1 / 17

MEASURING RESULTS OF IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT: THE EVALUATION OF COMPLETED IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN THE PHILIPPINES

MEASURING RESULTS OF IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT: THE EVALUATION OF COMPLETED IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN THE PHILIPPINES. Nick Baoy Pilipinas Monitoring and Evaluatiuon Society Email: nicktbaoy@yahoo.com INTRAC/PSO/PRIA Monitoring & Evaluation Conference Soesterberg, The Netherlands 15 June 2011.

shino
Télécharger la présentation

MEASURING RESULTS OF IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT: THE EVALUATION OF COMPLETED IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN THE PHILIPPINES

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. MEASURING RESULTS OF IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT: THE EVALUATION OF COMPLETED IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN THE PHILIPPINES Nick Baoy Pilipinas Monitoring and Evaluatiuon Society Email: nicktbaoy@yahoo.com INTRAC/PSO/PRIA Monitoring & Evaluation Conference Soesterberg, The Netherlands 15 June 2011

  2. PHILIPPINE AGRICULTURE SECTOR: A QUICK OVERVIEW • Total agricultural area : 9.6 million ha (32% of total land area) • Share of agriculture in GDP: 18% • Share of agriculture in total employment: 35% • GVA share of crops in agriculture: 50% • Total rice production in 2010: 15.8 million mt • Total rice imports in 2010: 1.8 million mt

  3. PHILIPPINE IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT: QUICK FACTS • Total irrigation potential: 3.1 million ha (32% of total arable land) • Total area served by irrigation: 1.4 million ha • Share in irrigated area by type of system: • National systems: 49% • Communal systems: 39% • Private systems: 12% • % of rice produced in irrigated areas: 76%

  4. IRRIGATION PROJECTS EVALUATED A B C D F E

  5. SIGNIFICANCE OF EVALUATED PROJECTS

  6. OBJECTIVES OF EVALUATION • Examine the performance of six completed projects funded by yen loan • Identify issues that need to be addressed to improve project performance • Suggest measures to enhance project effectiveness and sustainability

  7. KEY EVALUATION QUESTIONS Were the projects able to expand the irrigated rice area? Were the projects able to increase rice production in target areas? Did the projects contribute to the increase in farmers’ income?

  8. RAPID IRRIGATION PROJECT PERFORMANCEASSESSMENT (RIPPA) FRAMEWORK Planning Phase Assessment Phase Action Planning Phase Collect & review project documents Consult with project stakeholders Present findings to project stakeholders Clarify project results framework Implement assessment plan Formulate action plan Formulate rapid assessment plan Analyze data & assess performance Prepare RIPPA report

  9. TYPICAL RESULTS CHAIN OF IRRIGATION PROJECTS INPUTS ACTIVITIES OUTPUTS OUTCOME IMPACT Outcome Output • Labor • Equipment • Technical • assistance • Construction/ • rehabilitation of • irrig facilities • Institutional • development • Supply of • equipment • Operable • irrig system • Functional water • users groups • Improved • system O&M • Increased • irrigated area • Increased rice • production • Improved • irrigation service • Increased farm • income • Improved living • standards • Self-sufficiency • in rice

  10. SOME PARTICIPATORY TOOLS USED IN RIPPA Mapping Transect walk Interviews (focused, group, key informant) Structured problem/solution analysis Participatory action planning workshop Triangulation and cross-checking

  11. KEY EVALUATION FINDINGS The projects succeeded in expanding the irrigated rice area. The projects increased average rice yields in target areas. The projects contributed to the increase in farmers’ income. Due to operational issues, most projects failed to achieve cropping intensity targets.

  12. PROBLEM TREE: BHIP-I ISF collection target is not achieved Cropping intensity target is not achieved Institutional issues Target irrigated area (4,740 ha) not achieved Insufficient water at Malinao dam Inefficient water distribution Water conveyance losses Some leveled lands remain un-irrigated Low amount of rainfall Non-compliance with CCPP Unlined/very long MFDs Incomplete MFDs/SFDs Dam not reservoir type Defective WD structures Damaged canal structures Insufficient water in DS Degradation of watershed Illegal turn-outs Lack of SFDs Lands higher than canal Weak IA policy enforcement Illegal checks/ impoundments

  13. PROBLEM TREE: BRISRIP ISF collection target is not achieved Cropping intensity target is not achieved Institutional issues Target irrigated area (11,954 ha) not achieved Low river discharge Water can’t reach some areas Flooding in the downstream Sugarcane areas are excluded from LIPA Degradation of watershed Lack of terminal facilities Lack of drainage outlets Sugar lands are not irrigated Low rainfall (e.g. El Nino) ROW problems Siltation of drainage canal Sugarcane farmers are not IA members Farmers unable to build ditches Inefficiencies in water mgt Flooding during high tides No control over crop conversion Non-compliance to WDD schedule Excessive water offtake/diversion Weak IA policy enforcement

  14. ACTION PLAN: BRISRIP

  15. ACTION PLAN TEMPLATE

  16. SOME INSIGHTS ON RIPPA Quick structured method for assessing project outcomes and identifying post-project issues which could feed into periodic and more formal evaluations Commitment among stakeholders in addressing project issues is promoted by participatory evaluation approaches Attribution of observed changes/results becomes a challenge in evaluating projects that have long been completed.

  17. Thank you! Dank u wel! Salamat po!

More Related