Planning for Success and Lessons Learned

Transcription

1 Ethiopia s Productive Safety Net Public Works Program Planning for Success and Lessons Learned Ian Campbell HD Learning Week 11 November 2008

2 2

3 Background: Food Insecurity and Vulnerability in Ethiopia Ethiopia is associated with drought and famine A 1999/2000 Poverty Assessment indicated that 42% of population live below poverty level; Some 75% of population rely on subsistence farming on small plots of increasingly degraded land; Despite recent upswings, long-term per capita food production has been in decline 3

4 Current Trends Population growth Decline in average farm size Accelerated environmental degradation Increased climatic variability including flooding 4 Health risks esp malaria and HIV

5 Emergency food aid For two decades Government launched frequent national emergency appeals But aid was unpredictable, and often late So households still sold assets to survive 5

6 Furthermore, despite the food aid, the numbers have been rising 6

7 As numbers rise Vulnerable households slide deeper into poverty Rural growth stagnates 7

8 In parallel: 8 During the 1970s and 1980s, the government ran Food for Work programs Especially terracing and afforestation. Outcomes have been disappointing: Top-down planning, with little community involvement Works were often not appreciated and not maintained by the community Works were sometimes destroyed by the communities, to guarantee work opportunities next year Now little to show for a massive effort

9 Reforming the System In 2004 the government decided on a new approach: the Productive Safety Net Programme It replaces the emergency appeal system as the chief instrument for assisting chronically food insecure households Started with estimated 5 million beneficiaries. 9

10 Many Donors World Bank CIDA DFID EC Irish Aid USAID World Food Programme SIDA 10

11 Timetable Phase I: Phase II: Phase III: Design stage 11

12 Features 12 Eligible beneficiaries are identified each year: those who have repeatedly required food aid In addition, newly vulnerable households Cash or food is paid for participation in community Public Works Cash stimulates local agricultural production

13 Features of The Public Works Program Public Works develop sustainable community assets They improve the natural resource base and the social infrastructure Ultimately, aimed at developing the watersheds thereby increasing productivity and improving livelihoods 13

14 Soil and Water Conservation 14

15 SWC 15

16 Area closures 16

17 Pond Construction 17

18 School Construction 18

19 Health Post Construction 19

20 Road Construction 20

21 Bridge Construction 21

22 Pattern of Watershed Development Level of Watershed Development Cumulative Impacts - Environmental transformation 22 Degraded watershed Year

23 Moving up the curve Reducing soil loss Reducing sedimentation Increasing woody biomass Improved access to markets Better health, education Cumulative impacts reaching a critical mass 23

24 Half-way up the Curve 24

25 Watershed Rehabilitation 25

26 Recent Activities Examples in Annual Program 26 Soil and Water Conservation million kms bunds 47, 378 km terrace 1.38 million ha closed etc Small-scale irrigation 412 rivers diverted Rural roads constructed 32,896 km 527 concrete bridge 101 wooden bridges

27 Recent Activities Examples in Annual (cont d) 27 Social infrastructures 3,721 schools and school classrooms 935 health posts 826 FTC 52,732 pit latrine Water projects 2,002 Hand-dug wells constructed 3,570 springs developed 325 water harvesting structures 166, 719 ponds

28 Public Works Planning 28 Project planning by community based on Community-based Participatory Watershed Development principles Planning facilitated by Min of Agriculture Development Agents (DAs) Project technical designs by DAs and district government staff Public Works plans integrated into overall district planning framework

29 Why should the Public Works program succeed where its predecessor failed? There are key differences between the present program and the earlier Food for Work program: 29

30 1. The program operates at scale A unique opportunity to promote, finance and implement sustainable land management measures on an unprecedented scale, due to: $280 million/annum Implementation in around 50% of Ethiopia s districts 1.2 million people working each year, for approx 150 days each Approx 34,000 public works projects being implemented at the same time Ethiopia s largest development program 30

31 2. The program promotes Holistic Environmental Transformation: Projects are integrated, and selected on watershed development principles Projects can cover all aspects of the ecosystem Communities have ownership Incorporated lessons learned from Chinese Loess Plateau 31

32 3. There are key factors aimed at sustainability: Additional 20% provided to cover nonlabour costs, eg material inputs (not a feature of Food for Work Community ownership and planning 32

33 Community Ownership Community planning Community training Community Watershed Teams 33

34 4. Training Each year, there is a cascade of training: Regions Districts - Communities Six thousand DAs are trained Contributes to quality projects and sustainability 34

35 5. Monitoring and Evaluation Regular reporting of projects implemented Annual reviews, covering planning procedures, safeguards, and project design, implementation and operations Joint governmentdonor review missions Impact Assessments 35

36 6. Early Indicators of Success Rapid regenration of both grasses and trees, leading to: forage and biomass production, Reduction in soil loss Reduction in flooding 36

37 In and in

38 Water Increased recharge in downstream areas More water for irrigation, livestock and human use 38

39 Impact: Capacity Building 55% of beneficiaries trained in soil and water technologies 47% have already applied their knowledge on their own land 39

40 Water Harvesting 40

41 Gulley Rehabilitation 41

42 Small-scale Irrigation 77% of respondents reported imporved income due to irrigation 3% reported surplus produce for the market Improved farm practices, skills development and crop diversification and intensification 42

43 Education Impacts 80% of respondents have children attending a PSNP school 23% reported that they have children attending school who did not attend before 43

44 FTCs Positive impacts of FTC training noted in: Water harvesting, Improved agricultural practices Afforestation 44

45 Health 83% of respondents reported that there is a PSNP health post in their community 45

46 Economic Returns on Investment W/shed Benefit:Cost Econ IRR Bala, Tigray % Ganga, Amhara % Debaso, Oromia % Mofogna Kotico, SNNPR % 46

47 Some Lessons Learned A: Institutional Arrangements: The Public Works program needs to be coordinated and managed by Natural Resources staff 47

48 Phase I Institutional Arrangements Safety Net Programme management and Public Works were under the Federal Government Food Security Bureau 48

49 Phase II Institutional Arrangements Safety Net Programme management: Federal Government Food Security Department, Min of Agriculture Public Works: Natural Resources Department, Min of Agriculture 49

50 Phase II Institutional Arrangements to achieve: 50 Better management and coordination of the PW program Improved quality, performance, impact and sustainability of the PW Clear responsibility for PW programme Increased engagement of the Natural Resources sector and increase their scope of its involvement Increased focus on the development dimensions of the PSNP

51 Public Works Full responsibility for the implementation and outcome of the PW programme is assumed by the Natural Resources Department at Regional and federal levels 51

52 Division of Responsibilities Food Security Remains responsible for managing Safety Net resources, including provision of labour for executing the Public Works Natural Resources Takes overall responsibility for Public Works planning, capacitybuilding, implementation, monitoring, effectiveness and compliance with all necessary procedures 52

53 Lessons Learned B: Inter-Sector coordination can be a challenge Ministry staff have monoculture No history of inter-sector coordination Difficult to recruit multidisciplinary staff 53

54 One solution: Regional Technical Coordinating Committees Established Coordination of different sectors and other stakeholders such as NGOs in the Public Works programme 54

55 A Typical Technical Coordinating Committee: Rural roads Food Security Education Health Women affairs Water EPA Dept of Agricultural Extension Implementing NGOs 55

56 Lessons Learned C: Program promotion is important Both in government, and in the communities Dissemination of the development objectives of the program. PW more than a means of facilitating transfers 56

57 Lessons Learned C: Program promotion is important cont d Need to monitor and reinforce progress towards watershed development, improved livelihoods Essential for graduation. 57