“RURAL-URBAN DICHOTOMY: CONSIDERATIONS FOR PROJECT TYPOLOGIES IN CONSIDERATIONS FOR PROJECT TYPOLOGIES IN

PUBLIC-WORKS”

A case-study of the ‘Cash-for-Works Project implemented by NaCSA Sierra LeoneNaCSA, Sierra Leone

(15th June, 2010)

J P l N b hJ. Paul NgebehDirector – Soc. & Econ. Opps.

1

Context Context

Work Selection Mechanism

Current Project Typologies Across Sectors and Geographical SettingsAcross Sectors and Geographical Settings Design Differentials in project types Implementation Problems

Expanding the Works Menu New Initiatives

Challenges

Making the Shift Work Making the Shift Work

2

The Three F-Crisis:Increases in Food Prices

Significant proportionof the population affected

GoSL & Partner ConsultationA package of

Interventions -CfW

3

Obj.: To assist vulnerable Individuals and Households in the mostfood insecure areas access temporary employment

Geographic targeting National Level: Food Insecurity Index; and Relative Population Intra-District Level: Rel. Pop; Poverty Rating; level of Food Production;

Accessibility to Food; affordability of Food; Potential fory ; y ;Innovative Activity

• Implementation Plan – Quarterly targets across districts (including setting wage rates)

Work Typologies Work Typologies LOIs from Community Representatives & Local Councils SP Selection – conformity with Local Council Plans Field Appraisal is done, scope established and budget developed

Sub projects are then approved Sub-projects are then approved

Beneficiary Selection (Self Selection) Sensitization Lower Labour SS - ‘First – Come‘ ‘First-Serve‘ Basis Lower Labour SS - First – Come First-Serve Basis Xss DD over SS of Labour – Rotation; Lottery

Monitoring Weekly Payments based on Wage Sheetsy y g Measured Works for replenishment of funds on a monthly basis

4

A Geo Setting

Rural AreasRural AreasA. Geo-Setting

Feeder Roads RehabilitationFeeder Roads Rehabilitation

SwampSwamp DevelopmentDevelopment Swamp Swamp DevelopmentDevelopment

ShortShort--duration cropsduration crops

Environmental Protection Environmental Protection -- Tree Tree PlantingPlanting

Feeder Roads Community Roads

Agriculture Urban Renewal5

B Target GroupProject Type Type of Activity Target Group

Male Female

B. Target Group

Roads Drainages Civil-Works – culverts Clearing, grubbing & camber

formation

√√√ √

formation Agriculture Swamp Development

Irrigation Land Reclamation

√√√ √

√ Food Crops Vegetables

√√

Environmental Tree Nursery & Planting Garbage Collection Drains √

√

Protection/Urban Renewal

Garbage Collection, Drains & Sewage clearing

√

6

C. Current Works MenuTwo Phases of US$ 4m each

• Roads: 82.04% (-7.96%);

C. Current Works Menu

585

700

• Agriculture: 15.57% (7.67%);

585

500

600

( );

• Env. P/Re-En:330

300

400

2.38% (0.21%);255

111

200

300

Rural – Urban Divide:35%:65%29

82111

8 9 17

0

100

Phase I Phase II Totals

Roads Agric. Env. P/Re-En

7

O t t PhOutput PhasesP1 P2 Totals

# of Workers engaged 16,515 15,570 32,085

(3,468) (3,270) (6,738)

Physical Assets Produced

- Km of road rehabilitated492.3 380.41 872.71

- Ac. of crop developed679.9 1,392 2,071.9

- Trees planted 20,000 22,500 42,5008

ROADS REHABILITATION URBAN BEAUTIFICATION

9

FOOD CROPS LAND RECLAMATION

TREE CROP NURSERY 10

Project Type Geo SettingProject Type Geo-SettingRural Urban

Roads Focus on feeder roads connecting production areas

Town roads connecting sections within township: connecting production areas

to market centers Longer segments; fewer

structures; spot

sections within township: Shorter segments; more structures (higher material cost)p

improvement)

Agriculture Wider in scope (more labourintensive)Focus on swamp

More restrictive

Focus on vegetablesFocus on swamp development & traditional crops

Focus on vegetables

Environmental Tree Nursery & Planting Garbage Collection & Clearing Environmental Protection/Urban Renewal

gLow logistics

g gof DrainagesBeautification & Land

ReclamationHigher logistics requirementHigher logistics requirement

Generally, Urban projects are more expensive than rural ones 11

General

Managing G hi C

General

Managing Expectations

Geographic CoverageQuality vs Cost

Intra-district targeting

60:40 divide – Project CostTargeting/Exclusions

60:40 divide Project Cost

Level of Sensitization

Female Participation

Political Pay-back to supportersInfluence

y pp

Tussle between Parliamentarians & Councilors12

Setting Specific

Setting

Setting Specific

SettingRural Urban

Lower Labour Cost Labour supply in peak Higher labour Cost and agitation for payments Lower Labour Cost - Labour supply in peak farming season

Higher labour Cost and agitation for payments of wages

Ownership of agriculture projects/proportion of produce or income from produce to the community

Increasing demand for high quality work with more material input beyond budgets

Selection of participants amongst largely poor communities

Utilization of incomes earned and sustainability of impact

13

Paradigm Shift

AgricultureRenewable Energy/Env. MitigationMitigation

Land Improvement: Terracing & Irrigation

Environmental Protection – Land Reclamation

Biomass/Compost Production

Waste Management

Irrigation.

14

Project Type ProjectionsProject Type Projections

No. of sub-projects No. of Workers

Roads 282 14 100 Roads 282 (60.0%)

14,100

Agriculture 141(30 0%)

7,050(30.0%)

Environmental Protection/Re-energy

47(10.0%)

2,350

TOTALS 470(100 0%)

23,500(100.0%)

Rural – Urban Divide 55%:45%15

MaintainCurrent

Be Flexible /Reduce

Impact on Beneficiary

Duration

Wages

Slight increase in duration from 45 days to 50 – 75 days Slight increase in duration from 45 days to 50 – 75 days Maintain Wage Rate

16

New Thinking!

TrainingSensitization

Dynamism &Dynamism & Commitment

Improving Intra-District Targeting Increasing Community Involvement: Beneficiary Selection & Oversight 17

Where we are coming from C t t Where we are coming from - Context

Where we are now- Work Selection Mechanism; Current Project Typologies Where we are now Work Selection Mechanism; Current Project Typologies (Design Differentials & Implementation Issues

Where we Intend to go Improved Targeting – intra-district; community profiling; community

oversightoversight Expanded works menu Increased scope of works and average cost of sub-projects

I d d ti d # f b fi i i b j t Increased duration and # of beneficiaries per sub-project Added training for implementing partners and beneficiaries Built-in strong monitoring and impact evaluation

Bring PW to the fore of the SP Agenda – SA & PR18

19