Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY MICROE'ICHE Cop'y Report No. 9655-UNI Report No. 9655-UNI Type: (SAR) SINGH, S / X34572 / J-5231/ AF4AG STAFF APPRAISAL REPORT FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA NATIONAL AGRICULTURALTECHNOLOGY SUPPORTPROJECT FEBRUARY 20, 1992 AgricultureOperationsDivision Western Africa Department This document hasa restricted distribution and may be used by recipientsonly in the performance of their officialduties.Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized
Agriculture Operations DivisionWestern Africa Department
This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance oftheir official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
CURRENCY EOUIVALENTS
Currency Unit = Naira (N)US$1.00 = N9.5N I (100 kobos) = US$0.105
WEIGHTS AND MEASURES
Unless otherwise stated, all weights andmeasures used in this report are metric.
I metric ton (m ton) = 2,205 pounds (lb)1 hectare (ha) = 2.47 acres (ac)I kilometer (km) = 0.62 miles (mi)I meter (mn) = 3.28 feet (ft)
FISCAL YEAR
January I - December 31
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIANATIONAL AGRICULTURAL TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT PROJECT
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
ADP - Agricultural Development ProjectADPEC - ADP Executive CommitteeAERLS - Agricultura '5xtension and Research Liaison ServiceAPLC - Agricultural Programs Liaison CommitteeAPMEU - Agricultural Projects Monitoring and Evaluation UnitARMTI - Agricultural and Rural Management Training InstituteASD - Agricultural Services DtpartmentATSC - Agricultural Technology Support CommitteeATSF - Agricultural Technology Support FacilityBASIRDA - Bauchi State Integrated Rural Development AuthorityBES - Block Extension SupervisorCSU - Commercial Services UnitDFRRI - Directorate of Food, Roads and Rural InfrastructureFACU - Federal Agricultural Coordinating UnitFF Farm FamilyFGN - Federal Government of NigeriaFMAWRRD - Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Water Resources and
Rural DevelopmentFMST - Federal Ministry of Science and TechnologyFNT - Fortnightly TrainingFORMECU - Forestry Monitoring Evaluation and Coordinating UnitIAR - Institute of Agricultural ResearchILCA - International Livestock Center for AfricaKNARDA - Kano Agricultural and Rural Development AuthorityMADIA - Managing Agricultural Development in AfricaMANR - (State) Ministry of Agriculture and Natural ResourcesMDTD - Manpower Development and Training DepartmentMSADP - Multi-State Agricultural Development ProjectMTRM - Monthly Technology Review MeetingNACAR - National Advisory Committee for Agricultural
ResearchNAERLS - National Agricultural Extension and Research Liaison
ServiceNARP - National Agricultural Research ProjectNATSP - National Agricultural Technology Support ProjectNCAM - National Centre for Agricultural MechanizationNLPD - National Livestock Project DepartmentOED - Operations Evaluation DepartmentOFAR - On-Farm Adaptive ResearchOSR - On-Station ResearchPCC - Projects Coordinating CommitteePCR - Project Completion ReportPME - Planning, Monitoring and EvaluationPMEU - Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Unit
This document has a restricted distribution and may be used bv recinient" onlv in thP mrfnrni r
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS (cont'd)
PMU - Program Management UnitSARDA - Sokoto Agricultural and Rural Development Authority
SG - State GovernmentSIA - State Implementing AgencySMS Subject Matter SpecialistVEA - Village Extension AgentWIA - Women in Agriculture
FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA
NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT PROJECT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PagreNo
LOAN AND PROJECT SUMMARY ................................ i-iv
I. INTRODUCTION .................................. 1
II. AGRICULTURE SECTOR BACKGROUND .. 2.. ........ 2
A. Agricultural Sector and Economic Environment ................. 2B. Agricultural Policies and Bank Sector Assistance
Strategy. 4C. Bank Operations .5D. Agricultural Development Projects (ADPs) and
Lessons Learned .5
III. THE AGRICULTURAL TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT SYSTEM. 8
A. Technology Development ............................... 8B. Technology Dissemination ............................... 9C. Research-Extension Linkages ............................ 10
IV. THE PROJECT AREA ...................... 11
A. Population ..................................... 11B. Physical Features and Climate ........................... 12C. Farming Systems ................................... 12
The report is based on the findings of an appraisal mission which visited Nigeria in March1991, comprising Messrs. S. Singh (Mission Leader), A. Seth, R. Krishnan, S. Eremie, Ms.E. Gadzama (World Bank); V. Bindlish (Consultant); H.S. Randev and P. Yadav (FACU).Messrs. R. Hanan and V. Venkatesan reviewed the report for quality enhancement. Ms.M.L. Ah-Kee provided assistance in the cens tables of the report, and Mrs. E. Sunderlandprovided secretarial support. Messrs. J. Joyce and E. Lim are the managing Division Chiefand the Department Director, respectively, for the operation.
V. THE PROJECT ......................................... 13
A. Rationale and Objecives ..... ........................ 13B. Project Design. 14C. Summary Description .15
The Bauchi, Kano, Jigawa, Sokoto and Kebbi Components .... 151. Technical Support Se'rvices .152. Project Management .153. The Agricultural Technology Support Facility .16
D. Detailed Features .16Bauchi, Kano, Jigawa, Sokoto and Kebbi Components .16
1. Technical Support Services .162. Project Management .183. Agricultural Technology Support Facility .19
VI. PROJECT COSTS AND FINANCING .19
A. Cost Estimates .19B. Proposed Financing Plan .22C. Procurement .23D. Disbursement ........................ 25E. Auditing, Accounting and Reporting .27
VII PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION .27
A. Bauchi, Kano, Jigawa, Sokoto and Kebbi Components . .271. Overall Organization and Management .272. Operation of the Technology Support System .29
B. Agricultural Technology Support Facility .. 37C. Mid-Term and Completion Reviews . .37D. Implementation Schedule .. 38
VIII. FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC ANALYSIS .38
A. Determinants of Benefits and Costs .. 391. Input Use and Crop Yields .392. Prices . .40
B. Farm-Level Financial and Economic Analysis . .41C. Project Economic Analysis .. 42D. Implication for Fertilizer and Labor Use .. 43
IX. BENEFITS, JUSTIFICATION AND RISKS ..... 44
A. Benefits and Justification ..... 44B. Risks ..... 44C. Enviromnental Effects ..... 45
X. AGREEMENTS REACHED AND RECOMMENDATION .. 46
ANWEXES
1. The Technology Adaptation and Dissemination System2. Key Findings from the Past Adaptive Research and Priorities for
Future Work in Kano, Bauchi and Sokoto States3. Key Features of Extension Services4. Eligibility Criteria for Allocation of Funds Under the Agricultural
Technology Support Facility5. Crop Budgets and Economic Analysis6. Summary Cost Tables7. Project Implementation Schedule8. Disbursement Schedule9. Organization Charts10. Documents Available in Project File
MAP: IBRD 23561 Nigeria - Major Vegetat!-- Zones
FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF MNGERIA
NAINLARCLUA TECHNOLOGy SUPPORT PhOlECT
LOAN AND PROJECT SUMMARY
Borrower: Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Bneficia^rie: Federal Republic of Nigeria and Bauchi, Kano, Jigawa,Sokoto and Kebbi States.
Amount: US$42.5 million.
Terms: Payable over 20 years, including five years of grace atstandard variable interest rates.
3n-Lending Terms: The Federal Government would on-lend US$11.4 million toBauchi State, US$13.7 million to Kano and Jigawa States, andUS$10.8 million to Sokoto and Kebbi States on the sameterms and conditions as the Bank loan. Funds from anAgricultural Technology Support Facility of $6.6 millionwould be used by Federal Agencies for technologydevelopment and would also be on-lent to other states, on thesame terms and conditions as the Bank loan, upon compliancewith eligibility criteria such as, acceptable project managementarrangements and programs for adaptive research, agriculturalextension, staff training, environmental protection and privatesector participation. The states would carry the foreignexchange risk.
ii -
Project Description: The project would assist Bauchi, Kano, Jigawa, Sokoto andKebbi States in strengthening: AgriculturWa Technical Sup=ortSaiges and Project Management. On-Farm AdaptiveResearch would translate technology for application in majorfarming systems; Extension Services would be unified under asingle agency in each state. Village Extension Agents (VEAs)appropriate to the number of farm families and supported bySubject Matter Specialists would transfer technology tofarmers through advice on activities involving crops, animalhusbandry, animal tractior igro-forestry, soil and watermanagement and fisheries (where required). Extensionworkers would be provided with mobility, training andimproved supervision to enable them deliver better qualityservice to farmers. The gender-specific farming and post-harvest activities of the Women-in-Agriculture program wouldbe managed as an integral part of technology promotion by theextension service and would be given increased emphasisthrough training and adaptive research. Animal Traction andDevelopment of Small Scale Farm Implements would assist inproductivity enhancemnent with minimal soil disturbance. On-Farm Agro-Forestry and Soil and Water Management wouldaim to conserve soil and water mainly through biologicalmethods involving planting of trees and vetiver grass. ProjecManagement assistance would cover support forAdministration and Finance through rehabilitation of officebuildings, purchase of vehicles and provision of technicalassistance; upgrading of Planning, Monitoring and EvaluationUnits through better mobility, office equipment anddevelopment of joint M&E work programs with national andinternational centers of excellence in this field; and ManpowerDevelopment and Training to benefit management, technical,extension and administrative staff.
In addition, the project would establish an AgriculturalTechnology Support Facilit to replicate in other states thetype of activities outlined above for the five principal projectstates. States where similar projects are either coming to anend or where adequate resources are not available under anon-going project would be eligible. The ATSF would alsosupport discrete activities or pilot programs to increase farmerproductivity or production through acquisition anddissemination of innovative and affordable technologies.
- iii -
Estimated Costs
L& Ei IlUSS million
A. Bauchi, Kano, Jigawa, Sokoto and Kebbi- Technical Support1. Adaptive Research 2.6 3.7 6.32. Agricultural Extension 10.6 12.7 23.33. Animal Traction 1.2 3.2 4.44. Agro-Forestry and Soil and Water Management 2.4 1.9 4.3
Subtotal Base Costs 16.8 21.5 38.3
B. Bauchi, Kano, Jigawa, Sokoto and Kebbi- Project Mgt Support1. Administradon and Finance 1.2 1.7 2.92. Planning, Monitoring and Evaluadon 1.3 1.5 2.83. Manpower, Development and Training 0.3 0.7 1.0
Subtotal Base Costs 2.8 3.9 6.7
C. Agricultural Technology Support Facility 3.9 5.7 9.6
Benefits: Economic benefits under the project are expected from: (a)improved efiaciency of technological support services,especially those relating to adaptive research and extension;(b) incremental production and productivity of major rainfedand irrigated farming systems of the participating states; (c)enhanced sustainability of smallholder agriculture withdevelopment of integrated crop, livestock, aZro-forestry andland use systems through improvements in soil and waterconservation and promotion of animal traction.
Risks: The main risks would be the operational difficulties resultingfrom the unification of extension services, inadequatecounterpart funding, lack of appropriate technologies leadingto lower than expected adoption rates and weakimplementation capacity. To assist phasing in of the unifiedextension service detailed plans have been prepared andintensive consultation with state MANRs and other affectedagencies would be continued until the unification is fullyimplemented and opera'tonal. To overcome problems relatingto counterpart funding, firni commitment to provide adequatefunding has been obtained and sank funds would be targetedon key activities where continuity is important. To ensuredevelopment of appropriate and affordable technologiesresearch-extension linkages would be strengthened and greaterconsultation with farmers with clearly identified performanceindicators would ensure relevance of work to the end users.The implementation capacity of the participating agencieswould be reinforced through staff training and provision ofexpertise in critical areas.
Economic Rate of Return: 17%
Maps: IBRD 23561 Nigeria: Vegetation Zones
EDiERALREPUBLIC OF NGERiA
NATIONAL AGRICENJMAL T19CLOZGY SMMT PRQ.CT
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 At the end of the seventies, Nigeria's agriculture sector was depressed, with foodproduction almost stagnant and export crop production declining. Both Federal (FGN) andState Governments (SG) were concerned over rapidly increasing food imports and the ruralpeople not benefitting from the strong growth of an economy fueled by high value oil exports.At the same time, it appeared that on-going Agricultural Development Projects (ADPs) thathad been promoted by the FGN and supported with Bank loans were popular with the ruralpopulation. In spite of unfavorable macro-economic conditions ADPs were generatingincreases in agricultural production and providing improved access to markets. An ADPtypically included feeder roads construction and potable water supplies; supply of fertilizer,seeds and other inputs; adaptive research and agricultural extension services. In 1980, FGNpublished a Food Production Plan, which aimed to raise agricultural production by aminimum of 3.5% annually in the period 1981-85. This plan, which took account of the workof a Bank Food Strategy Mission, chose expansion of the ADP concept as the means ofgenerating 80% of the production sought, and consequently every state would have an ADP.The Food Plan also called for what is now the Federal Department of Agriculture (FDA) inthe Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Water Resources (FMAWRRD) to be strengthened toenable it to assist SGs (there were nine at the time) to implement the plan. A new unit, theFederal Agricultural Coordinating Unit (FACU) was created to provide implementationassistance, while an existing unit, the Agriculture Project Monitoring and Evaluation Unit(APMEU), was strengthened to assist ADPs to evaluate the impact of their activities.
1.2 ADPs now exist in all 30 states and 27 of these are currently receiving Bankassistance through four loans and one credit totalling US$495 million. In the courxe ofimplementing this very large program considerable experience has been gained andprogressively incorporated in the design of each subsequent new ADP or in the redesign of inexisting ADP. The system continues to evolve taking on new initiatives anddiscarding/modifying earlier ones. At this juncture, ADPs require continued financialassistance in order to: (a) exploit fully the successful elements of their programs; (b)overcome the constraints of inadequate resources that have limited the achievement of plannedobjectives; and (c) introduce new components that address environmental and natural resourcemanagement concerns and provide assistance to women in agriculture. FGN has asked theBank to help in providing such assistance.
1.3 FGN and the Bank have agreed that the practical way to maximize developmentimpact is through investment projects which provide support for specific ADP activities ratherthan a program covering a wide range of activities for an individual ADP or group of ADPs.Thus, the National Agricultural Technology Support Project (NATSP), would supportactivities designed to strengthen adaptation and dissemination of technological packages onoffer to farmers. A feature of this project is that in addition to financing activities in Bauchi,
Kano and Sokoto States (and Jigawa and Kebbi States)1/, which were formally appraised bythe Bank, it would contain an Agricultural Technology Support Facility (ATSF) from whichother states and agencies could draw funds upon acceptance of detailed proposals satisfyingcriteria established and agreed between FGN and the Bank.
1.4 The project proposal for NATSP was prepared by FACU and was pre-appraised bythe Bank with assistance from FACU staff, in July 1990. Bank appraisal was carried out inFebruary-March 1991 with significant involvement of FACU staff.
IL AGRICULTURE SECTOR BACKGROUND
A. Agricultural Sector and Economic Environment
2.1 Agriculture is the dominant sector of the Nigerian economy. It plays a key role insupplying food for the population and raw materials for industry, while supplementing thelarge export earnings from petroleum. Over two-thirds of the Nigerian labor force isemployed in agriculture, even though the sector produces only 35 percent of the GDP. Therapidly increasing population requires that the considerable potential of the Nigerianagriculture be efficiently harnessed to gainfully absorb the expanding labor force. The arableland area is 71 m hectares, or about twice the cultivated area. A wide range of agro-ecological zones permits a variety of farming systems. There are substantial surface andsubterranean water resources. Prior to the oil boom, Nigeria was a major exporter of cocoa,groundnut, cotton, rubber and palm oil, of which only cocoa is now exported in substantialquantities. Import substitution in agriculture and agricultural exports can become a importantsupplementary sources of net foreign exchange in the future, reducing some of the dependenceon oil exports.
2.2 The sector's importance has moved inversely with the rise and fall in oil revenues.Agriculture suffered severely during the oil boom period of the seventies. The nairaappreciated, agricultural vocations could not compete with the high urban wages and publicexpenditure favored other sectors. The sector's share of GDP fell from 45 percent to 27percent between 1970-82, while its exports became insignificant. Data quality preventsdefinitive conclusions, but the decline was asymmetrically concentrated on cash crops. Theoutput of seven staple food crops - sorghum, millet, maize, rice, wheat, yam and cassava -rose between 1970-82, but at an average rate of only 1.2 percent per year. Even after oilexports fell in the early 1980s, the government maintained the value of the naira and taxedexport crops through the operations of commodity boards. A policy of cheap food importswas also followed, resulting in a tenfold increase during the seventies. In the 1982-86 period,good weather conditions helped some recovery in cereal production. Also import restrictionsfor redressing balance of payments problems, aided consumption switch-back to indigenousroot crops and coarse grains and induced a recovery in domestic vegetable oil production.
1/Subsequent to appraisal the territory of Kano State was divided into Kano and Jigawa Stateswhile that of Sokoto into Sokoto and Kebbi States. All further references in this text to KanoState would include the territory of Jigawa State while Sokoto State would include theterritory of Kebbi State unless otherwise Jigawa and Kebbi States are specifically referred to.
-3 -
2.3 The incentive structure for the agricultural sector has undergone significant changeswith the implementation of policies and measures associated with the Structural AdjustmentProgram (SAP) introduced in mid-1986. The naira has depreciated considerably from N 1.6= US$1 in October 1986 to N9.9 = US$1 in October 1991 with the official auctioning offoreign exchange. This together with the abolition of the commodity boards brought about asignificant immediate increase in producer prices for several export crops. Also interest rateceilings on rural loans were removed, while exporters were allowed to retain their foreignexchange earnings in domiciliary accounts for conversion to imports at any time. Thebroadening of import restrictions including bans on the import of wheat, maize, rice, poultryand animal feed was another policy measure with a potential for impact on the agriculturalsector.
2.4 These measures have had a positive impact on the agricultural sector. The total valueof exports of major agricultural commodities in 1988 was 100 percent above 1987 levels incurrent naira. The export increase has been concentrated on cocoa, but the output of rubber,palm oil and cotton has also increased. Furthermore, a number of manufacturing enterpriseshave started import substitution in favor of local agricultural products, with backwardintegration and investmnent in the sector. The use of local sorghum for beer brewing in placeof imported malt is an example. In the case of food crops, the picture is more complicated.The abolition of the commnodity boards had no direct impact on food prices, and, in effectshifted incentives in favor of cash crops. Poor weather adversely affected food output in1987, but in 1988 and 1989 there was a recovery with good weather and favorable prices.All prices have increased in following SAP and with the substantial devaluation of the naira.Domestic prices rose by 10-15% in 1986 and 1987, 50% in 1988, 40% in 1989 and 15% in1990. Food prices did not rise during the first two years of SAP, but in the last three years,food prices have risen faster providing incentives for the food sector. The decline of realwages, which started before the SAP, continued during 1987-90. Unemployment rates in theurban areas have fallen since 1986 and rural unemployment in 1989 was lower than in 1986.
2.5 It is expected that in the short term exogenous factors such as oil prices and weatherconditions would continue to affect Nigeria's economic prospects. Oil accounts for 25% oftotal GDP and 80 percent of total export earnings, and good prices have helped GDP to growbetween 5 to 6% growth between 1989 and 1990. Agricultural output increased by 4.7 and4.1 percent in 1989 and 1990 respectively. Current indications suggest continued growth inagriculture, a decline in manufacturing and heavy relince on oil exports. The Nigerianeconomy will continue to require support from international creditors to be able to followthrough on structural adjustment. With Nigeria's population increasing annually by 3.4%, toprovide only a 1% increase in consumption, GDP (including the oil sector) would have togrow by four and a half percent per annum an average that has not been seen in the last twodecades. v,ch a growth rate for GDP is possible but it would require: (a) the agriculturesector to grow :oughly at four percent p.a. over the next five years; (b) the realization of aslighty higher oil prices and increased export volumes; and (c) substantial debt reschedulingand inflows of external financing to permit the volume of imports and investments necessaryfor growth.
2.6 The macro-economic adjustment program, including devaluation of the naira, hascreated short run problems for those agricultural activities where output price increases havelagged behind those for input prices or where a gradual shift is needed from imported inputsto local sourcing. During the time of structural changes associated with the adjustment
- 4 -
program, the private sector is reluctant to uindertake major investments with foreign exchangerisk. In addition, agriculture is constrained by: (a) weak agricultural services, especiallynational research; (b) poor marketing and information systems; (c) low productivity of publicsector investment in agriculture; (d) imperfections in the rural finance market, which limitsaccess to institutional credit; (e) poorly developed infrastructure; and (f) erratic input(fertilizer and seed) supplies.
B. Agricultural PolicLkfs and Bank Sector Assistance Strategy
2.7 In January 1988, FGN issued a Statement of Agricultural Policy that contained orreiterated the following key objectives: (a) attainment of self-sufficiency in basic foodcommodities; (b) increased production of agricultural raw materials to meet the needs of anexpanding industrial sector; (c) increased production of export crops; (d) modernization ofagricultural production, processing, storage and distribution through the use of improvedtechnology; (e) increased rural employment; (D protection against environmental degradation;and (g) improvement in basic amenities available in rural areas. FGN policies in pursuanceof the above objectives include import bans on a wide range of agricultural commodities toencourage local production (these were introduced first at the beginning of the decade andwere relatively ineffective initially but since then control has progressively improved and theeffect of the bans is now estimated to equate to an import duty of between 50 and 75 percent);the abolidon of all commodity marketing boards and deregulation of prices to provideincentives to growers, especially to exporters and to the private sector in general; andwithdrawal by FGN from direct investment in production and limiting its equity participationin any enterprise to under 25% and increasing private ownership. More recently, FGN hasannounced measures to encourage direct foreign investment in agriculture and the processingof agricultural products.
2.8 Following publication of the FGN policy document, the Bank and FGN conferred toagree on a policy framework and operational strategy for the Bank's sector assistance toNigeria and a 1989 Bank agricultural sector report 2/ identified actions required to achievean agricultural growth of 4.5% per annum over the medium term. The actions are:
(a) intensify efforts to improve agricultural extension, build the national researchcapacity, improve quality seed supply, and streamline input distribution;
(b) accelerate the on-going private small-scale irrigation program (mostly infadama areas) and develop a prioritized program of high return investments toexploit past expenditure in the medium and large-scale sector;
(c) launch a new fertilizer sector action plan which focusses on improvedavailability, reduced subsidies, private and cooperative distribution, andimproved location-specific formulations and recommendations;
(d) launch a new livestock sector action plan which focusses policies andprograms on achieving crop/livestock integration and improved draft poweravailability;
2/ Nigerian Strategy for Agricultural Growth, Report No. 7988-UNI, December 1989.
-5-
(e) develop an environmental action program to ensure sustained growth ofagriculture;
(f) improve the rural marketing systems through acceleration of the program forrural feeder roads, rural market development and increased private andcooperative storage; and
(g) strengthen systems to effect efficient rural financial intermediation toencourage capital formation and increased private sector involvement inagriculture.
The policy framework is based on an estimate that of the 4.5% increment in growth about1.3% would arise from the expansion of private irrigation; about 1.2% from increase in areacultivated and 2% from the use of improved technology and increased supplies and the moreefficient use of inputs such as fertilizers.
C. Bank ODrtions
2.9 The Bank is the principal external donor to Nigeria of loans and credits foragricultural development. Since 1975, Bank assistance to Nigeria by agricultural sub-sectorhas comprised: Agricultural Sector Loan (US$9 million), Forestry (US$102 million),Irrigation and Drainage (US$17.5 million), Livestock (US$102 million), Tree Crops (US$229million), Fertilizer Imports (US$250 million), Seeds (US$14 million), AgriculturalDevelopment Proiects (UJS$1.16 billion) and National Agricultural Research Project (US$78million).
D. Agricultural Development Projects (ADPs) and Lessons Learned
2.10 The acronym ADP applies both to the set of activities financed under FGN, SG andBank supported area agricultural development projects and to the institutions created toimplement them. Thus in each of the 30 states, there is a SG agency generally termed theADP that is responsible for agricultural development activities that traditionally were theresponsibility of the SG Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources (MANR). The extentto which ADPs have taken over MANR functions varies from state to state, but in all states,ADPs are now responsible for providing adaptive research and extension services for food andarable crop production. ADPs were established initially in the mid-seventies because at thattime, most state MANR were perceived as weak with rigid civil service procedures generallyincompatible with the handling of a major development program that included both agricultureand infrastructure components. ADPs were granted exemption from following some civilservice procedures - notably financial and personnel procedures - but were not madeautonomous. Most report directly to the State Commissioner for Agriculture (the head ofMANR) but in some states, where they are incorporated as a parastatal responsible for staterural development they may be reporting to both the Agricultural Commissioner and theGovernor's Office. ADP policy is set by an ADP Executive Committee chaired either by theState Governor or the Agricultural Commissioner with heads of other ministries anddepartments as members. Most agricultural staff of ADPs have been transferred fromMANRs, and as additional MANR functions are allotted to an ADP, staff are transferred with
-6 -
them. The salary costs of MANR transferees are met directly by SG but the ADP funds otherexpenses of these staff from its own budget. The ADP also recruits staff directly - usually oncontract.
2.11 The ultimate form and functions of ADP are still evolving. It has been accepted byFGN that as infrastructure construction/rehabilitation programs are completed and handedover to local governments the ADP will withdraw completely from the activity. Thus, theADP would remain the operational arm of an MANR for core activities such as extension andadaptive research. The planning, regulation and allocation of resources within the sectorwould be the responsibility of MANR. Associated with each ADP has been a CommercialServices Unit (CSU) or Farmers Supply Company owned by SG; in some cases, these areindependent of the ADP but in others less so. The original purpose of the CSU was to ensurea regular supply of inputs to farmers throughout the state, but with increasing liberalization ofthe economy the raison d'etre of these units needs to be reviewed.
2.12 The fiuancial stringency that has followed the decline in oil revenues in the 80s andthe launching of SAP in 1986 has had its effect on recently closed or on-going Bank financedADPs. Constrained by naira shortages, these ADPs have had to readjust and cut-backs inexpenditure have impacted severely on less urgent components. The core programs have alsosuffered somewhat. ADPs no longer receiving Bank assistance are facing serious financialdifficulties. The extension services based on principles of the Training and Visit System(T&V) and On-Farm Adaptive Research (OFAR) have only been recently systematicallypromoted by the ADPs and therefore are not fully established. Development of these servicesis proceeding slowly principally because of restricted resources. The lack of mobility ofextension workers and scientists is just one of a range of constraints. In sum, the coreagricultural services of ADPs like those in Bauchi, Kano and Sokoto remain relatively fragileinstitutions despite the earlier Bank assistance. Their sustainability depends not only ondeveloping the capacity to help farmers improve their incomes but to do this in a manner thatis affordable by State Governments.
2.13 The Performance Audits. The PPAR for the Gusau. Gombe and Funtua ADPs 3/noted that on the positive side agricultural production in the project areas increased at 5% perannum compared to 1% in the rest of the country during the project period. The reportcriticized the technical design of the project's agricultural component which recommendedsole crop packages with intensive use of inputs. These proved unacceptable to farmers whoinstead applied selected inputs to their traditional system of mixed crops. The extensionservice was not fully effective. The audit report estimated the ERRs to be 15%, an acceptablefigure but lower than estimated it appraisal. The PPAR for the Lafia and Ayangba and Bidaand Ekiti-Akoko ADPs 4/ criticized the projects' complicated design. The projectsexperienced serious shortfalls in local funding which caused implementation delays. The coreagricultural development programs failed to offer affordable improved technology to farmers.The audit judged the roads program to be more successful, and suggested that its benefits hadbeen under-estimated in the original analysis which had not looked at the roads programseparately. The project's autonomous management structure was questioned, with the audit
lI PPAR No. 3975.
4/ PPAR Nos. 5972 and 8557.
noting that the project units had not been re-absorbed in the state MANR followingcompletion. The re-estimated ERR for both projects was only 6%, but this reflected onlyagricultural benefits, not those flowing from the rural roads program even though costs of thelatter had been included.
2.14 On the basis of the Project Completion Reports (PCRs) for a number of projects, itcan be concluded that all have been worthwhile rural development projects. They havebrought many benefits to farm families notably from the provision of feeder roads and watersupplies. In the case of agricultural development, however, production targets set at appraisalhave not been met in the majority of cases. The causes of shortfall are a mix of factors. Themore important appear to be: (a) until 1986, and the advent of SAP, macro-economic policieswere strongly adverse to agriculture; (b) there were limited number of technologies availableto produce sufficiently high yields to be attractive to risk averse farmers, this was particularlyso in the case of the staple food crops - sorghum, millet, cowpea and groundnuts - of thedrier northern areas where most of the earlier ADPs were implemented; (c) fertilizer supplies,although very heavily subsidized. and thus an attractive technology for all farmers, wereusually in short supply and the situation worsened after SAP when increasing financialconstraints limited FGN and SG ability to fund the subsidy; (d) ADP-conducted adaptiveresearch had a very limited impact; and (e) infrastructure programs being given emphasis atthe expense of other activities due to high visibility.
2.15 The recent report by the Operations Evaluations Department (OED) to the Board onrural development E/ specifically covered the Nigerian ADP experience, and questioned thefinancial and institutional sustainability of the rural development strategy based on the ADPconcept which relied so heavily on Bank financing, parallel institutions outside the state civilservice framework, and expatriate management. The report mentioned all of the points notedin the PPARs referred to above. In addition, the report noted that: the traditional process ofdetailed project appraisal in rural development (RD) lending can cause rigidities in RDactivities, and recommended a more flexible approach (so-called "process approach"), whichprovides for continual appraisal from identification through completion; and the merits ofrelying on rate of return calculations for judging the success of ADPs were questioned, notingthat they may convey wrong signals to project sponsors about early production benefits whichmay not be reliably estimated or conflict with equally important objectives of institution-building and human resource development.
2.16 Since 1986, agriculture producer prices have in general increased significantly butfood prices have shown a more pronounced increase since 1988 with an accompanying rise inproduction. Such data as is available tends to indicate that such increases in food supplies arecoming from: (a) an expansion in cultivated area promoted by favorable output prices; (b)favorable weather conditions; (c) availability of improved technological packages for rice,maize and cassava; and (d) improved extension support. The design of this projectspecifically addresses the shortcomir.gs in technological support services identified by theOED reports with emphasis on simplicity and flexibility in project design and sustainability ofthe proposed program.
E/ World Bank Experience with Rural Development 1965-1986, OED Report No. 6883,October 1987.
- 8 -
III. THE AGRICULTURAL TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT SYSTEM
A. Technology Development
3.1 The Federal Agricultural Research Institutes. While some agricultural technology canbe imported and disseminated with little testing or development, e.g. simple farm andirrigation equipment, most has to be developed by Nigerian research institutions withemphasis on applied research - the further development of research carried out in othercountries or by international research organizations.
3.2 Nigeria has 17 FGN funded agricultural research institutions covering the mainagricultural disciplines and all agro-ecological zones. The institutes are semi-autonomous andhave been accountable to the Federal Ministry of Science and Technology (FMST)6/. Inthe past, they have developed several improved crop varieties as well as improved cropcultivation, farm forestry, livestock production and fish culture techniques. However, untilthe early 1980s, most research was geared to high input agriculture, in particular, theproduction of varieties that respond to high levels of fertilizer and pesticides use. While thereis a better understanding at the institutes of the constraints faced by the small farmers whoproduce the great bulk of agricultural production and follow mixed-cropping system and who,in north, integrate crop, agro-forestry and livestock production, considerably more researchneeds to be directed to the specific needs of these farming systems.
3.3 The Universities. There are 15 FGN funded universities that have faculties ofagriculture or agricultural technology and two newly established agricultural universities. Inaddition, three SG funded universities also have agricultural faculties. Since the fall in oilprices in 1982, university budgets have been totally inadequate and their technology outputinsignificant.
3.4 The Private Sector. The involvement of the private sector in research is limited butgrowing as industries become more dependent on domestically produced raw materials.Private corporations have contracted institutes to conduct research to meet their specificneeds, for example, development of sorghum varieties for the brewing industry. Someenterprises have developed their own limited capacity to carry out adaptive research, forexample, cotton spinners and agro-chemical companies.
3.5 Planned Developments. The recently approved credit for the National AgriculturalResearch Project (NARP) would bring needed reforms to the organization and management ofresearch at the institute level, as well as provide funds for the rehabilitation of researchinstitutes and specific research programs. A major feature would be to establish a Natiw,ialAdvisory Committee for Agricultural Research (NACAR) to ensure strong cooperationbetween FMST and FMAWRRD as well as to improve linkages between all engaged inagricultural technology development.
i/Since January 1992 FMST has been abolished and its functions taken over by the Agencyfor Science and Engineering but it is yet to be clarified vhether the agricultural researchinstitutes would be part of this agency.
-9 -
3.6 Recommendations generated by institute and university research have to be tested andproven through trials on farmers' fields with full farmer involvement before they can beconsidered suitable for general dissemination. Such on-farm adaptive research is theresponsibility of state ADPs which are also responsible for keeping institutes and universitiesaware of farmers' problems so that research programs of these institutes are properly orientedand prioritized. The effectiveness and quality of linkage between research institutes andfarmers is a critical determinant of the ability of the national research effort to developtechnologies that average farmers will adopt.
B. Technology Dissemination
3.7 The dissemination of most agricultural technology is through the extension services of
the State Governments. In all states, the ADP is the extension agency for arable cropproduction and either uses the T&V system or is in the process of converting to it. Thevillage extension agent (VEA) to farm family (FF) ratios vary between 1:1,200-1,500 exceptin Kano where it is close to 1:600. In an effort to improve the coverage of farm families,FGN appears anxious to improve ratios. Data on the current status of the extension service in
Kano, Bauchi and Sokoto and key features are summarized in Annex III. The VEA:FF ratiois 1 to 547 for Kano and 1200 for Bauchi and Sokoto. The recommended ratio is 1:1100.
3.8 Livestock and forestry extension work are normally the responsibility of the statelivestock and forestry departments, usually located in MANR but sometimes in otherministries, e.g. the Ministry of Animal Health and Forestry in Kano. For tree crops, mostlygrown in the South, responsibility is either with the ADP or the MANR Department ofAgriculture or both. All states through the National Council of Agriculture have accepted that
there should be a unified extension service in each state. Under the unified approach, a single
village level agent, backed by appropriate Subject Matter Specialists (SMS), would be thefarmer's principal contact for the dissemination of all agricultural technology. This view issupported by the Bank which believes such an arrangement to be cost effective. At theoperating level, however, there is some resistance to unification. This stems not only from
genuine technical reservations but also from differences in extension approach. In manycases, VEAs have acted more than just agents of technology transfer, often handling credit,input supply and community development. Personal considerations such as changes in status
and retrenchment are also a factor.
3.9 Unification of extension is of critical importance because, to varying degrees ofintensity, livestock, agro-forestry, fisheries and crop production are integrated into singlefarming systems. As now organized, the ADPs tend to serve only one component of thesystem - crop production, neglecting the issue of inter-dependency. Nevertheless, changes aretaking place. For example, under the redesign of Bank assisted Livestock 11 Project (LoanNo. 2737-UNI), ADPs in Kaduna, Katsina, Imo and Anambra would adopt a pilot unifiedextension system. Livestock Department extension staff would be transferred to ADPs and
officers from the Livestock Project would join the Monthly Technology Review Meetings(MTRMs) as Subject Matter Specialists (SMSs) for livestock activities. Consultations are inprogress with the forestry and fisheries sector for similar arrangements. It is very important,however, that when unification occurs, forestry and livestock specialists receive the sametechnical back up and training that the ADP system is designed to provide for its agriculturalstaff. As unification evolves, it would have to deal with issues such as linkages between ADP
and forestry research and training and veterinary services.
- 10-
3.10 Impact of Extension Services. Three technologies: use of cheap subsidized fertilizer,fertilizer responsive improved maize and rice varieties, and small petrol engined irrigationpumpsets (and consequently, the use of a range of improved irrigated crop varieties) have hadvery high adoption rates. The available data on these rates of adoption does not clearly showa relationship to the intensity of extension, i.e., the VEA: farmer ratio. Even if thecorrelation were to be high, the importance of knowledge transfer from farmer to farmercannot be discounted. Thus other methods of dissemination - radio, video, television, postersand leaflets - may be importanc additional tools that the extension service could use toreinforce the traditional dissemination processes and to compensate for shortcomings of theextension service. Overall, extension services have not had sufficient time to demonstratetheir full potential in the Northern States, because of technology and funding constraints, anddelays in finalizing extension methods to be used. Adequate funding and appropriately trainedstaff would be a key to future impact. SGs more so and FGN are no longer able to supportthe high costs of staff mobility inherited from a time when the naira was strong and domesticfunds more accessible. The NATSP would thus have to pay specific attention to bringingcosts to a more sustainable level.
C. Research-Extension Linkages
3.11 At the Federal level, the mandate for each research institute includes the transfer oftechnology to farmers through extension services of state MANRs. To achieve this, mostinstitutes have an Agricultural Extension and Research Liaison Services (AERLS) unit orsection. Policy requires that the AERLS unit of each institute caters for the specificcommodities handled by that institute and for the immediate extension demands of theecological zone in which it is located. At establishment, most institute units were wellequipped but funds have not been available for maintaining equipment or for fielddemonstrations and farmer visits. Thus, these sections largely became ineffective as a linkagebetween research and extension. Another institution, the National Extension and ResearchLiaison Service (NAERLS), under FMST, has responsibility for coordinating the overallnational planning and development of research-extension liaison activities and undertakeresearch into the technology transfer and adoption process including intensified use of mass-media techniques. NAERLS acts as an external reviewer of the activities of individualAERLS units of the institutes.
3.12 To ensure effective linkage, each ADP, depending on its agro-climatic location,collaborates with one of five national agricultural research institutes (NARI), listed in Annex1, which also shows links with other collaborating institutes and universities through NARI.The basic concept is that a team comprising of staff from the research institutes (including aleader appointed by the NARI), ADP and FACU conducts a diagnostic survey of the adaptiveresearch needs of the State and subsequently designs the annual On-Farm Adaptive ResearchProgram (OFAR) of the ADP, as well as such ADP On-Station Research work (OSR) thatmaybe needed to complement it or to meet specific needs 2/. Physical implementation andfunding, including the transport and living costs of the non-ADP research scientists are
1/ Sometimes ADPs undertake additional work mainly due to the inadequate performance ofthe institutes, e.g. sorghum and millet selection programs of Kano ADP. The scope of suchwork, however, is generally limited.
- 11 -
responsibilities of the ADP. At the heart of the OFAR program is the Monthly TechnologyReview Meeting (MTRM). The MTRM is an essential element in the backward and forwardflow of information between research and farmer. Participants in the MTRM include theOFAR team scientists, the senior ADP research and extension officers and the ADP subjectmatter specialists (SMS). The MTRM, as a regular and continuing process, is designed toensure:
(a) upgrading of the technical expertise of SMS;
(b) sensitizing of scientists to farmers' problems;
(c) joint field visits to study farming systems and field problems; and
(d) general review of OFAR and OSR progress.
ADPs are also able to contract institutes and universities to carry out specific research projectson their behalf. Full costs are met by the ADP. Gradual unification of sub-sectoral extensionservices is increasing the scope of MTRMs to include forestry, livestock, fisheries andprograms designed for women in agriculture.
3.13 There is full understandinig at all levels of the importance to the economy of thedevelopment of farmer acceptable technology. However, the mechanisms and organizationsestablished to promote research-extension linkages need additional and better staff, improvedfacilities and more vehicles and equipment. In the absence of an established system ofrecognition of their contributions, several scientists from NARI and other institutes anduniversities have shown reluctance to be active OFAR team members. The criticalimportance of OFAR and MTRM is such that special attention must be paid to the removal ofthese constraints and to the refinement of the OFAR and MTRM process. Over and abovethis is the problem of obtaining and retaining appropriately skilled and motivated OFAR stafffor the northern ADPs.
IV. THE PROJECT AREA
4.1 The initial beneficiaries of the project would include the Bauchi, Kano, Jigawa,Sokoto and Kebbi States for which specific proposals to improve the technological supportservices were available for appraisal. The discussion that follows, therefore, reviews thesituation in these five states.
A. Population
4.2 Total population in the project states was estimated in 1988 at about 24.2 million(Bauchi 4.5 million; Kano 11.1 million; and Sokoto 8.6 million). Population density is115/km2 (Bauchi 70/km2; Kano 256/ km2; and Sokoto 84/km2). There are some 2.15million farm households (Bauchi 0.52 million; Kano 0.85 million; and Sokoto 0.78 million).Since 1988, population has probably grown at about 3% annually giving a total population ofaround 26 million today.
- 12 -
B. Physical Features and Climate
4.3 The project area is located roughly between latitudes 9 N and 14 N and longitudes 3E and 12 E and straddles, from south to north, the northern Guinea Savanna, Sudan Savannaand Sahel vegetation zones (see Map). The Sahel strip is limited to the extreme north alongthe border of Sokoto with Niger Republic. Rainfall starts in May in the northern Guinea, andin June/July in the Sudan Savanna and Sahel. The duration of growing season is from 140 to200 days in the northern Guinea Savanna, 95 to 140 days in the Sudan Savanna, and 68 to102 days in the Sahel. Annual rainfall ranges from 1,150 to 1,400 mm in the northernGuinea and gradually decreases to 500 to 1,000 mm in the Sudan Savanna, and to 250 to 500mm in the Sahel. Evapotranspiration rates are high and in recent years, decline in rainfallappears to lhave become a recognizable trend. The whole project area is classified as eitherstrongly or moderately susceptible to drought. Crops and varieties with longer growingcycles dominate the Guinea and those with shorter cycles the Sudan and Sahel zones except inlow lying fadama areas where irrigation is possible from shallow aquifers. Surveys indicatethat in Bauchi, Kano and Sokoto, there are a total of 480,000 ha of fadama suitable forirrigation using farmer-owned irrigation equipment of which only 97,000 ha have beendeveloped.
C. Farming Systems
4.4 Farming systems are mostly rainfed arable mixed cropping. Some dry seasoncultivation in flood-plains and river basins (fadama) is also undertaken and usually underirrigation. The average farm size is small, about 2 to 5 ha, increasing in size from the southnorthwards. Fields are fragmented and cultivated manually but increasing number of farmersuse animal traction for ploughing. Farms are usually split into homestead, village and fadamaareas. The staple diet is cereal based with root crops of increasing importance in southernareas. Farmers generally plant staple food crops first with the on-set of rains. A bush fallowrotation is practiced where land is available but use of inorganic fertilizer, animal dung,compost and crop residues are common particularly in densely populated areas where the bushfallow option is limited. Livestock production is integrated to various degrees with thecropping systems. Nomadic Fulani tribesmen usually manage farmers' cattle. They move thecattle generally southwards in search of grazing during the dry season and back to northernareas during the wet season to avoid tse-tse fly. Cattle also feed on crop residues, manuringfields in the. process; but on homestead farms, the considerable amounts of manure producedand used are from cattle retained the year round and from the variety of small ruminants andpoultry maintained at the homestead. Livestock is a complimentary enterprise to cropping;farmers take advantage of any land, labor or feed resources which have no alternative use.Despite the system's low productivity, it increases the value of the final livestock productssignificantly, because in comparison to modern production methods, the use of high costresources and purchased inputs is very low.
4.5 In the Sahel, millet is the principal crop and staple food. The important crop mixtureis millet/sorghum. Rice, wheat and vegetables are grown under irrigation.
4.6 In the Sudan Savanna, the important crops are millet, cowpea and groundnut in thenorth, although sorghum and cotton are also important. In the south, the main crops are
- 13 -
sorghum, millet and cowpea; and of secondary importance, sweet potato, groundnut andcassava and the fadama cultivation of swamp rice and vegetables. Most crops are grown inmixtures, the pre-dominant being sorghum/milletlcowpea, milletlcowpea, and sorghum/millet.Groundnut is often included in these mixtures.
4.7 In the northern Guinea Savanna Zone, sorghum, millet and cov,pea are dominart inthe north, and sorghum, millet and maize in the south. Maize is rapidly increasing in area byreplacing cowpea and other crops. Fertilizer responsive high yielding waize is one of theADP success stories. Other crops are acha (wild rice), yam, sweet potawo, groundnut,cocoyam, cassava and cotton. Sugarcane and rice are important fadama .rops. Commonmixtures are sorghum/millet, maize/sorghum, maize/cotton, sorghum/cowpea, and undersuitable conditions, maize/rice. Sorghum is the staple food crop.
4.8 Agro-forestry and fruit trees are planted for edible foliage, fruits and nuts, fodder,construction timber and firewood. A range of indigenous and introduced species are usedsuch as Acaci albida, Adansonia digitata, Mangifera indic and Parkia biglobosa. However,evidence from recent studies suggests that there has been a decline in the natural vegetation aswell as in farm trees due to over-felling, thus exposing soils to degradation and erosion. Fruittrees, (mangoes, guava and citrus) which are largely planted in homesteads are popular inhighly populated areas.
4.9 Fadama farming under small-scale irrigation and the production of perennial crops inriver valleys and depressions with a high water table, has primarily been a response to marketopportunity, since crops produced - most of them in the dry season - are easily sold. Soilfertility in fadama areas is generally above average for the locality and labor demand does notconflict with rainfed farming. For these reasons, fadamas are intensively developed,especially in densely populated areas. In the 1980s, the demand for dry season vegetables,rice and recently wheat has expanded rapidly. At the same time, small-scale irrigation hasproved to be an attractive supplementary development strategy to rainfed farming in droughtprone areas. ADPs have taken the lead in implementing this strategy by providing pumps,washbores, inputs and technical advice. The fadama farming sector is characteristicallydynamic. Farmers change crops depending upon profitability. At present, the dominantcrops appear to be perishable vegetables (tomato, onions), rice and wheat.
V. THE PROJECT
A. Rationale and Obiectives
5.1 The Long-Term Perspective Study on Africa, 2/ Managing AgriculturalDevelopment in Africa (MADIA) study 8/ and the Strategy for Agricultural Growth for
7/ World Bank, 1989. Sub-Saharan Africa, From Crisis to Sustainable Growth: A Long-Term Perspective Study.
8/ A multi-donor supported study involving detailed analysis of agricultural development ofsix Africa countries - Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania, Cameroon, Nigeria and Senegal, June 1989.
- 14 -
Nigeria (Report No. 7988-UNI) have all emphasized the need to strengthen the agriculturaltechnology generation and dissemination systems (research and extension) to provideappropriate recommendations for sustained growth of agriculture essential to food security,foreign exchange generation and gainful employment of the rural population. However, thisis a long-term undertaking requiring strong commitment and sustained support from theGovernment and other donors. FGN believes that the ADP system continues to provide thebest means of addressing the needs of the rural population and exploiting the agriculturalsector's potential to obtain the growth needed to sustain the ongoing structural adjustmentprogram. The Bank's involvement in the project would be consistent with this operationalstrategy.
5.2 The ADPs have successfully implemented rural development programs and extendedavailable technology to farmers, e.g. increased use of fertilizers, the use of small irrigationpumpsets, improved maize, rice and cassava varieties, and new techniques for multiplyingyam seed. However, their ability to acquire and extend farmer-acceptable technology hasbeen constrained by lack of appropriate technologies for some of the major crops, e.g.sorghum, millet and cowpea, of the northern tier of States, including Bauchi, Kano and3okoto. In large part, this has been a consequence of the weakness of the nationalagricultural research system 2/. Also during the early years of their existence, ADPsconcentrated adaptive research and extension programs on the mono-cropping systemspracticed by a small proportion of farmers, and provided only limited support for the majorfarming systems of the States dominated by the mixed cropping systems integrated with agro-forestry and livestock production. Therefore, the main objective of the proposed projectwould be to re-orientate and improve the technology adaptation and extension activities ofADPs to ensure that: (a) the ADP adaptive research is aimed at the development of locationspecific technologies for sustainable intensification of the principal farming systems whereverappropriate integrating messages from crops, livestock apw agro-forestry research; and (b) theextension service is unifled to provide a better quality of cost effective service to farmers ofall categories including women in agriculture. While improvements in production andproductivity should occur in dhe short run, the principal benefits of the project will come lateras new technologies are adapted and extended.
B. ect Design
5.3 The agricultural technology support services (adaptive research, extension, farm-levelagro-forestry and soil and water conservation) of most States - including Bauchi, Kano andSokoto where the present phase of Bank assistance has come to an end-require continueddevelopment and support. However, to maximize development impact, the next phase ofBank support would focus resources on a limited number of related activit.es, therebysimplifying project design. In addition to providing funds for specific activities formallyprepared by the Government and appraised bv the Bank for Bauchi, Kano, Jigawa, Sokotoand Kebbi States (the prinicipal project states), the proposed project would also include an
2/ Funds for strengthening of the research system are being provided through a separateBank assisted National Agricultural Research Project (1991).
-1S-
Agricultural Technology Support Facility (ATSF) that other States 10/ would be able todraw upon subsequently if they presented proposals meeting speciflc eligibility criteria similarto those jointly agreed by the Federal Government and the Bank and adopted for the Kano,Bauchi and Sokoto components.
C. Summary Description
5.4 The Bauchi. Kano. Jigawa. Sokoto and Kebbi Compnonents:
1. Technical Support Services
(a) strengthening of adaptive research along with farming systems' approachlinked to close feed-back from extension and supported by the nationalagricultural research system;
(b) rationalization and unification of state agricultural extension services andupgrading of their operations to service all farmers on technology coveringcrops, livestock, fisheries, agro-forestry and land management;
(c) strengthening the ability of the extension service to advise on farmingactivities and enterprises managed by women farmers;
(d) adaptation and promotion of animal traction and simple farm implements foruse under upland and irrigated fadama agriculture;
(e) adaptation and promotion of farm-level agro-forestry and soil and watermanagement practices to enhance sustainability of agriculture;
2. Project Management
(a) support for p uject and financial administration in the state implementingagencies (SIAs);
(b) upgrading of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation units of SlAs to improvetheir capacity to keep management informed on progress of agriculturalprograms and to evaluate their impact; and
(c) support for manpower development and training activities of SIAs.
J1/ Consultations with the Government suggests that in addition to Federal activities,some of the early states to benefit from the ATSF may include Imo, Ogun andKaduna.
- 16 -
5.5 Agricultural Technology Support Facility. Establishment of a process to appraise andprovide support:
(a) technology adaptation and/or dissemination activities in other states whereeither the current phase of Bank assistance is coming to an end or adequateresources are not available for technology support activities; and
(b) special studies or pilot programs to improve farm-level application ofagricultural technology.
5.6 The SIAs would be the Bauchi State Integrated Rural Development Authority(BASIRDA), Kano Agricultural and Rural Development Authority (KNARDA), the SokotoAgricultural and Rural Development Authority (SARDA) and the ADP organisations whichare the successors to KNARDA and SARDA in the new States of Jigawa and Kebbi.
D. Detailed Features
5.7 Bauchi. Kano. Jigawa. Sokoto and Kebbi Components:
1. Technical Support Services
xa) On-Farm Adaptive Research (OFAR). The project would provide farm andoffice equipment and finance improvements to selected field testing facilitiesAch as threshing floors and sheds for cattle and equipment. These sites
would be used for a limited number cf on-station trials and provide a base ofoperation for the OFAR program. Recruitment of additional scientists andother technical support staff needed tJ operate the field trials programsefficiently would be financed and veiciiles would be provided to ensure theirmobility. The operating costs of the field trials would be provided for theduration of the project. Short-term consultancies on planning and review ofOFAR would also be financed by the ,roject. Funds would also be providedfor sponsored research (contract resea ..h) to be undertaken by nationalresearch institutes at the behest of SIAs on location-specific constraints, whichdo not form part of the core research prc ,ram of these institutes. In somelocations, suitable facilities for MTRMs a:Id workshops would be providedthrough limited construction work and puschase of equipment.
(b) The Extension Service. The extension activities would be rationalized andunified under SIAs as one service so that, in addition to crops, it is also ableto provide integrated messages including animal husbandry, agro-forestry, soiland water conservation practices and animal traction. The project wouldfinance improvements in existing facilities and construction of new traininghalls for Fortnightly Training (FNT) of VEAs and some additional officespace at headquarters, zonal and area level locations. Necessary plant andequipment for the FNT halls would be provided to assist VEAs to undertakeextension activities. Transport would be provided to make the extensionservice more mobile. To ensure enhanced usage and closer integration ofmass communication systems with extension activities, the project wouldfinance strengthening of Media Units, with emphasis on low-cost activities
- 17 -
such as audio-visual program based on photographic slides and pictorialleaflets. In addition, support for on-going radio and television programswvould be maintained. To improve supervision and technical content, qualityand coverage of extension work, the project would finance recruitment ofincremental staff to ensure that each rniajor discipline has a SMS at zonallevel, each block has a qualified supervisor (BES) and VEAs numbers aresufficient to achieve a statewide minimum of 1:1,00 VEA to farm familyratio. However, areas where cropping intensities are high and/or shortduration crops of high economic importance requiring frequent visits aregrown, more intensive extension support would be provided through areduction in VEA: farm family ratio to 1:500-600. At negotiations,assurances were obtained that recruitment of new BESs and VEAs would onlytake place after the exact number of staff to be transferred to SIAs under theunification plan has been finalized; in Kano and Jigawa, where the VEA tofarm family ratio has already reached 1:547, no further recruitment would beundertaken; and participating SIAs would stabilize VEA to farm family ratioaround 1:1000 to enhance long-term sustainability.
Women in Agriculture (WIA). Gender-specific farming and post-harvestactivities, to be managed as an integral part of the extension service, would bestrengthened through provision of trained female staff at the headquarters,zones and blocks to coordinate statewide field and training activities forwomen contact farmers and w3men's groups. Salaries and allowances ofincremental staff, the costs of purchasing and operating suitable transportation,and other operating expenditures would be met under this component. TheWIA program would, in addition to improving operational modalities andcontinuing to identify specific needs of women farmers, assist through adviceon crop production techniques, animal production, food processing, nutritionand other agro-based income generating activities.
(c) Animal Traction and Farm Implements. The main objective of thiscomponent would be to provide technological support to the extension servicein promoting use of animal traction and in the use of animal drawn farmimplements to overcome constraints on draft power supply during periods ofpeak labor demand both in rainfed and irrigated areas. The project wouldassist in rehabilitating/converting six existing facilities in the five states intoAnimal Traction/Work Oxen Training Centers by providing facilities,equipment and operational costs. The focus of the work program of thesecenters would be to provide specialized and intensive training to VEAs. Inaddition, short training courses would also be given to farmers interested inbecoming village level work oxen trainers as well as to others interested instarting business as village mechanics and carpenters to repair and/or producesimple farm implements. To facilitate introduction and promotion of simplefarm implements, the project would assist importation and local manufactureof prototypes of simple farm tools and animal drawn implements for testingand demonstration to farmers. This work would be undertaken by SIAs incollaboration with national institutions having relevant expertise.
- 18-
'd) On-Farm Agro-Forestry and Soil and Water Conservation. This farm-levelactivity would provide recommendations for conserving soil and water andimproving soil fertility through biological methods-trees and vetiveriaplanting in association with contour cultlvation. Valuable native farm treessuch as Acacia aLbida would also provide fuelwood, feed (foliage and pod) forlivestock. Tree and vetiveria seedlings would be produced at existing SIA andcommunity managed nurseries to be funded under the project. The extensionservice would promote trees and vetiveria both in rainfed and irrigated areas.Demonstration-curn-training plots would be established to exhibit benefitsfrom different soil conservation, moisture retention and agro-forestrypractices.
2. Project Management
(a) SIA Administration and Finance. The overall institutional structure andNigerian staff with necessary competence in most aspects of agriculturalproject implementation are already in place. The project would financerehabilitation of office buildings and other facilities, purchase of vehicles andoffice equipment for the project management units. The project would alsofund short-term consultancies for review and advice on accounting systemsand financial procedures besides meeting costs of independent audits of projectaccounts and expenditures.
(b) SIA Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Units (PMEUs). PMEUs would bestrengthened to enable them to keep state governments and SIA managementinformed on the performance of the agricultural programs underimplementation and provide basic data needed to assess the impact of theseprograms. The project would finance renovation of office accommodation,short-term consultancies, and purchase of vehicles and office equipmentincluding desk-top computers and photocopiers.
(c) SIA Manpower Development and Training. The project would finance short-term consultancies, training for management, technical, extension andadministrative staff as per numbers and schedules recommended by individualunit heads and agreed between the participating agencies and the Bank. Basedon initial recommendations of the states, a medium to long-term HumanResource Development Plan has been prepared and would be updated annuallyand govern the training programs in all the disciplines.
(d) Technical Assistance. The project would provide short-term consultancies toassist OFAR, extension human resource development, PMEU activities andfinancial reviews. The support to OFAR component would be for enteringinto contractual arrangements with institutions with recognized expertise infarming systems research covering crops, livestock, fisheries, animal traction,and agro-forestry activities. Similarly, PMEUs will contract with institutionswith recognized expertise in monitoring and evaluation. In addition,specialized skills in manpower development and training will be acquired.Advice on accounts and financial procedures would be obtained on the samebasis. The short-term consultancies or financial systems and accounts which
- 19 -
would be carried out for each SIA in PYI and PY3 for a total of 9 man-months All others would be for 6 man-months per year for 3 years except inthe case of M&E where it would be for 5 years. Total consultancies would befor 84 man-months.
5.8 Agricultural Technology Support Facility. To provide funds for technology adaptationand dissemination in states where the current phase of Bank assistance is either coming to anend or adequate resources are not available for specific technical support activities, aTechnology Support Facility (ATSF), would be established. ATSF would primarily be usedto replicate in other states components being proposed for the 5 principal project states, butthe financing would essentially be of a bridging nature in order to enable state governments tomake alternative financing arrangements. In addition, it would also finance discrete activitiesor pilot programs designed to increase farmer productivity and production through acquisition,adaptation and dissemination of appropriate technology. Three such activities on whichdetailed proposals would be prepared during implementation, include: (a) rehabilitation offacilities and operational support to the National Center for Agricultural Mechanization(NCAM) to test and adapt animal drawn equipment and farm tools for use in Nigeria; (b)pilot programs to develop technology and extension recommendations to minimize climaticrisks in rainfed agriculture; and (c) sustainable intensification of smallholder agricultureintegrating crops with livestock and agro-forestry activities in semi-arid zone of northernNigeria utilizing indigenous technology based on experiences of Kano Closed Settled Zone.
5.9 ATSF would be administered by FMAWRRD through an Agricultural TechnologySupport Committee (ATSC) to be appointed by the Honorable Minister of FMAWRRD.ADPs and other institutions requiring funds would develop their own proposals using criteriaoutlined in Annex IV. FACU would provide the ATSC Secretariat and operational supportunder a senior staff attached to its Program Development and Planning Department. TheSecretariat would be responsible for scrutinizing and appraising proposals either through itsown resources or with assistance from external consultants. The project would financepurchase of vehicles, computers, office equipment, furniture and operational expenses for theATSC and its Secretariat, including costs of appraising proposals either through its ownresources or hired consultants.
VI. PROJECT COSTS AND FINANCING
A. Cost 13stlima
6.1 The total incremental project costs, including identifiable duties and taxes, over thefive year development period are estimated at N702 million (US$60.0 million equivalent).This includes Technical Support Program costs of N507 million (US$43.6 million equivalent)and Project Management Support costs of N88 million (US$7.6 million equivalent). Inaddition, a Technology Sub-Projects Facility of N 107 million (US$8.8 million equivalent) isalso included. Foreign exchange costs amount to N404 million (US$34.9 million equivalent)or 58% of total costs. Taxes and duties amount to P38 million (US$3.3 million).Investment costs amount to N425 million (US$36.8 million equivalent) or 62% while therecurrent costs amount to N277 million (US$23.2 million equivalent) or 38%.
- 20 -
6.2 The project cost estimates are based on March 1991 prices. Physical contingencies of10% have been applied to all costs but excluding technical assistance, consultancy and studies,and salaries and allowances. Price contingencies are based on domestic inflation at 20% for1991, 15% for 1992 and 10% thereafter; and international inflation at 9.5% for 1991, 2.5%for 1992, 4.6% for 1993 and 4.1% thereafter. Contingencies, both price and physical,amount to 10% of baseline costs. In determining project financial costs, a nominal exchangerate of N9.5 to US$1 has been used for 1991 with gradual depreciation to N13.2 by 1996. Aproject cost summary is given in the table below. Project costs by components and bysummary accounts are provided in the tables in Annex V.
HIGERIANATIONAL AGRCULIURAL IECHNOLOGY SUPPORT MPOJECT
fROJECT cosT SUwRWY
(MIRA 000) (USI '000)
I Total Z Total2 Foreign Base Z foreign Base
Local Foreisn Total Exchange Costs Local Foreign Total Exchanre CostsA Bauchi, Kano, Jigawa, Sokoto and Kebbi -
6.3 Of the total cost of US$60.0 million, IBRD would finance US$42.5 million at thestandard variable rate of interest over a 20 year period including a five year grace period.The proposed IBRD loan would finance 71% of total project costs, (75% excluding taxes andduties). IBRD financing would cover 100% of foreign costs (US$34.9 million) and 30% oflocal costs (US$7.6 million), with staff salaries being not eligible for such financing. Thebalance of US$17.5 million would be funded by FGN and SGs (State Govermments) on anequal sharing basis. T'he ATSF of US$8.8 million would be 75% (US$6.6) funded by IBRDand 25% (US$2.2 million) by FGN with IBRD funds being not available to finance staffsalaries. The financing plan is as follows:
Poject Financing Plan(US$ million)
Total IsBR F(N
Buildings 3.8 3.6 0.1 0.1
Vehicles 8.6 7.7 0.5 0.4
Plant, Machinery andEquipment and PlantingMaterials 10.2 9.2 0.4 0.6
Consultancies, Studiesand Training 5.4 5.4 - -
Incremental OperatingCosts* 23210
Costs for Bauchi, Kano,Jigawa, Sokoto and Kebbi 51.2 35.9 7.6 7.7
"Bank financing excludes staff salaries of US$4.6 million.+ +To be determined at appraisal of sub-loans.
- 23 -
6.4 The Bank loan of US$42.5 million would be made to FGN with FMAWRRD and SGsas the beneficiaries. FMAWRRD with FACU's assistance would oversee the use of Bankfunds. US$35.9 million would be on-lent by FGN under subsidiary loan agreements, on thesame terms as the Bank loan, to five state government as follows: Bauchi US$11.4 million;Kano and Jigawa US$13.7 million and Sokoto and Kebbi US$10.8 million and it would be acondition of effectiveness that e subsidiary loan agreement has been signed by the FGN withat least one of the states; besides signing of such agreement would be a condition ofdisburseMent for each state. The amount of US$8.8 million, constituting the ATSF, wouldremain with FGN to finance special studies or pilot programs or allocated to individual statesunder the ATSF operational procedures agreed with the Bank. Each allocation from theATSF to a participating SG would be under a subsidiary loan agreement similar to the onereferred to above for the 5 principal project states. At negotiations, assurances were obtainedthat: (a) FGN would include in the FMANR annual budget adequate provisions to meetFGN's share of project expenditures for the SIAs of Bauchi, Kano, Jigawa, Sokoto and KebbiStates and for special studies and pilot programs and such other programs or projects as maybe agreed to with the Bank to be funded under ATSF; and (b) the SGs would include in theirannual budgets their respective share of the expenses of the SIAs. In ordei to help ensureGovernment commitment and timely funding, each SIA would open and maint. ̀ n a ProjectAccount in a local commercial bank deposit into these accounts FGN's and SG's contributionsto meet project expenditures. It would be a condition of effectiveness that FGN would havepaid into the Project Accounts of each SIA an initial amount estimated to cover 50% of itsfirst year's contribution and would be the equivalent of US$250,000 (Bauchi State),US$300,000 (Kano and Jigawa States) and US$200,000 (Sokoto and Kebbi States). It wouldbe a condition of disbursement that SGs would have paid into SIA Project Accounts theequivalent of US$250,000 (Bauchi), US$300,000 (Kano and Jigawa) and US$200,000 (Sokotoand Kebbi). Subsequently, FGN and SGs would pay their contributions quarterly in advance.
6.5 Secial Account, which would be denominated in US dollars would be established byeach SIA in local commercial banks into which the Bank would make initial deposits. Theamount of initial deposits for Bauchi, Kano, Jigawa, Sokoto and Kebbi State SIAS would beUS$0.5 million each would be approximately equal to about four months of eligibleexpenditures. The deposits would be used solely to pre-finance goods and services which arereimbursable under the loan. The special accounts would be operated under terms andconditions acceptable to the Bank. Should any disbursement made from this account be foundto be ineligible for financing FGN would cause the respective state government to deposit thecorresponding amount into the account prior to submission of any further replenishmentapplications.
C. Procurement
6.6 Procurement arrangements proposed for the project are summarized in the tablebelow:
Total 15.1 5.0 39.9 60.0(13.7) (4.6) (24.2) (42.5)
Note: (1) Figures in parenthesis refer to financing by IBRD.(2) Operating costs cover staff salaries and allowances,
vehicle, plant and equipment operating costs, generaladministrative costs.
(a) Buildis. The total amount of US$3.8 million includes expenditures relatingto construction and renovation of existing training centers, stores and offices.Local capability exists for these type of works which would be procured underLCB procedures acceptable to IBRD. Foreign contractors would be eligible tobid but are unlikely to be interested given the small value of 35 individualcontracts averaging $110,000 each and their wide geographic dispersion.
(b) QGo. Vehicles and equipment valued at about US$18.8 million wouldwherever possible be grouped into contracts valued at US$200,000 or more,and would be procured through ICB procedures following IBRD procurementguidelines. Goods valued under US$200,000 but above US$60,000 would beprocured through LCB procedures acceptable to IBRD and these wouldinclude replacement motor-cycles, air-conditioners, electricity generators,agricultural equipment, office equipment and furniture, and survey equipment.Items valued under US$60,000, but in aggregate amounting to not more thanUS$2.5 million would be procured through prudent shopping based on at least
- 25 -
US$2.5 million would be procured through prudent shopping based on at leastthree price quotations and these would include tree seedlings and nurseryequipment.
(c) Consultancies. ets. Consultant services, Studies and Training totalling US$5.4million would be procured in accordance with IBRD guidelines for use ofconsultants. The appointment of all consultants and technical assistance staffwould be with the concurrence of the Bank and amendments in their terms ofreference or service conditions including premature termination would be withthe Bank's prior 'no objection". Both domestic and overseas training wouldbe ;n accordance with schedules agreed annually with FACU and the Bank.
(d) Incremental Operating Costs. Expenditures totalling US$23.2 millioncovering staff salaries and allowances, and operating costs and would follownormal government procurement procedures and relevant documents would beattached to SOEs and would be available to review by IBRD supervisionmission and external auditors.
(e) The procurement method for each sub-project under the AgriculturalTechnology Support Facility would be determined according to the needs ofeach proposal but would observe the thresholds and procedures adopted forthe 5 principal project states as described in paragraphs 6.6 and 6.7 of thisSAR and would be first cleared with the Bank's Regional ProcurementAdviser.
6.7 All procurement under LCB (goods and civil works) would be required to: (a)incorporate advertisements soliciting bids in at least 3 local newspapers; (b) undertake publicbid opening dates and venue of which would be announced together with the advertisementsoliciting bids and any subsequent changes being announced similarly; (c) award contracts tothe lowest evaluated bidder on the basis of pre-disclosed criterion; (d) apply no localpreference; and (e) Pot preclude foreign bidders from participation. All bidding packages andcontract awards estimated at US$200,000 equivalent would be subject to prior review byIBRD. The remaining contracts would be subject to random post review after contractawards.
6.8 In order to facilitate the procurement process which in the past has been one of themain reasons for implementation delays, assurances were obtained at negotiations that eachSIA would have a Procurement Officer whose qualifications and experience would beacceptable to the Bank. Each SIA had also made available before negotiations a ProcurementSchedule for the period of the project. Payments made for expenditures for Civil works andConsultancies, Studies and Training up to $1 million equivalent incurred after December 31,1991 and before the date of the Loan Agreement would be eligible for retroactive financingupon compliance with the above procurement procedures.
D. Disbursement
6.9 The proceeds of the proposed IBRD loan would be disbursed over an estimated sixyears which is about a year earlier than the standard disbursement profile for the agricultural
- 26 -
Amount of Loan % of ExpendituresCagQ to be Disbursd to be Disbursed
1. Buildings 3.0 100% of foreign expenditureor 95% of total expenditure
2. Vehicles, Equipment, 100% of foreign and 90% ofSpare Parts and Planting 15.5 local expenditureMaterials
3. Consultancies, Studies 5.0 100%and Training
4. Operating Costs a/ 60% of total expenditure up9.5 to $6 million, and 40% of
total expenditure on balance
5. Agricultural Technology Similar percentages asSupport Facility shown for other categories
6.3 in this table on approval ofsub-projects 11/ except for50% of total expenditure foroperating costs.
6. Unallocated 3242.5
1/ Excluding staff salaries.
.i/ See para 5.8 and 6.4
6.10 Disbursements of all expenditures would be based on full documentation, except forforce account, salaries and contracts for goods and services of value less than US$25,000which would only require statements of expenditures (SOEs). The project agencies wouldhave adequate staff and controls for the preparation of SOEs, for which supportingdocumentation would be kept for review by external auditors and Bank supervision missions.Assuran were obtained at negotiations that within 3 months of loan effectiveness each SIAwould engage a firm of financial consultants to review (a) the adequacy of staff skills andresources for producing project accounts of proper quality and in time for meeting auditingdeadlines, and (b) possibilities of refining/amending the accounting system and financialprocedures to better meet project needs; and that this review would be completed anddiscussed with the Bank no later than 6 months from loan effectiveness.
E. Auditing, Accounting and Reforting
6.11 Participating agencies would maintain their accounts in accordance with soundaccounting practices to reflect their operations and financial positions and would have theaccounts including Special Accounts and SOEs, audited by a firm of independent external
- 27 -
E. Auditing. Accountin and Rporting
6.11 Participating agencies would maintain their accounts in accordance with soundaccounting practices to reflect their operations and financial positions and would have theaccounts including Special Accounts and SOEs, audited by a firm of independent externalauditors acceptable to the Bank. The audited accounts and the auditor's report, including theManagement Letter (Long Form), and a statement as to whether or not Bank funds had beenused for their intended purpose would be submitted to the Bank within six months of the endof the fiscal year of each SIA.
6.12 By September 30 of each year starting with 1992, NATSP implementing agencieswould submit to FMAWRRD, with a copy to the Bank, annual work programs and budgetsusing a uniform format to he introduced during the first year of the proje;. which wouldadequately portray project activities, unit costs, benefits and productivity and provide the basisfor proper management of the project and the establishment and operation of a sound projectaccounting system. The budget proposal would include quarterly cash flow statements.Procurement of goods and civil works would specify source of funds, timing and procurementmethods (whether ICB or other) and would be accompanied by an updated ProcurementSchedule for the remaining life of the project. FMAWRRD would examine, approve andconsolidate into one national program for submission to the ministry responsible for thefederal budget to agree on the level of annual funding, financial plan, and allocation ofresources. Assurances were obtained at negotiations that by November 30 of each yearstarting from 1992, FMAWRRD would submit to the Bank for comment a copy of theNATSP program and budget for the coming year.
6.13 Each SIA would submit quarterly reports and management accounts to FMAWRRDand IBRD showing actual and budgeted expenditures, statements of progress achieved and theobjectives for d.t forthcoming quarter by each project component. Quarterly reports wouldcontain summaries of to-date expenditures and use of funds by source plus a forecast ofwithdrawal of Bank loan proceeds by quarter for the immediate forthcoming year and by yearthereafter.
VII. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
A. Bauchi. Kano. jigawa. Sokoto and Kebbi Componenits
7.1 Overall Organization and Management
(a) Fedeal!Coordinading Role. FMAWRRD, assisted by FACU and APMEU,would be responsible for the coordination and monitoring of the projectimplementation through participating SIAs. FMAWRRD plays a crucial rolein the budgeting process, ensuring that the agreed level of Federal funds arebudgeted annually for all Bank supported projects in the sector, and also thatthe funds are then released quarterly to the entities. It coordinates input fromother Federal Ministries and agencies through a Projects CoordinatingCommittee (PCC). Establishment of this committee was agreed under theMSADP II (Ln. 2988-UNI) and later its role was enlarged to include MSADP
- 28 -
III (Cr. 2035-UNI) such that it now provides support to all Bank assistedADPs. The PCC is chaired by the Director FDA, FMAWRRD. Its othermembers include: Directors of Federal Departments responsible forLivestock, Forestry and Fisheries; Director, Agricultural Services Department(ASD), FMST; Chairman of the Committee of Directors of NationalAgricultural Research Institutes; all Program Managers of ADPs; ChairmanCommittee of Deans of Faculties of Agriculture; Head of Units of FACU andAPMEU; and one representative of Farmer Organizations. FACU wouldprovide the secretariat to this committee. At negotiations, assurances wereobtained that the PCC would also provide support to NATSP along with otheron-going ADPs and resolve any coordination issues that may surface.
(b) State Level Organization and Management. In each state, the existing ADPExecutive Committee (ADPEC), chaired by the State Governor or hisnominee, would oversee the operations of the NATSP. Other members of theADPEC typically include State Commissioners for Agriculture, LocalGovernment, Finance and Economic Planning, the Works and Transport,Commerce and Industry; the Secretary to the State Government (and Head ofService), the Director of FDA, the Director of ARMTI, the Head of FACU,the General Manager of the relevant River Basin Authority, the State Directorof DFRRI, the Director General MANR, and the SIA Chief Executive(Managing Director or Program Manager). ADPEC would meet at least onceevery two months for the first two years of the project. No changes would berequired in existing structures, procedures and responsibilities that aregenerally appropriate. However, to improve linkages with other state agenciesat the operational level, the project would have an Agricultural ProgramsLiaison Committee (APLC) with the State Commissioner for Agriculture asChairman. Its other members would include representatives of statedepartments responsible for Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry and Fisheries;Bank assisted Livestock II and Forestry 11 Projects; Farmers SupplyCompany, a Farmer Organization; and the SIA Chief Executive, the SIADepartment of Agriculture Head and the FACU Regional Head. This shouldaddress the general complaint that other agencies at the state level are notalways aware of SIA plans and operations. At negotiations, assurances wereobtained that Bauchi, Kano, Jigawa, Sokoto and Kebbi States would establishAPLCs no later than December 31, 1992.
(c) SIA Management. The Program Management Unit (PMU) of each SIA wouldbe responsible for managing NATSP activities in each state. The PMUincorporates heads of both operational and service units of the SIA. Theoperational departments most directly involved with the NATSP would be: (i)Agricultural Services; (ii) Fadama Development; and (iii) Land Use Planningand other non-extension technical activities. Support services would beprovided by the central departments including: (i) administration; (ii) finance;(iii) manpower development and training; and (iv) planning, monitoring andevaluation. SIA administration and technical services are decentralized intozones and this structure would be maintained under the NATSP. The zonesare broadly based on agro-climatic conditions, and a zonal managerresponsible for all agricultural activities in the zone. The proposed
- 29 -
organization of each State implementing organization is shown in Annex IX.The implementation arrangements for Bauchi State would however berestructured. Assurances have been obtained that BASIRDA, the Bauchi Stateimplementing organization, would carry out the Bauchi components of theproject through its Agricultural Development Program (BSADP) Unit actingunder the direction the Bauchi Agricultural Development Program ExecutiveCommittee which would be- reconstituted with the Bauchi State Governor asChairman and two members representing FMAWRRD12/. This wiliprovide for BSADP to be an almost autonomous unit within BASIRDA whichhas a very wide span of activities, including rural electrification and social andcommunity development, which would otherwise tend to reduce theimportance given to agricultural operations. To assess the impact of thesearrangements, assurances have been obtained that Bauchi State would carryout jointly with FMAWRRD and the Bank by June 30, 1993 a review of theorganizational arrangements supporting the carrying out of Bauchi State'scomponents of the project and would by December 31, 1993 put into effectrecommendations emanating from the review. At negotiations, assuranceswere obtained that the key p;oject staff including the Program Manager,Financial Controller, Heads of Agricultural Services, Planning, Monitoringand Evaluation and Manpower Development and Training and theProcurement Officer, would be appointed with conditions of employment,qualification and terms of references satisfactory to the Bank; and theappointment of the Program Manager, the Financial Controller and the Headof Agricultural Services along with his two deputies responsible for AdaptiveResearch and Extension would be condition of disbursement.
7.2 OQeration of the Technologv Supoort System
(a) OFAR. OFAR is a part of the nationwvide network on farming systemsresearch. Under this system, each state is assigned to one of the five areas(zones) corresponding with those of the National Farming Systems Researchnetwork. The activities in each zone are coordinated by a NationalAgricultural Research Institute (NARI) with resource persons drawn fromother collaborating institutions. In the case of Kano, Bauchi and Sokoto, theInstitute of Agricultural Research (IAR) at Zaria is the coordinatinginstitution. The list of collaborating institutions and their broadresponsibilities, adaptive research cycle and a diagram showing pathway forflow of information between research, extens;on and farmer are given inAnnex I. Based on experience from previous projects, the operationalprocedures used by OFAR teams are now well established. The OFAR staffwould be located in each of the major agro-ecological zones of the state andinteract regularly with extension workers and farmers in the area.
12/BSADP was an autonomous unit implementing the Bank-assisted Bauchi State AgriculturalDevelopment Project (Ln. 1981-UNI) until it was brought under the purview of BASIRDA.Experience in Nigeria and elsewhere and also in BASIRDA shows that a wide array of non-agriculture activities tends to reduce the importance given to agricultural operations and leadsto a lower impact in the sector.
- 30 -
Accordingly, OFAR teams in SIAs would operate in close collaboration withthe national research system. Key features of the operational procedure forOFAR activities include: diagnostic surveys of typical farming systems todetermine key constraints; identification of available technology to solve thediagnosed problems; commencement of on-station and/or on-farm adaptivetrials to confirm recommendations; assist development of a plan for Small PlotAdoption Trials (SPAT) to be implemented by the extension service; reviewof findings in MTRMs; analysis of data from SPATs and formulation/revisionof recommendations. To ensure work is carried out on location-specificproblems which cannot be tackled by the SIAs and which do not form part ofthe core programs of Research Institutes, SIAs would finance sponsoredresearch by institutions with appropriate expertise. Problems falling into thiscategory would be identified during implementation of the project. Farmerinfluence on determining priorities for adaptive research would be achievedthrough: (i) membership of a farmer representative in the APLC; (ii) regularinteraction with OFAR staff based at the zonal level and with extensionworkers; (iii) consultation during diagnostic surveys; and (iv) farm leveltechnical constraints identified by extension workers during MTRMs. OFARteams would be responsible for organizing pre-MTRM field visits andMTRMs with the assistance of collaborating institutions (Research Instituteand/or University) who would identify and ensure participation by theresource persons. An annual adaptive research workshop, jointly organizedby the SIA, collaborating Research Institute and FACU, would be held toreview results from on-station and on-farm trials, findings of diagnosticsurveys, results from SPATs and to develop work program for the followingyear. During the workshop, research results ready for transfer to theextension service would also be identified. Before adoption, newrecommnendations would be reviewed by a Technical Committee composed ofrepresentatives from OFAR team, collaborating institutions, concerneddivisions of FMAWRRD (Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry), the ExtensionService and a representative from farmer organizations. Theserecommendations would also be reviewed during the annual workshop.
Major topics of research for rainfed and irrigated areas would include:improvements in mono and mixed cropping systems through adaptation ofimproved varieties/crop mixtures and/or agronomic and cultural practices andfertilizer trials; evaluation of integrated farming systems incorporating agro-forestry with nitrogen fixing leguminous shrubs, crops and livestock;adaptation of recommendations for fodder bank establishment being developedby NAPRI and Bank assisted Livestock II project along with testing ofresearch findings on utilization of crop residues for animal fattening andanimal waste as organic manure; coordination of animal traction work; testingof methods of establishment of selected tree species and interaction of treesand crops; role of woody species in biomass production for fuelwood, fodder,green manure and soil enrichment under traditional farming systems; effect ofvarious vetiver grass planting techniques on water and soil conservation.Annex II summarizes the key findings from past adaptive research undertakenby the three SIAs which are the basis for new recommendations being
- 31 -
promoted by the extension service and outlines proposed priorities for futurework.
FACU, through its regional OFAR coordinators, would promote the sharingof experience, skills and resources between the OFAR teams of the differentSIAs. Upon completion of the annual workshops FACU would arrange forthe 3 OFAR teams to meet and share on-station and on-farm trials results anddiscuss ways and means of reducing duplication, maximizing sharing ofskilled staff who are in short supply and jointly entering into twinningarrangements with selected institutes for improving the quality of OFARplanning, implementation and analysis and staff training.
(b) Animal Traction and Farm Implements. Implementation of this componentwould be coordinated by the OFAR team in collaboration with selectednational institutions. First, the testing of appropriateness of currentlyavailable equipment and other animal drawn implements for land preparation,harrowing, inter-cultivation, threshing, water-lifting etc. would be organizedby the OFAR teams, if necessary, under sponsored research contracts with theAgricultural Engineering Department of IAR and/or the National Center forAgriculture Mechanization based in Ilorin. The assistance of ILCA's AnimalTraction program for West Africa would also be sought. In northern parts ofKano, Bauchi and Sokoto, a large proportion of farmers own work oxen andutilize them for land preparation. In southern parts and fadama areas of thesestates, however, the frequency of ownership is much less but the demand isincreasing due to shortage and high cost of hired labor and escalating cost ofcultivating land with tractors. Following re-design of the Bank assistedLivestock II Project, funds on term credit are being made available for thepurchase of work oxen and traction implements. SIA animal traction/workoxen training centers would be administered by the Manpower Developmentand Training Departments. Training programs would be developed andconducted by OFAR staff attached to the training centers. The main thrust ofthe courses would be to train extension workers and village oxen trainers.They will, in turn, promote the use of work oxen and associated implementsand provide the necessary training to farmers. At negotiations, asurancwere obtained that required sponsored research agreement(s) with selectednational institution(s) would be signed by July 31, 1992 to test and adaptavailable animal'drawn or manually operated implements in the rainfed andirrigated areas of the project.
(c) Agro-Forestry and Soil and Water Conservation. This component, to bemanaged by the Technical Services Division of the Agricultural Department ofan SIA, would promote low cost technologies suitable for smallholders. Aspecial emphasis would be placed on the use of: agro-forestry species foralley cropping, wind breaks and contour hedges; promotion of fruit trees forestablishment in fadama and upland areas; use of vetiver grass along contoursto stabilize soil, control erosion and conserve moisture. Since the impact ofthis component would depend on the adoption rate of recommendedtechnology, the extension service would play a crucial role in promoting theuse of fruit trees and agro-forestry species and slips of vetiver and
- 32 -
disseminating messages to farmers. To enable extension workers to undertakethis task, strong emphasis would be placed on providing technical support toand training of extension workers both at headquarters and zonal level prior todemonstration to farmers. Close working r ,lationships would be establishedwith research institutes and other agencies operating in this area, to ensurethat latest findings from technical work are used in formulating/testingextension messages. The extension workers would be familiarized withdifferent types of trees in terms of what they produce, their environmentprotecting function and role in existing agricultural systems. Training on howto get seedlings, how to plant and maintain them would also be provided. TheSIAs would keep in close touch with related ongoing programs such as theBank-assisted Forestry II Project and the EEC Environment Prograrn. Agro-forestry activities be coordinated by the Ministry responsible for forestry ineach state with the bulk of seedling production being undertaken by ForestryII nurseries. The SIAs would supplement seedling production through existingand communit' nurseries to fill the forecasted gap between demand andsupply. State ministries and Forestry II do not charge for agro-forestryseedlings and SIAs would in the interim follow this practice but would workto support only community nurseries where lab^: and maintenance are theresponsibility of the farmers and the plant species propagated are selected bythe farmers. During negotiations assurances were obtained that SIAs wouldsell fruit trees at prices to recover operational costs in the first year of theproject with full costs being recovered from Project Year 4.
(-d) Extension Service. In line with Government policy, provision of extensionadvise to farmers would be unified under SIAs and operated on the T&Vprinciples. The proposed structure of the service after unification is given inAnnex III. It includes provisien for the service to broaden its area ofcoverage to include advice on crop and livestock production, agro-forestry,soil and water conservation practices, animal traction and use of animal drawnand/or manually operated farm implements. Integrated extension messageswould be promoted in consultation with relevant Subject Matter Specialistsfrom within and outside SIAs. Completion of transfer of all identifiedextension staff from other state agencies to SIAs under the unification planwould be a condition of disbursement against individual participating states.
The gains made through past investment w6uld be consolidated and quality ofservice provided to farmers improved through: systematic planning andprioritization of extension activities; provision of mobility and other workrelated tools to the extension workers to run a professional service; selectionof suitably qualified staff especially SMSs; improvements in VEA to farmfamily ratios to provide effective coverage in relation to agro-ecologicalpotential of zones and allocation of available resources to meet the specificneeds of farming communities; preparation of a medium to long-term HumanResource Development Plan, and provision of training to resource andextension personnel with a focus on updating and/or upgrading of theirprofessional skills; increasing two way exchange of information with farmersand increasing their involvement in extension activities through farmer groupsand sharing of responsibility for technology transfer with leading farmers
- 33 -
identified by the group and closer liaison with local administrative andtraditional leadership; enhanced collaboration with the private sector andNGOs; improved focus of M&E activities, especially to assess impact of theextension service; strengthening of research-extension linkages throughdiagnostic surveys, in-depth discussion of farm-level technical constraintsduring MTRMs and exchange of staff between SIAs and research institutions;and promotion of research on extension methodologies, use of mass media,gender specific and other sociological issues.
With a view to providing intensive farm coverage and increasing adoption rateof extension messages, the use of mass communication systems would beintensified in support of regular extension activities. Low cost audio-visualprograms based on photographic slides would be produced in relation to thecropping calendar and used as the basis of discussion with farmer groupsinvolving a contact/lead farmer as the moderator supported by the extensionworker. Their work would be underpinned by leaflets depicting extensionmessages in pictorial form. In addition, support for the radio and televisionprograms currently in place would be continued. However, to minimize costsand maximize impact, FACU with the help of NAERLS would coordinategreater exchange of audio visual, radio and television programs participatingbetween SIAs.
The WIA Program, to be operated as an integral part of the extension service,would focus its support on production and post-harvest activities performed bywomen farmers which would be confirmed through special surveys. In partsof Kano, Bauchi and Sokoto, there is strong inhibition for male extensionworkers to interact directly with women farmers. In these areas, womenVEAs would advise women farmers and select some of them as contact and/orSPAT farmers. The proposed increases in female extension workers at HQ,zone, block and village would enable good coverage. To reinforce directvisits by extension workers, mass media and work with women's group wouldbe emphasized. It is anticipated that women VEAs would spend up to 70% oftheir time in educating women farmers in agriculture production activities and30% supporting processing and utilization of agricultural produce.
(c) Research-Extension Farmer Linkages. Although both the NARP and thisproject would initiate actions to enhance farmer influence on research, themajor channel for linking research and farmer would be the SIA managedunified extension service of the state MANR. At the Federal level, the stateextension programs would be supported and monitored by FMAWRRDthrough its operational departments including Agriculture, Livestock, Forestryand Fisheries with coordination being undertaken by FACU (para 7.3).The two fundamental linkage mechanisms for strengthening research-extensionwould be the On-Farm Adaptive Research (OFAR) (details discussed under7.2(a)) and the Monthly Technology Review Meetings (MTRMs). MTRMsare now an integral component of the SIA technology transfer system andenable SMSs and Extension Officers to meet regularly and frequently withagricultural researchers to review actual farm conditions and technologicalneeds on a specific locational and seasonal basis, and for researchers and
- 34 -
SMSs to agree on the appropriate technical recommendations to be providedby extension for the coming one month. It is also intended that researcherswill receive in the meeting, direct and systematic feedback on farmersreactions to recommend technology. The MTRMs would continue to beattended by all SMSs together with two to three scientists of the instituteactively involved in research for the main crops of the zone. These contactscientists participate on continuous basis and would be joined by otherspecialists who act as resource person for specific meetings. To enhance theireffectiveness, MTRMs would be: (i) conducted like interactive workshops toencourage two-way flow of information between research and extension; (ii) abroader cross section of research scientists would be encouraged to participateespecially to provide coverage of issues relating to livestock, forestry,fisheries and soil and water management activities; (iii) agenda taken upduring MTRMs would be prioritized with emphasis on fee 'ack from fieldexperiences and development of appropriate technical messages; (iv) increaseduse of modem communication, technology, e.g. videos, to record farmeractivities, farmer interviews and general field conditions for review duringMTRMs; (v) greater participation by women scientists and women SMSs; (vi)allocation of some MTRM time to field visit and discussions with men andwomen farmers; and (vii) improved system of recording of subject dealt atMTRMs with a view to identifying farmer constraints and impact points.
(d) Extension, Effectiveness and Sustainability. Not only must the cost ofoperating the extension system be within the means of government, it 1iustalso be seen to be bringing actual benefit to the farming population. Staffmobility is a major cost in extension. The cost of staff mobility would becontrolled through (i) using less capital intensive transport arrangements, (ii)using vehicles with low operating costs, and (iii) maintaining a tightsupervision on vehicle use and maintenance costs. The project would providea fewer number of 4-wheeled vehicles and, where needed, replace these withmotorcycles, which would be less expensive in both capital and operating costterms. Actual vehicle operating costs in some SIAs appear to be substantiallyhigher than those in the private sector, even after allowing for poor roadconditions in many rural areas. To exercise better control of costs and vehicleuse, each vehicle (excluding motor-cycles) will be allocated a fixed monetarybudget for fuel and lubrication costs, batteries and spare parts and service andrepairs and a record kept of actual expenditures. The financial controller ofeach SIA would include a review of vehicle operating costs in the quarterlyreport. In terms of tailoring activities to the needs of the rural population, itwould be planned that in each year at least two of the VEA fortnightlytraining sessions would include selectad contact farmers who would providetheir assessment of the impact of the extension activity and what the farmerswould like to be included in the extension program. Frequency and timing ofvisits would be discussed with the objective improving impact and reducingcosts. The record of these discussions would be transmitted to the SIA ChiefExecutive for a summary record in the quarterly report.
7.3 FACU Support. FACU's main role would be to assist SIAs in the implementation ofthe technological support system being proposed under the project. FACU headquarters and
- 35 -
its regional offices are staffed with technical staff who would: (a) jointly with thecollaborating NARI, participate in the formulation of adaptive research and MTRM programs;(b) monitor implementation of OFAR and extension activities; (c) assist in the identificationand integration of technological information from different disciplines into recommendationsbased on farming systems perspective; and (d) to promote interchange of information andexperiences between SIAs.
7.4 Planning. Monitoring and Evaluation. Although financed under the NATSP, thePMEUs would cover all SIA activities. They would ensure that work plans are consistentwith agreed objectives and priorities, and collect data in order to monitor the progress andevaluate the effectiveness of these activities.
7.5 There is an insufficient understanding of the role of the PMEUs by departmental andunit heads, and this partly explains why these continue to remain relatively weak andineffective. Also contributing to this are the inadequate links that the PMEUs have with theother project components (e.g. extension and adaptive research). Thus, under the NATSP,the PMEUs would participate in all project activities (including the MTRMs and OFAR), andhave representation on the APLC. The modalities for this would be determined duringproject implementation.
7.6 Planning is the weakest of the three PME components (i.e. planning, monitoring andevaluation), a consequence of which is that work programs are generally poorly implemented.Thus, while the project would strengthen all three components, particular attention would bepaid to improving the capacity of the planning section to coordinate the work programs andbudgets of the different project and SIA components, and integrate these with the overallplans of the state MANRs. The strengthening of the PME components would be undertakenprincipally through a careful determination of the qualifications, skills and experience requiredfor the recommended complement of staff positions, and filling these positions with suitablecandidates. Gaps in the skills of current incumbents would be filled through in-servicetraining.
7.7 Further, the data collection and analysis functions of the PMEUs continue to becharacterized by weaknesses. In particular, some of the baseline information (especially onland use) used to arrive at production estimates is now outdated. Similarly, there is a need toascertain the correct sample size for surveys. Also, the PMEUs still appear to be collectingmore information than is necessary, or can be conveniently analyzed. Thus, a carefulenumeration of the variables for which data needs to be collected and analyzed at a minimumin order to effectively monitor and evaluate the project impact would be undertaken and thedata collection and analysis process streamlined. To the extent that the weaknesses in the datacollected by the PMEUs are ascribed to enumerator mobility and supervision problems,motorcycles/mopeds would be provided to a core of permanent enumerators and supervisors.
7.8 Provision would also be made for technical guidance to the PMEUs on the design ofsurveys and impact studies, as well as on undertaking data analysis. While the PMEUs wouldcontinue to receive such guidance from APMEU and FACU, linkages would be developed aswell between the projects and national universities. Cooperative programs would also bedeveloped between national and international un,versities in order to strengthen the capacity ofthe former to support the projects. APMEU would organize a workshop for the 5 SIAs,within 3 months of Board approval, to establish the type of assistance that would be required
- 36 -
by the SlAs and what portion of it would be provided by APMEU and what would be the roleof other institutions. Finally, resource centers would be established so that the informationdeveloped by the PMEUs is easily accessible. In addition to project documents, theseresource centers would also maintain relevant national and international journals andpublications from the field of development.
7.9 Training and Technical Assistace. The project would put in place a systematic in-service training program to reflect emerging changes and needs in technology and policyareas. The highest priority for training would be aimed at strengthening of management andtechnical capacity of staff at all levels through in-house and external (including overseas)courses. The training program for each SIA would be coordinated by a ManpowerDevelopment and Training Department (MDTD). In consultation with each operational unit,it would be responsible for: (a) managing in-house training activities; (b) establishingprocedures and criteria for determining staff training needs; (c) preparing criteria for selectingtraining programs and candidates; (d) developing procedures for evaluating training activities;(e) identifying suitable training institutions for external in-country and external courses; (f)organizing a record-keeping system for trainees. While the training program for extensionstaff would be executed by the Extension Division, the MDTD would cooperate andparticipate with the extension department in planning and implementing the training program.National institutions such as NAERLS and ARMTI would be extensively used to conduct in-country extension training programs. The MDTD would be headed by a qualified seniortraining officer, who, with the assistance of other unit heads, would update the HumanResource Development Plan on an annual basis which govern the training to be financedunder the project. Assurances were obtained at negotiations that the Human ResourceDevelopment Plan would be updated annually and the annual training program for eachparticipating agency would be submitted to the Bank for agreement starting from January 31,1992.
7.10 No long-term technical assistance is proposed under the project. The Governmentagencies in the past have, however, had difficulty in recruiting and retaining adequatelyexperienced and qualified financial controllers due to higher incentives in the private sectorand shortage of qualified applicants. If at the end of the financial review (para 6.10) an SIAneeds technical assistance, this would be obtained through contractual arrangements with aNigerian financial management consultant firm and only if the required expertise is notavailable locally, would expatriate recruitment of financial advisors take place. In view of thehighly specialized needs of the adaptive research and monitoring and evaluation activities,where professional skills as well as continuity are very important, institutions with appropriateexpertise would be identified to provide short-term consultants. In the case of adaptiveresearch, qualified staff from these institutions would make at least two visits a year for thefull duration of the project. Similar support would be provided to PMEUs. In addition,short-term consultants for specific studies, especially to support extension and human resourcedevelopment activities, would be hired as needed. At negotiations, assurances were obtainedthat by June 30, 1992, the SIAs would enter into contractual arrangements at terms andconditions, terms of reference and qualifications agreeable to the Bank with selectedinstitutions to support adaptive research and planning, monitoring and evaluation activities.
- 37 -
B. Agricultural Technology Sunport Facility
7.11 Agricultural Technology Support Committee (ATSCI. ATSC would be responsiblefor the administration of the facility. The chairperson of the committee would be theDirector-General, FMAWRRD. It would additionally consist of: Directors of the FederalDepartnents of Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry, and Planning, Research & Statistics;Chairman of the Committee of Directors of Agricultural Research Institutes; Four ProgramManagers of ADPs (selected by the PCC); Chairman of the Committee of Deans of Facultiesof Agriculture; Heads of FACU and APMEU; and one other person as the Minister ofFMAWRRD may appoint.
7.12 ATSC Secretariat. FACU would provide the secretariat to service the ATSC. Headof FACU would be assisted by the Program Development and Planning Department where adiscrete cell (consisting of a coordinator at GL14, a Technical Assistant at GLO8 and asecretary at GLOS) would be established to provide the day-to-day support. Establishment ofthe ATSC and its secretariat would be a condition of disbursement against the facility.
7.13 Operation of the ATSF. Proposals would be first scrutinized by the ATSC Secretariatand appraised by a team of specialists using criteria established jointly by the Government andthe Bank. These would essentially be similar to those used for appraising the Kano, Bauchiand Sokoto components. The team will comprise of FACU specialists, augmented withadditional external consultants whenever necessary. A list of suggested eligibility criteria forsub-projects is given in Annex IV. Assurances were obtained at negotiations that the first fiveapplications for financing under the ATSF would be sent to the Bank for agreement afterFACU appraisal and approval by the ATSC; thereafter, only proposals costing more thanUS$1 million would be submitted to the Bank for prior approval after ATSC clearance. Thisthreshold would be reviewed after 2 years of projec' Leration.
C. Mid-Term and Completion Reviews
7.14 FACU, with the assistance from SIAs and APMEU, as appropriate, would prepare aprogress report on the project which would form the basis for the mid-term review to beundertaken jointly by the Government and the Bank. The review would focus on assessingthe success of the technology support system in adapting and disseminating new messages tofarmers to improve total farm productivity and in promoting sustainable use of land and waterresources. Progress in strengthening of PMEUs and implementation of training programswould also be assessed. Implementation of the ATSF component would be reviewed againstagreed objectives, criteria and operational procedures. At negotiation, assurances wereobtained that FACU would coordinate preparation of comprehensive progress reports by theparticipating agencies for the mid-term review of the project which would be completed nolater than December 31, 1995 by a joint Government/World Bank team.
7.15 The Proiect Completion Report (PCR) to be prepared by APMEU, would assess: (a)achievements of the project in relation to its objectives; and (b) field impact of the newapproach adopted under the project where the funds for to the technology support services,are being provided through a national program and ATSF using ADPs as the implementingagencies supported by the specialized agencies of FMAWRRD (FACU, APMEU, ARMTI,
- 38 -
NLPD, FORMECU). The PCR would be submitted to the Bank no later than six monthsafter completion of the project.
D. Iwrlementatlon Schedule
7.16 During the first year of the project, emphasis would be on achieving unification ofextension services and improving quality of the OFAR and extension programs. Limited civilworks, rehabilitation of infrastructure and procurement of most of the vehicles, field andlaboratory equipment would be completed during the first two years of the project.Applications for financing under the ATSF would be invited from the second project yearonwards. A bar chart showing implementation schedule for key activities is given in AnnexVIII. Bank supervision mission timing and nature is provided in the same schedule. The firstBank supervision mission will cover all 5 principal project states and would agree with theSIAs, APMEU and FACU on a list of performance indicators to assess the developmentimpact and the institutional effectiveness of the project entities.
VIII. FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
8.1 The economic analysis in this chapter shows that the major project benefits are likelyto be associated with the expansion of irrigation, and adoption of the improved practices forirrigated rice and wheat. Although there is doubt over the validity of using economic rate ofreturn calculations for justifying extension projects because of the difficulty of estimatingadoption rates, nevertheless it does provide some insight into production possibilities andgrowth potential. The overall rate of return for the project comes out to be 17 percent whenaccount is taken of the risks accompanying rainfed farming in northern Nigeria, It ispostulated that in one out of every five years, rainfall will be inadequate and while the yieldsof the irrigated crops will decline by 20 percent; the prices of the non-traded crops areassumed to increase in such years. The estimation of the economic rate of return assumesthat (a) the irrigated area, and consequently the area planted to the improved practices of riceand wheat (the dominant wet and dry season irrigated crops) would increase by 5 percent eachyear; and (b) the area of the rainfed crops brought under the improved practices wouldincrease by 2 percent each year. The assumption of 5 percent annual growth in the irrigatedarea is reasonable in view of the recently-appraised Fadama Development Project and thepossibility of Bank support for the development of medium- and large-scale gravity irrigation.
8.2 The financial analysis (conducted in terms of the domestic prices actually faced byfarmers which include a large subsidy on fertilizer) indicates that the improved practices formost individual crops and crop mixtures would be profitable at the farm level. Theprofitability comes out to be especially high when the labor input is not priced, and theanalysis is undertaken in terms of the returns to labor. As a result of the assumed rates ofadoption, the incremental area covered by the improved practices would amount to almostone-half of the total crop area in the three states at full development of the project (thetwentieth year). Total production in the project area would increase by some 41 percent, orat an annual rate of 1.7 percent over the 20 year life of the project. This is close to thecontribution of 2 percent that is expected by the 1989 Strategy for Agricultural Growth
- 39 -
(Report No. 7988-UNI) from improved technologies towards a targetted annual agriculturalgrowth rate of 4 percent.
A. Determinants of Benefits and Costs
1. Input Use and Crop Yields
8.3 The crop models constituting the basis for the project financial and economic analysisare presented in Annex V. Eight of these models are for crops produced in sole stands: oneeach for irrigated rice, irrigated wheat, maize, millet, sorghum, cowpeas, groundnuts andcotton. There are six mixed-crop models, encompassing combinations of maize and cotton;maize and sorghum; millet and cowpeas; millet, sorghum and cowpeas; millet and sorghum;and sorghum and groundnuts.
8.4 The improved practices encapsulated In these models are comprised of better crophusbandary (plant populations, land preparation, weeding, etc.), increased fertilizer use, theuse of improved seeds, and (in the case of cotton and cowpeas) the application of insecticides.In addition, for irrigated rice and wheat, it is assumed that there will be better water controland greater intensity of water use (as reflected in a higher input of labor for irrigation). Forthese two crops, land preparation is deemed to be performed by tractors in the case of bothtraditional and improved practices.
8.5 Labor is the main input under both traditional and improved practices. For thetraditional practice for all rainfed crops produced in sole stands or mixtures (except cotton),labor valued at the market wage rate accounts for 80 percent or more of the total input costs.The share of labor declines to 60 percent in the case of the improved practices (again for allrainfed crops, except cotton) as that of other inputs (especially fertilizer) increases. Forcotton (given the relatively high levels of fertilizer and insecticide used), the share of labor intotal costs amounts to 70 percent for the traditional practices and under 50 percent for theimproved practices. Because of the costs associated with water use, tractor hire, and chemicalinputs, the share of labor in total input costs amounts to only around 55% for irrigated rice,and around 40 percent for wheat in the case of both traditional and improved practices. Thepostulated models assume that the adoption of the improved practices for most sole crops andcrop mixtures would entail a two- to threefold increase in per hectare fertilizer use. Theimplications of the project for total fertilizer and labor requirements are considered below.The assumed increases in the labor input (in physical terms) as a result of the adoption ofimproved practices range from 30-40 percent for most sole crops except cowpeas where these.could be 140 percent. These increases range between 30 and 50 percent for the cropmixtures. In the case of cotton, labor use is assumed to remain more or less unchanged, andthe yield increase is ascribed almost wholly to increased fertilizer and insecticide use.
8.6 For the crop mixtures, per hectare yields are expected to be 20-70 percent higherbecause of the adoption of the improved practices. For crops produced in sole stands, thelargest proportional increases in per hectare yields as a result of the adoption of improvedpractices are for cowpeas. As shown below, cowpea yields are assumed to increase almostfourfold, while the increases for the other sole crops range between 50 and 75 percent.
- 40 -
Crop Yields for Traditional & Improved Practices
Traditional ImprovedPractices Practices % Increase(kglha) (kg/ha)
8.7 Domestic market prices. The financial analysis below is based on the crop pricesprevailing in the rural areas of Bauchi, Kano and Sokoto during 1990 (Annex V, Table 1).Inasmuch as the available price data relate to the retail level, they have been deflated by afactor of 0.80 in order to account for transaction costs and arrive at farmgate prices. Thefarmgate prices range narrowly from 3,000 to 3,500 Naira per metric ton for rice, wheat,cowpeas and groundnuts, and from 1,300 to 1,400 Naira per metric ton for the three coarsegrains (maize, millet, and sorghum).
8.8 Import parity prices. The economic analysis is based on the border prices of crops(Annex V, Table 1). For the non-traded crops (cowpeas and millet, in addition to sorghum ofwhich the type produced in Nigeria is not traded internationally), the domestic prices used inthe financial analysis are adjusted by a standard conversion factor of 0.85 to obtain borderprices. On the other hand, for rice, wheat, maize, groundnuts and cotton, import parityprices are computed on the basis of world market prices adjusted to reflect international anddomestic transport and other transaction costs. An exchange rate of 11 Naira to a dollar isused which, although over 20 percent higher than the official exchange rate of 9 Naira, wasroughly the rate obtaining in the parallel market in 1990. The import parity price comes outto be higher than the domestic price for groundnuts, cotton and maize. While the differenceis small in the case of groundnuts, the import parity price is almost twice as high as thedomestic price for maize, and about one-fourth higher for cotton. In contrast, the domesticprice exceeds the import parity price for rice and wheat, but only slightly in the case of riceand by about 10 percent in the case of wheat.
8.9 Input Prices. As the earlier discussion of the crop models underlying the financialand economic analysis indicates, labor is by far the most important input. Thus, the
- 41 -
agricultural wage rate will be a critical determinant of the project benefits and costs. Thewage rate used in the financial analysis for all operations is 20 Naira a day, which was therate prevailing in northern Nigeria in 1990. This constituted a two-fold increase from 1988(10 Naira) in response to higher crop prices and the increased demand for farm labor. Forthe economic analysis, the wage rate of 20 Naira is adjusted by the standard conversion factorof 0.85 to arrive at the border price for agricultural labor of 17 Naira a day.
8.10 After labor, fertilizer is the next most important input used in Nigerian agriculture. Ithas been heavily subsidized by the Federal Government, and its price in 1990 included asubsidy of roughly 85 percent. Thus, while its official 1990 price of 400 Naira a metric tonis used in the financial analysis, it is priced at full cost in the economic analysis (2,667Naira). For other inputs (seeds, insecticides, pesticides, and bags), the standard conversionfactor of 0.85 is applied to the local prices used in the financial analysis in order to obtainborder prices for the economic analysis. The same is done for the operational costs,including the charges for irrigation, tractor hire services and local transport.
B. Farm-level Financial and Economic Analysis
8.11 This section considers the farm-level profitability of the improved practices postulatedby the models in Annex V. Three aspects are considered: (a) the relative profitability ofdifferent crop enterprises; (b) the returns to labor; and (c) the effect on profitability of apotential removal of the fertilizer subsidy, and of the use of border prices for outputs andinputs.
8.12 The Profitability of Crop Enterprises. The incremental benefits and costs (in 1990prices) associated with the adoption of the improved practices for the different cropenterprises are presented in Annex V, Table 2. The ensuing benefit-cost ratios for sole cropsgenerally attest to the profitability of the improved practices at the prices actually faced byfarmers (millet is an exception). The highest ratios are for irrigated wheat (2.09) and rice(1.61) , followed by maize (1.55). Cowpeas and cotton have benefit-cost ratios of around1.5, and groundnuts and sorghum of around 1.4.
8.13 The computed benefit-cost ratios are less attractive for most crop mixtures, theproduction method generally preferred by Nigerian farmers. While high for the maize/cottonand maize/sorghum combinations (1.89 and 2.0, respectively), they are 1.2 and 1.28 for themillet/sorghum/cowpea and millet/sorghum combinations, and just above one for themillet/cowpea and sorghum/groundnut combinations.
8.14 Returns to Labor. In determining the profitability of different crop enterprises, theabove analysis has valued all labor at the market wage rate (i.e., at 20 Naira per day). Inreality, however, much of the labor used in crop production consists of family labor. Thus,farmers' perceptions about the profitability of improved crop practices are likely to beinfluenced by how these practices affect the financial returns to labor.
8.15 Estimates of the returns to each manday of labor for the different crop enterprises arepresented in Annex V, Table 3. As it shows, the returns to labor exceed the wage rate of 20Naira for all sole crops and crop mixtures (except millet) under both the traditional andimproved practices. The highest returns are for wheat under both the traditional and
- 42^
improved practices (39 and 51 naira, respectively). The incremental benefit-cost ratioscomputed for the improved practices In terms of the returns to the labor input are above 2 inall cases, except sole cotton (Annex V, Table 4).
8.16 Fam-Level Profitability Using Border Prices for Outputs and Inputs.Annex V, Table 5, considers the effect on the farm-level profitability of the improvedpractices if border prices are used for inputs, while financial prices continue to be used foroutputs. This is done essentially to see how a removal of the fertilizer subsidy might affectprofltability. The benefit-cost ratios for several crop enterprises, including a number of cropmixtures, and sorghum and millet, decline to under one. Thus, the implication is that withouta subsidy on fertilizer, it may not be profitable for farmers to adopt the improved practicesfor these crops. When border prices are used for both inputs and outputs, the benefit-costratios for the crop mixtures in question, as well as for sorghum and millet, decline further(Annex V, Table 6). This means that with the removal of input subsidies, and theliberalization of output markets, adjustments may be needed in cropping patterns. The ratiosfor the mixtures including maize, however, increase substantially because of the extent towhich the border price of maize exceeds its domestic price. Although to a smaller degree, theratio for cotton also increases for much the same reason. Inasmuch as the computed benefit-cost ratios indicate that rice and wheat production is profitable even at border prices, it is areflection of the degree to which the exchange rate for the Naira has depreciated. While anexchange rate of 11 Naira to a dollar is used in the current analysis, the 1989 Nigeria Strategyfor Agricultural Growth Report had concluded on the basis of an exchange rate of around 7Naira that wheat production, and to a lesser extent rice production, were not profitable.
C. Project Economic Analysis
8.17 In addition to the assumptions about output and input prices discussed above, it isfurther assumed that:
(a) the project would be initiated in 1992 and benefits would accrue with a lag ofone year;
(b) the project would have a life of 20 years;
(c) the investment period is five years;
(d) following the assumption used in the economic analysis for MSADP II (LoanNo. 2988-UNI), recurrent expenditures in the sixth year are assumed to equalone-half of the total expenditures in the fifth year; they are assumed toincrease by five percent a year thereafter through the 20th year (see Annex V,Table 7);
(e) all prices are expressed in 1992 constant Naira terms (this conversion isperformed in order to make the first year of the project the base year for theanalysis);
(t) the opportunity cost of capital is 12 percent.
- 43 -
8.18 The economic analysis Is conducted in terms of the adoption of improved practices onincremental areas (i.e., it is assumed that these practices have not been used before on thoseareas in any form). The input and output parameters for sole crops per the postulated models(Annex V) are used, and the returns and input costs computed for individual crops are addedacross to arrive at the aggregate picture. It is assumed that the improved practicesencapsulated in these models would be adopted in their entirety on new areas as a result of theproject efforts. As noted earlier, the improved practices are deemed to be adoptedincrementally on 5 percent of the crop area each year in the case of irrigated rice and wheat,and on 2 percent of the crop area each year in the case of the rainfed crops.
8.19 It is assumed that in one out of every five years, there will be insufficient rainfall, andthe yields of the rainfed crops will decrease by 20 percent, although those of irrigated riceand wheat will remain unaffected. It is further assumed that as a result of these yielddecreases, the prices of the non-traded rainfed crops (sorghum, millet and cowpea) willincrease. On the assumption of a price elasticity of demand of -0.5 (and a perfectly inelasticsupply), the price increase amounts to 40 percent for each of these crops. The resultingeconomic rate of return is 17 percent.
D. Implications for Fertilizer and Labor Use
8.20 Fertilizer use. Fertilizer is a critical component of the package of improved practicesto be propogated by the project. Thus, the availability of fertilizer in the required quantitieswill be an important determinant of the project benefits. Annex V, Table 8, considers theeffect on fertilizer requirements of the assumed adoption rates for the improved practices.The incremental fertilizer requirements translate to an annual compound growth rate of 7percent over the 1990 level of fertilizer sales in the 3 states which totalled 247,000 metrictons. Thus, given that the national demand for fertilizer is projected to increase by 8-10percent a year, the incremental requirements entailed by the project are not exceptional.
8.21 Labor requirements. Shortages of labor are not expected to impose a constraint onthe adoption of the improved practices, and the realization of the project benefits. Theestimated number of farm households in the three project states totals almost two million.Assuming that each household comprises of three adult equivalents, this denotes almost sixmillion units of family labor. Against this, the number of units of labor required to enablethe adoption of improved practices at the assumed rates is less than 5 million (in accordancewith the crop budgets presented in Annex V). Indeed, on the assumption that the rural laborforce will grow by 2 percent a year, this implies a surplus of more than 4 million units oflabor in the project's twentieth year. This, of course, does not consider the demand for laborduring peak periods (e.g., land preparation, and weeding). The promotion of animal tractionand small farm implements, for minimizing labor shortages at such times, is a projectobjective.
v 44 -
IX. BENEFITS. JUSTIFICATIQN AND RISKS
A. Benefits and Justification
9.1 The major benefit of the project would be the streamlining and strengthening of thetechnology adaptation and dissemination systems in the participating states. In particular,strengthening of linkages with research, unification of extension services along withdevelopment of integrated extension messages covering the major farming systems involvingcrops, livestock, fisheries and agro-forestry would enable the technology support services tocontribute much more effectively towards the overall objective of raising agriculturalproductivity and income of smallholders. In this respect, this project would complement otherBank supported activities in the agricultural sector, especially the National AgriculturalResearch Project and forthcoming National Fadama Development Project, whose success soheavily depends on the ability of state extension systems to adapt and disseminate affordableand appropriate technologies to smallholders.
9.2 In addition to rainfed agriculture, the technological support for irrigated agriculturewould enable many farmers to double their cropping intensities with little or no risk of cropfailure due to drought and provide greater food and financial security. Although, the projectis not designed to increase the number of persons employed in agriculture, the technologicalpackages to be promoted and the overall trend towards intensification of agriculture wouldincrease demand for labor. The emphasis to be given to promotion of animal traction for arange of farm activities including irrigated crop production in fadama areas would help toreduce labor shortages during peak demand periods while raising productivity of off-seasonlabor.
9.3 Nigeria, whose agriculture is an important part of the economy must have strongtechnological support services at the ADP leve: to adapt affordable and appropriateagricultural technology to increase food production for its growing population, improve ruralincome and re-establish agriculture's past pre-dominant role in export earnings. Even thetechnology generated by the national research system requires testing and, in most cases,modification and adaptation to meet the location specific needs of farmers which can only beaccomplished by an effective and efficient technology support system. However, the extent oftechnological improvements, the rate of their adoption by farmers and resulting productivitygains cannot be accurately predicted and are likely to vary significantly across the agro-ecological zones. Moreover, future gains would be attributable not only to farm leveltechnical support activities but also to combined impact of all the other support services(research, input supply and credit) and the general macro-economic environment.
B. Riks
9.4 The main risks would be the organizational and operational difficulties resulting fromunification of the extension services, inadequate counterpart funding, lack of appropriatetechnologies leading to lower than expected adoption rate by farmers and weakening of theimplementation capacity of some of the agencies.
- 45 -
9.5 To overcome any resistance to unification of extension services, endorsement for thispolicy has been obtained at the highest level in the Government and has full support ofparticipating states U/. Intensive consultation with State MANRs and other affectedagencies have been carried out throughout the process leading to project appraisal and wouldbe continued until the unification is complete and fully operational. To overcome initialadjustment difficulties of field staff being transferred to the SIAs, special orientation coursesare planned. it is expected that provision of mobility, equipment and intensive training wouldcounter any potential morale problems and motivate staff to achieve higher professionalstandards.
9.6 To overcome problems relating to counterpart funding, assurances have been obtainedfrom the Government that expenditure for technological support services would be expandedas needed in order to cover all project costs by the end of the project. This commitmentwould be further reinforced through Bank's sector and economic dialogue with theGovernment.
9.7 To ensure development of appropriate and affordable technologies, the Bank isassisting the Government to strengthen the research system through a free standing researchproject. In addition, relevance of research would be further improved through strongresearch-extension linkages and strengthening client's influence on research policy andprogramming. Improved planning and greater consultation with farmers would ensure thatextension messages relate to their needs. Adoption of farming systems approach andextensive small plot on-farm demonstrations supported by intensive mass-media support wouldhelp greater adoption of extension messages. Implementation capacity of participatingagencies would be reinforced through staff training greater supervision and provision ofexpertise in critical areas. At the same time, Bank's future lending operations aimed atfurther improving incentives to farmers, input supplies, credit and marketing should also takecare of the non-technical constraints inhibiting technology adoption.
C. Environmental Effects
9.8 The major focus of the technological support services would be to identify andrecommend technologies which optimize productivity while safeguarding environment and areconsistent with farming systems practiced by the majority of farmers. The sustainability ofintensive smallholder systems in semi-arid parts is a critical issue due to variable rainfallwhich has diminished by about 25% since the relatively wet 1960s, soil of moderate to poorfertility and a population needs to be augmented with a shift from low input - low output tohigher input - higher output system. Experience of Kano Close Settled Zone (KCSZ), a smallarea within Kano State, where population density exceed 350/km2 indicate that progress canbe made in this direction under conditions of indigenous technical knowledge. The system asfollowed by smallholders integrates crop production with agro-forestry and livestock.Findings from a detailed study on the nature, rate and effective limits of intensification in thefarming system of this zone show that the key features that enhance sustainability include: (a)
13/The National Council of Agriculture which is chaired by the Federal Minister ofAgriculture, Water Resources and Rural Development and has all the State AgriculturalCommissioners as members has endorsed this policy.
- 46 -
intensified use of labor and fertility enhancing inputs including use of farm yard manure andchemical fertilizers; (b) use of fallow system eventhough declining in duration and on a smallpart of land; (c) use of improved varieties which fit into the mixed cropping-raising livestock-farm forestry system; (d) use of trees not only as a source of timber, brouse and shade butalso as a sound basis for soil protection. Thus, the approach being proposed under the projectto develop recommendations integrating findings from crops, livestock and agro-forestryresearch as well as knowledge gained from experience of indigenous farmers provides the bestchance for sustainable intensification of agriculture. Soil and moisture conservationtechniques would utilize simple and cost effective techniques such as contour planting alongwith hedge planting of vetiver grass (Vetiveria nigratana), which is available locally and canbe readily multiplied through vegetative propogation. As compared to mechanical cultivationsystems, the project's animal traction component involving promotion of work oxen alongwith animal drawn implements would be more cost efficient, in the long-term, less damagingto the soil structure. Increased use of animal traction and appropriate mechanizationt wouldenable timely land preparation and planting, thus reducing labor demand peaks, improvingcrop establishment and growth and providing farm yard manure to improve organic mattercontent of soil.
9.9 Overall usage of agricultural chemicals to control pest and diseases in Nigeria isrelatively low. With the traditional and improved varieties of sorghum and millet currentlyunder cultivation, no pesticides are used and this situation is unlikely to change in the nearfuture. New varieties and hybrids of maize are tolerant to the most important crop protectionproblem - the streak virus. The crops with significant pest problems requiring use ofpesticides, mainly insecticides, are cotton, cowpea and rice. To minimize the use ofpesticides in these crops, the project would promote: (a) increased use of tolerant varietieswhen available; (b) adaptation of integrated pest management systems, especially for cottonand cowpea, based on recommendations available or likely to be available from the nationalor international research systems; and (c) cultural practices able to avoid or minimize pest anddisease incidences.
X. AGREEMENTS REACHED AND RECOMMENDATION
10.1 During negotiations with the Government, agreements were obtained on the following:
(a) recruitment of new BESs and VEAs would only take place after the exactnumber of staff to be transferred to the state implementing agencies under theunification of extension plan has been finalized; in Kano, where the VEA tofarm family ratio has already reached 1:547, no firther recruitment would beundertaken; and the participating SIAs would stabilize VEA to farm familyratios around 1:1000 to ensure long term sustainability (para 5.7.1(b));
(b) FGN would include in the FMAWRRD annual budget amounts adequateprovisions to meet FGN's share of project expenditure for the SIAs of Bauchi,Kano, Jigawa, Sokoto and Kebbi and for special studies and pilot programsand such other programs or projects as may be agreed with in the Bank; andSGs would include in their annual budgets their respective share of theincremental expenses of their SIAs (para 6.4);
-47 -
(c) Within 3 months of loan effectiveness the SIAs of Bauchi, Kano, Jigawa,Sokoto and Kebbi States would each engage a firm of financial accountants toreview (i) the adequacy of staff skills and resources for producing projectaccounts of proper quality and in time for meeting auditing deadlines; (ii)possibilities of refining/amending the accounting and financial procedures tobetter meet project needs; and (iii) that this review would be completed anddiscussed with the Bank no later than 6 months from loan effectiveness (para6.10);
(d) By November 30 of each year starting from 1992, FMAWRRD would submitto the Bank for comments a copy of the NATSP program and budget for thecoming year (para 6.12);
(e) the Projects Coordinating Committee would provide support to NATSP (para7. 1(a));
(f) Bauchi, Kano, Jigawa, Sokoto and Kebbi States would each establish anAgriculture Programs Liaison Committee by December 31, 1992 (para7. 1(b));
(g) Bauchi State would carry out jointly with FMAWRRD and the Bank by June30, 1993 a review of the organizational arrangements supporting the carryingout of Bauchi State's components of the project and would by December 31,1993 put into effect the recommendations emanating from the review (para 7.1(c));
(h) key project staff would be appointed with conditions of employment,qualifications and terms of reference satisfactory to the Bank (para 7.1(c));
(i) required Sponsored Research agreement(s) with selected national institution(s)would be signed by July 31, 1992 to test and adapt available animal drawn ormanually operated implements to prevalent conditions in the rainfed andirrigated areas of the project (para 7.2(b));
(j) SIAs would sell fruit trees at prices to recover operational costs in the firstyear of the prorject with full costs being recovered from Project Year 4 (7.2(c);
(k) the Human Resource Development Plan would be updated annually and theannual training program for each participating agency would be submitted tothe Bank for agreement starting from January 31, 1992 (para 7.9);
(I) by June 30, 1992, SIAs would enter into contractual agreements on terms andconditions, terms of reference and qualifications satisfactory to the Bank withselected institutions to support adaptive research and planning, monitoring andevaluation activities (para 7.10);
(m) the first five application for financing under the ATSF would be sent to theBank for agreement after FACU appraisal and approval by the ATSC and all
-48 -
applications costing more than US$1 million would be appraised by FACUand submitted to the Bank for approval after prior clearance by ATSC (para7.13); and
(n) FACU would coordinate preparation of comprehensive progress reports by theparticipating agencies for the mid-term review of the project which would becompleted no later than December 31, 1995 by a joint Government and WorldBank team (para 7.15).
10.2 The conditions of loan effectiveness would be the following:
(a) that the Federal Government has paid the project accounts of the SIAs initialamounts to the equivalent of US$250,000 (Bauchi), US$300,000 (Kano andJigawa) and US$200,000 (Sokoto and Kebbi) (para 6.4); and
(b) that subsidiary loan agreements between the Federal and State Governmentshave been signed for at least one state (para 6.4).
10.3 The following would be the conditions of loan disbursement:
(a) a Program Manager, a Financial Controller and Head of Agricultural Servicesalong with his two deputies responsible for Adaptive Research and Extensionwould have been appointed by the participating states with conditions ofemployment, qualification and terms of reference satisfactory to the Bank(para 7.1(c)); and
(b) the State Governments have paid into the Project Accounts of their respectiveSIAs the equivalent of US$250,000 (Bauchi), US$300,000 (Kano and Jigawa)and US$200,000 (Sokoto and Kebbi) (para 6.5);
(c) transfer of all identified extension staff from other state agencies to the SIAsunder the unification plan would have been completed by the participatingstates (para 7.2(d)).
(d) the Agricultural Technology Sub-Projects Committee and its Secretariat wouldhave been established before disbursement of funds from the ATSF (para7.12); and
(e) the subsidiary loan agreements between Federal and Scate Governments wouldhave been signed (para 6.4).
10.4 On the basis of the above assurances and conditions the project is suitable for anIBRD loan of $42.5 million to the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
-49- ~~~~~~~Annex -IPage 1 of 5
PEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIOERI
NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT PROJECTThe Technolooy Adaotation and Dissemination System
A. Collaboratina Institutions in the On-Farm Adaptive Research/MonthlyTechnoloav Review Mostine Notwork
Zone Coordinating Stat*/ADPs * OtherInstitute Covered Collaborating
Institutions
South-East National Root Akwa-Ibom, Univ. ofCrops Research Anambra, Cross Nigeria, Imo;Institute River, Imo, State Univ.,(NRCRI) Rivers FUT, Owerri;Umudike Univ. of
South-West Institute of Lagos, Ondo, U.I. Ibadan,Agric. Ogun, Oyo, UNIFE; UNIBEN,Research and Bendel Lagos StateTraining College of(IAR&T) Ibadan Technology,
Ogun StateUniv.; FUTAkure, NIHORT,Univ. ofAgric.Abeokuta,NIVOR, andFACU, Ibadan
North-East Lake Chad Bomo Gongola Univ. ofResearch Inst. Maiduguri and(LCRI) FACU JoeMaiduguri
North-West Institute of Kaduna, Kano, AERLS, Zaria;Agric. Katsina, NAPRI Shika;Research (IAR) Sokoto, Bauchi ABU,Zaria UNISOKOTO,
FACU Kadunaand FACU Joe.
-50-
Annex IPage 2 of 5
NOTE: FUT - Federal University of TechnologyRSUST - Rivers State University of Science and TechnologyNIHORT - National Institute for Horticultural ResearchNIFOR - Nigerian Institute of Oil-Palm ResearchNAPRI - National Animal Production Research Institute
* In addition, support to the national network is also being providedby the Livestock and Forestry Departments of the Federal Ministry ofAgriculture and Natural Resources through Bank assisted projectsLivestock IS (Loan No. 2737-UNI) and Forestry II (Loan No. 2760-UNI).
B. Roles and Resoonsibilities of the Collaboratina Institutions
The National Aaricultural Research Institutes (NARII would:
(a) Provide the Zonal Coordinator for all OFAR activities in the zone.The Zonal Coordinator may appoint representatives to the respectiveADP OFAR teams.
(b) Provide technical support and relevant back-up training for SubjectMatter Specialists (SMSs) of the ADPl.
(c) In collaboration with FACU and ADP, design, Implement, and monitorresearch extension and training projects of the ADPC as mutuallyagreed by the institute, the ADP and FACU.
(d) Make available promptly all relevant research results to assist ADPofficials in the implementation of project activities.
Universities/NARI Sub-Stations
(a) Provide leadership of ADP OFAR teams under the overall responsibilityof the Zonal Coordinator.
(b) Collaborate in the discharge of NARI responsibilities as outlinedabove.
Aaricultural Develonment Project (ADpj
(a) Provide the financial resources for OFAR as agreed in the budget forthe OFAR project.
(b) Provide transportation for the OFAR team and for successfulimplementation of the OFAR project.
(c) Provide materials for MTRM training and allowances for the resourcepersons required.
(d) Provide staff and space for the conduct of research-ADP trials (on-pstation and on-farm).
Federal Acticultural Coordinatino Unit (FACUI
(a) Link up the collaborating institution in OFAR and facilitate theimplementation of agreed activities.
-51-
hAnnai Page 3 of s
(b) In collaboration with NARI and ADP, coordinate research extension,and training activities agreed upon by the collaboratinginstitutions.
(c) Arrange meetings and workshops to review pre-season and end-of-seasonOFAR activities.
(d) Assist in ADPs the publication of reports and information generatedthrough OFAR activities.
C. Prooosed On-Farm Adaotiv. Research and Training Activity Cycle andInstitutions ReXsonsible for Action
Activity Process InstitutionResponsible forAction
1. ResearchPlanning andR isn
(a) Identification, Diagnostic Surveys, ADP/NARI/University/definition and Monthly Technology FACUprioritization Review Meetings, andof problems and Field Visitsopportunities
(b) Identification Inventory of NARI/University/FACU/and listing of technologies ADPprobable andpossiblesolutions tocommonly-definedproblems
(c) Selection, Review and Planning ADP/NARItuniversity/formulation and Workshops FACUdesign(includingcosting) of ADPon-farm and on-station trials
(d) Release of Development of agreed ADP/FACUapproved funds program and timetableto NARI for for various actionsMTRH support
2. Efterimentation
(a) Execution of Trials on farmers' ADP/NARI/Contacttrials (on-farm field, field stations Farmersand on-station) and multi-locational
testing
(b) Monitoring of Joint supervisory FACU/ADP/NARITrials site visits, monthly University
-52-
Annex IPage 4 of 5
and quarterlyreports, mid-yearreview and planningworkshop
(c) Trial Data Processing ADP/NARI/UniveruityAnalysis
(d) Review of Annual Review and ADP/FACU/NARItrials results Planning Workshop Universityand formulationof recommenda-tions
(e) Small Plot Small plots in ADP Extension withAdoption Trials several farmers' support from OFAR
fields in different teamlocations
3. TrainLna
(a) Identification Annual Work Plan ADP/FACUof trainingneeds andtraininginstitutions
(b) Training Training ADP/FACU/NARIproposals, Universityresourcing andimplementation
(c) Training (i) Monthly NARI/University/ADP(types)s (i) Technology ReviewSubject Matter MeetingsSpecialists andResearch (LL) Special short VariousOfficers courses
(iLLi) Orientation ADP/FACUtraining NARI
(ii) Research (i) Pre-season ADP/FACU/NARIAssistants and traLningTechnicLans
NARI - National Agricultural Research InstituteFACU - Federal Agricultural Coordinating UnitADP - Agricultural Development Project
-53-
Annex IPage 5 of 5
D. Technology Development Dissemination and Feedback Pathway
_~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Basic Research
(Specialized institutionsmainly international some national)
I__________App2lied Research -
(Replicated; field oriented; C z
detailed observations)
-T - | o-~~I
On-Farm Adaptive Research
Location specific f
(Single replication; farmland; simple records)
A1'~~~~~~~~~~~~ Z Small Plot Adoption Techniques I e
Leading to formulation of extension messages W(Single plots; farmer 4
Ka Findings froM Past Adaptive Research and Priorities forFuture Work In Kano. Bauchi and Sokoto States
1. Based on available data from past adaptive research undertaken by Kano, Bauchi andSokoto and discussions with ADP staff and research scientists at national research institutes,key findings which have assisted development of new extension messages were identified. Atthe same time to focus resources or priority areas, recommendations for future work weredeveloped. These are briefly summarized below with more details included in Working Paper2, Part II.
A. An Overview of the Agr&Ecological Settina
2. Kano, Bauchi and Sokoto fall under the Nigerian sahel, sudan and Northern GuineaSavanna zones. The rainfall characteristics determine the dominant crops and relatedagricultural activities. The key features of the major agro-ecological zones are brieflysummarized below:
(a) Sahel (Semi-&id). This zone occupies the north-et corner of the countrywith about 500 mm of rainfall. The vegetation is sparse annual grassland,woodland or shrubland, heavily grazed or browsed. With no more than 90growing days in a good year, rainfed cropping is dominated by quick growingmillet mixed with cowpeas. A greater range of crops, vegetables, wheat aregrown on the low lying (fadama) alluvial soils with dry season irrigation.Other major economic activities include: pastoralism with nomadic fulaniherds grazing the area from July to September. This zone represents a fragileenvironment with low potential ; it is drought prone with poor soils. Futuredevelopment should seek to: arrest degradation through agro-forestry andvegetative systems for soil moisture conservation; greater use of fadama land;and low input technology for improving crop productivity mainly based ontraditional farming systems.
(b) Sudan Savanna. This zone, formerly wooded plain, extends across NorthernNigeria with sandy soils of low fertility in east and somewhat more fertileformations in the center-west. Although annual rainfall ranges between 500 to1000 mm, droughts are common. This zone includes some of the moredensely populated parts of the country which has a significant affect on landuse leading to reduced fallow periods and continuous cultivation in someareas. Traditional farming system is a complex of agro-forestry, crops andlivestock. Mixed cropping systems predominate, built around main staplessorghum and millet. Other crops grown in mixture include cowpeas,
-55-
Angex UPage 2 of 12
groundnut and cotton. Some maize is now being grown in the southern partsof the zone. Dry season cropping with small scale irrigation is common withrice, wheat and vegetables. The zone being tsetse free provides wet seasongrazing for many transhumant fulani herds of cattle, The rate of grazingrenewal, however, is limited. A lot of the nutrient reserves especially of Nand P, are being exhausted through more intensive cropping. The zonesuffers from lack of improved varieties suitable for major cereal crops, milletand sorghum and mixed cropping improved agronomic practices suitable forsmall farmers, fodder and fuelwood shortage and declining soil fertility.Sustainable improved integrated farming systems incorporating agro-forestrywith nitrogen fixing leguminous shrubs, crops and livestock could providefodder, fuelwood, and arrest degradation with improved soil fertility.Intensification and further extension of fadama areas offers major growthopportunity.
(c) Northern Guinea Savann. Rainfall in this zone ranges from 1000-1250 mm.The soils of zone are of medium fertility intercepted by low fertility sandiersoils in some parts. The southern parts of this zone represent a transitionfrom the northern cereal-based systems to those incorporating some rootcrops. The main crops are sorghum, maize, rainfed rice and some yam andcassava. Cotton and groundnut are common and important components of themixed cropping systems. Fulani herds of cattle, sheep and goats migratesouthwards into the zone at the start of the dry season utilizing crop residues.Like the other zones, development of integrated livestock and cropmanagement systems offers potential for future growth.
KeU Findings from Past Adaptive Research Suitable fQr Inclusion in Extension Messages
A. Bauchi
(a) Maize
(i) Maize varieties I7.B and TZESR-W (short season) producer higheryields. Hybrid maize produced similar yields to open pollinated TZBunder same management practices.
(ii) Maize grown at 48,000 plants/ha with either one plant/stand at 23 cmspacing or two plants/stands at 46 cm spacing was the best practice.
(iii) Maize requires 90-120 kg N/ha, 45-60 kg P20/ha.
(iv) Fertilizer to maize in the form of NPK fertilizer was a commonpractice; series of studies indicated that Urea X DAP as compared toNPK compound fertilizer also produced similar results and saved costof fertilizer. This provided an alternative to NPK.
(v) In case farmers have not been able to apply fertilizer early, itsapplication as late as 30 days after sowing also gives good response.
-56-
Annex 11Page 3 of 12
(vi) Maize responded equally to placement and broadcast method offertilizers application.
(b) Mille
(i) Varieties Ex-Borno, Nig. Composite, Dwarf composite, Bristlecomposite gave good performance.
(c) Sorgbum
(i) With adequate moisture supply improved varieties KSV8, KSVMAND SK5912 give good yield in mono-cropping trials. BES varietygave higher (almost double) response to fertilizer than local varieties.
(ii) Local selection giving good yield included Jajara, Gajara and Gadu.
(d) Grosndnut
(i) Varieties Ex-Dakar and RMP-12 are the best. Other good varietiesare RMP 91 and RRB.
(e) Cotton
(i) July month is the best time for sowing cotton.
(ii) Cotton gave best yields at 25,000 plants/ha.
(iii) Spraying cotton with cymbush greatly increased the yield.
(iv) Cotton requires potassium application at 60/80 kg K20/ha.
(f) Sunflower
(i) The crop should be sown (except north zone) soon aftercommencement of rains.
(g) Soybean
(i) Varieties Samsoy 1 and Samsoy 2 are the best varieties.
(h) Maize/Cotton
(i) Maize with full stand and cotton undersown in the same ridge wasbetter than alternate row pattern.
(ii) Fertilizer at 120:60:60 of NPK is required for this mixture.
(i) Maize/Sorghum
-57-
A.m=APage 4 of 12
(i) Application of fertilizer rate for this 1:1 row intercrop can be halvedwhen directed to maize rows instead to the whole plot.
B. Kano
(a) Sorghum
(i) Among local selections, Yarwasha gives good performance in drierparts of the state. Other selections found suitable in the same areasdue to early maturity were Gaya Early, Yargadama, Lafta Danbatta,Kadawa farafara Yar gamel, Yarwuri and Bagoba red. The improvedvarieties suitable for areas where moisture availability is better areKSV12, BES KSV8. Niger improved, Bagoba rod and EImota werebest of the Niamey material.
(ii) Yield levels under NPK at 60-30-30, 30-15-15, and 0-0 were 1964,1571 and 1072 kg/ha. However, soil in Kano trials were such that nosignificant yield differences were observed between 60:30:30 and30:15:15 NPK rates of fertilizer.
(iii) Sorghum should be sown at 1 m row spacing closer spacing of 50 cmgave no advantage.
(iv) Productivity of sorghum can be increased by addition of FYMfollowed by top dressing of 30:15: 15 NPK.
(b) MilUe
(i) Varieties Ex-Borno and Nig. composite perform well especially in thenorthern parts of the state. In areas of head worm attach Gwagwalocal should be preferred.
(ii) Millet fertli zer responses were similar to that of sorghum.
(iii) Millet should be sown at row spacing of 1.0 m. Closer row spacingof 50 cm has no advantage over 1 m.
(iv) Fertilizer application before first weeding is simple and safe underfavorable soil moisture conditions. However, application byplacement also gave good yields.
(v) Productivity of millet can be increased by addition of FYM followedby top dressing with fertilizer.
(e) u
-58-
Annex 11Page 5 of 12
(i) TZESR-W and TZESR-Y are suitable varieties for maize growingareas of the state. Hybrid maize does better in high rainfall areas onheavy soils with higher fertility levels.
(ii) Growing of maize at two plants/hill at about 50 cm has similar yieldto that of one plant/hill spaced 25 cm giving a population of about48,000 plants/ha; wide spacing has advantage in view of conveniencein planting and top dressing of fertilizer.
(iii) Fertilizer requirement for open pollinated maize (TZESR-W) is 90-30and that of hybrid maize is 120:60 N and P respectively. Soils arenot deficient in K.
(iv) For catching green ear market TZESR-W variety should be sown inearly May.
(d) Cowpeas
(i) Varieties found suitable are TVX X 3236, ITA 60, Den Ilan, IT8ID-985 and Sampea 7. Varieties showing striga resistance were Survita-2and KVX30-322.
(ii) Best time of sowing cowpeas is first fortnight of July and yieldcontinues to decline after mid July.
(iii) Cowpeas requires three sprays of insecticide (cypermethrin) for higheryields.
(e) Groundnut
(i) The groundnut varieties found suitable in the state are RMP-12, RRBand Ex-Dakar. RMP-12 should be preferred for long season and RRBfor short season. RMP-12 showed some resistance to Rosette.
(ii) Diammonium phosphate can also be safely used as a source of P.
(t) Rice
(i) Shallow swamp varieties give much more yield (almost double) thanupland varieties.
(ii) Varieties found suitable were ITA305, 1TA257 and Ex-China forupland and ITA212. SIPI 692033 and ITA312 for lowland. ITA312and ITA308 gave good performance among medium duration varieties.Faroy 306-6-2 and SIPI 692033 were better among short durationones
-59-.
Annex-11Page 6 of 12
(iii) Transplanting due to better weed control is better than direct sowingunder lowland conditions.
(iv) Shallow swamp varieties with supplementary irrigation and applicationof NPK fertilizer at 120:30:30 gives yields ranging from four to sixt/ha.
Dry Season Crops (Irrigated)
(g) Garden Peas
(i) Garden peas should be sown in November, December sowing inDecember causes sharp decline in yields of green pods.
(ii) Crops need to be staked only if the crop growth is vigorous andgrown on heavy soil/high fertility conditions.
(h) Wheat
(i) Varieties found suitable were Pavon 76, Siett cerros and Sonalika.
(ii) Crop should be sown in November, earlier or later sowing give loweryields.
(i) Onion
(i) Varieties Samaru Composite and Maiduguri improved should begrown for higher bulb and seed yield.
(j) Tomato
(i) Variety Tl-531 performed best in heat tolerant variety trial.
Crop Mixtures
(k) Millet/Sorghum
(i) Any of the millet varieties among Ex-Borno and Dwarf composite canbe grown in the mixture.
(ii) Out of sorghum varieties, yarwasha should be preferred in more drierparts and KSV12 in higher rainfall areas.
(iii) Millet/sorghum grown in 1:2 row pattern required NPK fertilizer atoO:30:30 (K, although not deficient was applied a part of compoundfertilizer composition).
(iv) The mixture can be grown at I m row spacing as closer row spacingof 0.5 m has no advantage.
-60-
Anne:liPage 7 of 12
(I) Sorghum/Groundnut
(i) Sorghum/groundnut in any of the row pattern 1:2, 1:3 and 2:4, couldbe used till more work is done on this aspect. However, further workis required to refine the recommendation.
(ii) Variety RRB of groundnut was successful as mixture.
(m) Millet/Maize
(i) Millet varieties Ex-Borno and Dwarf Composite performed alike in themixture in one row millet and two row maize pattern. Similarly,maize yields were also similar when grown with these millet varietiesmaize variety TZESR-W (short duration) out yielded TZB in themixture.
(n) Maize/Groundnut
(i) Maize/groundnut grown in 2:4 row pattern showed that maize varietyTZESR-W (90 days duration) produced good yields. Groundnutvariety RRB performed better than RLB.
(o) Sorghum/Cow eas
(i) Yarwasha variety of sorghum perform better than KSV12. Similarlycowpea yields higher when grown with Yarwasha than KSV12.
(ii) One row of sorghum with two rows of cowpeas is a better plantingpattern for this mixture.
(p) Strip Cropping
(i) Crops such as millet, sorghum, cowpeas and sesame grown in fourrow (75 cm spaced) strip produced good results. Outer rows of eachcrop produced more yield than inner rows.
(q) Management of Exhausted Land
(i) Yearly application of FYM along with the fertilizer restorates theproductivity of exhausted land better than fertilizer alone.
(r) Livestock. From the trial conducted by KNARDA, following messagesemerged:
}) Feeding animals with Urea treated crop residues (Cruprocess) greadyimproves the crude protein of the forage from 2.1 to 9.2% anddigestibility percent from 46.9 to 57.5% resulting in increased body
-61-
Annex IIPage 8 of 12
weight compared to feeding of untreated sorghum residue whichcaused reduction in body weight during dry season.
(ii) Feeding of legume hay of lab lab during dry season is very beneficialfor maintenance of animal.
(iii) Growing of white accession of lab lab, under irrigated conditions orresidual moisture is successful. There is no need of seeding it everyyear as the falling seeds germinate and make good growth. It is adual purpose crop, the seeds being used as food by human beings.
(iv) Fodder Banks of lab lab can be established by fencing the area withcereal stalks.
(v) Lab lab should be grown as sole crop as growing it in mixture withsorghum/millet has not succeeded.
C. Sokoto
Sole Crops
(a) Mill
(i) Ex-Borno continues to be best variety in the state performingbetter/equal than the other local and improved varieties.
(ii) Local varieties Yar Duwigi gave good performance, followed byYargadamna in eastern zone.
(b) Sorghum
(i) Varieties LS1499, LS187, BES, S35, local farafara and Early Gayagive good performance.
(ii) Out of local varieties Yarduwigi followed by Yargadama gave goodperformance for early sowing (June-early July). Lafla Danbattavariety should be preferred for late sowing (ate July) as its yieldswere stable and did not fall with delay in sowing.
(iii) The optimum time for sowing sorghum is end June/early July. Yieldsof sorghum declined to 1/3 when sowing was delayed from 30/6 to27/7.
(iv) Application of N30 P15 K15 and N60 P30 K30 gave 36% and 63%increase in grain yelled over no fertilizer (based on means of 115trial). Any rate between these can be selected by farmer dependingupon availability of resources etc.
-62-
Annex 11Page 9 of 12
(c) Groundnut
(i) Varieties Ex-Dakar, S61 and *rmpl2 gave best results and were betteryielders than local.
(d) Maize
(i) Application of N50 P25 K25 and N100 P50 K50 (based on means of35 sites) gave 42 and 79% more yield than no fertilizer. Dependingupon resources the farmers can select the dose in between these two.
(e) Rice
(i) Faro 27 and SIPI performed better among short duration varietiesunder irrigated conditions.
(ii) Rice crop can be successfully grown as a dry season crop by sowingduring the first week of January and transplanting in last week ofFebruary. The crop matures by the end of April. However, waterneeds are very high and crop has to compete with lower waterrequiring crops, e.g. wheat, during dry season.
(f) Wheat
(i) Siete cerros and Pavon 76 continued to perform well.
(ii) Whole month of November is the best sowing period for wheat delayin sowing beyord November causes a sharp decline in wheat yields.
(iii) Fertilizer at N60 P30 K30 and N120 P60 K60 gave 44% and 75%increase in yield over no fertilizer. The crop requirement, thus, isN120P60K60.
(iv) Drilling method is better than broadcast and dabbling.
C. Priorities for Future Work
3. The OFAR program would cover the following major areas:
(a) Crop and Cropping System
Sole Cropping
(i) Variety Trials. Primary responsibility for the development of newvarieties lies with the national research system. OFAR teams wouldassist research institutes in implementing the variety evaluation trials.The crops would include:
Comparative evaluation of local vs. improved varieties would beundertaken.
(ii) CulturalIPrac . Limited number of trials testing selected crops andvarieties would include:
Date of sowing;
- Plant population/spacing studies;
- Method of planting.
(iii) Fertilizer Trials. Response of Cereals (Maize) to Rates, Sources andformulating of NPK. Mostly, farmers are using NPK (15:15:15)which is low in N and contains uawanted K which is not deficient.New formulations containing high N and very low K would be testedat different rates in major agro-ecological zones. This work would belargely confined to major fertilizer responsive cereals.
CrowDinL Syvst
4. The important crop mixture requiring attention are millet/cowpea,millet/sorghum/groundnut, millet/sorghum/cotton, maize/sorghum and maize/rice.
(a) Varietal Selection for Crop Mixtures. As the performance of a given varietymay vary whether it is being grown as sole crop or in a mixture, trials wouldspecifically screen new varieties and local selections to identify those suitablefor growing in crop mixtures.
(b) CroD Geometry and Planting Date Studies in a Crop Mixture. Therequirements of crops in the mixture for optimum growth vary for factors ofgrowth like nutrient, water, light, temperature etc. The crops also requiredifferent types of plant protection measures. Farmers in most cases areadopting inter-row mixed cropping rather than intra-row. It will beworthwhile to compare growing of crop mixtures in the same as well asdifferent rows.
Farmers at present are sowing component crops either on the same date ordifferent dates. For example, in millet + cowpeas mixture, the cowpea isplanted 4-5 weeks after millet. It is, therefore, important to work out theoptimum sowing time of the component crops particularly when new,especially short duration, varieties are introduced in the mixtures.
(c) Fertilizer Requirements of Crops Mixture. The fertilizer requirements ofcrops mixture in terms of sources, rate, time and method of application vary
-64-Annex II
Page 11 of 12
from the sole crops and is also influenced by the choice of variety. Further,the type of mixture, viz: cereal legume will also change the fertilizerrequirements of different crop mixtures. Additional work on these topicswould help to provide specific answers for different locations.
(d) Contribution of Component Technglogies. The farmers sometimes adopt acomponent and leave the others for growing crop mixtures. It is importantthat the contribution of each component technology is worked out so as toenable the farmers pick up the most important one to them in terms of inputcost and income. Some trials to generate this type of information will beplanned.
(e) Maintenance of Soil Productivity. With increase in the intensity of cropping,there is more exploitation of soil resources. Maintenance of soil productivitythrough practices like suitable crop rotations, crop mixtures involvinglegumes, green manuring, addition of organic matter, growing of restorativecrops and fallowing will be adopted. On-Farm Trials to generate technologieson these aspects will be carried out in collaboration with research.
Land Management and Agro-Forestrv
5. For acceptance of new technology being advocated by the national and internationalresearch organizations in this area, a systematic On-Farm Adaptive Research Program isrequired. The main areas requiring OFAR trials are:
(a) Effect of various vetiver grass planting techniques on contour lineestablishment, and efficiency of the contour line information on water and soilconservation;
(b) Effect of main alley cropping technology/design using different woodyleguminous species on the soil and moisture conservation for different crops;
(c) Effect of woody species hedge rows on dry season agricultural production infadama lands; and
(d) Role of woody species in bio-mass production for fuel wood, fodder, greenmanure and soil enrichment under mixed economy and traditional farmingsystems.
6. Tkese trials depending upon the facilities available will be selected by each ADPresearch units and carried out in collaboration with the FRIN and Bank assisted projects in theforestry sub-sector and extension staff of agro-forestry/land use/soil conservation.
Animal Traction
7. On-Farm trials in collaboration with IAR and/or National Center for AgriculturalMechanization would cover the following aspects in rainfed and irrigated fields:
-65-
Annex IIPage 12 of 12
(a) Evaluating various improved hand tools like serrated sickles (for harvesting)and hand hoes;
(b) Evaluation of manually operated and animal drawn seed drills, inter-rowweeders;
(c) Studies on traction from shoulders versus hump;
(d) Evaluation of buliock drawn ridgers cum planters;
(e) Evaluation of bullock power driver fodder cutters, threshers (particularlywheat areas where it is a serious problem);
(f) Working out suitable fodder preservation methods at crop harvest for use offodder in dry season; and
*g) Evaluation of bullock powered water lifting devices.
Irrigation Water Management
8. Irrigation research will concentrate on evaluation of technology such as methods ofland shaping, size of plots, irrigation schedules for different crops of dry season andsupplemental irrigation needs of wet season crops, simple low cost methods of waterdistribution to improve efficiency of irrigation water and development of cropping pattern.The crop production technology for irrigated crops will be worked out.
Integrated Farming Systems Research LFSR)
9. Farming systems research will focus on diagnostic surveys to design meaningful FSRprogram, developing sustainable production of crops involving mixed and sole cropping,tillage systems involving animal traction, development of integrated crop, agro-forestry andlivestock production systems suiting various agro-econologies and resource constraints. Indeveloping work program, lessons learnt from the review of traditional integrated systemspracticed by farmers in the Kano Close Settled Zone would be incorporated.
10. To complement the FSR activities, a limited number of trials specifically aimed at thelivestock component would also be undertaken in collaboration with NAPRI/NLPD and ILCAWest Africa Program. Before commencing any work, specific needs of farmers wouldidentified through diagnostic survey on livestock issues. The trials program is expected toconcentrate on: (a) collection of data from crop varietal trials on stover/grain yield ratios toidentify dual purpose varieties; (b) methods of improving nutritive value, palatability andstorability of crop residues as feed (cowpea, millet, sorghum lab-lab etc.); and (c) effect ondifferent animal management practices on animal health.
-66-
Amex IIIPage 1 of 2
FEDERAL REPU8LIC OF NIGERIA
NATIONAL AGRICIJLTURAL TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT PRWOECT
Key Features of Extension Services
A. Institutioenl
1. Federal
Policy and Ffnance Federal Ministry of Agricultureand Natural Resources
Coordination and Implementa- Agriculture/Crops: Federaltion Support Dept. of Agric./Federal Agri-
cultural Coordinating Unit(FACU)
Forestry: Federal Departmentof Forestry/Federal ForestryMonitoring, Evaluation andCoordinating Unit (FORNECU)
Livestock: Federal Dept. forLivestock/National LivestockProject Dept. (NLPD)
Fisheries: Federal Department ofFisheries and Agric. Cooperatives
2. State
Bauchi Kano Sokoto
Policy and Finance MANR MANR MANRMLFR
Implementation RDA RDA RDA
3. Organizational (lImlementing Aaencv)
HQ
Chief Executive MD MD PMProJect PM PM PMExtension Head Heed Head
Agric.Dept. Agric.Dept. Ext.Dept.
Zone
Overall ZN ZM ZNExtension Head Head Head
Agric.Serv. Agric.Serv. Agric.Serv.
4. Others
Local Govt. Areas 20 64 30No. of Farm Families 521,614 805,000 670,000
-67-
Page Z of Z
B. Ozerationat
1. Staffinu of the Extension Services
Bauchi Kano Sokoto
Current Proposed Current Proposed Current Proposed
2. fortninhtlv trafifnINo. of Locations/Hats 8 14 14 14 16 16Skill Practice Plots 14 14Av. and Skill 14 14Dev. Equipment
3. MIRMLocation 1 1 1 1 1 1Coordinating IAR IAR IAR IAR IAR IARInstitutions
4. Media UnitsMobile Units Yes No Yes no yes noTV Programs Yes yes Yes Yes yes yesAV Photographic Slid.e No Yes No yes no yesRadio Programs Yes Yes Yes yes yes yesPublication Yes Yes Yes yes yes yes
5. Methodoloav-Days of visit to 8farmers in a fortnight 8 8 8 8 8 8-Sub-cireles/EAs 8 8 8 80 8 8-Contact Farmers/EA 80 80 80 16 80 80-Women CF/EA 16 16Farmer Group Meetings Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes-Small -Plot Adoption Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesTechnique
6. Extension Susoort Bauchi Kano Sokoto
SPATS (No.) 21,662 9,794 12,240Field Days (No.) 2,776 - 188
Technology Promoted - Line planting;* Increased plant population;
Timely weeding;- Fertilizer use, timing andmethod of applicaton;
- Improved seed; and- Crop protection techniques.
7. Technoloay Adoption - Increased planting and production ofmaize and rice;
- Increased fertilizer usage; and- Increased availability of seed andplanting of short duration varietiesand local selections of millet tex-Borno)and sorghum (Yarwasha) in response tochanging rainfall pattern, especiallyin northern halves of all three states.
-68-
Annex IPage 1 of 3
FEDERAL REPUMLIC -F NIGERIA
W&MIONAL GgRICULTURAL TECHNOLOGY SUPPO)T PROJECT
Eliaibilitv Criteria for Allocation of Funds Under theAericultural Technoalov Suooort Facility
Category Prooosed Criteria
A. Kanaaement and Finance
(i) Staffing Availability of qualified andexperienced 1/ staff in place inkey management positions toeffectively oversee the activitiesto be supported by the Fund.
(ii) Counterpart Funding Evidence of regular provision ofcounterpart funds and commitmentfrom the state government thatpriority would be given to ADPagricultural operations in futurebudgetary allocations.
(iii) Disbursement At least 75% drawdown from theexisting external loan fund.
(iv) Procurement A fully trained procurement officerin place; evidence of goodprocurement record and submission ofprocurement schedules along withsub-project proposal(s).
(v) Covenants Up-to-date on all legal covenants,especially financial audits andquarterly reports on existingexternal loan funds; or any otheroutstanding covenant on recentlycompleted project(s) financed usingexternal funds.
B. Adaptive Research
(i) Staffing Availability of qualified andtrained technical staff able to
1/ This especially applies to the: Project Manager; FinancialController; Chief Agriculturist and his two deputies responsiblefor Adaptive Research and Extension; Chief Planning, Monitoringand Evaluation Officer, and Chief Manpower Development andTraining Officer. The qualification, experience and terms ofreference of these key project staff would need to be satisfactoryto the Bank.
-69-
Amex IPage 2 of 3
implement adaptive research programswith farming system research focuscovering major disciplines.
(ii) Linkages with the Evidence of effective linkages withResearch System the research system
through (a) regular MTRM meetingswith full complement of resourcepersons; and (b) sponsored researchcontracts with relevant researchinstitute (and/or university).
C. Extension
(i) Unification Evidence of satisfactory progress inimplementing and operating unifiedextension service covering crops,livestock, forestry and whereverappropriate, fisheries activities.
(ii) VEA to Farm Family Assurances provided that theRatios participating agencies would
stabilize VEA to farm family ratiosaround 1:1,000 to enhance long-termsustainability.
(iii) WIA Program Evidence of progress in implementingan effective WIA program an integralpart of unified extension service.
D. Manpower Develooment and Traininc
Availability of a long-term humanresource development plan withclearly identified annual trainingschedules for all major activities.
E. Environmental Protection
Availability of qualified andtrained staff and an cost effectiveand comprehensive soil and watermanagement strategy to enhancesustainability of smallholderagriculture.
F. Inout Suoolv
(i) Seed Production and Phasing out of Government/ADP ownedMarketing farms for certified seed production
and evidence of full cost recoveryof seed procured and marketed byADP.
-70-
Ame9xIPago 3 of 3
(ii) Marketlng of Other Evidence of progress Ln the
Inputs privatizatLon of publicly ounedLnput dLtrLbutLonactivitLes.
md - mandays . **the fInanca pices of al Inputs, except ftNlzw. are deoatod by a laclor ol 0.85 to arrIvo at border prices. D * D
x
Note: Geeally, larmers do not grow millet In sole stands. Ua cThis budget has been tormulated lo lacilitate the economic analysis.0
doc.nams:tmlNe(5 Jun 91)
APPENDIX A
Poge 4 Of 4
SECTOR ISSUES RECOUGENDATIOSS ENTITY RESPONSIBLE
Health and Mn9agemnt i. Undertaking thorough reviow of objectives of MINSAPInforpition System a/ MINSAP's current mdcalt statisticol systm
with senior MINSAP staff. Ephasize on adequacyof present data collection system nd
qy ty *nW lfty of *existing data, anddwlopwntot the hotlth indicators.
2. Doeigning and adopting a eawprohens1w health U
and management information system (HISMIS)for entire health sector.
3. Doeeloping guidelines for medlcal data collection.
4. Developing a supervisory visit protocol andmnoua enabdlng each operating departmentto he" a systoemtic heock list that could becompleted for each site visit.
5. Requiring that each operating department draftdetailed one-year operational nd ction plnsto delineate all operating groups andresponsibilities, Implementation scheduleby month nd week of tasks and activities.
6. Using health data and information from regionaldirectors and adinistrators as a topic forfuture MINSAP in-service training.
7. Considering the use of a personal computer (PC)system for MINSAP data processing activities.
Gender Issues in the Health 1. Giving high priority to women as a central MINSAP, NGOs, DonorsSector focus in heatth projects and programs. Integrating
health program with other social nd economicprograso oriented to inproving the quality ofwomen's lives.
2. Developing o series of "coiimfication educationprograms" and incorporating heatth and nutritioneducation for mothers, with family planningoptions to impact on maternal mortality,morbidity and fertility.
Child Health 1. Recomendation regarding chfid health are part MINSAP, HGOs, Donorsof those listed under various issues relatedto social sectors.
2. Investigating possibility of prooting home daycare centers in urban are s.
3. training MC workers to regard chfildren asa priority population group, ensuringthat they receive attention of various programs
.................
s/ Detaited recowndestionr for Hospitals and Health nd Management Informtion System (HIS/MIS)are found in Voluse 11; Annexes of the report.
a:gub*.k1 (Ja28)
EDUCATION -- SULN RY OF RECOCWENDATIONS APPENDIX P
age I of 2
SECTOR ISSUES RECOSAENDATIONS ENTITY RESPONSIBLE
Primary Education 1. Uperading toaching quality. KOE, ASOIEducattion adTraining 2. Producing instructionat (ateriets for students
and teahers.
3. lprovine the quality of education by providingIn-service teacior traininr.
4. loproving efficiency In teahfng by upgreding ICALP and SIMAPSEthe teachersr conmnd of the Portugueselanguage and their skill in teaching It asa foreign language.
S. Producing and distributing on lorge scaleinstructional mnterials written In Portugueseand training toeahors in appopriate uaoof materitls.
6. Involving the Normul School staff in designing, Normal School staffproducing nd revising the instructionalmateriels.
7. Improving method for the dirtribution of Possibly using teachers totextbooks and other instructional materials, distribute
S. Continuing curriculum reform by faplementing MSE INDEthe school progr in three stages (adjustment,readjustment, and reformulation).
2. Improving distribution of textbooks and producingsupport mterils
3. Consolidating the Normal School's two campusesinto one to generate savings.
4. Rorienting teacher training progras towards Gulbenkian Fowidation andcurriculue subject matters. NE
5. Strengthening the Inspectorate Service. MOE
6. laporting textbooks related to basic scieneu d basic social science; ond domestic productionof instructional materials focusing onteachers guides, student manuals nd variedsets of exercises covering all attubcts of thecurricutul.
t. Using teachers' time more effectively by involvingthem in the production of instructionalmterials for secondary students and teachers.
FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIANATIONAL AGRICULTURAL TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT PROJECT
Farm Budget: SovghumIGroundnuts (1990 Nalra per hectare)
FINANCIAL PRICES BORDER PRICES'
TIadkl EinI Im raoed Tradillonal Improved
Quanty T. Costs Quanty T. Coass Quanilty T. Costs Quantity T.Costs
1.4 Completion Date 1 I3 9t 23191.5 CloBing Date 12/3 99
2. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION2.1 SIA Financial Review ---2.2 Update Human Res. Plan2.3 Establish ATS Committee .2.4 Sponsored Res. Agreements2.5 Signing of FGN/State Loan Agreements2 W 6 Work Program Submitted to Bank , .|2.7 Reports
It Based on profile of Bank-assisted Agriculture Projects Profile for Nigeria dated April 1990.
-98-Annex IXPage 1 of 3
rARDA -O- M l l
aI ILI NA MO Ms On Spot PrPRGUN
T { t1 ~~~~~~~~~~ui
. . T_~~~~~iYU
IjJJIN'L,
-99- ~~~~~Ann'ex I.XPage 2 of 3
. IS@FMAD O~IIZTIIXI
ft I
'LfL ?P RO
ION
cein
-100- Annex IXPage 3 of 3
No?
i IA
Elk DUUAruI
L~~~~~im
-101-
1 Annex XPage 1 of 1
FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA
NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT PROJECT
DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE IN PROJECT FILE
A. Backaround
1. Managing AgricuLtural Development in Africa (MADIA)
a join study by eight donors and six AfricanGoverrments (World Bank, USAID, UKODA, DANIDA,CIDA) the French and German Governments; Kenya,Malawi, Tanzania, Cameroon, Nigeria andSenegal Goverrvnents)
2. Agricultural Policy for Nigeria Ministry of Agricultureand Natural Resources(Formerly FederalMinistry of Agriculture,Water Resources and RuralDevelopment), January1987, Lagos
3. Sub-Saharan Africa: From Crisis to World Bank, Washington,Sustainable Growth - A Long-Term Perspective D.C., November 1989Study
4. Strategy for Agricultural Growth in Nigeria World Bank AgriculturalSector Report No. 7988-UNI, December 1989
B. Prolect Identification and Preoaratfon Report
1. National Agricultural Technology Support ProjectBrief - FAO/CP Report No. 70/90 CP-NIR 32PB,June 4, 1990
2. Project Preparation Report- Main Text and FiveWorking Papers. Federal Agricultural CoordinatingUnit, Federal Ministry of Agriculture and NaturalResource, 1989
C. Workina Papers
1. Memorandmn of Understanding for the conduct of Monthly Technology Review Meetings2. Adaptive Research:
Part I: On-Farm Adaptive ResearchPart II: Review of Adaptive Research in Kano, Bauchi and Sokoto, Messages
Future Strategy3. Suggested Protocol for Sponsored Research Contract4. Animal Traction and Farm Implements5. Agro-forestry and Soil and Water ianagement6. Agricultural Extension Services7. Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation8. Mediun to Long-Term Human Resource Development Plan for Kano, Bauchi, and
Sokoto9. Technology Sub-projects Facility10. The Nature, Rate and Effective Limits of Intensification in the
Smaltholder Farming System of Kano Closed-Settled Zone
4- IBr Y 0 N -I G E R 2 _ _4 IBRD 23561
4- s*2 i6- 1'2o AW.02VEGEI'- - Z 24- >
bS ~ ~ Bon Roac 'C. -
\ D20 4D 60A CDIDIo o
*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~FBUR I 9
'C2a
- DMAWAU UI CA
B E N I N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- RVEEAIN OE
00
Igo KAD~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4
