Document of

The World Bank

FOR OMCIAL USE ONLY

Report No. 11093-GM

STAFF APPRAISAL REPORT

THE GAMBIA

AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT

DECEMBER 1, 1992

Africa RegionSahelian DepartmentAgriculture Division

This document bas 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 EOUIVALENTS

Currency Unit = Dalasi

US$1.00 = 9.1 Dalasis

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

Metric System

GOVERNMENT FISCAL YEAR

July 1 - June 30

FOR OMCL4 USE ONLY

ABBREVLiTIONS AND ACRONYMS

ACCND Advisory Committee for the Coordination of Non-Govemme_a OrpanizationsACU Agricultural Communications Unit of DASADP-II Agricultural Development Project IIARF Agricultural Research FundAPMU Agricultural Pest Management UnitATI Animal Traction InstructorsDAC Divisional Agricultural CoordinatorDAO Divisional Agricultural OfficeDAR Department of Agricultural ResearchDAS Department of Agricultural Services (Ministry of Agriculture)DEC District Extension CenterDES District Extension SupervisorDLS Department of Livestock ServicesDNFE Department of Non-Formal EducationDOP Department of PlanningDPS/PC Deputy Permanent Secretary/Project CoordinatorEAP Environmental Action PlanERP Economic Recovery ProgramEU Environment Unit of MNREFNU Food and Nutrition UnitGARD Gambia Agricultural Research and Diversification ProjectGARF Gambia Agricultural Research FundGARS Gambia Agricultural Research SystemGCU Gambia Cooperative UnionGOTG Government of the GambiaIFAD International Fund for Agricultural DevelopmentITC International Trypanotolerance CenterJPSP Jahaly-Pacharr Smallholder (Irrigation) ProjetMOA Ministry of AgricultureMNRE Ministry of Natural Resources and the EnvironmentNARB National Agricultural Research BoardNARI National Agricultura Research InstituteNARS National Agricultural Research SystemNASS National Agricultural Sample SurveyNGO Non-Governmental OrganizationNRMF Natural Resources Management FundODA Overseas Development AdministrationPAC Program Advisory CommitteePSU Project Support UnitSMS Subject Matter SpecialistSPAAR Special Program for African Agricultural ResearchSWMU Soil and Water Management Unit (Ministry of Agriculture)TANGO Association of Non-Governmental OrganizationsTO Training OfficerTS Technical Secretariat (NARB)UNDP United Nations Development ProgramUSAID United States Agency for International DevelopmentVEW Village Extension Worker

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performanceof their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be discbosed without World Bank authoriation.

THE GAMBIA

AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT

STAFF APPRAISAL REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTI

Pam No.

Credit and Proiect Summary .................................................

1. BACKGROUND

A. Introduction ...................................................... 1B. The Agricultural Sector ............................................... 1C. Government and Bank Strategy in the Sector .................................. 3D. Lessons from Past Agricultural Project Lending, especiaUy ADP-II .................... 4

I. AGRICULTURAL INSTITUTIONS AND SUPPORT SERVICES

A. Agricultural Institutions .SB. Agricultural and Livestock Extension. 7C. Agricultural Research. 8D. Agricultural Credit .10E. Functional Literacy .11F. Farmers' Organizations .11

HI. THE PROJECT

A. Rationale ....................................................... 11B. Summary Description .12C. Detailed Features .12D. Project Cost and Financing .18E. Procurement .20F. Disbursements .22

IV. PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

A. Project Organization, Management and Financial Monitoring .24B. Implementation of the Sector Analysis and Planning Component. 25C. Implementation of the Extension Component. 25D. Implementation of the Agricultural Research Component. 26E. Implementation of the Component to Promote Self-Reliance and Farmer Empowerment .29F. Financial Management and Reporting .31G. Training and Technical Assistance .31H. Implementation and Effectiveness Monitoring .31

V. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT. BENEFITS AND RISKS

A. Environmental Impact ................................................ 32B. Benefits ......................................................... 33C. Sustainability ..................................................... 33D. Justification ...................................................... 34E. Risks .......................................................... 35

VI. ASSURANCES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................... 35

This report is based on the findings of an IDA/IFAD appraisal mission, which visited The Gambia in April/May 1992.The appraisal mission comprised Mies/Messrs. F. Schorosch (Mission Leader), 1. Cerych, and J. Masteon, AFSAG,and 1. Weijenberg, AFTAG, IDA; and M. van Offelen (Project Controller), IFAD and T. Rychener, S.V.S. Shastry,N. Femando, and G. Onaba ([FAD consultants). Peer reviewers were Mr. V. Venkatesan and Ms. J. Murphy. Thewordprocessing of this report was done by Mmes G. Rohan and D. Dietrich. Ms. K. Marshall and Mr. S. Darghouthare the Department Director and Managing Division Chief, respectively, for this operation.

Table of Content (continued)

Pane No.

ANNEXe

Annex la: Evaluation of Effectiveness of DAS Crop Extension ........................... 37

Annex lb: Agriculturl Research Component ...................................... 42

Annex 2: Technical Recommendations Available ................................... 45

Annex 3: Training Component .............................................. 47

Annex 4: Indicative List of Key Indicators for Extension .............................. 51

Annex 5: Project Cost Tables .. 53Table 1: Project Cost Summary .53Table 2: Summary Accounts Cost Summary .54Table 3: Summary Account by Project Component .55Table 4: Summary Accounts by Year ..... 61

Annex 6: Estimated Schedule of Disbursements of the IDA Credit .63

Annex 7: Supervision Plan .64

Annex 8: Costs and Benefits .66

Annex 9: Project Implementation Schedule .68

Annex 10: Organizational Charts .............................................. 70

Annex 11: Documents contained in the Project File .................................. 72

MAP: IBRD N 23977.

- i -

THE GAMBIA

AGRICULTURL SERVICES PROJECT

CREDIT AND PROJECT SUMMARY

Borrower : The Gambia

Beneficiais Farmers and herders, Ministry of Agriculture and National Agricultural ResearchBoard (NARB)

Amount SDR 8.8 million (US$12.3 million)

Terms : Standard IDA terms, with 40 years maturity.

Relending Terms Part of the proceeds of the Credit would be passed on by Government in grantform to the National Agricultural Research Board (NARB).

?roject 'MThe project aims to generate increased agricultural productivity and sustainedDescription growth of the incomes of small farming families, through the strengthening of

support services in agricultural extension and research, training and thepromotion of farmer self-reliance and empowerment. The main components ofthe project are: (i) strengthening sector analysis and planning capacity of theMinistry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Natural Resources and theEnvironment; (ii) consolidating, improving and strengthening agriculturalextension services covering crop and livestock production and natural resourcemanagement, and expansion of functional literacy programs; (iii) improving andstrengthening the Gambian agricultural research system and modest support to theAgricultural School of the Gambia College; and (iv) promoting farmer self-reliance/empowerment through pilot activities in one administrative Division(McCarthy Island Division - MID) that would test new approaches involvingfarmer participation and self-management in the areas of: irrigation watermanagement, rural savings and loans, training of rural entrepreneurs, and ruralsocial infrastructure.

Economic Rate : Not applicable.of Return

Beneflit and : Benefits: The project will contribute to the well-being of a large number of theRiUkA rural population. Most of the 550,000 people in rural areas would benefit from

a more dynamic agricultural education, research and extension system thatcontinuously generates and diffuses improved agricultural practices. However,how many of these households would choose to adopt recommended practicescannot be estimated with any precision. More specifically, project benefitsshould manifest themselves in four main areas: (a) increases in production andproductivity of both the crop and livestock sectors in a sustainable manner;(b) better coordination of delivery of agricultural services within the public andprivate sectors (NGOs, farmer organizations); (c) human resources: the project

- ii -

strongly emphasizes training and continuing education programs for farmers,herders and government staff (approximately 200 staff at various levels); and(d) institutional development: by converting the Department of AgriculturalResearch into a National Agricultural Research Institute and by furtherstrengthening the capacity of the Department of Agricultural Services, theDepartment of Livestock Services, the Department of Planning, and the GambiaCollege, the ability of the Ministry of Agriculture to plan, coordinate and deliveragricultural support services to the farming community will be greatly enhanced.The project will allow for a more effective system of technology generation anddiffusion and will permit better leadership of other agricultural services, therebycreating a good opportunity to streamline donor financial assistance.

Risks: The risks foreseen, which are common to similar projects supported byIDA, include: (i) ineffective management of research and extension personnel;(ii) low adoption rates of technical recommendations by farmers and/or slowbuild-up of applicable technology by research, especially given its dependenceon outside sources of technology and information; and (iii) the possible failureof Government and/or donors to sustain the long-term commitment required toachieve durable improvements in the effectiveness of agricultural supportservices. To minimize these risks, lessons learned under the IDA financedSecond Agricultural Development Project, IFAD funded agricultural projects,and a USAID supported research project have been built into the project design.The management of agricultural extension and research services is expected toimprove as a result of the training, technical assistance, improved organizationand monitoring and evaluation provided by the project. The previous project hasshown that appropriate technologies are available for extension to farmers, andthat there is room for considerable improvements in food crop and livestockproduction as well as in better natural resource management, since many of thecountry's farmers and herders, especially women, have not previously had accessto extension advice. The project also focusses on the pre-extension testing of asizeable body of existing research results, both within the country and abroad,and on strengthening research linkages with the outside world. Finally, theannual review of work programs and budgets, as well as the mid-termimplementation review, will provide good opportunities for program review andlong-term commitment building.

- iii -

ESTIMATED COSTS AND FINANCING PLAN

USS millionEstimated Costs h -

LOCAL FOREIGN AL

1. Agricultural Sector Analysis &Planning- MOA Coordination Unit 0.1 0.3 0.4- Department of Planning 0.4 0.9 1.3

2. Extension Services & FunctionalLiteracy- Agricultural Extension and

Communications 1.3 2.3 3.6- Livestock Extension 0.8 1.0 1.8- Environment 0.3 1.2 1.5- Functional Literacy 0.2 0.3 0.5

3. Agricultural Research and Education- Agricultural Research 0.9 2.8 3.7- School of Agric.- Gambia College 0.1 0.5 0.6

4 Promotion of Self-Reliance and1Farmer Empowerment a0n6 0d9 1S

| Base Costs 47 10.2 14.9Physical Contingencies 0.3 0.7 1.0Price Contingencies J 0.6 0.7 1.3

TOTAL PROJECT COSTS 56 d1 j 1 116 | 2/a N;t of identifiable taxes and dutis

FINANCING PLAN

LOCAL F FOREIGN TOTAL

_________________ I ___________________ USS m illion |

IFAD 1.2 2.4 3.6

GOVERNMENT 1.3 0 1.3

IDA 3.1 9.2 12.3

TOTAL 5.6 11.6 17.2

ESTIMATED IDA DISBURSEMENTS lb

IDA FISCAL YEAR

94 95 96 97 98

Annual 3.0 4.0 2.0 1.7 i 1.6

|Cumulative 3.0 | 7.0 | 9.0 107 12.3/b The disbursement projections deviate from the standard profil for aR project i ueminveaIments are

heavily concentrated in the first two years of the project, and about 20% of the Credit would be disburned againstselected items of the Ministry's annual operating budgets and would therefore not be subject to inplementation delays.

I

lHE GAMBIA

AGRICULTUJRAIL SERVICFS PRO.lECT

STAF1F APPRAISAL REPORT

I. BACKGROUND

A. Introduction

1.01 Under the Second Agricultural Development Project (ADP-II, Credit 1476-GM, closingdate June 1993), co-financed with the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), and Italy,significant progress has been achieved in building up a professional crop extension service. However,much remains to be done to improve effectiveness of the services, to improve linkages with research, tointegrate livestock extension and natural resources management practices into one polyvalent extensionservice, and to generalize extension to women farmers. During the same period (1985-92), the USAID-funded Gambia Agricultural Research and Diversification (GARD) Project has made big strides inimproving the Gambia Agricultural Research System (GARS). Funding for this project was assured untilJuly 1, 1992. Continued funding is being provided under the ADP-II Credit. IFAD has funded the JahallyPachar Smallholder (irrigation) Project (JPSP) which will be closed soon. This project, covering TheGambia's largest irrigation scheme, was successful in providing modern irrigation technology tosmallholder farmers. However, its sustainability would need to be assured by transferring schememanagement to the water users. The Government, fully aware of the need to sustain its support forextension, research and increased self-reliance of the rural population, has requested in 1990 World Bankassistance in the preparation of a project that would cover these priority areas. Early in 1991 an FAO/CPmission visited The Gambia to prepare such a project. A World Bank pre-appraisal mission visited TheGambia in October 1991. The project was appraised by a joint World Bank/IFAD mission in April andMay of 1992.

B. The Aricultural Sector

1.02 Agriculture currently accounts for some 25% of GDP; it provides employment for morethan 75% of the labor force, and it is the principal means of livelihood for the rural population.Population density is high - with 90 inhabitants/km2 of agricultural land, and population growth rate isover 3% p.a. It is estimated that the area harvested averages about 160,000 ha, or some 40% of thecountry's suitable agricultural land. Nearly all of it is rainfed and only about 1,000 ha are pump-irrigated,although rice is also grown on some additional 10 - 20, 000 ha of uplands, mangrove swamps and infreshwater tidal areas. The predominant production system is traditional shifting, slash and burncultivation, that requires a substantial area for fallow and recovery.. The increasing population pressureis gradually reducing the fallow period, leading to more continuous cropping and soil degradation. Thedirect economic and other consequences of this environmental degradation are being increasingly felt.However, agricultural production so far shows no clear trend. Crop output continues to be primarily afunction of weather and yearly fluctuations can be as high as 40 %. Livestock production on the otherhand has continuously increased over the last six years. To reduce yearly fluctuations in production andto maintain agricultural productivity, increased attention wDI have to be given to soil fertility and moisturemanagement, erosion control and development of tidal irrigation.

1.03 The principal crops grown are: groundnuts, millet, sorghum, swamp rice, maize, andupland rice. Minor crops are cotton (2,000 ha) and vegetables (800 ha). Productivity, although betterthan in drier areas of the Sahel, is generally low due to the low fertility of most of the agricultural soils.Both the areas planted and yields vary considerably from year to year due primarily to fluctuations inrainfall and changes in the profitability of individual commodities'. The sector is heavily dependent ongroundnuts, which account for 95% of export earnings. While irrigated rice development is constrainedby natural factors (salinity of the Gambia river due to tidal intrusion of sea water), vegetable growing hasgreatly increased in the last several years stimulated by NGO investments. In the Banjul area vegetablesare also grown for exports.

1.04 Livestock is also important, as about 15-20% of the rural population owns cattle, andalmost all farm compounds keep some sheep, goats and poultry. The national herd has recently beenestimated to be as follows: 280,000 heads of cattle, 120,000 sheep, 180,000 goats, 15,300 horses, and36,500 donkeys. The present stocking rate of about 70 heads of cattle per sq. km is considerably higherthan the generally accepted carrying capacity of 50 heads per sq. km. in the Sahel. When sheep andgoats are included, the density is much higher and the pressure on the grazing lands is a major factor inland degradation. All livestock are kept under traditional husbandry systems, and productivity isgenerally low. To date, no significant modern poultry producing units exist largely because of the costof imported animal feed and problems in obtaining supplies of day-old chicks.

1.05 Forest cover is decreasing and today only 175,000 ha or 17% of the total land area canbe considered as wooded. The quality of the stand and the canopy cover have deteriorated as aconsequence of logging, land clearing, firewood collection and burning. The rate of firewoodconsumption exceeds the annual growth increment of the remaining national forest, and the country hasto import 95 % of its construction timber requirements. Massive deforestation has resulted in soil erosion,excessive runoff and in the extinction of animal species. Hunting is no longer an important source ofprotein for the rural population. To deal with these problems, GOTG has laid the legal foundation forsubsequent action with the passage of the National Environmental Management Act, created the Ministryof Natural Resources and the Environment (MNRE), and is in the process of preparing a nationalenvironmental action plan (see para. 1.08).

1.06 The family unit is the main source of labor supply. Although reliable statistics are notavailable, the use of animal traction (oxen, donkeys and horses) has been reported to be increasing andat present, it is estimated that over 95% of the coarse grain and groundnut area is prepared using animaltraction (National Agricultural Sample Survey, 1990). Land tenure and allocation practices aretraditional. Compounds are generally divided into one or more production units (dabadas) andconsumption units (sinkiros). All dabada members are expected to contribute to family food production,the ultimate responsibility for which lies with the dabada head. Men are traditionally responsible forproducing upland crops (millet, sorghum, maize) and women, primarily for swamp rice, the country'smain staple. For cash income, men produce groundnuts and sell a portion of their upland crops. Womenare also involved in groundnut production and are virtually the exclusive producers of horticultural corpsand sesame. It is estimated that 75% of the population is illiterate.

I/ Average yields over the last ten years were: groundnut - 1.3 t/ha, millet - 1.0 t/ha, sorghum- 0.9 t/ha, maize - 1.4 t/ha, upland rice - 1.0 t/ha, and swamp rice - 1.3 t/ha.

1.07 Women play a prominent role in the Gambian farming system, providing between 30%and 50% of the total agricultural labor. Gender-specific responsibilities vary according to villagelocation, ethnicity, and the level of farm mechanization. Farming activities are generally more separatedin lowland villages, where mutual assistance between men and women is less common and where woiner,spend more time on farming than do those in upland villages. In upland farming, there is a considerableamount of labor exchange, with men often helping women with the heavier tasks such as land clearingand when animal traction is used for plowing, planting and weeding. Women, in turn, provide most ofthe labor for harvesting and are responsible for post-harvest processing of cereals, one of the most time-consuming and arduous tasks of rural women. Both men and women produce food for householdconsumption (maruo crops), which is usually done collectively; both also grow crops for their personaluse (kamanyango crops), a large proportion of which is sold. More than half of the women of workingage cultivate their own kamanyango fields. Women are practically the sole producers of swamp and tidalrice, horticultural crops, and sesame, and they also own and manage a large proportion of the country'ssheep, goat and poultry stock.

C. Government and Bank Strategv in the Sector

1.08 Government's strategy in the agricultural sector under the Bank supported EconomicRecovery Program (ERP) has been to create and maintain an environment conducive to growth andeconomic efficiency. Specifically, the strategy is to encourage increased efficiency in groundnutproduction, diversification into other cash crops, and increases of production of food crops.Implementation has relied on flexible pricing policies, expansion of the role of the private sector in outputmarketing and input supply, and provision of credit for inputs on market terms. The Ministry ofAgriculture has been restructured to focus on support activities, primarily extension services, research,policy analysis and agricultural statistics. Input prices and prices for agricultural products are marketdetermined. At the same time and to preserve the natural resource base, in 1987 GOTG passed theNational Environmental Management Act and established in 1990 the Ministry of Natural Resources andthe Environment (MNRE). MNRE is to coordinate government services and has started to prepare anEnvironmental Action Plan, which will be presented to a donor conference in Banjul, planned forJanuary 1992.

1.09 IDA, in close collaboration with GOTG and other donors, is supporting the abovestrategy, with strong emphasis on the reinforcement of agricultural services, natural resourcesmanagement, and farmers' participation. A new partnership between the public sector institutions andthe farming community will be encouraged. The emphasis will be on having the right agriculturalpolicies in place, and on mobilizing the energy, knowledge, and resources of local people and enhancingtheir understanding of agricultural technology and natural resources management techniques. Publicsector institutions are to become much more professional and act in a service mode. The proposedproject would be a vehicle for this strategy and would complement the USAID National ResourcesSupport Project, which is currently being prepared. The joint involvement of IDA and IFAD wouldcreate a better opportunity for obtaining and streamlining both internal and external financing, providecontinuity and would allow improving efficiency in the use of public resources and ensuring anappropriate balance between capital and recurrent spending.

- 4 -

D. Lessons from Past Arcultural Project Lending. especally ADP-II

1.10 IDA has financed three projects in the rural sector and the Women in DevelopmentProject which has an agricultural component. The Agricultural Development Project (Cr. 333-GM,US$1.3 million, 1972) developed 500 ha of double cropped irrigated rice. The second operation was theRural Development Project (RDP) (Credit 644-GM), the total cost of which was US$11.7 million,financed by IDA, UK (ODA), and BADEA. The project became effective in November 1976, and closedin March 1982. It aimed to increase cereal and cash crop production and livestock husbandry of about48,000 farmers living in 65 selected villages through the introduction of proven package programs forcrop production supported by better coordinated and strengthened Government services, and improvedcommunications and marketing. The third operation was the Agricultural Development Project II - ADP-II (Credit 1476-GM, US$9.4 million, effectiveness date 11/07/84). ADP-II had as principal objectives:(i) consolidation of positive results achieved under the RDP project; (ii) assistance to government withmajor sectoral reforms; and (iii) overall increase in production of upland crops through the strengtheningof support institutions, improved input supply, improved research and improved seed multiplication. Thefourth operation is the Women in Development Project (Credit 2141-GM, US$7.0 million, effectivenessdate 12/27/90). This project has an agricultural pilot component that seeks to increase women'sagricultural productivity through the strengthening of agricultural extension services to better servewomen; private sector input distribution; support for women's cooperative groups; strengthening of foodstorage, preservation and nutrition extension; improved management of small-scale post-harvestequipment; and a savings mobilization campaign directed at women.

1.11 Under the first project, the Agricultural Development Project, the impact was mixed.The performance was generally good in physical achievements and the Gambian Produce MarketingBoard satisfactorily carried out its role of importer and supplier of fertilizers to the project area.However, project performance was not good in several other areas. The expatriate Project Coordinatorwas unable to maintain adequate local commitment during project implementation. The civil works whichwere financed by ODA had a cost overrun of 228%. The project did not include support for rainfedcereals (sorghum and millet). A viable cooperative system to handle credit, input supply and marketingof output was not achieved.

1.12 The lessons learned from the second project, the Rural Development Project, were asfollows: (i) there is need for more local involvement in the planning stages to ensure adequatecommitment during implementation; (ii) the promotion of women's farming activities is important; (iii)more attention should be given to the selection and training of suitable extension workers; (iv) there isa lack of adequate management and administration expertise in Gambia; (v) Gambia Cooperative Union(GCU) and the primary cooperative societies require much more attention than was given in RDP; thereis need to strengthen and financially rehabilitate the cooperatives to enable them to handle input supply,credit and marketing more effectively; and (vi) there is need to limit recurrent costs after projectcompletion, since Government could not provide sufficient recurrent fnance to sustain the level ofdevelopment achieved under RDP.

1.13 The third project, ADP-II is still ongoing and success with strengthening of theDepartment of Agricultural Services' (DAS) extension activities has been considerable, althoughcontinuous improvements are necessary to increase extension impact. An understanding of, and theadministrative infrastructure for a national crop extension service based on T&V principles has beenestablished. Also, the reorganization of the Ministry of Agriculture was a success. The reorganizationresulted in the reduction of staff (about 400 out of a total of about 1,500 persons) and the strengthening

of the Ministry as an agricultural services institution. However, the agricultural credit component is notachieving its institution building objectives. After the introduction by the Gambia Cooperative Union(GCU) of village based lending in 1987, recoveries of short term and medium term loans were initiallysatisfactory. However, during the 1990/91 season they fell again to about 50% and it is now clear thatthe financial viability of GCU's credit operations can only be addressed as part of a global effort to dealwith the banking system as a whole.

1.14 Although the credit for the fourth project, the WID proje, only became effective inDecember 1990, experience with several of the agricultural sub-components has been positive. Theoutlook and operating procedures of the DAS crop extension service are changing and many more womenfarmers are being reached. The diagnostic skills of extension agents have been improved to identifygender specific constraints and new technologies have been identified that are of special interest and useto women farmers. The proposed project will build on these achievements, mainstream the focus onwomen and thereby spread the benefits to women beyond the 200 target villages of the WID projectthroughout the country.

H. AGRICULTURAL INSTffUTIONS AND SUPPORT SERVICES

A. Agricultural Institutions

Ministry of Agriculture and Related Institutions

2.01 The Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) is the main institution responsible for agriculturaldevelopment. It was reorganized in 1987; staff was reduced; some services, such as tractor plowing,animal health care and the leather tannery, were privatized; and a central management unit and fouroperational departments were established (see Organizational Charts in Annex 10).

2.02 Central Management Unit. This unit is responsible for the overall strategic managementof the Ministry and coordinating operational activities. It consists essentially of the Permanent Secretary,his two Deputies in charge of Programs/Projects and Administration, and the Director of the Departmentof Planning (DOP).

2.03 Department of Planning (DOP). This department provides policy advice to the Minister,and helps in identifying and preparing agricultural investment programs and projects. It collects extensiveagricultural data and its national agricultural data center every year conducts a national agricultural samplesurvey and presents a statistical yearbook of Gambian agriculture. In addition, it monitors ongoinginvestment operations and does selected evaluation studies.

2.04 Department of Agricultural Services (DAS). This department is responsible for providingcrop extension services to farmers. The total staff of the Department is 420. The HQ of the DAS in St.Mary's consists of the director, an assistant director, an executive officer, two crop protection officers,two accounts clerks and support staff. The director reports to the permanent secretary of the MOA andalso to the Deputy P.S. in his capacity as ADP-II project coordinator. In turn, the director is responsiblefor the six Divisional Agricultural Offices (DAOs), and 25 District Extension Centers (DECs), theAgricultural Communications Unit (ACU), the Crop Protection Service, the Soil and Water ManagementUnit (SWMU), and the Food and Nutrition Unit (FNU).

- 6 -

2.05 Department of Livestock Services (DLS). This department is presently responsible forcontrol of notifiable diseases, meat inspection and livestock extension and research. It also hasresponsibility for the Livestock Marketing Board, the tannery and veterinary services, pendingprivatization. It also retains responsibility for livestock research, pending transfer of research to theDepartment of Agricultural Research or its successor organization (para. 3.17). DLS has a total staff of210.

2.06 Department of Cooperation. This department has responsibility for promotion ofcooperative societies, provision of advice to members and gathering information on demand for inputs,market trends and training needs.

2.07 Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment. This Ministry was created in 1990to improve coordination of government actions in this area. Its two main units are: the EnvironmentUnit and the Planning Units. The Ministry is charged with overseeing the implementation of the GambiaEnvironmental Action Plan.

2.08 The Gambia Agricultural Research System - (GARS). The Gambia Agricultural ResearchSystem is composed of a number of institutions, primarily the Departmnent of Agricultural Research(DAR), the Department of Livestock Services (DLS), and the National Agricultural Research Board(NARB). The DAR, created in 1988 following the reorganization of MOA, is responsible for cropresearch. The DLS is responsible for animal production research and DOP provides support for researchin social sciences. Staff from the Departments of Water Resources (DWR), Fisheries (DFISH), Forestry(DFOR) and Wildlife (DWLIFE) within the ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MNRE) areresponsible for research in their areas of specialization. The NARB was established in 1988 to advise onresearch priorities for all agriculture, livestock and natural resources management research. In practice,NARB only provided oversight for research done by DAR and DLS, since the other departments did nothave full-time scientific staff. Some adaptive research (variety introduction and testing) is being done byNGOs. Catholic Relief Services (CRS), the Good Seed Mission (GSM) and the Methodist Mission (MM)have been particularly active in this respect. The International Trypanotolerance Center (ITC), locatednear Banjul, was created in 1982 to carry out studies to exploit trypanotolerance for agricultural,commercial and food production purposes and to conduct research.

2.09 The Gambia College. Gambia College was established in 1978 by joining together fourexisting schools viz. The School of Agriculture, The School of Education, The School of Public Health,and The School of Nursing and Midwifery. The School of Agriculture offers a two-year certificate coursein general agriculture, which is an upgrading program for field staff of the Department of AgriculturalServices. It also provides a two-year certificate course for livestock assistants of the Department ofLivestock Services. Furthermore, it offers a three-year course leading to the Higher Diploma inAgriculture. Its graduates work mostly as extension agents either for DAS/DLS or NGOs. The schoolalso provides short term in-service training for the upgrading of extension agents. The school operatesa demonstration and teaching farm on up-land soils partly under sprinkler irrigation. It also has a fewhectares of gravity irrigated low-land soils.

2.10 The Gambian Cooperative Union (GCU) Ltd. This is the lead organization for some 55primary Cooperative Produce Marketing Societies (CPMS), with a total membership of approximately80,000 farmers. The GCU is a licensed buying agent for the Gambia Produce Marketing Board (GPMB).The CPMS buy produce, principally groundnuts, from members and supply production inputs, which areoften supplied on credit. The GCU is, therefore, the principal formal rural credit system in the Gambia.

- 7 -

2.11 The Gambia Produce Marketing Board (GPMB). This is a parastatal organization withresponsibility for marketing groundnuts, and until recently for rice and cotton, for importing rice, andfor operating paddy processing facilities. Under the ongoing Program for Sustained Development (PSD),the GPMB is scheduled for privatization, and USAID is assisting GOTG in finding potential buyers.

2.12 Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs). There are estimated to be some 100 local andoverseas-based NGOs operating in the Gambia. A number of the larger ones such as Action Aid TheGambia (AATG); Catholic Relief Services (CRS) and Save the Children (SCF-USA) have activeagricultural sections. Typically these NGOs concentrate on a particular activity such as seedmultiplication (eg. The Good Seed Mission) or the promotion of a new crop (eg. Catholic Relief Service -CRS and sesame) or women's horticultural gardens. However, many NGOs also provide generalagricultural advice to the communities in which they work, often by recruiting the best extension stafffrom the MOA by offering them attractive benefits. Registered NGOs have formed an inter-NGO entity,The Association of Non-Govermnental Organizations (TANGO). Coordination of governmental and NGOactivities is the responsibility of the Advisory Committee for the Coordination of Non-GovernmentalOrganizations (ACCNO). NGOs, particularly those that have been operating in the country for sometime, have made significant contributions to the Gambia's development efforts not only by complementingthe government services, but also by playing an innovative and demonstration role.

B. Aericultural and Livestock Extension

2.13 Crop and livestock extension services are the responsibility of the Department ofAgricultural Services (DAS) and the Department of Livestock Services (DLS), respectively. At presentlittle coordination and/or cooperation between the two departments exist.

2.14 The Director of DAS is assisted by the assistant director whose specific responsibilitiesare agricultural extension and linkage with the Department of Agricultural Research (DAR). At thedivisional and district level, extension is supervised and implemented by the six Divisional AgriculturalOfficers (DAOs) and 25 District Extension Centers (DECs). Each DAO consists of a divisionalagricultural coordinator (DAC), an assistant divisional agricultural coordinator (ADAC), two subjectmatters specialists (SMSs)--crop protection and crop production-and a training officer (TO). The DAOsare located at strategic positions within each division and consist of staff housing, offices, stores and aclassroom. The majority of DAC staff have the equivalent of a 3 year college diploma either from theGambia College or from training colleges in Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria or Sierra Leone. The 25 DECs areheaded by District Extension Supervisors (DES), who supervise a number of VEW. At each operationalDEC there are also two Animal Traction Instructors (ATIs) who are responsible for training draughtanimals for land preparation.

2.15 The Director of DLS is assisted by the assistant director whose specific responsibility isto oversee the field operations of the Department. At the divisional level, there is one Chief VeterinaryOfficer assisted by field staff (livestock assistants). These livestock assistants have a two year certificatecourse from the Gambia College and their primary tasks are the treatment of animal diseases and theannual vaccination campaign. Livestock assistants work basically with little or no systematic supervisionand backstopping from higher level staff. They do not provide extension advice on animal husbandrypractices, unless as part of a specific donor financed project. Under the proposed project, this situationwill be changed and DLS will introduce a time-bound work plan for the livestock assistants (seepara. 3.10).

- 8 -

STAFF INVOLVED IN EXTENSION(at present and under the proposed project)

DAS

Village Extension Workers 72 Livestock Assistants 66

Field Supervisors 25 Field Supervisors 15

Subject Matter Specialists 15 Principal Veterinary Officers 5

Training Officers 6 Subject Matter Specialists and 5l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ trainedDivisional Agricultural Coordinators 6

Technical Staff in Specialized 60Units (Agric. Communication Unit, Foodand Nutrition Unit, Soil and WaterManagement Unit, Agric. PestManagement Unit)

2.16 While extension advice on crops by DAS has had considerable impact on the adoptionand diffusion of new technologies (see Annex lb), efforts to address the following issues are needed:higher-level training of extension staff, the selection of target groups, the broadening of extensionmessages to cover also livestock and natural resources management aspects as well as post-harvestconservation techniques and market information, and increasing the number of farmers being reached byextension. In the past, access of women to information on new and improved production technologies waslimited. Extension agents tended to work primarily with male farmers. However, this situation isimproving. Under the Bank-financed Women in Development Project and ADP-II, measures have beentaken to reorient extension activities towards women farmers and the number of women contact farmershas increased dramatically from 5% to over 30% in two years. Also, new extension messages of specialinterest to women in the areas of post-harvest technology and food processing have been added.

C. Agricultural Research

2.17 Research Infrastructure. DAR operates two experiment stations, one near Yundum in thecoastal area where its headquarters and central laboratories are located, and one at Sapu approximately300 km to the East, which also includes a small pump-irrigated low-land site along the Gambia River.The Yundum station is scheduled to be relocated with ADP-II funding to a site adjacent to The GambiaCollege. The rationale for the transfer of the Yundum experiment station to a site adjacent to the schoolis = the possible sharing of equipment and facilities, with the possible exception of the workshop, butrather the sharing of staff, which would enhance both the teaching and the research capacity. DLSoperates one research site at Yorro Berri Kunda (YBK), in the vicinity of Sapu; its office facilities andsome minor laboratory space are located at Abuko near Yundum. ITC has three research sites with fullyoperational housing and laboratory facilities and pastures; one at the coast (Kerr Seringe), which alsoincludes its headquarters, one at about 150 km East (Kenaba) and the third one approximately 300 km

- 9 -

East at Bansang, i.e., close to both YBK and Sapu. Most of the on-station research and testing by CRSis done at its Nemankuku Nursery.

2.18 Research Programs. DAR currently has six research programs, including: croppingsystems/resource management (CSRM), rice, horticulture, upland cereals, grain legumes/oil seeds andagricultural engineering/animal traction. Achievements are mainly in the areas of: crop density, soilfertility management strategies (FAO Fertilizer Use Project), the introduction of higher yielding maizevarieties (maize production in The Gambia has significantly increased in recent years), the introductionof pest resistant varieties of coarse grains and short-cycle varieties of groundnuts, horticultural marketing(FAO Horticultural Project), mechanization of rice production in inland valleys and the adaptation of low-lift pumping equipment (FAO Agricultural Mechanization Project). A feature that distinguishes GARSfrom many research systems in the Sahel is its emphasis on on-farm research (testing) in collaborationwith the extension services and NGOs, and its almost total dependence on technology generatedelsewhere. The testing of technology with the direct participation of farmers is done as part of the'Farmer Innovation Testing Technology - FITT" program. DAR also operates the Seed Technology Unit(STU), located at the Sapu station, which is responsible for the production of foundation seed, qualitycontrol and seed certification, and the promotion of seed multiplication by farmers under contract; thelatter in collaboration with Winrock International and with support from ODA.

2.19 Animal production research by DLS has in the past focused on range and feedmanagement. With its limited capacity, it is more recently focussing on experimenting with market-oriented sheep fattening for Tabaski in collaboration with CRS. Results so far are very promising. NGOmanaged research, mainly by CRS, has been particularly successful with the on-farm testing andintroduction of sesame, sunflower, cowpea, cassava, findo and rainy season vegetable varieties. ITC'sinitial research focused on the productivity and breeding of The Gambia's famous trypano-resistantN'Dama cattle. More recently the institute broadened the scope of its research to also include: livestocksystems, small ruminants (goats and sheep) and animal traction.

2.20 Research - Extension - Farmer Linkage. A feature that distinguishes GARS from manyresearch systems in the Sahel is its emphasis on on-farm research (testing) in collaboration with theextension services and NGOs, and its quasi-total dependence on technology generated elsewhere. In thecontext of the GARD project, DAR established in 1986 the Research/Extension Liaison Unit (RELU) andcreated the position of Research/Extension Liaison Officer (RELO). In 1989, RELU in collaboration withCSRM initiated a program of Farmer Innovation and Technology Testing (FITT). This program provedto be highly successful and a source for creating a "bondage" between research and extension staff arounda common objective. Finally, Assistant Directors in DAS and DAR have been given explicitresponsibility to oversee research/extension linkages.

2.21 Human Resources (Research Capacity). The Government operated components of GARS,i.e., under NARB oversight, employs 43 scientists, of which eight are expatriates (six with DAR and onewith DLS). However, taking into account the multitude of administrative and extension tasks thatscientists in a small system have to undertake in addition to their scientific work, one estimates that only20 person years are available for research. The distribution of scientists over the differentactivities/Departments is as follows: crops (DAR) 24; livestock (DLS) 10; social sciences (DOP) 2;forestry (DFOR) 1; fisheries (DFISH) 1; and water resources (DWR) 5. Sixty three percent of theGambian scientists have the equivalent of a masters degree, only one holds a PhD.

- 10-

2.22 Agricultural Research Constraints. Continuity in the generation of new or improvedtechnologies, together with policies conducive to sustainable agricultural growth, are the two cornerstonesfor a healthy development of the agricultural sector. The generation of agricultural technology in TheGambia is constrained by:

(i) inadequacies in the linkages of the system with external (neighboring countries, sub-regional and international) sources of technology, GARS being too small to generate itsown technologies;

(ii) irregular funding of research operating expenditures and experiment station maintenanceand operation, jeopardizing the sustainability of the system;

(iii) inadequacies in human resources development and management, leading to unacceptablyhigh staff turnover rates, inadequate staff incentives, and insufficient accountability forresearch results; and

(iv) inadequate public sector institutional arrangements, which may be the most importantbottleneck preventing the system from becoming sustainable.

These are the issues the proposed project intends to address.

D. Agricultural Credit

2.23 Agricultural credit to small farmers is provided chiefly by GCU. Commercial banks arereluctant to provide credit to them (they do, however, provide credit to large commercial farmers)because of risk involved and high cost. Increasingly, credit is also provided by NGOs and underdevelopment projects financed by other donors. GCU still is, however, the principal source of formalrural credit in The Gambia, although its importance is declining rapidly.

2.24 Established some 25 years ago, GCU experienced in the mid 1980's severe problems andrepayment rates declined to unacceptable levels. Under ADP-II, during 1987/88 - 1989/90, considerableimprovements were achieved in the operational efficiency of the GCU. In particular the previous systemwhereby loans were screened by the CPMS Executive Committee and approved by the GCU, wasreplaced by a system under which loans were screened by Loan Committees at the Village Branch levelof each CPMS. This led initially to a dramatic improvement in loan recovery rates. However, during1991/92 season credit recovery fell to 50% and the future of GCU as a credit institution is in doubt. TheGovernment, with donor assistance, is in the process of defining an institutional, regulatory, supervisoryand legal framework for rural financial market operations. Within this framework, village savings andloan associations will be encouraged. One such promising initiative is the Village Savings and LoansAssociations (VISACAS) operating in the Maccarthy Island Division. They were created in 1988 throughexternal interventions by a French NGO - Centre International de De'veloppement et de Recherche(CIDR), with funding from the German Kreditanstaltftr Wiederaujbau (KfW). VISACAS have beenhighly successful in building-up people's capacity to manage their own small village banks, mobilizingsavings and ensuring credit recovery. The proposed project would support further development of thishighly participatory concept.

- 11 -

E. Functional Literacy

2.25 The Department of Non-Formal Education (DNFE) of the Ministry of Education isresponsible for dealing with adult illiteracy throughout the country. The DNFE has a staff of 27 at itsHQ in Banjul and a Program Officer in each of the six divisions who train personnel involved in DNFE(including NGOs). They also train facilitators in the villages - these facilitators are volunteers. DNFEdesigns and produces materials for Adult Literacy Classes and coordinates the activities of all DNFEPrograms in the country. The DNFE services are composed of four sections: the Directorate; LiteratureDivision; Field Programming Division, and a Print Unit. The Literature Division has three sub-units,each with a staff of two, at Mandinka, Pulaar and Wolof, respectively. The Field Programming Divisionhas eight staff, of which five are posted in the divisions.

F. Farmers' Oreanizations

2.26 In The Gambia, basically two types of social organizations exist in rural areas: traditionalgroupings based on age and gender, called kafos and recently introduced organizations, such as producerorganizations (i.e., maize growers association, livestock producers association), local NGOs, and villagedevelopment committees. In the past, development projects financed by external donors mostly ignoredthese traditional rural organizations and did not build upon them and strengthen them. Only recently havedonors realized the importance of these groupings and recognized their potential for self-management andsustainable indigenous development. Under the WID project, women kafos are encouraged to registerunder appropriate existing legislation to have better access to resources. Through its involvement withirrigation development projects, IFAD also has come to the conclusion that irrigation investments tobecome economically viable and in order to be able to introduce intermediate technology need to bemanaged by the users themselves. DAS on its part is analyzing ways to have extension agents work moreclosely with kafos. The project will support these efforts to bring about much greater farmerparticipation. These efforts are all the more important as the role of Government in rural developmentis changing and functions previously the responsibility of Government are to be assumed by the ruralpopulation itself.

III. THE PROJECT

A. Rationale

3.01 Agriculture is likely to remain the principal economic activity of the majority of the ruralpopulation and raising agricultural output is the most efficient way of raising rural incomes. Theagricultural pricing policy adopted under the Economic Recovery Program (ERP) is beginning to provideadequate financial incentives for farmers to raise the output of most of the major crops and the mosteffective way to assist in the development of the rural economy is to ensure the generation and adoptionof improved production technologies by small farmers. Under ADP-II a T&V inspired crop extensionservice has been established, and there is evidence that some 30% of farmers are directly reached byextension staff and that proposed technologies are being widely adopted (Annex lb). An adequatephysical infrastructure now exists together with a well defined and understood management structure.Also, an adequate number of tested technologies are available that can be recommended to farmers andnew technologies are being worked on (see Annex 2). However, there is considerable scope for further

- 12 -

improvements. In-service training needs to become much more regular and key staff need furtheracademic training in agriculture, extension, and general management techniques. Also, operationalconstraints linked to the mobility of extension staff remain. These constraints must be eliminated beforethe service can be expected to function reliably. Furthermore, there is a crucial need to provide farmerswith comprehensive extension advice on crops, livestock and natural resources management and toorganize service delivery by DAS and DLS accordingly. In addition, recent efforts to increase the numberof women farmers benefitting directly from extension (para. 2.16) need to be continued and the capacityof extension agents to deal with gender issues needs to be improved. Finally, agricultural research needscontinuous strengthening to sustain the extension effort. Experience elsewhere indicates that thedevelopment of an operationally effective national research and extension service can take up to 15 years.In The Gambia, the process of developing a modest research capacity and establishing a professionalsystem of extension is still in its infancy. Given present limits on government budgetary resources, thisprocess requires further external support for its consolidation and continued development.

B. Summary Description

3.02 The project aims at generating increased agricultural productivity and sustained growthof the incomes of small farming families, through the strengthening of support services in agriculturalextension, research, and training, and the promotion of self-reliance and farmer empowerment. In this,the project would build on experience gained during the implementation of the ADP-II, GARD and JPSPprojects. The main components of the project are:

(i) strengthening natural resources/agricultural sector analysis and planning;

(ii) consolidating, improving and strengthening agricultural extension services covering cropand livestock production and natural resources management, and expansion of functionalliteracy programs;

(iii) improving and strengthening the Gambian agricultural research system and modestsupport to the Agricultural School of the Gambia College; and

(iv) promoting self-reliance/farmer empowerment through pilot activities in one administrativeDivision (MacCarthy Island Division - MID) that would test new approaches in farmerparticipation and self-management in the areas of: irrigation water management, ruralsavings and loans, training of rural entrepreneurs, and rural social infra-structure.

The project would be implemented by the Ministry of Agriculture and the National Agricultural ResearchBoard.

C. Detailed Features

Strengthening Agricultural Sector Analysis and Planning

3.03 To improve the limited policy-making, investment-screening and performance-monitoringcapacity of DOP in MOA and the Planning Unit in MNRE, the project will provide professional supportand staff training for the following three main tasks:

- 13 -

(a) the formulation of development policies in agriculture and natural resources management,the analysis of factors affecting the demand and supply of inputs and outputs, and thedefinition of the respective functions of public and private actors and of sub-sectoralpriorities for public investment;

(b) appraisal and consistency checking of investment proposals prepared in the technicaldepartments; and

(c) monitoring of performance of public agencies and projects responsible for implementationof rural development activities.

3.04 The project will finance incremental operating costs of DOP/MOA and the PlanningUnit/MNRE over the project period. This financing will cover: (i) a support contract with an externalinstitution/university for the provision of short-term consultancy services on demand, (ii) staff training(short-term and at the graduate level - 3 BSc and 2 MSc), (iii) equipment and equipment maintenance(vehicles, computers, software and other office facilities); (iv) workshops and networking activities, and(v) construction of office space for the Environment Unit of MNRE. During negotiations, assuranceswere obtained that before the end of December 1993, DOP/MOA would sign a contract with an externalinstitution or university that will provide professional support to the Department (para. 6.01 (i)).

Strenathening of Extension Services and Expansion of Functional Literacy

3.05 Extension. DAS crop extension operations will be further supported to institutionalizethe new approach developed under ADP-II and to continuously improve the quality of its services.Special emphasis will be given to software aspects: extension planning, programming, and monitoring;development of extension recommendations covering not only crop production, protection and storage,but also animal husbandry, natural resources management practices and farming systems' aspects;diagnostic studies; use of mass media; research/extension/farmer linkages, collaboration with NGOs andfarmer organizations; and in-service training of staff at all levels. In addition, extension managementwould be further decentralized, enabling the DECs to function largely independently in diagnosing localfarmer problems and in defining appropriate extension strategies and recommendations. Also, thecapacity of regional staff to deal with sociological aspects such as selection of contact farmers/contactgroups and gender issues will be enhanced through short term consultancy support (3 man/months).Finally, extension activities will be closer coordinated with other policy instruments and a comprehensivelong-term manpower development plan will be put in place.

3.06 In view of the critical importance of natural resources management, the outreach activitiesof DAS/SWCU would be greatly enhanced to deal countrywide with soil conservation measures onindividual farmers' fields and to advise on community based land management plans. For the latter,SWMU would form two multi-disciplinary teams of engineers, agronomists and social scientists to helpcommunities to develop such plans.

3.07 To implement the Environmental Action Plan (EAP), scheduled to be presented to a donorround table in January 1993, a series of country-wide ecological/environmental surveys and inventoriesare proposed to be undertaken to provide the underpinning for the design of GOTG natural resourcesmanagement plans. Most of these surveys are already scheduled to be funded by other donors (mainlyUSAID). However, some of the proposed inventories, the results of which are expected to directlyimpact the activities of DAS/SWCU, have not yet found support from other donors and are therefore

- 14 -

included for financing under the present project. These surveys include: (i) a range land inventory, and(ii) a study of river flow and saline intrusion in the river Gambia. The first survey is of particularimportance for the establishment of village land management plans. The results of the investigations onthe intrusion of saline water are of crucial importance for the management of existing and future irrigationschemes. Apparently, areas recovered for pump irrigation upstream, are lost downstream because ofsaline intrusion. Tidal low-land gravity irrigation does not seem to affect such intrusion to the sameextent. MNRE would have first responsibility for implementation of these surveys, but detailed termsof reference, mode of execution and administrative arrangements would be included in the formalagreements to be concluded with MOA (para. 4.01). These agreements would also include arrangementsfor support to the Environmental Unit (EU) in MNRE, including the construction of offices and alaboratory for pesticide control included in the EAP.

3.08 DLS objectives and activities will be reoriented to include extension responsibilities.Extension will become part of the regular activities of the Department and not be limited to specificproject interventions. The field staff of DLS (livestock assistants) which hitherto basically dealt only withanimal health care, will be providing farmers also with professional advice on animal husbandry practices.Instead of remaining in their health posts and treating animals when the need arises, they willsystematically visit farmers and advise them on all aspects of animal production. DLS will organize itselfto assume these new functions and will introduce, inter alia, extension supervisory staff and designateSubject Matter Specialists.

3.09 No new extension staff will be hired by DAS and DLS other than to replace peopleleaving the service. Once DAS and DLS field staff coordinate their extension activities, coverage shouldbe adequate, with one field extension agent per 360 dabadas. These ratios would be applied flexibly totake into account regional characteristics. Staffing levels and staffing ratios as well as the posting of fieldstaff would be reviewed annually in order to achieve the highest possible cost effectiveness.

3.10 The extension system which will be applied will include (i) establishing and adopting atime bound and supervised work program; (ii) providing regular and continuous training to staff at alllevels; and (iii) strengthening the links between extension and research. A special effort will be madeto develop and disseminate extension recommendations that address the particular concerns of resourcepoor farmers (less than 2 ha and no animal drawn agricultural equipment) and of women farmers.Extension agents will work with existing farmer groups and, where necessary, induce the creation offarmer contact groups and foster their evolution towards groups that can assume other developmentrelated activities. To support face-to-face extension advice by DAS and DLS front line staff, a mediabased communications strategy will be developed by the Agricultural Communications Unit (ACU) ofDAS. To do this, ACU will liaise with radio stations, NGOs and the Non-Formal Education Unit of theMinistry of Education.

3.11 Concerning technical recommendations for crop and livestock production and naturalresources management, proven technologies ready for transfer to farmers and livestock owners exist.They were developed by researchers in collaboration with extension agents and farmers and have alreadybeen adopted by many farmers. Other technical innovations will be coming on stream as a consequenceof ongoing research (for areas for which technical recommendations exist, see Annex 2).

3.12 Given the particularly intricate farming systems existing in the MacCarthy Island Division(MID), where upland cultivation of cereals, and production of rice in swamp areas and small-scaleirrigation perimeters and livestock raising compete for scarce labor, extension agents would receive

- 15 -

special training to deal with this situation. Their skills in farming systems analysis and in theidentification of particular target groups and sociological constraints would be enhanced through speciallyselected and trained Subject Matter Specialists. Field staff of DAS and DLS would work especially closetogether in this Division to harmonize operations at the grassroots. In fact, MID would be the "test case"for forming truly polyvalent field extension agents. The experience gained here would provide a solidbasis for extending a polyvalent approach to extension services countrywide and to move beyond a closecoordination of activities of DAS and DLS field extension staff. At negotiations, assurances wereobtained that the measures and procedures concerning extension activities described in paras. 3.05, 3.06and 3.08 - 3.12 would be followed. They have since been sunmmarized in a Government policy statementon extension which was submitted to IDA.

3.13 To implement the above DAS/DLS extension activities, the project would finance thefollowing:

(i) renovation and repair of selected DAC and DEC facilities and veterinary posts includingprovision of fences and the rehabilitation of wells;

(ii) communication and office equipment and supply of farm implements to each DEC;

(iii) pick-ups, motorcycles, mopeds, and bicycles;

(iv) operating expenditures for vehicles;

(v) travel allowances for extension staff; and

(vi) overseas degree-level training (6 BSc.and 6 MSc.), in-service and specialized training andtechnical assistance (Annex 3).

3.14 To allow SWMU to increase its soil conservation activities and to move from a focus ondamage treatment to prevention, the project would fund incremental operating expenditures of SWMU.The Agricultural Communications Unit (ACU) with its radio, video, print shop and graphic art sectionswould also be strengthened through financing of office equipment, video, audio and printing equipment,incremental recurrent costs, and technical assistance.

3.15 Functional Literacy. The Non-Formal Education Department (NFED) will play a vitalrole in helping to disseminate extension messages to the rural population through their literacy programsin the countryside. The NFED together with ACU will develop and produce functional literacy materialsto this effect. In addition, an ongoing program of functional literacy training would be expanded in oneof the Divisions (MacCarthy Island Division), where increased farmers' participation is crucial to thesustainability of past and ongoing irrigation investments. The functional literacy program wouldconcentrate on a population of some 22,000 people (para. 4.21).

3.16 The sub-component would support the DNFE through provision of: (i) intensive trainingof 10 program assistants to train village facilitators; (ii) vehicles and equipment to the Divisional ProgramOfficer to make the assistants mobile; (iii) teaching allowances for village facilitators; and(iv) consultants' services (3 man/months) to assist in preparing training materials.

- 16 -

Improving and Strengthening the Agricultural Research and Education System

3.17 Strengthening the Gambia Agricultural Research System (GARS). NARB would becomean independent body cororate under Gambian law, that would have ultimate responsibility foragricultural research policy and public funding for research, including the guiding of official developmentaid for agricultural research (donor coordination and consolidation of funding). DAR and DLS researchstaff would be regrouped in one independent National Agricultural Research Institute (NARI) underNARB auspices. NARB would create and manage the Gambia Agricultural Research Fund (GARF),which would allow it to let research contracts with MNRE, ITC, NGOs, the private sector and othernational, regional and international research institutions. NARI would in the first instance be directlyfunded through NARB, but, by January 1996, three years after project start-up, it should also be fundedthrough GARF on the basis of research contracts for which it would have to compete. For NARB to playits role in overseeing NARI and to administer GARF, it would constitute a small Technical Secretariat(TS), consisting of a highly qualified research manager and a finance expert, supported by a fewsecretarial and administrative staff. The appointment of the Research Manager and Finance expert, withterms of reference, qualifications and experience acceptable to IDA, would be a condition of effectiveness(para. 6.02 (i)).

3.18 Under the research component, the project would finance the following:

(i) establishment and operation of a Technical Secretariat (TS) to the National AgriculturalResearch Board (NARB), and the preparation of a long term strategy (master plan) foragricultural research;

(ii) operating costs, except salaries, of National Agricultural Research Institute (NARI);

(iii) initial contribution to Gambia Agricultural Research Fund (GARF) to fund selectivepriority research programs on a contractual basis;

(vi) strengthening of internal (with farmers, NGOs and extension services) and externallinkages (with national, regional and international research institutions);

(v) establishment of an independent internal and external research program review system;and

(vi) provision of overseas scholarships for degree-level training (4 MSc and 3 BSc),experiment station and scientific management training, participation in short overseascourses to upgrade specific skills, and, where necessary, on-the-job training (Annex 3).

3.19 Strengthening the Agricultural School of the Gambia College. The school would besupported to improve the quality and relevance of its two-year certificate and three-year diploma courses(para. 2.09). In view of GOTG's policy to develop a unified and polyvalent extension service and tomeet the demand for general agriculturalists, the curriculum of both courses would be adjusted so as toprovide more courses on animal husbandry to the agriculturalists and more courses on crop productionto those following the livestock orientation. In addition, the School of Agriculture would make specialefforts to attract female students. Minimum requirement for new recruits into the extension service wouldbe certificate level training. Diploma level training would be the minimum recruitment requirement forDESs. Diploma courses would also be made available for selected VEWs as part of their career

- 17 -

development. In collaboration with DAS, DOL and the NGOs, the School would provide in-servicetraining courses for extension staff and upgrade its facilities, in particular the class room and laboratoryfacilities and the teaching farm. At negotiations, assurances were obtained that by December 31, 1993,Gambia College School of Agriculture would alter the curricula of its courses, and prepare a plan toattract female students (para. 6.01 (ii)).

3.20 The project would finance in-service training courses for field staff of DAS and DLSprovided by the Gambia College, a teaching laboratory and investments in a demonstration/teaching farm,instruction materials, and publications and documentation. Closer links would be established with NARIwhich would establish its experimental farm and headquarters on a piece of land adjacent to the School.These linkages would be manifested through the exchange of staff and a greater participation of teachingstaff in research.

Promotion of Self-Reliance and Farmer Empowerment

3.21 To enhance the impact of investments in extension and research a number ofcomplementary activities will be carried out on a pilot basis in a selected area. These activities aredesigned to foster farmer empowerment, promote self-reliance and sustainability of externally financedinterventions, and tap the indigenous development potential of rural people. The area selected is theMacCarthy Island Division. This Division has had a long history of externally funded projects, especiallyin irrigation development, and the beneficiaries are ready to organize themselves and to participate moreactively in their own economic development. These pilot activities will be carefully monitored and shouldprovide valuable lessons for the rest of the country. A participatory approach to monitoring andevaluation of extension results will be used. For example, as part of their functional literacy training,farmers would be trained to keep track of their agricultural tasks and production. Group discussionswould be held concerning adoption results and the causes of non-adoption.

3.22 These pilot activities are:

(i) support for non-formal education, in particular the functional literacy and numeracyprogram, to reach some 5 000 people in about 65 villages. This sub-component isspecifically designed to underpin the other pilot activities by preparing the localpopulation to assume these activities.

(ii) formation of water users associations and associated farmer training for irrigated riceproduction so that in due course they can take over the management of existing irrigationperimeters;

(iii) introduction of intermediate labor saving technologies (especially animal traction inirrigated rice production) so as to be able to move away from heavy machinery which hasproven to be uneconomical and unsustainable;

(iv) training of village entrepreneurs to encourage the establishment of small businesses forfarm inputs and implements thereby improving the availability of these inputs,

(v) support to the development of rural financial services through the strengthening of sixexisting and promotion of 15 new Village Savings and Credit Associations (VISACAS);and

- is -

(vi) support for community-initiated self-help activities and social infrastructure, includingvillage water supply, day-care centers, and village wood lots, through provision of aVillage Development Fund.

3.23 For these sub-components, the project would finance respectively: (i) training, vehiclesand equipment, teaching allowances for village facilitators, and short-term technical assistance;(ii) training and visits abroad, soil and water testing equipment, engineering equipment and vehicles, andshort-term technical assistance; (iii) farmer training, adaptive research and consultancy services; (iv) asub-contract with Action Aid The Gambia; (v) a sub-contract with CIDR; and (vi) a contribution to theUNDP financed Village Development Trust Fund.

D. Project Cost and Financing

Project Cost

3.24 The total base cost of the proposed project, net of taxes, is estimated at DL 156.7 million(US$17.2 million equivalent). Base cost estimates reflect June 1992 prices. Physical contingenciesamounting to US$1.1 million are estimated to be 15% of civil works and 10% of other investment costs;their total amounts to about 7% of base cost. Price contingencies amounting to US$1.3 million,representing about 9% of base cost and 8% of total cost are based on average annual forecasts ofinternational inflation for foreign supplied goods (3.7% per annum), on estimated annual inflation in TheGambia for local costs (5% per annum), and on an implementation period of five years (see para. 3.35).The foreign exchange portion of the total project cost is 67%. The breakdown of total project cost ofUS$17.2 million equivalent is as follows:

- 19 -

Project Cost Summary

----------- Dlui '000 ----------- US$ miliom ------- %Fomeign %LOCARL LOC3GN TTAL L OREIGN ETcTL Total

II~~~~~~~~~~~h

Ac1. Autgr l Sector Anaiys & Plning- MOA CoordinationUnit 1 1,356.8 2.802.1 4,158.9 0.1 0.3 0.4 67 3

- DepartnentofPl nni32.S ,452.7 11,774.6 0.4 0.9 1.3 n 9

|2. EXteODa Scrvioes & Functinl ItWCYq

| -AgricullExtension =W Communion s 11,410.3 20,633.9 32,044.2 1.3 2.3 3.5 64 24

oLiveock Extendon 7,276.0 8,F95.5 16,171.5 0.S 1.0 IS | 55 12Ph-sEnvi onment 2,716.3 11,105.4 13,S21.7 0.3 1.2 1.5 0S 10

asFu ctonslts acy 1,919,7 2,940.3 4,160.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 61 4

|3. AgricuWal Rersh ud Bducstion

| Agri ultul ing ch 5,2S4.6 25,606.4 133,91.0 0.9 02. 3.7 1 76 26

L -School ofAgric, Gabia Coseg11 1,291.6 3,991.9 5,283.5 1! 0.1 0. 4 0.5 11 76 4

|4. Promotion of Self-Reliace and Fannrmer r1 M < HEmpDowemnu 11 5,204.8 8 ,255.2 13,460.0 1! 0.6 0.9 1.5 !1 61 10

eComa 42,781.9 192,68314 13 135465.-3 4.7 1 0.2 1 4.9 -6 IDO

Physical Contingemcies| 3,136.7 | 6,617.1 | 9,53.S| 0.3 | 0.7 | 1.0 ll 6S 7

Price Contingencis| 5,176.4| 6,337-4 | 11,513.7 | 0.6 0.7 1 1.3 1 55 9

Total Projed Cots 51,.0 15,637.9 | 156,732.8 5.[ | 11.6 17.2 116Numbers may not add due to wunding.-- =

Project Financing

3.25 Project costs would be financed by an IDA credit of US$12.3 million equivalent and anIFAD loan of US$3.6 million equivalent. The Gambian contribution would be US$1.3 millionequivalent, or about 10% of project costs net of the IFAD contribution. In addition to its monetarycontribution, Government would provide the agricultural extension and research staff. The tentativefinancing plan is detailed below:

FINANCING PLAN

DALASI MILLION US$ MILLION % OF TOTAL

IFAD 32.3 | _ 3.6 |_21

GOVERNMENT 12.0 1.3 8

IDA 112.4 r_12.3 __71_ _ _

TOTAL 156.7 17.2 100

- 20 -

E. Procurement

3.26 The table below summarizes the project elements and their estimated costs and proposedmethods of procurement.

Summary of Proposed Procurement Arrangementr(USS million equivalent)

PROJECT ELEMENT PROCUREMENT METHOD N.I.F TOTAL COSTICB LCB OTHER

1. Wok

1. I Buildinp 0.7 0.04 0.74(0.7) (0.04) _ _ (0.74)

1.2 Infrastructure 0.66 0.5"' 1.16___________________________________ __________ (0.66) _______ ______0 6 (0.66)

1.3 Rehabilitation and Maintenance 0.3" 0.3

2. Goods

2.1 Equipment, Machinery, 1.0 0.1 0.1 0.5 'h 1.7Purniture, Materials (1.0) (0.1) (0.1) (1.2)

2.2 Vehicles 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.4 'h 1.5___________________________________________ (0-9) (0.1) (0.1) (1.1)

3. Consultancies

3.1 Policy Support 0.2 0.2___________________________________ __________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (0.2) _ _ (0.2)

3.2 Project Preparation & 0.4 |0.S b 0.9Implementation Support _ (0.4) _ (0.4)

3.3 Institutional Development 0.6 0.6 h 1.2_________________________________ _ l(0.6) (0.6)

4. Miscellaneous

4.1 Training 3.9 0.9 lb 4.8(3.9) ______ (3.9)

4.2 Incremental Recurrent Costs 0.2 1.4 T 1.9': 1.2' 1 4.7(0.2) (1.4) (1.9) (3.5)

TOTAL 2.8 2.3 7.2 4.9 17.2of which (IDA) (2.8) | (2.3) (7.2) (12.3)

@1. _ * * *|- fiF '- I

NOTE: Figures in parenthese are the respective amounts financed by the IDA Credit. N.I.F. Not IDA-financed.I_ Cofinanced by the Governnent./> Cofinanced with IPAD. Procurement would be in accordance with World Bank Guidelines: Procurement under

IBRD Loans and Credits (Washington D.C, May 1992)./, IFAD to cofinance US$0.7 million of operting costs. Government to contribute US$0.5 million./_ It is etimated that US$1.8 nillion would be for procurement of fuel, laboratory and office supplies, and spare

part. Of this, US$0.2 million (spare parts) would be procured by ICB, US$1.4 million would be procured by LCBand US$0.2 million would be procured by prudent shopping. The remaining US$1.7 million is for salaries and travel allowances.

- 21 -

3.27 Civil work financed by IDA are:

(a) construction of an office complex for the Environment Unit of MNRE, estimated atUS$322,400;

(b) construction of laboratory and classrooms at the Gambia College (US$334,000);

(c) construction of houses for extension staff in two divisions and greenhouses andshadehouses at agricultural research stations (US$42,900); and

(d) infrastructure, including fencing, road rehabilitation, and rehabilitation of irrigationnetworks at research stations and divisional headquarters (US$660,000).

With the exception of items (a) and (b) which are located in or near Banjul, and would be procured byinternational competitive bidding, the remainder of the works involve small contracts, are geographicallyscattered over 25 administrative districts, and are unlikely to be of interest to foreign firms.Consequently, items (c) and (d) would be procured under local competitive bidding procedures,satisfactory to IDA, up to an aggregate amount not to exceed US$0.7 million.

3.28 Goo. Goods financed by IDA would include vehicles, furniture, office equipment,laboratory equipment, audio-visual equipment, agricultural equipment, demonstration equipment for theVEWs, materials, spare parts and training materials. Most of these goods would be procured in the firsttwo years of the project, and could be grouped into packages of at least US$100,000 each and procuredby international competitive bidding (ICB) in accordance with IDA's Guidelines for Procurement underIBRD Loans and IDA Credits (May 1992). Contracts for goods procured under ICB would totalUS$2.1 million. Where ICB procedures are used, a preferential margin of 15%, or the applicablecustoms duty, whichever is less, over the c.i.f. prices of competing goods would be given to domesticmanufacturers in accordance with IDA Guidelines. Goods procured under contracts estimated to cost lessthan US$100,000 equivalent each, which in the aggregate would not exceed US$1.6 million, would besuitable for procurement through LCB under procedures acceptable to IDA. The remaining goods, whichcannot be grouped into bid packages of at least US$30,000 equivalent, would be procured on the basisof price quotations from at least three suppliers, provided that the aggregate amount of such procurementdoes not exceed US$0.4 million equivalent.

3.29 Services. Consultants financed by IDA, totalling US$1.2 million, would be contractedin accordance with the Bank's Guidelines on the Use of Consultants by World Bank Borrowers andby the World Bank as Executing Agency (August 1981), and all such contracts would be subject toprior review. Consulting services financed by the IDA credit would be short-term consultancies forstudies, policy analysis, sociological/gender issues, accounting, mid-term review, and researchprogramming and evaluation.

r

3.30 The project will finance a significant overseas degree training program in addition to theperiodic training of research and extension staff. An estimate of the formal training is in Annex 3.

3.31 The principal Government agency responsible for implementing the project is theCoordination Unit located in the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA). This Coordination Unit, which wascreated under ADP-II, would continue to be responsible for project coordination, administration,procurement, and monitoring of project extension and research activities. The submission of a detailed

- 22 -

procurement plan, including timetables, satisfactory to IDA, would be a condition of credit effectiveness(para. 6.02 (ii)).

3.32 A Country Procurement Assessment Report was completed in June 1985. In general,The Gambia's current procurement laws and regulations do not conflict with IDA's Guidelines, with afew exceptions. In order for LCB procedures to be acceptable to IDA, the credit documents shouldinclude a side letter concerning advertising, public bid opening, clarity of evaluation criteria, award tothe lowest evaluated bidder, and non-exclusion of foreign bidders.

3.33 IDA-financed contracts for works and goods above a threshold of US$100,000 equivalenteach, and all consultant services, would be subject to IDA's prior review procedures. An assurance wasobtained at negotiations that Bank sample documents for the procurement of goods, works and consultantswould be used (para. 6.01 (iii)). The review process would cover about 68% of the works, goods andservices financed by IDA. Selective post review of awarded contracts below the threshold levels wouldbe carried out on about one in 10 works contracts and one in 5 goods contracts.

3.34 Procurement information will be collected and recorded as follows:

(a) proni1pt reporting of contract award information by the Borrower;

(b) comprehensive semi-annual reports to the Bank by the Borrower, indicating: (i) revisedcost estimates for individual contracts and the total project, including best estimates ofallowances for physical and price contingencies; (ii) revised timing of procurementactions, including advertising, bidding, contract award, and completion time forindividual contracts; and (iii) compliance with aggregate limits on specified methods ofprocurement; and

(c) a completion report prepared within six months of the credit's closing date.

F. Disbursement&

3.35 The project corresponds to a five-year program and the IDA credit would be disbursedover a period of five years instead of over the standard seven and a half year disbursement profile forall projects in The Gambia. Faster disbursements are anticipated because: (i) about 65% of theinvestments will take place during the first two years of the project; and (ii) about 20% of the Creditwould be disbursed against selected items of the concerned institutions' annual operating budgets, andtherefore, would not be subject to implementation delays. The expected closing date is June 30, 1999.The estimated semi-annual disbursement schedule is at Annex 6.

- 23 -

3.36 The IDA credit would be disbursed on the basis of the categories shown below:

Disbursement,

Proposed IDA Allocation % of ExpendituresCategory of Expenditure USS million Financed by IDA

NARB/NARI

I. Civil Works 0.2 100of foreign expenditures

40of local expenditures

II. Vehicles, Equipment, Materials 1.4 100

III. Training 0.7 100

IV. Consultant Services 0.5 100

V. Operating Costs /I 1.0 75

MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE

VI. Civil Works 0.8 100of foreign expenditures

65of local expenditures

VII. Vehicles, Equipment, Materials 1.1 100

VIII. Training 2.8 100

IX. Consultant Services 0.6 100

X. Operating Costs LI 1.4 90

Xi. Unallocated 1.8

TOTAL 12.3

/1 The term operating costs means incremental operating costs for tavel allowances and local in-service training expensesfor extension and research staff, operating and maintenance costs of vehicles, equipment and buildings, motorcycleallowances, office and laboratory supplies, publications, and salaries of incremental staff in the coordinating unit ofthe Ministry of Agrieulture.

3.37 To expedite disbursements and ensure that funds for the project are available whenneeded, Government would open two Special Accounts: Special Account A, operated by the NationalAgricultural Research Board (NARB/NARI), and Special Account B, operated by the Ministry ofAgriculture, in a commercial bank, under terms and conditions satisfactory to the Association.Immediately after Credit effectiveness, IDA would make an initial deposit of US$250,000 into SpecialAccount A, and a deposit of US$500,000 into Special Account B, representing about four months'expenditures. IDA would replenish the Special Accounts upon receipt of satisfactory proof of incurredexpenditures and evidence that such expenditures were eligible for financing. Monthly bank statements

- 24 -

and reconciliation of the Special Account statements would accompany replenishment requests. To ensuretimely availability of counterpart funds, during negotiations assurances were obtained that the Borrowerwill make provisions in its annual budget for such funds, provide such counterpart funding quarterly inadvance and pay it into a Project Account to be used exclusively for project purposes (para. 6.01 (iv)).Establishment of this Project Account with an initial deposit of US$50,000 would be a conditioneffectiveness (para. 6.02 (iii)).

3.38 Disbursements of the IDA credit would be fully documented except for incrementaloperating costs and contracts valued at less than US$20,000 equivalent, which would be againstStatements of Expenditure (SOEs). Documentation for withdrawals under SOEs would be retained at theMinistry of Agriculture and at the National Agricultural Research Board (NARB/NARI) for review byIDA staff during supervision missions and for regular annual audits.

IV. PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND IMPLEMENTATIO

A. Project Organization. Manarement and Financial Monitoring

4.01 The project would be implemented by the Ministry of Agriculture through the DAS, DLS,and DOP and the National Agricultural Research Board (NARB). For minor activities to be implementedfor MOA by the Ministry of Education (ME), i.e., functional literacy training, the Gambia College, andthe Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MNRE), MOA would enter into formalarrangements acceptable to IDA, that would stipulate that the Permanent Secretary (PS) of MOA, wouldbe responsible for the management of project expenditures for these components. Conclusion of thesearrangements, satisfactory to IDA, would be conditions of credit effectiveness (para. 6.02 (iv)). TheVillage Development Fund would be administered under a separate tripartite agreement between GOTG,IFAD, and UNDP.

4.02 Overall responsibility for overseeing the implementation of all components, except foragricultural research which would be the responsibility of NARB, would be with the Permanent Secretaryof the Ministry of Agriculture and the day-to-day coordination would be assured by his Deputy PermanentSecretary, Programs and Projects who would be - ex officio - Project Coordinator (DPS/PC). TheDPS/PC would be assisted in his task by a small Project Support Unit (PSU), which was alreadyestablished under ADP-II as an integral part of the MOA. The PSU consists of a financial controller, anadministrative officer, an accountant and support staff. It would as in the past handle procurement,administration, and monitoring of project implementation. The PSU would also maintain separate projectaccounts using the recently introduced program budgeting system (PBS). During negotiations, assuranceswere obtained that the Borrower would (i) maintain the PSU in a form and with functions satisfactory toIDA, and (ii) cause MOA to maintain and strengthen its three-year rolling public expenditureprogramming system linked to the public budgeting system (para. 6.01 (v)). The DPS/PC would alsobe responsible for consolidating a human resources/training plan of the participating agencies inconsultation with the Personnel Management Office of the Presidency. Receipt of such a plan,satisfactory to IDA, would be a condition of effectiveness (para. 6.02 (v)). During negotiations,assurances were also obtained that this training plan would be reviewed annually between MOA and IDA,and that a detailed plan for each subsequent year would be agreed upon (para. 6.01 (vi)). NARB wouldbe responsible for the implementation of the agricultural research component and would handleprocurement, administration, accounting, disbursements and monitoring related to the researchcomponent.

- 25 -

B. Implementation of the Sector Analysis and Plannine Comoonent

4.03 This component would be under the responsibility of the Director of DOP who wouldestablish the training plan and agree annually with IDA and IFAD on the policy studies to be carried outand on the type of information to be collected regarding progress of the extension system as part of theNational Agricultural Sample Survey.

C. Implementation of the Extension Component

4.04 At the national level, responsibility for crop extension will be with the Director of DASand for livestock extension with the Director of DLS. The two Departments would closely collaborateat all levels to provide complementary extension recommendations to farmers/herders all over thecountry. To this effect, field staff of both Departmnents will receive additional training from theAgricultural School of the Gambia College in either crop or livestock aspects depending on their previousspecialization, and will be supported by SMS of both Departments including the SWMU and FNU ofDAS and the Forestry Department. All field staff will be familiarized with the whole gamut of extensionrecommendations of the two Departments and most training sessions will be held jointly. In this respect,during negotiations MOA presented a program of crop, livestock and natural resources managementextension messages, and a plan for the training of all VEWs of DAS in animal husbandry practices andof livestock assistants of DLS in crop production. Supervisory staff and SMSs will be deployed in sucha way as to provide the best possible support to field staff. Supervisory staff in charge of VEWs andlivestock assistants can be of either Department, the objective being to arrive at a closely coordinatednational extension system. Also, in the bi-monthly technology review meetings between research andextension, SMSs of both Departnents would participate. To define the approach to extension and themodalities of collaboration between DAS and DLS in extension matters, and with agricultural research,the Ministry has elaborated a policy statement. This policy statement includes provisions concerning thepurchase, management, maintenance and repair of motorcycles that ensure continuous mobility ofextension staff. It is based on two key principles, namely: (i) the means of transport belong to the user,and (ii) the allowance the user receives is adequate to cover the operating costs (fuel and repairs). Duringnegotiations, assurances were obtained that the Borrower would ensure continuous mobility of its fieldextension staff through, inter alia, an appropriate level of allowances paid to such staff. The adequacyof this level would be reviewed annually (para. 6.01 (vi)).

4.05 At the regional (Divisional) level, tasks and functions would be as at present but, inaddition, each DAC and Principal Livestock Officer would be responsible for (a) preparing extensiondocuments (leaflets, a monthly bulletin, booklets, etc.) relevant to its division; and (b) programming fieldtrials in conjunction with staff of NARI. Divisional staff would receive advice and support from theACU for publications and from DAR in undertaking research programs. NGOs would be invited tocontribute materials for a monthly extension bulletin. A Divisional Coordination Committee would beestablished at each of the six divisions under the joint chairmanship of the Divisional AgriculturalCoordinator and the Principal Veterinary Officer, and include appointed representatives from GCU,NGOs, NFE and other ministries, and would provide for coordination at divisional and field level.

4.06 At the local level, the project calls for four changes compared to the past: (a) a moveaway from dependence on contact farmers towards contact groups; (b) greater emphasis on on-farmtesting programs; and (c) an increase in the number of women's VEWs and of VEWs specializing inwomen agricultural activities (e.g., swamp rice, horticulture, and short-cycle livestock species). To

- 26 -

increase the number of women in the service, and especially to interact with sinkiros groups, the DASand DLS would endeavor to fill vacancies by female professionals whenever feasible. Cooperation withNGOs would be continued and, where possible, expanded by encouraging their participation in monthlytraining sessions, joint production of extension bulletins by DACs and testing of technologies on-farmin coordination with DAC/DECs. This would be done on the basis of contracts.

4.07 On-Farm Technology Demonstrations. As at present, extension supervisory staff wouldbe responsible for undertaking a series of on-farm demonstrations of proven technology which wouldinclude as appropriate micro-plots on farmers fields, block demonstrations, Kafo farm demonstrations,differential treatment of animals and herd management, and soil conservation measures at farm, villageand micro-catchment level. The demonstration program would be planned by each supervisor, inconjunction with the divisional TOs and SMSs. Implementation would be by the VEWs and livestockassistants, supported by the extension supervisory staff. In addition to these demonstrations, DAS andDLS would step-up their participation in the national program of on-farm trials (OFT) designed to testunder actual farming conditions technologies developed by researchers. These trials would be designedby researchers working in close cooperation with the divisional SMSs and after discussion withfarmer/herder groups.

4.08 Extension activities of DAS and DLS would be supported by the AgriculturalCommunications Unit (ACU), the Soil and Water Management Unit (SWMU), and the Food andNutrition Unit (FNU). Although all three units are located within DAS, they would provide technicalbackstopping to both Departments. The head of ACU would be responsible, inter alia, for: assistingDACs and the Principal Livestock Officers in preparation of extension material; coordination with theNon-Formal Education Department to ensure the incorporation of adult literacy programs into regularextension programs; coordination with NGOs and activities of the Women in Development Project;development of a regular program of work with Radio Gambia; and ensuring close linkage with researchprogram leaders. The head of SWMU would be responsible for developing extension recommendationsconcerning: (a) on-farm soil conservation advice; and (b) advice at the village or community level onthe design and implementation of community land management plans (including watershed managementprograms, range land management, and other agro-sylvo-pastoral aspects). For the first aspect, SWMUstaff would train all VEWs of DAS and staff of interested NGOs in soil conservation techniques and forthe second aspect, SWMU would constitute two interdisciplinary teams that would design community landmanagement plans using a participatory approach, and carry out the following tasks--primarily at therequest of villagers: resource inventory, formation of conservation committees, engineering/construction,and agronomic follow-up by DAS extension staff.

D. Implementation of the Agricultural Research Component

4.09 National Agricultural Research Board (NARB). The objective of the institutional reformof the Gambia Agricultural Research System (GARS) is to rationalize public and donor support byunifying crops, livestock, forestry and natural resources management research under the umbrella of theNARB (para. 3.17). To exercise its function as an independent research policy-maker and representativeof both the users of research results and GOTG/donor interests, NARB will become an autonomous bodycorporate under Gambian law. NARB would be assisted by a Technical Secretariat (TS), and would havea Finance Committee, and an independent Research Review Committee under its authority. To ensurenecessary management autonomy and decision-making transparency, NARB membership will consist offive ex-officio members (including the Permanent Secretaries of MOA, MNRE and Finance, the Director

- 27 -

General of NARI and the President of NARB) and six non-officio members. The latter will be selectedon the basis of qualifications, technical competence and experience upon the recommendation of anindependent Search and Appointment Committee. The mandates, composition and terms of reference ofNARB's Technical Secretariat, Finance Committee and Research Committee will be included in NARB'sOrder of Procedures. Draft Order of Procedures will be submitted to IDA and the other major donorsfor comments prior to their adoption. The critical elements to be contained in the statutes of NARB andthe tasks to be performed by the Technical Secretariat (TS) are contained in Annex la.

4.10 National Agricultural Research Institute (NARD. NARB will be the governing boardof NARI, which will be created by combining research staff and installations presently managed by DARand DLS in the Ministry of Agriculture with those managed by MNRE. The Director General of NARIwill be selected on the basis of a short list of three candidates prepared by such a committee. Candidateprofiles and the composition and terms of reference of these search committees will have to be acceptableto IDA and the other major donors represented in the Finance Committee. As an independent bodycorporate NARI could seek collaborative arrangements for the implementation of individual researchprograms with NGOs or other research institutions within The Gambia or outside its borders, rather thanundertaking 'in-house' all research within its mandate. NARI would initially be directly funded throughNARB, which would act as its board of governors. During the mid-term review of the project (para.4.26), GOTG and IDA will analyze whether it is feasible that NARI be entirely funded through researchcontracts. The future research system should allow for maximum flexibility (i.e. no monopolies) andintroduce an element of competition for research contracts. The due establishment of NARB and NARIby law, satisfactory to IDA, would be a condition of Credit Effectiveness (para. 6.02 (v).

4.11 Research Manaeement and Resource Allocation within NARI. Improvements in theagricultural research management system of DAR, tested and implemented from 1986 to 1992 under theGARD project, would basically remain the same for NARI. The essential elements of this managementsystem would be institutionalized under the proposed project, i.e. be included in NARB/NARI's statutes.This should provide the necessary guarantees for the participation of the users of research results(farmers, NGOs, extension services and the private sector) in the setting of the research agenda. Also,the system should provide for timely interaction with NARB and its statutory committees. The threeprincipal management elements of this system, i.e. research program task forces (RPTFs), AnnualResearch Reviews (ARREV) and Program Advisory Committees (PAC) are described in Annex I a.

4.12 Many agricultural research activities are seasonal. Most field trials have to start in June.This means that preparation (preparing research protocols and field books, ordering materials, etc...) hasto start at least six months earlier and that decisions on available resources have to be made beforeDecember 31 of each year. Therefore, the statutes of NARB/NARI would provide for an annualprogramming, budgeting and review cycle with specific dates. For details see Annex 1 a.

4.13 Research Programming. Monitoring. Evaluation and Review (PMER). The Gambiaagricultural research system recognizes three levels of PMER:

(a) strategic planning under the responsibility of NARB through the preparation, regularreview and updating of national agricultural research Master Plans;

(b) regular and independent technical reviews of individual research programs and researchcontracts; and

- 28 -

(c) the annual programming, progress reporting, review and budgeting cycle described inAnnex la.

4.14 NARI will have its own research programming and program (or contract) implementationmonitoring system. TS will be responsible for setting up this system for the entire Gambia agriculturalresearch system, based on information to be furnished by NARI and reporting and review requirementsto be included in individual research contracts funded under GARF. TS will commission the design ofthe system and subsequently present detailed proposals to the Research Review and Finance Committeesprior to its adoption by NARB and introduction by January 1, 1994. The terms of reference for thedesign of the system should be acceptable to IDA and will include the establishment of research databasesand linkages with outside sources of scientific information. Agreements to this effect were obtainedduring negotiations (para. 6.01 (vii)).

4.15 NARS Internal (users of technology) and External (sources of technology) Linkages. Themost direct linkages between research and farmers are through DAR's on-farm research and testingprograms, conceived together with the extension services and NGOs. The most recent activity conceivedby DAS is the FITT program described in paragraph 2.18, which tries to give the farmer a more directvoice in setting the research agenda and immediate program goals. The more formal links betweenresearch and its clientele through annual research reviews carried out by research program task forceswould be institutionalized and become mandatory steps in the decision making process. The decision-making that will be followed by NARI are described in Annex Ia.

4.16 GARS quasi-total dependence on technology generated elsewhere, as a reality and as an explicitpolicy, makes it vulnerable to weaknesses in its links with outside sources of technology and information.At present, GARS maintains an impressive range of linkages with external sources of innovation. Theseinclude all the IARCs operating in The Gambia's agro-ecological environment, namely IITA (cowpeas,cassava, maize, cropping systems/socio-economics; ICRISAT (sorghum, millet, groundnuts);ILCAIILRAD (animal production and health); IFPRI (food policy); and ISNAR (research management).Contacts with regional programs and NARSs include INSAH, AGRHYMET, SAFGRAD and Senegal(ISRA). Finally, connections with institutions through donor-supported projects, notably the Universitiesof Wisconsin, Michigan and Virginia. However, the latter tend to be the weakest upon "projectcompletion". On this point, the Bank-supported Special Program for African Agricultural Research(SPAAR) intends to support reinforcing and stabilizing the linkages between countries in similar agro-ecological conditions. GARS is expected to benefit from this initiative through its participation inregional collaborative programs, in particular through the exchange of information and staff and throughits on-farm testing programs. Improved linkages with research databases and other outside sources ofoutside information (documentation, publications, etc...) supported under the project should complementsuch collaborative efforts.

4.17 NARI Human Resources Development and Management. As long as scientists remaincivil servants, it will be impossible in the short run to offer them a salary structure that would reversethe present excessively high staff turnover rates. Moreover, regular GOTG funding of research operatingexpenditures, which could also be an important motivating factor for scientists to stay with the system,will remain uncertain under the prevailing economic conditions. Therefore, GOTG has decided, in linewith the SPAAR initiative, to grant NARI financial and personnel management autonomy by transformingNARB and DAR each into a body corporate. This would allow NARI to develop its own scheme ofservice under NARB oversight. NARB would also indirectly influence salary structures in other researchorganizations competing for research contracts funded under NARF. By July 31, 1994, NARI would

- 29 -

prepare for approval by the Finance Committee and NARB: (i) an update of the February 1990 reporton human resource management and staff development (GARD Report N° 58); (ii) proposals for criteriafor the recruitment, evaluation/promotion, tenuring and termination of staff; and (iii) draft employmentconditions including salary scales and employment under fixed term contract. Assurances were obtainedat negotiations that NARB would seek IDA approval for the proposed scheme of service prior to itsimplementation (para. 6.01 (viii)).

4.18 NARB/NARI Financial Management. The on-going GARD project has successfullydesigned and introduced a program/budgeting system for DAR. The system is in the process of beingintroduced by other MOA Departments. The future accounting and financial management system ofNARB and NARI would be based on this system. The establishment of NARI as an independent andautonomous body corporate implies the transfer of research assets Oand, buildings and equipment) thatpresently are owned by GOTG. These assets will need to be inventoried, their value estimated andpresented in an opening balance sheet, certified by an independent auditor. Fulfillment of theserequirements would be an integral part of the establishment of NARI, i.e. enactment of its statutes.

4.19 Research Station Operation and Maintenance. Costs of operating and maintainingresearch facilities have in the past been under-budgeted. Therefore, the program/budgeting system willneed to be further developed into a management tool for the efficient operation of research stations andlaboratories. This is of particular importance when a few years hence the system is going to be managedto a large extent through contractual arrangements. During the first year of the project, NARI wouldemploy consultants to assist in strengthening and improving its research station management through on-the-job training. Assurances were obtained during negotiations to this effect (para. 6.01 (ix)).

4.20 Gambia Agricultural Research Fund (GARFl. All official development aid and GOTGfunds for agricultural research would be administered by NARB, including the Gambia AgriculturalResearch Fund (GARF). Research funding would either be in direct support for NARI, or for researchcontracts to be paid through GARF. In the short term, funds entrusted to GARF would be used to payfor specific research contracts managed by NARB/PTS according to commonly agreed procedures, ratherthan to cover part of the overall costs of GARS. This may change in the future as donors (includingGOTG) gain confidence in the system, i.e. would be willing to put their funds into GARF withoutearmarking and trust the accounting system to be able to trace the usage of funds by source of finance.GOTG, IDA and IFAD disbursements for NARI would be by category of expenditure, whereasdisbursements for research contracts would be according to contract specifications, independent of thetype of expenditure. Assurances were obtained at negotiations that NARB would submit for IDA'sapproval draft standard contract specifications for research proposals to be financed through GARF priorto concluding the first such research contract (para. 6.01 (x)).

E. Implementation of the Component to Promote Self-Relianceand Farmer Empowerment

4.21 Execution on a pilot basis of these sub-components in the MacCarthy Island Division(MID) would be as follows:

(a) the functional literacy and numeracy program to reach some 5,000 people in about 65villages would be the responsibility of DNFE of the Ministry of Education. DNFEwould select 10 educators from existing staff who in turn would train village facilitators

- 30 -

according to well established procedures. Vocational training material would bedeveloped in close collaboration between DNFE and DAS/DLS and the 10 educatorswould work closely with extension personnel in the area.

(b) formation of water users' associations would be the responsibility of head of the SWMUwho would designate two of his staff for this task. These two professionals selectedwould visit the Philippines to study the participatory approach as practiced in the VisayasCommunal Irrigation Project. Appropriate forms (water permits) and other relevantdocuments obtained in the Philippines would then be adapted to Gambian circumstances.Simultaneously to the training abroad of SWMU staff and to the preparation ofdocumentation, MOA/DAS/SWMU would contract an NGO that would, with the helpof DAS/ACU staff, inform "Seyfos' (traditional chiefs of districts) and "Alkalos" aboutthe purpose of forming water users' associations and seek their collaboration. With thehelp of these traditional authorities, SWMU/NGO staff would then proceed with theidentification of suitable groups and ask these groups to nominate an "irrigation helper".These irrigation helpers would then receive on-the-job training.

(c) testing of intermediate labor saving technology, in particular of animal traction inirrigated rice production would be the responsibility of NARI. It is expected that thisspecific research contract would be given to ITC that has considerable expertise in thisdomain. Subsequent promotion of this technology would be the responsibility ofDAS/DLS extension field staff and animal traction instructors.

(d) training of village entrepreneurs would be subcontracted with Action-Aid The Gambia(AATG), an NGO with considerable experience in village input supply, the preparationof training materials and the conduct of training programs. The training programs wouldbe conducted by staff of AATG with resource persons drawn from GCU and theAgricultural Input Office. The training would cover such aspects as procurement ofinputs and output, their handling, estimation of demand, financial management, and basicaccounting and record keeping. Decisions on launching a business would be the decisionof the entrepreneur himself/herself, although the training to be provided will includeadvice on possible sources of financing and supplies.

(e) support to the expansion of Village Savings and Loan Associations (VISACAS) in theMacCarthy Island Division will be the responsibility of the 'Centre International deRecherche et de De6veloppement - CIDR", an NGO which has successfully introduced thisconcept in The Gamnbia. CIDR will provide technical assistance and recruit suitable localcounterpart staff, the objective being to assist VISACAS over time to link up with formalfinancial institutions. This support to VISACAS, as well as the training of villageentrepreneurs, will serve to test new approaches to rural financial services.

(f) support for community-initiated self-help activities would be channeled through theUNDP financed Village Development Trust Fund (UNDP-GAM/90/008). This fund isdesigned to promote participatory rural development through support to village groups.It is already being used successfully under the WID project and its operating proceduresare satisfactory.

- 31 -

During negotiations, assurances were obtained that the above sub-components would be executed asdescribed above and in accordance with an implementation plan agreed by the Borrower and IDA(para. 6.01 (xi)).

F. Financial Management and Reporting

4.22 Financial management and project accounts will be the responsibility of PSU and ofNARB/NARI for the research component. Both PSU and NARB/NARI will be staffed by qualifiedaccountants acceptable to the Association. The project accounts shall be maintained in accordance withsound and internationally recognized accounting principles and practices satisfactory to the Association.The accounting units will provide interim and annual financial statements to reflect the financialperformance and position of the project. Assurances were obtained during negotiations that the projectaccounts including the special accounts will be audited by international independent auditors acceptableto IDA and reports satisfactory to IDA on such statements will be provided within six months of the closeof the fiscal year (para 6.01 (xii)). The auditor(s)'s reports will include a statement on the adequacy orotherwise of the accounting systems and internal controls, the reliability of statements of expenditures asa basis for loan disbursements, the operation and use of the Special Accounts, and compliance withfinancial covenants. At negotiations, the Gambian delegation submitted to the Association for approvala short list of auditing firms and TOR for audit of project accounts, and the appointment of anindependent auditing firm, acceptable to the Association, to audit project accounts during a period of threeyears will be a condition of effectiveness (para. 6.02 (vi)).

4.23 The DPS/PC and the TS of NARB would prepare and submit to IDA six-monthly reportshighlighting progress achieved in project implementation, issues encountered and solutions proposed. Thecontent of the reports will evolve during project implementation with the objective of keeping the Bankinformed of the most important project parameters, without constituting an undue burden for the projectstaff and without overlapping with other documents supplied to IDA (monitoring report, budget, workprogram). Assurances to this effect were obtained at negotiations (para. 6.01 (xiii)).

G. Training and Technical Assistance

4.24 All degree level training will be coordinated by the DPS/PC and will be approved by thePersonnel Management Office (PMO), except for researchers where the Director of NARI would beresponsible. The PMO assesses training needs in the civil service and establishes training priorities inaccordance with Government's development and manpower priorities. Training abroad will only besupported if there is no possibility of an appropriate program in The Gambia. For more details seeAnnex 3. Short-term technical assistance will also be coordinated by DPS/PC.

H. Implementation and Effectiveness Monitoring

4.25 Given the difficult nature of institutional improvements in extension and research services,the project will be closely monitored. The supervision plan (Annex 7), the project implementationschedule (Annex 9), and selected key indicators (Annex 4) will serve as the basis for this monitoring.Particular emphasis will be placed on obtaining feedback on client satisfaction, i.e., farmers' reactions.The M&E Unit of the DOP will have overall responsibility for coordinating the monitoring and evaluation

- 32 -

efforts, with substantial inputs from the DAS, DLS and NARB. The main indicators that would be usedto assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the extension and research effort would be:

(a) extension activities: the percentage of farmers (male and female) reached byextension, average attendance at meetings with extension agent, number of testplots, number of on-farm trials, farmers' satisfaction with advice received andwork attitudes of extension and research staff;

(b) training: type of training, periodicity and institution involved by category ofextension personnel;

(c) research and links with research: new research findings, off-the-shelf resultsfrom research translated into technical recommendations, problems included inadaptive research program of trials, and main topics of trials; and

(d) results: for major technical messages, evidence of adoption, repeat adoption,rejection and reason; and evidence of impact on yield, production or productivityand factors that explain results.

4.26 Mid-term Implementation Review. Because of the institution-building nature of theproject, the implementing agencies, and the Bank would carry out a joint mid-term review of the projectno later than end of project Year 3. The review would cover physical implementation, the extent towhich project and institutional objectives have been achieved, as reflected in key monitoring indicatorsdiscussed and agreed at negotiations, and the results of an adoption and diffusion study. The findingsand recommendations of this mid-term review would be implemented promptly thereafter. The ProjectCoordinator, together with the Directors of DAS, DAR, and DOP would be responsible for organizingthis review, and would prepare and submit to IDA, three months prior to the date of the mid-term review,the reports, data and other information required for a sucessful mid-term review. Review of the researchcomponent would be organized by the Chairman of NARB and the Director of NARI. Within six monthsof the credit closing date, the Project Coordinator would be responsible for preparing a projectcompletion report that would summarize the project's performance and evaluate lessons learned based onreports prepared by each of the implementing agencies. Assurances on the above were obtained duringnegotiations (para. 6.01 (xiv)).

V. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, BENEFITS AND RISKS

A. Environmental Impact

5.01 The agro-ecological environment of The Gambia is difficult and in most regions crops,livestock and trees are subject to stress. Unreliable rainfall distribution and the increasing frequency ofdroughts is adding to the difficulties in the agricultural sector. In addition, expanding human and animalpopulations are steadily increasing the pressures on the fragile natural resource base.

5.02 The main thrust of the work of the research and extension services to be supported underthe project will be increasing agricultural production in a sustainable manner. This will be realized

- 33 -

primarily by improved cultural practices and improved herd management, i.e., low-cost (often zero cashcost) and low-risk measures such as soil conservation, water harvesting, contour planting, zero tilling,composting, alley-cropping, agro-forestry and better integration of crops and livestock, as well as moreefficient application of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Adoption of these measures will increase landproductivity and arrest soil degradation and will also complement activities financed by USAID under itsNatural Resources Support Project, currently under preparation. In addition, the project includes supportfor the implementation of the National Environmental Action Plan. It is thus anticipated that the proposedproject would be environmentally positive.

B. Benefits

5.03 The project should greatly contribute to the well-being of the rural population. Most ofthe 550,000 people in rural areas would benefit from a more dynamic agricultural education, researchand extension system that continuously generates and diffuses improved agricultural practices. However,how many of these households would choose to adopt recommended practices cannot be estimated withany precision. More specifically, project benefits should manifest themselves in four main areas:

(a) increases in production and productivity of both the crop and livestock sectorsin a sustainable manner;

(b) better coordination of delivery of agricultural services within the public sectorand with the private sector (NGOs, farmer organizations);

(c) human resources: the project strongly emphasizes training and continuingeducation programs for farmers, herders and government staff. The projectwould greatly enhance the capabilities of some 200 staff at all levels; and

(d) institutional development: by further strengthening the capacity of DAS, DLS,DOR, the agricultural research system and the Gambia College, MOA's abilityto plan, coordinate and deliver agricultural support services to the farmingcommunity will be greatly enhanced. The project will allow for a more effectivesystem of technology generation and diffusion and will permit better leadershipof other agricultural services, thereby creating a good opportunity to streamlinedonor financial assistance.

C. Sustalnability

5.04 The sustainability of the project is assured by the strong human resource developmentcomponent that would build up the capacity of DAS and DLS to provide effective extension services andof NARB/NARI to provide the country with a steady flow of appropriate technologies. The organizationof farmers into groups and the strengthening of farmers' associations would increase their capacity to dealwith credit issues, input suppliers and buyers of farm produce, thus reducing in the long-run theirdependence on extension staff for dealing with these aspects. MOA's ability to plan and coordinateagricultural extension at the national level would be greatly enhanced by the project. This would allowfor a more effective system of technology generation, diffusion and adoption and would permit improvedcapacity and leadership of other agricultural services, thereby creating a better opportunity for obtaining

- 34 -

and streamlining both internal and external financing. The infrastructural requirements of the extensionsystem in terms of office and staff accommodations would be in place to continue the national program.The recurrent costs can be expected to decrease with further improvements in extension and researchmanagement and it may be opportune to begin attempting partial cost recovery from certain farmers'associations and to privatize delivery of extension services for certain cash crops. There will nonethelessbe significant continuing costs to be met for public extension services, to be addressed under a follow-upproject that would be the third five-year time slice of the long-term national program to improve researchand extension related services and create strong farmer organizations.

D. Justification

5.05 It is not possible to isolate the effects of manpower training, extension and adaptiveresearch, and improvement in agricultural policy analysis on agricultural output and income.Development and adoption of technical improvements in crop, animal and tree husbandry, waterharvesting and soil conservation, depends on many factors, of which field testing and effectivedissemination are just a part. Other factors include prices of outputs and inputs (including labor andcapital), accessibility of markets and credit, differentiation of farm enterprises by size, tenure andcapitalization, and different assessments of risk and opportunities for risk sharing. While the causalityunderlying creation and adoption of innovations is difficult to determine, "good" research and extensionclearly have a catalytic role to play both by developing and by bringing farmers' and others'preoccupations to the attention of those who can adapt in consequence, such as bankers, tradesmen,merchants, commodity processors as well as national policy-makers. Despite the difficulties withcausality, a recent review of studies that have attempted to measure the impact of agricultural extensionprograms on farmer adoption and productivity concluded that extension in a number of countries has beena high pay-off investment.

5.06 A vibrant agricultural knowledge and information system is, therefore, a necessary butnot sufficient condition for agricultural growth, and its effects cannot be conclusively quantified. Whilean economic rate of return could be attempted, the calculation would be fraught with theoretical andempirical difficulties, and reduction of the outcome to a single rate of return would be spurious. A moreilluminating, although still imprecise, indicator is the increase in agricultural value added that would berequired to cover the costs of "good" extension and research. In The Gambia, the staff exists; theincremental cost of the extension and research system is the mobility, equipment, and continuous in-service training of such staff. This cost is US$1.2 million/ year, or about 1.85 % of agricultural valueadded. Since the project covers all of the rural population, the project's incremental costs are about 2% of the income of the target population and, to break even, would have to increase the targetpopulation's income by a similar annual increment. This increase is attainable in view of the monitoredresults on hundreds of micro-plots. On the basis of households, the project would reach some 69,0008-person units, at a cost of about US$17/household/year. It would suffice for these households to planta new 0.25 ha test plot each year to cover the costs of extension and research (Annex 8). The salary andbenefit costs of the existing staff for whom equipment, mobility and training would be provided underthe project amount to US$300,000/year. If these costs are included with the above incremental costs,the break-even rates would increase from 1.85 % to 2.4 % of the income of the target population. Thus,even including the salary and benefit costs of existing staff, the break-even rates are obtainable.

- 35 -

E. Risi

5.07 The risks foreseen, which are common to similar projects supported by IDA, include:(i) ineffective management of research and extension personnel; (ii) low adoption rates of technicalrecommendations by farmers and/or slow build-up of applicable technology by research, especially givenits dependence on outside sources of technology and information; and (iii) the possible failure ofGovernment and/or donors to sustain the long-term commitment required to achieve durableimprovements in the effectiveness of agricultural support services. To minimize these risks, the lessonslearned under ADP-II, IFAD funded agricultural projects, and a USAID supported research project havebeen built into the project design.

5.08 Concerning the management of research and extension services, improved managementis expected as a result of the improved organization, training, monitoring and evaluation, and technicalassistance to be provided under the project. Concerning technical advice to farmers, ADP-II has shownthat appropriate technologies are available. There is room for sizeable improvements in food crop andlivestock production and better natural resources management since many of the country's farmers andherders, especially women, have not yet had access to extension advice at all. The project also focusseson the pre-extension testing of a sizeable body of existing research results existing within the country andabroad, and on strengthening research linkages with the outside world. Finally, the annual review ofwork plans and budgets, as well as the mid-term implementation review, will provide good opportunitiesfor program review and long-term commitment building.

VI. ASSURANCES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.01 Assurances obtained at negotiations are:

(i) before December 31, 1993, MOA/DOP would sign a contract with an external institutionor university that will provide professional support (para. 3.04);

(ii) by December 31, 1993, Gambia College School of Agriculture would alter the curriculaof its courses, and prepare a plan to attract female students (para. 3.19);

(iii) Bank sample documents for the procurement of goods, works and consultants would beused (para 3.33);

(iv) the Borrower would make provisions in its annual budget for adequate counterpart funds,provide such funding quarterly in advance and pay it into a Project Account (para. 3.37);

(v) the Borrower would maintain the PSU in a form and with functions satisfactory to IDA,and cause MOA to maintain and strengthen its three-year rolling public expenditureprogramming system linked to the public budgeting system (para. 4.02);

(vi) MOA and IDA would review the training plan annually and agree on a detailed trainingplan for each subsequent year (para. 4.02);

- 36 -

(vii) continuous mobility of field extension staff would be ensured through, 1= ai, anappropriate level of allowances paid to such staff, to be reviewed annually (para. 4.04);

(viii) before January 1, 1994, NARI would introduce its own research programming andprogram implementation monitoring system (para. 4.14);

(ix) NARB would seek IDA approval for the proposed scheme of service for researchers priorto its implementation (para. 4.17);

(x) during the first year of the project, NARI would seek consultant assistance in researchstation management (para. 4.19);

(xi) NARB would submit for IDA's approval draft standard contract specifications forresearch proposals to be financed through GARF prior to signing the first such researchcontract (para. 4.20);

(xii) sub-components for promotion of self-reliance and farmer empowerment would beexecuted as agreed upon (para. 4.21);

(xiii) specific auditing procedures would be adhered to (para.4.22);

(xiv) the DPS/PC and the TS of NARB would submit semi-annual progress reportshighlighting progress in project implementation, key issues and proposed solutions(para. 4.23); and

(xv) a mid-term review would be carried out and a project completion report would beprepared (para. 4.26).

6.02 Conditions of effectiveness are:

(i) appointment of a qualified research manager and a financial expert in TS (para. 3.17);

(ii) submission of a detailed procurement plan, including timetables, satisfactory to IDA(para. 3.31);

(iii) deposit of initial amount into Project Account (para. 3.37);

(iv) conclusion of arrangements between MOA and ME, the Gambia College, and MNREconcerning the implementation of their respective sub-components (para. 4.01);

(v) presentation by DPSIPC of a consolidated human resources training plan for theexecuting agencies (para. 4.02);

(vi) establishment of NARB and NARI by law (para. 4.10); and

(vii) Appointment of an auditing firm (para. 4.22).

6.03 . With the above assurances and conditions, the project would besuitable for an IDA credit of SDR 8.8 million (US$12.3 million equivalent).

- 37 -

ANNEX laPage 1

THE GAMBIA

AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT

Evaluation or Effectiveness of DAS Crop Extension

1. An adoption/diffusion study was carried out from November 1991 through May 1992under the leadership of Messrs. Omar Sonko, Department of Planning, Ministry of Agriculture andSana Jabang, Department of Agricultural Services, Ministry of Agriculture. The results werepresented in June 1992 in a report entitled: "Adoption/Diffusion Evaluation Report of theDepartment of Agricultural Services and the Department of Agricultural Research Crop ProductionRecommendations to Farmers" available in the Project File.

2. The TOR of the study were to assess the extent to which farmers were aware ofextension recommendations and to determine how many had actually adopted them over the period1986-91. Some 333 dabadas (production units) were randomly selected from all over the country andfrom within each dabada, one farmer was asked to answer a standardized questionnaire. In addition,30 "contact farmers" were selected giving a total of 363 farmers being interviewed with the samequestionnaire. Percentage figures given below refer to this population.

3. More specifically, the adoption/diffusion study aimed at meeting five majorobjectives:

(i) To determine the spread of extension messages within the farming community.

(ii) To make comparative analysis of the different extension methodologies/strategies usedby DAS in getting the message across to farmers and determine the extent of theireffectiveness.

(iii) To determine the adoption rate of the recommended agricultural practices under thefollowing headings:

(a) Non-adoption.(b) Partial adoption.(c) Full adoption.

(iv) To determine the factors affecting the adoption of the recommended practices.

(v) To recommend ways by which Divisional Agricultural Coordinators can incorporateadoption/diffusion studies in their work programs.

4. Specifically, the evaluation study focussed on the diffusion and adoption of therecommended agricultural practices being promoted by DAS. The following are examples of some ofthe practices:

(i) Optimal plant population.

- 38 -

ANNEX aPage 2

(ii) Thinning of millet.(iii) Timeliness of operations.(iv) Use of improved varieties.(v) Row seeding of rice.(vi) Striga control measures.(vii) Seed dressing.(viii) Fertilizer rate per crop.(ix) Use of herbicides.

Principal Findings of the Study

5. The analysis of the data suggests that factors that influence the diffusion ofinnovations among farmers in The Gambia fall within the following areas of extension activity:

(i) Visits (micro-plots).(ii) Attendance at demonstrations (on larger tracts of land and mostly with purchased

inputs).(iii) Information sharing among farmers themselves (contact and non contact farmers).(iv) Training of farmers by extension agents (one week per year and primarily to show use

of animal drawn equipment).

6. Regularity of extension visits is surfaced in the survey results although the majority offarmers interviewed (94%) would prefer more visits than extension agents are doing currently. Forthis year (1991), 58% of those interviewed say they have been visited three times or more during thefour-month agricultural season. On the other hand, contact and non contact farmer visits to researchstations and District extension centers is generally poor. Only in certain Divisions (NBD, LRD andMID/S do contact farmers visit their DEC's fairly regularly.

7. Poor attendance to demonstrations is indicated in all the Divisions even thoughdemonstrations are being conducted in all the Divisions this season. Comparing the Divisions,frequently of attendance in Western Division and MacCarthy Island Division/South is greater than inother Divisions. On the average (The Gambia), 13% of farmers interviewed attended demonstrationsat least twice this season. This low attendance in demonstrations is further confirmed by farmerspoor knowledge of demonstration sites. Fifty-nine percent of those interviewed say they do not knowthe demonstrations sites. Use of this strategy (demonstration of purchased inputs on large tracts ofland owned by groups) should be given less emphasis in the future given the problems associated withthis strategy.

8. On the side of extension training (one week meetings per year in selected villages todemonstrate primarily the use of animal drawn equipment), the study shows that only 30% of noncontact farmers attended training sessions and of these, only 20% attended training sessions thisseason. Division wise MacCarthy Island Division/South has the highest rate of attendance (38%) thisseason. The continued usefulness of this activity which has been carried out for many years isquestionable and the whole concept needs to be rethought.

9. The rate of information sharing among contact and non contact farmers is very highaccording to contact farmers response (94%). However, only 46% of non contact farmers share this

- 39 -

ANNEX laPage 3

view. The majority of the non contact farmers view is that information sharing is more commonamong themselves (i.e., the non contact farmers).

10. Apart from extension contact, 79% of the farmers say that their other source offarming advice is though Radio Gambia. The apparent high level of information sharing among thefarmers and the common use of the National Radio as an added source to extension for farmingadvice suggest effective diffusion of messages within the farming community.

Farmers Awareness of Extension Recommendations

11. The level of success briefly discussed on each of the above extension activities has alot of bearing on the level of farmer awareness of the various extension recommendations onproduction practices. Hence the findings of this study on awareness of recommended technologiesshow a direct relationship with the rate of information dissemination described above.

12. In general, the level of awareness on some extension recommendations is impressive.These include thinning on coarse grains (cereals) with an average awareness rate of 90%; use ofimproved groundnuts and maize varieties with 70% and 57% awareness rates respectively; andtimeliness on planting, weeding and harvesting of these crops (99%, 100% and 99% awareness ratesrespectively). Also, there is a very high rate of awareness on cultural practices for striga control(93%).

13. Awareness level on fertilizer rates is fairly high for some crop (groundnuts 56%, latemillet 52%, maize 48% and sorghum 39%) and very low for others (sesame 14%, cowpea 16%,vegetables 18% and swamp rice 25%).

14. The level of awareness on other recommendations is very low. Most farmers are notaware of the correct seed rates for maize, early millet, late millet, groundnut and upland rice. Theawareness rate in this area range from 12% to 27% (country average). Almost the same range isreflected in all the Divisions except in MacCarthy Island Division North bank where there is 100%awareness on seed rates for late millet. "Spacing" complements "seed rates" when talking aboutoptimum plant population. For this too, awareness on extension recommendation is low for all thecrops except swamp rice for which 62% of farmers interviewed are aware.

15. It should be noted that exposure to information regarding new technology has greatbearing on the adoption of the technology.

Adoption of Recommended Farming Practices

16. For fertilizer rates on various crops, adoption rates are generally low (10% - 28%).Also, the findings indicate that of those adopting fertilizer rates, the majority are applying half therate which is also an extension recommendation. This is more so with sorghum and upland rice (68%and 64%, respectively).

17. Adoption of correct spacing for the various crops is impressive over the years (1986-199 1). There has been a lot of improvement in 1990 and 1991 over the previous years. Adoptionrates for maize is 50% and 54%, and 55% and 58% for groundnuts in the last two years (1990 and

- 40 -

ANNEX laPage 4

1991). Division wise too, adoption rates for spacing is good and there is little variation betweenDivision. The rate of adoption by those already aware of the technology is quite high up to 100% forsome crops in some Divisions.

18. Adoption of recommended seed rates over the years (1986-1991) varies from crop tocrop. For groundnuts the adoption rate ranges from 31% in 1986 to 55% in 1991. For maize it was18% in 1987, up to 43% in 1991. For millet, some 75% of farmers have adopted the recommendedseed rates.

19. Adoption rates on thinning are also fairly impressive for the whole project period(1986-1991), but for the other production practices (i.e. use of herbicides, use of improved varieties)they are not as good as those cited above. On the average however, adoption of recommendedpractices are within our expectations (50% average) before we embarked on the study.

20. Our surprises include the low level of awareness in some cases but, among thoseaware, the rate of adoption is very high for most of the recommended practices. The low level ofawareness could be attributed to the increase in number of villages covered by one VEW which is onthe average doubled at present.

Factors Contributing to non Adoption

21. The following factors have some correlation with non-adoption of the recommendedfarming practices in the Gambia:

(i) Inadequate labor.(ii) Inadequate extension coverage.(iii) Farmer participation in extension strategies.(iv) Availability and affordability of inputs.(v) Access to credit.

22. Inadequate labor is the main reason for not adopting thinning on Maize (36%) andEarly Millet (32%). Also, some (21%) farmers said they cannot cope with row seeding of ricebecause of inadequate labor. Farmer participation in extension strategies is a major contributingfactor for adoption of recommended practices. According to the survey, 17% of the farmers haveparticipated in micro plots, 7% in block demonstrations, 67% in kafo farms and 20% in trialdemonstrations. This seem to be closely related to the rates of adoption for the variousrecommendations.

23. Availability and affordability of inputs are very well covered in our Survey. Forfertilizer recommendations, the main reasons given for non adoption are availability and cost. Cost isthe constraint for herbicide application as well.

24. Only North Bank Division, Western Division and Upper River Division are usingmost of their credit on farm inputs and machinery. The others may have very little credit which, areused for other things not connected with farming such as food purchases.

- 41 -

ANNEX lPage 5

Recmmenatin

25. As implied in its concept/definition, the effectiveness of the T & V extension systemin The Gambia depends greatly on the extent to which the extension force succeeds in reaching out tothe farming population with relevant information, advice and ideas that can/will encourage thesefarmers to practice/apply new technologies and practices in their farms.

26. DAS extension systems can be said to be actively involved in this process and that itis achieving some success. However, the T & V extension Systems efforts at achieving optimaladoption of improved crop production practices by farmers still has some shortcomings. It is in thelight of these weaknesses that the following recommendations are put forward.

27. More and regular training of farmers at village level is recommended. Tocomplement the promotional role of the contact farmer in the extension system as operated by theDepartment of Agricultural Services (DAS), non-contact farmers should be encouraged more to attendthe training sessions. In fact, the emphasis should shift from working with contact farmers toworking with contact groups. This will result in a wider and faster dissemination of agriculturalrecommendations within the farming community.

28. It will be necessary to further complement these regular farmer training sessions withdemonstration sessions and/or field trips or field days which should be well published to encouragehigh attendance.

29. While adoption rates of some of the technologies may seem adequate it could beargued that this may not be as a result of direct extension intervention only. In this regard therefore,it is recommended that extension workers pursue a vigorous appraisal of crop productionshortcomings and try to focus on those which are seen as critical factors (i.e. from the farmersperspective) and on which a significant visible impact (particularly yield) can be obtained.

30. A mix of extension strategies in pursuing extension teaching efforts at increasing cropproduction is a crucial element of the T & V extension system. However, a standardized approach tothe use of these strategies across the divisions is not compatible with the current staffmg of the DAS.

31. Hence, we wish to recommend that extension workers only concentrate on thosestrategies with which they can adequately address the farmers production constraints in their areas. Itwill even be wiser to concentrate on one or two constraints (impact point) within a manageablegeographical area involving many farmer participants and using primarily micro-plots and the groupapproach to encourage adoption of new technologies by farmers.

32. An important source of farming advice for a majority of our farmers is RadioGambia. Since this service is provided by the Agricultural Communication Unit (ACU) throughRadio Gambia a more formal approach to this important farmer teaching method is essential. Betterorganized contact and non-contact groups should be 'formed' and used as formal radio listeninggroups. These should be routinely serviced by ACU through programming follow-up andcompetitions. This approach could help in improving information sharing among and between thegroups.

33. Adequate funding of Divisional evaluation studies should be provided so that resultscan be properly documented, published and circulated to all those concerned.

.

- 42 -

ANNEX lbPage I

TE GAMBA

AGRl AL S ES PROJECT

a&lWlNU u Rerch Compoet

Statutes of NARB would contain the following critical elements:

(i) a dear statement s to NARB's responsibility for frmulating and implementing thenational policy with respect to agriculral and natural resources management research;

(i) to implement the national policy, NARB would be authorized to create independentresearch institut under Its authority and within its mandate; and/or let research contractswith national, regional and international institutes, NGOs or the private sector; and/orncot into partnership arrangements with such institutions; NARI would be the first such

iostitute to be creatd under its auspices;

Olii) the terms of reference and responsibilities of the would be clearlydefined in NARB's statutes;

(iv) AU Government (including salaries) and fWial development aid fimds would bechanneled (or at least programmed) through NARB; annual decisions on the applicationof theme funds would be vested in a ED_IC _1 wbich would be chaired by thePermanent Secretary of the Ministry of Finance, and which would include dulyauthorized representatives of all sources of funds, Finance Committee decisions wouldbe binding;

(v) to review individual resarch proposals or entire programs, NARB would be assisted byan independent Rearch Review Commlttee wbich would include scientists ofinternational repute; to ensure transparency and accountability, committeerooommend&tions would be available to the Finance Committee prior to its deliberationsand to the scientists concerned;

(vi) NARB would appoint the directors general of the research institutes under its authority(including NAI) upon recommendation by an ad km and independent Search and

A_U i Comtm and

(vii) ins_ti under NARB's authority (including NARI) would have: (a) a commercialbudgeting and accounting system subject to independent audits, (b) a staff scheme ofswvice nd peonnel recruitment, promotion and termination policies acceptable toNARB, and (c) title to grounds, buildings and equipment.

- 43 -

ANNEX lbPage 2

2. Technical Secretariat aM. The TS would have the following tasks:

(i) organize the preparation, validation and regular updating of a national agriculturalresearch strategy (master plan), as a yardstick to direct decision making on priorityresearch objectives and research funding;

(ii) implementation oversight and administration of research contracts funded through GARF,including the organization of independent scientific reviews and financial audits asprovided for under the terms of individual contracts;

(iii) organize independent scientific and financial audits of research institutions under NARB'sauthority (including NARI), as provided for in the statutes of these institutions;

(iv) prepare guidelines for research proposal presentation, progress reporting and financialaccountability;

(v) based on information provided by research institutions under NARB's authority and onprogress reports on contract implementation, establish a data base to monitor researchprogramming, program implementation, research results and program funding, basicelements to be presented annually to the Research Review and Finance Committees; and

(vi) act as a secretariat to the meetings of the Research Review and Finance Committees anddisseminate their reports.

3. The three principal elements of DAR's research management and resources allocationsystem are:

(i) Research Program Task Forces (RPTFs); for each of the 7 programs, participants includeDAS/DLS, NGO and farmer representatives; RPTFs act as advisory panels to theprogram leaders for decisions on priorities and resource allocations at the program level;on-farm testing program proposals are in principle formulated by the RPTFs;

(ii) Annual Research Review (ARREV); ARREV meetings are scheduled annually to reviewprogress on the basis of NARI's Annual Reports, and to decide on priorities betweenprograms and on future directions; participants are decision makers from DAS/DLS,collaborating NGOs and other scientific partners; NARB Research Review Committeereports and findings concerning NARI programs should be available prior to ARREVmeetings; and

(iii) Program Advisory Committee (PAC); participants include: NARI's Director General, theAssistant Director, the 7 program leaders and the head of STU; PAC is a steeringcommittee that advises the Director General on priorities, programs, policies and resourceallocations. PAC's recommendations on resource allocations are presented by theDirector General to NARB's Finance Committee, which in turn presents it with its ownrecommendations to the full Board.

- 44 -

ANNEX lbPage 3

4. The statues of NARB/NARI would provide for the following annual programmg,budgeting and review cycle:

(i) by May 31: publication of the annual report of last year's research results, thus allowingfor last minute changes in research protocols before the start of the agricultural season;

(ii) by September 30: preliminary conclusions of RPTF meetings with respect to next year'sresearch programs to be presented to NARB's Research Review Committee;

(iii) by October 31: RPTF conclusions with Research Review Committee comments to bediscussed by ARREV;

(iv) by November 30: PAC presents and discusses ARREV conclusions with NARB'sFinance Committee (para. 4.08 (iv)); and

(v) by December 31: NARI's Director General presents research program proposals,detailed budgets and financing plans with Research Review and Finance Committees'recommendations to NARB for approval.

Adoption of this cycle would imply that NARB's and NARI's fiscal year would begin on: January 1.

5. Research by ITC, MNR&E Departments, NGOs, farmer associations, seed and otheragro-industries, IARCs and other foreign institutions, that are eligible for NARB support according tothe terms of the national agricultural research strategy, could in principle be funded through GARF undercontract, provided: (a) the research proposals presented according to NARB guidelines are accepted byNARB's Research Review Committee, and (b) the implementing institutions meet the accountabilitycriteria set by NARB's Finance Committee.

&kAOAMM%A0SRV%snnWb

- 45 -

ANNEX 2Page 1

Ie x a, lj.II i

fl x x X x ' ~~~I tfi{

.I #X X X X XS X t

I jl I § I g lldiI j

- 46 - ANNEX2

Page 2

IDSLAhMACRICULTURAL SIZRVICES PROJECT

Tedl" Re AvWdato be Tmfd for llvedd(fomnlated aconding to geographic reg , typ of animal,

an type of herd ownersip and management)

To be Teled/Technical RecommerKbtiour Readily Available further developed

xAnimal nutrition/feed supply (foage production and conervation),mineral upplements, crop by-products, use of ura to preerve green

vra)

Herd manaement (selection of breeding animals, castrtion, Xdestockage', weaning)

Range management practice Xx

Growing of forage trees X

Manure productionx

Otanization of producer groups to take on simple veterinary care and Xto take on simply veterinary care and to handle input supply and X

-rting

HeaMt Protetio(vaccinations against hemorrhagic septicemia, black quarter, andanthx, treatment of internal and extenal paraitic disases

xInproved feed quality in dry season (fodder bank technology-a lowinput sytems of esablishing high quality leguminous fodder reservesfor th dry sason for selected categories of livestock)

Ibultn X

-Management nd feeding-Vaccination, especially against newcatle die-Constroction of poultry houses

Smail Rumnin

(Vaccination apinst peste des petitc nuninants, deworming, acaricide X Xappliction and trimming of hooves) X

Sheep and goat fattening X

x

x

- 47 -

ANNEX 3Page 1

THE GAMA

AGRI UL SERVICES PROJECr

.Training Comt2n

1. Formal training of staff of DAS, DLS, DOP, and DAR is insufficient to develop ascience-based agricultural research and extension system. Divisional management posiions (DACs) andsubject matter specialist positions cannot be filled with qualified people and therefore thuse vital finctionshave suffered in the past. Since the Gambia does not have an agricultural university, degree otining hasto be pursued abroad.

2. The objective of the different Deparunents is to have key regional staff trained at the MSclevel and to have all SMS and training officers acquire over time a minimum standard of BSc. Frontline extension supervisory staff should have the Diploma in General Agriculture from the GambbCollege, School of Agriculture.

3. Likely training institutions for degree-level targ abroad have been idetfied acwordingto disciplines (Nigeria-Ahmadou Bello University, Kenya-Egerton and Nairobi Univesity, UK-WyeCollege, Holland-UnitersityofWageningen). Similarly, for short-term training in extension maagement,monitoring and evaluation, statistics and use of computers, and in specific agricultual subject arm,institutions have been identified (Institute for Low External Input Agriculture-ILEKA; IntnationalStatistical Programme Center-ISPC; and International Agricultural Research Centers-IARC).

4. All training will be coordinated by the Deputy PS/Project Coordinator and be approvedby the Personnel Management Office (PMO) of the Presidency. The PMO assees trining needs in thecivil service and establishes training priorities in accordance with Government's developmet andmanpower priorities. Training abroad will only be supported if there is no possibility of an aopriateprogramme in The Gambia. In order to reduce the loss of trained ciil servants to employment eswheroin the economy, a bonding system has been introduced to deter staff from applying for posts outsideGovermnent for an agreed period following training, and which compensates Government finncllyshould they nevertheless do so. Results of training will be monitored and evaluated and taken inoaccount in the annual training program.

5. The objective of the orienion gis to launch the projet and to introduco theconcept of coordinated crop and livestock extension services to the policy makers and the exoecutagencies. This course would last for 2 days. A similar orientation program is also plannod for theNGOs.

6. Induction course for the regional staff would be aimed at making them understad tbhirresponsibilities under a coordinated extension system. The focus would be on how the various disciplinwork together to deliver to farmers an integrated set of massages coveing all disciplines rdated toagriculture.

7. Front line staff would meet regularly with the SMS and training officen (iXnlally oncea month subject to review later on the basis of experience) to be trained and to exchang viow on thetechnical recommendations to be proposed to farmers ad to discuss farms' reactons.

- 48 -

ANNEX3Page 2

LEVEL OF TRAINING BSc (3-4 yearm) MSc (1-2 years)

DISCIPLINE -YEAR- -YEAR-

1 2 1 2 3

1) Depatment of AgricultureSevices-DAS

General Agiculturo I I

Agr. Extension Education I I

Horticulture 1

Entomology 1Rural Sociology 1

Agric. Communication 1 1

Soil Scie=ce

2) Department of LivestockServices - DLS

Animal Husbandry 1 _

Agricultural Extension Educ.

3) D2otet of Plannine DOP

Agricultural Statistics 1

Agricultural Economics 1 1

Computer Processing and 1bIformation System

Development Planning and 1Management

4) Departmnt of AgriculturalResearch - DAR/NARI _

Soil Science

Enthomology 1 I

Agronomy I I

* This table is indicative only. Results of training will be monitored,evaluated nd taken into accomt in the annualtraining program.

- 49 -

ANNEX 3Page 3

(2-4 monft hs drtion)

DAS/DLSIDAR/DLS 48 on/molnts(diploma courm in satoa/

minars on et monitotingand euaton)

AREA OF TRAINING DURATION NO. OF PARTICIPANTS_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~~~~~(days) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

1. QnoldioMinistrial 2 20NGOs 1 20

2. IR7 214Staff of DLS ad DAR

3. _ _ _HQ Staff 28 1SRegional Staff 28 20

4. Rebc Extldon

(bi-monthly worop) 4 50

5. StudXv TIma 7-14 1S(2 pr _your)

6. Regulrtr ningof 2 214front line staff of DASand DLS (oce a month)

7. Upgraing of fwnt line 6 months 30staff at Gambia Collop

&kc%AMWA%AGVmw3

ProRgosd Tochnical ASsist la

(in staff-weeks)

IDAEFAD

Nate of Consuaies Individual Firm Individual T O T A LShort-term Short-torm Short-term

A. Policy Support to DOP 16 16

B. Projedt lmpl_ntaton Support

- Audit 14 14

- Range Land Inventory 5 5

- Study of River Flow and Saline Intrusion 5 5

- Soil and Wate Maagement 10 10 o

- Extemal Review of Resarch Pogms 6 6

- Agricultural Communication Unit 10 10

- Execution of Part D (community sef-help and farmer empowermt) 40 40

C._nsituoa Deevdopment_- Accouting Sytem 6 6

- Monitoring & Evaluation 10 10

- Research & Extension Planning and Research Station Manwement 10 10 20

TOTAL 242

/I Consultaoces will be selected on the basis of short lists approved by IDA. No sole source procurement is envisaged.

,dbkWAM V.GV= OQ m fD >C

- 51 -

ANEX 4

N:llCU TIMi ncA s FtEA

Indkeatire Ike *. Kev ladinahis's r beExi.

Denurtment of Aricukurl Servi (DA nd Dm of Lek Svi (DLSU

I~~~~ ~~Activi Vy/Obiective 1dw At Probect Bus ExDected=~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~a MTenn Rbvia m PIroiect

I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ComplSon1) Progrm Inputs

Fielding of extension saffVEW and Livestock Asistants no. 138 138 138Supervisors no. 25 35 40SMS no. is 20 20Other extersion and project staff no. 72 72 72Vehicles no. 10 15 15Motoru ycles no. 35 138 138

2) Promm Outpu (total no. of villages in the country 1,300;total no. of farm families 69,000)

Villages covered by VEWs Total & peVIEW 360 5 710 5 960 7Contact groups in exince Total A per VEW 560 8 1,660 12 2,200 16Farmers in contact groups reached Total pot VEW 3,400 50 9,000 70 23,000 170Micro-plots established Total per VEW 560 * 1,660 12 2,300 20Demonstration plots in farmen' fields (maaged by Total A pee EW 138 1 2762

extension) 2Training sesion for VEWs per year No 3 12Training sion for SMS per year No 4 6Extension Mesages (Impact Points) ListWomen Famers Reached as % of Total Famun 20 35

so

3) Resulb

Evidence of changes in actu farmes' pracio (i.e. ral MoniAng surveyadoption rtes of technical reommendations per orop/animal species)

4) Impact

Consequences of extension in terms of income, Nationalproductivity, production, other aspect Agriculural Sample

Survey (NASS)-> ess

Obscrvation

5) a) Unusual Evenb(political changes, weather patten, etc.) whichinfluence project inplmentation

b) Indicate major s

- 52 -ANNEXPap. 2

IaktleLt of K,Indicators for Prolect CoumnMOn

Carried Out at Carrd Out atMid-Term Review Poica Comildion

A) Setor AnrAlya (DOP) Spocific PoL;oy Studis 2 5

3) Parte Empowermet-Non-formal education No. of boneficiie 1,200 3,500

-Formation of Wraer Ume Auoolationu No. 50 175

-Introduction of Animal Tracton in No. of User 200 800Irdgate ric production

-Training of Vlap Entrwrneurs No. 30 80

-Promotion of now VISACAS No. 5 1S

-Suppost for Community-intiad eU- No. of self-help 40 90help activities aotivitb noad

0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.

The GC biaAgriculturat Services Project

Project Cost Suwsry

DataslOOG USS000 X Total------------------------------ --------------------------- X Foreign Bae

LocaL Foreign Total Local Foreign Total Exchwige Costs

A. Agricultural Exteion 11085.3 16900.4 27985.7 1218.2 1857.2 3075.4 60.4 20.7B. C m ./Ext.& Adult Litracy

1. _nagmnt 167.1 2345.3 2512.3 18.4 257.7 276.1 93.4 1.92. Radio Unit 43.5 391.8 435.3 4.8 43.1 47.8 90.0 0.33. Video Unit 4.7 373.0 419.7 5.1 41.0 46.1 88.9 0.34. Print Shop & DAC 50.6 455.6 506.2 5.6 50.1 55.6 90.0 0.4S. Gr4hic Arts 17.1 167.8 184.9 1.9 18.4 20.3 90.8 0.1

Sub-Total 325.0 3733.5 4058.5 35.7 410.3 446.0 92.0 3.0C. Non-forml Education 1919.7 2940.3 4860.0 211.0 323.1 534.1 60.5 3.60. Agricultural Reserch

1. N&nagemwnt/Inst.& Staff 0 2349.4 12092.7 14442.1 258.2 1328.9 1587.0 83.7 10.72. station Develop. Tudm 1566.5 2813.1 4379.6 172.1 309.1 481.3 64.2 3.23. station Develop. Sapu 3152.9 7302.4 10455.3 346.5 802.5 1148.9 69.8 7.74. Norticutture Progrm 234.8 665.1 899.9 25.8 73.1 98.9 73.9 0.75. Grain Legsms oitseds 180.3 265.2 445.5 19.8 29.1 49.0 59.5 0.36. Cereals Progrm 138.0 371.2 509.2 15.2 40.8 56.0 72.9 0.47. Crop Syst_JRes. Nanagt. 213.5 869.6 1083.1 23.5 95.6 119.0 80.3 0.8S. Agricultural Engineering 143.9 396.3 542.2 15.8 43.8 59.6 73.5 0.49. Seed Technology Unit/Sapu 136.4 44.3 582.7 15.0 49.0 64.0 76.6 0.410. Livestock progrm 169.0 382.5 551.5 18.6 42.0 60.6 69.4 0.4 1

SubTotat 8284.6 25606.4 33891.1 910.4 2813.9 3724.3 75.6 25.0 unE. Livestock Extesion 7276.0 8895.5 16171.5 799.6 977.5 1777.1 55.0 11.9F. Rat. Resources/Envirorat.

1. Env.Unit & Staff Training 444.3 4284.7 4729.0 48.8 470.8 519.7 90.6 3.52. Nat. Resources Inventory 2272.0 6820.7 9092.7 249.7 749.5 999.2 75.0 6.7

Sub-Total 2716.3 11105.4 13821.7 298.5 1220.4 1518.9 80.3 10.2C. Strergthming .1

1. Department of Plamning 3321.8 8452.7 11774.6 365.0 928.9 1293.9 71.8 8.72. Coordination Unit 1356.8 2802.1 4158.9 149.1 307.9 457.0 67.4 3.13. GCis College 1291.6 3991.9 5283.5 141.9 438.7 580.6 75.6 3.9

Sub-Total 5970.2 15246.7 21216.9 656.1 1675.5 2331.5 71.9 15.7N. Farmer Setf-Retlince Act. 5204.8 8255.2 13460.0 572.0 907.2 1479.1 61.3 9.9

Total BASELINE COSTS 42781.9 92683.4 135465.3 4701.3 10185.0 14886.3 68.4 100.0Physical Contingencies 3136.7 6617.1 9753.8 344.7 727.2 1071.8 67.8 7.2Price Contingencies 5176.4 6337.4 11513.7 568.8 696.4 1265.2 55.0 8.5

Total PROJECTS COSTS 51095.0 105637.9 156732.8 5614.8 11606.6 17223.4 67.4 115.7

Values Scaled by 1000.0 - 11/11/1992 14:07

The GambiaAgricultural Services ProjectSuLry Accounts Cost Sum_nry

DOaa8iOOO U5S$OOO Total------------------------------ --------------------------- Z Foreign Base

Local Foreign Total Local Foreign Total Exchange Costs

I. IhVESTYT COSTS

A. Civit Works 4192.S 7697.2 11689.7 460.7 645.6 1306.6 64.7 6.6S. Civil Works Research 1441.5 3377.5 4819.0 156.4 371.2 529.6 70.1 3.6C. Equlpe nt

1. fam Equipment 9 Machin. 256.6 2122.3 2379.0 28.2 233.2 261.4 69.2 1.62. Fam Equipumt Reseach 273.6 1804.6 2076.2 30.1 196.3 228.4 86.8 1.53. Office Equi nt 136.6 1212.0 1350.6 15.3 133.2 146.4 89.7 1.04. Office Equi nt Research 77.9 647.9 725.7 6.6 71.2 79.6 69.3 0.55. Cammunication Equipmnt 107.9 971.3 1079.2 11.9 106.7 116.6 90.0 0.66. Survey/Lab Equipnt 4.5 760.6 45.1 9.3 63.6 92.9 90.0 0.67. Laboratory Equip.Research 564.0 1656.1 2240.1 64.2 162.0 246.2 73.9 1.76. Anim_s 302.5 0.0 302.5 33.2 0.0 33.2 0.0 0.2

Sub-Totl, 1625. 9174.6 11000.6 200.6 1006.2 1206.9 83.4 8.1P. Vehictes 762.9 6666.1 7629.0 83.6 754.5 836.4 90.0 5.6E. Vehicles - Resech 276.1 246.9 2761.0 30.3 273.1 303.4 90.0 2.0F. Technical Assistame 3236.2 10443.6 13679.7 355.6 1147.6 1503.3 76.3 10.1G. TA - Reserch 372.4 3942.6 4315.0 40.9 433.3 474.2 91.4 3.2 1N. Training 9976.8 22799.1 3277.9 1096.6 2505.4 3602.0 69.6 24.21. Training - Research 529.0 5906.0 635.0 56.1 649.0 707.1 91.8 4.8 -'J. NRM Reserch Fund 1516.2 6064.9 7581.1 166.6 666.5 833.1 80.0 5.6

Total INVESTIENT COSTS 24131.5 76756.7 102688.2 2651.8 6654.6 11306.4 76.5 76.0

II. REOJRIENT COSTS

A. Operating Costs1. 0 & II Vehictes 1522.3 3724.6 5246.9 167.3 409.3 576.6 71.0 3.92. 041 Vehicles - Research 1390.1 4170.4 5560.5 152.8 458.3 611.0 75.0 4.13. Suppties 386.1 3474.5 3860.5 42.4 361.8 424.2 90.0 2.84. Supplies - Reserch 487.6 793.9 1261.5 53.6 87.2 140.6 62.0 0.95. 01 Techn.Equip./Build. 185.0 165.0 370.0 20.3 20.3 40.7 so.0 0.36. OLN Costs Bldg. Research 762.5 762.5 1525.0 83.8 83.6 167.6 50.0 1.17. Meetings £ Altowances 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.08. Meetings/allow. Research 75.0 0.0 75.0 8.2 0.0 8.2 0.0 0.19. Putitications 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.010. Ptbications - Research 15.0 60.0 75.0 1.6 6.6 8.2 80.0 0.111. IMR Research Fund 755.8 755.8 1511.6 83.1 83.1 166.1 50.0 1.11Z. Persomnel Sal/Altlow. 11101.1 0.0 11101.1 1219.9 0.0 1219.9 0.0 8.213. Pers./Sal./Allow.Research 1969.9 0.0 1969.9 216.5 0.0 216.5 o o 1.5

Sub-Total 18650.4 13926.7 32577.1 2049.5 1530.4 3579.9 42.7 24.0

Total BASELINE COSTS 42781.9 92683.4 135465.3 4701.3 10185.0 14886.3 68.4 100.0Physical Contingencies 3136.7 6617.1 9753.8 344.7 727.2 1071.8 67.8 7.2Price Contingencies 5176.4 6337.4 11513.7 568.8 696.4 1265.2 55.0 8.5 lb

Totat PROJECTS COSTS 51095.0 105637.9 156732.8 5614.8 11608.6 17223.4 67.4 115.7 o x

Vatues scaled by 1000.0 - 11/11/1992 14:11

The GambiaAgricultural Services Project

Su_ary Account bV Project ComponentDoatasi000

Agricult Mon-form Manageme Grainurat Print at nt/Inst. Station Station Horticul Legums

Extensio Nanageme Radio Video Shop & Craphic Educatio & Staff Develop. Develop. ture & Cerealsn nt Unit Unit DAC Arts n D Tundum Sapu Program Oilseeds Prwgrm

1. INVESTMENT COSTS.. ... . . . . . . .

A. Civil works 4422.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 91.5 8.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0B. Civil Works - Research 0.0 I 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4723.0 93.0 0.0 0.0C. Equipment

1. Farm Equipment & Machin. 375 .0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.02. Farm Equipment Research 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 515.6 752.3 79.0 0.0 99.83. Office Equipment 289.0 0.0 54.3 193.7 314.0 34.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.04. Office Equipent Research 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 192.0 219.0 186.0 0.0 0.0 26.45. Couanications Equipment 0.0 0.0 306.0 198.5 50.2 124.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.06. Survey/Lab Equipment 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.07. Laboratory Equip.Research 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1800.0 230.0 0.0 0.0 35.0 0.08. Animals 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ................. ............................. ._..

Sub-total 664.0 0.0 360.3 392.2 364.2 158.0 0.0 1992.0 964.6 938.3 79.0 35.0 126.2D. Vehicles 2950.0 134.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0E. Vehicles - Research 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 450.0 310.0 630.0 347.0 155.5 155.5F. Technical Assistance 0.0 2204.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0G. TA - Research 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4315.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0H. Training 11214.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4860.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.01. Training - Research 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6435.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0J. NRH Research Fund 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total INVESTMENT COSTS 19251.0 2338.7 360.3 392.2 455.7 166.4 4860.0 13192.0 1274.6 6291.3 519.0 190.5 281.7

11. RECURRENT COSTS

A. Operating Costs1. 0 & H Vehicles 2174.5 173.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.02. Ol Vehicles - Research 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 416.6 1275.0 2750.0 259.4 125.0 125.03. Supplies 1450.0 0.0 75.0 27.5 50.5 18.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.04. Supplies - Research 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 125.0 795.0 36.5 32.5 55.0 32.55. 081 Techn.Equip./BuiId. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.06. 04 Costs Bldg. Research 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0. 0 0.0 525.0 1000.0 0.0 0.0 0.07. Neetings & Allowances 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.08. Meetings/allow. Research 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.09. Pubtications 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.010. Pubtlications - Research 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.011. URN Research Fund 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.012. Personnel Sal/Attow. 5110.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.013. Pers./Sal./Allow.Research 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 633.4 435.0 377.5 89.0 75.0 70.0

Sub-total 8734.7 173.6 75.0 27.5 50.5 18.5 0.0 1250.1 3105.0 4164.0 380.9 255.0 227.5.... -. --... .- - -- - - - - -- - - - - - - - -.. .........- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - - - -r- -

_ w

Tota BASELINE COTS 27985.7 2512.3 435.3 419.7 506.2 184.9 4860.0 14442.1 4379.6 10455.3 899.9 44S.5 S09.2Physical Cantlnuamcle 1971.7 233.9 36.0 507.S 50.1 17.1 291.6 630.7 296.5 1178.0 91.4 39.0 47.7Price Contin-gncies 2172.6 129.2 22.4 40.0 16.0 10.5 571.6 1276.1 482.2 1033.7 75.1 36.8 54.8

Total PJECT COSTS 32130.0 2875.5 493.8 967.2 S52.4 212.5 5723.2 1634..9 5160.2 12667.0 1066.4 521.4 611.7

Tzos 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0FeIuin Exchae 18765.3 2662.7 43.7 815.9 514.6 192.5 3418.1 13618.0 35.7 8778.3 779.0 305.2 441.4

Value Seated bV 1000.0 11/11/1992 14:10

0'

tD0

s i

The GambiaAgricutturat Services Project

Summary Account by Project ComponentDalasiOOO

Seed Nat.Crop Agricult technolo Livestoc Resource Farmer

System/R ural gy Livestoc k Env.Unit s Departme Coordina Setf-Retes. Engineer Unit/Sap k Extensio & Staff Inventor nt of tion Gambia iance

Managt. ing u program n Training y Planning Unit College Act.

1. INVESTMENT COSTS

A. Civit Works 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1319.5 228.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2590.0 3230.0B. Civil Uorks - Research 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0C. Equipment

1. Farm Equipment & Machin. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2004.0 0.02. Farm Equipment Research 296.8 334.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.03. Office Equipment 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 268.3 197.5 0.0 0.04. Office Equipment Research 7.3 0.0 17.1 78.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.05. Coufunications Equipment 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 400.5 0.06. Survey/Lab Equipment 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 737.1 0.0 0.0 108.0 0.0 0.0 0.07. Laboratory Equip.Research 112.5. 0.0 32.6 30.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.08. Animals 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 272.5 0.0

-.-- -------------------------- ---------- -------------- --------------------------- ------ ------------------------

Sub-totat 416.6 334.7 49.7 138.0 737.1 0.0 0.0 376.3 197.5 2677.0 0.0D. VehicLes 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2530.5 0.0 0.0 1614.0 400.0 0.0 0.0E. Vehicles - Research 384.0 0.0 173.5 155.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0F. Technicat Assistance 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 913.5 0.0 1820.0 1092.0 0.0 7650.0G. TA - Research 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0H. Training 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5855.1 2957.5 0.0 5083.2 227.5 0.0 2580.01. Training - Research 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0J. HRM Research Fund 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7581.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total INVESTMENT COSTS 800.6 334.7 223.2 296.5 10442.2 4099.0 7581.1 8893.5 1917.0 5267.0 13460.0

11. RECURRENT COSTS

A. Operating Costs1. 0 & M Vehicles 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1454.7 0.0 0.0 1014.6 429.6 0.0 0.02. OUI Vehicles - Research 112.5 125.0 247.0 125.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.03. Suppties 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 950.0 360.0 0.0 162.5 750.0 16.5 0.04. Suppties - Research 75.0 7.5 67.5 55.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.05. OL Techn.Equip./8uild. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 270.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.06. 00& Costs Btdg. Research 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.07. Meetings & Altowances 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.08. Meetings/allow. Research 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.09. Publications 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.010. PubLications - Research 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.011. NRN Research Fund 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1511.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.012. Personnel Sal/Allow. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3324.6 0.0 0.0 1654.0 1012.3 0.0 0.013. Pers./Sal./Allow.Research 95.0 75.0 45.0 75.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 r

--- -- --------------------------- ------- ---------- ---------- ---------------------- ------ OQ I 4

Sub-totat 282.5 207.5 359.5 255.0 5729.3 630.0 1511.6 2881.1 2241.9 16.5 0.0 0 0 P

Totat BASELINE COSTS 1083.1 542.2 582.7 551.5 16171.5 4729.0 9092.7 11774.6 4158.9 5283.5 13460.0

Physical Contingencies 100.8 53.5 51.5 29.6 1239.1 114.1 758.1 381.0 168.9 656.2 807.6Price Contingencies 82.7 34.1 56.0 59.5 1653.8 362.6 285.2 814.1 383.6 282.5 1578.7

Total PROJECT COSTS 1266.6 629.7 690.3 640.7 19064.3 5205.7 10136.0 12969.7 4711.5 6222.1 15846.3Ssstz=======================================S ....s8S=s=====S sg=ttt=t88XS==X

Taxes 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Foreign Exchange 1006.8 454.8 522.2 444.0 10131.3 4698.8 7623.2 9271.2 3171.8 4676.6 9596.8

Valua Sealed by 1000.0 11/11/1992 14:10

l

Ivr{D X

4!. 1

The GambiaAgricultural Services Project

Summary Account by Project ComponentDalasiO00

Physical PriceContingencies Contingencies

Total X Amount X Amount

1. INVESTMENT COSTS

A. Civil Works 11889.7 12.5 1481.4 6.2 735.3B. Civil Works - Research 4819.0 15.0 722.7 9.4 451.6C. Equipment1. Farm Equipment & Machin. 2379.0 10.0 237.9 7.6 179.72. Farm Equipment Research 2078.2 10.0 207.8 7.3 151.13. Office Equipment 1350.8 44.7 603.3 4.0 53.44. Office Equipment Research 725.7 10.0 72.6 8.3 60.25. Communications Equipment 1079.2 10.0 107.9 4.4 47.56. Survey/Lab Equipment 845.1 10.0 84.5 7.9 67.17. Laboratory Equip.Research 2240.1 10.0 224.0 10.1 226.78. Animals 302.5 10.0 30.2 14.3 43.3 1

-- - - -- - - -- - - -- -- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Sub-total 11000.6 14.3 1568.3 7.5 829.0D. Vehicles 7629.0 10.0 762.9 3.3 254.6E. Vehicles - Research 2761.0 8.4 231.1 5.7 157.0F. Technical Assistance 13679.7 7.8 1062.0 10.4 1421.1G. TA - Research 4315.0 10.0 431.5 7.2 309.6H. Training 32777.9 3.8 1243.4 8.3 2716.61. Training - Research 6435.0 0.0 0.0 8.8 566.8J. NRM Research Fund 7581.1 10.0 758.1 3.1 232.4

Total INVESTMENT COSTS 102888.2 8.0 8261.4 7.5 7674.0

11. RECURRENT COSTS

A. Operating Costs1. 0 & M Vehicles 5246.9 6.9 362.9 12.0 628.92. O&M Vehicles - Research 5560.5 9.0 501.9 11.7 652.13. Supplies 3860.5 0.0 0.0 10.0 387.34. Supplies - Research 1281.5 0.0 0.0 11.0 141.55. O&M Techn.Equip./Build. 370.0 0.0 0.0 15.1 55.76. O&M Costs Bldg. Research 1525.0 0.0 0.0 11.5 175.07. Meetings & Allowances 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.08. Meetings/allow. Research 75.0 0.0 0.0 13.3 10.09. Publications 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.010. Publications - Research 75.0 0.0 0.0 10.4 7.811. NRM Research Fund 1511.6 0.0 0.0 3.5 52.812. Personnel Sal/Allow. 11101.1 4.5 501.5 13.1 1450.4 OQ te13. Pers./Sal./Allow.Research 1969.9 6.4 126.1 14.1 278.3 m m X

Sub-total 32577.1 4.6 1492.4 11.8 3839.7 in

Total BASELINE COSTS 135465.3 7.2 9753.8 8.5 11513.7

Physical Contingencies 9753.8Price Contingencies 11513.7 6.2 715.5

Total PROJECT COSTS 156732.8 6.7 10469.3 7.3 11513.7

Taxes 0.0 0.0 0.0Foreign Exchange 105637.9 6.6 7002.6

Values Scaled by 1000.0 11/11/1992 14:10

OQ tl

0;

W Q M

ON D) X

The GambiaAgricultural services Project

DalasiOOO

Summary Accounts by Year

Base Costs Foreign Exchange

01 02 03 04 05 Total X Amount

1. INVESThENT COSTS

A. Civit Uorks 8259.2 828.0 964.5 873.5 964.5 11889.7 64.7 7697.2B. Civil Works - Research 229.0 2275.0 2275.0 40.0 0.0 4819.0 70.1 3377.5C. Equipment

1. Farm Equipment * Machin. 1219.0 290.0 290.0 290.0 290.0 2379.0 89.2 2122.32. Farm Equipment Research 911.3 51.7 1000.4 106.3 8.5 2078.2 86.8 1804.63. office Equipment 1222.1 15.7 19.3 78.0 15.7 1350.8 89.7 1212.04. Office Equipment Research 272.6 109.1 212.0 50.0 82.0 725.7 89.3 647.95. Comainications Equipment 838.5 0.0 188.6 26.8 25.4 1079.2 90.0 971.36. Survey/Lab Equipment 476.5 0.0 0.0 368.5 0.0 845.1 90.0 760.67. Laboratory Equip.Research 732.6 390.0 397.5 360.0 360.0 2240.1 73.9 1656.18. Animats 69.5 54.5 54.5 69.5 54.5 302.5 0.0 0.0

Sub-total 5742.2 911.0 2162.3 1349.2 836.1 11000.6 83.4 9174.8D. Vehicles 6841.0 0.0 250.0 538.0 0.0 7629.0 90.0 6866.1E. Vehicles - Research 1368.0 776.5 311.0 305.5 0.0 2761.0 90.0 2484.9F. Technicat Assistance 3830.0 2279.0 2896.7 2337.0 2337.0 13679.7 76.3 10443.6G. TA - Research 2282.0 443.0 704.0 443.0 443.0 4315.0 91.4 3942.6H. Training 10719.4 11393.2 4495.4 3084.9 3084.9 32777.9 69.6 22799.11. Training - Research 2015.0 1105.0 1105.0 1105.0 1105.0 6435.0 91.8 5906.0J. NRN Research Fund 6066.9 1514.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 7581.1 80.0 6064.9

Total INMESTMENT COSTS 47352.8 21524.9 15163.9 10076.1 8770.5 102888.2 76.5 78756.7

II. RECIRRENT COSTS

K. Operating Costs1. 0 A H Vehicles 960.0 960.0 1016.4 1155.2 1155.2 5246.9 71.0 3724.62. OL Vehicles - Research 1057.5 1089.6 1114.6 1149.4 1149.4 5560.5 75.0 4170.43. Supplies 772.1 772.1 772.1 772.1 772.1 3860.5 90.0 3474.54. Supplies - Research 256.3 256.3 256.3 256.3 256.3 1281.5 62.0 793.95. OLH Techn.Equip./Build. 20.0 40.0 70.0 120.0 120.0 370.0 50.0 185.06. O& Costs Bldg. Research 305.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 305.0 1525.0 50.0 762.57. meetings A Allowances 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.08. Meetings/allow. Research 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 75.0 0.0 0.09. Publications 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.010. Publications - Research 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 75.0 80.0 60.011. HNR Research Fund 1064.0 447.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 1511.6 50.0 755.812. Personrel Sal/Allow. 2548.4 2548.4 2001.4 2001.4 2001.4 11101.1 0.0 0.013. Pers./Sal./Allow.Research 394.0 394.0 394.0 394.0 394.0 1969.9 0.0 0.0

Sub-total 7407.4 6843.1 5959.8 6183.4 6183.4 32577.1 42.7 13926.7

Total BASELINE COSTS 54760.1 28368.0 21123.7 16259.5 14953.9 135465.3 68.4 92683.4Physical Contingencies 4759.9 1470.7 1535.5 1050.4 937.4 9753.8 67.8 6617.1Price Contingencies 1195.3 1859.9 2440.4 2714.4 3303.7 11513.7 55.0 6337.4

OQ ,-- 1xTotal PROJECT COSTS 10715.3 31698.6 25099.6 20024.3 19195.0 156732.8 67.4 105637.9

Taxes 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 P tnForeign Exchange 45863.7 21859.1 15948.9 11520.0 10446.2 105637.9 100.0 105637.9

-- - -- -- - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -.-- - - - - - - - - -- - - - .- - - -- - - - -

The GambiaAgriculturat Services ProjectSummary Accounts by Year

Totals Inctuding Contingencies Totals Including ContingenciesDatasiOOO USS000

01 02 03 04 05 Total 01 02 03 04 05 Total

I. INVESTMENT COSTS

A. Civit Works 9622.2 952.4 1166.9 1096.3 1268.7 14106.4 1057.4 104.7 128.2 120.5 139.4 1550.2B. Civil Works - Research 268.6 2779.0 2892.8 52.9 0.0 5993.3 29.5 305.4 317.9 5.8 0.0 658.6C. Equipment

1. Farm Equipment & Machin. 1366.7 337.6 350.5 363.9 377.9 2796.6 150.2 37.1 38.5 40.0 41.5 307.32. Farm Equipment Research 1021.9 60.3 1209.4 133.8 11.6 2437.1 112.3 6.6 132.9 14.7 1.3 267.83. Office Equipment 1847.6 18.2 23.3 97.9 20.4 2007.6 203.0 2.0 2.6 10.8 2.2 220.64. Office Equipaent Research 305.7 127.0 256.2 62.7 106.9 858.5 33.6 14.0 28.2 6.9 11.7 94.35. Coamunications Equipment 940.0 0.0 227.9 33.6 33.1 1234.6 103.3 0.0 25.0 3.7 3.6 135.76. Survey/Lab Equipment 534.2 0.0 0.0 462.5 0.0 996.8 58.7 0.0 0.0 50.8 0.0 109.57. Laboratory Equip.Research 821.8 455.6 483.2 455.8 474.5 2690.8 90.3 50.1 53.1 50.1 52.1 295.78. Animats 78.4 64.5 67.7 90.7 74.7 376.0 8.6 7.1 7.4 10.0 8.2 41.3

Sub-Totat 6916.3 1063.2 2618.3 1701.1 1099.1 13398.0 760.0 116.8 287.7 186.9 120.8 1472.3

D. Vehictes 7669.2 0.0 302.2 675.2 0.0 8646.5 842.8 0.0 33.2 74.2 0.0 950.2E. Vehictes - Research 1503.0 903.9 375.9 366.3 0.0 3149.1 165.2 99.3 41.3 40.2 0.0 346.0F. Technical Assistance 4233.5 2596.5 3447.3 2884.3 3001.3 16162.8 465.2 285.3 378.8 317.0 329.8 1776.1G. TA - Research 2558.1 515.5 850.5 555.4 576.6 5056.1 281.1 56.6 93.5 61.0 63.4 555.6R. Training 11217.3 12331.5 5260.0 3877.8 4051.4 36737.9 1232.7 1355.1 578.0 426.1 445.2 4037.1I. Training - Research 2053.4 1169.6 1213.0 1259.0 1306.8 7001.8 225.6 128.5 133.3 138.4 143.6 769.4J. NRM Research Fund 6805.7 1765.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 8571.6 747.9 194.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 941.9

Total INVESTMENT COSTS 52847.2 24077.4 18126.8 12468.2 11303.9 118823.6 5807.4 2645.9 1992.0 1370.1 1242.2 13057.5

II. RECURRENT COSTS

A. Operating Costs1. 0 & M Vehicles 1047.9 1090.6 1197.7 1422.2 1480.3 6238.7 115.2 119.8 131.6 156.3 162.7 685.62. O&M Vehicles - Research 1177.1 1261.9 1343.1 1437.2 1495.2 6714.5 129.3 138.7 147.6 157.9 164.3 737.93. Suppties 786.9 817.0 848.4 880.9 914.7 4247.8 86.5 89.8 93.2 96.8 100.5 466.84. Supplies - Research 261.7 272.7 284.1 296.1 308.5 1423.0 28.8 30.0 31.2 32.5 33.9 156.45. O&M Techn.Equip./Buitd. 20.4 42.6 77.9 139.3 145.4 425.7 2.2 4.7 8.6 15.3 16.0 46.86. OLh Costs BLdg. Research 311.6 325.2 339.4 354.2 369.6 1700.0 34.2 35.7 37.3 38.9 40.6 186.87. Neetings S Atlowances 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.08. Meetings/allow. Research 15.4 16.1 17.0 17.8 18.7 85.0 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 9.39. Publications 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.010. Pub.ications - Research 15.3 15.9 16.5 17.2 17.9 82.8 1.7 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 9.111. NRM Research Fund 1087.1 477.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 1564.4 119.5 52.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 171.912. Personnel Sat/Attow. 2714.9 2850.7 2375.1 2493.8 2618.5 13053.0 298.3 313.3 261.0 274.0 287.7 1434.413. Pers./Sat./Altow.Research 429.7 451.2 473.7 497.4 522.3 2374.4 47.2 49.6 52.1 54.7 57.4 260.9

SubA~-Totat 7868.1 7621.2 6972.9 7556.0 7891.1 37909.3 864.6 837.5 766.2 830.3 867.2 4165.9 '*

Total PROJECT COSTS 60715.3 31698.6 25099.6 20024.3 19195.0 156732.8 6672.0 3483.4 2758.2 2200.5 2109.3 17223.4

- 63 -

ANNEX 6

THE GAMBIA

AGRICULTURAL SERVICES I"ROIECT

Estimated Schedule of Dibursemenb of the IDA Credl

DISBURSEMENTS CumuliveDisbursemat

IDA Fical YeartSemerter Semester Cumuative%

FY94

December31, 1993 1.0 1.0 8%June30, 1994 2.0 3.0 24%

FY95

December31, 1994 2.0 5.0 41%June30, 1995 2.0 7.0 57%

PY96

December31, 1995 1.0 8.0 65%June30, 1996 1.0 9.0 73%

PY97

December31, 1996 0.9 9.9 80%June 30, 1997 0.8 10.7 87%

XY98

December31, 1997 0.8 l. 94%June30, 1998 0.8 12.3 100%

1. Expected date of board presentation: January 1993.2. Expected date of credit effectiveness: June 30, 19933. Expected closing date: June 30, 1999

&kWMAMBIACRV_nm"

- 64 -

ANNEX7Page 1

THE GAMBIA

Supervision Plan

1. IDA contribution to supervision of the project would be closely linked to theimplementation schedule given in Annex 9. The staff input indicted in the table below is in addition toregular supervision needs for the review of progress reports, procurement actions, correspondence, etc.Estimated to require two staff weeks per year. It is also in addition to support missions carried out bya Bank extension specialist stationed in Dakar, Senegal who will visit the Gambia 2-3 times a year.Three supervision missions are planned during the first year of the project, and two missions per yearthereafter. The first supervision mission would be a project launching mission that would assist theBorrower in meeting the conditions of project effectiveness and other preparatory tasks that need to beperformed for effectively launching the project. The second mission would ensure that the work programand budget for the first year of the project is prepared and that the other departments of the Ministry ofAgriculture and other agencies are cooperating with the Department of Agricultural Extension Services(DAES) in implementing the project. The third mission would be the beginning of the normal projectsupervision. One of the regular supervision missions would take place in either November or December,during which the results of the current calendar year would be assessed and the work program and budgetfor the following calendar year would be discussed and agreed upon with the Borrower.

2. Borrower's Contribution to Supervision.

(a) Progress Reports are to be submitted as follows:

(i) They should cover all parameters of crop and livestock extension (villagescovered, approximate number of beneficiaries, training, field trials, number offunctional literacy classes and number of participants, messages extended andcurrent issues with proposals how to solve them); agricultural research activities;and project related activities of DOP and the Agricultural School of the GambiaCollege;

(ii) At the end of May and November of each year;

(iii) By the Deputy Permanent Secretary, Programs and Projects, of the Ministry ofAgriculture who will coordinate report preparation by the participatingDepartments (DAS, DLS, DAR and DOP).

(b) Project monitoring wIll be the responsibility of each Department. The DPS/ProjectCoordinator with the assistance of DOP wUI supervise the implementation of themonitoring activities at all implementation levels.

(c) Each department would prepare by February each year a work program for the nextagricultural season and submit this program together with a detailed budget for discussionand approval to the DPS Project Coordinator. The DPS/Project Coordinator under theauthority of the Permanent Secretary Agriculture wIll, after discussion with theimplementing departments and needed adjustments, approve the program by mid-March.The approved consolidated work program and budget would be submitted to IDA for

- 65 -ANNEX 7

Page 2

comments and approval not later than the end of March each year. By the end of Juneof each year, the DPS/Project Coordinator would submit to IDA the audited projectaccounts for the previous calendar year.

(d) Mission briefing meetings on arrival will be chaired by the DPStProject Coordinator;wrap-up meetings will normally be chaired by the Minister of Agriculture or his delegate.

Table 1: SCHEDULE OF IDA SUPERVISION MISSONS

Approximate Date Activity Expected Skill Requirements StaffInput

_ _ _ _ _ ___ .__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (sw )

3/93 Project launching. Review progress Extension Specialist 6on procurement of vehicles, Research Specialistequipment & civil works. Review of Financial Analystfirst annual program & budget, stafftraining and research/ extensionlinkages & interdepartmentalcooperation

8/93 Review field activities Extension Specialist 2

2/94 Supervision mission Agro-economist 4Research Specialist

8/94 Supervision mission Agro-economnist 2

2/95 Supervision mission Research Specialist 2

9/95 Supervision mission Agro-economist 2

2/96 Mid-term project review Extension Specialist 12Adaptive Agr. Res. SpecialistTrng & Communic. SpecialistMonitoring Specialist

97-98 Yearly two supervision missions and Extension / Research / 8in-house reviews of work plans, Monitoring / Financial Analystbudgets, financial management, etc.

6/99 Project completion mission Extension Specialist 9Research SpecialistMonitoring Specialist

&iwm7

- 66 -

ANNEX8Page 1

THE GAMBIA

AGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT

Costs and Benefits

1. Cufent Costs. In the public institutions in the Gambia charged with responsibilitiesforextension and research, there are about 200 staff engaged on a full-time basis in technologygeneration and dissemination. The total cost of this staff, at an average salary and benefit costof $1,500, is $300,000/year. Most of this staff receive too little funds for mobility, training andother operating costs. Exceptions are to be found in some donor-financed projects.

2. Incremental Costs. Inspection of project cost tables shows that incremental recurrentcosts of extension and research will be US$6.0 million over the five years, or an annual averageof US$1.2 million, including vehicle and equipment replacement. These costs suffice to rendereffective 300 field staff. Incremental cost per field staff averages USS4,000 or about 2.7 timesthe salary and benefit costs. Since the non-personnel cost of good, i.e. mobile and continuously-trained staff, is so large, these expenditures will have to be carefully managed and monitored,whereby best practices can be identified and transferred to other areas and agencies.

3. Aggregate Breakeven Benefits. Any aggregate approach is subject to undue simplicity,and averaging over diverse local circumstances. Despite these limitations, an aggregate approachyields an order of magnitude for breakeven benefits that can be a useful, albeit imprecise,indicator of plausibility. Thus, with (i) a total rural population of US$550,000, and (ii) ruralGDP/head of US$120, project incremental costs are about 1.85% of the rural GDP. Since theproject will cover practically all of the rural population, the project incremental costs are about1.85% of the GDP of the target population. To break even, the project must increase this targetpopulation's income by 1.85% per year of what would be the case without the project. Thisincrease seems attainable when compared with long-term growth of rural income, or with theproductivity increases observed, albeit on small plots, under The Gambia - ADP-II Project overthe past several years. If staff salary and benefit costs are also included, total annual cost wouldincrease by US$300,000 to US$1.56 million/year, or 2.4% of the rural GDP. Income increasesof this magnitude also seem attainable.

4. Break-even Benefits at the Farm Enterprise Level. As above, any attempt to average overdiverse local circumstances will conceal the heterogeneity of local conditions and thereby providea possibly misleading indication of median incomes. Nonetheless, an average approach to break-even enterprise benefits yields a useful order-of-magnitude indicator of plausibility. Thus:

- 67 -

ANNEX 8Page 2

Rural population (thousand) 550No. of Farm Enterprises (thousand) 69 "No. of Target Farm Enterprises (TFE) (thousand) 69 k/Incremental Cost per TFE (USS/year) 17Rural GDP per Farm Enterprise (US$/year) 1,000

Size of Farm Enterprise (ha) 3 '

Value Added per ha (incl. livestock) (US$/year) 330Increase in Enterprise Value Added

from one 0.25 ha test plot: low (US$/year) 17 '

high (US$/year) 34

a/ Assuming 8 people per enterprise../ Full coverage.g/ Simplifying assumption: higher with animal traction, lower without.d/ Low is 20% increase in value added; this is the same as the incremental cost per Target Farm

Enterprise Oine 4).eJ High is 40% increase in value added, or more than double line 4.

5. These breakeven benefits show that the incremental cost (US$17/year) is covered if theTarget Farm Enterprises put in an additional 0.25 ha test plot each year. Clearly, someenterprises will rapidly expand the test plot to most or all of their area, i.e. full adoption.Equally clearly, some enterprises will not put in any test plots, because they have no labor, nomanure, no traction capacity, no access to credit or inputs, no security of tenure, nor means forrisk-sharing. The median outcome is indeed uncertain, and subject to different factorendowments of different enterprises, but it suffices that 0.25 ha out of the 3 ha farm (or 8%) isfarmed with test plot techniques each year to cover the incremental costs (or 4% in the highcase). If staff salary and benefit costs are also included, total cost per Target Farm Enterprisewould be US$22/year, and it would suffice that 10% of the land is put to test plots each year tocover the full cost.

6. The uncertainties underscore the need for careful monitoring of benefits - not only thenumber of test plots (and new tests), but also the rate of expansion (or true 'adoption") of thetechniques tried out on the test plots. Costs must also be carefully managed and monitored sothat best practices can be identified and transferred to other areas and agencies. It will be byworking on both the benefit MX cost sides of the breakeven calculation that the net benefit willbe maximized.

A-WMM1AWG8V%Md

- 68-

- I Page 1

.l _ " .~~ ~ ~~~~~~ I I I

_ _m

_ I li

E _I l Ii

£ _I I'IE

F - n I I:

- £

F- I I I II

V~ ~ I Ii1

_-

-69- ~~~~~~~~ANNEX 9

- - IPage 2

___ I I

ft _ 1i 11 1I

__~~~~~~~~~ _ II- I I 1 11 I

_ _ IIii

0~~~ ~~~~ II _ 111 111IzS _ _~ ~~ 11111 1 I I

_- 111 1 I I

!~~ _I 1 1 11111 I

*% _I 11 111 1 1I_~~~ _I 11 111 1I

_ _ II I

_ IL _ II

m m_

THE GAMBIAAGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT

Appraisal Report

Figure 1: Orgarnisation Structure of the Miristry of Agriculture

| the mwshhe EIJPenraalen Secry

Deputy Pemnwwnt Secretary Deputy Pennarent Secretaiy Director of(F-ac and Asm o) (PogranPros) Planning

l l l ~~~~~~~atrl Natonl

Stores Accounts Adanwstraton aPers Prepaon EvaluatID Raly Nasl

Deparment of Research Deparnt Of Departmt of Depant ofeal Services AgricuLtral Services ULvestock = Sevies(DlealCt (Director (Direcr (Direclor)

see Figure 2 see Figure 2

OQ Xo

THE GAMBIAAGRICULTURAL SERVICES PROJECT

Appraisal Report

Figure 2: Organisation Structure of the Ministry of Agricufture at the District Level

2Pmiar.nt SecretarysT AT(PS)

r- I - -| D srAr r Director Ky it Director ofti

AgrkAstsiral stavn |c | Uvestock Servisor

|~~~~~et FDeputy Director|

S Agricultural ExenSolSConserpaeonro Comunicaoios UEit e dIrrigatlon Unt

-ADAC~~~~DCDV o V

l 1. Traiong nttr- 2. SMSs

Key. DAC = DistokAgrculture Coordinaor Key: DVO = Distnct Vebeumary Offier IV ADAC = AssdntAgri ttur Coordinator LS = Liveslock Supervisor co sZTO = Train' owhcer LA = Livesdock Asdsmnts OQ X4SMS = Su=e Matter Speciadist eDDES = Dbtnct Extension Supervisor VEW = = agExteresioWorker .l C oAn = AnTraction IrFnscor

- 72 -ANNEX II

THEGAMBA

AGRICULUREA SERVICES PROJCT

Documiets Contained In the Pro3ect File

1. Detailed Cost Tables.

2. FAO/WB Cooperative Program: The Gambia - Agricultural Support Services andNatural Resources Management Project, Preparation Report, No. 54/91 CP-GAM. 11,20 May 1991.

3. Statistical Year Book of Gambian Agriculture: 1991, National Agricultural Data Center(NADC), Department of Planning, Ministry of Agriculture, March 1992.

4. IWAD project document with Annexes.

5. Adoption/Diffusion Evaluation Report of the Department of Agricultural Researchconcerning Crop Production Recommendations to Farmers, June 1992 by Messrs. OmarSonko, Department of Planning, MOA and Sana Jabang, Department of AgriculturalServices, MOA.

6. Miscellaneous Working Papers.

~Iv _OUVI

F . . s ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~E N G A L A^ 90tI A

2 tw S Z anD S Q '~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~A\<~~~~~~~ ,}t TSK,UEXS Lff|^ 45~ * A4DV Il, LL_l - ~ - | ~ - _-T E G MB IA -~ \ 11 s ,A-_- o-5 A

aF~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ARCLUA SEVIE p ECTer ENE

t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~O,, EOZ¢ticS S-ice< CeS' (25) c D,t,c..qt