Case study 1 nonie meeting in lisbon october 1 2008
Download
1 / 20

Impact evaluation for: - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 310 Views
  • Uploaded on

The small farmers lack access to credit, technical know-how, farm implements, etc, which result in the low productivity of the small farms. ...

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Impact evaluation for: ' - Kelvin_Ajay


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Case study 1 nonie meeting in lisbon october 1 2008 l.jpg

Impact evaluation for:Special Program for Food Security and Productivity Enhancement of Small Farmers in Pakistan(Crop Maximization Project-II)

Case study 1

NONIE meeting in Lisbon

October 1, 2008

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Section a presentation of project l.jpg

Section A: Presentation of project

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Area and target group l.jpg
Area and Target Group

  • Areas of intervention: 1,012 Villages: Punjab 430, Sindh 230, NWFP 160, Balochistan 150, AJK 40 and FATA 2.

  • Description of target group or beneficiaries: Small Farmers with land holding of up to 20 acres in Punjab, 25 acres in Sindh & Balochistan, 15 acres in NWFP and 5 acres in AJ&K.

  • Size of the target group: About 30,360 farmers in 1,012 villages

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Description of existing data on beneficiaries before the program started l.jpg
Description of existing data on beneficiaries before the program started:

There is considerable gap between the yield per acre of a progressive farmer and a small farmer. The small farmers lack access to credit, technical know-how, farm implements, etc, which result in the low productivity of the small farms. The credit to these farmers is provided by middlemen (Arhties) who give the farmer rate of their choice for his produce. This project proposes to help small farmers get out of the clutches of these middlemen.

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Brief description of the problem tackled by the project l.jpg
Brief description of the problem tackled by the project: program started:

  • The project envisages enhancement of farm productivity and sustainability of agriculture for food security. It will establish collective institutions, i.e., beneficiary owned and managed 1,012 Village Organizations (VOs) in 1,012 villages of 27 districts of all the provinces, AJ&K and FATA for procurement of critical inputs / services, marketing of outputs and diversification of income generating activities. It will be a technology-led project with main focus on small and resource poor farmers having land holdings below 25 acres.

  • A pilot project was implemented in three districts, popularly known as Sargodha Model. Finding the results to be encouraging, increase in productivity by about 30 %, Crop Maximization Project (CMP) was launched in 109 villages. Upon evaluation of this project, it was decided to implement the project on 1,012 villages, albeit with certain modifications.

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Specific objectives l.jpg
Specific Objectives program started:

a). Increase agricultural productivity in rural areas of Pakistan.

b). Enhance food security through provision of sustainable livelihood programs.

c). Empower small farmers and agricultural producers through the establishment of self-managed rural organizations backed by appropriate laws and regulations that enable them to manage their resources efficiently and become profitable market oriented entities.

d). Build sustainable financial mechanisms to channel smallholder’s own resources as well as external investments into the smallholder agriculture sector.

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Specific services delivered to the project beneficiaries participants l.jpg
SPECIFIC SERVICES DELIVERED TO THE PROJECT BENEFICIARIES/ PARTICIPANTS

  • Organizing and empowering farmer’s community through social mobilization, formation / registration / empowerment of 1,012 Village Organizations (VOs) and establishment / operation of revolving fund by VOs.

  • Revolving Fund: To solve credit problems of small farmers, a Revolving Fund of Rs. 4.391 billion will be established in 1,012 villages, 50% of which will be recovered in 5 equal installments starting from 6th year of loan disbursement. The remaining 50% will be Government equity. The VOs will extend the input loan to the farmers at 10% handling charges. The revolving fund will be recovered by the concerned revenue department of the District Governments from VOs and returned to the Federal Government.

  • Capacity building for crop productivity and income enhancement through training of VOs for administrative, financial and business management, farmers field schools, short-term training, field days / meetings, study tours, workshops, seminars, etc. It involves training to 2,676 staff and 25,040 farmers.

  • Crop productivity Enhancement: Crops such as wheat, cotton, rice, maize, sugarcane, potato, oilseeds, pulses and vegetables will be planted on an area of 1,680,860 acres with the target to enhance their productivity by 35%.

  • Small Animal Health Units / Animal Breeding Farms: About 1,012 each of animal breeding farms / health units will be established in the project area.

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Specific services cont d l.jpg
SPECIFIC SERVICES Cont’d PARTICIPANTS

  • Market linkages development through formation of 2,900/340 Commodity Specific Groups / Clusters (CSGs/CSCs), linkage producers with market functionaries / value chains, linkage producers with financial institutions, facilitating technical support, facilitating capacity building and training, building physical sale and marketing points.

  • Establishment of Farm Services Centers / Implement Pools in each village or a cluster of 3-5 villages to facilitate farmers in the availability of farm machinery: 80% cost will be borne by the project and 20% by the farmers. Rent of implements will go to revolving fund.

  • Input Sale/Marketing Centers (66 in total) working as houses of sale / marketing of inputs and farmer’s produce will also be established in one cluster of 30 villages.

  • Establishment of small enterprises through income diversification interventions such as establishment of enterprise clusters, rural poultry farming, fish farming, off-season vegetable production, aquaculture, bee farming, provision of specialized farm services, goat and sheep farming, calf farming, dairy farming, feed mill, inputs sale centers, milk collection centers, establishment of fruit and forest plant nurseries, introduction and promotion of women operated homestead tube plant nurseries. For these, 80% cost will be borne by the project and 20% upfront by the beneficiary farmers. The Project cost will be recovered in 24 equal installments along with 10% handling charges.

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Section b impact evaluation of project l.jpg

Section B PARTICIPANTS: Impact evaluation of project

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Evaluation framework and context l.jpg
Evaluation framework and context PARTICIPANTS

  • Baseline study for the 1012 villages with village profiles, income of farmers, use of technique, …

  • Household survey for Pakistan

  • Planning commission is monitoring

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Evaluation questions l.jpg
Evaluation questions PARTICIPANTS

  • How much did household income go up in participating households?

  • Did agricultural productivity go up due to the project?

  • Did the dependence to middlemen go down?

  • Are there any unintended effects, e.g. environmental effects?

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Outcome indicators l.jpg
Outcome indicators PARTICIPANTS

  • Household income

  • Yield per acre

  • Months of food availability, number of meals

  • % borrowed from middlemen, % of yield sold to the market

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Theory and results chain l.jpg
Theory and results-chain PARTICIPANTS

  • Lower prices for inputs incl. credits plus improved agricultural practices plus decent prices for output

  • will lead to higher income of household will lead to better food security

  • More access to credits will lead to higher productivity will lead to higher food security

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Evaluation design l.jpg
Evaluation design PARTICIPANTS

To make with and without comparison

  • Either add an immediate baseline on other villages (of how many?)

  • Or try to implement a randomized approach on sequencing implementation

  • Use propensity score matching to compare similar households with and without

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Challenges and risks l.jpg
Challenges and risks PARTICIPANTS

  • To project implementation

  • Natural disaster, e.g. drought, earthquake

  • terrorism

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Methodology l.jpg
Methodology PARTICIPANTS

  • Quantitative methods to compare with and without

  • Qualitative survey (interviews of a restricted number of (150?) Households) to find out why the effect occurred

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Other remarks l.jpg
Other remarks PARTICIPANTS

  • The objective of the evaluation might influence the evaluation question:

  • If it is to scale up the project

  • If it is to modify the project

  • If it is to target the roll out

  • The question could be:

  • What worked under what conditions

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Management l.jpg
Management PARTICIPANTS

  • [Insert text on evaluation management here]

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Expected results l.jpg
Expected results PARTICIPANTS

  • [Insert text on expected evaluation results here]

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


Expected conclusions l.jpg
Expected conclusions PARTICIPANTS

  • [Insert text on expected evaluation conclusions here]

Network of Networks on Impact Evaluation


ad