DOCSLIB.ORG

Evaluation of the Irrigation and Water Resource Management Project in Senegal: Interim Evaluation Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Evaluation of the Irrigation and Water Resource Management Project in Senegal: Interim Evaluation Report Evaluation of the Irrigation and Water Resource Management Project in Senegal: Interim Evaluation Report July 29, 2019 Thomas Coen Sarah M. Hughes Matthew Ribar William Valletta Kristen Velyvis Submitted to: Millennium Challenge Corporation 875 Fifteenth St. NW Washington, DC 20005 Project Officer: Ishani Desai Contract Number: 95332418C0126 Submitted by: Mathematica Policy Research 1100 1st Street, NE 12th Floor Washington, DC 20002-4221 Telephone: (202) 484-9220 Facsimile: (202) 863-1763 Project Director: Sarah M. Hughes Reference Number: 50220 The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of MCC or any other U.S. Government entity. This page has been left blank for double-sided copying. IWRM EVALUATION INTERIM REPORT MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEARCH CONTENTS LIST OF ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................................... xi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................................... xiii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. xv I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1 II. OVERVIEW OF THE COMPACT AND THE PROJECT .................................................................. 3 A. Overview of the Compact .......................................................................................................... 3 B. Overview of the IWRM Project .................................................................................................. 3 1. Activities .............................................................................................................................. 4 2. IWRM timeline and program logic ....................................................................................... 7 III. LITERATURE REVIEW.................................................................................................................. 11 A. Irrigation infrastructure ............................................................................................................ 11 B. Land tenure security and administration ................................................................................. 13 C. Gaps in the literature, and the contribution of the IWRM Project evaluation .......................... 15 IV. EVALUATION DESIGN.................................................................................................................. 17 A. Design overview and research questions for the interim evaluation ....................................... 17 B. Interim evaluation timeline and data collection overview ........................................................ 19 C. Quantitative evaluation methodology ...................................................................................... 20 1. Matched comparison group design for the Delta .............................................................. 20 2. Pre-post analysis for Podor ............................................................................................... 33 D. Qualitative Methodology for the Delta and Podor.................................................................... 39 1. Study sample .................................................................................................................... 39 2. Qualitative data collection process ................................................................................... 41 3. Qualitative analysis ........................................................................................................... 42 E. Case study analysis for the LTSA institutional outcomes study .............................................. 42 1. Study sample .................................................................................................................... 43 2. Case study data collection ................................................................................................ 46 3. Case study analysis .......................................................................................................... 47 V. EVALUATION FINDINGS: DELTA ................................................................................................ 49 A. Summary of key findings ......................................................................................................... 49 B. Use and availability of water .................................................................................................... 50 iii IWRM EVALUATION INTERIM REPORT MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEARCH 1. Source, availability, and access to water for agriculture production ................................. 51 2. Area of irrigated land ......................................................................................................... 55 3. Role of WUAs .................................................................................................................... 57 C. Agricultural production ............................................................................................................. 58 1. Impacts on agricultural land use ....................................................................................... 59 2. Crop choices and production methods ............................................................................. 64 3. Rice production, revenue, and investment ....................................................................... 66 4. Total agricultural production, including other crops .......................................................... 71 D. Agricultural profits and household income .............................................................................. 73 1. Changes in agricultural profits .......................................................................................... 74 2. Changes in household income .......................................................................................... 76 E. Land administration and governance ...................................................................................... 77 1. Effectiveness of local government land management and conflict resolution .................. 77 2. Support for commune-level land institutions ..................................................................... 83 3. Farmers’ perceptions of land institutions’ effectiveness ................................................... 84 4. LTSA influence outside project areas ............................................................................... 85 F. Land security and land conflicts .............................................................................................. 86 1. Changes in the extent of land formalization ...................................................................... 86 2. Changes in perceptions of land tenure security ................................................................ 88 3. Demand for land formalization .......................................................................................... 88 4. Changes in the number, severity, and type of land conflicts ............................................ 89 5. Women’s access to land ................................................................................................... 90 6. How changes in land security have affected investments on land ................................... 91 7. Constraints and barriers to land access............................................................................ 93 G. Sustainability............................................................................................................................ 93 H. Summary of Delta findings ...................................................................................................... 95 VI. EVALUATION FINDINGS: PODOR ............................................................................................... 99 A. Summary of key findings ......................................................................................................... 99 B. Use and availability of water .................................................................................................. 101 1. Source, availability, and access to water for agriculture production ............................... 102 2. Amount of irrigated land .................................................................................................. 106 3. Water management and the role of the WUA ................................................................. 107 C. Agricultural production ........................................................................................................... 108 1. Changes in land use ....................................................................................................... 109 iv IWRM EVALUATION INTERIM REPORT MATHEMATICA POLICY RESEARCH 2. Crop choices and diversification ..................................................................................... 115 3. Rice production, revenue, and investment ..................................................................... 116 4. Agricultural production for women, the poor, and the landless ....................................... 118 5. Total production, including other crops ..........................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Circular Economy in Africa-EU Cooperation
    Circular Economy in Africa-EU Cooperation Country Report Senegal Written by November - 2020 EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Environment Directorate F – Global Sustainable Development Unit F2 - Bilateral & Regional Environmental Cooperation Contact: Gaëtan Ducroux E-mail: [email protected] European Commission B-1049 Brussels EUROPEAN COMMISSION Circular Economy in Africa-EU Cooperation Country Report Senegal Authors: Bonnaire, S.M.; Jagot, J.; Spinazzé, C.; Potgieter, J.E.; Rajput, J.; Hemkhaus, M.; Ahlers, J.; Koehler, J.; Van Hummelen, S. & McGovern, M. Acknowledgements We acknowledge the valuable contribution of several co-workers from within the four participating institutions, as well as the feedback received from DG Environment and other DG’s of the European Commission as well as the Members of the EU delegation to Senegal. Preferred citation Bonnaire, S.M.; Jagot, J.; Spinazzé, C. (2020) Circular economy in the Africa-EU cooperation - Country report for Senegal. Country report under EC Contract ENV.F.2./ETU/2018/004 Project: “ “Circular Economy in Africa-Eu cooperation”, Trinomics B.V., ACEN, adelphi Consult GmbH and Cambridge Econometrics Ltd. In association with: LEGAL NOTICE This document has been prepared for the European Commission however it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://www.europa.eu). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2020 PDF ISBN 978-92-76-26828-4 doi:10.2779/042060 KH-06-20-056-EN-N © European Union, 2020 The Commission’s reuse policy is implemented by Commission Decision 2011/833/EU of 12 December 2011 on the reuse of Commission documents (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Sharing the Benefits of Large Dams in West Africa: the Case of Displaced People
    Akossombo dam ©encarta.msn.com Kossou dam ©fr.structurae.de SHARING THE BENEFITS OF LARGE DAMS IN WEST AFRICA: THE CASE OF DISPLACED PEOPLE Kaléta site ©OMVG Niger basin ©Wetlands international Draft Final report February 2009 Drafted by Mrs Mame Dagou DIOP, PhD & Cheikh Mamina DIEDHIOU With the collaboration of : Dr Madiodio Niasse This report has been authored by Mrs Mame Dagou DIOP, PhD and Cheikh Mamina DIEDHIOU, Environmental consultants in Senegal; Water Management and Environment Email : [email protected] , [email protected] Tel : + 221 77 635 91 85 With the collaboration of : Dr Madiodio Niasse, Secretary General of the International Land Coalition Disclaimer The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the organizations participating in GWI at national, regional or global level, or those of the Howard G. Buffett Foundation. The Global Water Initiative (GWI), supported by the Howard G. Buffett Foundation, addresses the challenge of providing long term access to clean water and sanitation, as well as protecting and managing ecosystem services and watersheds, for the poorest and most vulnerable people dependant on those services. Water provision under GWI takes place in the context of securing the resource base and developing new or improved approaches to water management, and forms part of a larger framework for addressing poverty, power and inequalities that particularly affect the poorest populations. This means combining a practical focus on water and sanitation delivery with investments targeted at strengthening institutions, raising awareness and developing effective policies. The Regional GWI consortium for West Africa includes the following Partners: - International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) - Catholic Relief Services (CRS) - CARE International - SOS Sahel (UK) - International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) GWI West Africa covers 5 countries : Senegal, Ghana, Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger .
    [Show full text]
  • The Slow Death of Slavery in Nineteenth Century Senegal and the Gold Coast
    That Most Perfidious Institution: The slow death of slavery in nineteenth century Senegal and the Gold Coast Trevor Russell Getz Submitted for the degree of PhD University of London, School or Oriental and African Studies ProQuest Number: 10673252 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest ProQuest 10673252 Published by ProQuest LLC(2017). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 Abstract That Most Perfidious Institution is a study of Africans - slaves and slave owners - and their central roles in both the expansion of slavery in the early nineteenth century and attempts to reform servile relationships in the late nineteenth century. The pivotal place of Africans can be seen in the interaction between indigenous slave-owning elites (aristocrats and urban Euro-African merchants), local European administrators, and slaves themselves. My approach to this problematic is both chronologically and geographically comparative. The central comparison between Senegal and the Gold Coast contrasts the varying impact of colonial policies, integration into the trans-Atlantic economy; and, more importantly, the continuity of indigenous institutions and the transformative agency of indigenous actors.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Agriculture in Senegal: Comparing the Effects of Intercropping and Mulching on Millet Yields
    Conservation agriculture in Senegal: comparing the effects of intercropping and mulching on millet yields Patrick J. Trail Thesis submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science In Crop & Soil Environmental Sciences A. Ozzie Abaye, Chair Thomas L. Thompson Wade E. Thomason January 30th, 2015 Blacksburg, Virginia Keywords: Sahel, Senegal, Millet, Cowpea, Mungbean, Intercropping, Mulch, Conservation Agriculture Copyright 2015, Patrick J. Trail Conservation agriculture in Senegal: comparing the effects of intercropping and mulching on millet yields Patrick J. Trail Abstract Situated on the western edge of Africa’s harsh Sahel region, Senegal faces a number of agricultural production constraints. Limited rainfall, poor soil fertility, and insufficient agronomic inputs all contribute to low yielding millet production systems. This study was initiated to assess the potential for intercropping either cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.) or mungbean (Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek) into traditional pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.) cropping systems. During the 2013 and 2014 growing seasons two varieties of cowpea (upright and viney), and one variety of mungbean (upright) were grown in monoculture and subsequently intercropped with millet to evaluate the potential for increasing millet and overall yields. Millet was also planted with a mulch (2 t/ha of neem leaves) to test the effectiveness of increased ground cover on millet yields. In addition to yield data, soil moisture and plant NDVI data were also collected. Millet grain yields increased when intercropped with either cowpea or mungbean compared to millet that was grown alone, with grain yield increases of up to 55%.
    [Show full text]
  • Creating Markets in Senegal
    CREATING MARKETS SENEGAL IN CREATING A COUNTRY PRIVATE SECTOR DIAGNOSTIC SECTOR PRIVATE COUNTRY A A COUNTRY PRIVATE SECTOR DIAGNOSTIC CREATING MARKETS IN SENEGAL Sustaining growth in an uncertain environment APRIL 2020 About IFC IFC—a sister organization of the World Bank and member of the World Bank Group—is the largest global development institution focused on the private sector in emerging markets. We work with more than 2,000 businesses worldwide, using our capital, expertise, and influence to create markets and opportunities in the toughest areas of the world. In fiscal year 2018, we delivered more than $23 billion in long-term financing for developing countries, leveraging the power of the private sector to end extreme poverty and boost shared prosperity. For more information, visit www.ifc.org © International Finance Corporation 2020. All rights reserved. 2121 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20433 www.ifc.org The material in this report was prepared in consultation with government officials and the private sector in Senegal and is copyrighted. Copying and/or transmitting portions or all of this work without permission may be a violation of applicable law. IFC does not guarantee the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the content included in this work, or for the conclusions or judgments described herein, and accepts no responsibility or liability for any omissions or errors (including, without limitation, typographical errors and technical errors) in the content whatsoever or for reliance thereon. The findings, interpretations, views, and conclusions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Executive Directors of the International Finance Corporation or of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (the World Bank) or the governments they represent.
    [Show full text]
  • Is GAFSP Reaching Small-Scale Food Producers in Senegal?
    Is GAFSP reaching small-scale food producers in Senegal? 1 Introduction: The GAFSP supported PASA Lou-Ma- Kaf in Senegal In Senegal, the proportion of people living in extreme poverty dropped from 55.2% in 2001 to 46.7% in 20111. Poverty remains high in rural areas (57.3%), where the majority of the 13 million Senegalese population lives. The deficit of productive jobs in rural areas is fueling an exodus of young people and women to urban centers both inside the country and abroad. Food insecurity remains high (16% of the population in 20142) and affects primarily farm households and poor families. Although contributing less than 13% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP)3, the agricultural sector supports more than half of Senegal’s population. Less than 2% of the cultivated farmland is irrigated4. The livestock sub-sector employs about 3 million people and accounts for about 35% of the GDP in the agricultural sector5. Local grain production can cover only half of basic food needs, and the country imports 70% of its food6, particularly large quantities of white rice. The Food Security Support Project (PASA) in the regions of Louga, Matam and Kaffrine (Lou-Ma-Kaf) is receiving US$40 million from the public sector window of the multi-donor trust fund of the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program (GAFSP). The Senegalese government’s contribution is US$5.8 million. This five-and-a-half-year project (2013-2018) aims to improve rural food security and incomes by facilitating access for small-scale producers, women, and their organizations to rural roads, agricultural and livestock infrastructures, as well as to technologies, services and specially adapted training.
    [Show full text]
  • Senegalmaking Better Use of Agribusiness Potential
    BUSINESS FOR 20DEVELOPMENT 08 SENEGALMaking Better Use of Agribusiness Potential Yoshiko Matsumoto-Izadifar BUSINESS FOR 20DEVELOPMENT 08 An OECD Development Centre Perspective P R O M O T I N G COMMERCIAL AGRICULTURE IN AFRICA www.oecd.org/ dev/publications/businessfordevelopment development CENTRE ODevelopmentEC CDentre OCDE The Development Centre of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development was established by decision of the OECD Council on 23 October 1962 and comprises 23 member countries of the OECD: Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Korea, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the United Kingdom as well as Brazil since March 1994, Chile since November 1998, India since February 2001, Romania since October 2004, Thailand since March 2005, South Africa since May 2006 and Egypt, Israel and Viet Nam since March 2008. The Commission of the European Communities also takes part in the Centre’s Governing Board.The Development Centre, whose membership is open to both OECD and non-OECD countries, occupies a unique place within the OECD and in the international community. Members finance the Centre and serve on its Governing Board, which sets the biennial work programme and oversees its implementation. The Centre links OECD members with developing and emerging economies and fosters debate and discussion to seek creative policy solutions to emerging global issues and development challenges. Participants in Centre events are invited in their personal capacity. A small core of staff works with experts and institutions from the OECD and partner countries to fulfil the Centre’s work programme.
    [Show full text]
  • Regenerative Agriculture in Senegal
    AGROECOLOGY CASE STUDIES REGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE IN SENEGAL Location: Central Senegal’s Groundnut Basin Rodale Institute Regenerative Agriculture Research Center teamed up with farmers’ groups and government researchers in Senegal to promote regenerative agriculture to increase food sufficiency, lessen farmers’ dependence on external inputs, and improve soil quality. CHALLENGE Similar to other countries in the Sahel region, Senegal’s indigenous food production is hampered by lack of moisture and sandy soils low in organic matter. Soil erosion and degradation threaten large areas of farm land. In central Senegal’s groundnut basin, the low-lying area between the Ferlo and Gambia rivers, the soil’s capacity to retain nutrients and moisture has been severely reduced after years of inappropriate agricultural practices, including tillage techniques, monocropping, and chemical input misuse. The few soil nutrients that do exist are often not available to plants due to high soil acidity or diverted by competing weeds. As a result, farm productivity has been steadily declining over much of the region.1 RESPONSE Beginning in 1987, the Rodale Institute Regenerative Agriculture Research Center (RARC) teamed up with farmers groups and government researchers in the country’s groundnut basin in an initiative to increase food sufficiency, lessen farmers’ dependence on purchased inputs for food production, and improve soil quality. Through networking, education, training, and applied research activities, the initiative promotes regenerative agriculture—organic
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the Drivers of Agricultural Land Use Change in South-Central Senegal
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222301748 Understanding the drivers of agricultural land use change in south-central Senegal Article in Journal of Arid Environments · November 2004 DOI: 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2004.03.022 CITATIONS READS 66 66 3 authors, including: Eric Wood United States Geological Survey 11 PUBLICATIONS 360 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE All content following this page was uploaded by Eric Wood on 09 April 2015. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. ARTICLE IN PRESS Journal of Arid Environments Journal of Arid Environments ] (]]]]) ]]]–]]] www.elsevier.com/locate/jnlabr/yjare Understanding the drivers of agricultural land use change in south-central Senegal E.C. Wooda,*, G.G. Tappana, A. Hadjb a SAIC, US Geological Survey Earth Resources Observation Systems (EROS), Data Center, 47914 252nd St., Sioux Falls, SD 57198, USA b Centre International d’Echanges pour le Developpement, Dakar BP 10404, Senegal Received 24 November 2003; received in revised form 27 February 2004; accepted 23 March 2004 Abstract Described is (1) the land use and land cover changes that have taken place in the Department of Velingara, an area of tropical dry woodland in south-central Senegal, (2) the biophysical and socio-economic drivers of those changes with an emphasis on transition to agricultural use, and (3) an assessment of the likelihood of intensification of agriculture in the Department. Results indicate that land devoted to agriculture, either in active cultivation or short-term fallow, is increasing. There is little evidence of agricultural intensification in most of Velingara, with extensification coming largely at the cost of reduction in both upland woodlands and riparian forest.
    [Show full text]
  • Democracy in Senegal Tocquevillian Analytics in Africa This Page Intentionally Left Blank Democracy in Senegal Tocquevillian Analytics in Africa
    Democracy in Senegal Tocquevillian Analytics in Africa This page intentionally left blank Democracy in Senegal Tocquevillian Analytics in Africa Sheldon Gellar DEMOCRACY IN SENEGAL © Sheldon Gellar, 2005. Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 2005 978-1-4039-7026-8 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles or reviews. First published in 2005 by PALGRAVE MACMILLAN™ 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10010 and Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, England RG21 6XS Companies and representatives throughout the world. PALGRAVE MACMILLAN is the global academic imprint of the Palgrave Macmillan division of St. Martin’s Press, LLC and of Palgrave Macmillan Ltd. Macmillan® is a registered trademark in the United States, United Kingdom and other countries. Palgrave is a registered trademark in the European Union and other countries. ISBN 978-1-349-53192-9 ISBN 978-1-4039-8216-2 (eBook) DOI 10.1057/9781403982162 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Gellar, Sheldon. Democracy in Senegal : Tocquevillian analytics in Africa / Sheldon Gellar. p. cm. “Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University.” Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Democracy—Senegal—History. 2. Political culture—Senegal—History. 3. Senegal—Politics and government. I. Indiana University, Bloomington. Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis. II. Title. III. Series. JQ3396.A91G43
    [Show full text]
  • Private-Sector Agricultural Research and Innovation in Senegal Recent
    Private-Sector Agricultural Research and Innovation in Senegal Recent Policy, Investment, and Capacity Trends Gert-Jan Stads and Louis Sène July 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms ................................................................................................................................................................................iv Abstract ...................................................................................................................................................................................vi Background ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Agriculture in Senegal ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Government Policy on Agriculture .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Initiatives to Revive Agriculture .......................................................................................................................................... 2 The Agriculture, Forestry, and Livestock Act (LOASP)....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Download Date 30/09/2021 22:02:53
    Draft Environmental Report on Senegal Item Type text; Book; Report Authors Grant, A. Paige; University of Arizona. Arid Lands Information Center. Publisher U.S. Man and the Biosphere Secretariat, Department of State (Washington, D.C.) Download date 30/09/2021 22:02:53 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/227954 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT ON SENEGAL prepared by the Arid Lands Information Center Office of Arid Lands Studies University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona 85721 National Park Service Contract No. CX- 0001 -0 -0003 with U.S. Man and the Biosphere Secretariat Department of State Washington, D.C. September 1980 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT ON SENEGAL prepared by the Arid Lands Information Center Office of Arid Lands Studies University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona 85721 National Park Service Contract No. CX- 0001 -0 -0003 with U.S. Man and the Biosphere Secretariat Department of State Washington, D.C. September 1980 THE UNITED STATESNAT10 MAN ANO THE BIOSPHERE Department of State, IO /TCS W ASim11NGTON. O. C. 20S20 An Introductory Note on Draft Environmental Profiles: The attached draft environmental report has been prepared under a contract between the U.S. Agency for International Development (AID), Office of Forestry, Environment, and Natural Resources (ST /FNR) and the U.S. Man and the Biosphere (MAB) Program.It is a preliminary review of information available in the United States on the status of the environment and the natural resources of the identified country and is one of a series of similar studies now underway on countries which receive U.S. bilateral assistance. This report is the first step in a process to develop better information for the AID Mission, for host country officials, and others on the environmental situation in specific countries and begins to identify the most critical areas of concern.
    [Show full text]