Document of

The World Bank

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Report No. 3065a-114D

INDONESIA

SWAMP RECLAMAITON PROJECT

STAFF APPRAISAL REPORT

February 23, 1981

Projects DepartmentEast Asia and.Pacific Regional Office

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance oftheir official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

US$1.0U = Rupiahs (Rp) 6Z5Rp 1.00 = US$0.0016Rp 1 oillion = US$1,600

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES - 1ETRIC SYST&1,1

1 millimeter (mm) = 0.039 inchesI meter (i) = 39.37 inches1 kilometer (km) 0.62 miles1 square kilometer (sq km) = 0.386 square miles1 hectare (ha) 2.47 -acres1 cubic meter (cu m) 35.31 cubic feetI million cubic meters (NCM) = 811 acre feet1 liter (1) 0.264 gallons (USA)1 liter/second (1/sec) = 0.035 cubic feet per secondI kilogram (kg) = 2.2 pounds1 metric ton (ton) 2,205 pounds

INDONESIAN FISCAL YEAR

April 1 - tiarch 31

ABbREVIATIOi.S

A.RD - Agency for Agricultural Research and DevelopmentBI%AS - Bimbingan 4assal Swa Sembada haihan Liakanan - ;lass Guidance for

Self-Sufficiency in Foodstuffs, a farm input-credit packageprogram

BRI - iank Rakyat Indonesia - People½s Bank of IndonesiaBULOG - National Food Procurement and iistribution AgencyDGA - Directorate General of Agrarian Affairs (Cadastral Office)DGCK - Directorate General of Cipta karya, (hIousing, Urbani and

Regional Development)DGT - Directorate General of TransuigrationDGWRD - Directorate General of lWater Resources DevelopmentDPU - Departemen Pekerjaan Umur Dan Tenaga Listrik - Public Works

MinistryGOI - Government of IndonesiaIPB - Institut Pertanian Bogor - bogor Agricultural UniversityIPEDA - Land Tax

IRRI - International Rice Researclh InstituteITE - Institut Teknologi Bandung - band&ng Institute of TechnologyJMT - Junior Minister (~Iinistry) for TransmigrationKUD - Village Unit Cooperative

FOR COFICLIL USE ONLY

MOA - Ministry of AgricultureMOH - Ministry of HealthO&M - Operation and MaintenanceP4S - Proyek Peibukaan Persawahan Pasang.Surut - Proiect Unit for

Tidal Swamp ReclamationPTPT - Penyapatan Tanah Pemukimnn Transmigrasi - Directorate of land

preparation for transmigration settlement (in charge of landclearing)

REPELITA - Rencana Pembangunan Lima Tahun - Five Year Development PlanSAE - Survey Agro Economi-Agroeconoiaic SurveySID - Surveys, investigations and designsUGM - University of Gajah Mada

GLOSSARY

Alang-alang - (Imperata cylindrica) a coarse grass which establishes itselfafter slash and burn operations

Hak Pakai - Individual right of use or exploitation of assigned landHak Milik - Right to full ownership of landKabuDaten - DistrictKecamatan - SubdistrictMarga - A community grouping under traditional (Adat) lawPUSKESMAS - Community health center

This document has a restricted distribution and may be ued by recipients only in the performanceof their official duties. Its contents may not othenris be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

INDONESIA

SWAMP RECLAMATION PROJECT I

Table of Contents

Page No.

1. BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I

General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IThe Agricultural and Rural Sector . . . . .1Development Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2Swamp Reclamation and Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Project Formulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

2. THE PROJECT AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10Climate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10topography and Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10Hydrology and Hydrometry ..... . . . . . . . . . . . 12Water Supply, Demand and Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Drinking Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15Land Tenure .......... . 16Access, Serv;-4- and Existing Development . . . . . . . . . . 17Existing Agric-u.~:ure . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

3. THE PROJECT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Project DT- h iption . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . 19Project WorKs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19Agricultural Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Physical Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Settlement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23Community Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24Status of Field Data, Planning and Design . . . . . . . . . . 26Implementation Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27Consulting Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27Cost Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29Financing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29Procurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29Disbursements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33Accounts and Audits .................... . 33Environmental Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

- ii -

Page No.

4. ORGANIZATIONOA JD MANAGEEE . N.T. .................. 34

General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34Agricultural Support Services . . . . . . . . , . .. . . . . 36Operation and Maintenance *..*.*. .... . . . . . . . .... . 38Monitoring and Evaluation . . . . . . . . . .... . 39

5. AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Cropping Patterns ... . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . 40Cropping Calendar . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42Yields . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42Production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43Drying, Storage and Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43Livestock and Fisheries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

6. MARKET PROSPECTS, PRICES, FARUM INCOMES AND PROJECT CHARGES . . 44

Market Prosp2cts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44Prices . . . . . .4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45Farm Incomes . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46Project Charges . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

7. BENEFITS, JUSTIFICATION AND RISKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

Benefits .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48Labor Costs and ienefits . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 49Investment Costs ... . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . 51Economic Rate of Return . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51Sensitivity AnAlysis . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51Risks . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

8. AGREEMENTS REACHED AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

LIST OF TABLES IN MAIN REPORT

1.1. Reclaimed Areas and Settled Families in Tide-Affected Swamps 72.1 Meteorological Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112.2 Spring Tide Ranges ... . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . 132.3 Salinity Iitrusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132.4 Water Balance for Rainfed Household Consumptive Use . . . . . 153.1 Consulting Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303.2 Pro4ect Cost Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 314.1 Initial Seeds and Agrochemical Package . . . . . . . . . . . . 375.1 Projected Agricultural Yields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425.2 Agricultural Production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 437.1 Sensitivity Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

- iii -

LIST OF ANNEXES - TABLES

ANNEX 1

Il. Cost Estimate2. Schedule of Expenditures3. Cost Estimate by Category of works4. Proposed Allocation of Loan Proceeds5. Estimated Schedule of Disbursements6. Bill of Quantities and Costs7. Village FacilitiesE.. Consulting Services: Categories and Estimated Schedule9. Consulting Services - Cost Breakdown

10. List of Equipment and Supplies

AIMNEX 2

1. Price Structures for Agricultural Outputs2. Price Structures for Agricultural Inputs3. Net Economic Benefits from Rice (Paddy) Production4. Net Economic Benefits from Soybean and Corn Production5. Coconut Prodction Volumes and ValuesC. Banana Production Volumes and Values7. Assumed Labor Inputs per Cropped Hectare&. Development of Typical Transmigrant Family Labor Force9. Economic Value of Family Labor in Areas of Origin and Settlement

10. EcoPomic Rate of Return CalculationI 1. Representative Farm Nodel1 2. Representati-ve Settler Family income Analysis13. Rent and Cost Recovery Calculation Summary

AJNNEX 3

Schedule of Early E'vents

ANNEX 4

Studies and Investigations, Terms of Reference

ANNEX 5

List of References

LIST OF FIGURES

3.1 Implementation Schedule (21825)4.1 Organization of the Directorate General of Water Resources

Development (18765)4.2 P45 Organization Chart (21493)4.3 P4S Provincial Office Organization (21491)5.1 Proposed Field-lot Cropping Calendar (21085)

LIST OF MAPS

IBRD 14919, 14920

I)DNESIA

APPRAISAL OF SWAMP RECLAMATION PROJECT I

1. BACKGROUND

General1.01 The Government of Indonesia (COI) has requested Bank Group assis-tance in reclaiming and developing about 9,000 ha (gross) of swampland atKarang Agung in South Sumatra, and in settling approximately 3,200 families.GOl also requested a number of related studies including an inventory ofreclaimable swamplands; upgrading of existing swamp developments; ecologicimpacts; and the availability of groundwater for drinking purposes at KarangAgung. The proposed project would provide for drainage, clearing anddevelopment of the land; housing and public facilities; selection, transport,

settling and subsistence of settled families; and agricultural supportservices and studies.

1.02 Tne potential reclamation and development of 200,000 ha at Karang

Agung has been studied by P4S /1 and consultants (under Irrigation ProjectVII, Loan 1268-IND) and subsequently an area of about 9,000 ha was idertifiedwith the assistance of Bank missions as a first stage develcpment. Thisreport is based on the findings of an appraisal mission composed ofMessrs. I. Naor, J. Goldberg, W.P. Ting and J.K. Coiilter which visitedIndonesia in November 1979.

The Agricultural and Rural Sector

1.03 Objectives. The Government-s major objectives for the agriculturaland rural sector are to: (a) create productive employment to raise incomes ofthe rural poor; (b) increase domestic food supply to keep pace with risingdemand; (c) expand agricultural exporrs particularly of smallholder treecrops; and (d) ensure productive, su n__nable use of Indonesia-s varied land,water and other natural resources.

1.04 Despite a 4% average annual growth of production, agriculture'sshare of GDP has declined from 40% to 30% since 1968, while its share ofexports dropped from 45% to 33% due mainly to the markedly increasedvalue of oil exports. Nevertheless, the agricultural and rural sectorremains of overwhelming importance to the great majority of Indonesians;nearly 80% of the population lives in rural areas, and agriculture is themajor source of income for about two-thirds of rural households and

/1 P4S - Proyek Peinbukaan Persawahan Pasang Surut - Project Unit for TidalSwamp Reclamation, in the Directorate of S-oamp Development, DirectorateGeneral of Water Resources Development, (DGWRD), Ministry of Public Works.

-2-

one-tenth of urban households. Some 15.6 million smallholder families producesubsistence and cash crops on 15.8 million ha, while 1,800 estates occupying2.2 million ha produce mainly rubber, sugar, tea, palm oil, and tobacco.

Development Strategies

1.05 Employment. Agriculture-s share of total employment decreasedfrom 69% in 1961 to 64% in September 1971, while in 1976 it ranged between66% in March and 60% in October./1 Nevertheless, agriculture remained byfar the largest single source (with 46%) of new employment during 1971-76.Outside Java, employment prospects in agriculture appear quite promising,given the sustained increases in the smallholder area, due to land reclamationand irrigation development, including both Government-sponsored and spon-taneous transmigration. In Java, rehabilitation of irrigation systems, whichgenerated significant employment in the last decade, should continue toprovide additional construction and farm work.

1.06 Food Crops. Given its limited manpower and financial resources, GOIhas concentrated on increasing the production of rice, the preferred staplefood of the great majoritv of Indonesians. Rie-e production increased rapidly(4.5% p.a.) between 1968 aad i974, chiefly due to irrigation rehabilitationand the provision to irrigated rice growers of fertilizer and high-yieldingvariety seed, financed largely through the BIMAS credit program. The growthrate slowed markedly to 1.7% p.a. over 1974-77, in the wake of severe declinesin fertilizer usage (due to restrictions on private sector fertilizer trade),successive seasons of untimely rainfall, and unprecedented attacks by pestsand diseases, principally the brown pla-- -aper and associated viruses. In1978 rice production increased by 10% with favorable weather, improved andliberalized fertilizer distribution, and nationwide Government-sponsoreddistribution of recently introduced pe-t-resistant varieties. Preliminaryestimates for 1979 suggest a rice production increase of only 2% over 1978due, mainly, to insufficient rainfal - --ver the past decade, output ofsecondary food crops (maize, cassava, soybeans, peanuts, and sweet potatoes)grew more slowly, at an average of only 1.6% p.a., composed of a 1.1% p.a.average decline in area (much of this land shifting to irrigated rice) and a2.7% p.a. increase in yield. These gains in food output did not keep pacewith the 3.5-4.0% p.a. increase in demand due to rising population andincomes. Indonesia became the world's largest rice importer, with a recordimport of 2.3 nullion tons in 1977, about 1.3 million tons in 1978 and about2 million tons in 1979. Simultaneously, -heat imports rose to 1.4 milliontons in 1978, but dropped to 1.2 million tons in 1979; cassava exportsnearly disappeared, and soybean, maize, and coconut oil imports began togrow. The -Indonesia Supply Prospects for Major Food Crops (Report No.2374-IND of March 3, 1979) concluded that even with expanded irrigation, and

/1 The share of agrfcultural employment in March ranged between 63% injava and 72% in the Other Islands. The corresponding fiTuixs inOctober were 57% and 66% respectively. The seasonal differencesrepresented a drop of 6.7 million workers in agricultural employment.

- 3 -

improved technology, extension, credit and marketing, food production growthwould not exceed 3.5% p.a., leaving a basic food deficit up to at least1990, of which a rice deficit alone would be 2-3 million tons a year.

1.07 Tree Crops. The Government has embarked on a major effort todevelop smallholder tree crops outside Java as part of its national rubberand coconut replanting and transmigration programs. The objective is toimprove production on existing plantations while developing large areas ofnew land for settlement. One of the Government's main approaches has beento use public estate companies to plant tree crops on land to be settled bylocal -1-andless families as well as by transmigrants. These companies clearthe land and provide settlers with planting material, other inputs,processing and marketing facilities. This approach is appropriate in viewof constraining management and technical capabilities.

1.08 Future Strategy. To prevent a widening food production consump-,tion gap, productivity and area under rice and secondary food crops must beincreased. In Java, rice-cropping intensity could be raised through storageand irrigaton projects although relocation of inhabitants of reservoir sitesmay delay progress. Yields and cropping intensity can also be increased byconstructing tertiary irrigation and drainage systems, developing ground-water potential and improving support services. In the Other Islands thereis considerable potential for new irrigation and swamp reclamation anddevelopment schemes which GOI is attempting to develop. Despite a scarcityof high-yielding varieties of secondary food crops, yields of existingvarieties could be increased by improved husbandry, including fertilizersand insecticides. 001 is just beginning to give serious -- -ion tomarketing, credit, seeds and research aimed at varietal improvement ofsecondary crops.

1.09 Area Development and Transmigration. In 1978. about 85 millionpeople lived in Java, at a density approaching 650 perss --:sq km. The island,with 7% of Indonesia's land area, has 45X of the cropped area and 63% of thepopulation. Java generally has more fertile soils and better infrastructurethan the Other Islands; however, its cultivable land is almost fullyutilized. In some watersheds where cualtivation already exceeds ecologicallysafe limits, contributing to increasing erosion, flooding, and siltation ofreservoirs, irrigation canals and ports, GO is preparing Integratedwatershed development projects to address this problem. The primary programfor new area development in the Other Islands, as well as for creatingemployment and settlement nuclei for Javanese migrants, is transmigration. Anorganized transamigration program is important for regional and naturalresource development in the Other Islands, production of food and exportcrops, and creation of employment and decent living conditions for landlessJavanese. Unfortunately, this program has long been hampered by unrealisticexpectations of its potential for resolving Java's population problems and forstimulating large-scale regional developmant, by overly ambitious targets, andby weak, uncoordinated implementation. Confronted by management problems, GOIreorganized the program in preparation for Repelita III, by transferringimplementation rf-3ponsibility from the Directorate General of Transmigration

-4-

to line agencies normally responsible for each sector (para. 1.15). Thismeasure needs to be complemented by continued attention to technical andpolicy issues including: (a) the suitability of the land for food crops;(b) the role of tree crops and livestock; (c) appropriate target incomes andfarm sizes; (d) the extent of Government financial, marketing and otherservices to settlers; and (e) the role of spontaneous migration.

1.10 Role of Government. While the private sector should be encouragedto expand its role in agricultural input supply, marketing, and processing,Government continues to bear the major responsibility for infrastructure,resource conservation, and other services. Despite marked improvements overthe past decade, centralized procedures, weak regioral planning, andtechnical and managerial manpower constraints have impeded planning andimplementation of agricultural and rural development. C-01s concern for areadevelopment has also increased the need to strengthen provincial and localplanning capabilities. Future programs responaive to GOI's statedobjectives will necessarily be complex, requiring closely coordinatedimplementation programs, agricultural research, extension, input supply,credit, land development, transport, pricing policies and marketing. GOImust therefore continue to strengthen its key rural development institu-tions, particularly through education, recruitment, training and retention oftechnical manpower.

1.11 Bank Group Lending Strategy. GOI and the Bank Group generally agreeon overall objectives and strategies for the rural sector. While viewssometimes differ on the relative emphasis to be given to differentinvestments, and on the technical design of some proife-e. such differencesare not impeding Bank Group operations generally and are ;sually resolved byfurther analysis and dialogue.

1.12 Projects. Since the first of 15 irrigation projects was approvedin 1968, the Bank Group-s agricultural lending has -- :ldly expanded toinclude estate and smallholder tree crops, fertilizer production anddistribution, sugar, livestock, fisheries, research, extension, training,seeds, transmigration, and resource survey and mapping. The OperationsEvaluation Department-s Sector Operations Review of Bank Group agriculturallending in Indonesia (Report No. 2166, dated August 9, 1?78) concluded thatdespite deficiencies in some projects, the Bank's portfolio in Indonesianagriculture was -of overall good quality and likely to contribute substan-tially to increased production." Within the context of GOIs agriculturalobjectives and priorities, as outlined in Repelita III, future Bank lending isexpected to focus on:

(a) a diversified irrigation, flood protection, drainage and swampreclamation program to intensify rice cropping on Java and to expandwater resources infrastructure in the Other Islands;

(b) smallholder and nucleus estate tree crop planting programsincluding industrial forest estates; and

- 5 -

(c) area development projects aimed at (i) watershed management toconserve soil and ensure long-term productivity in the denselypopulated areas of Java; (ii) rural works programs; and(iii) transmigration.

Swamp Reciam&tion and Development

1.13 Introduction. Indonesia-s land mass includes an estimated 35 mil-lion ha of swamps, nearly equally divided among Sumatra, Kalimantan and IrianJaya. These include an estimated 30 million ha of seasonally or permanentlyinundated inland swamps and an estimated 5 million ha of coastal and nearcoastal swamps, some of which are inundated during high tides by fresh orbrackish water. One of the main resources of swamps are their soils which arecovered by primary or secondary swamp forests. Although the aggregate arables,wampland has not yet beea assessed in detail, there is no doubt that it has aconsiderable potential to produce rice and other food and tree crops undercontrolled water management. Historically, coastal and near coastal swamplandalong tidal river estuaries in Sumatra and Kalimantan has attracted migratingsanjarese from South Kalimantan and Buginese from South Sulawesi who havespontaneously reclaimed an estimated area of more than 300,000 ha by diggingshallow canals slightly above low tides, perpendicular to rivers where wateris fresn year round. Through these canals, tides irrigate (and drain) adja-cent lands in the tidal range. This has enabled settlers to grow rice,vegetables, and a variety of other food and tree crops. Planned swamp recla-nation began by the Dutch as early as 1939 at Purwosari, near Banjarmasin, inSouth Kalimantan, followed in the l'30s and early 1960s by six small Govern-ment-sponsored projects in South and West Kalimantan; but it was only d` m

itS first five year program, Repelita I, in 1969-73 that the Gcvernmentbegan reclaiming large areas, penetrating inland from coastal rivers. It wasthen that P43 was established within the Ministry of Public Works to constructnavigation canals connecting river estuaries, and open up contiguous areas foragricultural development and settlements maialy by constructing draing-- --caaals. During this period some 33,000 ha were opened up in Sumatra andKalimantan and about 8,700 families from overpopulated Java and Bali weresettled. Two universities - Gajah Mada of Jokjakarta (UGM) and ITB /1 ofBandung - were enrolled to assist in designing reclamation projects, and eachfollowed a distinct design pattern. UGM, which designed projects forKalimantan, employed a 'herring-bone' or fork-like layout of canals, withreservoirs at their ends (to flush out toxic water from the canal systemduring low tides) whereas ITB, which designed projects for South Srmatra,employed a rectangular grid layout of canals, but without reservoirs.

1.L4 These reclamation activities brought new problems to developers asinLand penetration encountered unarable deep peats and soils that becameacidic and nonproductive when drying out. Nonetheless, the Governmentreclaimed an additional 42,000 ha of tidal swamps during Repelita II (1974-78)

/1 Institute Teknologi Bandung - Technological Institute, Bandung.

and plans to reclaim 0.4 million ha during Repelita III (1979-83). Thoughthe operation as a whole hao, been slow, it has been successful, as awhole,in reclaiming swamps and in developing them agriculturally, demon-strating their potential contribution to the transaigration program. Themajor weaknesses in the reclamation program have been poor implementationmanagement, particularly delays in the settlement of transmigrants, whichresulted in considerable idle investments; poor land clearing, which delayedagricultural production and benefits, and inadequate agricultural supportswhich resulted in less than optimal crop yields. Table 1.1 shows tidalswamps reclaimed and families settled by the Government during Repelita Iand Repelita II.

1.15 To overcome aanagement weaknesses in the transmigration program asa whole and to enable its expansion and acceleration, Presidential DecreeNo. 26 was formulated and issued on August 31, 1978 (para. 1.09).Principally this decree allocated responsibility for implementation to thevarious ministries ordinarily responsible for each sector, and thecoordination of implementation to the Junior Ministry of Transmigration(JMT). In the swamp reclamation program, where the canals are the communi-cation arteriee, various agencies within the Ministry of Public W7orks (para.4.01) are responsible for the implementation of the hydraulic infrastructureand land clearing; the Directorate General of Transmigration (DGT) isresponsible for housing, village development and settling of transmigrants,and the Directorate General of Foodcrops Agriculture (DGFCA) bears majorresponsibility to support agricultural development. To overcome technicaland administrative staff deficiencies in the impl+mentation of the transmi-gration program, the Bank, under Transmigration P....,ect II (Loan 170-919-IND) is now assisting a massive effort in institutional support, whichincludes the training of staff of participating line agencies, strengtheningof the coordinating capacity of the JMT and the capacity of DGFCA to deLiveragricultural supplies and services. A similar effort is planned under theproposed project to train the staff of implementing agencies to czr- aut thiereclamation and development program of swamp~z.

1.16 Agricultural Development. Agricultural production records ofswamp developments indicate that swamp soils, excluding deep peaLs anddrained and oxidized potential acid-sulphate soils are capable of producingfield crops and tree crops. Of ten Governmer t-sponsored projects developedduring the past decade and many small, older, spontaneous developments, onlyone has been practically abandoned when its potential acid-sulphate soilsbecame highly acidic and toxic as a result of overdrainage (Cinta Manis,para. 2.18). Ten years of farming at Upang (in a delta adjacent to that ofKarang Agung) under minimum water management and low inputs produced anaverage paddy crop of 2-2.5 t/:na of local and improved varieties and a testfarm, in the same area, produced more than 3.5 t/ha of improved ricevarieties under an application of 90 kg/ha of nitrogen fertilizers. Whilethese yields appear low compared to the 4-5 t/ha obtained on irrigated soilsin Java, they are well above the 1.7 t/ha yield of upland paddy with prcoperinputs, projected for upland transmigration developments. Upang'sexperience confirmed by other ongoing swamp developments, indicates the

- 7 -

Table 1.1: RECLAIHED AREAS AND SETTLED FAMILIES IN TIDE-AFFECTED SWAMPS /a

Area (ha) No. of familles

Repelita I (1969-73)

Sumatra Sumatra ~~~~~~~904 355

Jaml 6,802 2,584Cinta Manis 4,450 749Delta Upang 5,377 1,354

KalimantanTaraban Luar 3,705 1,252Tamban Lupak 946 421Barambai 4,200 890Jelapat 1,978 646Jejangkit 2,000 500

Total 30,362 8,751

Repelita II (1974-78)/

SumatraRiau 14,816 700Jambi 2,900 500Cinta Manis 1,634 500Delta Upang 3,046 1,000Telang 6,000 3,310

KalimantanRisan 4,380 1,050Arus Deras 7,047 1,550Tamban Luar 480 250Belawang 1,260 750

Total 41,563 9,610

Average yearly achievement: Repelita 1 6,072 i,750

Repelita II 8,31^ 1,922

/a Source: P4S and DGT records.

/b As of March 1978.

-8-

capability of swamp soils (with the exceptions stated above) to producecrops at moderate yields, giving settlers on small holdings in reclaimedswamps a reasonable financial incentive. It is not surprising thereforethat no difficulties have been encountered in mustering candidates fortransmaigration to reclaimed swamplands.

Project Formulation

1.17 The proposed project was identified by DGWRD and a joint Bank/FA0-CP and Government of Netherlands mission which visited Indonesia inFebruary 1976. As a result of- the mission, a master plan and feasibilitystudies for the reclamatf on of 200,000 ha of- tidal swamps in South Sumatraand Jambi and engineerint design of^an azea of 20,0D0 ha were financed underIrrigation Project VII (Loan 1268-IND). Additional funds were made availablein December 1978 under Irrfgation XII (Loan 1645-IUT) for mapping, detaileddesigns and construction drawings of Karang Agung, as well as for data col-lection, preliminary planning and feasibility studies of two other areas inSouth Sumatra (Lalang - 180,000 ha, hesuji - 50,000 ha) and one area inCentral Kalimantan (Sebangau - 120,000 ha).

1.18 The main objective of the proposed project, which is to reclaim andconvert swamps into agricultural land and settle transaigrants, is reflectedin its formulated hydraulic infrastructure which would include a navigationcanal and a network of drainage canals regulated by tertiary control strut-tures. The canals would evacuate excess surface water during the wet seasonand maintain optimal water levels for the cultivation of rice while fieldbunds and water levels controls on tertiaries would, during the dry season,prevent harmful overdrainage of peat- -X of potential acid-sulphate soils.The hydraulic system was originally planned to include dikes and a series oftidal and tertiary control structures but was modified to delete expensivetidal control structures and other dikes when it became apparent that about85% of the project area was above high tide levels, and river water, whichcould inundate about 15% of the a during spring tides to a maximum depthof 50 cm, was fresh year round.

1.19 Transportation in and out of the project area would be by navigationand the planned canal system would facilitate access by boats to settlements.In order to foster community activities which greatly contribute to a success-ful agricultural development, settlements would be compact and spaced close toeach other. This would result in a reasonably short distance between homesand services such as schools and clinics, and a distance of less than 2 kmfrom houses to farmers fields.

1.20 The management of implementing the proposed project, its infrastruc-ture acd settlement by a number of line agencies, a weak point in pastdevelopments, has been planned on the basis of past experience and improve-meats in the management of transmigration projects introduced under Transmi-gration Project II (Loan 1707/Cr. 919-IND). Coordination functions at thesite, in the region and at the central level have been defined (para. 4.04),steps taken to ensure suitable staffing, and a consultant has been provided toguide and assist in coordinating the implementation. The quality of landclearing, which in the past was usually unsatisfactory, would be improved as

- 9 -

under the proposed project transmigrants themselves would be engaged to cleartheir own farm plots (para. 3.06). With a vested interest in cleared plots,transmi.grants would be expected to perform better than transientlaborers did in the past, and the timing of the operation would close thetime gap between clearing and cultivation and prevent a regrowth of scrubbefore planting. Agricultural supports and services have been planned on thebasis of experience in nearby Upang, and would be provided under themanagement vehicle established under the Second National AgriculturalExtension Project (Credit 996-IND).

1.21 fhe size of the proposed projet- area .was limited-to a 9,00,O hablock which could be rapidly implemented and its innovations in projectpreparation and implementation readily employed in other Government swampxeclamation developments. Basically, agricultural development would focus ona wet-season, rainfed, rice crop planted on all field plots, and on a dry-season crop of other food crops on about 40% of the field plot area (para.3.03). A higher cropping intensity coluld be expected on about 15%- of theproject area, benefitting from tidal irrigatica and possibly on larger areas,by low-lift pumpage. However, benefits from such a development have not beenconsidered in the economic analysis.

1.22 The project has also been formulated to assist Government inbuilding its institutional capacity in order to cope with its targetedswamp reclamation program and this is reflected in the proposed technicalassistance in project preparation and implementation. Consultants wouldanalyze and address staffing requirements of participating agencies, and wouldtrain agencies- staff in reconnaissance investigatio-, :roject preparationand techniques of feasibility analyses, and in supervision of implementationof physical project works.

1.23 Tne following consultants assisted P4S i' "roject preparation:

EXSA International - Topography and MappingIPB - Institut Pertanian, Bogor: Soil and Agronomic SurveysITB - Institut Teknologi, Bandung: Master Plan and Engineering designSAE - Survey Agro Economi: Socio-Economic SurveysNEDECO - Dutch Consultants: Feasibility Studies, and general supervision

of engineering surveys, planning and design.

1.24 The formulation of the project is consistent with GOI and the Bank-sshort-term and long-term objectives and would assist the Government inmeeting national goals of providing productive employment, increasing foodproduction and promoting the development of the Other Islands. Though itwould not be a completely new type of development to the Government, whichis engaged in similar work in neighboring areas as w <1 as in Kalimantan, itwould be the first swamp reclamation development financed by the Bank,introducing upgraded techniques and institutional building thus assisting theGovernment-s efforts in implementing technically and economicallyfeasible swamp developments.

- 10 -

2. THE PROJECT AREA

Location

2.G1 The project area is situated about 70 km from the north coast ofSouth Sumatra, in the Musi Banyuasin district, about 80 km northwest ofPalembang. It is part of a flat, low-lying plain formed by marine andalluvial deposits. The Air Hitam, a small tributary of the Calik, andthe Tungkal-Tenggulan, both tidally affected rivers, border the area on thesoutheast and southwest respectively and slightly higher grounds border it cnthe north and northwestV. The -pro-jecttareaisunderdense scrub and secondaryforest which limits access to its interior.

Climate

2.02 The climate is typically tropical, hot and humid year round, withan average annual rainfall of nearly 2,500 mm. The wet season lasts fromOctober to April, with 15 rainy days per month and monthly rainfall rangingbetween 230 mm and 300 mm. The dry season lasts from May to September, buteven then rains ranging between 170 mm in May and 102 mm in July fall duringabout 8-10 days and heavy downpours are quite frequent. Table 2.1 showsmeteorological data of four stations located between 50-90 km from the projectarea. Rainfall is uniform over the project area, and weather patterns appearto be cyclic with dry years occuring about every four to five years.Temperatures, relative humidities and potential evapotranspiration (recordedat Palembang) are nearly constant throughout the year --d wind velocities arelow. Cloud coverage is also fairly constant, and bright sunshine prevailsmore than 50% of the time.

Topography and Soils

2.03 Most of the area is a flat, swampy, lowland plain, rising gently ina northwestern direction from an elevation of +3.10 m /1 to +3.70 m withminimal micro relief. River banks are slightly higher than the surroundingterrain, but semidetailed surveys did not discern the existence of large,permanently inundated, deep swamps. In the absence of internal waterwaysand of pronounced gradients, drainage is poor and portions of the area areperiodically inundated both as a result of rainfall and as a result of hightides reaching about +3.25 m./2

/1 All elevations calculated from Karang Agung-s Datum (Bench Mark PUTL 101,at Tangung Buyut) whose elevation is +1.930 m above mean sea level.

12 Spring tides reach an elevation of +3.58 m in the Calik-Tungkal River atthe eastern border of the project area where a proposed main navigationcanal would be connected to the river.

Table 2.1: METEOROLOGICAL DATA

No. ofyearsof data Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Total

Average Rainfall (mm)Stngeang 28 242 212 289 229 172 130 102 105 100 178 258 278 2,295

Bayunglincir 207 217 269 259 210 136 105 162 180 252 259 299 2,555

Sungai Gerong 23 270 225 323 287 194 99 107 100 74 158 252 302 2,391

(Palembang)Sekayu 29 329 250 350 309 195 127 99 148 160 266 285 344 2,862

Average No. of Rainy Days 15 12 15 15 10 9 8 8 9 13 15 17 -

DependableRainfall (mm)la 205 165 250 220 140 70 45 52 38 92 195 225 1,697

Temperature (0C)/a 26 27 27 27 28 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 -

Relative Humidity (%)/b 83 82 84 82 83 82 72 78 78 78 80 83 -

Wind Velocity (m/sec)/b 2.0 2.0 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 2.0 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 -

Sunshine (pct of day)/b 56 58 55 59 65 59 59 55 66 S8 60 48 -

PotentialEvapotranspiration (mm/day)/c 3.80 4.05 3.85 3.75 3.80 3.25 3.90 3.75 4.15 4.o5 4.00 3.68 -

/a At Palembang;equal to or exceeded 75% of the time.

lb Recorded at Palembang.

Xc Calculated by the modified Penman method.

- 12 -

2.04 Dominant soils covering nearly 80% of the project area, areperiodically flooded, tidal floodplain soils, composed of nearly ripe A1acidic sulfidic clays (cat clays)./2 In about 651 of the area they areoverlain by moderately decomposed acid peats 15-40 cm deep,and in about 15% ofthe area by similar peats up to 90 cm deep. River plain soils, consisting ofpoorly drained, nearly ripe acid clays, cover about 10% of the project areaand river bank and miscellaneous soils cover the remainder. These lattersails have a relatively high degree of agricultural potential for rice andpalawija,/3 and tidal flood plain soils have a moderate capability for thesecrops under controlled water management. Shallow peats, up to 90 cm i-nthickness, have a moderate to high capability of producing a variety of treecrops, including coconuts, and a moderate capability to produce rice. Peats,deeper than 90 cm, are considered' nonarable and have been excluded 'to the-extent possible in delineating the project area.

Hydrology and Hydrometry

2.05 Data on tides and salinities in the rivers surrounding the projectarea indicate a tidal fluctuation of 3.50 m and a considerable seasonal longi-tudinal movement of a saline, or brackish, front in the rivers. Table 2.2shows the tidal ranges observed during spring tides (highest monthly tides) ofthe wet and dry season respectively. Data recorded at CAL 2 reflect condi-tions near the project area. Based on these data and on friction losses inthe project-s hydraulic networks, the high water level in the center part ofthe project area will be about +3.25 a.

2.06 Table 2.3 shows the intrusion of salinity from ieasurements carriedout in 1977, during spring (maximum) tides and neap (minimuo) tide- 5-r totaldissolved solids (TDS), concentrations of 1,000 ppm 14 and 5,000 ppm rrom themouth of the Banyuasin River (the location of recorder BAN 1). Water contain-ing more than 1,000 ppm TDS would not be suitable for drinking while more thar5,000 ppm of TDS would rende- the water unsuitable for the irrigation of rice.Though these data are preliminary, requiring verification by ad& - !onal mea-surements during, at least, a 5-year cycle, they indicate a 60-km deep inlandintrusion /5 of the saline front during the dry season in the Calik Tungkal-Tenggulan river system under existing flows. The proposed connection of the

A1 The state of ripeness indicates the soil's softness, and consequently,its workability or tillage characteristic. Unripe soils are very softand practically nontillable.

/2 Because of pyrites these soils become very acid upon drying and arereferred to as potential acid-sulphate soils. They should be kept wet toprevent their acidification and loss of agricultural productivity.

/3 Other food crops.

14 ppm = parts per million.

/5 Measured from recording station BAN 1 located at the mouth of theBanyuasin River.

- 13 -

project's navigation canal to the Tenggulan river would be about 70 km froaBA,N 1 which would preclude the intrusion of brackish water into the projectarea.

Table 2.2: SPRING TIDE RANGES(meters)

River Calik Lalang BanyuasinRecording station CAL 1 CAL 2 JAL 1 BAN 1

Wet season - average 3.23 3.38 2.57 3.25maximum 3.69 3.59 2.77 3.82minimua 2.64 2.88 2.21 2.50

Dry season - average 2.94 3.04 2.57 2.93maximum 3.50 3.69 3.07 3.72minimuf 2.51 2.61 2.28 2.47

Table 2.3: SALINITY INTRUSION /a

(M)

Wet season Dry seasonRiver 1,000 pps 5,000 ppm 1,000 ppm 5,000 ppm

Calik-Tungkal-TenggulanSpring tide 45 37 60 60Neap tide 34 30 60 60

LalangSpring tide 53 43 60 50Neap tide 35 30 50 42

/a Measured from BAN 1.

2.07 The hydrologic, hydrometric, soil and topographic surveys confirmedthe following points:

(a) The proposed project area of 9,000 ha is not extensively anddeeply inundated. Only about 15% of it is up to 50 cm below hightide which limits the extent of tidal irrigation, but reduces theneed for protective dikes, eliminates the need for tidal controlstructures, and enhances the possibility of surface drainage.

- 14 -

(b) Surface drainage is required during the rainy season to removeexcess rainfall and accumulated river water from low-lyingareas. This can be achieved by a shallow, gravity drainage systemwhich will, however, have to be regulated, preferably at the farmand tertiary level to maintain an optimal depth of ponded water inpaddies during the wet season and to protect soils by preventingtheir overdrainage during the dry season.

(c) The intrusion of brackish water into the Calik Tungkal-Tenggulanrivers does not reach the project area-s southwestern border evenduring the dry season., Conneting .. the proposed..pro.jectw.&.drainage.-system to the river at that point would eliminate the need ofexpensive tidal control structures.

(d) 7Jnder controlled land development (minimum disturbance of topsoil)and controlled water management, the soils of the proposed projectarea are capable of producing rice, various field crops and treecrops.

Water Supply, Demand and Quality

2.08 A water balance for rainfed wet-season (six-month) rice crop and asecondary dry-season crop shows that under average rainfall conditions a wet-season rice crop and a dry-season secondary crop could be grown but waterdeficits could be expected to occur during the dry season in about 25% of theyears limiting the dry-season cropping intensity. The shortage of rain wouldcause a minor, gradual loss of peat top soil as a result of subsidence andoxidation./1

Drinking Water

2.09 Analyses of alternative drinking water supplies in the proposedproject area indicate that rainwater would be the most economic resource;groundwater could be more dependable, but its use would require investiga-tions before it could be considered. River water was found to bebacteriologically unsafe without treatment. Table 2.4 shows a water balancebased on dependable rainfall - as would occur 75% of the time, a potentialretention of rainwater from a 30 sq m roof (at a runoff coefficient of 0.85)and a minimum consumption use of 10 1/capita/day./2 Considering the deficitduring the months of July through September, storage of about 1,400 1 shouldbe provided to each household to ensure sufficient drinking and cookingwater during dry periods.

/1 A much greater loss could be expected if field bunds and tertiary controlswere not provided.

/2 10 1/capita/day has been considered the minimal requirement at nearbyUpang Delta for drinking and cooking.

- 15 -

Table 2.4: WAlER BALANCE FOR RAINFED HOUSEHOLD CONSUMPTIVE USE

Dependable Roof 'a Household /bMonth rainfall runoff consumptive use Balance

mm (cu m)

January 205 5.2 1.6 +3.6February 165 4.2 1.4 +2.8March 250 6.4 1.6 - +4.8-April 220 5.6 1.5 +4.1May 140 3.6 1.6 +2.0June 7) 1.8 1.5 +0.3July 45 1.1 1.6 -0.5August 52 1.3 1.6 -0.3September 38 1.0 1.5 -0.5October 92 2.3 1.6 +0.7Iovember 195 5.0 1.5 +3.5December 225 5.7 1.6 44.1

/a 85% of the rainfall from a 30 sq m roof.

/b Consumptive water use of a family of five based on 10 1/capita/day.

Population

2.10 Existing Population. The existing popllation of the district ofMusi Bany-uasin, in which Karang Agung is located, consists of three majorgroups: Malays - native to the province, Buginese - settlers originatingfrom the Bone listrict in South Sulawesi and migrating through large Buginesesettlements in Jambi province, Javanese and Balinese - chiefly concentratedin Government-reclaimed and settled swamplands (Upang, Telang, Cinta Manis).The population of Karang Agung (2,000 sq km) is about 12,000; approximately52% are Buginese, 40% are native Malay, and 8% are Javanese. Over half havesettled in Karang Agung within the past decade. The local clan (marga) seatsof Penuguan and Tungkal Ilir, with populations (including surroundingvillages) of 2,500 each, serve as marketing, processing and administrativecenters for the upstream portion of Karang Agung, and would provide thoseservices for the settlers in the proposed project area, which is unpopulatedat present.

2.11 Characteristics of Transmigrant Famiiies. A recent survey of theGovernment-sponsored transmigrants in the four main blocks of the nearbyDelta Upang swamp reclamation scheme shows a typical transmigrant family atthe time of settleme-it to consist of five persons; a husband and wife aged

- 16 -

35 and 29 years respectively, and three children aged about 10, 7 and 3years. Within ten years, a typical family has one more child. This impliesa family labor force of 1.7 adults in the year of settlement, increasingSJowly to about 4 labor units in the thirteenth year after settlement. Thiss-oall family labor force is a major factor in the slow pace of land&nvelopment in ongoing projects and explains the need for hired labor at peakscasons in initial years. the development of the settler family labor forceis analyzed in Annex 2, Table 8.

2.12 Migratory Labor. Large forces of migratory labor arrive annuallyfor the rice harvest in the reclaimed swamps of the district-from outside;the district (Lampung Province, the Ogan Komering districts of SouthSumatra the upland region of Pangkalan Balai and nearby fishing villages), andfrom upland areas within the district. These laborers, working on tradi-tionally large holdings of Malays and Buginese (who are heavily engaged infishing and forestry) supply about one-third of the total labor input.

Land Tenure

2.13 Control of land and resources is complex, with local and govern-mental syst-ms frequently operating side by side. The margas, traditionallycontrolling resources in Sumatra, grant land ownership rights for nominal taxpayments to marga members and land use rights to other, nonmarga settlers.They also control the planting of coconuts and other perennial crops on landto which ownership rights had not been assigned, and auction annually theexploitation of valuable common resources such as fishing grounds and theright to harvest nipah palm groves. Government, in coordination with themargas, grants timber concessions which now cover most of the primary forestsin the region. These concession agreements, however, are terminated byconversion of an area for transaigration following a mandatory minimum of oneyear-s advance notice to the concessionaire. The Government-s swamp recla-mation program has not caused serious conflicts with the local population/lbecause construction of na'rigation canals by the Government has opened uplabor opportunities and possibilities for settlement by local people, whilepublic services (health centers, markets, schools) have served also localresidents. The final step in the land tenure process, the granting ofofficial individual cadastral titles, has been largely confined to government-sponsored settlers.

2.14 Land tenure would pose no constraint for development as an area of1,500 sq km of Karang Agung has been declared a transmigration area /2 andthe proposed project area excludes settled lands along the river.

/1 Conflicts have, however, occasionally broken out between Buginese settlersand local communities.

/2 South Sumatra-s Governor-s Decrees #995/KPTS/I/1979 and I 1019/DPTS/I/1980.

- 17 -

Access, Services and Existing Developments

2.15 Access. All transport in the region is waterborne. The riversconnecting Karang Agung and Palembang 11 are plied by a varied, mostlyprivately owned fleet which includes commercial cargo and passenger riverferries of up to 50 tons capacity, sailing and rowing junks of 10-30 tonscapacity, motorized carrier vessels of 5-10 tons capacity and small speedboattaxis. Many settlers of established settlements own rowing or motorizedboats. All the major rivers have sufficient draft during low tide for theheaviest locally used barges, and river traffic is unimpeded year-round.

2.16- Supporting Services. Commercial facilities In Penuguan andTungkal Ilir are adequate to serve the proposed project area in the earlyyears. Both towns have daily markets and large-scale markets two days eachweek. There are 12 small private rice mills in Tungkal flir, one cooperativemill and two private rice mills at Penuguan. Nevertheless, about half therice surolus is shipped unhusked to Palembang. Cooperative marketing andagricultural input supply centers (BUbJD/KUD) are established in both towns,but have not yet made a major impact in the area. Agricultuzal extensionservices have been provided by one extension field worker (PPL)/2 who has beenvisiting the Penuguan area from the subdistrict capital once a fortnight mostof the year and has been staying in the area during the rice planting season.Technical backup for this PPL has been provided by a regional subject matterspecialist (PPS)i3 stationed in Sungsang, six hours downriver by boat. Theseextension services, insufficient for the proposed project, would be expanded(para. 3.03). Agricultural research, carried out presently at a station atUpang would be supplemented by a substation to be establ-ished in the projectarea. Education services are scarce in the project area. There are a fewelementary schools in the two marga villages with Government-supported schoolsserving indigenous and Javanese settlers and other schools operatedindependently by Bugiuese, whose teachers come from South Sulawesi and Jambi.The nearest secondary school is in Upang, but affluent families send theirsons to Palembang for secondary schooling.

2.17 Existing Swamp Development in Neighboring Areas - Delta Uoang. Thedevelopment of nearby Delta Upang 60 km downstream from Palembang on theestuary of the Musi River began in 1969. After initial difficult years, thearea is fairly well established now with over 2,300 Government settledfamilies and several hundred spontaneous Javanese, local and Buginese settlersfarming the land. Upang now has a market town and a full complement ofsocial, agricultural and commercial infrastructure. Land development, andparticularly tertiary development, is still proceeding.

/1 Palembang is the largest metropolis in the southern half of Sumatra witha population exceeding one million. It is the center of Indonesia's oilrefining and fertilizer industries and an important timber processingand shipping port.

/2 Penyuluh Pertanian Lapangan.

/3 Penyuluh Pertanian Spesialis.

- 18 -

2.18 Cinta Mauis. In 1971 an inland swamp at Cinta Man.s near Palembang,some 80 km from the coast, was reclaimed and settled, but failed to reach itsobjective of sustained agricultural production. The main reason for thisfailure appears to have been insufficient attention to soil constraints,manifested by a lack of water management which permitted soils to dry,oxidize and acidify. Cinta Manis is now populated by 750 Government-sponsored and 500 spontaneous settler families, most of whose labor forcework in nearby Palembang.

2.19 Telang Delta and Saleh Sugihan. The development of the Telang Ischeme, straddling the peninsula west of the Musi and east of the -TelangRiver, started in the mid-1970s and settlers have been arrivilg-As-ot-f98'.It has since accepted settlers at a faster pace: than any other swamp reclama-tion project In Indonesia, with nearly 3,000 families now established. TheTelang II project, on the peninsula to the west of Upang between the Telangand Banyuasin River estuaries, is in an advanced stage of land development.Some 6,000 ha at two developments at Air Saleh and Sungei Sugihan, east ofUpang, are being reclaimed and cleared to receive the first groups ofsettlers in 1980. P4S has excavated navigation canals across these deltaicislands and peninsulas improving access and transport to settlement areas,while facilitating spontaneous settlements along canal banks.

Existing Agriculture

2.20 At present, only a narrow strip of land along river banks on theperiphery of the project area is agriculturally developed. Buginese, whosettled this land spontaneously, grow paddy and fruits. A more intensepattern is observed at reclaimed swamps at Upang and Telang where settledtransmigrants cultivate fruit trees, cereals, vegetables and some rice inintensively cultivated houselots, while most of the rice is produced in farmplots, usually several years following settlement. Most farm plots have nowater level controls and as a result farmers are forced to transplant ricetwice in low-lying areas to protect the young crop from excessiveinundation. Nurseries are usually prepared around the middle of October,fields are prepared (with minimum hand tillage) till mid-December, andtransplanting takes place twice during December-January, The commonly usedlocal varieties require about 110-120 days to mature and are harvestedduring May-June. Farmers apply little or no fertilizers, pesticides orinsecticides. Paddy yields range between 2-2.5 t/ha, corn yields average0.7 t/ha, coconut yields average about 7,000 nuts/ha/year, and bananas about1,200 bunches/ha/year. In addition to growing crops, some farmersparticipate in a Government-supported cattle fattening program. TheInstitut Pertanian Bogor (IPB), under contract with P4S, operates a testfarm at Upang where fertilizer response and varietal trials have beencarried out for a number of years. The results of these trials indicate thatunder proper water management and fertilizers (mostly nitrogen), rice yieldsattain 3.5 t/ha.

- 19 -

3. THE PROJECT

Project Description

3.01 The proposed project - a low-cost swamp development scheme - wouldcomprise land reclamation, settlement of transmigrants and agriculturaldevelopment. It would include a system of open canals for surface drainage ofa gross area of 9,000 ha and for tidal irrigation of about 15% of this area.The canal system would evacuate excess surface water during the rainy seasonwhile- field bunds would maintain an optimal depth of water for rice <cultivation during the wet season, and, together with tertiary controls,would facilitate the maintenance of a high water table to prevent the dryingand oxidation of peats and potential acid-sulphate soil during the dryseason. The proposed project works Include the removal of trees and brush toclear a net area of about 7,200 ha, for division into about 3,200 house andfarm plots, the construction of housing, the clearing of about 420 na forvillage facilities and their construction, transporting and settling about2,800 families from Java or Bali and about 400 local families, and support-ing agricultural and community services. The project would include fourstudies, monitoring and evaluation and provide technical and institutionalsupport to the main executing and coordinating agencies P4S, PTPT,/l DGT,DGCK,/2 and JMT.

Project Works

3.02 The proposed project would include:

Hydraulic Infrastruetvre

(a) A navigation canal about 9 km long; about 6 primary canals of atotal length of about 24 km; about 102 secondary canals of a totallength of about 196 km; and about 185 km of tertiaries.

(b) About 204 km of small drains for about 100 hamlets.

(c) O&M roadways along the navigation and primary canals.

(d) About 800 tertiary control structures, 204 outlet structures forhamlet drains, 10 pedestrian bridges on the navigation andprimary canals, 102 pedestrian bridges on secondary canals, 100small jetties at hamlets, 2 navigation jetties and one primarycontrol structure to be built at the confluence of one primary canaland the navigation canal (para. 3.04).

/1 Directorate of Land Preparation for Transmigration Sectiement, Ministryof Public Works.

/2 Directorate General for Housing, Urban and Regional Development,Ministry of Public Works.

- 20 -

Land Clearance, Site Preparation and Housing

(a) Manual land clearance, including felling, cutting and burning oftrees and shrubs from about 7,200 ha and their subdivision into3,200 houselots of 0.5 ha each and 3,200 farm plots of 1.75 ha each(para. 3.06).

(b) Manual land clearance of about 420 ha for village facilities(paras. 3.18, 3.20, 4,lCG and 4.13).

(c) The construction of about 3,200 houses for transmlgrants and theprovision of about 22,400 barrels (7/family) or equivalent for thestorage of drinking water (para. 2.09).

Community Development and Settler Relocation

(a) Resettlement of about 2,800 families from Java or Bali and ofabout 400 local families wishing to settle in the project;

(b) Construction of community facilities in seven villages one of uhichwouo> be a mair, village, including six subhealth centers(sub-PiUSKESMAS) and one health center (PUSKESMAS), seven primaryschools, one lower secondary school, places of worship, a bank, anda market area. Construction of a base camp which would includequarters for construction supervisors, permanently stationed andvisiting officials.

(c) Provision of agricultural implements, and a subsistence food supple-mient over an 18-month period to all resettled families (para. 3.13).

(d) Malaria control in tne settlement area (para. 3.19).

(e) Procurement of boats, generators, telecommunication, miscellaneousequipment, and supplies (Annex 1, Table 10).

Agricultural Support

(a) Provision of rice seeds, vegetable and tree seedlings for homegardens, fertilizers and pesticides (para. 4.08).

(b) Provision of a properly staffed rural extension center (REC), aresearch substation, two warehouses, one small rice mill andoffice space (paras. 4.10 and 4.13).

Studies, Institutional Support and Monitoring

Provision of consultants to train and assist implementing agenciesin preparing an inventory of coastal and near coasta_. swamps, in

- 21 -

assessing the viability of upgrading existing swamp developments,in determining environmental Impacts in studying grouindwater avail-ability anid in monitoring the proposed development (para. 3.25).

Ag-ricultural Development

3.03 The agricultural development plan of the project area is based onthe cultivation of a rainfed wet-season rice crop progressively covering 100%of the area of all farm plots, and the cultivation of other food crops duringthe dry season (drawing on residual soil moisture) progressively covering40% of the area of all farm plots (para. 1.21). -Houselots would becultivated with a mixture of perennfal n aQnuat rcips. -The project(through DGFCA) would provide settlers with an initial seeds and agro-chemical package (para. 4.08). Extension services would be provided byDGFCA under the management vehicle established under the Second NationalAgricultural Extension Project (Credit 996-INWi) and research and varietaltrials would be provided by AARD. Sufficient funds are available under theSecond National Agricultural Extension Project and assurances were obtainedthat DGFCA would provide permaniently two middle-level extension workers(PPMs) and six field ex -nsion workers (PPLs) under the part-timesupervision of a subject matter specialist (PPS), and AARD would providepermanently adeqtuately trained staff, as required, to carry out agriculturalresearch.

Physical Development

3.04 The Hydraulic Infrastructure. The proposed project would be servedby a centrally located navigation canal and a network of primary, secondaryand tertiary canals. The navigation canal commencing at the Tungkal-TenggulanRiver at the southwest border of the project area would be excavated to-1.25 n (Karang Agung Datum) with 2:1 (H:V) side slopes and a bottom widthof 8 m. Six primary canals would branch off the navigation canal at rightangles, would each be about 4,000 m long, about 3-3.50 m deep (below averageground levels) and have a minimum bottom width of 1.50 m. Their crosssection area would be determined by drainage evacuation requirements and

their near horizontal bottom gradient would able two directional flow.There would be no structures at their confluences with the navigation canal(excepting one primary canal where a pilot tidal control structure would bebuilt) and hence water levels in canals would fluctuate with the tides.The canals would be passable by small boats most of the time except duringlow tides. Secondary canals would be constructed at a spacing of about 400m, perpendicular to primary canals, each extending for 2,000 m. Their crosssection would be determined by drainage evacuation requirements or by irri-gation requirements (for about 1,300 ha under the command of high tides).Navigation, primary and secondary canals would be mechanically excavated,

and if dredged, be properly drained in order to minimize damage to farmlandsfrom dumped, potentially toxic subsoils. Excavating equipment would befloated to the site on pontoons and, to reduce ground pressures, would be

- 22 -

operated from wooden mats. In view of the low consistency of excavatedsoils, the shaping of embankments would be deferred by 6-12 months(depending on rainfall) after excavation. Manually excavated tertiarycanals would be located along the boundaries of farm plots, and sized toevacuate 4.5 l/sec/ha./l At the turnout of each tertiary a stop logequipped wooden check would be built for the control of water levels.

3.05 Field Bunds. Bunds would be constructed along the perimeter offarm plots to facilitate the control of water levels in paddies during thewet season and prevent soil water depletion (by horizontal movement throughhighly pervious peats) during the dry season. They would project about 30ca above ground, founded on cThy 'sbsoiEs, oe 40 cm below groundsurface, and have an average cross-sectional area of about 0.28 sq m.

3.06 Land Clearing. About 7,200 ha would be cleared manually for culti-vation and settlement and 420 ha would be similarly cleared for villagefacillties. This activity would include felling and cutting up of trees,/2removal of swamp brush, windrowing and burning of all wood not usable in theconstruction of houses. Felling and cutting would be done by workers usingchainsaws, axes and handsaws. Based on experience in ongoing clearingoperations at nearby Telang, about 65 man-days would be required to clear 1 haof which 30 man-diys would be expended by chain saw teams (each consisting ofI skilled operator and 9 unskilled workers) to fell and cut trees; 30 man-dayswould be required to cut secondary growth and shrubs, and 5 man-days would berequired to burn the nonusable wood. Before the arrival of the transmigrants,a strip of about 400 m on either side or primary canals would be cleared fortransmigrants hamlets by a contractor using imported laborers, while threemonths after settling transmigrants would be employed (by a contractor) toclear their farm plots (para. 1.20).

3.07 Subdivision. Subdivision into plots would be carried out afterland clearing, and a peat survey, which would exclude from development anyplot in which the depth of peat exceeded 90 cm./3 Taking advantage of theflat terrain, the area would be subdivided into rectangular blocks boundedby secondary canals. Each secondary block would be subdivided into a 16 ha(net) hamlet area located near primary canals, and a net farm area of 56 ha.

/1 This rate was calculated from a design storm of 134 mm, recurring on theaverage every 2 years. Excess surface water would be evacuated frompaddies in less than 7 days under prevailing tides.

/2 But not destumping so as not to expose potential acid-sulphate subsoils.

/3 Although semi-detailed soil surveys already excluded most areas of deeppeats from the proposed development, this survey would ensure that nofarmers would be settled on isolated pockets of deep peats.

- 23 -

3.08 Houses and Couunity Facilities. About 3,200 settlers housesmeasuring approximately 34 sq i each (to BAPPENAS standard) would be builtof local wood on 0.5 ha houselots in about 100 hamlets located along primarycanals. Seven barrels or their equivalert would be provided to each settler tocollect and store about 1,400 liters of rainwater for drinking and cooking.Sanitary facilities (pit latrines) would be provided for each house at aminimum distance of about 15 m. About 14 hamlets would be served by onevillage where a primary school of six classrooms (para. 3.20), a healthsubeeater (para. 3.18), a place of worship, a village office, -a storage areaand staff houses would be constructed - Thet-e"'wou6dId" li t&taT tfsven- villages, one of which would be a main village with expanded administrationfacilities, a primary and a l.ower see2ondary school, a health center, plots forartisans wishing to settle in the area and space for a market place.

3.09 Base Camp and Associat-J FacilXties. A base camp would be buIltnear the planned inlet of the navigation canal, to house constructionsupervision and management staff./l This camp would include offices, messhalls, living quarters, well water supply, generating and communicationfacilities. At the completion of construction, the camp would be used tohouse permanently stationed 0&M staff and visiting officials.

Settlement

3.10 Settlement of transmigrants under the proposed project would followprocedures employed in other transmigration projects including recruitment,selection, transport, provision of tools, subsistence supplies, assistance andguidance during and after settling.

3.11 Recruitment. Recruitment of transmigrants should pose no particu-lar problem as more than 500,000 families in Java and Bali have registered fortransmigration. GOT criteria assigns priority to recruitment from:

(a) ecologically threatened areas;

(b) areas in the which population density exceeds 1,000 persons/sq km;

(c) nonarable areas;

(d) areas subject to recurring disasters;

(e) areas made uninhabitable by development projects (Q.g. reservoirs);and

11 Exclusive of contractor's personnel whose accommodations and officefacilities would be Drovided by the contractor adjacent to the base camp.

- 24 -

(f) the poorest Kecamatans /I of each Kabupaten./2

3.12 Selection and Transport. The selection process ensures, inter alia,that transmigrants are of reasonably good health, between 25 and 40 years ofage, are legally married and have had previous agricultural experience.Transmigrants would be transported to the project area at a targeted rateof about 128 families per month or at the actual rate of the construction ofhouses and the availability of provisions and support services.

3.13 Provisions. Prior to disembarkation, each family would be given astandard package consisting of mosquito netting, sleeping mats-andcooking utensl-ls- Upon arrival at; the -stite-,Aacifatt-woii reee-agricultural implements, saws and barrels, or equivalent to store drinkingwater. In addition, each family would receive the first of 18 monthlysubsistence rations, containing essential foods and kerosene./3 Specifically,a monthly ration would consist of 50 kg of rice, 5 kg of dried fish, 8 litersof kerosene, 3 kg of sugar, 2 kg of salt and i kg of soap.

3.14 Training. Settlers would be given information by DGT on thecharacteristics of their new environment, on agricultural production,marketing, use of local resources, appropriate technologies, health, educationand village participation. Javanese women who traditionally sharedecision-maklng and responsibilities for agricultural production and marketingwith their husbands would be given information on credit, cooperatives, landtitles and cooperative conmunity work.

Commuaity Develonment

3.15 Once transm4grants are on site, DGT would coordinate and promotecommunity development which would include:

(a) registration of new arrivals and settling them on assigned plots;

(b) disseminating economic and social information to settlers;

(c) stimulating the organization and growth of village level administra-tion;

(d) facilitating the establishment of village development organizations;

(e) record keeping;

/1 Kecamatan: Subdistrict.

/2 Kabupaten: District.

/3 The duration of the subsistence may be extended under adverse conditions(crop failure, etc.).

- 25 -

(f) preparation of transfer of communities to provincial adudnistration.

3.16 DGT, in cooperation with the Directorate General of Agrarian

Affairs (DGA), would provide each family with right of use title (hak

pakai) to their houselot and to their farmplot, within one year of arrival.

-t twould provide the migrants with land ownership title (hak milik) to all

their land, provided it was farmed, witiin five years of their arrival onsite. In accordance with existing regulations, transmigrants would be

prohibited from transfering or selling land within ten years after occupancy.An assurance was obtained at negotiations that each settler would receive a

certificate evidencing:v

(a) "hak pakai to his land within one year; and

(b) -hak milik- to all his land within five years after hisarrival on site.

3.17 Health. The objective of the health component would be to: (a)

protect new transmigrants from the risk of malaria; (b) establish a basic

health infrastructure; and (c) insure start-up and utilization of services

by providing incentives. Health care facilities would be provided at the

health center and at the subcenters (para. 3.02). Health services with a

prinmary health care approach would focus on immunization, nutrition, healtheducation, family planning and environmental sanitation. The project wouldalso provide for malaria control campaigns in the settlement areas.

3.18 Health Center arnd Subcenter. Construction of a health center

-(PUSKES.MAS) at the project's main village would follow establfshed LNPRES

standards and include a building of 80 sq m, one separate area of 70 sq i

for doctors- quarters and two staff buildings of 50 sq m each. The health

center would be provided with three sptedboats. In each of the other six

villages, the project would establish a subhealth center comprising one

examination room, sto-eroom, etc. (30 ssi m) and one staff building (50 sq a).

An assurance was obtained from GOI that the first subcenter would bebuilt, equipped and staffea before the settlement of the first transmigrants

and the other subcenters, and centers, as villages are built.

3.19 Malaria Control- In view of malaria endemicity and the sus-

ceptibility of nonimmune settlers, the project would provide for malariacontrol campaigns which would include spraying of houses, the detection ofpassive cases and treatment. In general, the control component would try toreduce malaria prevalence within five years to about 2% during the peaktransmission period. Houses would be sprayed before settlement and atsix-month intervals by hired spraymen and squad leaders. Passive case

detection and treatment would be carried out by the health centers.

Technical supervisior of the campaign would rest with the malaria staff atthe district level, while the provincial health service would administer it.

- 26 -

3.20 Education. The project includes the construction of primaryschools (grades 1 to 6) in each of the six villages, and a primary and alower secondary school (SMP, grades 7 to 9) in the main village. TneMinistry of Rome Affairs would supervise the construction of the primaryschools; the Directorate General of Education would supervise theconstruction of the lower secondary school, and be responsible for staffingall schools.

Status of Field Data, Planning and Design

3.21 Field Data

(a) Topography and Mapping. Aerial photos to a scale of 1:20,000,ground controls and mosaics were prepared for all of Karang Agungs200,000 ha in 1976. Ground surveys were carried out alongpenetration axes opened at 1,000 m intervals which served as basisfor a 1:50,000 topographic map. Subsequent surveys discerned errorsin spot heights but due to difficult access to the densely coveredproject area and time constraints, the 1:50,000 map was used in theMaster Plan and feasibility studies. In 1978, an additionaltopographic survey was carried out along planned alignments of thenavigation and primary canals, serving the 9,000 ha proposed projectarea. This survey, correcting earlier errors. led to the deletionof originally planned ring dikes and tidal control structures (para.1.18), to the realignment of one primary canal and also served forquantity and cost estimates of proposed works. Detailed surveys forsubdivision and tertiary design would be carried out after theclearing of land.

(b) Hydrometry. Tidal levels in the river system surrounding KarangAgung have been recorded since June 1977 under a Dutch-assistedprogram (P4S-BTA60) (para. 2.05). After resolving a differencebetween the hydrometric and the topographic data base, high andlow spring tides of +3.58 m and +0.08 m, respectively, have beenused in designing the hydraulic system.

0c) Soils Si-rveys A semi-detailed soil survey for the whole KarangAgung are. of 200,000 ha was based on data obtained from samples

-en along' penetration axes mentioned above. Soil classificationwere prepared from these data and the interpretation of-' pnotos. Areas of deep peats (in excess of 90 cm) were-ded from development, but a supplementary detailed peaty would be carried out during implementation to avoid

-tting people on deep peats, unnoticed in past investigations..ata. 3.07).

Master Plan and Feasibility Studies. Master plan and feasibi-'ity studies of Karang Agung-s 200,000 ha were carried out during 1976-78 andan area of about 110,000 ha was found suitable for agricultural development.

- 27 -

3.23 Design and Contract Documents. Engineering designs of the hydraulicnetwork and physical plans of the proposed project area were completed by theend of 1979, prequaliflcation of contractors in September 1980, and contractdocuments for the main and secondary hydraulic network in October 1980.Designs were based on the Master Plan, and revised in accordance withadditional topographic alignment surveys. They include plans and profiles ofnavigation, primary and secondary canals, typical designs of bridges, jetties,tertiaries and tertiary structures, quantity and cost estimates. Plans are ofsufficient detail to serve as contract drawings. Construction plans fortertiaries would be prepared following clearing and surveys.oLfarnareas=..

Implementation Schedule

3.24 With already completed designs, prequalification of contractors,and contract documents for the main and sezondary hydraulic network,implementation would start in mid-1981 and continue till the end of 1985(Figure 3.1) mainly by three line agencies (para. 4.01). Most activitieswould be carried out in parallel, to facilitate an early settling of peopleaad an early commencement of agricultural development. As an innovation,transmigrants themselves would be employed iP land clearing and on-farmdevelopment (para. 3.06) which has been reflected in the implementationschedule. Should this arrangement be unsatisfactory, the schedule would berevised to allow for contractors to employ imported laborers (from Java) forthe completion of the~se works. This, however, should not affect the overallimplementation schedule and project cost estimates (para. 3.26). Main andsecondary hydraulic systems would be constructed mechanically (para. 3.04),and other works would be constructed manually. Starting with the excavationof the navigation canal, the excavation of primary canals woul5 begin as soonas the excavated navigation canal reached their branch-off points to befollowed in a similar manner by the construction of secondary canals. As soonas work progress permitted, hamlet strips would be cleared and housescoi2structed for transmigrants at a rate of at least 128 units/month. Themoving and settling of transmigr4nts would start about one month aftercompleting the first group of 128 houses and would continue at this rate orthat of housing construction. About three months after arrival on site, eachgroup of settlers would be employed (by a contractor) to clear their farmplots. At a conservativelv estimated rate of 65 iandays/ha, this work wouldrequire an average of 120 days by each settler. The operation would becarried out progressively by each newly arrived group of settlers, until allfarm plots would be cleared, which would take about .wo years. After landclearing of each block, the area would be surveyed, subdivided and plansprepared for tertiaries. Settlers would be employed in constructingtertiaries and field bunds during the year following settlement.

Consulting Services

3.25 Services of local and internationally recruited consultants would beprovided to assist and train implementing agencies (P4S, DC Cipta Karya, PTPT,DGT and JM`T) to carrv out designs, construction supervision and management,and a number of studies. These services would include:

- 28 -

Project Implementation

Training and assisting:

(a) P4S in field surveys, final construction drawings, tertiarydevelopment, contract documents, construction supervision andconstruction management;

(b) DG Cipta Karya in subdivision work and in designing ruraldevelopments;

(c) PTPT in supervising and managing land clearing=

(d) DGT in supervising construction of houses, villages and communalfacilities; and

(e) JMT in programming and coordinating project implementation.

Studies, Investigations and Monitoring

Training and assisting:

(a) P4S in conducting a nationwide inventory of coastal and near-coastalswamps and in ranking their development;

(b) P4S in conducting an investigation of existing swamp developments toassess the viability of upgrading their infrastructure or supportservices;

(c) P4S in conducting an environmental impact study of selected swampdevelopments;

(d) P4S in conducting a groundwater investigation at Karang Agung; and

(e) P4S, DGFCA and DGT in monitoring the physical, ecological andsocio-economic impact of the proposed development.

Assurances were obta'ned at negotiations that consultants whose qualifica-tions, experience and terms and conditions of employment would be acceptableto the Bank, would be engaged by P4S for itself and for DGCK, PTPT, DGT, andby JMT. Foreign consultants for .JMT would be provided by modifying the termsof reference of consultants already engaged in the Transmigration Managementand Monitoring Services (financed jointly by UNDP and the Bank). All otheforeign consultants would be engaged by P4S. Local consultants for projectimplementation and for studies (except for monitoring, where eachparticipating agency may hire its own consultants) would be engaged byP4S. Consultants assisting P4S and DGCK in project implementation would beengaged by March 31, 1981, those assisting PTPT, DOT, and JMT would be

- 29 -

engaged by March 31, 1982. Consultants for studies (a) (b) and (c) abovewould be engaged by January 31, 1982, for (d) by March 31, 1982 and for (e) byOctober 31, 1984. The estimated schedule of consultants' assignments and costbreakdowns are given in Annex 1, Tables 8-9. Estimated base costs are givenin Table 3.1.

Cost Estimates

3_26 The total project cost is estimated at US$44.6 million (includingtaxes on civil works, physical contingencies and expected price increases), ofwhich-US$18.9 million (42%) is the foreign currency component-.-Project.costs.are expressed in end-1980 prices; unit costs of civil works have been based onsimilar costs in outlying areas, land clearing costs on contract prices inneighboring Telang and Saleh Sugihan (using Javanese laborers). Ouantitiesfor the excavation of the navigation and primary canals are based on detailedplans supported by alignment surveys, those of secondaries and tertiaries, onaverage ground surface elevations. Costs of houses have been based oncontract prices in neighboring areas without discounting any lumber whichwould be available from land clearing. Costs of community facilities, schools,health centers, etc., have been based on BAPPENAS standards and unitconstruction costs obtained in similar projects. Costs of relocating andsettling of transmigrants have been derived from similar projects. Estimatedmonthly base costs of local and foreign consultants are USS2,062 and USS12,100respectively for engineers and US$660 for technicians and draftsmen, similarto recent contracts in Indonesia. A 15% allowance for physical contingenciesand an additioral allowance for expected price iacreases, calculated onproject- t .u=-_al local cost inflation of 15% during 1981 and 10% duringfollowing years and on annual foreign cost inflation of 9% during 1981, 8%during 1982 and 7% thereafter, have been added to project costs./l Details ofproject costs are given in Annex 1, and summarized in Table 3.2.

Financing

3.27 The proposed Bank loan of US$22 million would finance the foreignexcharge cost of US$18.9 million and US$3.1 million of local costs. Thiswould amount to about 50% of total project costs exclusive of taxes. Theremaining Rp 14,125 million (US$22.6 million) would be provided by GOT throughannual budget appropriations.

Procurement /2

3.28 Civil Works. All mechanically constructed werks which would in-clude the excavation of the navigation, primary, and secondary canals,clearing of right-of-way, blockage of creeks, and construction of the basecamp, bridges, jetties, and the tidal control structure, would be groupedinto one contract (US$6.3 million) and tendered on the basis of international

/1 As base costs are for end-1980, only half of t.he expected 1981 inflationrate was applied.

/2 All contract values presented in this section are expressed in basecosts in end-1980 currency values.

Table 3.1: CONSULTING SERVICES

Man-montlhs Base CostsLocal Local Local l.ocal

Expatriate engineers technicians Expatriates/a engineers technicians Total----------- (US$ million)

Project Implementation

Responsible agency: P4S 76 168 336 0.92 0.35 0.22 1.49DCCK 60 180 - 0.12 0.12 0.24PTPT - 40 80 - 0.09 0.05 0.14DGT - 32 64 - 0.06 0.04 0.10JMT 36 /b - - 0.44 - - 0.44

Subtotal 112 300 /c 660 /c 1.36 0.62 0.43 2.41

Studies & InvestigationsResponsible agency: P4S 225 576 7Le 1,152 /e 2.72 1.19 0.76 4.67 o

Total 337 876 1,812 4.08 1.81 1.19 7.08

/a 75% of this cost would be in foreign currency.

Lb The consultant would be recruited from the same firm presently engaged to assist JMT in monitoring andmanagement.

/c To be provided by one local firm (or consortium).

/d To be provided by one firm.

/e To be provided by one local firm (or consortium) and by local universities.

Table 3.2: PROJECT COST SUMMARY /a

Local Foreign Local Foreign

cuirency currency Total currency currency Total

- (Rp million) - ------- (US$ million) -------

I. Project ImplementationReclamation & site preparation /b 3,326 4,108 7,434 5.32 6.57 11.89

Eqtlpment & supplies - 245 245 - .39 .39

Settlers relocation & settlementliouses and village facilities /c 1,873 468 2,341 3.00 .74 3.74

Services, equipment, supplies 1,376 1,039 2,415 2.20 1.66 3.86

Consulting services 894 613 1,507 1.43 .98 2.41

Agricultural supports 36 36 72 .06 .06 .12

II. Studies & InvestigationsConfulting services 1,641 1,277 2,918 2.63 2.04 4.67

Eq iment, supplies & training - 875 875 - 1.40 1.40

.,tal Base Cost 89661 17,807 14.64 13.84 28.48

Administration 1,389 - 1,389 2.22 - 2.22

Physical contingencies 1,580 1,299 2,879 2.53 2.08 4.61

Expected price increases 3,946 1,843 5,789 6.31 2.96 9.27

Grand Total 16,061 11803 2786 25.70 18.88 44.58

/a All costs are in end-1980 prices.

/b Including land compensation and 5% taxes on civil works.

/c Including 5% taxes on civil works.

- 32 -

competitive bidding (ICB) in accordance with Bank Group Guidelines. The aboveworks include -.ll t e equipment-intensive elements in the project. All remain-ing wcrks, which would be heavily labor-intensive, would not be appropriatefor ICB and hence would be tendered on the basis of competitive biddingadvertised locally in accordance with Government procedures acceptable tothe Bank./l Among these, the following works would be procured as follows:

(a) clearing of houselots and construction of houses and villagefacilities (US$5.1 million) would be grouped into no more thanfive packages, each consisting of land clearing and houseconstruction; and

(b) construction of tertiary drain structures and hamlet drainoutlets (US$0.7 million) would be grouped into three contracts.

Under these conditions, threshold estimated contract values of civil worksrequiring Bank review prior to tendering and award would be US$1.5 million.

3.29 Contracts for clearing of farm plots US$2.2 million; on-farm works(excavation of tertiary drains and construction of field bunds, US$0.8million) would also be inappropriate for ICB as they would be implementedemploying transmigrants, would not attract international bidders and hencewould be procured under competitive bidding advertised locally in accordancewith Government procedures acceptable to the Bank. To better synchronizethe clearing of houselots (managed by PTPT) and the construction of houses(managed by DGT), and to facilitate the use in construction of any usabletimber from clearing. 9-' two agencies have agreed to advertise and evaluatebids jointly and award each package to one contractor.

3.30 Equipment, Materials and Training. A total of about US$2.0 mi_lionworth of equipment and materials (including aerial photography and the provi-sion of drilling esr-pment, supplies and training) would be procured under theproject (Annex 1, Table 10) in addition to US$0.4 million of farm tools andsupplies to settlers. Of this, boats, radios, generators, lab and testingequipment (US$1.25 million) would be procured by P4S under ICE. A preferencelimited to 15% of the c.i.f. price of imported goods, or the customs duty,

whichever is lower, would be extended to local manufacturers of such items inthe evaluation of bids. All remaining equipment and materials could not begrouped in packages sufficiently large to attract international bidders andhence would be procured through GOI procurement procedures acceptable to theBank. Under these conditions, threshold estimated contract values ofequipment and material requiring Bank review prior to tendering and awardwould be $200,000.

/1 In mid-1980 Government introduced local procurement guidelines whichincluded measures to strengthen indigenous, small, contractors bypromoting their participation in Government sponsored work in theirdistrict. These procedures will permit efficien.t procurement under theproject.

- 33 -

3.31 During negotiations for the fourteenth (Loan 1811-IND) andfifteenth (Credit 995-IND) irrigation projects, ar. understanding was reachedwith GOI on the use and content of standard contract documents for civilworks and equipment to be procured by ICB. The understanding on the use andcontent of standard contract documents for locally advertised competitivebidding was reached in September 1980. It is expected that implementingagencies will use standard General Conditions in their contract documents.

Disbursements

3.32 Disbursements for equipment and materials required for constructionsupervision and for studies would be at the rate of 100% of the foreignexchange costs of directly imported equipment and materials, /1 95% of theex-factory cost of locally manufactured equipment and materials. Funds forremaining equipment and materials would be provided fully by GOI_ Disburse-ments for civil works would be made only against the 1CB contract and theLCB contract for land clearing of farnplots (specified in para. 3.28), atthe rate of 100% of total expenditures, with direct disbursement to thecontractors. Funds for remaining civil works would be provided fully byGOI. Disbursements for consulting services, for project implementation /2and for studies 13 would be financed at a rate of 100% by the Bank.Assurances were obtained at negotiations that the Government would commencethe groundwater investigation by March 1982 and monitoring by June 1984.Estimated schedule of expenditures and disbursements and the proposedallocation v_A loan nroceeds are presented in Annex 1, Tables 2, 4 and 5.

Accounts and Audits

3.33 Assurances were obtained from GGI that: (a) all implementingagencies would maintain separate accounts for the project; (b) these accountswould be audited by independent auditors, acceptable to the Bank; and(c) these audited accounts would be s4t.zitted to the Bank Group within sixmonths of the close of each fiscal year together with the auditor's commentsand opinion.

Environmental Effects

3.34 The environmental impact of swampland development, especially inSouth Sumatra, has been studied by the Center for Natural Resources Management

/1 Except for equipment and materials required for an investigation ofgroundwater and monitoring which would be wholly funded by GOI.

12 Except for consultants for DGCK who would be financed from fundsprovided under Irrigation XII (Loan 1654-IND) and consultants forDGT who would be financed by the Government.

/3 Except for an investigation of groundwater and monitoring of theproject. The Government would fully disburse the cost of consultantsfor these activities.

- 34

and Environmental Studies of Bogor Agricultural University which concludedthat if mangroves were preserved in coastal areas, the reclamation of swampswould have little adverse environmental effects. P4S follows this directivein the ongoing swamp reclamation program. There is, however, a need tocollect additional data on water quality and soil productivity in settledareas. The proposed project would study these aspects in a number of on-goingdevelopments and in the project area itself (para. 3.25).

4. ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

ene~rai

4.01 The organization and management of the proposed project has beenformulated in line with GOI policies entrusting the implementation ofproject components to line agencies normally responsible for those activities.On this basis, three line agencies would implement the physical componentsof the project: P4S would implemernt the hydraulic infrastructure; PTPTwould implement land clearing; and DGT would be responsible for theconstruction of houses, village facilities, tr?nsport and settlement oftransmigrants, and coordinate social services for a period of about fiveyears. Subdivision would be supported by DG Cipta KaTya which would planvillages and DGA (Directorate General of Agrarian Affairs) which wouldsurvey and register titles to individual plots. Agricultural support to theproject would be given by DGFCA from inception and throughout the lfe ofthe project. In response to the needs nf this multiagency operation, linesor authority and responsibility have vee. defined and specific coordinationresponsibilities delineated at various activity levels.

4.02 Field Operations. The first agency in the field would be P4S, whosesite manager would supervise the co^--truction of the hydraulic system and itsrelated structures. As other operations would depend on the progress ofthis construction, closely following it, the Government agreed to entrust !-hefield coordination of all other activities which include land clearing,housing, and settlement of people to the P4S site manager until thecompletion of main and secondary hydraulic infrastructure, in the fourthconstruction year. The supervision of each of these activities would,however, rest with the site manager of the respective responsible agency-Thus from the second construction year, PTPT-s site manager would supervisethe clearing of houselots and farm plots, while DGT-s site manager wouldsupervise the construction of houses and village facilities, the supDly ofprovisions and the settlement of people, and coordinate the field activitiesof settlement supporting agencies (IXFCA, Ministries of Health andEducation). The latter would take over the coordination of all fieldactivities from P4S- site manager after the completion of the main andsecondary hydraulic network and until handing over the administration of the

-35 -

axea to local authorities. An assurance was obtained from GOI that P4Swould post their site manager by March 31, 1981 and that PTPT and OGT wouldpost qualified and experienced site managers by January 31, 1982.

4.03 Regional Operation. Contract management and back-up services to":>ld operations would be handled by regioaal offices of participating linea;esz1es, lcated at Palembang, and coordinated by a Regional Coordinatorirs, the Junior Minister of Transmigration-s Office. This official wouldisoc coordinate the implementation of other Bank-supported transmigrationprojects in the region. His main function would be to follow closely theprogress of contracning and implementation- of physical works and to plan and.regulate the flow of transmigrants to the project area. Re would coordinatethe services to be rendered by regional agencies including tK H4inistries ofHealth, Education and Agriculture and would report monthly progress ofoperations to the Junior Minister of Transmigration, alerting him of anyshortcomings or potential bottlenecks in the operation which may requireintervention at headquarters of line agencies or ministries. An assurancewas obtained that this official would be appointed by December 31, 1981.

4.04 Headquarters Operation. Headquarters of line agencies would planthe implementation of components of the project for which they are respons-ible. Each agency, assisted by consultants, would prepare plans, designs,contract documents, budgets, and assuming complete control of the qualityand timely completion of its contribution and operations of its regional andfield staff, take immediate action in case of slippages. The coordinationof headquarters activities would be .he responsibility of the ProjectCoord>,r ~in the Office of the Junior Minister of Trausmigration, who hasbeen designated under Transmigration Project 11 (Loan 1707/Cr. 919) tofulfill this function for all Bank-supported transmigration projects.

4.05 To strengthen project coordination furtner, a consultant would beengaged to advise the Project Coordinator, Regioaal Coordinator and theon-site field coordinator. The consultant, who would be recruited from thoseengaged by the Junior M-irtister of Transmigration (para. 3.25) would assistin preparing timetables, follow up on implementing procedures, alertparticipating or supporting agencies on actions to be taken, advise onremedial action in case of slippages and establish a streamlined mechanismof information exchange and decision making to reduce the workload imposedby this and other projects. The consultant would also assess the manpowecneeds of participating agencies to execute GOI-s targeted swamp reclamationprogram and propose a staffing recruitment program.

4.06 Annual implementation timetables would be prepared at the headquar-ters of participa.ing line agencies in close collaboration with regionalmanagers, reviewed jointly and adjusted. An integrated timetable would thenbe prepared by the Project Coordinator and budgetary allocations based on it.Each agency would be responsible for updating its work program on a monthlybasis and communicating any significant changes to the Project Coordinator

- 36 -

who would then readjust the integrated timetable in cooperation with otherconcerned agencles. Critical slippages would be brought to the immediateattention of all agencies, which would adjust their operations accordingly.

AgricriAtural Support Services

4.07 The Ministry of Agriculture (MOA), Bank Rakyat Indonesia (BRI) andDirectorate General of Cooperatives (DGC) would provide the agriculturalsupport to the proposed project. As these agencies have presently no faci-lities in the area, the provision of necessary infrastructure and facilitiesfor their staff would be constructed as part of, community facilities. Theagencies would mobilize and prepare their--staff- to "Artrve in the area duringthe settling of transmigrants.

4.08 Seeds and Agrochemicals. DCFCA would supply each transmigrantfamily upon arrival with an initial seed package of food and vegetablecrops and perennial seedlings .or their home gardens. Additionally, inthe first year of settlement DGFCA would supply 150 kg of urea, 100 kg of?SP, 4 liters of insecticide and 1 kg of rodenticide (Table 4.1). rhe initialseed package would contain sefficient food crop and vegetable seeds to enaLlea farmer to repiant part of his area should he experieuce a crop failure inthe first year. DCFCA would ensure that inputs are made available to farmerswhen needed.

4.09 Seed FarEs. The central seed station (Kebun Benih Sentral) in SoutSumatra in cooperation with CRIA would be responsible for production of foun-dation seeds. Two seed farms, one in Upang (10 ha) and one presently underconsti-<ction in Telang (25 ha) would produee stock seeds. Prior to theestablishment of a network of seed growers in the project area the bulk of thextension seeds would be produced by the two seed farms. Assuming farmerschanged rice seed every fourth season, the annual demand for certified seedwould be about 50 tons and the agricultural office would coordinate its supplfrom the seed farms by alerting them six months in advance of actual s,aedrequireme.nts. REce and sezondary food crop seeds would also be available frothe Palembang Estate and seed farms in Java.

4.10 Agricultural Extension. A rural extension center (REC) would beconstructed by DGFCA under the Second National Agricultural Extension Pro ct(Credit 996-IND). Two middle-level extension workers (PPMs) and six fieldextension workers (PFLs) would be appointed to provide extension services tofarixn2rs in the -roject area. As the local agroclimatic conditions differ frothose at the transmigrants- place of origin, PPLs would advise farmers onvarieties, cultural practices and pest control (para. 3.03). The subjectmatter specialist (PPS) stationed at Sungsang would make fortnightly visitsto the REC to train the PPLs on production techniques developed for swamps atUpang-s test farm. He would also plan and supervise verification trials infarmers- fields, familiarize himself with the production constraints in theproject area, and participate in adaptive trials with research staff at theproject substation (sec para. 4.13).

-37 -

Table 4.1: INITIAL SEEDS AND AGROCHEMICAL PACKAGE

TotalTotal/family Unit cost cost

1. Seed and PerennialSeedling Package

A- Food Crops (kg) (Rpfkg) Rp)

Rice 50 220 11,000Corn 3 150 450Soybean 1 500 500Groundnut 10 500 5,000Mungbean 1 350 350Cassava 500 (cuttings) 3 1,500

B. Vegetables (g) (Rp/g)

Chili 25 10 250String bean 50 3 150Miscellaneous 25 5 125

C. Perennials (No.) (Rp/unit)

Jack fruit (plants) 4 200 800Banana (suckers) 10 250 2,500Papaya (seedlings) 10 250 2,500Pineapple "slips) 25 50 1,250Coconut (seedlings) 15 700 10,500f -ffee (seedlings) 15 250 3;'750Clove (plants) 4 350 1,400

Subtotal 42,025

2. Agrochemicals (kg) (Rp/kg)

Urea 150 120 18,000TSP 100 115 11,500Pesticide (liter) 4 6,500 26,000Rodeaticide 3,000 3,000

Subtotal 58,500

Total 100.525

38

4.11 Farmers- Cooperatives. The DGT would construct two warehouses,one of 50 sq a for fertilizer storage and one of 100 sq m for grain storage;a 500 sq a drying floor; one small rice will (1-2 ton rice/day); one 30 sq arice mill shelter; and 15 sq m office space for the KDD (village un-itcooperative). The DGC would be responsible for tralning and staffing theKUD with qualified personnel, and maintaining the village cooperativeinfrastructure until the KlD is able to operate and maintain it on its own.

4.12 BRI. The Bank Rakyat Indonesia (BRI) wouid staff one village unit(VU) bank in the main village of the project area. BRI would provideshort-term production credit under the BIMAS program through the VU. -

4.13 Research. AARD would be responsible to fund and carry out researchin the project area. A research substation (20 ha) adjacent to the REC wouldbe e6tablished under the project. The facilities would include one 20 sq mgeneral laboratory cum office, one 20 sq m store, one 70 sq A house and one 50sq m house. The substation would be provided with field, laboratory, offlce,and meteorological equipment; furniture; field inputs; bicycles and a speedboat. Research and support staff would undertake testing of availablecropping patterns developed for swamps and modify them to suit local needs.Research would be aimed at developing appropriate and feasible farmingpractices for transmigrants and would include food crops, tree crops, cattleand poultry. The siting of the research substation and REC in the same areaand sharing of common facilities would encourage closer interaztion betweenresearch and extension personnel and ensure a two-way flow of information.

Operation and Maiw--=nce (O&M)

4.14 The hydraulic infrastructure (navigation, primary and secondarycanals) would be maintained by the regional office of the Public WorksMinistry (DPU) at Palembang, after a two-year 'running in period followingcompletion of construction during which P4S would train DPU staff inmaintaining and operating the infrastructure. An O&M office would beestablished at the base carp of the project area three years after the startof construction. As the small size of the proposed project would not justifythe acquisition of costly draglines, manual labor would be employed wherefeasible, supplemented by DPU-s own equipment or contract work. Assuranceswere obtained from GOI that sufficient funds would be provided for operationand maintenance, half of them by August 15 of each year, and the other halfin two installments until all budgeted amounts have been made available,that a detailed annual O&M plan be worked out, the first by May 31, 1984and that a project O&M office be staffed with qualified personnel by May 31,1984.

4.15 On-farm works, tertiaries and farm bunds, would be operated andmaintained by the settlers with P4S assistance. Common elements of villagesand hamlets such as hamlet drains and outlets would be maintained by theresidents of each hamlet, as done in other ongoing developments.

- 39 -

4.16 Public buildings (schools, health centers etc.) constructed by DGT,vould be operated and maintained by the appropriate ministries. The Ministryof Religious Affairs would supply religious leaders to places of worship ineach village. The Directorate General of Education (Ministry of Education)vould supply teachers and would supervise school curricula. The DirectorateGeneral of Community Health would supply staff and equipment for the sub-centers and the health center, and would arrange for malaria control, andnutrition activities. The Ministry of Home Affairs would appoint villageheads and arrange the integration of the project-s new villages Into theexistiag administrative structi-re, after DGT completes its adfinistration,about. five years after settlement starts.

4. 17 Agricultural support services would be operated and maintained byDGFCA-s annual budgets. Facilities and equipaent of village cooperatives,constructed by DCT, would be transferred to DGC, DGT, which would operate andmaintain them until cooperatives become financiaUy viable. The management ofco-ops would be turned over to their aembers, who would appoint staff for thatpuxpose. The infrastructure would be turned over to KUDs, who would maintainIt and its equipment from earnlngs generated by its activities.

Mozm1toring and Evaluation

41-i Implementation Monitorng8 The implementation of the proposed-advelopment would be monitored and evaluated by the Regional Coordinator atPalembang, focussing on the technical and administrative performance of eachparticipating agency and on identifying factors constraining the attainment oftimetables or causing cost overruns_

4.19 Physical, socioeconomic conditions of the proposed development andits ecological impact would be monitored by P4S, DGFCA, DGT, and DC Fisheriesfrom fifth implementation year and on. An assurance was obtained from GOIthat it would provide funds, staff and equipment required for monitoring forfive years and report its findings annually. Monitoring activities wouldfocus on the following subjects:

(a) operation and maintenance requirements of the hydraulic system;(P4S)

(b) cropping patterns and their response to soil-water management;(DGFCA)

(c) changes in water quality in the systems serving the project areaand in the neighboring river system; (P4S)

- 40 -

(d) subsidence of soils; (P4S)

(e) changes in soil fertility; (DGFCA)

(f) effects on fish; (DG Fisheries)

(g) the incidence and prevention of pests; (DGFCA)

(h) actual farm budgets and farm incomes; (DGFCA),

(1) off-farm activities; (DGT) and

(j) development of villages and of supporting and administrativeservices (DGT).

5. AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION

5.01 The project would bring into agricultural production aver 7,200 haof presently undeveloped swamp land, allocated to 3,200 settler families onthe basis of 2.25 ha per family. While the total land allocation per familyis the same as in ongoing swamp reclamation schemes in the region, theportlon allocated to the houselot would be enlarged from 0.25 ha presentlyallocated to houselots in other projects to 0.5 ha, and the field plot wouldbe reduced to 1.75 ha. This innovation is based on the repeated observationin the older schemes that the houselot- is rapidly put into intensive year-round cultivation, often with higher value crops, while the e'-ltivation offield plots, at some distance from the house, invariably lags. There areseveral reasons for this, the first being that a mother with small childrencan much more easily work within eye and earshot of the house than at adistance. The second reason is that work in the houselot avoids the timeinvested in walking to the field plot and back, and is particularly amenableto short period investments of labor. Finally, houseplots naturally benefitfrom improved pest surveillance and from fertilization by household wastes.The size of the houselot is limited, however, by the goal of providingnucleated settlements for purposes of providing efficient access, social andagricultural services, and coEmminity life.

Cropping Patterns

5.02 Based on previous experience, the houselot will be used for amixture of annual and perennial crops, while the field plot will be usedexclusively for annual crops. Bouselot crops grown in existing areasinclude wet rice (during the rainy season), corn, soybeans, coconuts,banaaas, cassava, taro, various beans, tobacco, peanuts, pineapple, sweetpotatoes, and various tropical fruits, depending on farmer preferences,

- 41 -

skills, and price expectations. To simplify the agricultural and economicanalyses, it is assumed that the hboxselot would be divided into 0.25 hadevoted to annual crops (wet rice in the rainy season, corn in the dryseason) and 0.2 ha to perennials, represented by 0.1 ha of bananas and 0.1ha of coconuts. It is assumed that cultivation and planting of the entirehouselot would take place within the year following settlement, asexperienced in other projects and due to the fact that bouselots would becleared before arrival of settlers.

5.03 Starting about three months after their arrival, settlers woulddevote at least one full dry season to participating in the clearing offield plots (para. 3.06). Thus, settlers would --not- be -expected- to cowenee-planting of these plots until between 6 and 15 months after their arrival.Planting of field plots would begin with a wet-season rice crop, assumed tocover only 60% (1.05 ha) of the plot area allowing for space taken up byunburned stumps, logs, roots, windrows, and other debris. The proportion ofthe field plot devoted to wet-season rice is assumed to approachprogressively 100% over the next four rainy seasons, as woody materialsgradually decompose or are burned and chopped away. The assumption of wet-season rice monoculture is in accord with both past experience and theappropriateness of this crop to the climate, soil, topography, and plannedwater regime of the project area, in the context of smallholder settlement.

5.04 A departure from, or acceleration of cultivation practices inongoing developments is projected in regard to an expected relatively rapidinitiation of a dry-season upland crop (soybeans) in field plots. In ongoingdevelopments, this cultivation has been hampered b-u lack of moistureduring the dry season, the widespread presence of uncultivable deep peats,and attacks by pests from uncleared belts of forest intersectingagricultural areas. The proposed project differs importantly fromother developments in the following aspects:

(a) an improved measure of water control with water level controlstructures on tertiary drains and clay-to-clay field bunds toprevent overdrainage during the dry season, as well as the poten-tial capability to irrigate 15% of the area through tidal action;

(b) the intentional location of the project in an area without deeppeats; and

(c) clearing of the entire agricultural area during the constructionphase, relieving the settlers of subsequent years of difficultclearing work without adequate tools, organization and direction;also, the moderation of the pest (rats, boars, birds, insects)menace by clearing the entire area.

Given these improvements, it is assumed here that IOX of the field plot willbe planted to a dry-season upland crop two years after settlement, rising

- 42-

progressively to an intensity of 40Z over the subsequent four years. Ahigher final cropping intenslty is unlikely due to moisture deficiencies(para. 2.08).

Cropping Calendar

5.05 Farmers would be expected to grow wet-season paddy from October toJune. Depending on available rainfall, seedlings would be transplantedbetween December and January and the crop harvested fros May to June.Secondary food crops would be grown from June to October. The planting offood crops in houselots would follow the same cropping calendar as for farmplots. Perennial tree crops and tropical fruits would- be- established in- the-ehouselots soon after settling. The proposed cropping calendar shown inFigure 5.1 was based on climatic considerations and on demand and supply oflabor for each operation (Annex 2, Table 7).

Yields

5.06 Projected initial and final agricultural ylelds and periods ofyield development are presented in Table 5.1 below:

Table 5.1: PROJECTED AGRICULTURAL YIELDS

Crops Initial yield Final yield Development period

Houselots

Paddy (tons/ha) 1.0 2.6 8 yearsCorn (tons/ha) 0.6 1.2 6 yearsCoconuts (nuts/ha) 1,500 8,500 14 yearsBananas (bunches/ha) 600 1,200 7 years

Field Plots

Paddy (tons/ha) 1.2 2.4 7 yearsSoybeans (tons/ha) 0.5 1.0 6 years

Assumed yields and their development over time are based on actual experiencein nearby areas of potential acid-sulphate soils, particularly in the olderblocks of Upang, where agricultural development has proceeded for abcuteight years. Details of yield development and assumed input usage by yearare presented in Annex 2, Table 11 for a representative settler family, andon an aggregate basis for each crop, taking into account the phased arrivalof the settlers, in Annex 2, Tables 3-7. Assumed input usage is actuallygreater than present settler practice and should enable settlers under thepresent project to achieve higher final yields over the long term,

- 43 -

particularly of paddy. Asstmptions of slow buildup of yields and croppingiatensity attempt to give adequate weight to the typical difficulties facedby settlers anywhere, including the coastal swamp region of SumAtra, inconverting rough scrub-covered terrain into agricultural land. The pecullardifficulties faced by settlers in the swamps include the control of soilaoisture to prevent soil toxicity, and an almost total reliance on manualcultivation and handsLashing of weeds, as the soils in the region would notsupport conventional four-wheel or pedestrian tractors or even draft animalsuntil several years of cropping and drainage have passed. Erosion by wateror wind, a comon problem in the uplands, would not be a factor here.

Productlo_

5.07 Assumed production buildup of the various crops is presented inthe respective Annex 2 tables. Production and bc1me consumption at fulldevelopment is summarized in the following Table 5.2.

Table 5.2: AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIONI

Productlon at full Estimated settlerCrop development consumption Year

Paddy (tons) 15,520 4,000 1992corn (tons) 960 600 0i4tSoybeans (tons) 2,240 300 1992Coconuts (nuts) 2,721,000 1,750,000 1999Bananas (bunches) 382,000 290,000 1992

Thus, by the 1990s the project area is expected to ship about 12,000tons of paddy (7,300 tons of ailled rice), 2,000 tons of soybeans or othersecondary food crops, a million fresh coconuts and 90,000 bunches ofbananas (representing a variety of fruits) to food deficit points in theregion, chiefly to Palembang (para. 6.01).

Drying, Storage, and Processing

5.08 Farmers would be expected to sun-dry paddy in houselots and on matsand store dry paddy in their bouases. The BUUDs/KUDs would be equipped withconcrete drying floors (para. 4.11), and private millers or traders, expectedto move into the area, would also provide paddv drying facilities. Theproject would provide a warehouse suitable for grain storage, while millingfacilities would be provided chiefly by private millers (para. 2.16).

-44-

Livestock and Fisheries

5.09 The Directorate General of Animal fusbandrv (DGAH) is consideringthe introduction of cattle fattening and breeding on a credit basis toInterested farmers. The cattle could be fed in part with some of theabundant weeds, and their nanure could be used to fertilize houselots. Asthis scheme would be expected to be limited in its initial scope, nospecific actions need be taken under the project and no benefits were takeninto account in calculating project benefits.

5.10 Fishing would be expected to be an important activity of thetransmigrants both for the supply of protein as well as -a. source. of. incOAe..Fishing areas would be in the estuaries of the rivezs and in adjacent man-groves and would be leased from the narga at annual auctions. The projectitself would not include a special fishery component, as standing waterbodies in the project area would be drained, and fishing in the drainagesystem could not compete with fishing in the nearby rivers.

6. MARKET PROSPECTS, PRICES, FARM INCOMES AND PROJECT CHARGES

Market Prospects

6.01 Dle to its size and the effective demand generated by its largegrowth industries, Palembang is, and would continue to be, the major marketfor all surplus produce of the project area. Although there are secondarymarkets close to the project area, particularly Sungsang, the ys- of mostagricultural products are set by the demands of Palembang. These prices arein many cases much higher than elsewhere in Indonesia, due to Palembang'slocat0on in the middle of extensive swamplands, far from major agriculturalsurplus regions. This is particularly true for products which are notmarketed or regulated by the Government-s logistics agencies, such ascoconuts, bananas and other fruit. For example, coconuts are currentlyshipped fresh and unhusked to Palembang from the project area for a qu.aysideprice of Rp 100 (US$0.16) per nut, and bananas fetch an average of Rp 625(US$1.00) per bunch for the same market. Soybeans and corn, which are alsonot yet effectively covered by a Government procurement system, are alsorelatively high priced in the swamp region at about Rp 250 (US$0.40) and Rp90 (US$0.14) per kg, respectively. The local prices for most othercommodities which would be produced on houselots (para. 5.02) exceed thosein Java, and farmers apparently experience no difficulty in selling thesecrops to traders even in small volumes.

6.02 Both Sumatra as a whole and South Sumatra Province in particularare rice-deficit areas, with the total deficit of the province estimated atover 100,000 tons of rice per annum or 20Z of provincial consumption. Asidefrom Palembang itself, 7 of the provinces 11 districts must import ricefrom the 4 surplus districta in the province (MUsi Banyuasin providing

- 45 -

about 30,000 tons per annum), from surplus districts in neighboring provin-

ces, and from overseas. At the margin, project area production would substi-tute for foreign imports, a major agricultural policy goal in a countrywhich in recent years has been the largest rice importer in the world.

6.03 Alongside the thriving private marketing channels described above(paras. 2.15-2.16), project area farmers would have access to the Governmentlogistical system which supports producer prices for paddy and, eventually,for corn and soybeans as well. Under the system, the village cooperatives(KUDs) function as purchasing agents for the Government-s food procurementauthority (BULOG/DOLOG), which maintains a floor price for paddy throughoutIndonesia. This is currently Rp 105 (US$0.17)/kg for 14% moist paddy. Therecently instituted BULOG support prices for soybeans and corn (Rp 210 andRp 70 per kg respectively) are below the actual market prices prevailing inthe region, and are thus anticipated to exert little influence on farm-gateprices in view of the small impact of the production of the proposed projecton local markets. The BULOG rice price is expected to serve as a goodIrdicator of actual farm-gate prices, particularly once new KUDs are estab-lished in the proposed settlement area. DOLOG, BULOG-s subsidiary in theprovince, would arrange the transport of paddy purchased by the KUD from thelocal KUD warehouse to its own warehouses in Palembang.

Prices

6.04 Farm inputs and outputs have been valued in terms of constant 1980currency values for both the farm budgets and economic analyses. For rice,soybeans, corn, and fertilizers, projections of economic prices were based onworld market price forecasts produced by the Bank-s Commodity Division,adjusted for transportation, processing, and handling costs down to thefarm-gate level (Annex 2, Tables 1-2). For coconuts and the local varieties

of bananas, which are sold fresh to the regional market, actual currentfarn-gate prices were used for the 1980 base year, adjusted Gver time

proportionally with Bank projections of world market copra and bananaprices. The economic prices of agrochemicals (insecticides androdenticides) have been assumed to remain constant i- real terms, whileeconomic prices for seeds and coconut and banana planting materials havebeen assumed to vary proportionally with the prices of the respectiveagricultural outputs. In order to value the project output of paddy, it wasassumed that 30% of such output would be milled into high quality rice (5%brokens); 50% into medium grades (25-30% brokens) valued at 75% of highquality; and 20% into low grade rice (42% brokens) valued at 60% of high

quality. A unit of project rice output would thus be valued in ec--omicterms-at 80% of the world market price for 5% brokens. The economic pricefor paddy at the farm-gate would, on this basis, rise from US$230/ton in 1980

to US$270/ton in 1990, in constant terms.

6.05 Ristorically, the Government has followed a policy of keepingconsumer food prices low by selling imported rice below its cost and keepingdomestic floor prices low. To mitigate the effect of this policy on farm

- 46 -

income, the Government has simultaneously subsidized fertilizer, pesticides,and seeds. In the last five years, however, GOI has substantially raiseddomestic floor prices to encourage paddy production. This change in policy,combined with the fall of world prices from the record levels of 1973/74,has brought farm-gate prices fairly close to world market levels, taking intoaccount the quality differences. It is assumed that the BblOG floor pricefor paddy will continue to rise with the world market price, moving propor-tionally closer to it over the coming decade.

Farm Incomes

6.06 For farm income analysis a'detailed year-by-yeartmodel (Annnex 2,'Table 12) has been prepared for a representative settler family arrivingduring the second half of 1983. The cropping pattern and agriculturaldevelopment of this family farm (Annex 2, Table ll) is similar to thatdescribed in Chapter 5, and its supply of casual labor for wages (Annex 2,Table 9) and engagement of hired labor would follow the pattern discussedin paras. 7.05-7.09. The model shows that the family requires considerablesubsistence assistance in the first 18 months of settlement, as its firstsmall crop of paddy in the houselot would not be harvested until May/June1984, followed by a small secondary food crop (corn) in the houselotharvested in September/October 1984, and augmented over that period byearnings of between Rp 36,000 (US$58) and Rp 68,000 (US$109) for 45 to 85days of labor on land-clearing and drain excavation operations. Estimatedconservatively, earned income during the first year of settlement couldamount to no more than Rp 76,000 (US$122), fa-m below the bare subsistencelevel of Rp 110,000 (US$176) the family survived orn before it migrated.During the second year of settlement the family would initiate planting ofthe newly cleared field plots, with the first large rice crop ready forharvest in May/June 1985. Thus, until this time the family would requirethe subsistence provisions provided under the project (para. 3.13).

6.07 The end of the second year of settlement should see the familyin a markedly improved agricultural and financial positio., Its first largepaddy crop should be harvested, the 1,640 kg of paddy harvested being about600 kg greater than the familys annual subsistence needs. Secondary food

crop production (corn and soybeans, or equivalently cassava, peanuts, sweetpotatoes, taro, beans, vegetables, etc.) should roughly equal householdconsumption, while rapidly maturing fruits (bananas, pineapples) should bemeeting a large part of family needs, as should houselot poultry flocks andpart-time fishing in the nearby rivers. The household at this stage would belargely self-reliant for food except for meat, and should have a net annualcash income of about Rp 140,000 (US$220), half from labor earnings and halffrom paddy sales, to purchase supplemental food, clothing, other consumergoods and agr'cultural inputs. Subsequen, years should witness a rapid

growth (24% per annum) in the gross financial value of farm cutput, from Rp

269,000 (USS430) in 1984/85 to Rp 958,000 (us$1,530) in 1990/9i. Net familyincome, including labor earnings and payments for agricultural inputs andland taxes, would rise at a slightly slower rate (19%) over this period,

from Rp 326,000 (US$520) in i984/85 to Rp 9i0,000 (iUS$1,460) in. 1990/91.

- 47 -

6.08 Settler family income would continue to rise slowly after 1991,as slowly maturing tree crops in the houselot (e.g. coconuts, fruit,cloves, coffee) come into full bearing, and particularly as maturingchildren engage more heavily in labor activities off the family farm or getmarried and form new families and farms of their own. The maximum settlerfamily net income, before departure of adult children, about 12 years aftersettlement, would be about Rp 1 million (US$1,600) for a family of sixmembers, or Rp 167,000 (US$267) per capita, in 1980 currency values. Thislevel of income would compare favorably with incomes of settlers in othertransmigration areas.

Project Charges

6.09 As in all of the transmigration projects, settlers would pay notaxes or project charges until DCT transfers administration of settlements tothe Provincial Government, about five years after settlement. After that,settlers would pay a national land tax (IPEDA), at a rate calculated on thebasis of the assessed 'with project- land capability and productivity. Inaddition, settlers would operate and maintain all tertiary and hamlet drainsystems. This arrangement is similar to that in effect in irrigationprojects, with the exception of the initial grace period, which in this casewould release transmigrant settlers from financial obligations during theirsettling period. The land tax would contribute towards the operation andmaintenance costs of the main and secondary systems and as it is assessed as apercentage of the estimated value of farm production, it would increase ascrop yields rise. At full agricultural development, IPEDA would reach anestimated Rp 9,000/ha or Rp 19,800 (US$32) per settler farm. GOI has tieddisbursements under its local infrastructure development program (INPRES) toIPEDA collection and as a result IPEDA collection, as observed elsewhere inIndonesia, is expected to be high.

6.10 In calculating cost recovery, all administration, infrastructure,land development and settlement costs, and physical contingencies have beenincluded; on the basis of these costs the recovery by IPEDA taxes yields acost recovery index of 2%. The rent recovery index is 11% (Annex 2, Table13). These rates, which are quite low if one considers only projects in Java,are in liae with those obtaining in other transmigration projects (5% costrecovery for Transmigration II Project - Loan 1707/Cr. 919-IND) and withthose in new irrigation projects in the Other Islands (3% cost recovery forIrrigation Project XV, (Cr. 995-IND). They are justified considering presentand projected income levels of settlers in this project, which are and willremain below present and projected critical consumption levels (assuming anaverage growth rate of 4.5% per annum)./l It would be counter productive tothe Government-s efforts to resettle people from Java if they were to be taxedin resettlement areas more than farmers in other parts of Indonesia, wherelands are better and agricultural risks are much lower. As a matter ofpolicy, the Government has not contemplated recovery of costs intransmigration projects; considering the low income projected and the personalrisks entailed, cost recovery during the initial years of settlement not onlywould be unjustified on equity grounds but could also prove a disincentive toparti- ipation.

/L Real consumption expenditure of the bottom 40% of the population isexpected to increase at 3.5% to 5.5% annually.

- 48 -

7. BENEFITS, JUSTIFICATION AND RISKS

7.01 e.it benefits to be derived from the project depend to a largezxtent ou -. ;e wiay the settlers respond to the opportunities and challengesoffered then by the project, particularly in regard to water management, theloice of c:ops to be cultivated, the intensity with which they cultivate

the land, the range or inputs, and the amount of off-firm work engaged induring the long slack seasonrs when available labor supply exceeds thepro,ect area's own agricultural demands. The latter is a benefit of theproject, as the proJect its-lf locates the settlers in a region where laboris scarce and seascual wages in agriculture, forestry, fishing, construction transport and other activities are much higher than in Java/Bali.

7.02 The benefits of timber extraction facilitated by improved accessprovided under the project, which are qiite important in many settlementprojects, are negligible here due to the location of the project in an areaof secondary forest and scrub, and are not accounte' for in this analysis.The social benefits of establish5ng self-reliant land-owring farmers fromdependent, economically marginal families are also not accounted for,although they are significant. Independent surveys of established settlersin nearby swamp reclamation projects, including some where agriculturaldevelopment has been unsatisfactory, indicate that an insignificantproportion (2%) of the settlers leave a project area, and that nearly all(99%) of those who remain feel better off than in their areas of origin,which must reflect improvements in both their Financial and social status.In general, the economic behavior of the settlers unde: the present projecthas been projected on the basis of surveys and observations of older projectareas in the region (paras. 2.17-2.19).

Benefits

7.03 The pattern and pace of ptojected agricultuiral development of thesmallholdings, and final yields, production and input usage are discus-d InChapter 5 and derailed in Annex 2, Tables 3-7. Yield development andincreases in 7set-season rice cropping intensity have been estimated on thebasis of trends in the region. The agricultural model is based on fivecrops whi-ch are well known to the settlers, without livestock; in factcropping patterns will be more complex as individual farmers adopt differentcrops which provide even higher returns.

7.04 As presented in Annex 2, Table 10, rice is the agricultural linch-pin of the proJect, both in the early years, when it provIdes over 75% ofthe net agricultural production benefits, and at full development, when itstill provides over 67% of such benefits.!L A dry-season upland crop (corn)

/1 This, despite the fact that all hired labor required by the farms i-sascribed to rice production (Annex 2, Table 3).

- 49 -

on :7alf the bouselot area provides small but early benefirs, typical-lysubsistence food for the wet season, while in the longer term, thedevelopment of tne dry-season crop (soybeans) in the fields contributes 15%of total agricultural benefits. Among the houselot perennials, a mixture isprojected of early producincg crops (bananas) and those with a longermaturity per-tod (coconuts) requiring considerably less labor.

Labor Costs a -1 Benefits

7.05 Settler labor figures in the economic analysis of this project asboth a cost and a benefit. The- apportunity. cost of. settler labor throughoutthe project period has been assumed to be equal to their Incomes in theirpoint of origin, as the project itself would remove the settlers from theJava/Bali labor force. On the basis of recent suirveys, these incomes areestimated to average annually Rp 110,000/family (US$176/family)_/1 Realvages are assumed to remain constant over time, in accord with severalvillage-level sociological studies in Java which have indicated this to Fetrue dturing the past decade. However, it is assumed that the opportunitycost of settler family labor increases over time (Ainex 2, Table 9) as thechildren mature and reach the age when they would have entered the labormarket in the home region. In the economic analysis, it is assumed that thechildren t-'ould have earned the same real wages as their parents, agriculturalor casual laborers.

7.06 The employment pattern in the settlement area represents a familiarcycle. In the early years (1982-85), there will generally be an excess ofsettler labor over and above the requirements of the slowly de--oping farms.By 1985/86 new settler arrivals will cease, and most of the settlers will beattempting to cultivate most of their land during the wet season and to ini-tiate dry-season cropping on a portion of the field plots, in additior. tointensive cultivation of the houselot. At this point, the need for hiredmigratory labor during the peak seasons (May/June for harvesting the ricecrop and planting the soybean crop, November/December for transplanting therice crop) commences, reaching a peak of i27,000 man-days in 1987/88 anddeclining to zero in 1991/92 (para. 7.07; Annex 2, Table ). Increasingfarm labor requirements over time follow from -he gradually increasingintensity of land use, including the houselots, to a maximum of 153% at fulldevelopment, in 1990/91. Requiremsents for hired labor were determined onthe basis of a monthly analysis of settler labor supply and demand for thevarious arriving groups. Family labor supply development was based on Annex2, Table 8, while farm labor needs were derived from the scheJule presentedin Annex 2, Table 7 and the hectarage of various crops presented in Annex 2,Tables 3-6.

/1 This could be earned typically by 160 days of labor by the father atRp 500/day (US$0.80/day) and 120 days of labor by the mother at Rp 250/day (US$0.40/day).

-50 -

7.07 The settler family labor force increases Inexorablv overtime (Annex 2, Table 8) as the children mature- Vhile considerablesettler surplus labor is available during the slack months (particularlyJuly-September and February-April) of even the busiest years, the lack ofneed for any migratory hired labor during the peak operations after 1991 isan indication of considerable underemployment of the family on the farmitself after that year. Tle key parameters are obviously the assumed familysize (four children) and the amount of land given to a family. While alarger farm plot would provide more on-farm employment in the long run, itwould also reduce the total number of families participating in thetransuigration program, demand increasing (and perhaps unfeasible) numbersOf migratory laborers during the peak seasons of the middle years, andrepresent a poorer return on investment in opening up the settlement areadue to slower increases in intensity of land use.

7.08 The farm size and agricultural model presented here, which provides516 days of productive employment /1 per farm per annum at full development,Ss considered a reasonable resolution of these tradeoffs. The maximumcalculated amount of hired migratory labor required during the single peakmonth of the development period (58,000 man-days in June 1988, equivalent to1,000 migrant families) is estimated to be feasible at the margin, given thevery large flows of migratory labor in the region (para. 2-12). The finalfarm income provided by the model is reasonable in the Indonesian context.The total investment of settling one family on 2.25 ha of reclaimed swamps isaDout USS7,300 (in end-1980 prices), including the cost of infrastructure,site preparation, settling, supports and physfcal contingencies, and is closeto that of settling a family on 2.25 ha of cleared uplands. 7tal landallocation is similar to that in other transmigration projects thus fittingthe Goveruimert-s overall program. Finally, the pace of agriculturaldevelopment and cultivation of the land is both feasible and economicallyattractive (para. 7.11).

7.09 Given the agricultcral model discussed above, settler familieswould engage in a consi-ferable amount of nonfarm work in slack agriculturalseasons, and the rev.ards of this labor are accounted as benefits due to theproject (Annex 2, Tables 9-10). In the first instance, each settlerfamily head would be offered the opportunity to work at least 130 daysduring the first two years after settlement on land clearing and drain andbund construction within his settlement block. Contracts for thoseactivities would specify the payment of Rp 800/day (US$1.28) for settlerlabor, which is considered a fair estimate of agricultural wage rates in theKarang Agung region, and which is used in the economic analysis for bothpeak-season labor hired by the farm and for all off-farm work by settlers.Javanese laborers working with contractors, and local people and trans-migrants working with timber and construction companies generally earn muchmore, typically between Rp 1,200 (USSI.92) and Rp 1,800 (US$2.88) per day,

JI Valued :n economic terms it an average of Rp 2,125 (US$3.40) per man-dayequivalent.

- 51 -

but this work involves weeks or months in remote jungle far from families,and entails more hardship- After the first two years, settler families areassumed to work an average of 50 days per year off-farm during their slackperiods until about 10 years after settlement, when grown children are assumedto begin to engage heavily in off-farm work (fishing, logging, work in lumbermilLs and in transport) helping on the family farm oaly during peak seasons.This projection accords closely with observed practice, except that itabstracts from eventual formation of new families aad new farms by grownchildren, which is economically much aore attractive than wage labor.

Investment Costs

7.10 All project base costs and related physical contingencies, includingthose of infrastructure, settlement, subsistence provisions, administration,

and consultants working on project implementation, were included in the costsfor the purpose of economic ana'.sis. Such costs total US$27-6 million(Rp 17.2 uillion) in 1980 Drices .i In addition to the above costs, an esti-mate of US$300,000 per year (hS$42/settled ha/year) has been charged to themaintenance of the infrastructure and the provision of basic agriculturaland settlement services, commencing immediately after the investment periodand continuing throughout the life of the project. Foreign and local costsaad benefits have been converted into border prices using the officialexchange rate of Rp 625 = US$1.00 and a standard conversion factor of 1-

Economic Rate of Return

7.11 Usiag the foregoing assumptions and discounting project costs andbenefits through 35 years, the economic rate of return is 13Z (Annex 2,Table 10).

Sensitlvity Analysis

7-12 Sensitivity analysis -as used to determine which variables wouldbe crucial to the succoss of the project. To that end, crossover valuesfor a IOZ discount rate were calculated for a number of variables. Thecrossover value is the valae of the variable tested for which the project'sret present value, calcJlated at 10X discount rate, is zero, or, equivalentlythe value beyond which the economic rate of return would be below lOZ.Therefore, the greater the difference between the crossover value and thevalue assumed in the analysis, the less sensitive the economic rate ofreturn is to the tested variable.

/1 Including base costs and physical contingencies of civil works and houses(US$18.44 million), services, equipment and supplies (US$4.58 million) andconsulting services and administration costs (US$4.56 million). TheseCosts do not include studies and an advisor in the Office of the JuniorMinister for Transmigration, who would fulfill a coordination andprogramming function.

-52-

7.13 Crossover values shown Inl Table 7.1 i-ndicate that :he vabi. itv o'

the project is relatively insensitive to substantia! departures fromappraisal assumptions. A 36% increase in investment costs. above

conservatively estimated base costs and 157 physical cont .-. z4enc;ies. -would berequired to reduce the rate ot return to 10Z. Sir.iariv, The entireagricultural benefit stream would have to decrease by 23/ *- value, !noldingt

other assumptions constant, to reach the same result. Regarding ouroiyphysical factors, the yield of the paddy crop (the ma ior 7ro- eCtei soC) ce ofbenefits) would have to drop by one-third, to the low level of 1.h3 tor._/ha,to lower the rnturn to that leve!./! Combining worst case agric-slturaloutcomes, the totai absence of a drv-season. crop i7 the fie'cds '!here assumedto be soybeans) through.out the three-decade--roject ho-ri -r, lrre with a

14% drop in wet-season paddy yields to 2.09 tons/ha would be requirred toreach that result_/2 Finally, a delay ot the entire setrlenrent progran andagricultural benefit stream by 33 months, while maintaining Ohe originalinvestment schedule, would be required to invalidate pro-,ect t easibility.The results of these analyses show that the Project is i-zdeed viable evenunder adverse conditions.

Table 7.1: SFNSIrIV-TTY A?:ALYSIS

Appraisal Crossover Percentvalue valuie change

Total investment costs (constant 'SS million) 2 7.5 37.C +36

Annual agricultural benefit stream(constant USS million),a 5.6 S.3 -23

Paddy yields at fu ll development (tons/ha) 2_43 7.-3 --33Paddy yields at full developrMent (tons/ha)

with no dr---season field cropping 2. 3 2 - -1gDelay of total agricultural benefit strearn

(months) 0 33-

/a At full development. Calcutla ions were based on a reduced benefit streamover the life of the project.

.1 Sssuming that the saie inputs and hired lahor appropriare to a yield o'f

over 2.4 tons/ha would continue to be applied.

/2 Assuning thac reduced croppin- :tensiz v and yieldc wuou`d nolt be r,arZia7lycorpensated for by reduced in.rut usage and hiring (o l.abr. ad n7ore

se-tler wage employment, which would agair raise ,ti rate o: r !;:rn above

iO7.

- 53 -

Ri sks

7.14 Risks pertaining to the proposed project are environmental and orga-nizationdl. Environmental problems could develop by ignoring constraintsimposed by soils in the project area while organizational problems coulddevelop by poor implementation management.

7.15 Environmental Factors- The achievement of targetted rice yieldson potential acid-sulphate soili as found in the project area, requires ahigh soil moisture in order to prevent these soils from oxidizing and acidifi-cation. The project addressesrthis requirement-and provides. nec.essary safe-guards: impervious bunds along perimeters of farm plots and checlks ontertiary canals to maintain sufficiently nigh water levels in fields.Experience on similar soils in neighboriflg areas shows that with thesearrangements risk of soils acidification is minimal.

7.16 Organizational Factors- The project has made arrangements forproperly coordinated implementation of works, settlement o' people and supportservices. Although agricultural development and benefits could be delayed bythe failure on part of management to coordinate activities of participatingagencies, heavy input of Government staff and consultants, the advanced stageof project preparation and a strong commitment to the transmigration and swampreclamation program should cininize this risk.

8. AGREENENTS REACHED AND RFCOMMENDATIONS

8.01 During negotiations agreements were reached with the Govern-ment on the following points:

(a) DGFCA would provide pernanently two PPMs and six PPLs under thepart-time supervision of a PPS for extension services, and AARDwould provide permanentl-: adequately trained staff, as required,to carry out agricultural research (para. 3.03);

(b) DGT in coop'ration with DGA would assign "Right of Use (hakpakai) certificates for houselots and farm plots to settlers oneyear after settling, and assign titles (hak milik) to their landwithin five years after settling (para. 3.16);

(c) Vae first health subcenter would he built, equipped and staffedbefore the settlement of the first transnigrants and the othersubcenters and centers, as villages are built (para- 3.18);

(d) A suitably qualified regional coordinator would be appointed byJMT not later than T)ecember 31, 1981 (para. 4.03);

(e) Consultants whose qualifications, experience and terms andconditions of employment would be acceptable to the Bank, would beengaged by P4S for itself and for DGCK, PTPT, DGT, and by JMT.

- 54 -

Consultants assisting P4S and DGCK in project implementation would

be engaged by March 31, 1981, while those asisting PTPT, DGT, andJMT would be engaged by March 31, 1982. By January 31, 1982 P4S

would engage consultants to assist in (i) carrying out a nationwide

inventory of coastal and near-coastal swamp developments;

(ii) carrying out a survey of selected existing developments to

assess the viability of their upgrading; and (iii) carrying out anenvironmental impact study of selected swamp developments. By

March 31, 1982 P4S would engage consultants to assist ln carrying

out an investigation of groundwater at Karang Agung. By October 31,1984, the Government would engage consultants to assist P4S,

DGFCA, DGT and DC Fisheries in monttoting the physiea1, ec:6ogfcaland socio-economic impact of the project (para. 3.25).

(f) Separate project accounts would be maintained by each implementing

agency which would be annually audited by independent auditors

acceptable to the Bank, and submitted to the Bank within six monthafter the close of each fiscal year (para. 3-33);

(g) P4S would post a qualified and experienced site manager by March 31,

1981 and PTPT and DGT would post qualified and experienced site

managers by January 31, 1982 (para. 4-02):

(h) GOI will allocate adequate funds to properly maintain the con-structed project infrastructure including the navigation, primary,secondary canals and all structures providing half of annual funds

by August 15 of each year, and the second half in two installmentsuntil all budgeted amounts have been made available. Annual

detailed O&M plans would be prepared and a project O&M officewith suitably qualified staff would be established by May 31, 1984.

(i) The physical, socio-economic conditions and ecological impact of the

development would be monitored by GOT during 1985-1989 and reported

annually (para. 4-19).

8.02 With the above assurances the project would be suitable for a Rank

loan of ITSS22 million with a 20-year maturity including a grace period of

five years. The borrower would be the Republic of Indonesia.

~~.~J9t ttC.SJO. - 2R0J8C

Con ffo1809 :

--(P mUtc)- 310 0ot4"'?rtg 9n

1.c. Fregn Toa 1001 or'0

ocl xc.9 ca22? 91 3i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~0) (0

- ~~tOSC 10tt 50>. ~~~~ 270 7715 072 472 2.34 5

- Vera rIot. 09Ž ~~~~~~4.4 il5 ) 32 7. 2.197 ~ 55 1

SoIgnt>oo. ptlo.cr ooodowy-I . . I.~~.taŽr, ta.. cp 771Ž 2295 1.to* a75 26 253 .5 (

.70-3030 0>tt 5439 22 559 011 43 950~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2 ',

Ao Zp99429 75 17 32 t*>.-~~~n~~ 275 110 393 4.40 :09 92) 30~~~~~z

Ž0773.0 Ž23Ž 94 214 351 751 502~~~~~~~~~~~~~7, Ž 9

aol~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A 6N;1r

Qoo.rc.r,. ro.3.7o - '.9 99 .7o 120~~NI

- 9$ 9'. $2 .00~~~~~~C 0...'.o - - 7 100~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 7

4707 30.406 '9o.o.037 >0 '9 100~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

71>~~e .. q.3~~~on7 - 3 100~P

- 56 - ANEX i-I 56 7Able 2

INDXONESIA

SWA4fP RECLAMATION PROJECT I

Schedule of Fxpenditures(USS 1eoo)

Indonesian fiscal veer1981/82 IS82i83 '983/84 &984/85 1985/86 oc. p

Local Foro LocalIPot Local r al For. Loc-al For. Local tor. Tot

Reclamation and Site

-.DarationCivi! works /a 244 543 600 :,6Z7 1.129 2,0i7 ;.766 1,S97 :,584 688 1,32 6h,572 '1,8

iquip=ent: and supplies - 259 - :33 - - - - 392 3

Base cost 244 8.2' 600 1.760 1,129 2,01? 1,766 ',697 1,584 688 5.323 '.,9t4 12,2

Physical contingencies 3. 120 90 264 *168 302 265 255 238 I3i4 798 I 045 ! g

Expected price increas&s 12 44 12_ 7 2S66 394 480 882 56' : ,05 7 3.14 2 ,472 ., 4.

Totl ' 293 966 ,,7 24.Q i.69i 2,799

9 , 2,8 979 r 8,93 96 ii2

Settlers Relocat ion and

Settlementftouses 4 village

facilities - 5 5': :25 1,2Y0 320 1.O1 275 115 29 ',99S 749 3.7

Ser-:Ices. equipmen- andsupplies - 10)4 293 266 1. 0 4' 789 806 48P 58 i6 2, 2° :,663 3.

Base cost - 104 794 39: 2.325 -,109 1 ,907 763 73 45 5,199 2 41 I 7.61

Physical contingencles - ;6 :18 S9 349 166 286 !i- 26 6 17'9 361 1.1

Expected price increases - :66 78 903 264 944 256 114 '9 2.02. 602 2.6

Total - :25 i S C8 3,4'7 1,539 3,137 1 133 313 70 8 005 '.375 11.

Consult i ng ServicesRase cost 3!4 36 405 2'S 302 30! 275 2i8 134 82 1,430 05 2.4

Physical contingencies 46 2' 6: 35 4' 45 42 34 21 13 215 *48 3

Expected price increases 27 6 85 3S 104 72 116 74 90 3c 447 22

.otal 387 163 5: 3:$ 45; 418 453 326 24-, 130 * ?i7 1,i 3,4

Agricultural Supportsbase cost 58 Si' - ' - - - - - - S8 se

Physical contingencies 8 8 - _ _ _ , 8Expected price Incrases 3 -

,ort1 7. 69 - - - - - - -- 5G

Studles and investigatIonConsulting services 7!76 536 ; 5 82' 626 6(00 - 229 82 * 2* 7,744 4,6

Equipaent & supplies -° S -*0S - - ,4

Base Cost 7S'. : .33- 1 ,005 :,43: S24 ' 00 -,1 _ 2 _ ' P '0

Phvsical contIngence.s !'S 20( ;5; -24 94 9: - - 34 :3 '97 ;1 91

Expected price increases 66 69 1': 213 2:6 142 - '52 37 .4S 461 1,1'

Total 9' 7 :.60X :366 ;,858 °3S 832 - - 4;5 32 3,664 4,-' 8,

AdministrationCivil ~rks (103) '0 - 236 3; 347 27 :,22? -,2

Settler relocation (;OZ3 'C - 3P - 3 267 - -2 c 7

Studies (5t) $ - 9' - - - ' - 3 2

Base cost :79 - 44'.:9 - 6- - ?4 - 2,2

Physica! contIngencIes '7 - 69 - 9' - ' - - 3

Expected price increases 3 - 3' -58 - 7 -

Total 209 550 - 943 964 - S i. - 3,2

CRAND IOTAL 90 7 2, 923 4 34' ,97 j9 ,588 7,467 3.978 4 42 8 ' ,,P 0 :.889 44,51

/a Including land compensatlon and 5% tax

ANNEX ITable 3

INDONESIA

SWAMP RECLAMATION PROJECT I

Cost Estimate by Category of Works

Net Physical Expected Total

base contin- price project

cost Taxes gencies increase costUS$ nillion

I. Civil Works(a) Land clearing; canals 1.61 0.10 0.26 0.23 2.20(b) Land clearing; ple'ts 3.56 0.19 0.56 1.56 5.87(c) Earthworks; zanals 2.72 0.14 0.43 0.97 4.26(d) Earthworks; tertiaries, bunds 0.80 0.04 0.13 0.29 1.26(e) Structures; canals, base camp 2.01 0.12 0.32 0.78 3.23(f) Structures; tertiaries 0.48 0.02 0.08 0.17 0.75(g) Houses & village facilities 3.55 0.19 0.56 1.27 5.57(h) Buildings; agric. support 0.08 - 0.01 0.03 0.12(i) Land compensation 0.10 - - - 0.10

Subtotal 14.91 0.8C 2.35 5.30 23.36

T. Services, Equipment & Supplies(a) Construction supervision equipment 0.39 - 0.05 0.03 0.47(b) Settlers relocation 1.13 - 0.17 0.36 1.66(c) Settlers supplies & tools 0.37 - 0.05 0.12 0.54(d) Health equipment & supplies 0.13 - 0.02 0.04 0.19(e) Subsistence to settlers 2.24 - 0.35 0.70 3.29(f) Inventory, upgrading & ecological

studies, equipment & training 0.85 - 0.14 0.29 1.28(g) Groundwater study equipment 0.22 - 0.03 0.08 0.33

(h) Monitoring equipment 0.33 - 0-04 0.11 0.48(i) Agricultural support equipment 0.03 - - 0.01 0.04(j) Administration 2.22 - 0.34 0.72 3.28

Subtotal 7.91 - 1.19 2.46 11.56

1. Consulting Services

(a) Construction supervision

P4S 1.49 - 0.23 0.32 2.04PTPT 0.24 - 0.04 0.05 0.33DGCK 0.14 - 0.02 0.03 0.19DGT 0.10 - 0.01 0.02 0.13JMT 0.44 0.06 0.09 0.59

(b) Studies and investigationsInventory, upgrading &

ecological impact 4.05 - 0.61 0.86 5.52(c) Monitoring 0.31 - 0.05 0.07 0.43(d) Groundwater study 0.31 - 0.05 0.07 0.43

Subtotal 7.08 - 1.07 1.51 9.66

Total 29.90 0.80 4.61 9.27 44.58

ANNEX I

- 58 - Table 4

INDONESIA

SWAMP RECL AITIOtJ PROJECT I

Proposed Allocatlon of Loan Proceeds

Net base

cost and

expectedprice Loan Disbursement

increases amount percentage

USS million

1. Civil Works(a) Land clearing; canals 1_84 1.84 100

(b) Land clearing; house lots & villages Z 2'.' - 0

(c) Land clearing; farm plots 2.89 2_89 100(d) Earthworks; canals 3.69 3.69 100

(e) F-arthworks; tertiaries, bunds 1.09 - 0

(f) Strucreres; canals, base camp 2.19 2.79 100(g) Structures; tertiaries 0.65 - 0

(h) Houses & village facilities 4.82 - 0

(i) Buildings; agric. support 0.11 - 0

(j) Land compensation 0.10 - 0

Subtotal 20.21 11.21 56

1!. Services, Equipment & Supplies

(a) Construction supervision equipment 0.42 0.42 100(b) Settlers relocation 1.49 - 0

(c) Settlers supplies 4 torols 0.49 - 0

(d) Health equipment & supplies 0.17 - 0(e) Subsistence to seLi-s'S 2.94 - 0

(f) Inventory, upgrading 4 ecological

studies, equipment & training 1.14 1_14 100(g) Groundv-ater study equipent 0.30 -

(h) Monitoring equipment 0.44 - 0

(t) Agricultt ral support equipment 0.04 - 0

(j) Aduinistration 2.94 - 0

Subtotal 10.37 1.56 16

III. Consulting Services

(a) C,onstrucrton supervIsionP4S 1.81 I.Ri 100

PTPT 0.29 0.29 100

DCOY /a 0.17 - 0DCT / 0.12 - 0

JTh 0.53 0.53 100(b) Studies and investigations

Inventory, upgrading & ecological

inpact 4-91 4.91 100

Groundwater Investigation 0.38 - CMonitoring 0.38 - 0

Subtotal 8.54 7.54 86

Total 39.17 20.31 52

IV. Unallocated

Physical contingencies 461 1.69 37

Total 43-7R 22.00 30

Taxes 0.80 - 0

GR.AD TOTAL 44.58 22.00

/a Financed under Irrigation XII (Loan 1645-IND)

lb Financed by OI.

-59- Table 5

INDONESTA

SWAMP RECLAMaT1ON PROJECT I

Estimated Schedule of Disbursements

IBRD fiscal Cumulativeyear and disbursementsemester (US$ million)

FY82First _

Second 1.2

FY83First 3.0Second 6.0

FY84First 8.0

Se cond 10-0

FY85First 12.0Second 14.0

FY86First 19.0Second 22.0

AhNEX ITable 6

- 60 - Page 1

INDONESIA

SWAMP RECLAMATION PROJECT I

Bill of Quantities and Costs /a

Unit

Item Unit Quantity cost TotalRip -000

1. Land Clearing

1.1 Mechanical clearing

Navigation canal ha 84 2,000 168,000

PriLary canals ha 177 1,553 274,881

Secondaries ha 490 1,110 543,900Base camp ha 2 2,000 4,000

Creeks ha 48 1,553 74,544

1.2 Manual Land ClearingFarm plots ha 5,600 227 1,272,999

House lots ha 1,60, 481 770,800

Public facilities ha 420 481 202,020

Subtotal 3,311144

2. Earthworks Rp Rp 000

2.1 Mechanical earthworksNavigation canal cu m 734,000 715 524,810Primary canal cu m 757,000 715 541,255

Secondary canals cu m 876,000 715 626,340

Shaping embankments ha 115 231,000 26,565

Blockage of creeks cu m 40,000 1,000 40,000

Fill of base camp cu m 16,000 715 11,000

Stabilization of base camp cu m 1,500 6,600 9,900

2.2 Maaual EarthworksTertiary canals cu m 141,000 990 179,190

Settlement drains cu m 112,000 990 110,880

Field bunds cu m 350,950 990 347,440

Subtotal 2 2417 38O

la All costs are for end of 1980 and include a 5Z tax on civil works.

-61- ANNEX ITable 6Page 2

Unit

Item Unit Quantity cost Total----- Rp 000-

1. Structures

3.1 BridgesNavigation canal ea 1 15,730 14,300

Primary canals ea 9 7,683 62,865Secondary canals ea 102 3,400 315,282

3.2 Tertiary structures ea 788 439 314,9993.3 Settlement drain cutlets ea 204 451 92,0043.4 Settlement jetties ea 102 2,700 275,400

3.5 Navigation jetties ea 2 19,100 38,200

3.6 Tidal control structure ea 1 287,000 287,0003.7 Base camp

Houses (A) sq m 180 110 19,800Houses (B) sq m 2,160 73 156,816Offices sq m 400 8 33,300

Workshop sq m 400 66 26,400WLs ea 1 3,438

Subtotal l,639,704

4. Settlement

4.1 Settlers houses /a ea 3,200 575 1,839,2004.2 Basic villages /b ea 6 56 333,96C4.3 Main village /b ea 1 169 168,7734.4 MobiLizatior. and transport ea 2,800 /c 252 705,1004.5 Tools and supplies ea 3,200 72 228,8004.6 Subsistence package ea 3,200 436 1,398,999

Subtotal 4,674,832

/a including all material and construction costs of houses, 7 barrels/familyfor drinking water; I pit latrine.

lb See Table 7 for breakdown.

/c Java and Bali based transmigrants. Four hundred indigenous families areexpected to settle by themselves.

-62 -ANNTEX ITabie 7

INDONESIA

SWAMP RECLAMATION PROJECT I

Village Facilities

UynitItem Unit Quantity cost Total

____ Rp '000

1. Basic Village (6 total)Ofrice sq m 40 55 2,200Storage sq m 40 35 1,400Mosque sq m 56 50 2,800Meeting place sq m 50 50 2,500Primary school sq m 320 60 i9C?J0Staff houses sq m 300 50 - ^)Village head house sq m 50 50 jHealth subcenter sq m 80 62.5 _')0

Subtotal 5_>,00

2. m-= Village (I total)Office sq m 108 55 5,940Storage sq m 54 35 1,890Post and security sq m 54 50 2,700Bank sq m 36 50 1,800Mosque sq m 91 50 4,550Meeting place sq m 135 50 6,750Primary school sq m 320 60 19,200Lower secondary school sq m 320 60 19,200Staff houses sq im 600 50 30,000Village head house sq m 75 60 4,500Health center sq m 250 62.5 15,625REC sq m 166 62.5 10,375Agr. research sq in 160 62 5 10,000KUD/Coop sq m 475 44 20,900

Subtotal 153,430

AMIWEX I

- 63- Table 8

I ND0lPYSA

SWAMP R ELAMATI0N PROJECT I

Consulting Services: Categorles and Estimated Schedule

Indonzstan Fiscal Year

198l/82 1982/83 1983/34 1984/85 1985/86 Total

man morths

1. Project Iwoleuen'-~t1on

31.1 Foreign ConsultantsP4S - Construction engineer La '2 12 12 *2 9 57

- Surveying specialist - - 7 - - 7

- Short-terc experts 4 4 4 - 12

TM- Project Coo'dinator - 12 12 12 - 36

Subtotal 16 28 35 24 9 112

1.2 Local Consultants

t4S - Engineers 36 36 36 36 24 168- Teinulc tans 72 72 72 72 48 336

PTPT - Engineers - 8 12 12 8 40- Technicians - 16 24 24 16 80

DOCK - Engineers 36 24 - - - 60

- Technicians 108 72 - - - 180

DC?' - Engineers - 8 12 12 - 32

- -"chnicians - 16 24 24 - 64

Subtotal fe. ?roject

nplenentation- Engtnee-s 72 76 60 60 32 300

- Technictans 180 l76 120 120 64 660

Ir. Studfes and investigations

p4S: -ynE2ry Studfdes

Foretgn consultants 24 48 48 - 120

Local consultants:- Engineers 48 96 96 - 240

- Technlilans 96 192 192 - - 480

P45: Unrading Studies

Foreign consultants 18 36 18 - - 72Local consultants:- Engineers 30 60 30 - - 120

- Technicians 60 120 60 - - 240

P4S: Eviro Studies

Foreign consultants 8 4 - - 12

Local consultants:

-Engineers 60 48 - - - 108

- Technirians 120 96 - - - 216

P4CS Gtoundwater Studies

Foreign consultants 9 3 - - - 12

Local consultants:- Engineers 36 12 - - - 48

- Technicians 72 24 - - - 96

P4S- P sl.ologland

Socio-Econooic lt,nltorinA /b

Foreign consultants - - - - 9 9

Local consultants:

- Englnears - - - 60 60- Technicians - - - - 120 120

Subtotal for Studies and

Investigatioa:

Foreign consultants 59 91 66 - 9 225

Local consultants:

- Engineere 174 216 126 60 576- Technicians 348 432 252 _ 120 j~15

L_ This engineer would also assIst PTPT and DCT mainly in the field.

l& Consultants wtsld be engaged by P4S (pars. 4-19).

- 64 - ANNEX ITable 9

INDONESIA

SWAMP RECLAMATION PROJECT I

Consulting Services-Cost Breakdown /a

Expatriates LocalForeign Local Total consultants

Item currency currency cost Local currencyUS$/rnn month

Billing RateBasic salary 3,060 - 3,060 685Social benefits 827 - 827 154Home office overhead 2,440 - 2,440 570Overseas allowrance /b 867 - 867 178Net fee 452 - 452 113

Subtotal 7,646 - 7,646 1,700

Reimbursable ExpensesMobilization and travelInternational travel 627 - 627 _Relocation 350 - 350 -Subsistence en route 67 - 67 33Miscellaneous 138 - 138 20

Subtotal 1,182 - 1,182 53

Duty Station ExpensesLocal duty travel - 187 187 34Per diem - 308 308 47Field office overhead - 494 494 46Housing and utilities - 1,481 1,481 79Transport - 802 802 103

Subtotal - 3,272 3,272 309

Total 8,828 '.L_72 12,100/c 2,062/d

/a Based on recent contracts, projected to end-1980 prices./b Field allowance for local consultants./c May vary between $9,700 and $13,700 depending on nationality and experience.Id Applies to engineers, senior agronomists, senior economists and senior

surveyors. Cost of draftsmen and technicians averages $660/man-monrth.

- 65 -

ANNEX 1Table 10Page 1

INDONESIA

SWAMP RECLAMATION PROJECT I

List of Equipment and Supplies

Desciiption Quantity Unit cost -TdtaYcost~~us$ -

For Base Camp

Generators (25 kva) 3 27,500 82,500Radio equipment (SST) LS 23,760 23,760Workshop equipment LS 116,160 116,160Misc. water supplv and storage LS 35,200 35,200

equipment

Subtotal 257,620

1¾or Construction Supervision

Boats 6 12,000 72,000Surveying equipment LS 59,000 59,000Office equipment LS 3,750 3,750

Subtotal 134,750

For Health Services

Boats 3 12,000 36,000Medical and office equipment LS 16,000 16,000Sprayers and parts LS 12,000 12,000Insecticides LS 67,000 67,000

Subtotal 131.000

For Agricultural Supports

Field and meteorological equipment is 11,000 11,000Boats 1 12,000 12,000Bicycles 6 200 1,200Laboratory equipment LS 6,800Office equipment LS 3,000

Subtotal 3

ANNEX I- 66 - Table 10

Page 2

Description Quantity Unit cost Total costUSS …

For Stueies and Investigations

(a) Inventory studyBoats 3 12,000 36,000Water and soil testing equipment LS 34,000Stereoscopic equipnent LS 35,000Satellite imagery, aerial photos LS 150,000

Subt,tal 255,000

(b) Upgrading studyBoats 6 12,000 72,000Meteorologic and hydrometric

equipment LS 150,000Water and soil testing equipment 2 35,000 70,000Surveying equipnent LS 80,000

Subtotal 372,000

(c) Ecological impact assessmentWater and soil testing equipmett 2 35,000 70,000Laboratory equipment LS 50,000

Subtotal 120,000

(d) Groundwater investigationsPortable drilling equipment 2 70,000 140,000Casings and screens 500 m 30 15,000Compressor 2 20,000 40,000Water level and quality testingequipment 5 5,000 25,000

Subtotal 220,000

(e) Mlonitoring

Meteorological and hydrometricequipment LS 68,000Surveying equipment LS 75,000Water and soil testing equipment 2 35,000 70,000Laboratory equipment 120,000

Subtotal 333X000

Total for studi?s and investigations 1 300,000

Grand total 1,8527370

-67 - AIEX 2

Table I

IWDONES IA

SWM(P RMCLAfuTto PROJECT I

Price Structures for Agricultrral Outputa(lSS - 1980 currency valnes)

Opera-

ltemas tion 1980 1985 1990

Rice (ton)Export price. Ihai St brokens. f.o.b. Bangkok 46S4 527 544

Quality adjustmer /a 8-% 371- 422 --35Freight and insurance - 20 20 20C-i-f. price, Palembang - 391 442 455Eransfer to utiolesalers - 3 3 3Mills to .. holesalers - 2 2 2Ex-%il price. Palembang - 392 443 456Conversion to paddy 63Z 247 279 287Milling and cleaning costs less value of

byproducts - 5 5 5?addv ttaosport, Karang Agung to Palesbang

and cransfer to wholesalers - 3 8Randling, transfer and storage, farm to wharf - 4 4 4Economic farr.-gate price, tSS/ton - 230 262 270Economic farm-gate pri-e, Rp/kg /b - 144 164 169(Financial farm-gate price. Rp/kg) (105 ) (115) (i30)

Sovbeans (ton)

Expo-t price. f-o-b. US G,lf port /c 281 331 395Freight and insurance + 35 35 35Transfer to Palembang ,holesaler 4- 3 3 3

ramsport, Karang Agung to Palembang wA olesaIer - 7 7 7Econoiic far-gate price, MS/ton - 312 362 426Economiic farm-gate price. Rp/kg /b - 195 226 266(Financ'al farm-gate price, Rp/kg) (250 ) (270) (290)

Corn fron)

Export pu'ce. f.o.b- MS Gulf port i72 189 194Freight and tnsuranc4 4 35 35 35Transfer to Palembang ubolesater + 3 3 3Transport. tarang Agung to Palembang wkolesaler - 7 7 7Econonic farm-gate price, TD;S/tot Id 203 220 225Economic farm-gate price, Tp/kg , - 127 138 141(Financial farm-gate price, fP/kg) (90 ) (100) (110)

Fresh Coconuts (nut)

Index of world copra price in constant terms inde" (100%) (96%) (89%)Economic and financial farm-gate price, 1SS 0-160 0-153 0.142

Economic and financial farm-gate price, Rp lb - 100 96 89

Fresh Bananas (bunch)

index of wrld export price of bananas incolistant terms index (100) (96%) (92%)

Econoutc and finanrial farm-gate price, ISS 1-00 0.96 0.92Economic and financtal farm-gate price, Rp /b - 625 600 575

Ia A.sumed outpuit qualtty nix as follows: 30X high quality (5% broke-s); 50Zwed iam grade. (25-30Z brokens) valzxed at 75% of high quality; and 20C low

pjal:itv (42t brokens) ralued at 'G% of high quality-/b Prices are converted at the official excnange rate of Rp 625 - USSI-00-

c Fiqual to standard price projections. c.itf. Rotterdam, minus T!SSZO/ton

insurance and freight from Gulf port to Rotcerdan-!d It is Iikelv that only a small market:ble surplus of corn woild be arailable

abo-e the settLers own 'subsistence requirements. The economic fanr_atevalue of subsistence produce would actually be higher than recorded here,,is such produce eould hare tr, Se tbported tnto the project area either viaPalembang or from other wamp region settlemenrts (ljpang) in the absence ofpro,ductlon-

AM 2Table 2

I1DONESIA

SIJSAP RECLAMATION PROJECT I

Price Structures for Agricultural Inputs(USS - 1980 currency values)

Opera-Items tlio-z 1980 1985 1990

Ure" - 46Z N (ton)World export price, f.o.b. Europe 201 272 300Ex-factory price, Palembang /a 216 287 315Handling and distribution to retail -

level, Kararig Agung + 11 11 11Storage and transfer to farm + 4 4 4Econoatic farm-gate price, US$/ton - 231 302 330Economc farn-gate price, Rp/kg /b 1 144 189 206(Financial farm-gate price, Rp/kg) (120) (140) (166)

TSP - '6Z P (tori)World export price, f-o.b- Florida 148 208 2'0Freight & insurance to Palembang /a + 30 30 30Handling and distribution to retail

level, Karang Agung 4+ 11 11 11Storage and transfer to farm 4 4 4 4Economic farm-gate price, USS/ton - 193 253 255Economic farm-gate price, Rp/kg /b - 121 158 159(Financial farm-gate price, Rp/kg) (115) (125) (135)

rnsecticides (liter)Economic farm-gate price, US$ 10.40 10.40 10-40Economic farw-gate price, Rp 6,500 6,500 6,500(Financial farw-gate price, Rp) (2,000) (2,500) (3,000)

Rodenticide - Zinc Phosphide (kg)Economic farm-gate price, US$ 6.70 6.70 6.70Economic farm-gate price, Rp 4,200 4,200 4,200(Financial farm-ga2e price, Rp) 2,300 2,600 2,800

Purchased SeedsRice

Economic farm-gate price:US$/kg 0.35 0.42 0.48Rp/kg 220 260 300

Financial farm-gate price, Rp/kg 150 180 220Soybean

Economic far-gate price:LISS/kg C.64 0.72 0.e0

Rp/kg 400 450 500Financial farm-gate price, Rp/kg 300 350 400

CoconutEconomic and financial far=-gate pcice:

US$/seedling 1.12 I-05 1.00Rp/seedling 700 65¶ b25

BananasEconomic and financial far--gate price:

USS/sucker 0.40 0.38 0.37Rp/sucker 250 240 230

/a Urea Is valued e:-PUSRI plant, Palembang. Price projections for baggedurea, f.o-b. Europe have been adjusted to Asian aarkets by adding atransport prewulm of US$15/ton.

/b Prices are converted at the official exchange rate of Rp 625 - USSI.00-

SWlAI'F Q`CLARATION PFnJP.CT I

Net Fconnmlo menenltta Prom Rlce ,Paddy) Prodhict ion-(198n 1is)

1882/83 1983/A4 I /984 /85 1985/8 A6 98A6/q7 1 (87/pA 19(Rq/89 IqRI/90 I 10(/Qt Iol./92

Prodtict ifonllarvetted area (ha) 168 1,919 11630 4,76h s,130 5,872 6,?10 6,400 6,400 6,400Co'mposite yleltd h (ton/a ;i) 1.0 1,1? 1,29 1.51 1.73 1.93 2.11 2.28 2,30 2.41Production (ionr-) )68 2,(40 4,1h69 7,180 9,210 11,71n 13,120 14,60 IS1,00 15,52(Crots valhie of prottdu,Unn /bh (0;$) 41,0(1 5447, 00 I,193,000 1,881,000 2,431,000 3,n00,000 3,502,000 3,930,0O0 4,131,000 4,191,0nO

I'u rohanad inu ! is(rrWWl7k-g7f111'1-1T11;,- -tS 17 19 I5 30 3S 41 51 56 58( tons) 3 33 60i 120 1 60 206 267 328 158 171(US$) /h 700 9,000 20n,000 36,000 40,00, 64,000 85,0r0 106,000 118,000 12,0oo0TSI' (kg/ha) h0 1( It 11 11 18 21 25 28 29(tons) 2 19 40 60 AO 106 I1I 160 179 186(OSS) /) 4n0 4,200 10,O0) 6,000 270,000 27,000 33,000 41,000 45,000 47,000t stnc tcled I (1/hli n,s 0,6 o.7 1.0 l.2. 1.3 1.5 1.5 1,6 I,7 ,(1) AS 1,10( 2,50o 4,800 6 ,400 7,7nn 9,200 9,600 10,200 140,900 '(trs.s /h 900 11,80 (o,00n 40,n0o 66,000 0,000 6,000 0 0 no,00oo0 106,000 I13,000ttodenticlJo (ko2/b) )- n.5 0,3 0,n I, ?12 (,1 0.15 n.1.5 0.6 0,17(kg) hS I ,n0) [,100 so0 640 77n0 9?0 96n 1,020 1,090(015) /b 600 f,00 7,00nn 3,0n0)n 4,,000 5,0 6,00n 7,000 7,no0 8,0o0Scedl ¾ (kg/ha) 25 ?5 ?5 5 30 30 130 30 i0 30(Lons) 48 Ql Q1 1,0 17? 1R7 92? 192 142(C ) /t, /a 1 7 1,), 9, A 27,000 50,000 69,000 80,000 88,000 (1,000 3,000 03,000lt rv.l lahbor /dl (mia -day/h) - - - 13 tol 22 17 a I(o'~ rtan'-1,,y~al - - - 61>o,000 103,000 , 127,00 )108,000 48,000 9,n00(12;$5) - * _ 78,000)(( 112,000 163,000 138,000 61,00n 12,000

.'e t vo1,oc of prndiw I no (1'S$) 38,4(0 51 5I,0r00o , ,00 1, om ,.4I ,000 2,0c9,n s 1,0 (',5 f 89,0 3,w l,0 3,524,000n 3,750,0)00 1,R08,000

/a l.nLipobStLo of violds 4f housclotH And fiolds of setILler groupti alt varlous phases of aettlantent and developner(t.T7 Vol6; H ,if nutplit a,1d inputs Interpolated froem prtce utructores 1, Tribles I and.t 2.rf 81IL, s eod for fI rit Iwo yLears providedg 8rult Ia by ), Tranim I rastr and accoin t for In s5ittIoment cos ts,7Tl Alit l rod ktho r rc u,ilred for fa rin work Is attrIhuted here to rice pvrodutc tIon, a rinl Vtt iied at 1uS$I .27 (Rp A00) per man-day. Requiurements forhi Ir,ld Iz, wtr .r , iet,'rml rined .on the Salt a of A mollth y analyal a of settIer Iabor supply and demand for the vrlinis arrI vtr4 pRronPs, not onltl IVet.Ldge 11illoal hat7Sl. Alhor supply pro)Octions tiore halted on the model presentedt In Table 8, laibor demadnd from the schedule presentedlu Tl,a 7 :,.u Ia. to i.-ragv of various , ropfs prosented tin tins tahlta and Tables 4-01. TIiie val2e of settler" own labor Is acco'snted for InTable .q

-70- AWTaK

1NOONESIA

SIJANP RECLA?ArTION PIRoJECT I

Set Econoaic Benefitz From Soybean and Cora Production( 1980 OVSS

1983/84 198.4/85 1985/86 1986/87 1987/88 1988/89 1989/90 199(/91 1

Soybeans

Production

*Rarvested area (ha) 120 470 1,050 1,600 2,050- 2,240 2,240Composite yield (ton/ha) 0.50 0.59 O.-64 0.73 .R-l 7 * GA?Production (cons) 60 280 670 1,170 1,670 2,036 2,170Gross value of production /a (US$) - 71,000 101,000 252,000 454,000 670,000 R43,h 300 924,000) 9

Purchased Input Usage lb

TSP (kg/ha) 10 13 14 17 18 21 24(tons) 1.2 6h1 14.7 27.2 36-9 47.0 65.0(USS) la 30° 1,500 3,700 6,r00 9,400 11,90n 16,600

insecticides (1/ha) 0.5 r).6 0.6 0.1 0.8 0.9 1.0(1) 60 280 630 1,129 1,640 2,016 2,?40(USs) /a 600 2,900 6,600 11,600 17,000 21,000 23,300

Seed (kg/ha) 20 25 25 25 30 20 30(tons) 2.4 11.8 26.3 40.0 61.5 67.2 67.2(USS) /a 1,700 8,500 20,000 30,000 47,000 53,000 54,0090

.1et value of production (USS) - 28,400 88,100 221,700 405,600 596,6(0 757,100 830,100 R

Corn

Production

Harvested area (ha) 331 524 800 RO0 900 fO Rm g00Composite yield (ton/ha) 0.60 0-73 C.R1 °.Q6 1.06 1.15 1.18 1.20Production (tons) :(00 380 650 770 R50 q2O 940 960Gross value of production la (US$) 43,000 33,000 143,000 171,000 189,000 205,0On 210.000 216,(00 2

Purchased Input Usage /b

TSP (kgfha) 10 15 1° ?7 1 3( 'in 30(tons) 3.3 7.9 14.4 21.6 24-0 24.n 24.0 24.0(USS) /a P00 2,000 3,700 5,'O -,o 6,100 6,10 6,100t 6,100

Seed la (kg/ha) 10 10 i 12 13 14 15 I5(cons) 3.3 5.2 8.9 9.6 1°n4 11 12.0 12.°(USS) -a 700 1.100 1q0fl 2,100 2,300 2.500 2,700 7,70n

Net value of production (USS) 41,500 79.90n 137.400 163.400 180,600 116,400 201,200 207,2-0 2

/a S'alues of o,;rputs and tnputs interpolated from price structures in Tables I and 2.

/b Ali hied iabor for far= work attributed to r!Le production (Table 1).

tNDONBS T-

SWAP RL AT1QH MOJECT I

Coconut Production Volumes and Yslues JL

(1980 Us$)

Coconut Production build-up /b Value of InvestmentGrouip A Group B Group C Group D Group E Total productton Cost (USU)

Jun/Dec 1982 Jun,Dec 1983 Jun/Dec 1984 Jan/Jun 1983 Jan/Jun 1984 production (US$) /c /d

1982/83 (67 ha planted) -11,1001983/84 (77 ha planted) (66 ha planted) -23,2001984/85 (12 ha planted) (78 ha planted) -17,500' 985/86,986/871987/88 …-----------------…-- --------- '000 fresh nuts -----.---

1988/89 101 - - - 101 15,0001989/90 168 H16 - 99 - 383 54,0001990/9l 201 193 48 165 117 724 103,0001991/92 268 231 80 198 195 972 138,0001992/93 335 308 96 264 234 1,237 175,0001993/q4 402 385 128 330 312 1,557 221,0001994/95 469 462 160 396 390 1,877 266,0001995/96 536 539 192 462 468 2, 197 312,0001996/97 570 616 224 528 546 2,484 353,0001997/98 570 655 256 561 624 2,666 378,0001998/99 570 655 272 561 663 2,721 386,000

2015 570 655 272 561 663 2,721 386,000

La All coconuts aswsumed to be planted In houselot.

Lb For each planting, it is assumed that bearing will commence six years after planting, that 120 trees/ha would bear, that theinitial yLeld would be 1,500 nuts/ha (12.5 nute/tree), rising thereafter in annual increments to 2,500; 3,000;:4,000; 5,000;6,000; 7,000; 8,000; and 8,500 nuts/ha (70 nuts/tree).

L Fconoisc value of output projected from Table 1.

/d Assuming ISO seedlings/ha purchased of which 120 survive. For cost of asbdling, see Table 2. Some of the chemicals allocatedto field crops (Tablet 3 and 4) vili be applied to houselot perennials. All labor hired by farm assumed to be used in riceculture. Family labor on perennials assuned at 210 man-days/ha/year (Table 0l).

CM1

WfONES LA

SWAMiP RECIANATION PROJECT I

Banana ProductLon Volumes and Values L(1980 US$)

Banana Production Build-up /b Value of InvestmentGroup A Group B Group C Group D Group e Total production Cost (US$)Jun/Dec 1982 Jun/Dec 1983 Jun/Dec 1984 Jan/Jun 19R3 faTl/nhi 1984 production (US$) LC /d

------_'000-----_---------------------- 'OoO freah bunches -------------------------------1982/83 (67 ha planted) - - -20,0001983/84 40 (77 ha planted) (65 ha planted) 40 38,800 -41,0001984/85 40 46 (31 ha pLanted) 39 (19 ha planted) 125 120,000 -31,0001985/86 40 46 19 39 47 191 l13,3001986/87 60 46 19 39 47 211 200,500198)/88 6O 69 19 59 47 254 238,700 i1988/89 60 69 28 59 71 287 266,900 N1989/90 80 6- 28 59 71 307 282,4001990/91 80 92 , 28 78 71 349 321,0001991/92 80 9; 37 78 95 382 351,0001992/93 80 92 37 78 95 382 352,000

2015 80 92 37 78 95 382 352,000

.La All bananas assumed to be planted in houselot.

Lb For each planting, it ls assumed that ue.iring wilL commence one year after planting, that 600 plants/ha would bear, that theinitial yield would he 600 burtchtsl/hla rttiltn the.-eafter in annual increments to 600; 600; 900; 900; 900; and 1,200 bunches/ha.

Lc economic value of output projected from TabLe 1.

Ld Assuming 750 suckers/ha purchased of w^ch 600 nurvive. For co8t of sucker, see TaLble 2. Some of the chemicals allocated,fdcrnns (Tseea 8 and 4) will be applied to houselot perenniala. All labor hired by farm aaumed to be used in rice Ncuiture. FPmtll l1ator on perennialA assumed at 210 man-days/ha/year (Table 8).

- 73 - ANMFX 2Table 7

INDONESIA

SWAMP RECLAMATION PROJCT I

Assumed Labor Inputs Per Cropped Rectare(Man-day equivalents)

RoteyardDry-season perennials

Wet-season soybeans (bananas andMonth rice and corn coconuts)

January 24 15

February 9 - 20

March 9 - 20April 9 - 20

May 33 - 10

June 26 26 10

July - 24 25August 14 25September 36 25

October 9 20 20November 32 - 10December 29 - 10

Total Per Crop 180 120 210

-74- AN

Tab~

IhD0NESIA

SWAMP RLAMATION PROJECT I

Developmeat of Typical Transmigrant Family lAbor Force

man-days Man-d

No. of _Ae structure (vears) Family Adilt available availayears First Second Third Foutrth size labor (normal (pe

settled Father /a Mother lb child /c child /c child /c child /c (person5) unilts months) /d motbas

0 35 29 10 7 3 - 5 1.7- 43 44

1 36 30 1 1 8 4 - 5 1.7 43 462 37 31 12 9 5 0 6 1.5 38 413 38 32 13 10 6 1 6 1.8 45 4911 39 33 14 11 7 2 6 1.9 48 515 40 34 15 12 8 3 6 2.0 50 546 41 35 16 13 9 4 6 2.3 58 627 42 36 17 14 10 5 6 2-6 65 708 43 37 18 15 11 6 6 2.8 70 769 44 38 19 16 12 7 6 3.1 78 84

10 45 39 20 17 13 8 6 3.3 83 891 1 46 40 21 18 14 9 6 3.6 90 9712 47 41 22 19 15 10 6 3.7 91 9913 48 42 23 20 16 I 1 6 3.9 98 10614 49 43 24 21 17 12 6 4.1 102 1101I 5 44 25 22 18 13 6 4-3 109 117

/a Males 19 years wf age and above are assumed to pro-vide 1.0 adult labor Units.

1b Farmales 18 years of age and above are assumed to provide 0.7 adult labor units, except during the vearchildbirth when they provide 0.5 units-

!c For simplicity it is asaumed that 50% of the children are mal'e, 50% female, and that an 18 year old oradult child provides 0.85 adult labor units. Labor input of teenaged children Is assumed to increaselollows:

Age (years': 13 14 15 16 17 18

Proportion of adult input: 10% 20t 30% 60% P.3Z 100;Adul. labor unzs: 0.09 0.17 0.25 0-51 0.68 0.85

The average age of marriage among local trausmigrant families is 23 for men and 18 for wmen, and the ftwo children may actually leave the home after their 21st year to establish their own homes, in thatevent. the familv labor force would level off at 3 labor units., as the inheriting chfild and his spousesume nore work responsibilities and the aging parents gradually less. To simplify calculation of long-

term settlement benefits, all children are here assumed to remain on original farm through projectperfod, and to engage in wage labor rather than forming new farms.

/d Assuming 25 working davs per month-

Ie Assuming 27 workIng davs per ronth.

Source: 3ased on Agro-Economic Sur-.ev data froma 1977 sur:ey ia Delta l2pang. reported i- Reference I

'Table 1), Voi. 71, p. 255.

- 75 -AWFl 2Table 9

IN7NESIA

S3WAls RECL&.A_TIOM ?!nJFCT I:

Economic t'alue of Fazilv Labor in Areas of Origin and Settlement la(1980 U.SS)

Prcjected off-farm earnings tn settleeow^t area /fOpporturnity cost of Total

famailv labor in Java!Biali Group A Groap B Group C Group D rroup E off-farm Value ofCumlative Value of (672 (770 (315 (655 (78O labor off-f-f-7

Departure departure labe- /e families) faailies) families) families) families) (030 labr /g(fa3iilies) (fauilies) (tS$) --- (man-days per faraily worked off f.rm) - days) (05$)

3 1, 327!b 1,327 23-4, O0 45 - - - -3,1,558/c 2,885 508,000 9 5 ,7 - 'C5 - 147X3

31 T1H 3,200 563,000 so SC 615 4c 2!1) 26^t,000O- 56 3,0.O in) so 85 In 4s 6, 21 4,000

7 - 563.000 so 50 50 "0 50 160 20%,000- 563.000 50 50 50 9° 91O 160 2o5,0m0

7, - 563,000 50) 50^ 5 5, c,^ 160 20S,0W00- 563, 000 0 5e 50 9O 50 1760 205s,000

'I. - 563,000 50 50 50 50 5" 160 205,000sz - 563,000 50 50 5 *0 5 160 205,000^

,3 - R45,000 125 50 50 50 50 210 26$,00u74 - P45,000 125 125 590 125 50 317 406f,00

- 48b5,000 760 125 725 1} 125 4C0 629,0007',> - 1,126,000i 260 260 125 260 129 653 874,0,0, - 1,126,000 260 260 2w0 260 260 R32 I,4305,000^.

O "- 1,12(6,000 460 260 260>( 260 260 066 1,237,00077 -1,408,00^w0 466 _69 60 460 260 1,291 1,602,000

-OAJ4J - 1,408,013^0 4i6' 460 460( 460 460 1,472 1,884,000)

- 1,4m0,^w00 460 460 460 4&0 46f1 1,472 1. RP4,000

z i cable estimates the total pportunltv cost oa withdrawing t'he 3.2^00 settler families fr.m the Javalball laborutce, and the wage or labor share earnings of t1e settler fasmilles in rhe sertlesaent area (5rarane Agqung) The analy-

s would change ooly neglIgibl, by re,lace.7ent of 1)Z of the transais.grants with settlers from Sumatra- The economic-The of settler labor on their own a:ss is registered hy the net value of agricultusral production (Tahle 10),._ragiog at f7ull develovment Rp (.-S"007fanilv (- 1S.

7 96/fanllv) or RP 2,125/rmanday (^'SS340fmadayV

-OUDS A e-d D-

roups B and

roup C-

-lued lnitia1lv at ' Sil6/fantlv (Rp per/fa-ily- er annu.- -his could be earned typically by 160 days of laborthe father at i'SSO 80day (Rp

900/davy and 120 davy o; labor by the motrher at '5SO..40/dav (Rp 250/day). Value of

a~llv labor increases as children reach naturitf r, d find work at same real wages and with sarae frequenry as-rents

30 ma-days of pafd labor are requfred from each family during first two years of settlerent for land clearing and-. ation of tertiarv drains- This is ro.r-;hly the aamir, which car. be spared from farm opecratiors during the first- years_ Thereafter labor -uriag slack seasons, other tran on other settler farms on an. exchange bas-s, inc7udlr,g

-her consrtrction operations, :ofgt:nf, fisheries, transport, traeo, and artisan activities are assumed l1mitee by-^ to 50 zaon-days ver ann,=, out of -,el over 7B'fl <?a-s availabie_ Subseqvenr increments in off-farm labor

epresent taking of zobs by grown children

'1 oft-atn labor is valued at ' -29

/aan--dav (p ROO?'man-daj- as Is all nonfamilv labor hired by farr. (Tahle 3) for- season wrk duri7.. eariy se:.le-^eat years.

- 76 - ANNE.'( 2Tatle I

INDONESIA

SWA_P RECLAMATION PROJECT I

EconomLic Rate of Ret-urn Calculation(1980 US$ million)

Net valueAgricultural production benefits (cost) of NetSoy- Coco- Bana- settler Project O&M project

Rice /a beans lb Corn lb nuts Ic nas Id Total labor /e costs7/f costs benefitt

1981/82 - - - - -2.18 - -2.181982/83 0.04 - -0.01 -0.02 0.0l -0.20 -5.10 - -5.291983/84 0.52 - 0.04 -0.02 - 0.54 -0.32 -8.85 - -8.631984/85 1.10 0.02 0.08 -0.02 0.09 i.18 -0.30 -8.08 - -7.201985/86 1.65 0.09 0.14 - 0.18 2.06 -0.35 -3.35 - -1.64

1986/87 2.09 0.22 0.16 - 0.20 2.67 -0.36 - -C 9 2.01198,/88 2.59 0.41 0.18 - 0.24 3.42 -0.36 - -0.30 2.761988/89 3.06 0.60 0.20 0.02 0.27 4.15 -0.36 - -0.30 3.49

1989/90 3.52 0.76 0.20 0.05 0.28 4.81 -0.36 - -0.30 4.151990/91 3.75 0.83 0.21 0.10 0.32 5.21 -0.36 - -0.30 4.551991/92 3.81 0.86 0.21 0.14 0.35 5.37 -0.36 - -0.30 4.71

1992/93 3.81 0.86 0.21 0.18 0.35 5.41 -0.58 - -0.30 4.531993/94 3.81 0.86 0.21 0.22 0.35 5.45 -0.44 - -0.30 4.711994/95 3.81 0.86 0.21 0.27 0.35 5.50 -0.22 - -0.3 4.98

1995/96 3.81 0.86 0.21 0.31 0.35 5.54 -0.25 - -0.30 4.991996/97 3.81 0.86 0.21 0.35 0.35 5.58 -0.06 - -0.30 5.221997/98 3.81 0.86 0.21 0.38 0.35 5.61 0.11 - -0.30 5.421998/99 3.81 0.86 0.21 0.39 0.35 5.62 0.19 - -0.30 5.511999/2000 3.81 0.86 0.21 0.39 0.35 5.E2 0.48 - -0.30 5.80

2015 3_81 0.86 0.21 0.39 0.35 5.62 0.48 - -0.30 5.80

Economic rate of return = 13Z.

la Froz Table 3./b From Table 4./c From Table 5.Td From Tab'e 6./e From Table 9, representirg a netting oct of the opportunity cost of settler labor in the

area of origin (Java/Bali) against off-farm wages of settlers in the project area (Karang

Agung).If Base costs and physical cOutingencies from relevant items In Annex 1, Table 3.

~:,4 WA- I A11. It4

jLepaseotat(ve Farm Modeli

:DLVsic3 Farm O'tpucs ad ipt

Crop year 2a 16683/64 164P4 /A 5 1 665IA",II 7 1987 /;z qRl/66 q69/00 I0M/61I q~ l 16iQ5? 66/tQ 1 1 01/O 1664.'95 jqo,96 lq"4/97 1997/98

Area P lantL i (ha)

Paddy (wet season) n03 ). 2 5 0).75 '1 0. 0. 25 0.35 02 5 0,3 0% ( .5 1.5 02 5 0, 25

Corn (dry godson) 2,3 0,5 (3 . 0.2 0,5 0,5 ). 25 ,5 -54 2 .2S 0 .2 0).2 5

Co0 302t8 0.I 0( 1k(O 1 >0 fj 0 01 O.10 >10 1,1 00 0I 0,1 0. 10rBananas 'i.1'~~~ (>10 020 (>10 07 040 010~~i 010 fl 12,1 1)0I'In 0 ,I 0,( m 01

ftc IdPadUpy (wet acln 5 123 14 4 ' 1.I 25 1 '1$ I75 I / 15 145 1.,75 7's

Sy he-ns (.A ryv s e s,on) - ( ,5 5 070I 0 ,704 '270 > 07 it,70 07 0 0. 70 ('70 (1.70)

I cc lot

Corn (tons/hla) '4 > 1 1 . 2 1.3 IA >2 1,12 I. 1.,2 I,2

Ba' nanas C 1 hunce /(, N11 <O .( 0 w0 I , 300 , 'no. I~ 300 I 307 - 1, )fe) 1 20n I ,nf0 1, 200

tat/v lionsini) - 1,2 1.5 I.' iN' 'I 34 3, '.4 32 3,5 3/ 1,4 3,4 2,1~~~~~~~(nn1) I210 I)o I201 ro I2 fi)nn I ,?n

Prtodklc ci 1onP. dd y (12I 35 .4' 33 '5 ,¼ ,/ (45 .% 45 4 ,, 45 " 4,5 46R5 4A 5

Corn (toins) t1 U( ) NA N 1 ,(5 '-' '5 010,, t,3' In3 04 2,30 1()30 0.312

COCoInult ( Iki,t 5) ' .- 511 350 300l '.00 500 700 800 850)

IIanir11as C huchs . N(N a 'n 60' 3 IS) I 12 0 120 I20 (20 120

'h1~~jca1 1ni!~~ (per hlt /h

t'ei(paddy) (kg) IS (6 2 3 4I 35 65 85 58 ¶8V"V (paddy) (kg) ( 'I (5 Ii 1 (61 2 7 363 92 t 32 26 7 261

j151 (corn A so Ybeans) (kg) IH' (5 I6 I I' 1) in (0 7' I0 30 30 30 0 3 0

I3setNtIlc IdCs ( padI.iv (I) 0, >0 1,2 .1 1" I" 1, . . 17l.1. 11,

Insert lcilies Issybeans) I) - 0, 1,!~. 0, 'I 0,Q .1(, . N 1,N , , , .

Ro'Ieai ct(rl (paddy) (kg) .55( '5 (0. 01,I f~'2 11 .1 6 , 17 I11 '.12I 0,(7I 07I 11, 0.1'

Padd,y seed (kg) 3 .1 V5). I"3 330 50 I0 30 0 30) 30 30

Sceoi soybeansq (kg;) 2'N1

1 ' 101 I >5 70(I 01

Solcorn (kg) 10 11 3 5 ' V 30 30 I1 0 0

t-iho r I npukt s ( per (cnr0)

Fant Iy I labhor hoAN-a1, s(1 3r 1' ;> ,1 -A 4 p6 50)7 54 6I(444SI s SI c

NA 'r-'p yea rs beg~I n wi t Oit w -,sc t ofth l n o I 5C,36o0, 10.,NI ''tIher

-B Perennl -to;' plan'ting' OIntei,;N5 wv b)h n'ppl)e'I t" 1e , it I 1( 21't1I )iN I''I rela,''-A 06 jr-"9~ r n<rssgr/ f Iro (S rr 050 ow t-NN' - o'1i h~ ic ennI c a's a I'Ioc stied to0 f I,

~'r1,s wIll he ippi ted. to hoe I "t],'rnCtia,( 1I11

I(N ONlESIA

0AMP_RFl&0. AATION I1t0JFCT I

Repri-qtert3vue 8 ttler FAmily Income Ailaly83s In-9t89-3-r-x-R J-tDcme1983

(Rp) 3

1983/8. 3984 'i39 8S 3989/86/8th 1)8,/87 1987/88 1Q988/89 13989/90 1990/91 1991 '92 I 992/93 1993/94 1994 /95

Crons Agr !L%,ltorill

3'addv 27, SOCI 1 884 6ot3 .'f .'00 3 S 6O31 .23,60 53 63S000 604, SO0 630,500 8i0,s00 6300,500 630,500 630,500sn 'VI). ~m?) - .)i" 10( ~ 6' ?0- 24, 300 96, 700 9 0 1 9f, 8 0( 79sn) 6' Po3,000 90),ooo 203,0no 203 ,000 2 03, 000 203, 000Corn I , 3 11/ 20. 000 5, 01) '9,400n 79, 400 32,4 00 33,000 33, 000 33,000 33,000 33,000 33,000COVINI)10 - - - - - 13,400 22, 300 26 700 3 5,600 44, 500 53,400

- 36, 000 36, 000 tS, .00 S3 3{o 5n !00 '1,800 6s9, 000 69, 000 ,000 69,0no 69, 00

S,3 ti tatI 1 . 80) 2l6,9,90 379Q90?0 9t) 4)00 bt?,2 ,9P 9900 9 05700 st80 962,20o 97L,100 980,noo 000 90()

6F,j_ndjt,rna 'n

Vrtal fntrti I3e,r 00 ,00 ,?no W.O 3 ,1'00 9, 300 1 l ,80 137, 6(00 19, 300 19, i0n 19,3O 139, 300 19, 300.sP fertt 3 Itrer tOO3 2,40f0 3,0, 3 I,00 6, 800 8,7 00 1,(0 I 1l, 6O I 1, 600 11,600 11,600 1,60 1lnnn,-r 3,IIi di 00 2 40(1 4 ,00 6,100 7, 900 0, 200 11,400 12, 300 12, 100 1-2,300 32,300 12,^300 0xRoet 1, ' 1d' 300 , t0( 400 500 600 pill 800 300 3,0oo 0(3 , 000 ,oo 00,Ono 0,o3000Seed ii, f"'~ ,00 1,0 0no I,3 100 18,800 20 2o '1 ,30( 22,000 22,000 2)2 000 22,00 22,00013lre.l iabor -- 2 60 ?f,0o '7 600 4 , 600 21,600 7,20O 2,40 -

Suh ot. t,I i1 0 44 2O 96,900 il on0 9_ 9t0 8 3800 73,4 _8,6 6 6_00 6,200 66,20o

r1tFtIA llnd Tnx - - - - - 6,0 O ;,CG 1i4, 000 I 5,500 3o , 000 3 8, s3o 1 9, 800

F'et A5triul1tural___e<rme 1,0 noo 2S IO,30 315,200 45 ,500 581,900 69',,0t0 813,900 870,400 828, 100 887,900 895,400 902,900

Off2-Farun FarninKs J lf,()000 68, 000 40,0)0 40, 000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 300,0000 300, 000

rI t a I S t t e rladil _ Income 0 _ 325j8t3 3?5j?00 :492j900 621 ,900 853900 1 400 918, 100 927 900 995,400 1,002,900

g!a hItaned on ph y ItaI ,i ant It I (t of 1n dkits an d outpt p a t resen ted I2 i n Annex 2, Teb 33, paid IabeL dAVe pre nced I nex 2, Table I , andf insanltal pr t~ee presented In AnleX 2, TaMI PA I Al1(l 2.

11 n I(983/85, InitiAl COConut adl bnanakl plantlog malertals (Pp 28,500) tind paddy seed (Rp 8,000) would be supplied to settlers by theprov iniell D epartment of Food Crops Agric u1lturv, It Is ae8eime0 here thelt th3e setLIers would purchase only corn and aoybeAn seedti,rtngt 'IlONCe yeAri. co

Lc t i", oni dAti; Riven in Annex 2, Table 9 And A dli3ly opportunity Wvge rte, of Rp 800.

_

- 79 -

ANNEX 2Table 13

INDONESIA

SWAMP RECLAMATION PROJECT I

Rent and Cost Recovery Calculation Summary

Values per farmM (Rp 000)

A. At Full Agricultural Development

1. Gross value of farm production /a 1,0002. Less cash production costs /a 663. Equals net cash income 9344. Less imputed family labor cost /b 4135. Less imputed farmers- management /c 506. Less allowance for risk/uncertainty /d 2507. Less general taxes /e 508. Equals project rent If 1719. IPEDA land taxes /a 20

B. Discounted Cash Flows over Project Life X

10. Project rent 77011. Project costs (including 0&M costs) 5,03112. Land taxes 8613. Rent recovery (%) 1114. Cost recovery (%) 2

/a From Annex 2, Table 12.

/b 516 davs labor p.a. at Rp 800/day.

/c At 5Z of gross value of farm production.

/d At 25% of gr ss value of farm production.

/e Village taxes, at 5% of gross value of farm production.

/f Project rent is first positive in the sixth year of settlement,at the same time that IPEDA payments are assumed to commence.

ly Net present value of project rent, cost, and land taxes. whichare discoulnted at 10% per year through 2015. Costs include physicalcontingencies and administration.

- 80 -

AN EX 3

INDONESIA

SWAMP RECLAMATION PROJECT I

Schedule of Early Events

Target Date

1. P4S post site manager 3/31/81

2. P4S and DGCCK engage consultants 3/31/81

3. First ICB contract awarded 4/15/81

4 PTPT and DGT post site managers 1/31/82

5. PTPT, DGT and JM1l engage consultants 3/31/82

6. First LCB for clearing of house lots

and for construction of houses and

village facilities

(a) Issue bid documents 9/1/&1

(b) Award contracts 4/15/82

7. Start moving and settling of transmigrants 8/1/82

8. Second LCB for clearing farm plots and

tertiary earthworks

(a) Issue bid documents 4/1/82

(b) Award contracts 8/1/82

9. Fourth LCB for tertiary - and hamlet drair.

outlet structure

(a) Issue bid documents 2/1/84

(b) Award contracts 6/1/84

- 81 -ANNEX 4Page 1

INIDO!ELSIA

SWAMP RECLAMATION PROJECT I

STUDIES AND INVESTIGATIONS

Terms of Reference

I. Nationwide Inventory of Coastal and Near-CoastalSwamp Developments

1. The object of the study, which would be conducted by P4S andconsultants, is to prepare a nationwide inventory of potentially reclaimablecoastal and near-coastal swamps and rank the priority of their development.A second object of the study is to train P4S- staff in the interpretation ofremote sensing techniques, in establishing criteria of reconnaissance surveysand in programming and planning swamp developments. The scope of theinventory is to collect, collate and screen available data, eliminateunsuitable sites, investigate, on a reconnaissance level, sites of anapparent development potential and rank the priority of their developmentaccording to their physical characteristics, available data, etc.

2. P4S and consultants would analyze and interpret satellite imagery,aerial photos and maps, collate and analyze reports on soils and landcapability, existing land use, morphology, forests, tides, floods, waterquality and fisheries. After screening the data and eliminating unsuitablesites, supplementary field data, on a reconnaissance level, would becollected for apparent, promising, sites, and analyzed. In this process,particular attention would be given to the dynamics of settlement (throughtime ser!e' of satellite Imagery and aerial photos), and to morphologicalchanges.

3. At the conclusion of this work phase, a list of potentialdevelopment sites wouild be prepared, ranked by their development priority.Consultants would also prepare terms of reference for master plan andfeasibility studies, detailing needs for minimum additional data required ateach work phase, and feasible techniques of obtaining them, and establishingnecessary manpower requirements.

4. P4S would provide all available data to consultants conducting thestudy, review all consultant reports, follow the progress of works andevaluate results prior to the departure of the consultants. Work is expectedto be completed within 36 months of the arrival of the consultant staff.

- 82 -

A:.NEX 4Page 2

.MNPOWER, EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES AND COST ESTIMATE

LocalExpatriate Technicians &

Engineers /a Engineers /a support staff Totai(man-conths)

I. Manpower

Land resources specialists(incl team leader) 36 72 144

iiydrologist 36 108 216

Draiaage engineer 24 60 120Forest expert 6 -Short-term specialists 18 -

Total 120 240 480

Lnit cost USS 12,100 2,062 660

Total cost LSS000 1,452 494.9 316.8 2,263.7

II. Equipment, Supplies Quantity Unit cost Total costUsS -000

Boats 3 12iater and soil testing equipment LS 3-

Stereoscopic equipment LS 35Satellite imagery and

aerial photos LS 150

Total 255

Ill Training

Two fellowships in remote

sensing interpretation and

in reconnaissance techniques LS 50

Base cost 1981/82 1982/83 1983/84

IV- Total Cost of Study ---- (US$S000) - ----------

Xanpower 2,263.7 453 905.3 905.4

Equipment, supplies 255.5 100 155 -

Training 50.0 25 25

Total base cost 2 568 578 1,085.3 905.4

/a Including academi-ally qualified professionals of other disciplines-

- 83 -ANNFEX 4Page 3

II- INVESTIGATION OF EXISTING SWAMP DEVELOPNF1:XS FOR UPGRADING

1. The object of the investigation, which would he conducted by P4Sand b, consultants, is to determine upgrading needs of about 12 existingGovernment-sponsored and about 6 spontaneous swamp developments In Sumatra

and Kalimantan. the investigations would primarily focus on the Infra-

structure, soils, cropping patterns, pest and weed controls, and yield

responses to water management and other inputs. Socio-economic conditions in

the satne areas would be investigated separately under a study funded underTrans=igration 1I (Loan 170 7/Cr. 919-IN')) by teams from local universities

(Sriwijaya University in Smatra and Lamhung Mangkurat TJniversity in

Kalimantan).

2. P4S and consuitants would examine characteristics, operational

features and conditions of the hydranlic infrastructure in the selected

developments and note deficiencies and upgrading requirements. They wouldcollect and analyze data on the extent and depth of inundations resultingfrom tides, floods or rain; the quality of tidal water during the dry and wetseason, and its effect on soils and crops. Consultants would monitorperiodically quality of drainage effluents, soil pli and study the subsidence

and oxidation of peats-

3. P4S and consultants would determine past and present cropping

patterns, cropping intensities, inputs a.-_ yields and assess factorsconstraining the attainment of higher yields. They would prepare a shortfeasibility study of upgrading three selected developments, including two

Government-sponsored and one spontaneous (development. Finally, they wouldprepare a work program for follow-up surveys, desions and implementation,specifying data requirements and site specific methodologies for surveys and

designs.

4- P4S would coordinate this study with the socio-economic surveyand the ecological impact study, follow and review the consultants- work and

all their reports, and evaluate it prior to the consultants- departur-?. T!ork

is expected to be completed within 36 months after the arrival of

consjltant staff.

- 84 -

ANNEX 4Page 4

MANPOWER, EQUIPMENT, SU-PPLIES AND COST ESTIMATE

LocalExpatriate Technicians SEngineers /a Engineers /a support staff Total… ------ …- (man-months) ----------

I. Manpower

Hydraulic engineers(incl tea-m leader) 36 72 144

Agronornists 12 24 48Soil experts 12 12 24Hydrologists 3 12 24Economists 3 -

Short-term specialists 6 -

Total 72 120 240

Unit cost US$ 12,100 2,062 660

Total cost USS000 871.2 247.4 158.4 1,277.0

Ii. Equipment, Supplies Quantity Unit cost Total cost------ …US$- 000

Boats 6 12 72Meteorological and hydrometric

equipment LS '50Water and soil testing equipment 2 35 70Surveying equipment LS 80

Total 372

Base cost 981/82 1982/83 1983,/84III. Total Cost of Study - (US$-O00)

Manpower 1,277 319.3 o38.5 319.2Equipment, supplies 372 280.0 92.0 -

Total hase cost 1,649 599.3 730.5 319.2

/a Including academically qualified professionals of other &dsciplines.

-85-ANNEX 4Page 5

III. IMPACT STUDY OF SWAMP DEVELOPMENTS

1.. The object of the study, whIch would be conducted by P4S and byconsultants, is to assess the ecological *.mpact of swamp developments andformulate integrated area management strategies and related monitoring andvalaation procedures.

2. Consultants would investigate the ecological impact in about 6existing, Government-sponsored, swamp developments and spontaneous-settledareas included amongst the developments which would be studied forupgrading (Sttudy 1I), focussing, inter alia on the following issues:

(a) the effects of deforestation and agriculture on river andestuarine ecology and fisheries surrounding developed areas;

(b) the effects of swamp developments on pests and malaria;

(c) the effects of swamp developments on soil productivity andphysical stability (subsistence of soils);

(d) the effects of swamp development on the chemical andbacteriological quality of water in svstems within and surroundingdeveloped areas during dry and wet seasons;

(e) the effect of Government-sponsored developments on the localpopulation and on spontaneotus settlers;

(f) together with P4S staff formulate management development models,optimizing the exploitation of all available resources.

3. At the conclusion of the study, consultants would express theirfindings in terms which could be applied in monitoring, and would preparedetailed terms of reference for monitoring and evaluation procedures of swampdevelopments.

4. P4S would participate in this study, coordinate it with Studies Iand II under this project, review the consultants- reports, follow progress,and evaluate findings prior to the departure of the consultants. The studywould be expected L') be completed within 24 months after the arrival ofc nsultaut staff.

- 86-ANNEX 4Page 6

MANPOWER, EQUIPI1ENT, SUPPLIES AND COST ESTI1ATE

_ _ _ _ _ _ Ic aExpatriate Technicians &Engineers /a Engineers ia support staff Total

- (man-months) -----

I. Manpower

Environmentalist 5 48 96Fishery experts 2 30 60Agronomists 3 30 60Resource Economist 2 - -

Total 12 108 216

Unit cost US$ 12,100 2,062 660

Total cost US$-000 145.2 222-7 142.6 510.5

II. Equipment, Supplies Quantity Unit cost Total costUS$ -000

Water and soil testing equipment 2 35 70Laboratory and fish sampling LS 50equipment

Total 120

llI. Training

Two fellowships in ecologicimpact studies LS 50

Base cost 1981/82 1982/83IV. Total Cost of Study ----… -S(US00000)- -…

Manpower 510.5 299.7 210.8Equipment, supplies 120.0 120.0 -Training 50.0 50.0

Total base cost 680.5 469.7 210.8

/a Including academically qualified professionals of other disciplines.

- 87 -

ANNEX 4

Page 7

IV. GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION AT KARANG ACUNG

1. The object of the investigation, which would be sponsored by P4Sand conducted by consultants is to assess the availability of groundwaterat Karang Agung for drinking purposes and to analy7e the feasibility of its

exploitation.

2- Consultants would collect and collate hydro-geologic data, Prepare

a plan and drill test borings at about 12 sites. T)rillings would be

logged, test pumped and the quality of the water would he analyzed chenicallyand bacteriologically.

3. Based on the results of the test borings and on estimated costsof production wells, consultants would analyze the feasibility of groundwater

exploitation in the Karang Agung area for drinking purposes.

4. P4S would review the consultants reports, follow progress andevaluate findings prior to the departure of the consultants. The study wouldbe expected to be completed within 24 months after the arrival of consultantstaff.

- 38 -

ANNEX 4Page 8

MANPOWER, EQUIPMENT, SERVICES AND COST ESTIMATE

LocalExpatriate Technicians &Engineers /a Engineers /a support staff Total

-- … (man-months)

I. Manpower

Groundwater hydrologists 12 42 96Drilling superintendent 6 -

Total 12 48 96

Unit cost US$ 12,100 2,062 660

Total cost USS-000 145.2 99 63.4 307.6

II. Equipment, Supplies Quantity Unit cost Total cost----- uSs $-000

Use of portable drilling equipment LS 140Casings and screens 500 m 30 15Use of compressor LS 40Water level and qualitytesting equipment 5 5 25

Total 220

Base cost 1981/82 1982/83III. Total Cost of Study - (US$'000)

Manpower 397.6 230.6 77Equipment, supplies 220.0 220 -

Total base cost 527.6 450.6 77

la Including other academically qualified professionals and qualiWieddrilling superintendents.

- 39 -

ANNEX 4Page 9

V. MONITORING THE PHYSICAL, ECOLOGICAL AND SOCIO-ECON(' G IMPACTGF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

1. The objective of monitoring which would be conducted by P4S, DGFCA,DG Fisheries, DGT and consultants is to study the effects of the proposedproject on soils, water, fishes and people.

2. Employing procedures developed under Study II the proposed projectwould be monitored for a period of abou- five years (starting in the fifthimplementation year) focussing, inter alia, on the following subjects underthe respoasibility of agencies listed in brackets:

- operation and maintenance of the hydraulic system (P4S)- cropping patterns and their response to soil-water management and

inputs (DGFCA)- changes in water quality in the project-s hydraulic systems and

in the neighboring river systems (P4S)- subsidence of soils (P4S)- changes in soil fertility (DGFCA)- effects on fish in surrounding rivers (DC Fisheries)- incidence and prevention of pests (DGFCA)- actual farm budgets and farm incomes (DCFCA)- off-farm activities, (DGT) and- development of villages and of supporting social andadministrative services (DOT)

3. P4S would coordinate all monitoring activities, eview theconsultants reports, follow progress and evaluate findings semi-annually. Afinal report would be issued five-and-a-half years after the start ofmonitoring operations-

- 90

ANNEX 4Page 10

MANPOWER, EQUIPMENT, SERVICES AND COST ES-rIMATE

LocalExpatriate Technicians &Engineers /a Engineers /a support staff Total

(man-months)

I. Manpower

Hydraulic engineers 3 15 30Soil experts 2 10 30Agronomists 2 15 20Sociologists 2 10 20Fishery experts - 10 20

Total 9 60 120

Unit cost US5$ 12,100 2,062 660

Total cost US$000 108.9 123.7 79.2 311

II. Equipment, Supplies Quantity Unit cost Total costUs$-Oo0

Meteorological and hydrometricequipment LS 68

Surveying equipment LS 75Water and soil testing equipment 2 35 70Laboratory equipment LS 120

Total 333

III. Total Cost of Study Base Cost 1982/83 1985/86…-- --- US$000 -

Manpower 311.8 311.8Equipment, supplies 333.0 333

Total base cost 644.8 333 311.8

/a Including academically qualified professi>nals of other disciplines.

91 -

ANNEX 5

INDONESIA

SWAMP RECLAMATION PROJECT I

List of References

1. "Feasibility Study of the Karang Agung Area, Main Report," Nede>-Euroconsult, August 1978.

2. "Feasibility Study of the Karang Agung Area, Annex M, 9,000 ha Implemen-tation Project," Nedeco-Etiroconsult, October 1979.

3. "Agro Socioeconomic Study in the Tidal Swamp Area of Karang Agung,Sub-P4S South Sumatra, Final Report," Agro-Economic survey (llidayat, Suhud.V.T. Manurung) for Ministry of Public Works, March 1978.

4. "Social and Economic Aspects of Tidal Swamp Land Development," WilliamL. Collier, February 5, 1979.

5- "Development Problems and Conflicts in the Coastal Zone of Sumatra:Swamps are for People,' William L. Collier, December 18, 1978.

iNDONESIASWAMP RECLAMATION PROJECT I

Implerimenta1)on Sehedule

1 ¢961 66e2 t981 0 4384

jO14611213 61"789 01111 12 1h1 71 31 6j 66 Ol 2 3 4 6 6 7 6 6 ¶0 1112 ¶ 2 3 4 6 6 766 1611 2 2 4 6 613 7 8 111

ACTlVITtS\ llWoD4%i{DFilc.l Y.., . 1981M8 I 192830t83 A4 1084185 1 188/88

\1RDP Fl., Yao, 1881 1662 1383 1D84 I 1988

. b c - = -Al

I /n snonoflfouxlsul8st l l l l l l | t $ r 7 7; 7 ! | | 1 < w LLLi | ! { i | [ | | { {~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~41 OV 1;¶8¶2 8 6 1 ~j18I116 2j81

No.,1A.i, -o _ 8 I2 ll 10 6 I I 1 SIII3I 16 17 1 12 18 18 10 9 6 6 161 16 17 168

IK0.0m4 o. K2'000 166.000 t.1I

K200 c to K140 182,80 C. to1Kn,200 . K6, 04 166800;nn14 6

KS-W,20 K616,85 320,000 c,t

Pi2r .kn 1. too cI e I l D tLJI

01 821to 160,800o,n,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~rrl s-2t2

P4 3,t. k I IOOo,El

P3 87 0'k 160.000w~I4

P5 Of,o. 0 8 con,,g is 1,0

041 32-o 11 .8,0.,,0 t 4

23 16 - 28G.800t,w

Vs. P6 ;0 X.t l3

600too!

Ct,,;,.6 0.1 lI0,&I4 Ott,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~ P P P

Con,,t,.ct,oool llouOos .04 OOCtI, 8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i 2 843 PS i8poWtN.lfi litWm e,m"o

ClsmiNof F1 4-n P1011

PI 1.6680h., l

P2 44860, 02

PA 7640 h.

P3 2.1280he,

Sobdivil- .04 7.Tit- S., II1nyi P

c;cl,lroClto1 04 P.mt.,4, 8

140,, Ol.tb.t, in to.oto.,. ,otlt to.olmttbuo000,0., o 4ts4110a ttttoll#l lot .Coo,¶lOtt. ,Vt,rldBn4t-7187Not.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

0

Organization o4 the Directorate Benerat o4 Water Re.ourees DGv 86opmanf:

MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS

ASSISTANTS TO IMINISTER OF DIRECTOR.GENERAL OF

PUBLIC WORKS _ WA TER RESOURCES

FOR WATER RE- DEVELOPMENTSOURCES DEVELOP_

MENT 12i

DIVISION OF FOREIGN

SEORETAF-HATLOAN ADMINISTRATION

ZLII -- -...,_ -'I,

DIRECTORATE OF DIRECTORATE DIRECTORATE OF DIRECTORATE ORECORA O HYDFAULiC

PROGRAMMING OF RIVERS | SWAMPS OF IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT ENGINEERING

f P4SPROJECT UNIT GENERAL MANAGER

FOR TIDAL SVVAMP PROSiDA/PIBDRECLAMATION

Worvd Bmnk - 18765

INDONESIASWAMP RECLAMATION PROJECT I

P48 Or94anztt,on Chart

Alst~~ ~ ~~~ ic-. o 5t11

| A,ttUnI I l AsIdoanl iI A A,,,s,,n, 111 8 k - 21493

| 0 91 pr-n P,,p,rlion 5*..1( OPX tio... Kdmrflnbn Cpmrrtons F ncsSt

Stn,1,tcs |~nn LOIC P0.t Con.t caon _

Ir.- In, r S Imps- fi IIr

SI|I|flu /|t tUn&f* | *tw naqe4 | | -o ,0 S[ ' TItnon Sooro1tnnTtd | |Ot;npmnmnl | | Q,^M. { 1* Ic I OIliner,;g||Pi,ninn;Q 4 P.nmno'g | *Imnn@t4 uR>i 2;zp moIotS |AS' T^ IAg "e A.,,nl Aol, fl _ 2 [ A n

Figure 4. 3

INDONESIASWAMP RECLAMATION PROJECT I

P4S Provincial Office Organization

P4S Provirwial Manager

Assistant Manager

Cashier

Head of ~Staff|

Supervisor| Proect Manage

Technical Supervisors Technica Site Managers

Affairs a r

O&M O&M

Personnel n SiteFnnel

Finance & OSupervnoesm nin. Admin|

1W'Nor kshop r

Wor!d Bank - 2491

Figure 5.1

INDONESIASWAMP RECLAMATION PROJECT IProposed Field Plot Cropping Calendar

j F M A M i J A S 0 N D

T~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Wet SeasDn T TPaddy M

16,400 ha)H

CDry Season

Soybean} |M-_

(2.240 hal

HNotation:C - CultivationN - Nursery

T - Transplant

M -Management

H - Harvest

-Avmage

-0 - --DependableRainfall (rqn)

400_

325 (Total 2,390mm)

3~(0 7 8 300

250~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5

-- 220 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~225200 11 55

200 1 t65 j < t 60

_j L1t40 1 lTocal 1697mm)

Dependar,!e 100 100 100 92 1

Rainfall (mm) L-.20 52 7 _~~145

J F M A M J J A S O N D

World Bank -21085

30 0 . 36 109* 1120

--MALAYSIAMALAYS I

< SINGAPOREb- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~.

=. vb

,OOOha~~~~~~e'oPio.,9 R i .

P.do-; itstroi D _ - K A L I M A\ -' ~~~Subzt , _t

.Kaf4nq A9J0f S%Op Study Area 200,000 ha\ 2g . Beiiti o ___ , BELITUNG .BANGKA 120,009hx

\ 1 ,/inKAxy Amc Kar~g Awrg Protect Ar 9.000 ha 120 -- h\\b';<15,000ha g > Mesoji S0anpStudy Ares

8es}S\ - 2 ~ \ 59.000ha _

\ Z~~~~~Way Se ouzi Extension axldJ\ rrs,etleat Projet 25,000 ha

b,k 0 ,0-0aySpnhSSrt25f0h

Sekau SubiStuieCt

Bekri Sub-proiect 8,600 1 65,000 ht-

way Kandis Sub-project t250iha iuiung Subrojct24300 ha1n mngtS | Draiqage Sub-proteCt 5.0W0

* Way KeqSub&roiCt3.b hi * Dra J-ive h t Projec- 253.000 ha-, - 2_ .Project4 Oha /250haT-D-

t~h D Serio Rk,e( Oraf.w~ &INDONESIA S 'K Rentang Sb-proyeC 92000 FoodhranPr

~~~~AKAR1 -m,'-Cmfsb;> SdkuD-sae ui,po a30,

AIrAMP RECLAMAT ION PROJECT I 7r'& 12CS .OO

upper & Lower Jaeilrd tw 'anWduk Kero SCibeeT Study Area N / i4s.

* PROJECT AREA Coktuh Stu4y Area

SWAMP STUDY AREAS 7.OD)ha Cila-dok Study Area jS5s80 ha -Lw iau-- S ,

; . ,IRRIGATlON PROJECTS I-XV Cont Flood P-ro

ROADS CirebonPnopec -rFPp g

RIVERS 34MW h di,rn 4 STbeti I Mad,.... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Reh.bilitwtion

INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARIES st

O #00 200 300 z00 SOO .

KI[CMETERS

e tOO 200 300

MILES

I00* lO? 109-

IBRD 14919lt* 11502 118° 121° 1i4 APRIL 1980D

^1AYSIA J

Sub - pro!ml

) B.o~~~~~~

M A N T A N

rtumbaa Study A-ae

B-tok / Pii s Area< r~-or Wal.kamo 20,i00ha

Omt Studv 30A)ha

S U L AW E S IBon¶ormo,n -y Cern-oo >

NoMt S,d~n 5 jb woiC6000 ha

Sadan S Flood Conto;Si KolokoDrainage StuLdy Area

54,000 ha

U.oog 'od-g ii*

Th1s mp tea bee prae by thebpeaje 30.00 ha Woda1 8_**s stf f exckca,.y f,

tnpro,ect ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~the ccaea,en-cv of Vhe rcede,~ of

* Kezrn Stud7. Arez 3600 haiKetroSnsdvAres ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Th 3.0h 7otcd xfd7- tAhd

MAEfltgA - h'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~budwAr sho.wn 00 efs map,gs ' MADi)UR A do, 0 nS r iJ. a" the pat of rh

Wolid B* and ft aff5,aieany_-wq>ean Sam Sub-pio07s lodgmtw 0o the 5evad tta of.anipoan - a Sub-project :i?p ?ts0to y 0 'Y 7doe

o _ )e_tnr t e of such .trn s

. i tr('38on7UOt'LOMBOK Bl ^, PHILIPPINES

WX>-d' !jvD tfomtoon . MAA-LAYSIA -

PL-kaen5; _ F ._.Sub-proiect ' - - -

229,000 ha SUMBAWA

AREA Ot MAP- i . ir_ ._ lie

4crH_ J1 5° ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~PROJECT LOCATION 1ITYPICAL BlOCK LAYOU.T( ,~~~~MALAYSIA . .1.N rICt7r Ei Plra als

jnSUM4R, Swamp carea i -- | - -1_ -SecondJary c inr,ls

v / : i 9 ',V7~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Wter level r'ecor'eIs 1 l -s~rrir afi

\ l g ~~RIAI) ,, tv51NGAPCRE 090oRrxraflrJu MQetorological Station ;s iL _ 4.........i, IL1....... i-F vbelQd biflnds

(r & / . ~~S U, A T R A, t o lErr-. * Ruilwanys _ r C *---- Hsme l;o. ( JAUrtl , , 4 , -~- ProuircilJl ttolJredOy j | * --^r !" r -M*1 it*-r1 -............................... '_H'r| -t fJrcetrs way

''#ESTurnFuo�sR4 C11 BI i(5tI; w lhiOS

-Ba~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(. v l-fl s o , j 1 .L , 30 I ( L . 0er_ ) \*~ > s < ['tAA), 7* GJhrr'¢7§,5nAN r ............ t- 4 ,,t, ,,.,.,.; ,. .,,, . _ 0 so

f ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~)-.- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`AA~ A- C?_._.

_,G

i\ ' %t w}' / s GE~~~~~NERAL PlQN ;(TAi //<\ < / / \; Project orea houndary~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

_ _ Z .X \ \beX / / \ -, ' . ~ ~ ~~~~~~:~~~ :': CAavlqJ, 'o .1 cI I i ai

-, - ~~~~SWAMP RECLAMATIONPRJCI'GENERAL PLAN

Project orea boundary.. ZNavigation canal

.Primary canals-- Secondary canals

\ Nk - '~~~~~~ Contours (meters)N ~~~~~~Forest areaibudr

Hofl boundaryeA- x's ,~~~~~~~~~~~~~, », / 7 N , ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4 din village

--, ¼>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~fo ool t,,- \ I / V~~~tI'( l lthIAYOen'

:34~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4

----------- o de It ¶8

'N~~~~'0

-, 7~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

rNs6)p pr wpp~ /y ,4 Ak,9 f-,

f h68A41 i ' IP0t M~hc 1 ' 11ho v S61A"ffi1h, ~W00IN , p,, 1~ 14,/ RtA "O 1.

A(a,14, ' 0 l~ 1 Y...... an o,Se16/

tccowre ofT"/