cost reductions, viz. 25% and 50%, which yield the followingERRs:
Base -25% -50% costs costs Jayakwadi - (88,000 ha) 10% 14% 21% Majalgaon - (58,000 ha) -8% -7% -5% U. Penganga - (23,000 ha) -11% -10% -8% 61
I Kukadi- (20,000ha) 3% 6% 9% Bhima - (28,000 ha) na na na Krishna- (10,800) 4% 5% 7%
C. AGRICULTURAL AND FARM INCOME IMPACTS
Agricultural Impact
22. Since the project was considerablyaltered at the time of restructuring, when four more subprojects were added to the two subprojects included in the original project, it is not meaningful to compare the agriculturalimpact estimated at appraisalto that at the time of the ICR. However, it can be concluded that the impact of the project on agricultural production has been much less than that estimated at appraisal since the area actually irrigated has averaged only 36% of that created during project implementationdue to a scarcity of water. The situation in the future is not likely to change unless major changes are made by the IIDat the river basin level in terms of optimisingthe allocationof water to dams, and by the ID staff, WUAs and farmers in terms of water management at the scheme level.
Cropping Intensities
23. The cropping intensitiesestimated at appraisaland at the time of the ICR are shown below.
SAR
Jayakwadi and Majalgaon Present rainfed 100%-105% Future irrigated 175%
ICR
Jayakwadi/ U.Penganga Kukadi Bhima Krishna Majalgaon
Present rainfed 93%-99% 67% 100% 100% 100% Future irrigated 175% 124% 159% 155% 157%0l
24. In the Jayakwadi and Majalgaon subprojects, whilst the rainfed cropping intensity is estimated to be slightlylower at project implementationend than it was at appraisal,the future irrigated cropping intensity estimates remain unchanged. For the additional subprojects irrigated cropping intensities are all estimated to be lower than in the Jayakwadi and Majalgaon subprojects due less experience of farmers in irrigated agriculture. 62
25. It was considered by the ICR nission that full irrigation potential in pre-project rainfed areas would be reached in 7 years rather than the more conservative12 years assumed at appraisal. The main reasons for this faster switch from rainfed to irrigated farming are: (i) the increasing number of private dugwells in the project commandareas and the impact this has had on expanding the knowledge base of farmers of irrigated farming since appraisal in the project command areas; and (iii) the reasonably active irrigation extension in the area, stimulated in the most recent years through direct project interventions.
Farmers' Incomes
26. SAR. Average farm incomes1 for a 4.5 hectare farm calculated in the SAR under rainfed (without-project)and irrigated (with-project)conditions are summarised below. Full details, including the crop budgets and cropping patterns for each of the subprojects are containedin Appendix 2.
Net Farm Income (1997 financialprices) WithoutProject With Project Change (Rs) (Rs) (%) Jayakwadi 23,020 85,720 272 Majalgaon 11,283 115,774 926
27. ICR re-evaluation. Farmers' incomes recalculatedby the ICR mission for a typical 4.5 hectare farm are tabulated below for each of the subprojects. Net farm incomes are compared under present rainfed conditionsto those expected under irrigationat full development.
Net FarmnIncome (1997 FinancialPrices) Present Rainfed Future Irrigated Change (Rs) (Rs) (%)
Jayakwadi 12,592 58,684 366 Majalgaon 11,922 69,271 481 U. Penganga 6,575 57,119 769 Kukadi 8,218 52,157 535 Bhima 10,260 49,233 380 Krishna 16,653 78,455 371
28. For the Jayakwadi subproject, the re-estimated farm incomes under both rainfed and irrigated conditions are lower than were estimated at appraisal. In the case of Majalgaon, the re- estimated net farm income under rainfed conditions is almost equal to that estimated at appraisal, although the re-estimatednet farm income under irrigated conditionsis only slightlymore than half that
1 Incomesare averagesweighted by the areas of the differentsubproject segments analysed in the SAR.Rupee valuesinflated to firstquarter 1997 prices using the WPIindex (Table 1). 63
estimated at appraisal. Comparing the estimated changes in farm incomes as a result of the project, the change is now estimated to be considerablyhigher in Jayakwadi(366% compared to 272%) but much lower in Majalgaon (481% compared to 926%). Nevertheless, the impact of providing irrigation to farmers is still estimated to provide a substantial lift in farmers' incomes. It should be stressed that these changes in farmers' incomes only apply to a limited number of farmers in the project-affected command areas - probably less than 40% of all farmers. For the farmers who have not received canal water, or additional well water from groundwater recharging, the project has not had any impact on their incomes. 64
INDIA: MaharashtraComposite Irrigation Project III ImplementationCompletion Report Appendix2: Economicand FinancialAnalysis Table 1: WholesalePrice Indices and Inflatorsfor India
Fiscal Year (a) WPI Inflators 1997Q1=100(b) 1997Q1=1
1985/86 38.27 2.61 1986/87 43.56 2.30 1987188 45.43 ___ 2.20 1988/89 48.92 2.04 1989/90 53.08 1.88 1990/91 58.67 1.70 1991/92 65.90 1.52 1992/93 69.81 _ 1.43 1993/94 75.51 _ 1.32 1994/95 83.78 _ 1.19 1995/96 91.40 1.09 1996/97 | 94.34 1.06
1997Q1 . _ 100.00 1.00
(a) Fiscal yearWPI = averageof Q2,Q3,Q4and Ql _ (b) Source: InternationalFinacial Statistics, IMF, variousissues .8dmso- - b I- -
-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~a=dll i 0040 d I - pANTY(1) _ _ iEI 13618 m GlumS 12 S SUGA 16N DAO) 90 CANE PRAECTED Y 117A PRIC 2_
h Ut5. T 2566 60340 140 0 0474 i i0 O 797120 3X 060 13640 Ii 5Z 40 bdlbsIIOIUOdsga,S 7 i 56' 118 I111 It 116 7 I III _ = I_ b csnstaedl dIS"doomf _ f 5SI 71201 14167 *io01 510478 11154 5 250 75 44934 0 16314 l?4t OUAUTYUADASTMENT #0 - 0 -,O 00 *0600 000 0000 0 o 7Do 35 1000c 1000 1 t000 K MARK5ETELVA4T 24 12 701 1103B 4020 161S30 1U04 02 43 27 6 t57 o n -743 kasmaunha _ USSUtT 5000 10000o 00 0 00 250 0 50 00 .o000 1000 50 00 500 1000 CIF*MN PORT USt 20412 012701 11763 15620 36530 14502 17323 257 27 21095 23314 16743 EXC54AIGERATE t4 RIADSI 5 3560 150 230 356 3560 1560 3 60 3560x: CIF IDIAN POfi AsUT 1041062 260076 6150 24 16303 647 4822 6 f o0405 0 _ 62W46 1106 4 Pod RsT 261n 77 226s 157 6 14000 -121512 11708 15 I7 228 1577 - 46 14102 Wemas Rs/Mt - 150 20000 20000 20000 24000 20 -200 - 2500W 10000 IOO 10000 anohiU t202W2 00 120W 1200W tlO0W 20 12000 1500Isw 12000 120O t200W
4_ased so 8 tlW2h00ii f 2dhd I f Ws 5 0 3s ff3542 P8 = 07 S 105 075 700 0170 p d"o % *2~~~~~~~~~~5W-200 W tO00 -100 Woo 050 eo 1W O t WWIO
VA ufdco"e -- R&lT 25WW _ OLESALE VALUE s5 Rmat ff7b4 M12521 50006tOS.60 5e 55 Sf 5t 5 f 1b 1 i1 _
FARWGATEPstfCE R";tT 47tU tW5026St Sf 0 5n5 5025 tf 7 *t 072SS Ot1704 _ 67t420 5 = ECONOSC FAXK>TlEPtUCE ¢47tt~~~~9051 Si5 0 t5to5W1 4 5 07 Sa 0--2- *t43 0tn
[4)bdzishe PA= Ii tITY10.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0(0 oXL6 "_t_l bSCF I
t4}-l vw uuedZh- Rs__ INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project -II Appendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis Jayakwadi and Majalgaon Sub Projects Table 3: 4.5 HectareFarm Model - Jayakwadi
l______j% of typical holding |
Season/Crop Present - Rainfed Future - Irrigated
Kharif _ _ ._ l _l Millet _ __ 10 _ 18 Sorghum 18 __ 22 Groundnuts 14 Pulses 10 18
Rabi_ Sorghum 30 31 c Safflower 9 _ 0' ____ Chickpea 4 ______. Wheat 12 _____Sunflower . 19
Hot Weather Vegetables l | 10 Groundnuts 3
Biseasonal ______Cotton 12 22
Perennial ______I_ Bananas 2 _ Sugar Cane _ 4
Cropping Intensity 93 175 INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project -11 _ - Appendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis . ______Jayakwadiand MajalgaonSub.Projects l Table 4: 4.5 HectareFarm Model - Majalgaon
% of typical holding _
Season/Crop Present - Rainfed Future - Irrigated
______Kharif l -| Millet _ 10.__ _ | 18 ._ _ Sorghum 10 20 __. Groundnuts . 14 --- Pulses ______18 _ _ 18 .
Rabi _ | _ . 0% _ Sorghum 28 20 | Chickpea . 10 Wheat .__ _ 10 Sunflower 12 10
Hot Weather Groundnuts 10
Biseasonal Cotton 21 _ 30
Perennial Bananas 3 _ ___ Sugar Cane _ 12
Cropping Intensity 99 175 INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project -11/ Appendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis 'UpperPenganga SubProject I Table 5: 4.5 Hectare Farm Model
% of typicalholding
Season/Crop Present- Rainfed Future- Irrigated
Kharif . _ Millet _ 133_ 33 ll Sorghum 33 Groundnuts 10 Vegetables _ 5 Pulses __ 8 Paddy _ 5
______------ab i ______Sorghum _ 5 . 8 | Wheat _17 Chickpea _ 5 5
______Hot Weather _ . Sunflower I Groundnuts 4
Biseasonal Cotton ___ 31 35
Perennial ____ = .. Bananas 2 ______Sugar Cane _ . ___ 4 l
______CroppingIntensity 67 124 INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project - 111 Appendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis Kukadi Sub Project _____ ~Table 6: 4. 5 HectareJ.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ fiarm Model
h%of typical holding
Season/Crop Present - Rainfed Future- Irrigated -_---
Kharif : Millet _ 22 l Sorghum 11 16 _ __ Groundnuts 11 47 Pulses 11 Vegetables 16
Rabi ______. ____ Sorghum 27 14 Wheat 24 Chickpea 18 14 Vegetables ____ _ 14 Sunflower 14
Cropping Intensity 100 159
______I _ __ =______INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project -11 Appendix 2: Economicand Financial Analysis
______Bhima Sub-Project ______Table 7: 4.5 HectareFarm Model
___ _ _% of typical holding | _ _
Season/Crop Present - Rainfed Future- Irrigated
______Kharif Millet _ 17 _ _ 17 I o | Sorghum ___ _ 5 25 I Groundnuts 6 41
Rabi . . _ _ Sorghum 43 _ 34 | Wheat 20 -| Chickpea 22 13 Sunflower _ __ 7 _ _ _
___ _ Bis _aso ,a ______Biseasonal_| .______Chillies _ | 5
Cropping Intensity I I 100 155 INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project - il/ Appendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis Krishna Sub -Project Table 8: 4.5 Hectare FarrnM odel
% of typical holding
Season/Crop Present- Rainfed Future - Irrigated
Kharif _ Sorghum __ 28 .J/37 Groundnuts 14 22 Maize 14 Pulses 14 . ______
______Paddy ______15 ______
Rabi l Sorghum __ _ 15 17 Wheat _ 20 Chickpea 15 13
Hot Weather Maize __ l 3 Groundnuts 10
Biseasonal Spices l 10
Perenn-ial l Sugar Cane 10
. Cropping Intensity 100 _ 157 VEARISM? 1967M UM ti062 565M 19791 167201 161M 2075 2499" 294576 2062S 4903 420o 42001 420010 42O0 42001 4201 42010 42010 420016
PIWJCT CEOSFTS
-Aecee 1,0.1440.1.35.17bad 606 32472 20357 so0632 10673 1211 299s 9626 255623 27040 4000 4000 4000 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 Atea 5.0 le.1ihn c"wM .0401`."2 I2. 42 2.4 61306 53312 4960 762 1624 26 62 46352 6746 52 34 597 6000 600 60 60 60 90 60 60 60
A," c9.te .h. 3Mmm.u 9 241R..j9 77067.76790 7965656610075007,40079 6737 62261 K 6416716009 635950 66640 6_1 96 71 96 76 71 66 1 66
&MCWJIt .ftw 47.22. 26.4 6 G417 49608 1660 t 1662 25729 24903 32478 02412 36210366276 426626 366.26 42662 4628 4 63 426636 3626 426626
TOTACOT ,0 432 391 8 2710 6 641 299626 6S144 0 123 23746 36990. 27356 4273 61206 1145732 o666 67614 976 9766 571 5766 9766. 576614
TOAl" ngM IT 47ss 256636472 331 44606 14966 12114 26019 6762 20962 23974 43000 44269 44432 44423 44423 44422 44423 44433 44433 44423
AwTIENEPIT .2431 .211 .1549 .1 5230 14619 .8263 -296 4612 .742 8722 1326 20463 2422 24262 2429 24292 24292 3429 2429 2429 24292
NIV112%40of 2629 6o
696hmu, . ea fiSt 4m 69r 1 l S790. 7cl0001 914.0514m& 17 23 36 $3 65 $9 64 04 71 881 88 7i M 71 71 88 709AICOST9 18454~~"R 11616216 17 9430SSM1991921 1924322 197271 1521SS19134769 29 159709 9894553 45320 4386 39660 3696M 203686 3996M 3960366 8
PROJECT COSEFTS
1cooun'm foo ca 008 d191.0 2 5 8 4 1 109 515 53 13It6 223 47 547 54671 61479 s0947 547 Goo a4 54c67 64 47 54 47 57 Am otd .,OW31 O.44 423 4660 42IS 4890 39047 510,6 9623 BUST 51672 91 16 69 59 1 66 966 51 Th.~O" n.4d44tolool 392500 402 40 2412 4009 433O 3426 4296 - 42 6 429 3 4.2 6 42 546 429 42 428 3 42 6 42 6 429 cm lfooftmdd, ate.(.A 4986 3U13326343690340 349 3490 72531 563 35.37 3526 91 33 61 33 59 22 5
PiMtso 60 f Ia0 3 0t 01010165 37 0374 379 362o 36 293 1 393 232s 33 2 393 239 2 39 2 39 2 39 2 38
TTLCSS..t 00411.. f 154 1162 14 0 21 0 2 s?1 M1636 649 127666 9699 1709 4 372 14388 3as 34586 93a 10 69 30N 1484N 1484S
6uWe ft1 .,Qtoaol. 7 $9 10 39 74 332 5 -19929 9942 7942 10440 -2097 143045023 260 640 .060 -20600 130600 1406 4060
Al" othd fet, fMd W7 3 s 5 1 3 6 48 83266 2591 2994 26146 2677 21709 2740 274 2740 2740 2740
F.blOtlllloa(tw mdl- i i 528 S3 0 754 54 18634 96476 99647 92471 944 9997 99947 999 SIt oalw Sal 609 96 1409o 4790. 593 3696 5660 233a1 i 6997 s660 999 9464 16026s 14.2 951 96491 16823 16114s 1636s 639 OThodwoo toot,.,3 076 .49s 2.9 707 7701 5 4636 428660 29 922 17264 43106 240 4 2291 2266 2322 2373 2417 244 TOA6NF-th 5.09 1072 9666 4921_564SS 3 466 8973 457 34065 93S31 92303157693 9.36 31 3794 97293 31779 69 359949 9932 9976231
::Z96N Wwf -449 1411 62 100 -77 999 .96 -16 09 .6124 -1309 59.662 -82374 13759 912 49 93746 913295 -12443 1 133674760 9460274943 47 40o 112%164.lac'al -646.22 lt1o.1 , s S0? s 3 4 S iis ott 3 I4 9Eghh u 49916.91 S4 1 i -96 2 3 .03 2 0 -06 2 0 -06 2 0 -0D--06
NOTyES lmin)I12 5 2 G 49 52 2 6 2 5 2 s 61 6i, 261 6I 61 T-thol.od oM leaWOKqdl116, SOo 04 d7OO 040 26 2O 20 40 2l 0ttt?t40tw 2.t40b2t,40to4 2? El"al to. LW*to . .2 o I J 999 060so011410000020 .006 asO 9 28, 27 2e5t9I 2lo 5 2710011 2C.t50 3 TAo.ooo611 00 oooai0d)01124lo701toIt,.CCA ed5.931C(95eolt,b2le,92tO2Os 030104dote1199196 22o,2lot
61516.1 M* owldEt,itolad..I ted SCI~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~II I I
ERRoaod140 l%eloojsboto-40 6 ee IAD4 - tfshif Cempos/teIn*wtoba fPj*ct - IN_ _ _ _ _x~~~~~ppof2 .Eco_mc xrd P_m-* Analyst _.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I _-aw Dofi telM.o l7n - --______
s7 = rndYEAR 1o I7S IS 19 260931 0 202 1s 82 I 3i62 197iu m"884 18415 24087 2001i02 20020 20nio40 200400 200 00 200 200000
PRiOECTcoSTS
Ac£0 mAd_elec _.2_7_ I 108.20 1672. 0 4260 734418 3 72 42 2000 0 10 2 2 = 1 0 800 ccew co i.s n am 19s7cwi n1 130,; 1 63 _ 42 74 533 & 330 7 37s 19 oa oa oa0 =
Amo 5.d INW31 = t0. 0x 7,32720 11,52726 2305 363021,15 18 2 2,0 230501. 14 8350 72
Inrl"J Oa "Mz 4/ ___ 4 SS 7 47-1 11 12 37 13 1603 15 29 !6 53 15 63 is6 * 15fi.3 15 53 is *: 15 53 15 53 Ca m5 m ofdd of51 2484 1.8 2502 122 86 5 12 647 64 64 7 647 6.47 64 64a4 847 847 o Id m..IocOft1 368 41 43 60 460 50 62o351 561 1.s2s 121 5 621 52 63156 ss
TOto~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~ao COTS0oa O oco0 o 0o 000 13262 203Sl - 42 37 WA7st ^J 34 an s so 22n 21 to 21.74 t7.0 i7.0 17.03 17 03 17.0t 17.021-709
PiioECTUNCFITS=== ______-
Al" WNPMt=sCr c I 71 82s a0 1 021co I'mia 2,0200a 3.729S 15,75512 so00oa S5sa I'Ssaia Il,soo 00 sco I.SC0o I Il,Sooa01.00 Iso1,sc00 00 o
10.0Wnlmoo (acloOI 26532 3813a 14 3S 13 2 6,7 70 0,463i.728 ee ,72Sa ,72 1726 728 728 7206
Rat Nr &. 52 t5_ 4 84 3194 2645 25 71 2 36476 22 5 57 6764 6 47 6408 87 2 24 6 4 6 94 6 4 Al" otl f 2rT 220n210 33at861412221266 252 58 213 58 002dhm e ed 1 03 . 1645 0 422 3 1 7 3 a 7 28 522 7 2 85 21 21 5428 28 1
f dth r Ipro endl a62 S 6 9 7 31 7 aSS 7 99 8.33 S Go 5 5ti 6 5i 5 5i 6i81 a NIT68NS l 000 000r 000 000 0_0 000 8 .2_683_2 41076 .32020 -36750OS2924 .1270 13 33 13 9 14 58 1 21 158 7 5183 1521 1 283 166 Srh "ar __ _ _ 13 as 14U3i Is 11 8is SI11 52 123 17 91 17 94 17 94 17 94
FOA6.07h 484 700 12691 283 2681s 420 18.41 630 6611 67609 6782 7138 7227 7238 7226 7 238 4 5 10rritl e=-4 94 6 34 10 54 16 72 24 Is n7 30 52 4 55 07 5 7 92t 62a5 23 , 42 94 62 94 62 94 a2 94
Ger rr^rar rrv = ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~074 O sS I a0 2 51 3 62 5fIII 7 93 6.26 a 59 11.8 9 13 9 33 9 44 9 44 9 44
TOTAL11it1WIT | 4 94 7 as I1 59 IS 31 26 i 41 ao 5 .46 63 ao as 51 67 SO S97 71n 30 72 27 72 31 72 38 72 38
MET KNEaFTS | 000 O x OCO0 ca0 oa00 oo 12766 ISII 53 -450 79 5 24 32202z -357 5C 35.75 -41OS -43 77 50 71 52 69 64 27 55 is 552 29 fS 9 5 S 5 29
NV 422%2108l 40 _12 stwmi__
89 1406 j- .9 %
NlOTES = 11CM, *lduf noAols 0Kods I00 5502(s0 .t248 .d .os.. 0 NWd rm IIhd.*sm1s ___.
31Asmo "1 ar_ oer rwc. lw mai m42w i.s toted dw CCA smdx MC111 dithSlot om lost1 of Mr9m1 do_ 18606.
5rASmn w SWmf Soomw_t woddSo 151% ol cr Ar. C coos O 2 5 hr8..0 md1 to.,is .,b y ppip SCF. 5/ 11d8 orr .. NcsdoSIeO sdOs Mrd brSCf $ ii AcsMMmo,n 001 u0199L96 Ifti'" Ito wdvM 1 5 .0 loom us" WSI I _ _ rI ASS.d to be 1% .1 cdi014 v 11 gd by"onv0|0 N PAOJECTISNEFITS~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ lootntedsoiolId tin. 01. YEAR.75a 97 988 1410l 912 46619 39260 14250 606 6002 697106 502659 192666 1600000001160020 1600304 160040S 2000 56000 12000
AU.eeeNW blmoon o.dIa. 5.3 W I 6 342 6327 179 60 0 1253l 564 566 220 220 220 260 260 260 26
Fos mmo 310. 1ta146 153 2w126 2489 2627 632 316 60 3360 36 6 60 20 30 26 6 6 Al ecOnd 5003. 10003044663 723 6.363 666 553720 1268 O 7.540200 000400425402 40 42 142 50 ThwumOd -.seata2 4o4 627 S70 653 5062 1 216 13401 54622 1422 54822 14632 5483 146 546 54632 .O.."aof sada.Iowet S 0 2 58 2 76 136aa 02 465 629 7 660 63 62 63 63 63 63 63
TOTLCOST no ete0 00 0 00l 4 26 9 34 2 4 3-07 376o9 4946 6546 23686 16626 726 7o26 7626 7626 7625 1725
Setentit" toaodlol d8am .6G387 4S 21 7132 6756 5037D 5169 5365 5623 1666 5665 5666 5666 Ab 6 mibt 50,MeW Wbtor(Ieda)42 6 W 11 7S49 916 10.60 12650 254.0 52600 1770 2570 3770
5.06.30W s". 348 7.7 5275I 2366 263 3669 627 64 82.65 60 67 9625so 50460 1066 534 5s 623 503623 0,e.nd.o.iere& Intol022 26 22 6 224 426? 694 761402 150.2 524M 4 526 142 5671473 5646 14702 57261
TOA.ONFowlS 546 7.67 5667 2394 39362 43 466662 2763 903 50333 S33a 359 a52669 5266 5322 52262 NT4FIth 00 00 00 00 00 .0 644 260 333 -6276 7676 7 42504660 206 6946 7056 66625033 10943 1536 15669 5526
614340 1 4756odtoeco)71 5 03 I9 361 1 3 l 5 IS0 6a 6
NOES.a M1Vl1anolI74 91 1.0 3 o 1.0 12 77 77 5Col Ndodh ",oldt1651 andoC' on. . ob9es. netd421and andisdslOistSs I0 20olit9ensnt 714b etlote. ong44 so9030. oe0too o113o45ootdt.233116l267e7ted00571I21hSe.020.13039tO9 62 70A 82.U 90 21oo04 SS
6AsC-de sea 0.h.34 ten2nwoOs be246403 s sea90lto. 26.12 @73.1OO4 le1n.026 I S 2.o.d 9I 44513003.44tel3In 6TOTAL aElET .oeso9lddtebob.a d.eY 5 e S SC F 9 3 932b0e3 II is 9 2led!2 325 75NET en0 le O1956 l.sot.OtOe ensFIT60 5000 bes oedt 7656no aeon494 3n33i9onsi-7 9 -60 8so 2 9 04 7 5 9 s 0 3 0 3 1 8 s99 16 NPVAo1.d12.40 beS .. 0010 .0 .,655320 Wbenu,o Sne INDM - Mahtashir9 CompositeIffgeton Project -IN ______Append&x 2 Economsc and F,nancA AnaIlsy BAn, S&ub.Iecf ._ 78 .3 fC%s,m Col,! dtB,h1 I(R.anjsm 1997 con, ., w I
YEAR 198n/a7 1987,88 196683 1089190 1990/91 1991192 109293 1983194 1994f95 -1995,96 1996197 1997/OS 1998,99 1999/00 2000/01 2001102 2002,03 2003/04 2004t50 200Sx 2006107 2007w PROJECTCOSTS kmwlllwo Cons, AcI.M 4I bOldn.s Wkslf 17771 175621 49711 058856 867231 72 44 III114 Ila984. a00 EOmm su6 or 188997vs- 2/ 228 71 209 34 532 40 77 38t 41 21 e6 10 100 03 1068e8 000
Afu a"eed (ha)3/ 837 00 3.937 00 8.235 00 19,021 00 18 33660 20.752 62 26.584 20 28.000X
cAmUSW O10t CaeSt4/S = _244 5 0o 9 78 128 148 1834 3 12 1991 19,S 199, 1s91 1981 1991 1891 1991
Ca CaoSll t ddlWma Si =S 082 049 00 1 47 33 67 0 844 673 7.03 OSMtCost eofaddtlo ws..*/ 0 04 00o 008 0 15 1 67 19 2 24 2 S4 2 88 2 86 2 88 2 88 2 2 86 2 86 TOTALCOSTS 000 000 000 000 000 000 22953 21220 53802 8591a S806 9C849 12476 1340t 2946 2277 2277 22.77 227 22.77 2277 2277 PROJECT 8ME6FfITS kmpgesd v.. -g5elod fo- cw4dsIh 7/ 271 432 598 1080 12208 14315 18450 18678 21000 21000 21000 21000 21000 21000 21000 21000
mes, b.,lfti Dnom tfounilw loihaioBno 2f = 4 ! as 94 147 1U43 2145 2461 2106 3116 als 315X 6ISC 3160 also 3160
f§lC VS.a " F _a _.. _ 70 0804 9 0o0 o0t o30 O4 09 so oss oss o 9^s 0 5 095 94 o0 g6ie g0
Tho hv ) e-0 49 *o 5 o 5 0 6 3 6t40 0 61 os 06 on 6 t 67 t 57 0 5E o o mh at"'ortl = _ _ _ _ = _ _ _ = _ 32 t83 32 8 33846 4 1 78 36 71 38 65 38 61 38 65 388 23865 65
S.n t*1. o _ _ 0"t79 1 29 _ a 3 29 36 22 42 32 so0 5t bS es so as65 7131 7 1225 71 l 72 26 724 724
GouQtww140t.'Ch.192 = O i 0 19 0 27 o 45 5 43 5 35 7 59 a 7t o003 10 30 lo 70 10591 10 78 lo 84 lo 87
TOTALfBEltEfITS 0 79 z 14 1 3 57 35 ?i 47 75 55 94 N6 l0 IS 67 78 61 el tK el so 825 3 03 53 30 83 3i
ffTtlEliEfiTS ooa oi0 ooc ooo oo ox 220 21060 5 3 0 568S12 551 34 -40 74 67 81 56794 48 20 55 2AlEl.ghth996/ae. V5.ells. *an,sO&fte 9887IJs do711wsltdl7e1 o.29 s48S7SGS lO6 95 5883 59 19 59 73 5028 tio53 60566 M/A.othIv,, aeC eeedSetaIma7 S eOe CA l20l C6 a/ISga. cleseIsw 58e02aK NPv 12%.40 ".4 4X333 26 Rs WmPo 5 119026 elof
EMt40s1~ ~~~~~- 24 %l
90TES ______1/ Casts.. ckb4t,m*s td . t ib#". bL,4ngs W-01M. -00ces, sr4m t,NW nint tflbEDo I/AvuelDlloue o310CNkst"IJ 19Whli tVt hgdi-CWkl...tbVn4eitom tcnvfetlncc-bSCf*9 ol09_
4/ Caisold at RS670/. poeald Ic ofl I&ma. beusO RSIf68. Wq wled 150o f.. .o.ks e Sled SCr 6AeSSo,eNUU boDng f- .4w11w0.ld ba 15% lOfe 0.1C C, lcosel pn 2 5 6.50600 Ad.led l W-on olem S br a irm9 SCF 6/ 5% Wed Lwea". of+hch kS p51p0g, m wm dewtd br SCf! _ 7/ ACtU.0aSSdlaaw uad10 181995S,1lh..ll,l algnedt Ove S 0 h a n5.114 Ine 75% * ellen hmel sI Al As.aWd lo be 15% elCus i * 01s,Il,otl b0wvlds Miegdbr os re ------. + I , _~aa _10031 _hl - a. lr6ga ti5 21200-00 1.2000 7N.30900 730900t 945te 922 00t 0 _ nx 2 EconoDic wd FinancialAnAdyl
0EA54 se9857 1987/tof adBalbals wa 1s 199O2l 90104 I95 047199O2,7 068 19971 0 0774d99 I9 CC 2000901 21.102 2002K 2 1004 10 20 10 100 PROJECTCOStS __
kwam,_0_ 44 = - rwal Co1 308 509x _68 57 639d 703sb 7.68a _ 76l __66=_76 76 7.6 76 hAct.. a4 badIw a. 1.1 _39 92 100 X 1,40 474 143463 347 0 58 01 21775 10 60 0 E_ ts h conul 1997 p- 2t _S1 3 lieU " S 2S 254 3 1# 75 57 51 822 23 494 012 Ame ... td Ihid 1 | Ot 6.278-252 00 7.309 00 il309 00 S181 7t -,5 tl 927 25 10 6000C katlal O&t4 cats 481 =3"6 09 s 51 s 76 e 39 7 03 7.e8 7 61 75t 76el 7 776 7 7 Go
Cwt oalt 1adddon. wnt 5 10 34 4 0 0 649 2 26 2 35 2 47 2 27 OSU. d a afa" Iwb6/ 0 4. a60 840 0 74 0 87 O90 1067 1 106710 I 06I 10 7 1007 TOTALCOSTS = OC 000 OOt 000 0Ot 000 51 3t 1188fa 164 27 268 89 142 96 76 Is Ui 72 338B7 11 24 8 78 8 71 87t 787 8 78 878t 787 FROJECT8tNEFITS____
Al" bngat- 1hnl 51 06 0 712 73 047 064 1.80 1215 1215 120 1210 121t 1210 1210
FTnd . W" I tO CU d - -- 1 i s 79 1 17 1 9 6 98 2 1 6 4 2 3 5 9 2 5 U 4 2 7e2 7 4 2 7 4 9 27 4 92 7 4 2 7 4 9 2 7 4 9 2 7 4 Ftlh VW I0 w0i c6dl 3 46 3 a 4.31 4.73 16 5 55 60t 6 01 6 01 601 001 J Fillh al~~~~~~~~~ aOl 3622 4060 4614.81 4069 540640 6885 s 83030 6630 0 6303 aio630~~~~~~3 Sl-,b y.l c14l 3 78 2 4271 51 8 4 5 .11 6 6 50 650 S-tonh aol IW.01d 3294 4 42 4891 5 40 588s 6 37 68 686a S YS.b-a o 15 79 23 07 27 20 33 51 40 34 47 79 56 81 58 52 0 44 62 26 6366 645 1 65 10 6s10 Gawd a1W lcatwgig 2 37 3 58 409 031 6.05 7 17 36 8 76 9 07 9 34 9 S5 06 9 77 TOTALBENEFITS 000 000 s157 2624 30 84 3760 457 5 864 63.02 e 0 69 21 71.33 73 00 7441 74 7t 74 8i NUTSENEFITS 000 000 0o 000 000 000 -51 38 1106 146848 2426d 112 11 3858 .1636 1097 51 7 5812 6043 6255 6422 a538 6801 68e0 NPV 112%7.40VYa) -28452i 1WonRs
EA (40 V*aS S 1%
NOTES W Costs aocadOtw0lI loadM .0001 r1.15I. a. .010s0 a0a04ll aId 4. 104bdldna_ _ _ _ 21A.0 a at..tpW31 Oeg. 1996 09.004 51hy El aplaWbncet6 m Il.t 1997, an vffttd w 4 p0o5aby WWr SCFOS0=0
41 CAdd aR 6701aIOOMaol lofl llm spk a1ad lao an.IaOm . adObYSW I I I I___V V561sA L as. banal o h kwoOid P. I5% ol canoaaoa CA by1010 28 6 000 A ds labY a SCF56
71 Actue amlioAMd v a 19956. dt4ttwledt ln..ad @005 Ya boa. l 10 atnwzY01.11110_
IA ... d to De0 15% l alln gdcuni Y. | f A f . ! b onI r l _ __ 78
INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project -11 Appendix 2: Economicand FinancialAnalysis Upper PengangaSub-Project I Table 15: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) Sorghum (Hybrid)- Kharif (Rainfed)
_ _ _ I_ _ __ I __ _ _ Item Unit Present Future 1/ Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price Value (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) A. GrossValue of production. Yield Kg. 1500 5.13 7695 1650 5.13 8464.5 By product Kg. 2250 0.495 1113.75 2475 0.495 1225.125 Gross Return 8808.75 9689.625
B. Cost of Farm Inputs. Land Preparation ha 1 1080 1080 1 1080 1080 Seed Kg. 8 36.81 294.48 8 36.81 294.48 Manures tonne 4 180 720 5 180 900 Fertilizers - N Kg. 20 17.43 348.6 20 17.43 348.6 P Kg. 10 12.37 123.7 10 12.37 123.7 K Kg. 10 10.72 107.2 10 10.72 107.2 Pesticides ha 1 180 180 1 180 180 Labour - Hired m-d 46 40.5 1863 50 40.5 2025 Family m-d 46 40.5 1863 50 40.5 2025
Total Direct Costs 6579.98 7083.98 C. Net Return
(A - B) ______2228.77 2605.645
Notes: I/ Higher yields attained 7 years after first receiving irrigation. Familylabour and hired labour expressedin man-days(m-d) assuming1 woman day is equivalent to 0.4 man-day. lII l l Assumed male : female labour is 3:1 and family labour : hired labour is 1:1
I~~ I______79
INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project - 111 Appendix 2: Economicand FinancialAnalysis
_Upper Penganga Sub-Project I I Table 16: Economic Crop Budget (per hectareJ -______Sorghum (Hybrid)- Kharif(Irrigated)
Item Unit Present Future 1/ InadequateIrrigation Adequate Irrigation Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price Value (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) A. Gross Value of production. Yield Kg. 1800 5.13 9234 2600 5.13 13338 By product Kg. 2700 0.495 1336.5 3900 0.495 1930.5 Gross Return 10570.5 15268.5
B. Cost of Farm Inputs. _ Land Preparation ha 1 1080 1080 1 1080 1080 Seed Kg. 8 36.81 294.48 8 36.81 294.48 Manures tonne 5 180 900 6 180 1080 Fertilizers - N Kg. 40 17.43 697.2 80 17.43 1394.4 P Kg. 20 12.37 247.4 40 12.37 494.8 K Kg. 20 10.72 214.4 40 10.72 428.8 Pesticides ha 1 180 180 2 180 360 Labour - Hired m-d 52 40.5 2106 62 40.5 2511 Family m-d 52 40.5 2106 62 40.5 2511
Total Direct Costs 7825.48 10154.48 C. Net Return (A - B) _ 2745.02 5114.02
Notes: I/ Higheryields attained 7 years after first receivingirrigation. Family labour and hired labour expressedin man-days(m-d) assuming 1 woman day is equivalentto 0.4 man-day. l l l Assumedmale : female labour is 3:1 and family labour hired labour is 1:1 80
INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project 1- Appendix 2: Economicand FinancialAnalysis UpperPenganga Sub-Project | I Table 17: EconomicCrop Budget (per hectare) Groundnuts- Kharif (Irrigated)
Item Unit Present Future 1/ Inadequate Irrigation Adequate Irrigation Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price Value (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) A. Gross Value of production. Yield Kg. 1000 10.08 10080 1200 10.08 12096 By product Kg. 500 0.45 225 600 0.45 270 Gross Return 10305 12366
B. Cost of Farm Inputs. Land Preparation ha 1 1260 1260 1 1260 1260 Seed Kg. 100 19.35 1935 100 19.35 1935 Manures tonne 4 180 720 4 180 720 Fertilizers - N Kg. 12 17.43 209.16 25 17.43 435.75 P Kg. 25 12.37 309.25 50 12.37 618.5 K Kg. 0 10.72 0 0 10.72 0 Pesticides ha 1 180 180 1 180 180 Labour - Hired m-d 50 40.5 2025 55 40.5 2227.5 Family m-d 50 40.5 2025 55 40.5 2227.5
Total Direct Costs 8663.41 9604.25 C. Net Return (A - B) 1641.59 2761.75
Notes: I/ Higher yields attained 7 years after first receiving irrigation. Familylabour and hired labour expressedin man-days (m-d) assuming 1 woman day is equivalentto 0.4 man-day. I I I Il Assumed male : female labour is 3:1 and family labour : hired labour is 1:1 81
INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project 1- Appendix 2: Economicand FinancialAnalysis Upper PengangaSub-Project Table 18: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) Paddy (Drilled)Kharif - (Rainfed) _
Item Unit Present Future 1/ Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price Value (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) A. Gross Value of production. Yield Kg. 1500 6.47 9705 1650 6.47 10675.5 By product Kg. 2250 0.585 1316.25 2425 0.585 1418.625 Gross Return 11021.25 12094.13
B. Cost of Farm Inputs.______Land Preparation ha 1 1440 1440 1 1440 1440 Seed Kg. 55 7.785 428.175 55 7.785 428.175 Manures tonne 4 180 720 4 180 720 Fertilizers - N Kg. 15 17.43 261.45 15 17.43 261.45 P Kg. 10 12.37 123.7 10 12.37 123.7 K Kg. 10 10.72 107.2 10 10.72 107.2 Pesticides ha 1 180 180 1 180 180 Labour - Hired m-d 55 40.5 2227.5 58 40.5 2349 Family m-d 55 40.5 2227.5 58 40.5 2349
Total Direct Costs 7715.525 7958.525 C. Net Return (A - B) 3305.725 4135.6
Notes I/ Higher yields attained 7 years after first receiving irrigation. Family labour and hired labour expressed in man-days (m-d) assuming 1 woman day is equivalent to 0.4 man-day. IlI_I Assumed male: female labour is 3:1 and family labour: hired labour is 1:1
T f r A _ _ _ _ _ 82
I I I I I I INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project - 111 Appendix 2: Economicand FinancialAnalysis UpperPengangaSub-Project I I Table 19: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) Pulses- Kharif (Rainfed)
Item Unit Present Future 1/
Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price Value (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) A. GrossValue of production. Yield Kg. 400 10.8 4320 440 10.8 4752 By product Kg. 100 0.387 38.7 110 0.387 42.57 Gross Return 4358.7 4794.57
B. Cost of Farm Inputs. LandPreparation ha 1 900 900 1 900 900 Seed Kg. 15 29.7 445.5 15 29.7 445.5 Manures tonne 3 180 540 4 180 720 Fertilizers - N Kg. 0 17.43 0 0 17.43 0 P Kg. 0 12.37 0 0 12.37 0 K Kg. 0 10.72 0 0 10.72 0 Pesticides ha 0 180 0 1 180 180 Labour - Hired m-d 25 40.5 1012.5 26 40.5 1053 Family m-d 25 40.5 1012.5 26 40.5 1053
Total Direct Costs 3910.5 4351.5 C. Net Return (A - B) 448.2 443.07
Notes: I/ Higher yields attained 7 years after first receivingirrigation. Familylabour and hired labour expressedin man-days(m-d) assuming 1 woman day is equivalent to 0.4 man-day. I1 l l Assumedmale : female labour is 3:1 and family labour : hired labour is 1:1 83
INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project -11 Appendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis |Upper Penganga Sub-Project I Table 21: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) Pearl Millet (Hybrid) - Kharif (Irrigated)
'I I~ I Item Unit Present Future 1/ Inadequate Irrigation 1/ Adequate Irrig Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) A. Gross Value of production. Yield Kg. 1200 4.95 5940 2000 4.95 By product Kg. 1800 0.315 567 3000 0.315 Gross Return 6507
B. Cost of Farm Inputs. _ Land Preparation ha 1 1350 1350 1 1350 Seed Kg. 3.5 38.25 133.875 3.5 38.25 Manures tonne 3 180 540 4 180 Fertilizers - N Kg. 30 17.43 522.9 60 17.43 P Kg. 15 12.37 185.55 30 12.37 K Kg. 15 10.72 160.8 30 10.72 Pesticides ha 1 180 180 2 180 Labour - Hired m-d 50 40.5 2025 60 40.5 Family m-d 50 40.5 2025 60 40.5
Total Direct Costs 7123.125 C. Net Return (A - B) = -616.125 =
Notes: I/ Higher yields attained 7 years after first receiving irrigation. Family labour and hired labour expressed in man-days (m-d) assuming 1 woman day is equivalent to
0.4 man-day. x _ Assumed male: female laboour is 3:1 and family labour: hired labour is 1:1 = 84
INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project 111- Appendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis T Bhima Sub-Project I I Table 22: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) Vegetables - Kharif (Irrigated)
Item Unit Present Future 1/ InadequateIrrigation Adequate Irrigation Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price Value (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) A. GrossValue of production. Yield Kg. 7000 2.25 15750 10000 2.25 22500 By product Kg. 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gross Return 15750 22500
B. Cost of Farm Inputs. Land Preparation ha 1 1440 1440 1 1440 1440 Seed Kg. 0.75 450 337.5 0.75 450 337.5 Manures tonne 8 180 1440 10 180 1800 Fertilizers - N Kg. 75 17.43 1307.25 150 17.43 2614.5 P Kg. 50 12.37 618.5 100 12.37 1237 K Kg. 50 10.72 536 100 10.72 1072 Pesticides ha 2 180 360 2 180 360 Labour - Hired m-d 82 40.5 3321 92 40.5 3726 Family m-d 82 40.5 3321 92 40.5 3726
Total Direct Costs X 12681.25 16313 C. Net Return (A - B) 3068.75 6187
Notes I/ Higheryields attained 7 years after first receivingirrigation. Family labour and hired labour expressedin man-days(m-d) assuming 1 woman day is equivalentto 0.4 man-day. r___= I I Assumedmale : female labour is 3:1 and family labour: hired labour is 1:1 85
INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project -111 Appendix 2: Economicand FinancialAnalysis Upper Penganga Sub-Project I I Table 23: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) Wheat - Rabi (Irrigated)__=
Item Unit _ Present Future1/ InadequateIrrigation Adequate Irrigation Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price Value (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) A. GrossValue of production. Yield Kg. 1500 5.8 8700 2500 5.8 14500 By product Kg. 1500 0.306 459 2500 0.306 765 Gross Return 9159 15265
B. Cost of Farm Inputs. == =_== Land Preparation ha 1 1440 1440 1 1440 1440 Seed Kg. 100 9.45 945 100 9.45 945 Manures tonne 4 180 720 5 180 900 Fertilizers - N Kg. 40 17.43 697.2 80 17.43 1394.4 P Kg. 20 12.37 247.4 40 12.37 494.8 K Kg. 20 10.72 214.4 40 10.72 428.8 Pesticides ha 0 180 0 1 180 180 Labour - Hired m-d 53 40.5 2146.5 65 40.5 2632.5 Family m-d 53 40.5 2146.5 65 40.5 2632.5
Total Direct Costs 8557 11048 C. Net Return (A - B) 602 4217
Notes: I/ Higher yields attained 7 years after first receiving irrigation. Familylabour and hired labour expressedin man-days(m-d) assuming 1 woman day is equivalent to 0.4 man-day. IIi Assumedmale : female labour is 3:1 and family labour : hired labour is 1:1 I I I I =__= 86
INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project -11 Appendix 2: Economicand FinancialAnalysis UpperPengangaSub-Project I I Table 24: EconomicCrop Budget (per hectare) Sorghum(Local) - Rabi (Rainfed)
Item Unit Present _ Future 1/ InadequateIrrigation Adequate Irrigation Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price Value (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) A. GrossValue of production. Yield Kg. 800 6.3 5040 880 6.3 5544 By product Kg. 1600 0.495 792 1760 0.495 871.2 Gross Return 5832 6415.2
B. Cost of Farm Inputs. Land Preparation ha 1 1080 1080 1 1080 1080 Seed Kg. 8 14.4 115.2 8 14.4 115.2 Manures tonne 3 180 540 3 180 540 Fertilizers - N Kg. 0 17.43 0 0 17.43 0 P Kg. 0 12.37 0 0 12.37 0 K Kg. 0 10.72 0 0 10.72 0 Pesticides ha 0 180 0 0 180 0 Labour - Hired m-d 28 40.5 1134 30 40.5 1215 Family m-d 28 40.5 1134 30 40.5 1215
Total Direct Costs 4003.2 4165.2 C. Net Return (A - B) 1828.8 2250
Notes: I/ Higher yields attained 7 years after first receivingirrigation. Family labour and hired labour expressedin man-days(m-d) assuming 1 woman day is equivalentto 0.4 man-day. III_ l I . Assumed male : female labour is 3:1 and family labour : hired labour is 1:1
I l l _ _l_ _ _ 87
INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project -11 Appendix 2: Economicand FinancialAnalysis |Upper PengangaSub-Project | l Table 26: EconomicCrop Budget (per hectare) Sorghum (Improved)- Rabi (Irrigated)
Item Unit Present Future I/ InadequateIrrigation Adequate Irrigation Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price Value (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) A. GrossValue of production. Yield Kg. 1800 6.3 11340 2400 6.3 15120 By product Kg. 3600 0.495 1782 4800 0.495 2376 Gross Return 13122 17496
B. Cost of Farm Inputs. Land Preparation ha 1 1260 1260 1 1260 1260 -Seed Kg. 8 14.4 115.2 8 14.4 115.2 Manures tonne 5 180 900 6 180 1080 Fertilizers - N Kg. 40 17.43 697.2 80 17.43 1394.4 P Kg. 20 12.37 247.4 40 12.37 494.8 K Kg. 20 10.72 214.4 40 10.72 428.8 Pesticides ha 1 180 180 2 180 360 Labour - Hired m-d 52 40.5 2106 60 40.5 2430 Family m-d 52 40.5 2106 60 40.5 2430
Total Direct Costs 7826.2 9993.2 C. Net Return (A - B) 5295.8 7502.8
Notes: I/ Higheryields attained 7 yearsafter first receivingirrigation. Family labour and hired labour expressedin man-days(m-d) assuming 1 woman day is equivalent to 0.4 man-day. I|I | | Assumed male : female labour is 3:1 and family labour : hired labour is 1:1
T I T T =______88
INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project - I11 Appendix 2: Economicand FinancialAnalysis UpperPengangaSub-Project | I Table 26: EconomicCrop Budget (per hectare) Chickpea- Rabi (Rainfed)
Item Unit Present Future I/ Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price Value (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) A. Gross Value of production. Yield Kg. 500 9 4500 550 9 4950 By product Kg. 125 0.405 50.625 135 0.405 54.675 Gross Return 4550.625 5004.675
B. Cost of Farm Inputs. Land Preparation ha 1 900 900 1 900 900 Seed Kg. 55 19.8 1089 55 19.8 1089 Manures tonne 4 180 720 4 180 720 Fertilizers - N Kg. 0 17.43 0 0 17.43 0 P Kg. 0 12.37 0 0 12.37 0 K Kg. 0 10.72 0 0 10.72 0 Pesticides ha 0 180 0 0 180 0 Labour - Hired m-d 28 40.5 1134 29 40.5 1174.5 Family m-d 28 40.5 1134 29 40.5 1174.5
Total Direct Costs 4977 5058 C. Net Return (A - B) -426.375 -53.325
Notes: I/ Higher yields attained 7 years after first receiving irrigation. Familylabour and hired labour expressedin man-days(m-d) assuming 1 woman day is equivalent to 0.4 man-day. I I I I Assumed male : female labour is 3:1 and family labour: hired labour is 1:1 89
I I I I 1--' INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project - 111 Appendix 2: Economicand FinancialAnalysis | Upper PengangaSub-Project I l Table27: EconomicCrop Budget (per hectare) Chickpea- Rabi (Irrigated)
Item Unit Present Future I/ Inadequate Irrigation Adequate Irrigation Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price Value (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) A. GrossValue of production. Yield Kg. 1100 9 9900 1500 9 13500 By product Kg. 275 0.405 111.375 375 0.405 1 51.875 Gross Return 10011.375 13651.88
B. Cost of Farm Inputs. _ Land Preparation ha 1 900 900 1 900 900 Seed Kg. 55 19.8 1089 55 19.8 1089 Manures tonne 5 180 900 6 180 1080 Fertilizers - N Kg. 12 17.43 209.16 25 17.43 435.75 P Kg. 25 12.37 309.25 50 12.37 618.5 K Kg. 0 10.72 0 0 10.72 0 Pesticides ha 1 180 180 2 180 360 Labour - Hired m-d 38 40.5 1539 45 40.5 1822.5 Family m-d 38 40.5 1539 45 40.5 1822.5
Total Direct Costs 6665.41 8128.25 C. Net Return (A - B) 3345.965 5523.625
Notes: _ I/ Higher yields attained 7 years after first receiving irrigation. Familylabour and hired labour expressedin man-days(m-d) assuming1 woman day is equivalent to 0.4 man-day. I [II I l Assumedmale : female labour is 3:1 and family labour : hired labour is 1:1
______I _ _ _I=_ _ _ _ 90
INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project 1- Appendix 2: Economicand FinancialAnalysis Table 28: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) UpperPenganga Sub-Project I I Groundnuts- Hot Weather (Irrigated)
_ I_ Item Unit Present Future 1i InadequateIrrigation Adequate Irrigation Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price Value (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) A. GrossValue of production. Yield Kg. 1200 10.08 12096 2000 10.08 20160 By product Kg. 600 0.45 270 1000 0.45 450 Gross Return I 12366 20610 I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ B. Cost of Farm Inputs. =. ____ Land Preparation ha 1 1620 1620 1 1620 1620 Seed Kg. 100 19.35 1935 100 19.35 1935 Manures tonne 4 180 720 6 180 1080 Fertilizers - N Kg. 12 17.43 209.16 25 17.43 435.75 P Kg. 25 12.37 309.25 50 12.37 618.5 K Kg. 0 10.72 0 0 10.72 0 Pesticides ha 2 180 360 2 180 360 Labour - Hired m-d 53 40.5 2146.5 65 40.5 2632.5 Family m-d 53 40.5 2146.5 65 40.5 2632.5
Total Direct Costs 9446.41 11314.25 C. Net Return (A - B) __ _ 2919.59 9295.75
Notes I/ Higher yields attained 7 yearsafter first receivingirrigation. Family labour and hired labour expressedin man-days(m-d) assuming1 woman day is equivalent to 0.4 man-day. lI1 llll 1 1 Assumed male : female labour is 3:1 and family labour: hired labour is 1:1 91
IT I I I I I INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project - 111 Appendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis Upper PengangaSub-Project I l Table 29: EconomicCrop Budget (per hectare) Sunflower - Hot Weather{Irrigated)
Item Unit Present Future 1/ InadequateIrrigation Adequate Irrigation Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price Value (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) A. GrossValue of production. Yield Kg. 1200 9 10800 1800 9 16200 By product Kg. 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gross Return 10800 16200
B. Cost of Farm Inputs. _ Land Preparation ha 1 1440 1440 1 1440 1440 Seed Kg. 10 35.1 351 10 35.1 351 Manures tonne 5 180 900 5 180 900 Fertilizers - N Kg. 30 17.43 522.9 60 17.43 1045.8 P Kg. 15 12.37 185.55 30 12.37 371.1 K Kg. 0 10.72 0 0 10.72 0 Pesticides ha 2 180 360 3 180 540 Labour - Hired m-d 55 40.5 2227.5 68 40.5 2754 Family m-d 55 40.5 2227.5 68 40.5 2754
Total Direct Costs 8214.45 10155.9 C. Net Return (A - B) 2585.55 6044.1
Notes:
I/ Higher yields attained 7 years after first receiving irrigation. _ ____ Family labour and hired labour expressedin man-days(m-d) assuming1 woman day is equivalentto 0.4 man-day. I IlI_I Assumed male: female labour is 3:1 and family labour : hired labour is 1:1
l l l l ___ =_ _ _ 92
I I ~I I INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project - 111 Appendix 2: Economicand FinancialAnalysis UpperPenganga Sub-Project I Table 30: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) Cotton (Hybrid)- Biseasonal (Irrigated)
Item Unit Present Future 1/ InadequateIrrigation Adequate Irrigation Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price Value I______= _____=__| (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) A. Gross Value of production. Yield Kg. 1100 18.4 20240 1200 18.4 22080 By product Kg. 550 0.18 99 600 0.18 108 Gross Return | | 20339 22188
B. Cost of Farm Inputs.. Land Preparation ha 1 1440 1440 1 1440 1440 Seed Kg. 3 321.3 963.9 3 321.3 963.9 Manures tonne 5 180 900 6 180 1080 Fertilizers - N Kg. 50 17.43 871.5 100 17.43 1743 P Kg. 25 12.37 309.25 50 12.37 618.5 K Kg. 10 10.72 107.2 20 10.72 214.4 Pesticides ha 15 180 2700 20 180 3600 Labour - Hired m-d 80 40.5 3240 90 40.5 3645 Family m-d 80 40.5 3240 90 40.5 3645
Total Direct Costs 13771.85 16949.8 C. Net Return r____ _ (A - B) __ :__r_|6567.15 5238.2
Notes: | I/ Higher yields attained 7 years after first receivingirrigation. Familylabour and hired labour expressedin man-days(m-d) assuming 1 woman day is equivalent to 0.4 man-day. Assumed male : female labour is 3:1 and family labour: hired labour is 1:1 93
[ I I I I _ _ INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project 1- Appendix 2: Economicand FinancialAnalysis Upper PengangaSub-Project I I Table 31: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) Cotton (mrstaple)- Biseasonal(Rainfed)
Item Unit Present Future 1/ Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price Value ______(Rs.)_ (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) A. Gross Value of production. _ Yield Kg. 800 18.4 14720 880 18.4 16192 By product Kg. 400 0.18 72 440 0.18 79.2 Gross Return 14792 16271.2
B. Cost of FarmInputs. L_I_ Land Preparation ha 1 1440 1440 1 1440 1440 Seed Kg. 8 38.7 309.6 8 38.7 309.6 Manures tonne 4 180 720 4 180 720 Fertilizers - N Kg. 25 17.43 435.75 25 17.43 435.75 P Kg. 12 12.37 148.44 12 12.37 148.44 K Kg. 5 10.72 53.6 5 10.72 53.6 Pesticides ha 10 180 1800 10 180 1800 Labour - Hired m-d 60 40.5 2430 62 40.5 2511 Family m-d 60 40.5 2430 62 40.5 2511
Total Direct Costs 9767.39 9929.39 C. Net Return (A - B) 5024.61 6341.81
Notes: I/ Higher yields attained 7 years after first receiving irrigation. Family labour and hired labour expressedin man-days(m-d) assuming 1 woman day is equivalentto 0.4 man-day. i T T_I _ Assumed male : female labour is 3:1 and family labour: hired labour is 1:1
__ __ I I __ __=_ _ 94
I I I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~II I= INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project - 111 Appendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis Upper Penganga Sub-Project I i Table 32: EconomicCrop Budget (per hectare) Chitlies- Biseasonal(Irrigatedj
Item Unit Present Future 1/ l______Inadequate Irrigation Adequate Irrigation r______Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price Value ______= ______(Rs.) (Rs.). (Rs.) (Rs.) A. GrossValue of production. Yield Kg. 600 36 21600 800 36 28800 By product Kg. 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gross Return I T_.T _X_ 21600 28800
B. Cost of Farm Inputs. _ Land Preparation ha 1 1350 1350 1 1350 1350 Seed Kg. 0.4 450 180 0.4 450 180 Manures tonne 6 180 1080 8 180 1440 Fertilizers - N Kg. 50 17.43 871.5 100 17.43 1743 P Kg. 37 12.37 457.69 75 12.37 927.75 K Kg. 37 10.72 396.64 75 10.72 804 Pesticides ha 2 180 360 3 180 540 Labour - Hired m-d 100 40.5 4050 120 40.5 4860 Family m-d 100 40.5 4050 120 40.5 4860
Total Direct Costs 12795.83 16704.75 C. Net Return (A - B) 8804.17 12095.25
Notes: I/ Higher yields attained 7 years after first receiving irrigation. Family labour and hired labour expressed in man-days (m-d) assuming 1 woman day is equivalent to 0.4 man-day. lI l I I Assumed male : female labour is 3:1 and family labour: hired labour is 1:1 95
INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project - 111 Appendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis Upper Penganga Sub-Project I I Table 33: Economic Crop Budget (per hectare) Bananas Perennial (Irrigated)
Item Unit Present | Future 1/ Inadequate Irrigation Adequate Irrigation Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price Value (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) A. Gross Value of production. Yield Kg. 40000 5.07 202800 50000 5.07 253500 By product Kg. 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gross Return 202800 253500
B. Cost of Farm Inputs. _ _ Land Preparation ha 1 2700 2700 1 2700 2700 Seed Kg. 4200 0.9 3780 4200 0.9 3780 Manures tonne 20 180 3600 20 180 3600 Fertilizers - N Kg. 200 17.43 3486 400 17.43 6972 P Kg. 85 12.37 1051.45 170 12.37 2102.9 K Kg. 85 10.72 911.2 170 10.72 1822.4 Pesticides ha 4 180 720 5 180 900 Labour - Hired m-d 170 40.5 6885 185 40.5 7492.5 Family m-d 170 40.5 6885 185 40.5 7492.5
Total Direct Costs 30018.65 36862.3 C. Net Return (A - B) 172781.35 216637.7
Notes: I/ Higher yields attained 7 years after first receiving irrigation. Family labour and hired labour expressedin man-days(m-d) assuming 1 woman day is equivalent to 0.4 man-day. I rII Assumedmale : female labour is 3:1 and family labour: hired labour is 1:1 96
INDIA - Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project -111 Appendix 2: Economic and Financial Analysis Upper Penganga Sub-Project I I Table 34: EconomicCrop Budget (per hectare) ______SugarcanePerennial (Irrigated)
Item Unit Present Future 1/ Inadequate Irrigation Adequate Irrigation Qty. Unit Price Value Qty. Unit Price Value _Rs.)( (Rs.) (Rs.) (Rs.) A. GrossValue of production. Yield Kg. 60000 0.49 29400 70000 0.49 34300 By product Kg. 0 0 0 0 0 0 GrossReturn r, 29400 34300
B. Cost of Farm Inputs. _ _ _ __ LandPreparation ha 1 3150 3150 1 3150 3150 Seed Kg. 5000 0.9 4500 5000 0.9 4500 Manures tonne 10 180 1800 10 180 1800 Fertilizers - N Kg. 200 17.43 3486 400 17.43 6972 P Kg. 85 12.37 1051.45 170 12.37 2102.9 K Kg. 85 10.72 911.2 170 10.72 1822.4 Pesticides ha 4 180 720 5 180 900 Labour - Hired m-d 150 40.5 6075 160 40.5 6480 Family m-d 150 40.5 6075 160 40.5 6480
Total Direct Costs 27768.65 34207.3 C. Net Return (A - B) 1631.35 92.7
Notes: _ I/ Higher yields attained 7 years after first receiving irrigation. Family labour and hired labour expressedin man-days(m-d) assuming 1 woman day is equivalentto 0.4 man-day. III II Assumedmale : female labour is 3:1 and family labour : hired labour is 1:1 97
IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION REPORT
INDIA
MAHARASHTRA COMPOSITE IRRIGATION PROJECT III
ICR. 16214lNl
APPENDIX 3: MISCELLANEOUS TABLES
1. Total Project Costs by Financial Year 2. Cost Summary Subproject Wise 3. Year-Wise Expenditure by Subproject (Up to 31 December 1996) 4. Financial Program for Balance Work of MCIP III S. Statement of Subproject Wise Physical Achievements Against Targets 6. Physical Program af Balance Works Beyond 31 December 1996 7. Year-Wise Culturable Command Areas: Provided with Irrigation and Actual Cropped 8. Subproject Wise Irrigation Performance 9. Flow Irrigation Rates 10. Year-Wise Areas Available for Irrigation and Actually Irrigated by Season INDLk Mdw=Mm CmVoMe lirlipationPmjsd III APWI& 3. Miscellaneous Tobin TOM 1: Total Projed Costis by FMNCW Yew
Prot"Icellpeamw 19"47 1907186 lsmo IOBOM I"Wgl 1921192 19020113 IVIIV94 ltmo I iown 199647up SoD- 9 JACLENP T. I COOd BalmmeWWOM TOWPmW Cog RWIRAOUSS 1279 1297 14 49 to Go 17 95 2462 26 41 31 36 3105 3371 352? 131 1906 35 3 1 RsM UN M AsM unm RsM us$ m US$U Rs M Un M RSM IUS11M R&M USSM I R&M Un M Rs M I us$ m RSM US$PA RSM UN M I RS M US11M RSM I US11M RSM usll u krwad- D"L I t ModwnMbMd Headwoft &Cwwb 374 -15232 -- 406 18370 6 00 14364 425 4511 124 62352 1904 5300 150 676 52 2144 usm,cwws is 97 1 46 56 48 4 35 58 55 4 04 so 96 3 06 45 94 2 56 38 00 1-5 5 308 33 1167 32742 10 44 76146 2405 1.10643 3520 42479 12 04 3.27733 11046 531 00 i5ot 3,80833 12551 b..Ch, Out. & I I - MNWC.Wlds 4 3521 34 2 72 36 70 2 53 5t 25 306 8403 4 60 gois 392 10431 736 22600 721 33544 10601 06364 2026 370 57 1061 7641 5024 im 2,706.79 9194 krilows D"L I upwaabm of consw 2 79 1-1 9 44 030 10387 326 13539 4 03 42 46 1 20 "4 45 4 92 Is 00 042 309 45 9 35 Man old Lk*Otwi 1957 1 33 3 43 026 254 Ole I 66 010 I so 0 09 2 07 OOB 0 26 401 4 31S 014 5 52 0 21 46 64 1 39 1707 0 51 too GI 449 000 00D 106 61 4 49 6Sub Sfam Omm 2 50 019 2 42 0 17 6 so 0 41 6 20 0 35 420 Oil 4 52 017 $62 'O27 733 0 23 $17 024 2 53 007 5322 2 22 7 00 020 60 29 2 41 7 ROWchantwo & 000 -soltm*ve U*v 66 35 5f9 3105 2 39 6864 4 74 5166 3 70 5336 2 97 3510 147 7119 2 70 6716 2 70 80 71 2 80 lliSS 3 32 47 96 136 72403 33 42 ift 43 469 889 46 3811 6 L&WShap.9 &WCaq I I I I I U" 37 60 2 90 582 0461 3 321 023 7 05 0 42 I 27 046 2261 0 92 24 14 0911 1049 0 33 194 0 05 5 431 016 0 63 0 02 12740 0 93 10 00 028 137 40 7 21 S Romm 0 50 0 00 3 37 019 4 05 017 912 035 6 79 0 22 12 44 0 39 15 29 045 3 08 0 09 64 64 145 5 00 014 59 64 1 n 10 FOMUbWWUAS 020 ooi 020 001 0 W 0 03 4 50 013 310 0 09 a 90 0 28 000 000 a 90 0 28 11 DV- R"uM-(PPDR) I 78 0 00 8440 191 1082 0 31 77 00 2 27 000 000 77 00. 227
COMM P10911INNIUSSFtw Wallis 12 Estmbkshn*MCam 132521 1036 76 46 a 05 1152? 7 95 10575 6 35 10095 6 07 12257 6 00 17221 6 52 18269 5 02 19547 5 N 240 " 713 12365 351 1.50 43 7064 0 00 000 1.568 43 7064 2BW&np 20DI 016 409 032 0 91 006 067 004 - 0 29 0 02 0 42 002 074 0 03 711 0 23 978 0 31 12 26 036 333 009 41 62 163 000 000 41 62 1 63 14VorJcks SO Eqpm M 0001 0 00 49 19 3 791 9 971 069 0 00 0 000 000 160 0 07 0 25 001 Oil _O00 1525 0 40 i 06 003 040 0011 7164 4 60 0 00 0 00 77 84 4 60 is SWSS 6 001 0 46 297 0 23 9 77 067 2 341 014 1 44 000 0 73 003 2 47 0 09 127 004 067 002 1500 0 44 la 05 0 451 58 71 -- la inw" I 9 08 029 16 44 0 52 21 70 064 2350 0 67 7072 212 000 OOO 70 72 212 2 Dwn$af*RSVW.F&;;7 I I I ROPWMMA Safety M S 5 50 015 a so 0 10 203 501 5 76 209 001 79-2 Re" 0 rAAL- ReMbfta 18 Ec* Rshmb*wbon S0381 io 54 583 01 18 54 19 C*AC rmms 7000 0 00 6960 197 13060 1 97 20350 $16 343 10 7 74 P.W; WwksDOW 20 RwalRoaft &,dBddgj 1 3 001 021 000 0 00 680 0 30 7330 2 N 13T7 0 M 3937 1 so 60 172 375 50 12 45 55 52 157 431 02 14 03 jAqftuft OePL 1000 00 421 iii- 206 26 6 99 INDIA: MaharashtraComposite Irrigation Project III Appendix3: MiscellaneousTables Table 2: Cost SummarySubproject Wise (Rs Million)
Restructured Completedup to December ComTiponlent 1992/93 31,1996 Baance for Completion Tobl
Cost Cost % Cost % Cost % ExlSav Jayakwadi IrrigationI 382.00 314.21 82 53.00 14 367.21 4 InrigationII 0.00 1,452.05 0.00 1,452.05 PublicWorks Dept 157.45 153.88 98 0.00 0 153.88 2 SubTotal 539.45 1,920.14 53.00 1,973.14 Majalgaon IrrigationI 1,503.63 1,394.74 93 128.73 9 1,523.47 -1 ImrgationII 407.15 403.52 99 39.87 10 443.39 -9 PublicWorks Dept 9.98 9.98 100 0.00 0 9.98 0 SubTotal 1,920.76 1,808.24 168.60 1,976.84 UpperPonganga IrrigationI 2,034.40 1,580.66 78 453.74 22 2,034.40 0 IrrigationII 214.11 127.30 59 4.05 2 131.35 39 PublicWorks Dept 79.82 23.62 30 56.20 70 79.82 0 SubTotal 2,328.33 1,731.58 513.99 2,245.57 Kukadi _ lmgation 1,153.11 1,087.60 94 115.89 10 1,203.49 *4 lmgationII 170.29 136.97 80 32.34 19 169.31 1 PublicWorks Dept 84.30 47.80 57 36.50 43 84.30 0 SubTotal 1,407.70 1,272.37 184.73 1,457.10 shima _ _ IrrigationI 1,592.11 1,862.87 117 240.15 15 2,103.02 -32 IrrigationII 174.75 141.37 81 58.73 34 200.10 -15 PublicWorks Dept 98.30 77.00 78 21.30 22 98.30 0
SubTotal 1,865.16 2,081.24 _ _ 320.18 2,401.42 Krishna Imgation1 684.75 659.47 96 153.24 22 812.71 -19 IrrigationII 75.69 53.08 70 8.30 11 61.38 19 PublicWorks Dept 37.40 24.90 67 12.50 33 37.40 0 Sub Total 797.84 737.45 92 174.04 22 911.49 24 Common Programmos R&RActivities CivicAmenites 343.10 139.60 41 203.50 59 343.10 0 EconomicRehabilitation 583.81 0.00 0 583.81 100 583.81 0 Training 104.00 70.72 68 0.00 0 70.72 32 Studies 62.17 58.71 94 50.60 81 109.31 -76 Agriculture 190.00 157.20 83 32.80 17 190.00 0
Dam SafetyReview Panel _ Rep.&SafetyMeasures 959.42 5.50 1 203.50 --I 209.00 78 SubTotal Com. Programme 2,242.50 431.73 19 1,074.21 1,505.94 Total ProjectCost 1/ 11,101.74 9,982.75 90 2,488.75 1 12,471.50 1/ Costs of buildings,vehicles and equipment have been includedunder ID I and ID II. IND)IA. MaharashiraComposite Irrigation Project 11 ImplementationCompletion Report Appendix3 MliscellaneousTables
Table 3: Year-Wise Expenditure by Subproject (Up to 31 December 1996) (Rs Million)
JAYAKWADI (Page 1 of 4) Project Component 86/87 87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 Up to 31/12/96 Jayakwadi ID (I) Modernization 29.47 43.96 59.31 47.33 Main Canals - - - - Branch Dist. & Minor 42.08 20.30 10.30 10.20 9.90 8.92 6.22 3.45 Establishment ------Subtotal ID (1) 42.08 20.30 10.30 10.20 9.90 8.92 6.22 32.92 43.96 59.31 47.33 ID (11)CAD Works Upgradation ------Main & Link Drains 19.57 3.33 2.54 1.66 1.50 1.20 0.26 - - - - Sub-Surface Drains - 2.50 2.42 6.80 6.20 4.20 4.52 8.62 4.02 1.53 0.24 o Field Channels & 66.35 31.05 58.96 56.26 44.81 19.31 19.41 3.97 1.40 0.09 0.08 o Lining Land Shaping 37.80 5.82 3.32 7.05 8.27 22.31 23.77 10.08 1.92 - - Service Roads - - 0.50 3.37 4.05 9.12 6.59 7.67 5.61 0.13 Subtotal ID (11) 123.72 42.70 67.24 72.27 64.15 51.07 57.08 29.26 15.01 7.23 0.45 PWD ------Rural Roads 73.30 12.42 14.61 8.01 6.78 3.51 BGS - - 22.34 9.31 2.55 1.05 Bridges & Strtcttires Subtotal 73.30 12.42 36.95 17.32 9.33 4.56 Establishment Cost 128.52 64.16 85.01 79.06 76.15 86.87 79.38 85.14 60.24 61.13 35.41 Buildings 2.00 4.09 0.91 0.67 0.29 0.42 - 1.25 2.62 0.99 0.57 Vehicle & Equipment , 49.19 9.97 ------1.06 0.46 Studies 6.00 2.97 2.15 0.71 0.41 0.56 2.32 1.23 0.58 0.34 5.78 Subtotal 136.52 120.41 98.04 80.44 77.53 87.85 81.70 87.62 63.44 63.72 42.22 Total 302.32 183.41 175.58 162.91 151.58 221.14 157.42 186.75 139.73 139.59 47.23 INDIA: MiahaashiraComposite Irrigation ProjecaIII Implementtion CompletionReport Appendix 3 MiiscellaneousTables
Table 3: Year-Wise Expenditure by Subproject (Up to 31 December 1996) (Rs Million)
MAJALGAON (Page 2 of 4) ProjectComponent 86/87 87/88 88/89 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 Up to 31/12/96 ID (I) - Modernization Main Canals 18.97 56.48 58.55 50.96 45.94 38.00 102.05 31.70 45.00 124.20 14.45 Branch Dist. & Minor 3.00 15.04 26.40 41.06 74.12 87.26 47.65 78.15 36.58 40.20 10.51 Subtotal ID (X) 21.97 71.52 84.95 92.02 120.06 125.26 149.70 109.85 81.58 164.40 24.96 ID (II) - Upgradation Main & Minor Drains - - - - - 0.77 - - 0.07 - Sub-Surface Drains - - - - - Field Channels & 16.79 23.37 34.88 25.27 13.97 20.20 - Lining Land Shaping 0.30 0.37 0.41 - - Service Roads Dynamic Regulation - - - 1.78 40.10 22.52 WUAs 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.5 1.4 Subtotal ID (II) 18.06 23.94 35.33 27.46 54.71 44.12 PWD - - - - - Rural Roads & 3.0 6.98 ------Bridges Others Establishment 4.40 14.30 30.26 26.69 32.87 35.70 67.32 65.84 49.43 75.54 26.36 Buildings ------Vehiicle& Eqtuiptent - - - 1.60 0.26 0.11 11.42 - Studies - - 7.62 1.63 1.03 0.17 0.19 0.04 0.09 0.28 Subtotal 4.40 14.30 40.88 35.30 33.90 37.47 67.77 65.99 60.94 75.82 26.36 Total 26.37 85.82 125.83 127.32 153.96 180.79 241.41 211.17 169.98 294.93 96.04
... ,. ~ _ =,= ,. ===, = INDIA: MialiarashiraComposite Irrigation ProjectIII ImplementtionCompletion Repon Appendix 3: MliscellaneousTables
Table 3: Year-Wise Expenditure by Subproject (Up to 31 December 1996) (Rs Million) (Page 3 of 4) KUKADI BHIMA 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 Up to 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 Up to 31/12/96 31/12/96 ID (I) Modernization 98.11 89.39 67.41 10.00 9.00 0 24.2 0 Main Canals 58.00 72.91 164.74 318.35 38.8 75.86 72.53 205.76 204.69 92.67 Branch Canals ) Distributary Canals ) 906 11.55 12.40 99.85 16.70 85.83 75.98 201.99 206.36 369.44 Minor Canals ) Establishment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vehicle & Equipmenit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Buildings 0 0 1.08 1.60 0.84 0.04 2.53 1.47 0.98 0 Subtotal ID (II) Main & Link Drains 0 0.75 3.0 0.07 0 0 3.6 2.50 45.0 17.89 Sub-SuirfaceDrains 0 0 0.80 0.22 0.08 0 0 1.51 0 0 Field Channels & 6.74 16.61 25.02 32.33 3.32 13.19 7.29 11.73 18.8 4.09 Selective Lining Land Shaping & 0 0 0 5.43 0.53 0 0 0 0 0 Conjunctive Use Service Roads 0 0.2 2.0 1.54 0.00 0 0 2.07 3.13 0 PPDs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Buildings 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Establishment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vehicle & Equipment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Upgradation of Canals 16.30 21.70 9.0 2.79 5.28 70.08 85.4 40.0 WUAs 0 0 0.5 0.2 1.0 0 0 0.5 0.2 1.0 PWD Rural Roads & 0 0 11.00 37.3 10.48 0.15 7.42 13.42 53.06 23.90 Bridges INDIA: MiabarashtraConmposite Irrigation Project III Iniplementtion Completion Report Appendix 3: MliscellaneousTables
Table 3: Year-Wise Expenditure by Suibproject (Up to 31 December 1996) (Rs Million) (Page 4 of 4) KRISHNA UPPER PENGANGA 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 Up to 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 Up to 31/12/96 31/12/96 ID (I) Modernization 0 2.73 1.29 0 0 0 13.01 49.06 12.72 11.27 Main Canals 12.98 53.25 75.92 148.07 72.87 59.44 97.03 270.04 391.12 218.27 Branch Canals ) Distributary Canals ) 26.43 39.66 50.63 93.03 29.88 19.12 17.21 33.84 49.12 41.00 Minor Canals ) Establislunent 0 0 0 0 0 14.61 19.95 55.05 70.27 40.57 Vehicle & Equipment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Buildings 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Subtotal ID (II) Main & Link Drains 0 0 1.0 1.84 0 0 0 0 0.05 0 Sub-Surface Drains 0 0 1.00 2.00 1.99 0 0 0 1.23 0.02 Field Channels & 0.51 4.41 9.75 9.37 8.45 7.97 20.00 15.54 19.67 9.95 Selective Lining Land Shaping & 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Conjunctive Use Service Roads 0 0 0.70 5.01 2.95 0 0 0 0 0 PPDs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Buildings 0 0 0.70 0.22 0 0.70 3.33 3.91 8.49 1.92 Establishment 0 0 0 0 0 10.9 11.66 9.45 10.59 6.52 Vehicle & Equipmenit 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.83 0 0 Upgradation of Canals 0 1.75 10.16 35.55 7.24 0 2.41 7.33 7.00 0 WUAs 0 0 0 0.70 0.30 0 0 0 0.70 0.40 Rural Roads 0 0 2.34 24.90 7.78 0 0 0 10.40 13.26 104 INDIA: MaharashtraComposite Irrigation Project 111 ImplementationCompletion Report Appendix 3- MiscellaneousTables
Table 4: Financial Program for Balance Work of MCIP-III (Rs million)
Cost of PROGRAMME Balance Work Name of Project as on 01/1997 to 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 01/01/1997 03/1997
Jayakwadi ID- 53.00 2.60 50.40 ID-II Subtotal 53.00 2.60 50.40 0.00 0.00 Majalgaon ID-I 110.99 12.17 98.92 ID-II 38.39 8.39 30.00 Subtotal 149.38 20.56 128.82 0.00 0.00 Upper Penganga ID-I 384.58 15.58 369.00 ID-Il 61.27 10.06 51.21 Subtotal 445.85 25.64 420.21 0.00 0.00 Kukadi ID-I 131.20 17.00 48.90 28.00 37.30 ID-II 22.30 4.90 10.30 7.10 Subtotal 153.50 21.90 59.20 35.10 37.30 Bhima ID-I 276.17 37.00 55.91 86.44 96.82 ID-It 70.47 6.22 17.53 24.70 22.02 Subtotal 346.64 43.22 73.44 111.14 118.84 Krishna ID-I 176.30 26.50 70.40 53.30 26.10 ID-Il 10.00 0.70 4.60 4.70 Subtotal 186.30 27.20 75.00 58.00 26.10 PWD (UPP) 55.52 8.06 47.46 Agriculture 32.80 30.00 2.80 Studies 50.60 24.10 26.50 Total 1,473.59 203.28 883.83 204.24 182.24 Implementation of 203.50 32.80 130.70 40.00 Reconstruction of DSRP R&R 787.31 30.00 250.00 250.00 257.31 Grand Total 2,470.86 275.34 1,261.73 494.24 439.55 INDIA: MaharashtraComposite Irrigation Project Ill Appendix3: MiscellaneousTables Table 5: Statementof Subproie:tWise PhysicalAchievements Acainst Tarqets (PaSS1 of ) Jayakwadl Subproject Majalgaon Subproject Kukadi Subproject Work Items Unit Restruct. Achievement % Balance Restruct. Achievement% Balance Restruct. Achievement% Balance 1992/93 Dec.31,1996 !992/93 Dec.31,1996 1992/93 Dec31, 1996
ID I Works _ ==______1.Modemization % 10000 100.00 100 0.00 0100 0.00 0.00 100.00 93.00 93 7.00 2. Main Canals _ (a) Earthworks Tm3 0.00 0.00 0.00 6,040.00 5,860.00 97 180.00 4,577.00 4,446.00 97.14 71.00 (b) Lining Tm2 0 00 0.00 0.00 1,050.00 970.00 92.4 80.00 1,507.00 1,321.00 87.66 186.00 (c) Structures Nos 0 00 0 00 0.00 276.00 265.00 96 11.00 186.00 181.0097.31 5.00 3 Br.Canals (a) Earthworks rTm3 0 00 0 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 260 00 196.00 75.38 64.00 (b) Lining rTm2 0.00 0 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2500 21.00 84 4.00 (c)Structures Nos 0 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.00 26.00 96.3 1.00
4. Distributaries ____= (a) Earthworks Tm3 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,700.00 5,500.00 96.5 200.00 4,790.00 4,752.00 99 21 38.00 (b) Lining Tm2 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,412.00 1,250.00 88.5 162.00 889.00 886.00 99.66 3.00 (c) Structures Nos 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,626.00 2,275.0086.6 351.00 7,422.00 7,341.0098.91 81.00 W
5. Minors _ _ = (a) Earthworks Tm3 2,485.00 2,465.00 99 0.00 4,225.00 4,000.00 94.7 225.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (b) Lining |Tm2 1,517.00 1,507.00 99 0.00 672.00 728.00 108 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (c) Structures Nos 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.901.00 1,690.0088.9 211.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ID II Works 6.Upgrading = = = = Exist.Canals ha 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 65,000.00 45,860.00 71 33,216.00 7. Main Drains ha 72,69000 72,690.00 100 0.00 11,160.00 11,16000 100 0.00 20,000.00 20,000.00 100 0.00 8. Link Drains ha 5,500.00 4,310.00 78 0.00 9.Subsurf.Drains ha 13,500.00 12,692.00 94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 560.00 460.00 82 0.00 !O.FieldCanals ha 85,000.00 84,671.00 100 0.00 58,000.00 56,000.00 96.6 2,000.00 20,000.00 15,540.00 77.70 4,460.00 11.Selec.Lining ha 88,000.00 87,290.00 99 0 00 58,000.00 40,000.00 69 18,000.00 20,000.00 17,000.00 85 3,000.00 12.LandShap. |- _ . _ . . &Conjunc.Use ha 33,862.00 33,862.00 100 0.00 158.00 15800 100 0.00 4,000.00 1,540.00 39 2,440.00 13.Serv.Roads Km 572.00 572.00 100 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 27.00 18.00 67 9.00 PWD Works I_I_I _II 14.Roads Km 445.00 413.00 93 0.00 34.00 34.00 100 0.00 93.00 98.00 105 0.00 15. Bridges Nos 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 2.00 67 0.00 Fibe:AWICIPPHY.XLS I I I_I INDIA: MaharashtraComposite Irrigation Project III Appendix3: MiscellaneousTables Table5: Statementof SubDroiectWise Physical Achievements Against Targets (Page2 of 2) ______Bhima Subproject I_Krishna Subproject Upper Penganga Subproject Work Items Unit Restruct. Achievement % Balance Restruct. Achievement % Balance Restruct. Achievement % Balance 1992193 Dec.31,1996 1992/93 Dec. 31,1996 1992193 Dec. 31, 1996 ID I Works _ _ 1.Modemization % 100.00 100.00 100 0.00 100.00 100.00 100 0.00 100.00 100.00 100 0.00 2. Main Canals (a) Earthworks Tm3 1,498.00 2,211.00 148 191.00 1,542.00 1,542.00 100 0.00 4,512.00 3,285.00 72.81 1,227.00 (b) Lining Tm2 829.00 647.00 78 65.00 1,334.00 946.00 70.91 386.00 1,717.00 827.00 48.17 890.00 (c) Structures Nos 111.00 111.00 100 2.00 129.00 111.00 86.05 18.00 19200 109.00 56.77 83.00 3.Br.Canals _ (a) Earthworks Tm3 1,103.00 1,274.00 116 74.00 0 00 0.00 0.00 3,302.00 2,60000 78.74 702.00 (b) Lining Tm2 759.00 571.00 75.2 26.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,902.00 1,070.00 56.26 832.00 (c) Structures Nos 122.00 122.00 100 6.00 0 00 000 0.00 41100 252.00 61.31 159.00 4 Distributaries (a) Earthworks Tm3 3,148.00 3,451 00 110 291.00 22700 260.00 114.5 0.00 1,343.00 885.00 65.9 458.00 (b) Lining Tm2 1,112.00 977.00 87.9 36.00 155.00 98.00 63.23 1.00 168.00 150.00 89.29 1800 (c) Structures Nos 2,150.00 2,150.00 100 828.00 669.00 654.00 97.76 15.00 1,024.00 547.00 53.42 477.00 o 5. Minors _ .__ (a) Earthworks Tm3 666.00 1,208.00 181 360.00 383.00 483.00 126.1 126.00 1,047.00 570.00 54.44 477 00 (b) Lining Tm2 820.00 686.00 83.7 2.00 181.00 169.00 93.37 93.00 66.00 3300 50 33.00 (c) Structures Nos 1,078.00 1,615.00 150 22.00 1,296.00 1,413.00 109 0.00 1,426.00 750.00 52.59 676 00 ID 11Works _ _ 6.Upgrading __ _ Exist.Canals ha 85,000.00 83,00000 3,000.00 50,000.00 46,828.00 3,172.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7. Main Drains ha 28,000.00 30,972.00 0.00 6,000.00 6,000.00 100 0.00 23,000.00 650.00 2.826 0.00 8. Link Drains ha 9.Subsurf.Drains ha 1,400.00 1,514.00 108 0.00 1,000.00 1,100.00 110 0.00 1,300.00 120.00 9.231 0.00 !0.FieldCanals ha 28,000.00 23,323.00 4,677.00 16,700.00 9,046.00 7,654.00 23,000.00 20,000.00 3,000.00 11.Selec.Lining ha 28,0W0.00 15,996.00 57 12,004.00 1,679.00 2,561.00 152.5 0.00 12 Land Shap. &Conjunc.Use ha 4,000.00 0.00 0 4,000.00 4,000.00 0.00 0 4,000.00 4,000.00 0.00 0 4,000.00 13.Serv.Roads Km 81.00 28.00 34.6 53.00 26.00 34.00 130.8 0.00 45.00 45.00 100 0.00 PWD Works _ 14.Roads Km 134.00 134.00 0.00 97.00 79.80 82.27 19.00 33.60 17.00 50.6 15.00 15. Bridges Nos 7.00 3.00 42.9 4.00 1.00 0.00 0 1.001 10.0 1.00 9.00 1 -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~lI I I J~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 107 INDIA. MaharashtraComposite Irrigation Project III ImplementationCompletion Report Appendix3 MiscellaneousTables
Table 6: Physical Program of Balance Works Beyond 31 December 1996
(Page I of 4)
Balance YEARWISE PHYSICAL PROGRAMME Project Component Unit Quantity as on 01/01/1997 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 01/01/1997 to l ______31/03/1997 Jayakwadi Project Modernization of % 22 5 17 PLBC & PRBC Majalgaon Project ID-(I) WORKS MAIN CANAL (a) Earthwork 000 m3 180 35 145 0 0 (b) Structures Nos. 11 2 9 (c) Lining 000 m2 80 15 65 Distributaries (25 to 250 cusecs) (a) Earthwork 000 m3 200 10 190 (b) Structures Nos. 351 15 336 (c) Lining 000 m2 162 6 156 Vehicle & Equipment % 100 100 Minors (1-25 cusecs) (a) Earthwork 000 m3 225 10 215 (b) Structures Nos. 211 8 203 (c) Lining 000 m2 0 ID(II) WORKS (a) Field Channels 000 ha 2 0.55 1.45 & Field Drains (b) Selective lining 000 ha 18 3.39 14.61 Upper Penganga Project ID-([) WORKS (a) Earthwork ooo m1 1,929 55 1,874 (b) Structures Nos. 5 7 235 (c) Lining 000 m2 186 50 1,672 Distributaries(25 to 250 cusecs) (a) Earthwork 0oo m3 458 35 423 (b) Structures Nos. 477 37 440 (c) Lining 000 m2 18 2 16 Canal Upgradation % 100 15 85 Minors (1-25 cusecs) (a) Earthwork 000 m3 477 37 440 (b) Structures Nos. 676 55 621 (c) Lining 000 m2 33 3 30 ID (II) WORKS (a) Field Channels 000 ha 3 1.04 1.96 & Field Drains (b) Selective lining 100 ha 14 11.5 2.5 (c) Bridges Nos. 8 8 108
INDIA: MaharashtraComposite Irrigation Project III Implementation Completion Report Appendix 3: MiscellaneousTables
Table 6: Physical Program of Balance Works Beyond 31 December 1996
(Page 2 of 4)
Balance YEARWISE PHYSICAL PROGRAMME Project Component Unit Quantity as on 01/01/1997 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 01/01/1997 to 31/03/1997 Kukadi Project ID-(I) WORKS HEADWORKS (a) Dimbhe % 0.08 0.01 0.07 0 0 (b) Manikdoh % 0 (c) Visapur Tank % 0 Modemization MAINCANAL (a) Earthwork 000 m3 71 20 51 0 0 (b) Structures Nos. 5 l 4 0 0 (c) Lining 000 m2 186 10 30 5I 95 BRANCHCANAL (a) Earthwork 000 m3 64 20 44 0 0 (b) Structures Nos. I 0 I 0 0 (c) Lining 000 m2 4 0 l l 2 DISTRIBUTARIES (a) Earthwork 000 m3 38 5 16 17 0 (b) Structures Nos. 81 12 40 39 0 (c) Lining 000m 2 3 0 0 l 2 ID (II) WORKS (a) Main& Link 000 ha 0 Drains (b) Sub-Surface 000 ha 0.04 0.01 0.03 0 0 Drains (c) FieldChannels 000 ha 4.6 1 1.6 2 0 (d) SelectiveLining 000 ha 3 0 1 2 0 (e) ConjunctiveUse 000 ha 2.46 I 1.46 0 0 (f) Upgradation 000 ha 19.14 6 13.14 0 0 Work (g) Service Roads km 9 3 6 0 0 (h) Water Users' Nos. 0 Association (i) Buildings 0% 109
INDIA: MaharashtraComposite Irrigation Project III Implementation Completion Report Appendix 3 MiscellaneousTabics
Table 6: Physical Program of Balance Works Beyond 31 December 1996
(Page 3 of 4)
Balance YEARWISE PHYSICAL PROGRAMME Project Component Unit Quantity as on 01/01/1997 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 01/01/1997 to ______31/03/1997 Bhima Project ID-(I) WORKS HEADWORKS Vjani Dam & % Powerhouse MainCanal (a) Earthwork 000 m3 191.43 30 101.43 60 (b) Structures Nos. 2 - I I (c) Lining 000 m2 64.96 9 10 15 30.96 BranchCanal (a) Earthwork 000 ml 73.63 11 47.63 15 (b) Structures Nos. 6 - 4 2 (c) Lining 000 m2 26.22 5 5 8 8.22 Distributaries (25- 250 cusecs) (a) Earthwork 000 ml 291.15 50 161.15 80 (b) Structures Nos. 828 120 408 300 (c) Lining 000 m2 36.21 4 6 10 16.21 Minors (0-25 cusecs) (a) Earthwork 000 m3 359.96 50 209.96 100 (b) Structures Nos. 22 2 13 7 (c) Lining 000 m2 1.58 0.18 0.40 0.40 0.60 Upgradingof Canal 000 ha 2.52 0.22 0.30 0.70 1.3 Vehicle & Equipment - - - - ID (11)WORKS (a) Field Channels ha 46.77 3 15 17 11.77 (b) Selectivelining ha 12,004 1,000 5,000 3,000 3,004 (c) Main & Link ha 0 - - (d) Sub-surface ha 0 - - (e) Land Shaping& ha 4,000 600 600 1,400 1,400 ConjunctiveUse (flService Road km 35 5 5 13 12 (g) Water Users' Association - Registered Nos. 0 - -
- Handed-over Nos. 0 -- (h) Buildings % 50 10 20 20
m -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. 110
INDIA: Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project III ImplementationCompletion Report Appendix 3: MiscellaneousTables
Table 6: Physical Program of Balance Works Beyond 31 December 1996
(Page 4 of 4)
Balance YEARWISE PHYSICAL PROGRAMME Project Component Unit Quantity as on 01/01/1997 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 01/01/1997 to 31/03/1997 Krishna Project ID-(I) WORKS HEADWORKS Dhom& Kanher % Dams&Powerhouses MAINCANAL (a) Earthwork 000 m3 (b) Structures Nos. 18.00 3.00 7.00 8.00 (c) Lining 000 m2 388.00 50.00 50.00 178.00 110.00 DISTRIBUTARIES (25-250 cusecs) (10.8 Th) (a) Earthwork 000 ml (b) Structures Nos. 15.00 2.00 6.00 7.00 2 (c) Lining 000 m 1.00 - 0.75 0.25 MINORS(0-25 cusecs) (a) Earthwork 000 m3 (b) Structures Nos. (c) Lining 000 m2 12.00 2.00 5.00 3.00 2.00 ID (II) WORKS Upgrading Existing 000 ha 3.17 0.90 1.00 1.27 Canal (a) Main & Link ha (b) Sub-Surface ha (c) FieldChannels ha 7.65 0.30 5.35 2.00 (e) ConjunctiveUse ha 4.00 0.10 1.80 2.10 (f) Service Roads km (g) Water Users' Nos. Associations (h) Buildings %
11 This area consists of 10,800ha area for Arphal Canal between 43 to 85 km and deprived area of 5,900 ha from Dhom and Kanher canals. INC4A 9961 _M CCI_39 b Poo29d 111 h _p~UaO999MO 1,09. APP_ S Meas,$ Toi
TIu ya.* C9dIo30WColf44tt4dAro.5P04.wfl h3.99 aodA43II11 _a Al94 9916d4
80p12 CCA .610."| l1om9 19m47 I 99749 1H9 t9o"0 393l0ll 3i7132 91 4 10977 U___ Moo9 C.M 030._99. WM4 CIZ12 A..4C4 pp A0..s1 tC.C2 A4.I5 C-P. A1.0k I C.-0 A- 0 C2 A..%" C4. A9.L C09 AIM9 C5 4
h ..k9. l, 0a 11994 0 23130 0 35190 6069 70 35472 7091 3990 75610 90339 77J0 10932 79Z 0 1on7 79901 19111 9471 309 940 S326 64671 99
US&M5Isla_ 1390 471 73 921 171 3309 330 4-99 30410 4634 41447 3532 30919 069 3947 3233 474579
20 0 1 = K . a = lo ===l4= 34f 2260 4,1 _ 4210 73SS S OY 11960 __~~~~ ~~~~=_ _ - _-- - - I
90. 293 _ = - - ======93 7 279 3337 432 9335 599 89333 loss 93921 90 9
I ,949 90000 _ _ 0 0 '3 0 0 233 a X3373420 7909 4749 730 90
,99?94 t 2300 f 1 0 0 0 0 50003 93 73357 909 11907 96 17039 2029 96316
I0..99o.oo.,0 337912 99, 290 331911 00 394090 3390 791140 04909 32320 99 939 93279 993997 9309 936334 307 94243970 494269 323598 999 9
__. M" Kh9 9.. TS n _ (W0 __. T 0 ho9. _ 9..9d- by 99610 _09E.
F499 AWACIPCRAR 09.0 INDIA: MaharashtraComposite tnigation Pro;ect III ImpementationComplebtion Reporl Appendix3. MiscellaneousTables
Table8: Subproject-WlseIrrigation Cropping Intensities
Jayakwadi Majalgaon Upper enanga T ukdiiima -rish - Season Av At 1 1 At A At % Av iAt Av At Av At * 1988189 57,950 35,472 61 1,510 478 32 1989/90 70,910 39.960 56 7,230 929 13 _ . _ . _ . _ 1990191 75.610 30.335 40 16.710 1.303 8 ______1991192 77,580 50,832 67 23,060 4391 19 1992/93 78,840 10,827__ 14 30,4101 4.634 15 3,000, 828 28 810 455 581 837 271 32 - - 1993194 79.901 19,211 24 41,447 3,532 9 7,357 1,021 14 3,440 2,280 66 3.937 432 11 252 0 0 s 1994195 84,671 30,899 36 50,189 5,061 10 11,987 1,688 14 6,033 4,210 70 8.235 598 7 5.287 3,420 65 1995196 84,671 5,826 7 53.947 3,259 6 17,058 2,620 15 7,355 5,060 69 15,921 1,085 7 7.309 4,748 65 %Averages 38 14 . 9 . 65 14 65 I/ .______Overallaverage 36%
Av - Numberof hectaresavailable for irrigation. _ .__ Al Numberof hectaresactualy irrigated. I ._ -_-| %= Actualarea expressedas percentageof availablearea.
1/ Exckudes199394 figures. -- - 113
INDIA: Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project 111 ImplementationCompletion Repon Appendix 3: MiscellaneousTables
Table 9: Flow Irrigation Rates (Rs per Hectare)
Season/Crop Year-WiseRates per Major/Medium& Minor Projects
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 From 1.7.1991 1.7.1992 1.7.1993 1.7.1994 1.7.1990 .
KHARIF SEASON Kharif seasonals 65 70 80 90 100 Kharifpaddy (for agreement) 65 70 80 90 100 Kharifpaddy (as per demand) 120 140 160 180 200 Kharifgroundnut 120 140 160 180 200 Pre-seasonal/water (for rabi - - - - crops in kharif season) Hy. foundationcrop 120 140 160 180 200 RABI SEASONS Rabi seasonals(excluding 90 105 120 135 150 wheat & H'nut) Rabi wheat 100 125 150 175 200 Kharif& rabi cotton 180 210 240 270 300 Rabi groundnut 180 210 240 270 300 Rabi & hot weather paddy 180 210 240 270 300 Foundationcrop 180 210 240 270 300 Post-seasonal/wateringfor 30 35 40 45 50 kharif crops in rabi HOT WEATHERSEASON H.W. seasonals 180 210 240 270 300 H.W. groundnut 375 420 500 550 600 H.W. cotton (from 1stApril) 400 450 500 550 600 H.W. cotton (from I st March) 480 560 640 720 800 AdditionalWater - one water 90 105 120 135 150 in H.W. season Post-seasonalwater - one 35 45 55 65 75 water in H.W. season for rabi crops TWO SEASONALCROPS Tur. Batata & others: (i) kharif& rabi season 90 105 120 135 150 (ii) rabi & H.W. season 150 175 200 225 250 PERENNIALS Sugarcane 1,000 1,250 1,500 1,750 1,750 Banana 800 1,000 1,250 1,500 1,750 114 INDIA: Maharashtra CompositeIrriapfon Project 111 ImplementationCompletion Report Appendix3: MiscellaneousTables
Table 10: Year-Wise Areas Available for Irrigation and Actually Irrigated by Season (Hectares) Jayakwadi Majalpon Upper Kukadi Bbira Krishna Penganga
Total Available 57,950 1,510 Kharif - Rabi 15,066 259 Hot Weather 16,974 14 Two Season - 4 Pemrnnial 3,432 31 Total Irrigated 35,472 47S 1989190 Total Availabic 70,910 7.230 Kharif 2,088 Rabi 20,879 440 HotWeather 11,255 160 Two Season 9 Perennial 5,738 320 Total Irrigated 39,960 929 199091 Total Available 75,610 16,710 Khaif 77 13 Rabi 12.013 633 Hot Weather 14,192 237 TwoSeason 3 Perennial 4.050 370 Total Irrigated 30,335 1.303 191/92 TotalAvailable 77.580 23,060 Kharif 2,780 224 Rabi 29,243 3,490 HotWeather 9.923 72 Two Season 6,534 453 Perennial 2.352 152 TotalIrrigated 50,832 4,391 1992/93 Total Available 78,840 30.410 3.000 810 837 Khwif .II .- - Rabi 9,542 1.892 433 415 214 Hot Weather 1I.701 174 40 TwoSeason 176 571 110 Perennial 1,109 459 141 Total Irrigated 10,827 4,634 858 455 271 193194 TotalAvailable 79,901 41,447 7,357 3,440 3,937 252 Khauif - - 520 Rabi 3,924 595 412 1,542 388 Hot Weather 14,099 822 194 218 44 TwoSeason 44 194 Perenial 1,144 2.11S 219 Total Irrigated 19,211 3,532 1,019 2,280 432 0 1994195 Total Available 84,671 S0,189 11,987 6,033 8,235 5,287 Khuif 233 149 459 581 Rabi 7,910 1,140 776 2,139 535 1,940 Hot Weater 13,950 355 155 1,612 63 899 Two Season 4,157 645 413 Perennial 4,649 2,772 344 Total Irrigated 30,899 5,061 1,688 4,210 598 3,420 1995/96 Total Available S4,671 53,947 17,058 7,355 15,921 7,309 Kharif - - 549 I,S2 Rab- 1,743 621 1,095 4,511 1,050 2,562 Hot Weather - 32 263 . 35 1,034 TwoSeason 1,108 365 722 Perennial 2,975 2,241 540 Total Irrigated 5.826 3.259 2,620 5.060 1.085 4,748 115
IMPLEMENTATIONCOMPLETION REPORT
INDIA
MAHARASHTRACOMPOSITE IRRIGATION PROJECT III
(CR. 1621-IN)
APPENDIX4
ECONOMICREHABILITATION PROGRAM
A. Background
1. The mission's findings on Economic RehabilitationProgram (ERP) are based on: (a) field visits to the project sites; (b) documents provided to the mission by the rehabilitation and irrigation departments; and (c) discussions with the staff of Rehabilitationand Irrigation departments responsible for implementationof ERP.
2. The key areas of concern during the mission were: (a) allocationof funds to the Divisional Commissioners; (b) the recruitment of NGOs and M&E agency; (c) finalization of list of eligible beneficiaries for individual schemes; (d) progress in construction of balance civic amenities in the resettlement Gaothans; and (e) fillingof staff positions.
3. The inclusion of economic rehabilitation component is one of the strong reasons for supporting restructuring of the project since economic rehabilitationwould otherwise may not have been satisfactorily executed by GOM. This componentwas included to redress the inadequacies in the earlier rehabilitation efforts made by GOM. The amendmentsto the Development Credit Agreement between India and IDA, dated 8 June 1993, containsthat the borrower would update the baseline socio- economicsurveys and assist in completingthe plans for the rehabilitationof eligible persons affected by Majalgaon, Kukadi, Bhima, Krishna, and Upper Penganga commands. The rehabilitation program includes provision of civic amenitiesin resettlementvillages, housing, irrigation and income generating schemes for eligible persons (Schedule 2 of Agreement Amending Development Credit Agreement, dated 8 June 1993).
B. Objectives
4. The main aim of includingthe economic rehabilitation component was to assist GOM's efforts to improve the welfare of persons previously resettled due to earlier investments related to reservoir and headwork's development. The objective under this time-bound economnicrehabilitation program was to improve or regain the standards of living that they had prior to their displacement.It 116
would thus redress a past inadequacyin GOM's executionof R&R, acknowledgedby GOM, who have asked for Bank's assistance to achieve this objective. More broadly, the restructured project's economic rehabilitationprogram would also serve as a model for possible further use elsewhere in Maharashtra.
C. Project Component
5. Retrofit Socio-economicsurveys were carried out during 1994-95 to find out the number of PAPs residing in the Resettlement villages (RGs) and their living standards. Against the total number of 36,084 who were originallyaffected during early seventies, only 22,168 PAPs (61.4%) were found residing in RGs at the time of conducting survey. Based on the survey findings and subsequent rehabilitationaction plans, the GOM has brought out a GovernmentOrder (GO) dated 4 January 1996 detailing out the economic rehabilitationpolicy. This reflects the commitmentof GOM to implement this important component of the project by moving beyond minimallinkages of traditionalprograms to poverty alleviation programs. It added improvementsin civic amenities, housing, irrigation facilities and opportunitiesfor developmentof incomegeneration activities. The Bank found that plan to be quite progressive and endorsed it. As per the plan, this componentwould be implementedover a three year period from January 1996 to December 1998 at a cost of Rs. 960 million (US$27.42 million). The various activitiesto be undertakenunder this componentare as follows:
(a) Providing the basic civic amenities as per the existing "Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Act, 1986" and undertaking the necessary repairs of already existingfacilities (Rs. 384.60 million);
(b) Providing financial assistance (Rs. 15,000 for agricultural families and Rs. 10,000 for non-agriculturalfamilies) to those PAPs who are living in the kuchha and semi- pucca houses for their protection from natural hazards and calamities (Rs. 178.80 million);
(c) Extending appropriate assistance (up to Rs. 55,000) for creating irrigation facilities to those landed PAPs who do not have adequate irrigation facilities (Rs. 280.0 million);and
(d) Providing assistance to the landless PAPs living below poverty line (up to Rs. 18,000) to enable them to engage in some income generation activities with a view to raise their living standards above poverty line (Rs. 120 million). This componentof the policy will be implementedwith the involvementof NGOs.
6. The details of ERP as per implementationprogram agreed with the Bank during January 1996 is fumished in Table 1, which differs marginallywith the provisionsmade in the GO of 4 January 1996. 117
Table 1: Details of Economic Rehabilitation Program as per Implementation Plan
(Amount in Rs million) Project Civic amenities Housing Irrigation Income Generation Total Scheme Amount No. Amount No. Amount No. Amount No. Amount Kukadi 121 28.08 2688 60.03 876 48.18 671 14.76 151.05 Krishna 533 38.33 1332 19.60 457 25.13 327 7.19 90.25 Bhima 916 174.68 4290 59.42 737 40.53 2210 48.62 323.25 Upper 165 72.35 1560 18.96 1505 82.77 635 13.97 188.05 Penganga __ l Majalgoan 188 65.37 1491 21.66 1515 83.32 1339 29.46 199.81 Total 1923 378.81 11,341 179.67 5090 279.93 5182 114.00 952.41*
* Inadditional to this, there is also provision of 2.8 million for creation of additional staff. D. Mission's Findings
7. Implementation of this component is well behind schedule and is yet to pick up momentum: (a) out of the four activities envisaged under this component, only improvements in civic amenities has been commenced. So far 18% of physical (162 out of 905 new facilities to be created) and 33% of financial progress (Rs. 125 million out of Rs.378 million) was noticed. The implementation of other three components (housing, irrigation and income generation activities) are yet to be commenced; (b) the funds earmarked for 1996-97 for the components of housing, irrigation and income generation activities are yet to be placed with the Divisional Commissioners; (c) though 70% of the professional staff created for exclusive implementation of this scheme is in position, but the key position of Deputy Secretary is yet to be filled; (d) updating of list of eligible PAPs for individual schemes is yet to be completed; (e) recruitment of NGOs for implementation of income generation activities has been pending for quite some time; and (f) no efforts have been made so far to finalize the TOR and appointment of consultants for Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E).
8. The mission is of the view that the project implementation need to be considerably speeded up by (a) placing adequate funds for all activities with the Divisional Commissioners; (b) filling up the vacant staff positions including the key position of Deputy Secretary; (c) finalizing the recruitment of NGOs; and (d) selecting the M&E agency to monitor and provide regular feed back of the project implementation activities.
E. Major Factors Affecting Timely Implementation
9. The mnssion observed that the following are the major factors affecting the timely implementation ERP:
(a) Non-availability of funds: As the Credit under the project has been fully utilized, the irrigation and rehabilitation departments have been arguing over who should fund the rehabilitation activities of housing, irrigation and income generation activities of 118
ERP. The Irrigation Department is willing to finance only for civic amenities, as these were in accordance with the state act on rehabilitation and being implemented by IrrigationDepartment. Accordingto them all other activities should be financed out of the rehabilitation department's funds since these are being implemented by RehabilitationDepartment. On the other hand the RehabilitationDepartment do not have any funds and they feel it is the responsibilityof Irrigation Department, since they are responsiblefor displacementand it should form part of the project cost All the activities included under the ERP are consistent with the Agreement Amending DevelopmentCredit Agreementdated 8 June 1993 and the GOM should resolve this issue early and provide necessary funds to complete the balance works within the planned period as per GO of January 4, 1996.
(b) Lack of proper co-ordination: The Deputy Secretary is the key person in the implementation of the program which is yet to be filled up. The delay has affected the proper coordination and guidance to the staff at divisional and project level. There are also no proper follow-upfrom the senior level staff at the divisionallevel. As a result, the preparation activities of implementationat project level suffered considerably.
(c) Delay in recruitment of NGOs: The appointmentof NGOs for implementationof income generation activities is pending for over eight months. Despite the Bank's " no objection" for the recruitment of NGOs, no action has been taken to finalize their contracts. This has resulted in considerable delay in initiating this important componentunder ERP.
(d) Failure to appoint M&E agency: The appointmentof M&E agency is essential to monitor the implementationprogress and provide necessary guidance to the NGOs and other persons involvedin the implementationprocess for successful and timely execution. The failureto initiate the process of appointingthe M&E agency has also contributedto delay in completingvarious preparatoryactivities such as updating of list of eligible PAPs for individualschemes, issuance of identity cards, finalizmg the details of irrigation and income generation components, and providing guidance to the staff involvedin implementation.
F. Current Status and Management of ERP
10. The mission expressed concern over the delay in initiating the housing, irrigation and income generationactivities pertaining to this component. Out of the total budget provision of Rs. 380 millionfor 1996-97, only Rs. 177 millionwas placed with the Commissionerof Pune to be utilized only for civic arnenities. The mission was informed that the amount for Aurangabad division is yet to be placed with the Commissioner. The detailsof implementationprogress at each project level are shown in Attachments 1 to 5. 119
Finalizationof Economic RehabilitationPlans
11. The project level implementingauthorities are supposed to finalize the plans after duly consulting each PAP by ascertaining their existing housing condition and income level. The mission observed that substantial progress was noticed in respect of finalizationof PAPs eligible for housmg grants While in case of Kukadi, Upper Penganga and Majalgaon the task of finalizing list has been completed, in case of Bhima and Krishna it is near completion. Finalization of list of beneficiaries regarding irngation facilities has been delayed due to lack of proper coordinationbetween the District Resetflement Offices and Geological Survey Development Agencies (GSDAs) except m Upper Penganga and Majalgaonprojects where the process has been completed. In case of these two projects wells are not suitable in most parts of the project area and they have to go for lift irrigation in a big way. The mission was informed that detailed instructionof lift imgation is yet to be issued. As a result the detailed survey in this regard is yet to be initiated. Fmalization of list of beneficiaries for income generation activities is proposed to be taken up only after the formal recruitment of NGOs who are expected to finalize the lists.
Improvement of Civic amenities
12. Substantialprogress was noticed in this componentonly under Bhima-Ujjaniand Krishna projects. So far 18% of physical (162 out of 905 new facilities to be created) and 33% of financial progress (Rs. 125 million out of Rs. 378 million) was noticed. The details of physical progress (new facilities and repairs to existing ones) and the financial progress were presented in Attachments 6 to 8. The implementationof civic amenities component is at various stages of completion and funds have been made available for this componentin Pune division. However, in case of Aurangabad, both in Majalgaon and especially in Upper Penganga there had been no progress because of non-release of finds earmarked during 1996-97. Preparation of tender documents and invitationof tenders are m advance stage and if funds are made availablein time most of the civic amenities can be completed by December 1997.
Staff Positions
13. Ten out of the fourteen senior level staff created for implementationof ERP are in position. However, the key position, i.e. Deputy Secretary at Headquarters is yet to be filled in. Identificationof suitable person for this position will be key for successful implementationof this component as he will be the main coordinatorfor the implementationprogram.
Recruitment of NGOs
14. The GO on rehabilitationpolicy for this projectemphasised the need for involvementof NGOs for implementationof income generationschemes (para 7 of RehabilitationPolicy dated January 4, 1996). The recruitment of NGOs for implementationof income generation activities and formation of cooperative societiesfor lift irrigation schemes has been pending since March 96. Bank gave its " no 120
objection" for hiring five NGOs. In respect of hiring other NGOs for other subprojects Bank had requested GOM to submit the revised proposals for review and clearance. There was no progress since then in this respect.
Recruitment of M&E agency
15. No efforts have been made so far to finalize the TOR which were discussed and agreed during the January 1996 mission regarding the selection criteria and recruitment of monitoring and evaluation agency. The appointment of M&E agency is essential to monitor the implementation progress and provide necessary guidanceto the NGOs and the implementingofficials from time to time for successful implementation. The mission strongly recommends that the M&E agency should be appointedwithout any further delay.
Progress Reports
16. During the last supervisionmission in July 1996, formats for progress reports were given to the GOM for periodical monitoringof the progress and taking timely managementdecision based on progress. Bank has not received any progress report on this component and it was informed to the mission that since there was no progress these were neither prepared nor sent. The mission strongly recommendsthat the progress of implementationof this componentshould be sent to the Bank quarterly for informationand record.
G. Urgent Actions Required for Speedy Implementation
17. As per the Legal Agreement, ERP was to be completed by Credit Closure on December 31, 1996. Due to various reasons, it was agreed that the economic rehabilitation component of the restructured project would be implementedover a three year period from January 1996 to December 1998 at a cost of Rs. 960 million (US$27.42 million). The implementationhas only began and so far has been confined to one componentonly, i.e. providing civic amenities. Therefore it is not appropriate to evaluate its impact, outcome and sustainabilityat this point of time. In the opinion of the mission it should be evaluated at the end of three year period, i.e. in December 1998. The GOM should take prompt action in sorting out the source of funding for this component as this appears to be the single major reason for the inordinate delay in implementation. The Bank should be kept informed about the decision of GOM regarding source of funding for this component from now onwards. The implementationof this componentneed to be speeded up by GOM by: (a) placing adequate funds for all four types of activitieswith the commissioners;(b) immediatelyfiling up of the position of Deputy Secretary, who will be the mam coordinatorof implementationprogram; (c) recruitmg NGOs without any further delay; and (d) finalizing the TOR for M&E based on the comments provided by the Bank and appointingthe M&E agency. 121
Attachment 1
Summaryof R&R implementation KukadiProject (Costin Rs Million) Target as per Achieve- Antici- Balance Likely Date Implementation went as pated as on 31- of Plan on 30- achieve- Dec-96 completing Details Nov-96 ment as implement- on 31- ation target Dec-96 L Housing (a) PAPs to be given grants 2688 ------949 31-Dec-97 (b) Total cost 60.03 13.50 IL Irrigation facilities (a) PAPs to be benefited 876 --- 1168 31-Dec-98 (b) Totalcost 48.18 --- 5256 M. Income Generation Schemes 671 (a) PAPs to be covered 14.76 ------932 31-Dec-98 (b) Total cost ------16.77 IV. Civic amenities (i)Newfacilities (a)Newfacilities to be created 60 20 20 40 30-Jun-97 (b) Total Cost 19.90 6.46 7.18 12.72 (ii) Repairs (a) Repairworks to be taken up 61 --- 20 41 31-Dec-97 (b) Total cost 8.18 - 6.13 2.05 (iii) Total (a) No. of works 121 20 40 81 31-Dec-97 (b) Total Cost 28.08 6.46 13.31 14.77 122
Attachment 2
Summaryof R&Rimplementation Project Krishna Project
(Cost in Rs Million) Target as per Achieve- Antici- Balance Likely date Implementation ment as pated as on 31- of Plan on 30- achieve- Dec-96 completing Details Nov-96 ment as implement- on 31- ation target Dec-96 L Housing (a) PAPs to be given grants 1332 ------949 31-Dec-97 (b) Total cost) 19.60 ------13.50 IL Irrigation facilities 457 (a) PAPs to be benefited 25.13 --- 1168 31-Dec-98 (b) Total cost --- 52.56 m. Income Generation Schemes 327 (a) PAPs to be covered 7.19 ------932 31-Dec-98 (b) Total cost ------16.77 IV. Civic amenities (i)Newfacilities (a)Newfacilities to be created 263 55 65 198 30-Jun-97 (b) Total Cost 28.02 22.31 25.00 3.02 (ii) Repairs (a) Repairworks to be taken up 270 3 8 262 31-Dec-97 (b) Total cost 10.31 0.71 2.84 7.47 (iii) Total (a) No. of works 533 58 73 460 31-Dec-97 (b) Total Cost 38.33 23 02 27.84 10.49 123
Attachment 3
Summary of R&R implementation Bhima-Ujjni Project (Cost in Rs Million Target as per Achieve- Antici- Balance Likely date Implementation ment as pated as on 31- of Plan on 30- achieve- Dec-96 completing Details Nov-96 ment as implement- on 31- ation target Dec-96 L Housing (a) PAPs to be given grants 4290 ------949 31-Dec-97 (b) Total cost) 59.42 13.50 IL Irrigation facilities (a) PAPs to be benefited 737 --- 1168 31-Dec-98 (b) Total cost 40.53 --- 52.56 m. Income Generation Schemes (a) PAPs to be covered 2210 ------932 31-Dec-98 (b) Total cost 48.62 ------16 77 IV. Civic amenities (i)Newfacilities (a)Newfacilities to be created 377 87 200 177 31-Dec-97 (b) Total Cost 150.08 94.56 98.70 51 38 (ii) Repairs (a) Repair works to be taken up 539 --- 150 389 31-Dec-97 (b) Total cost 19.60 --- 6.0 13.60 (iii) Total (a) No. of works 916 87 350 566 31-Dec-97 (b) Total Cost 169.68 94.56 104.70 64 98 124
Attachment 4
Summary of R&R implementation Upper Penganga Project (Cost in Rs Million Target as per Achieve- Antici- Balance Likely date Implementation ment as pated as on 31- of Plan on 30- achieve- Dec-96 completing Details Nov-96 ment as implement- on 31- ation target Dec-96 L Housing (a) PAPs to be given grants 1560 --- 949 31-Dec-97 (b) Total cost) 18.96 ... --- 13.50 IL Irrigation facilities 1505 (a) PAPs to be benefited 82.77 ------1168 31-Dec-98 (b)Total cost ------52.56 IL Income Generation Schemes 635 (a) PAPs to be covered 13.97 ------932 31-Dec-98 (1) Total cost _ 16.77 V. Civic amenities (i)Newfacilities (a)Newfacilities to be created 82 - --- 82 31-Mar-98 (b) Total Cost 58.92 0.83 0.83 58.09 (ii) Repairs (a) Repairworks to be taken up 83 --- - 83 31-Mar-98 (b) Total cost 13.43 --- 13.43 (iii) Total (a) No. of works 165 ------165 31-Mar-98 (b) Total Cost 72.35 0.83 0.83 71.52 125
Attachment 5
Summary of R&R implementation Majalgoan Project (Co_ _in Rs Million Target as per Achieve- Antici- Balance Likely date Implementation ment as pated as on 31- of Plan on 30- Achieve- Dec-96 Completing Details Nov-96 ment as Implement- on 31- ation target Dec-96 L Housing (a) PAPs to be given grants 1491 15 949 31 -Dec-97 (b) Total cost) 21.66 --- 0.015 13.50 II. Irrigation facilities (a) PAPs to be benefited 1515 --- ... 1168 31-Dec-98 (b) Total cost 83.32 --- 52.56 III. Income Generation Schemes (a) PAPs to be covered 1339 --- ... 932 31-Dec-98 (b) Total cost 29.46 --- 16.77 IV. Civic amenities (i)Newfacilities (a)New facilities to be created 123 --- 6 117 31-Dec-97 (b) Total Cost 24.20 0.84 2.18 22.02 (ii) Repairs (a) Repair works to be taken up 65 --- 15 50 31-Dec-97 (b) Total cost 41.17 1.02 40.15 (iii) Total (a) No. of works 188 --- 21 167 31-Dec-97 (b) Total Cost 65.37 0.84 3.20 62.17 126
Attachment 6
Details of Implementation Progress of New Civic Amenities to be Provided in the Resettlement Gaothans
(a s on 30-Nov96) No Type of facility Kukadi Krishna Bhlina Upper Majalgaon Total to be provided Penganga T C % T C % T C % T C % T C % T C % I Piped Water 3 0 00 9 2 22.2 46 14 30.43 13 0 00 71 16 22.5 ____ supply Schemes 2 Bore Wells 5 0 0.0 6 2 33.3 6 350.0 - - - 17 5 29.4
3 Open Wells _-- 3 0 0.0 18 00.0 ------21 0 0.0 4 School buildings 19 10 12 5 41.7 90 13 14.4 15 0 23 0 0.0 159 28 17.6 52.6 0.0 ______5 Approach roads 19 5 73 3 4.1 10532 62.5 1 0 0.0 29 0 0.0 227 40 17.6 26.3 ______6 Intemal roads 2 0 0.0 12 1 8.3 11 327.3 1 0 0 0 1 0 0.0 27 4 14.8 7 SamitaryUnits 6 597 17 21 838.1 - - - 30 0 0.0 154 30 19.5 83.3 17.5 ______8 Gutters 5 0 0.0 35 19 68 14 20.6 25 0 6 0 0.0 139 33 23.7 54.3 0.0 9 Community - - -- 8 4 8 00.0 9 0 0 0 -- - 25 4 16.0 _ Centres 50.0 .
10 Ashplatig of_- - -23 ----- 0 0 0 23 0 0.0
___ roads ______11 Others* 1 0 0.08 2 4 00.0 18 ° 1 0 0.0 42 2 4.8 25.0 0.0 ______Total 60 20 263 55 377 87 23.0 82 0 0.0 123 0 0.0 905 162 17.9
______33.3 1 20.9 1 _ _ 1______
T: Target; C: Completed: % ; Achievementagainst target * Others include street lighting, fencing of cremation grounds and land development 127
Attachment 7
Details of Implementation Progress of Repairs to CivicAmenities in ResettlementGaothans
(as on 30-Nov-96) N Type of facility to Kukadi Krishna Bhima Upper Majalgaon Total o be provided Penganga T C % T C % T C % T C % TC % T C % I Piped Water 6 0 0.0 36 3 8.3 56 0 0.0 13 0 0.0 111 3 2.7 supply Schemes 2 Bore Wells - - -- 23 0 0.0 60 0 0.0 -- - - 83 0 0.0 3 Open Wells 1 0 0 0 21 0 00 41 0 0.0 - - - 63 0 0.0 4 School buildings 8 0 0 0 43 0 00 84 0 0.0 22 0 0.0 21 0 178 0 0 0 ______~~~~~~~~~0.0 5 Approach roads 9 0 0.0 26 0 0.0 71 0 0.0 14 0 0.0 - - 120 0 0.0 6 Intemal roads 16 0 0.0 49 0 0.0 77 0 0.0 27 0 0.0 23 0 192 0 0 0
7 SanitaryUnits 3 0 0.0 - - - 60 000 ------63 0 0.0 8 Gutters 12 0 0.0 29 0 0.0 11 0 0.0 - - -- 2 0 0.0 54 0 0.0 9 Community 6 0 0.0 43 0 0 0 79 0 0 0 7 0 0.0 19 0 00 154 0 00 Centres Total 61 20 3.3 270 3 11 539 0 00 83 0 0.0 65 0 00 1018 3 03
T: Target; C: Completed; %: Achievement against target. 128
Attachment 8
Details of Implementation Progress of Civic Amenities in Financial Terms
(Amount in Rs Million) Project Estimated Spent as on Achievement Budget 30-Nov-96 % Kukadi 28.08 6.46 23.00 Krishna 38.33 23.02 60.06 Bhima-Ujjini 169.68 94.56 55.73 Upper Penganga 72.35 0.84 1.16 Majalgaon 65.37 0.83 1.27 Total 373.81 125.71 33.18 129 APPENDIX 5
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
GOVERNMENT QE MAHARASHTRA IRRlGATION DEPARTMENT
MAHARASHTRA COMPOSITE IRRIGATION PROJECT-Ill (RESTRUCTURED) ( CREDIT-NO. 1621-IN)
BORROWER'S EVAL UA TIO ORERT
MAY 199 130 llurro%er's Report PAGE-I MAHARASHTRA COMPOSITE IRRIGATION PROJECT (RESTRUCTURED) CREDIT NO.1621-IN BORROWER'SREPORT
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 After closure of Maharashtra Composite Irrigation Project -I ( MCIP-I) in 1978, GOM requested International Development Association of World Bank ( WB) for consideration of further assistance in completion of balance work of Jayakwadi and Majalgoan projects, so that maximum command area of these projects could be provided water for irrigation. In consideration of GOM's request NVB had discussions and deliberations with GOM and after completion of appraisal studies by GOM, the agreement of MCIP-111 for the total external assistance of SDR 164.20 million was finalised in December 1985, in whiichsome civil works, command area development , agricultural and road works in Jayakwadi and Majalgaoln projects were contemplated to be complcted by June 1991. 1.2 Implementation of MCIP-1II commenced from 1986 after completion of preliminary works as per WB's requirements. During implementation of MCIP-III it was realised that some command area development provision contemplated in the agreement were either more than the actual requirement or not actually required at all. Hence to reassess the actual requirement of all provisions, with concurrence of WB it was decided in 1987 to reformulate MCIP-III . Reformulating of MCIP-III could be finalised in 1989.In the meantime exchange rate of rupee for dollar increased considerably from Rs. 12 for one dollar, as considered in agreemenit to Rs. 34 for one dollar in 1989. Besides the above reasons adequate budget could not be made available due to financial constraints prevelant in the State at that time due to which funds were needed to be diverted to other essential and priority areas in the State. 2.0 PROJECT COST 2.1 Due to above obvious reasons total external assistance ( 164.20 M. SDR) was not possible to be fully utilised on works of Javakwadi and Majalgoan projects, despite approval of two extensions by WB upto April 1993. Ilence to utilise the full external assistance it was decided to restructure MCIP-III by expanding the scope of works, by including some works of Kukadi, Bhima, Krishna, and Upper Penganga projects, which were the earst-while MCIP-II projects, and new components such as resettlement and economic rehabilitation of PAPs, EIA & EMP studies, basii planning, Agricultural extension programmes, developments of roads in command area of these sub projects etc. This restructured MCIP- III was finalised after completing the required feasibility studies and accordingly the restructured ( ammended ) agreement was signed in June 1993, with credit closing date up to 31-12-1996 and the total external assistance of SDR 132.20 million. 3.0 DISBURSEMENT 3.1 Initially the disbursement for MCIP-III was very slow due to devaluation of Rupee against the SDR and construction constraints. Most of the contracts for the works were fixed before the agreement. These contracts were not fixed as per the tender norms of the World Bank hence not eligible for disbursement. The closing date of the restructured project was 31st December 1996. The sanctioned credit of SDR 132.20million has been fully disbursed before closing date of the credit 1621-IN. 131
Borro%cr's Report PAGE .2 3.2 Thc ycarly disbursement programme agreed during the rcstructured project and disbursemcnt obtained was as under. Year Programme Disbursement Upto3/1992 SDR 37.60 Million 1992-93 SDR 4.60 Million SDR 4.60 Million 1993-94 SDR 19.00 Million SDR 22.80 Million 1994-95 SDR 26.50 Million SDR 27.00 Million 1995-96 SDR 25.50 Million SDR 32.50 Million Upto12/96 SDR 19.00 Million SOR 7.70 Million
4.0 PROJECT MONITORING 4.1 The Irrigation Dcpartmcnt had monitored these projects by setting up central monitoring unit at Mantralaya, Munibai, regional monitoring unit at Pune & Aurangabad, Project Monitoring units at each subprojects.
4.2 The World Bank Supervision Field Missions have visited the project areas every six month for review of the project implementation. The Superintending Engineer, Special Evaluation and Analysis cell at Punc was the co ordinating officcr for the whole project. The monitoring report preparcd by thc Special Evaluation & Analysis Cell Pune had been apl)reciated by the Field Mission. The Chairman Central Water Commission had also rcviewed the project implementation quarterly. Implementation Completion Reporting Mission visited the MCIP-III (R) project from 2 - 13 December 1996 and found the project's outcome to be satisfactory in respect of civil works both for Irrigation and Roads. The Mission has noted that the implementation of the agreed action plan for economic rehabilitationi of PAPs has been satisfactorily prepared but not carried out for want of funidsduring the last year of thc project
5.0 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
5.1 The Ammended Project Agreement for MCIP-III ( R ) was singed by the Government of India with the World Bank on 8th June 1993. This projects was implemented by four Departmcnts of the Government of Maharashtra as follows.
1) Irrigation Departmcnt :- All the Irrigation works. CAD works, special studies, monitoring. WALMI training. 2) Public Works Dcpartment: Rural Road works in sub projects command area. 3) Agriculture Department :- Agricultural extension programme in the command of the project and adaptive agricultural research training in State agricultural Universities. 4) Rcvenuc & Forest Departmcnt: Resettlement, and Economic Rehabilitation of Projcct Affected Persons in subprojects. 132
lUorrower's Reqori PAGE .3 6.0 IRRIGATIONWORKS
6.1 The cultivable command arca to bc developed, at the Appraisal Report of MCIP-III, was estimated 3,00,000 ha. and was re-estimated during restructuring the project in 1993 as 2,27,800ha. i.e 1,46,000ha. for Jayakwadi and Majalgoan projects, and 81, 800 ha. for Kukadi, Bhima. Krishna and Upper Penganga subprojects. However, during the execution the area of Krishna project was increased to 14,000hia. and works were carried accordingly. Thus thc total arca to be developed was 2,31,000 ha. Out of this development works on 2 10 .0,1i#4 0 ha. were completed by the closing date of the Credit,i.e 31st Dcember 1996. 2) '6.4 Project wise development was as under:
Project Planned Achieved Achieved % Jayakwadi 88,000 ha. 84,670 ha. 96% Majalgaon 58,000 ha. 55,530 ha. 96% U.Penganga 23,000 ha. 19,650 ha. 85% Kukadi 20,000 ha. 18,470 ha. 92% Shima 28,000 ha. 20,400 ha. 73% Krishna 14,000 ha. 11,480 ha. 94% Total ;}686 ha. 2,10,200 ha. 91% -3,3i, D 0 6.2 The main rcasons for the Icss achievemcnts of development arc i) constraints of land acquisition, objections by villagers in close proximity to blasting operations, the extensive rock cxcavation in the main canal system, delay in awarding some of the contracts for major aqueducts. 6.3 It is the cxperience of the GOM that delay in fixing the tenders in certain cases, was mainly duc to the tendering procedure laid down by the Bank, such as Bank's permission for rejecting or rebiding tenders if the tender offer is high, no negotiations with bidders etc. Tender offers were invariably high in these projects compared to the general trade in the State. This give%scopcto infer that the contractors might have managed the tenders amongst themselves as a evident from less numbers of offers received. Similarly Govt. was required to increase lot of extra expenditure by way of litigation because of Bank insistence on inclusion of arbitration clause in the tenders. Almost all the contractors have resorted to putting forth unreasonablc claims and taking disadvantage of the clause. They were successful in getting the claim because of legal position. It would be worthwhile to review these provision in future projects. 6.5 Project wise objective and progress is as below.
7.0 Jayakwadj Project.
7.1 All the works on Jayakwadi dam and main and branch canals were completed before March 1985. Under MCIP-III the following works were included : a) The irrigation distribution system to serve 45,000 ha. ii ) The main drains of 72000 ha. and link drains of 5,500 ha. iii) on farm development works on 4.670 ha. out of 88.000 ha. completed. iv) land shaping on 1,28,000 ha. v) Modernisation of the Paithan Left and Right bank canals including distribution systems was completed. All these works were completed in 1994-95. 133
UIorroucr-sReport PAGE -4 8.0 MajalgoanProject
8.1 The works included in MCIP-1II ( R ) project are i) Construction of 116 structures on main canal. between km 0 to 67, construction of main canal between km 67 to 100, ii) Construction of the irrigation distribution system along the first 100 km. main canal to serve 58,000 ha. iii) Construction of the field channel and protection work and OFD works along the first 100 km. main canal to serve 58,000 ha. iv)) Carrying out land shaping of 6,200 ha. (v) Operation of Majalgoan main canal and Ganga Masala branch canal on the principle of dynamic regulation . vi) construction of 150 km. of service roads. 8.2 Out of above planned works, the achievement by 31-12-1996is: i) Construction of 261 structures out of 276 structures on main canal, from 0 to 100 km. completed., earthwork 97 % and lining 95 %, on 67 to 100 km. of main canal completed. ii) Construction of the irrigation distribution system along the first 100 km. main canal to serve 57,000 ha. out of 58,000 ha. completed. iii) Construction of the field channel and protection work and on farm development works along the first 100 km. main canal to serve 55, ha out of 58.000 ha. completed. iv)) Land shaping of 1600 ha. out of 6200 ha. completed. Due to problems associated with the loan arrangements and farmer's reluctance to accept this development, target could not be achieved . v) The Pilot Project Dynamic Regulation (PPDR) exercise was implemented on the Mlajalgoan Right Bank Canal. The existing control structured were improved to operate automatically. The main canal is initially to operate under constant volume conditions was eventually shifted to controlled volume method. The branchi and minor canals envisages volume controls, those new structures were constructed. The Pilot project was provided with controls on the main canal for about 58,000 ha. on the branch canal for 11,000ha. and on minor canal covering area of 2,000 ha. MIs. GERSAR of France, was thie consultant for implementation of the PPDR. A trial run of the l PDR was taken in October 1996. The system will become operational during the cropping season of 1997.
9.0 UpperPenganga Project. 9.1 The works included in MCIP-III ( R) projects are: i) Modernisation of the Isapur dam ii) Construction of main and branchi canals about 220 km. iii) upgrading the existing distributory canal system covering an area of about 25,000 ha; iv) constructions of partially lined distribution networks covering an area of about 23,000 ha; v) Construction of OFD works (including main and link drains) covering area of about 23,000 ha; and vii) Pilot land shaping operations and conjunctive use covering area of about 4,000 ha. 9.2 Out of the above works planned, the achievement by 31-12-1996is i) Modernisation works of Isapur dam are completed. The preventive works recommended by Dam Safety Review Panel (DSRP) are in progress. ii) Construction of Isapur left bank canal, 57 km out of 81 Km. completed. Construction of Isapur Right bank canal of 115 Km, 74% of earthwork, 50% of lining, and 42% of structures were completed. and on the remaining 24 km. branch canal about 70% of earthvork, 50% of lining, and 40% of structures completed. iii) Distributory canal system covering an area of 23000 ha. out of 25,000 ha completed,A4jponstructions of partially lined distribution networks covering an area of 20,000 ha.k23,000ha. completed v) Construction of on farm development covering area of 19.650l ha. out of 23,000 ha completed and vii) Land shaping was not carried out as farmers were not interested in getting loans to carry out the work. Conjective use on about 4,000 ha. was not implemented due to delay in obtaining reports and certificates from the Government organisation responsible for ground water exploration. 134
IIurra%cr'sRepot PAGE .5 10.0 Kukadi Pmiroec
10.1 The works included in MCIP-1II ( R ) projects are: (i) modernisation of the Dimbhc and Manikdoh dams, and Visapur tank; (ii) constructions of 127 km of main and branch canals: (iii) upgrading the existing canal system covering an area of about 65.000 ha; (iv) construction of partially lined distribution networks covering an area of about 20,000 ha; (v) construction of main and link drains and field canals covering about 20,000 ha; sub- surface drains covering about 500 ha; and (vi) provision of pilot operation for land shaping and conjunctive use covering an arca of about 4.000 ha.
10.2 Out of the abovc works planned, the achievement by 31-12-1996 is i) The modernisation works on the Dimbhe & Manikdoh dam and works on Visapur Tank completcd. The preventive works recommended by Dam Safety Review Panel (DSRP) are in progress. ii) Construction of 127 km of main canals on the right and left banks of the Dimbhe, Manikdoh, and Yedgaon reservoirs are in progress, in this reach about 9896 of carthworks and structurcs and 80% of lining have been completed. The major works remained to be completed are: (1) the Ghod aqueduct located in the Dimbhe Right Bank Canal. and rock tunneling in this canal. and (2) construction of Hanga aqueduct located at km 74 of the Kukadi Left Bank Canal. These works were commenced in October 96 and are in progress. (iii) upgrading cxisting canal system over an area of 45,760 ha. out of 65,000ha. were completed. (iv) construction of partially lined distribution network covering about of 19.960 ha. out of 20,000 ha. were completed (v) construction of field canals and drainage eovering an area of 18.470 ha. out of 2O ha, were completed. sub-surface drains covering about 470 ha. out of 500 ha. completed. vi) Land shaping was not carried out as farmers were not interested in getting loans to carry out the work. Conjective use on about 4.000 ha. was not implemented due to delay in obtaining reports and certificates from the Government organization responsible for ground water exploration.
11.0 Bhima Project
11.1 The works included in MCIP-III ( R ) projects are: (a) Irrigation works includes; (i) modernisation of Ujani dam and powerhouse; (ii) construction of main and branch canals over a length of 63 km;(iii) upgrading existing canal system over an area of 85,000 ha; (iv) construction of partially lined distribution network covering about 28,000 ha; (v) construction of field canals and drainage covcring an area of 28,000 ha; (vi) provision of pilot operation land shaping and conjunctive use covering an area of 4,000 hla.
11.2 Out of above works planned, the achievement by 31-12-1996 is i) Modernisation of Ujani dam and power house has been completed. The preventive works recommended by DanmSafety Review Panel (DSRP) arc in progress and will be completed by MKVDC Pune. (ii) construction of main and branch canals over a length of 63 km is in progress and 94 96 of earth work, 90 % structures and 89 % of lining were completed. (iii) upgrading existing canal system over an area of 71,290 ha. out of 85,000 ha. were completed. (iv) construction of partially lined distribution network covering about of 28,000 ha. were completed (v) construction of ficld canals and drainage covering an area of 20.400 ha. out of 28,000 were completed. vi) Land shaping was not carried out as farmers were not interested In getting loans to carry out the work. Conjective use on about 4,000 ha. was not implemented due to delay in obtaining reports and certificates from the Government organization responsible for ground water exploration. 135 lBorrower's Report PAGE -6
12.0 KrishnaProjec
12.1 The works included in MCIP-11I ( R) projects are: (i) modernisation of Dhom and Kanher dam and their powerhouses ; (ii) construction of main and branch canals over a lcngth of 58 km; (iii) upgrading existing canal system over an area of 50,000 ha; (iv) construction of partially lined distribution network covering about 14,000 ha; (v) construction of field canals and drainage covcring an area of 14,000 ha; (vi) provision of pilot operation land shaping and conjunctive use covering an area of 4,000 ha.
12.2 'Out of the above works planned, the achievement by 31-12-1996is: i) Modernisation of Dhom and Kanher and their power houses has been completed. The preventive works recommended by Dam Safety Review Panel (DSRP) are in progress and will be completed by MKVDC Pune. (ii) construction of main and branch canals over a length of 58 km was in progress and 94 % of carthwork, 78 % structures, and 68 % of lining were completed. (iii) upgrading existing canal system over an area of 46,300 ha. out of 50,000 ha. were completed. (iv) construction of partially lined distribution network covering 5,400 ha. out of 14,000ha. were completed. (v) construction of field canals and drainage covering an area of 1140i ha. out of 14,000 ha were completed. vi) Land shaping was not carried out as farmers were not interested in getting loans to carry out the work. Conjective use on about 4.000 ha. was not implemented due to delay in obtaining reports and certificates from the Govcrnmcnt Organisation rcsponsible for ground water exploration.
13.0 Water Management and User's Associations:
13.1 The restructured project provides for establishment of 10 Watcr user's associations (WUAs) in Jayakwadi command, 30 in Majalgoan command, 10 each in Kukadi, Bhima, Krishna and Upper Pcnganga project and hand over water management to the WUAs. 13.2 80 WUAs targeted to be completed by 31-12-1997, however 193 societies were registered out of which 71 societies have taken over the responsibility of operation and maintenance. Remaining societies are persuaded to take over the management and maintenancc. 13.3 Workshop of officials as well as prominent NGOs and farmers were arranged to cncourage the WUAs to take ul) the management & maintenance responsibilities. Farmers are conscious about the bencfits of self managemcnt, and up gradation of the system. 13.4 The Director of Irrigation Researchi Directorate at Pune (DIRD) is motivating the farmers towards WUAs formation, and monitoring the functioning of the WUAs in the State. 14.0 RURALROADS
14.1 The programme for the rural roads in the restructured project was prepared and executed by the Public Works Department of Maharashtra.
14.2 The works included in MCIP-II ( R) projects are: i) Construction of a rural road of 537 km in Jayakwadi command ii) Construction of a rural road of 120 km in the Majalgoan command. (iii) Construction of a rural road of 40 km with 9 bridges in the Upper Penganga command. (iv) Construction of a rural road of 140 km in the Kukadi command. (v) Construction of a rural road of 100 km. in the Bhima command. (iii) Construction of a rural road of 103 km wvith3 bridges in the Krishna command. 136
Uorro%cr-sRcport PAGE-7
14.3 Out of the above works planned, thc achievement by 31-12-1996is (i) In Jayakwadi command 413 km. of rural roads out of 445 km. have becn completed. in Majalgaon command, 34 km. of rural roads completed as planned. In Upper Penganga command, 21 km. rural roads and 3 bridges out of 40 km. rural road and 9 bridges completed. In Kukadi command. 94 km. rural roads and 3 bridges out of 140 km. rural road completed. In Bhima command, 129 km. rural roads and 3 bridges out of 134 km. rural road and 7 bridges completed. In Krishna command. 75 km. rural roads and 2 bridges out of 97 km. rural road and 3 bridges completed.
15.0 Resettlement & Economic Rehabilitation of PAPs.
15.1 The programme for the Resettlement and economic rehabilitation of PAP's in the restructured project was prepared and executed by the Revenue and Forest Department of Maharashtra. 15.2 The works included in MCIP-1II ( R) projects are: i) Updating the base line socio- economic survey for Project affected persons to assist in completing the plans for the rehabilitation, including provision of civic amenities in resettlement villages, housing, official buildings , and income generating scheme for i) 4300 project affected persons in 26 villages in Majalgaon command ii) 4700 Project affected persons 29 resettlement villages in Upper Penganga command. iii) 6400 project affected persons in 32 villages in Kukadi command vi) 14000 Project affected persons in 51 resettlement villages in Bhima command. v) 7300 project affected persons in 80 villages in Krishna command. 15.3 Out of the above works planned, the achievement by 31-12-1996 is i) The Socio economic surveys were carried out by engaging Consultants during 1994-95 to find out number of persons in the resettlement villages and their living standards. Against the total number of 36,700 estimated originally affected PAPs , only 22,168 PAPs were identified at the time of conducting the Surveys. Based on these surveys and with the guidance of the World Bank, Rehabilitation Action Plan was got prepared from the same consultants who had carried out the Surveys. The Action Plan after scrutiny by the Revenue & Forest Departmcnt has been approved by Government of Maharashtra for implementation from the credit available under MCIP-III (R). 15.4 A substantial progress was made on providing civic amenities to the project affected persons, as per the Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act of 1986. The implementation of civic amenities component is at various stages of completion and funds are made available for this component. The balance civic amenities will be provided by the GOM from the State funds. 15.5 Therc was no provision for economic rehabilitation in the administratively approved irrigation projects, under execution in the State. Economic Rehabilitation is new concept to Govcrnment of Maharashtra . It was accepted by the GOM for execution under the available Credit of MCIP-111 ( R ). Adopting the procedurc laid down by the Bank for engaging consultants and getting the surveys carried out by the consultants the preparation of the Rehabilitation Action Plan was delayed hence could not be executed during the Credit period. The credit has been closed on 31-12-1996. It is therefore now necessary to re - examinc the issuc for cxecuting the same from the State funds. This Rehabilitation Action Plan was for five irrigation projects. There are numbers of irrigation projects in the State where this Action Plan would bc required to be executed. The GOM has therefore thinking of reviewing Maharashtra Project Affected Pcrsons Rehabilitation Act of 1986 . GOM will take into account the experience gained from the socio economic surveys carried out and the provisions in the rehabilitation action plan prepared under MCIP-III ( R) while reviewing the Act. The Bank will be appraised in the matter in due course of time. 137
Borrower's Rcport PAGE -8 16.0 Training Technical Assistance and studies
16.1 Training 16.2 The restructured MCIP-Ill provides i) Training at Water and Land Management Institute at Aurangabatl and the State Agricultural Universities, in water management's and agricultural practices of farmers including farmers in the project area and CADA and irrigation Department staff and study tours. ii) Special studies in the field of management information system, Water management , basin planning, environmental impact assessment & management plans. 16.3 Achievement: Water and Land Management Institute at Aurangabad has been provided funds to conduct training in land water management. A total nos. of 125 courses werc conducted for Irrigation and Agriculturc officials, staff, farmers, WUA office bearers and NGOs. About 2482 ofricials and staff and 2844 farmers and NGO representatives were trained upto December 1996, and an expenditure of Rs. 68.243 million has been incurred. 16.3 The Banks observation that there is need to place more emphasis on practical oriented training is noted. 16.4 Work plan for Rs.18.20 millions for incountry and abroad study tours have been approved by the Bank. Due to concentration on construction works, funds were not made available to the study tours.
17.0 Equipment andVehicles ( Technical Assistance)
17.1 The restructured MCIP-1II provides i) Vehicles for the construction operation and maintenance of the projects. ii) Establishment of radio communication systems for the control and monitoring of canal system. iii) Establishment of agro-meteorological and hydrometeorogical network. iv) Provision of Officer technology equipment for management, monitoring and evaluation of the project.
17.2 Out of the above works planned, the achievement by 31-12-1996is: i) Work plan for procurements of vehicles amounting to Rs. 18.90 Million was approved by the Bank and all vehicles are procured. ii) For establishment of radio communication systems for the control and monitoring of canal system no expenditure has been done, as it is already in existence. iii) Work plan amounting to Rs. 12.36 million has been approved by the Bank for establishment of agro-meteorological and hydrometeorogical network. no expenditure on this account has been incurred, as Ilydrometeorogical network has been included in the National Ilydrological Project Credit No. 2774-In. The same is under implementation. iv) Work plan for procurement of Office technology equipment for management, monitoring and evaluation of the project amounting to Rs. 26,00 million was approved, Out of it procurement of equipment amounting to Rs. 20.00 Million have been completed.
18.0 STUDIES 18.1 The ammended project agreement provides to carry out the important studies for efficient irrigation management, management information system, environmental sustainability, water planning, and basin study etc. The Bank insisted to carry out these studies by engaging national and international consultants. So far such studies were got carried out by establishing committees of experts or by the Central Design Organisation of the Irrigation Department. I-Ience the finalising of the Consultancy services took more time and therefore thesc studies could not be completed during the project period. The present status of these studies is as below: 138
Borro,,er's Report PAGE -9
18.2 Management Information System (MIS) : M/s. CMC Ltd. Pune was engaged as consultant at the cost of Rs. 7.796 million for the preparation of management information system for six subprojects. The Consultants have prepared 24 modules for monitoring the project works before, during & after construction of the project. The Consultant has also trained 80 officials for basic computer awareness and 21 Ofricers in the advanecd course in computer application, to operate the modules prepared for MIS. An expenditure incurred for this work is Rs. 6.70 million. 18.3 EIA and EMP studies for subproiects in Krishna Basin: M/s. Acres International Ltd. Canada was appointed as consultants for this study at an estimated cost of Rs. 9.28 million. The consultant have prepared and submitted the draft report of the study. The same is under review of the review committee. The final report after approval of the GOM will be sent to the Bank in due course of time for record. An expenditure Rs. 6.10 million is incurred for this study. 18.4 EIA and EMP studies for subprojects in Godavari Basin: M/s. ERM London was appointed as consultants for this study at an estimated cost of Rs. 10.80 million.. The consultant have prepared & submitted the draft report of the study. The same is under review of the review committee. The final report after approval of the GOM will be sent to the Bank in due course of time for record. An expenditure incurred for this work is Rs. 6.10 million. 18.5 Pilot Studies of Water Resourcc in Godavari Basin up to Paithan Damn M/s. WAPCOS (India) Ltd. New Delhi was appointed as consultants for this study at an estimated cost of Rs. 11.00 million. The consultant have prepared and submitted the draft report of the study. The same is under review of the review committee. The final report after approval of the GOM will be sent to the Bank in due course of time for record. An expenditure Rs. 4.46 million is incurred for this study. 18.6 Studies of Plan of Operation and Water Management (POM) for Kukadi: Mis. Snowy MEC Ltd. Australia, was appointed as consultants for this study at an estimated cost of Rs. 25.68 million. The consultant have prepared and submitted the draft report of the study. The same is under review of the review committee. The final report after approval of the GOM will be sent to the Bank in due course of time for record. An expenditure Rs. 18.10 million is incurred for this study. 18.7 Plan of Operation and Management (POM) for Bhima and Krishna: M/s. CES, New Delhi was appointed as consultants for this study at an estimated cost of Rs. 6.67 million. The consultant have prepared and submitted the draft report of the study. The same is under review of the review committee. The final report after approval of the GOM will be sent to the Bank in due course of time for record. An Expenditure Rs. 5.53 million is incurred for this study. 18.8 Plan of Operation and Maintenance (POM) for Jayakwadi & U.Penganga: Tenders for appointing consultant for the work was invited. But due failure of negotiation with the Bidder it could not finalised. Hence it was decided to prepare the said POM in- house. The same will be sent to the Bank in due course of time for record. 18.9 Dam Safety Review Panel: The ammended project agreement provides for one time review of the dams and major structures of subprojects5 by appointing Dam safety Review Panel (DSRP). The DSRP of four member was appointed. The report submitted by the DSRP is accepted by the Irrigation Department (ID). The superintending Engineer, Dam safety organisation of ID is monitoring the implementation of the action plan for executing the recommendations of the DSRP. 139 Borrower's Report PAGE10
19. Irrigated Agricultural Development
19.1 The restructured MCIP-III provides establishment and implementation of programme of adaptive research in thc project area to develop and demonstrate suitable irrigutionpractice croppingsc(luClice and farm input levels. 18.2 Agriculture Dcpartment has conducted 30,618 crop demonstrations and 3947 drip and sprinkle irrigation demonstration sites were established in the six project area. 52 multipurpose Agricultural Technology Dessemination Centers ( ATDC) were built and 223 training programme were conducted for agriculture department staff . The Bank had approved the Work Plan for Rs. 190million. An expenditureof Rs. 153.85has been incurred during the project period.
19.3 The infrastructure built and the experiencegained from the agriculture extension programmeconducted under MCIP-111( R ) willbe useful for further development.
20.0 Financial programme of balance works of MCIP-111( R I
= ______Rs. Million, Work Cost of Programme for balance work 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 ID- I Works 1021.39 693.43 167.74 160.22 ID-l1Works 172.16 113.64 36.50 22.02 PWD Works 47.46 47.46 0 0 R & R 16.74 5.06 5.56 6.12 Agri. Programme 0 0 0 0 Studies 26.50 26.50 0 0 DSRP implementation 170.00 130 40 0 Total 1454.25 1016.09 249.8 188.36
21.2 Three sub project namely, Kukadi, Bhima & Krishna are being implementedby Maharashtra Krishna Valley DevelopmentCorporation, Pune and the Corporation will provide required funds for the completionof the balance works. Irrigation Departmentwill provide funds for Jayakwadi,Majalgaon & Upper Pengangasub projects for the completion of the balance work. Public Works Departmentwill provide funds for balance roads work. The Agriculture Department had completed the agricultural programme. Regarding EconomicRehabilitation plan, 4J mentionedin para 15.0above, fovt. of Maharashtra is thinkingof reviewingMaharashtra Project AffectedPersons Act of 1986.While revisingthe Act the experience gained through the base line socio-economicsurveys and the ERP prepared under MCIP-III ( R ) will be suitably used. The actions taken by Revenueand ForestDepartment, will be appraised to the Bank in due course of time.
22.0 Government of Maharashtra cxpress its appreciation for the excellent guidance givenby the Banks SupervisionMissions during their field visits.
IMAGING
ReportNo.: 16688 Type: ICR