Review. Report

DSB/AGR -. Water Management Synthesis Project(Consortium for International Development)

Tucson;. Arizonw, Daeember 9-11,. 1980"

Douglas Caton, AID'Art Handley, AIDMarvin. Jensen, USDA

Review. Report-

DSB/AGI - Water Managemenr Synthesis- Project"(Colorado-Utah State Universities)

Tucson,. Arizona., December 9-11, 1980

This review report is composed of four- parts. Part I contains a statementof the project objectives, and. a- synopsis- of the project's progress. PartII is the team's evaluation- of the conceptual framework of the project-,the project design and. project progress. Part IIL"is. tha team's findings.observations, and conclusions.. Part IV contains. two' general reconmendations..

L introduction

The primary- obj ectivL- of' the water management synthesis: proj ect. isi t-.transfer knowledge- and. to- improve scientific skills. and. institutional.capacities- to- increase- the efficiency- and cost effectiveness of LDC.on-farr irrigatio' systems-.. Partly this; primary- objective is. a. concernmwith deermining: technologies available, and. applicable to developing:country irrigatioir proerams and: in parr it: is; a: concern' with- getting:these technologies- adapted- for- and adopted; i. each: country.The synthesis proj ect-embodies: both-technical assistance and research,with a good share of the technical assistance being training.. The:project format integrates farm water. problem identificatioi coupled*with research and analysis on cost effective methods of irrigationsysteiir improvement. Handbooks on specific aspects of management- suchas land leveling, and. "how to do" manuals. are being prepared in supportof the- training courses to supplement training materials on problemidentification and. irrigation. systems- improvement analysis.

The manpower resources and the knowledge required for effective irrigationdevelopment and management in the, developing countries is enormous. FewLDCs have more than a fraction of the knowledge and skills which willbe required. The United States has a large research establishment whichis. continuously developing new knowledge and irrigation technology.Foremost among these resources are Colorado State and Utah State Universi-ties. In addition to their own extensive research capability and overseasexperience in on-farm irrigation, .they can draw upon the various additionalresources of the U.S. research comnunity as the need arises.

However, most U.S. based knowledge does not directly fit into developingcountries and cannot, therefore, be transplanted without substantialadditional research or technical assistance. To attempt this additionalresearch or technical assistance entirely country by country is beyondthe scope and funding of this project and, moreover, if the project wereto be conducted on a country by country basis it would be counter-prod-uctive with respect to the- immediate assistance needs of all countries.

Ok

2'

Therefore, the% aim of' th synthesis, project* is the- development of newand improved information and. technologies applicable to conditiois andirrigation management problems generally, thereby reducing the amount ofcountry-by-country adaption necessary. Adaption, is being attempted bymeans of area and. regional on-farm irrigation problem identification andsolution, analysis.. The aspect of the project addressed in area training-courses which will be' continuously up-dated throughout the- course of.the- project..

The! six project: activitie& center- on. two. main- considerations;. informatiomtransfer- and sk±lX. improvemenz. It hasm long: been recognized: that the-qualities. and- knowledge, of a; nstion! s people: have. am important influence.on: its.. prosperity an. growtlr.-. -As has been- said: by no lesr than. Adam:Smith-,. the. prosperity, of w nationt is- determined, mainly- "by the. skilL,.dexterity, and. judgement- with- which. its- labor- is, generally app-lied.."The synthesia: projectz rightly- stresses,. therefore,. thet management aspects.of irrigation and. thei skill level- and. knowledgeability, of irrigationtechnicians-.. EBt while. the. project: placesg- proper emphasis, on' these.factors,. ther scope of thc. project,. e.g.. on-farm- water management whileimportant in; and of" itself, may not be- of sufficient scope, as presentlyformulated to effectivley address important systems and other economic:questions.

In this regard, to many, increased irrigation is one of the most effective-ways to feed the world's growing population. Supplemental water- underpins.double and. triple cropping and for a number of crops and for' a numberof places is necessary for any crop at all.. These people believe thatgiven water availability, water-management (water-control1 and waterdelivery according ta' crop demand) coordinated wit: "inputs"- and appropri-ate cultural and harvesting- practices is-among the surest routes to meetrapidly growing demand for food. This is ihe technical view. From anotherpoint of view, irrigation creates a different, and new, decision-makingenvironment.

Soil, water-logging, salinization, and even health problems are broughtinto the picture by water. Often, therefore, ..with poor managementpractices, the potential gains from irrigation are offset, or greatlyreduced, by one c- more of these elements. An introduction to the subjectQf irrigation may well place emphasis only on water management, however,from a more total view, on-farm water management is but one elementof a larger decision package. While the on-farm water management factorsare crucial, a focus is also needed on the economic potential of irrigation.

3

It follows that the: opportunity for developing countries to achieve morerapid agricultural growth to increase and to make more secure their-food supplies and to expand both on-farm and off-farm employment for ruralpeople not only depends. upon how well and how cost effective irrigationwater is developed, and utilized,. but also on whether it is economical.Economical production increases should. be- the long-run measure of irriga-tion's success or failure.

At the! same time an- eionomical-technicaL perspectiVe. of irrigatio- in.- LDCsmust also, be: guidedL by- ther following criteria::.

- an. irrigation: programt. exist.s. i& beinq; developed-,, or will. be: deveL padtand-. U. S.. assistance- is- requested;:

- conceptual and/or technicat problemsz exist7 for which the project:internally,, or- by- drawing- upon. addiltional resources; and. talents,, hasunique. competence;-

- the expectation. is- thar proble- resolution- will have important economicand social benefit potentials such astyield increasing-cost reducingproductivity, improvinW nutrition' among low income groups,. lowering-food prices . to consumers, increasinW rural incomes, eliminating or-reducing. food imports, and/or expanding exports.

builds upon LDC scientific and farmer experience and introducesapplicable levels of technology in such a way that for an-indiuvdualfarm or an area new and improved technical and economic processes areimplanted which are replicable in country and between countries;

that improvement of irrigation- is considered an integral part of AID'sgeneral effort to improve the lot of small commercial agriculture,encourage more equitable production, distribution and consumption offood.

Part I

Prolect ObJectives and Progress

A. Project Design

The main reference documents utilized for the purpose of this review werethe project contracts, the project work plan, and the scope-of-workdocument prepared by the project manager. The main source of informationon progress and problems encountered were the annual reports, the projectmanager's progress evaluations (in the form of project review summaries),and review discussions with the project co-leaders.

The synthesis project is viewed by the project manager ao having beendesigned "to develop a service to improve design, implementation, operationand evaluation of irrigation water management programs in LDCs." Thereview brought out that the single most important objective or main

/\\J

4;

purpose of the project is to improve. water management "on-farms!' inLDCs. On-farm-water-management is- considered by the. project manaqer-and the project co-leaders to be the- most- important aspect of wateruse. Also, for reasons of data- development, field testing of the train-ing courses, and for-the preliminary stages of the traditional methodsanalysis,. geographically with certain exceptipns, the project has beenconfined. pzrtnarily to Asia.. The project results. will,. however-, bemore widely applicable.

ticipated users of the project outputs, are AID Missions, other donoragencies-,. LDCs. and; contractors providing: the. development comunity-with, technciai. assistance im agriculturaL wate= management... Pa3e& 8-9'of the. project: con=rar. liata, eigh= project servicex that w'i1. be- devel-oped: over- the- three- yea= period-. o:Fthe project, with- the- evel ofeffort building- t, a. maximnu durLng- the: third- year.-. These. services*include- the- followingL analyses,, information transfer process-,. and. tech.-nical, materials:

- On-site trainingz courses. on: water management problear identification;.

- "How to do'." handbooks. on. water- management techniques.

- Evaluative analyses, on advantages and disadvantages of irrigationmethods- and- management practices under- different settings.

- General guidelines for on-farm water management.

- Tracking of AID supported. water management projects to improve outputs..

- Create an awareness of the socio-economic problems associated withirrigation investment and- water management practices' and costs.

Generalization of training aids and on site demonstration of materials de-veloped under the project are also included in the above services. In-principle.,,the project aim is establishing a basis by which countries canultimately gain self sufficiency in on-farm water management.

B. Project Progress

Project prL-,ress is jointly the responsibility of Wayne Clyma, ProjectCo-leader, Colorado State University, Jack Keller, Project Co-leader,Utah State University and the project manager, Gil Corey, DevelopmentSupport Bureau, AID.

5

The project was contracted by DSB as a three year project, September-27, 1978, and was funded in the. amount of $1,969,497.00. Roughly$700,000 of these monies had been used in support of project activities-as of December-, 1980. Six related activities provide the basis forinformation transfer of irrigation technology and. manigement principles:

1. Prolect- Analysis: review,. identification and description o 1 water-managemn, t.technologies: which. have, ai high probability of successfulimplementation;:

2.* Traditional Methods. Analysis: conducted in. three countries: in con--junction with' the preparation of training. course materials;:

3. Training' Cousse: a course in diagnostic. analysis of farmirrigationsystems for use: im LDCs;

4. Handbooks and Guides: provide a technical and evaluativr procedurefor successful irrigation water management technology transfer ofcrucial management considerations;

5. Workshops: two regional workshops- to be-conducted to demnstrate.the utility of the outputs of this project;-

6. Technical Assistance: limited, technical assistance on projectdevelopment and evaluation for countries- and missions.

At the outset the project experienced a. six month delay associatedwith the contracting-subcontracting process, so the- project wasevaluated as having been underway roughly 18 months. Two months ofthis time was not counted against the project as this time was spentconducting an Asian irrigation survey for the Asia Bureau. The reviewteam does not view the Asian survey as a distraction from project progress.The experience gained in conducting the survey, the base data obtainedand the contactsmade will readily work to the- advantage of the projectand will, over time, contribute materially to the project's progress.

The project is making good progress on all of its identified.-activities,even though delays were experienced in obtaining AID project documents andbecause of the time required to gain approval to review World Bankirrigation projects. The main effort of the first 18 months has beenon moving the project analysis and the training course forward. Thequestionaire to obtain the necessary data for the traditional methodsanalysis has been completed and field tested. The technical assistancecontribution made so far is indicated above. The question of whathandbooks and guides may be necessary to round-out and support otherprolect activities is under active consideration but, other than ahandbook on land leveling, the specifies of this activity has not beensettled.

6

II Evaluation Overview.

The review team experienced difficulty in establishing the projectscope and project focus while reviewing this project according to theTeam's Scope-of-Work. The main reason for this difficulty involved.background documents (Project Parer-, rontract, Scope-of-Work and theOctober 197d Work Plan)..which were nci. fully consistent and terminologywas not always- clear to reviewers with differing backgrounds. Specifi:-cally, the. title "Water- Management Sythesis" implied. different. purposes.The.e title of. the Proj ec Paper "Synthesis; of Water Management Improve-ment- Processes!" was more: descriptive. The- project contract or wori.plan. needs. a. set of definitions, for kIvy terms. such as.:

Water Management Synthesis. - Syr.thegis of what? Is onlyknowir information- being brought- together or- is it improving-known information: by how it is brought together?

Successful Technology - how is- succesw measured? For example,if the irrigation projecr goal was to deliver water to farmsand water isL.bein- delivered regardless of rate and. amount,is this successful technology? Is success determined byincreased food production, achi.eving- a. certain level of irri-gation efficiency, achieving low- cost food. production, etc.

Traditional Methods Analysis -traditional methods of analyses.or analysis of traditional. irrigation methods.

Handbooks- and. Guides - a concise definition of each- is needed.

Target Audiences - identify for each project output.

Water Management - define scope.

Successful Project - what criterion or criteria determine success?How is it measured? Does it include economics as well as technicalaspects?

Farm Water Management - .is this different from water management?

Basically the project documents are more cowplex than necessary andleave much roon for interpretation or misinterpretatlon. A simplerproject statement is needed with definitions and specific identifiableproject outputs listed in order that progress and the quality and quantityof project outputs ca1 be evaluated. Changes made in the Work Plan bythe A.I.D. Project Manager and Project Co-leaders as the project pro-ceeded should have been documented with amendments to the contract.

7

The purpose of technical assistance as an integral and an essentialpart of this project was not clear. Similarly, the purpose of theWorkshops was not clearly stated. The project contract identifiedtwo project Co-leaders (Clyma and Keller). The Work Plan describeda Coordination Team and listed Clyma and Keller as Co-coordinators withClyma as the principle contact: for the. A.I.D. Project Manager.

The Work Plan. describes, "Proj ect Teams" and. "Team Leaders." but doesnot clearly' identify the number of such- teams- or their specific roles.Presumably, a team: would. be. established- for- each of the. six activities..A Planning-and. Implementation. Team also is, described to prepare-work plans,. review personnel- qualifications, plan and execute: program:activitiee and. evaluate. progress. Specific work plans developed bythes& teams. and. their- revisions were- not available to tha Review. Team-The- Proj ect Work. Plan. did. contai, a. Schedule- of--activities listing the.sequence of events- im each activity,,, but the: activity work. plan. and flowLchart called for in the Work. Plan- to establish a priority timm framewas not available and the Raview Team. could only assume that this had.not been done... With the change- from project Co-leaders- to Co-CnOrdin-ators and. the establishment: of project. teams, it appears that leader--ship responsibilities- have become so disbursed that real project.leadership responsibilities ncr.onger. exists. To illustrate how theproject statement might be improved and how the contract should beamended, some of our interpretations are presented in detail in thispart of our report.

A. Review Team's Assignment

The Development Support Bureau work assignment document datedSeptember 9, 1980, Subject: Scope-of-Work for Team Evaluation ofthe 'synthesis of Water Management" project lists the purpose andrationale for this project review as follows:

1) Evaluate progress toward development of specified outputs,

2) Determine project impact on AID's irrigation programs,

3) Provide suggestions for project improvement, and

4) Provide a recommendation regarding the future direction andscope of the project.

a

The proj ect review was conducted according- to a review- agenda preparedby the review team, as follows:

1) The project goal and purpose as they address the- needs ofA.I..

2) The- planned results of the project,.

3) The assumptionsi in: relatio, toy anticipatad end-of 'projectstatus., an&

4) The- adequacy and. correctness; of' overall pro j er= desigm as.well as, metholologiesx used.

In making. this6 evaluatio, the team- considerec the following- issue&raisecL during the course of the review:

1) Project design ; appropriateness of the- methodology- and,usefulness of products,.

2) Progresse- is the project on schedule according to plannedtiming. If not, what is recommended regarding completionof the project,

3) Performance of Contractor - assess quality of -output and the.methods used to- develop the products,

4) Staffing - adequacy, balance,. and supervi3io2. What are thestrengths and weaknesses of the co-leader arrangement?

5). Management n A.I.D. management provides a key role in communi-cation and planning. How can this role be strengthed and/orimproved?,

6) Expected results - will the expected results be useful andused by A.I.D. and LDC governments? What more can be doneto assure utilization?,

7) Project relevance - the project is aimed at providing A.I.D.with technical assistance in irrigation water management.Should this type of project be continued beyond the presentcontract? If so, what changes are necessary to improve it?

I(

9

B. Project Objectives

As set forth in the contract, the objectives of the Water Manage-ment Synthesis project is to develop materials and methodologiesto improve design, implementation, operation and evaluation ofirrigation water management programs in LDCs. The objectiveis to be accomplished by means of six interrelated activities:1) Project. Analysis, 2) Traditional Irrigation Analysis,3) Training Courses, 4) Handbooks, 5) Workshops, and 6)Technical Assistance. And as set forth in the project work plansummary,- purposes of the project are- to:

1) Identify- technologies which have been: successfullytransferred and which improve- on-farm water managementand- increase food production,.

2) Teach host country personnel in three- countries how-to-do Probleni Identification studies in on-farm wate= manage-ment and do three such studies,.

3) Prepare materials (technology- handbooks) describingmethods and procedures for transferring technology,

4) Provide- information to host countries and developmentagencies about the results and use of the results ofthe above aetivities.

C. Project Funding and Leadership

The Water Management Synthesis (WMS) project is fundd atapproximately two million dollars for three years (October 1978 -October 1981) by the Agency for International Development (A.I.D.)through the Consortium for Internatioral Development (CID) withColorado State University and Utah State University jointly design-ated as lead universities. Drs. Wayne Clyma, Colorado StateUniversity and Jack Keller, Utah State University and Projectleaders.

10

U. Project Activities

Six ±nterrelated project activities are called for in the project contract:

Title Brief Description Estimated worker months

1.. Project Analysis a review of" all A.I.D. 32-38other completed andon-going project docu-ments. and, a field. re-view of 10-20 selectedprojects- to provideinformation needed, forActivity 4., and. toprepare a summary re-port dn successfulwater managementactivities.

2. Traditional Methods an analysis- to describe 26-30in detail three typesof traditional LDC farmirrigation systems toestablish a data base onexisting methods, howthey are operated andtypical problems beingencountered.

3.. Training Course a course in diagnostic 33-37analysis of farm irrigationsystems, complete withcourse materials, for usein on-the-job training andtaught in two LDCs selectedby A.I.D. to develop illus-trative diagnoses of watermanagement problems. Muchof the data for Activity 2will be collected whileconducting this course.

4. Handbooks a "living" handbook, similar 40-55to the SCS National Engineer-ing Handbook, with at leastfour chapters will be prepareddescribing successful watermanagement technologies andtheir transfer or implementa-tion by LDC personnel in their

D. Project Activities (continued)

Title Brief Description 'Estimated worker months

4. Handbooks own country. Four(continued) or five technical

field guides willbe prepared for useby field technicians.Chapter subjects. will.be- selected. from'Activity 1.

5. Workshops two- regional workshops 5-8will be conducted forLDC supervisory person-nel to demonstrate. theutility of the projectoutputs..

6. Tc-hiicalAssistance technical assistance. 10

on request by missions.project development and/or evaluation selectedto be relevant to otherproject activities andto give the contractorexperience with typicalA.I.D. requests and therequirements of such acontinuing service.

Total 146-178

The project documents, without the activity work plan and flow chart did notclearly indicate which activities were interdependent and which ones couldbe carried out sequentially or concurrently, as well as merely being inter-related.

12

E. Review Findings and Conclusion

The objective of the project is clearly "to develop" materialsand methodologies "to improve" design, implementation, operationand evaluation of irrigation water management programs in LDCs.It is not, therefore, just one exercise to bring togetherinformation on previous and on-going projects and an assessment orgrouping- of the project elements relative to success or- failure.The project activity process- will lead to the development ofimproved. designs,. methods, and. implementatioix procedures. which.will,. a an: acceptable level of. probability, be successful.

This. is. a noteabl- objectLve,, one. which donors, and- LDCa alikehave. been: striving for, without success, for a- long time-. Inreality; however, .- this, goal does not. appear within the trained-resources, management and- time limits of aL three. year- project.A.I.D.. should,. therefore-,. consider financing a research/technicalassistance project aimed_ at developing new knowledge, and- technologyapplicable. to Africa. and Asia,. including local adaptations- on acase by case basis.

Also of some concern to the review team was the fact that theproject may be under-staffed. The-team recognizes that thestaffing requirement. will vazy from time to ttae and that fullyqualified staff are difficult to come by. However, when projectleadership is directly res onsible for project implementation aswell as conceptualization and that both project leaders haveother responsibilities at their respective universities projectstaffing is of conceun. Project leadership when it undertakesproject implementation as a primary task also tends to get boggeddown in detail. It would a&la seem that project leadership andthe project manager may be out of contact for extended periodsof time leaving open the question of how much-project planningand/or conceptualization can really te done that was not done in:the first few months of the project.

The review team concurs that the technical content of the projectis solid, but, as will be brought more fully in Part III, believesthat the pveject leadership and the project manager may want toconsider making the synthesis project a water systems project,at least on an area basis, and provide essential linkage withagronomic and economic factor or systems co asideration. Projectduration could be changed accordingly.

13.

111. Findings-, Observations and Conclusions

A. On Project Progress

As noted, because: of funding and contracting difficulties, theproject did not actually get under way, until six months afterthe contract date of September 1978. SubtrActing the twomonths spent on the: Asian irrigation survey, the project hasactually been: underway for a period of approximately 16 months36wever, tbe. projec.t ha madee strong: progressi justiying.extension of the- proj ect tim- to, completioir.

Also- as noted. under: Parr II of this- report,. a. revised proj ect.statement ar this- point might be- timely to provide a, refine&scope-ef -work- and.- to. mor sharply focus- ou; the. project's.objectiwes, Im this. regard, the review- tear suggests. in its:-general recomendations.that consideration: be- given to a. morecomprehensi-ve-.systems-like, look at irrigation, in a new, longer-term proj ect. The review team, however, does. not view theextension of the project to Africa ta be an open questionin. consideration of Africa's food needs and. A.I.J's concerns,whether under this project or a complimentary project. TheLatin America region does not have- the same order of priority,

In preparing a revised project statement the project managerand leadership will want to weigh the following specificrecommendations on each of the project's activities:

1) Project Analysis:.

a. The project plan calls for analysis of projectsin-addition to establishing a data base. A narrativeinterpretation should be added to identify relevanttrends or characteristics of projects in each generalregion. This narrative should indentify and describewater management technologies that have a significantimpact on the project in achieving its goals and havesuccessfully transferred.

b. The contractor should consider and recommendprocedures or guidelines to enable projects to bemonitored, or periodically evaluated, to determine if

14

projects are operated: or perform as planned. The fieldstudies should provide examples of evaluating projectstatus relative to project plans for use by others infuture, similar evaluations.

c. The contractor should obtain impact evaluationdocuments that exist, conduct a review and analysis,and make recommendations un the need for and approachto conducting future impact analyses.

d.. The- contractor- and- projec= managev shouldc plan to,have: multidisciplinary- teams, make field. studies* im-Africa. so as: to- increase the! awareness of- this: projectin those regions; ah to enable including, these: regions;in the detailed- project analyses.

2) Traditional Methods Analysis

a.. Critical factor analysis. should. be included in the analyses.

b. The analyses should identify and include the original pur-pose of the project.

c. Africa should be consilered when selecting the countries.to which the training course is to be taken.

d. The assessment should include region's concepts of on-farmwater management.

e. The contractor and project manager should consider compar-isons with similar, unimproved surface irrigation systems inthe U.S. which were evaluated in great detail by the U.S. Bureauof Reclamation. For example, these data are available inprinted volumes for hill ar:2as in Idaho and flat areas inCalifornia and New Nexico.

f. The analyses should include an assessment of and guidesto recognizing problems generated by irrigation such as water-logging, salinity, soil compaction and possibly human diseaseproblems.

V

15'

,3- Training Courses

a. The contractor should avoid making the training coursetoo academic. The training course materials. must beapplicable to all commonly used irrigation methods and.should not be. site specific.

b. Introducory- material, or course descriptive materialshould. identify: thosek training, elements. that are long-term traiLnin&. needsi and provide some guidance aw. to, when:thi- . raining, ,. course. o on-the job: methods. shoul&be used. Such- guidelinew- also should- consider when suchtraining. is not- needed:..

c. The. Riview: Teau:. did nor have am opportunity- to. study-the EWUP Tralning- course, material in-deptr,. but reconmendsconsidering7 adding. an introductory chapter or summary clearly-stating: what the trainees will. learn from each chapter and.why that chapter is important to technical people planningto take the- course. This sumary material should be conciseand prepared. at a level similar to the- Contractor's Train-ing Prograur brochure.

d. The contractor and. the project manager should clearlyestablish which materials are user guides to supplementhandbooks and which are supplemental materials to accompanythe training cuurse, and which materials being distributed.are oi-side of this contract.

e. A training course has been developed for use in Egyptand the course was taught there in the summer of 1980. Somematerial from the Egypt Water Use Project (EWUP) will beused to further develop the course and further refinementwill take place while conducting the training course in LDCs.A training section on level basin irrigation has been preparedentitled "Field Study of Level Basin Irrigation" A Manualfor Engineers". Requests have been received to present thecourse in India sometime-during the-period ofJanuary-March 1981. Opportunity to promote the trainingoccured as a result of the team's activities. This furthersupports the review team's recommendation that a multi-disciplinary team make field studies in Africa.

16

4) Handbooks and Guides

a.. In discussing, this activity the evaluation teaminquired. as to target audience, subject matter sel-ection and. probable utilization. The responses givenby the. Co-directors and A.I.D. Project Manager revealeda -) range- of views, as. to probable- audience withthe suggestioir that different chapters might: be, dlrected;at different- levelsi of- audience,. 2) continuing. lack;of ciarity- asT to: completeness- of' the Handbook with. majorel ementso not. being included as: they- were- satisfactorily-covered: in! other- existing- publications:. There seemed. tobe little' evidence that- there- had. been: any- feedback fromthL- project: analysis activity in- selectiotr of topics, forthe Handbooks..

b- The evaluation team suggested that materials neede&to be prepared and. distributed which would address major-program" isseas or options faced by LDC government policymakers who were technically proficient- in water management.The A.I.D. Project Manager and Project Co-directors respondedthat this was a good suggestion and would be pursued. Itwas emphasized that such materials had to be succinct andunderstandable to be useful. The evaluation team noted thatfield guides desaribed in the contract were not being devel-oped. In the ensuring discussion it became clear that therewas less than satisfactory agreement as to relevance or needin the Handbook Activity.

c. It is the view of the evaluation team that with thepassage of time since the initiation of the contract-(September 1978) there has been a change in the views ofProject Manager and Contract Staff, covering the HandbookActivity which should be clarified and articulated parti-cularly in view of the fact that this activ."v absorbs thelargest-amount of staff time (50-55 WM).

d. The CID project Co-directors and the A.I.D. ProjectManager should rethink the efficacy and objective of theHandbook Activity and rearticulate the logic, purpose andwork plan. This should then be included in an rppropriatecontract amendment as soon as possible so the planned actionscan be pursued during the remaining period of the contract.

17

5) Workshops

a. The evaluation team suggested that the workshopactivity would- be difficult. to implement successfullyin terms of outlining the appropriate LDC personneland in securing the cooperation or participation ofother donors. The A.I.D. Project Manager- and. ProjectCo-directors. concurred- and: indicated. they were- consider-ingi anothe= coursef of action: to. accomplish. th&. obJ ectiveThey Evaduatiom Team' leader suggested. other! international.conferences, and:.meetings, which-. could- be used- to- communir-cate- th& information,, findingst, and- -onclusiona. resultin.from project activitLea.. The. Pro, ct Manager made re-ference,. tD-- the 5-8 - WM. of effort that would. be involved,and- the possibility of using- this. resource- for othermore productive activities such as technical. assistance..

b. The- Evaluation Team recommends, that the workshopactivity- provided. in the. contract be reconsidered andalternativesw investigated and. determined to accomplishthis objective in a more-practical and cost effectivemanner,. and. such change in plans be reflected in acontract amendment.

6) Technical. Assistance

a. An estimate of the probable time commitments for' TAbased on average project time commitments by disciplinesis:

TDY Expert Man - Months by Year

ist 2nd 3rd

Keller - 1

Agronomist 1 1

Economist - 1 1

Engineer 1 1 2

Sociologist - - 1

Totals 1 3 6 (10)

br; While-technical assistance-is only about 6-7% ofthe work months of the- project the A.I.D. ProjectManager and the CID Co-directors believe that it isa very important: element which will undoubtedly beincresingly active as time goes on. The: Evl.uationtesam. noted that project field activities appearedto be. focussed on Asian countries.. This is under-standable-perhaps- taking into consideration the ex-tensive field. axperience in Asia. of the- ProjectManager- and- the! two- CID Universities; (Colorado State-UnL-versLty, andi Utah Star& University).. Thet Co-director-stated. that as of now. (December 1980) about 50%. ofthe planned. 10 .M of technical assistance- had- beenused- exclusively- im Asia-,

c The Evaluation Team-expressed. concern that project:-f bus wasi being- overly: drawn to, Asia. in- the preparation:of Irrigation subsector- reviews-for Asian countries, and_presentation of materials at the A.I.D. Asia: Bureau.Agriculture Conference in Indonesia January 15-20, 1981.The Project Manager and Co-director defended this activity-as- an integral and. valuable part of. their activities andfelt it would be balanced in the future as the contractactivities were initiated in other regions in the nearfuture.

d.. The Evaluation Team recommenas that the A.I.D. Pro--ject Manager and. CID Co-directors give increased attentionto Africa in all project activities in the remaining periodof the contract. They should define the technical assist-ance available and make it known to the Africa Bureau.

B. On Project Scope

While centering on on-farm water management, the projectcontract and the work plan appear also to be concerned witheconomic feasibility and with the viability of irrigation.It follows that the project at some point is concerned withsufficiency of water management as well as the technical,economic and other forces impinging upon the farming operation.Some of these forces are structural-roads, water delivery,market facilities; some are institutional, credit, extension,research; some are economic - prices, wages, taxes; and someare social - traditional, mores) attitude-, learning.

19

Each of' these functionals has. a uniquely defined.set of variables,. each set being subject toresource or variable factor allocation principles,and for each the farming operation is subject todecreasing marginal returns as follows:

1. Our defination of water management is theactivity which insures a specific waterflow rate through a particular irrigationstrictur as guide& by- a. particular prod-uctou technically- while! "maIntalning!" the&systems

a.. This. definatio- is. static state!

b- Any- other defination is economicallyand. echnically meaningless.

2.. Opposed. to static state management, manage-ment dynamics- involves two variable decision.realms and: one constant which is maintenanceof the system so it will operate at the speci-fic level of performance, e.g. rate/flow-C.The variable decision realms are:

a. The farm or-cropping system. Each systemhas a derivable plant water use- coefficient.

b. The technological and management require-ment is derived from the plant water use(demand) coefficient.

The profitability of investment and management isdetermined by marginal cost-marginal revenue (price)comparisons.

3. Since the farm doe.a not, and can not, operate in isola-tion of the environmental socio-economic factors, or ofthe systems which determine water availability (be theysurface or ground) - except under the assumption theexogenous variables are fixed '(constant) - economi-calJ.y'Tationale decision cannot be made unless suchexogenous variables are taken into account. Forpurposes of this argument, all matters external tothe irrigation system itself are considered to beexogenous.

/

20

It" follows that:-

a. a rationale water management and tech-nology decision. is not. possible in theabsence of a farm system production functionand determination of tangency thereto of acost-price line.

b. am optimal water management (and tech-nology) decisioir cannot be made- in: the-absence- of a,. determination; of the, productibwsurfac associated wth. farming syat= alter-nativeo (and! therefrow the economic expansio=path)..

rn. thq absence, of a. determination, of a and- b , above,the safest bet. isi that- the. current water managementsystem is- optimal.

Having said the foregoing: it needs immediately to bequalified. Where it can be demonstrated that improvedtechnologies- and/or advanced managerial techniquesare cost reducing or investment saving these costs orsavings can be used in appropriate equations as revenues,The limit in this regard is that optimal water manage-ment solutions are not possible.

IV 'Recommendations

In addition to the specific recommendations contained in thebody of this review report the review team has the followinggeneral recommendations regarding future direction and scopeof the synthesis project:

1) For good and su"?icient reasons the initial projectstatement was written in broad and very general terms.Experience over the past 16 months indicates that theproject statement needs to be narrowed and more sharplyfocused. While the project analysis activity needs tobe finished (it is nearing completion) the main emphasisshould be given to training, the-traditional methodsanalysis, and the handbooks and guides. The WorkshopActivity could well be deleted. Technical assistanceshould be retained but should be used to supplement themain activities of the project. The project budget shouldbe reevaluated comparative to the work requirement andthe project extended to completion.

2) Simultaneous with the narrowing and sharpening of thepresent project statement (contract) a new long-termproject statement should be prepared. In preparing the

21.

new project statement, consideration should be givento: a) placing the project on a total irrigationsystems basis, b) -incorporating the essentialagronomic and economic components enumerated hereinto provide necessary decision and policy guidence,and c) placing Africa and Asia on a comparableassistance basis.

a. In the. above recommendation economic. and.system: analysis: are- given; much. stronger role.tha presently. However, this. recommendatiomdoes not envisio any che -ige, in- proj ect- leader-ship.. The- review; team, believes: the. currentproject leadership to be exceptionally- qualified.The team: also- commends: the- efforts- and leader-ship, prL vided. the- project by- Dr-. Corey- the:Project: Manager..

b. The- above- recommendation does imply a broaderand more-comprehensive conceptulization of watermanagement synthesis, the development- of. approp-riate analytical methodologies for- both the,macro and the micro components of water systems,as well as- the development of a framework andtransfer-mechanisms (methods) on-technalogT. andinformation, transfer (the team has no hesitancyin making this recommendation as it is: aware thatClyma and Lowdermilk, Colorado, and Jack Keller,Utah, have been working on transfer methodologiesfor some- time).

The team would like to end this review report bycowiending Drs. Clyma and Keller for the persevera~urand imagination they have shown in pursuit of adifficult and complicated subject, for their willing-ness to make personal sacrifice in the conduct ofthe project, and for the substantial and worthwhileproducts being produced. The team firmly believesthat a nucleous of water resource competency isbeing created in the conduct of this project whichwill be a valuable resource of the Agency and fordeveloping countries over future years.