RURAL-URBAN DICHOTOMY: CONSIDERATIONS FOR PROJECT TYPOLOGIES IN PUBLIC-WORKS

Transcription

1 RURAL-URBAN DICHOTOMY: CONSIDERATIONS FOR PROJECT TYPOLOGIES IN PUBLIC-WORKS A case-study of the Cash-for-Works Project implemented by NaCSA, Sierra Leone (15 th June, 2010) J. Paul Ngebeh Director Soc. & Econ. Opps. 1

2 Context Work Selection Mechanism Current Project Typologies Across Sectors and Geographical Settings Design Differentials in project types Implementation Problems Expanding the Works Menu New Initiatives Challenges Making the Shift Work 2

3 The Three F-Crisis: Increases in Food Prices Significant proportion of the population affected A package of Interventions - CfW GoSL & Partner Consultation Obj.: To assist vulnerable Individuals and Households in the most food insecure areas access temporary employment 3

4 Geographic targeting National Level: Food Insecurity Index; and Relative Population Intra-District Level: Rel. Pop; Poverty Rating; level of Food Production; Accessibility to Food; affordability of Food; Potential for Innovative Activity Implementation Plan Quarterly targets across districts (including setting wage rates) Work Typologies LOIs from Community Representatives & Local Councils SP Selection conformity with Local Council Plans Field Appraisal is done, scope established and budget developed Sub-projects are then approved Beneficiary Selection (Self Selection) Sensitization Lower Labour SS - First Come First-Serve Basis Xss DD over SS of Labour Rotation; Lottery Monitoring Weekly Payments based on Wage Sheets Measured Works for replenishment of funds on a monthly basis 4

5 A. Geo-Setting Rural Areas Feeder Roads Rehabilitation Swamp Development Short-duration crops Environmental Protection - Tree Planting Feeder Roads Agriculture Community Roads Urban Renewal 5

6 B. Target Group Project Type Type of Activity Target Group Male Female Roads Drainages Civil-Works culverts Clearing, grubbing & camber formation Agriculture Swamp Development Irrigation Land Reclamation Food Crops Vegetables Environmental Tree Nursery & Planting Protection/Urban Renewal Garbage Collection, Drains & Sewage clearing 6

7 700 C. Current Works Menu Two Phases of US$ 4m each Roads: 82.04% (-7.96%); Agriculture: 15.57% (7.67%); Env. P/Re-En: 2.38% (0.21%); Phase I Phase II Totals Rural Urban Divide: 35%:65% Roads Agric. Env. P/Re-En 7

8 Output t Phases P1 P2 Totals # of Workers engaged 16,515 15,570 32,085 Physical Assets Produced (3,468) (3,270) (6,738) - Km of road rehabilitated Ac. of crop developed ,392 2, Trees planted 20,000 22,500 42,500 8

9 ROADS REHABILITATION URBAN BEAUTIFICATION 9

10 FOOD CROPS LAND RECLAMATION TREE CROP NURSERY 10

11 Project Type Rural Roads Focus on feeder roads connecting production areas to market centers Longer segments; fewer structures; spot improvement Agriculture Wider in scope (more labour intensive) Focus on swamp development & traditional crops Geo-Setting Urban Town roads connecting sections within township: Shorter segments; more structures (higher material cost) More restrictive Focus on vegetables Environmental Tree Nursery & Planting Garbage Collection & Clearing Low logistics of Drainages Protection/Urban Beautification & Land Renewal Reclamation Higher logistics requirement Generally, Urban projects are more expensive than rural ones 11

12 General Managing G hi C Expectations Geographic Coverage Quality vs Cost Targeting/Exclusi ons Intra-district targeting 60:40 divide Project Cost Level of Sensitization Female Participation Political Influence Pay-back to supporters Tussle between Parliamentarians & Councilors 12

13 Setting Specific Rural Setting Urban Lower Labour Cost - Labour supply in peak farming season Higher labour Cost and agitation for payments of wages Ownership of agriculture projects/proportion of produce or income from produce to the community Increasing demand for high quality work with more material input beyond budgets Selection of participants amongst largely poor communities Utilization of incomes earned and sustainability of impact 13

14 Paradigm Shift Agriculture Renewable Energy/Env. Mitigation Land Improvement: Terracing & Irrigation. Environmental Protection Land Reclamation Biomass/Compost Production Waste Management 14

15 Project Type No. of sub-projects Projections No. of Workers Roads , (60.0%) Agriculture 141 7,050 (30.0%) 0%) Environmental Protection/Re-energy 47 (10.0%) 2,350 TOTALS 470 (100.0%) 0%) 23,500 Rural Urban Divide 55%:45% 15

16 Maintain Current Duration Wages Impact on Beneficiary Be Flexible /Reduce Slight increase in duration from 45 days to days Maintain Wage Rate 16

17 New Thinking! Sensitization Training Dynamism & Commitment Improving Intra-District Targeting Increasing Community Involvement: Beneficiary Selection & Oversight 17

18 Where we are coming from - Context t Where we are now- Work Selection Mechanism; Current Project Typologies (Design Differentials & Implementation Issues Where we Intend to go Improved Targeting intra-district; community profiling; community oversight Expanded works menu Increased scope of works and average cost of sub-projects Increased duration and # of beneficiaries i i per sub-project Added training for implementing partners and beneficiaries Built-in strong monitoring and impact evaluation Bring PW to the fore of the SP Agenda SA & PR 18

19 19