SSL-CCT: Country Presentation_Cambodia Experience

7/30/2019 SSL-CCT: Country Presentation_Cambodia Experience

1/28

WELCOME TO CAMBODIA


2/28

EFAP

Dr VONG SANDAP

Deputy Secretary General,

Ministry of Economy and Finance &

Project Director, EFAP


3/28

CAMBODIA IN BRIEF

Location: South East Asia

Geographic Area: 181,035 km2

Population: 14.1million (2008 Census)


4/28

GOVERNMENT APPROACH IN SOCIAL TRANSFER

Budget support: free education, free medical treatment for thepoor people, free short vocational training for workers who lost

job temporarily during economic crisis, and other activities.

Policy Support: (i) Provide social concessional land to poor people (ii) Cancel commercial fishing lots to give access to small

fishing families for family scale fishing

(iii) Develop infrastructure (roads, irrigation and

telecommunication networks) and others. Project Support: by using financial and technical supports from

IFI and Donor Countries, many activities have been done to

provide social assistance to vulnerable people of the society.

Some of these activities are done through Emergency FoodAssistance Project (EFAP).


5/28

EMERGENCY FOOD ASSISTANCE PROJECT (EFAP)I- EFAP first phase:- from October 2008 to September 2012;- Direct Beneficiary- 298,435 HHs; and Additional Beneficiary Through Disaster Response:

130,679 HHs;

- Short, medium and long term interventions are designed to help the vulnerable and poorpeople affected by high price of food, fuels and agricultural inputs in 2008.

II- EFAP-Additional Financing- From October 2012 to June 2015;

- Estimated Direct Beneficiary- 55,491 HHs

- To help poor families with increased availability and improved access to food and nutrition(as focus is to continue the medium and long term initiatives aimed at Food security)

III- Total Budget including Additional Financing: US$ 61.29 millions (Loan- $11.67millions; Grant- $42 millions; and Government-$7.62 millions)

IV- Responsible Institutions (overall EFAP): EA :Ministry of Economy and FinanceIAs: MRD; MOWRAM; MAFF; MOEYS;MOWA; MOC; CARD; NCDM; 13 Provincial

Administrations; Commune Councils; UN WFP, Civil Societies.


6/28

ACHIEVEMENTS OF EFAP IN FIRST PHASE

I- First component:-Free Rice Distribution: 342, 853 persons

- School Scholarship: 10,443 Students from grade 5,6,8 and 9.

(Girl students: 5,510).

- School Feeding : 65,387 Students (Girl students: 31,555).- Early Childhood Learning Center : 127 Volunteer teachers

(100% women).

- FFW, CFW and CW: Created 2 million labour days;

Improved around 800 km of rural roads; andrehabilitated small canals that have

potential to irrigate more than 20,000

hectares of rice fields.


7/28

ACHIEVEMENTS OF EFAP.

II- Second component:1- Seed and Fertilizer Distribution: 73,625 marginal farmershouseholds (13,841 woman farmers) got the benefits;

- Distribution: carried out in 2009 wet and dry seasons and

2010 wet season;- TOT training: received by 13,672 farmers

- Rice Seed: provided for free (only 50% of requirement);

- Fertilizer: 50% of cost payable and on credit without

interest, to be refunded after the harvest;- Debt Collection: arranged in cooperation with Microfinance

Institution (till date 85% of total debt is collected)


8/28

ACHIEVEMENTS OF EFAP.

2- Disaster response (Additional activities) provided rice seeds to 54,965 families (farmers) from 62

communes affected by Ketsana Typhoon in 2009.

provided rice seed to 622 families (farmers) affected by

flood in 2010.

provided rice and vegetable seeds to 12,065 families

(farmers) from 92 communes in 2011.

provided rice seeds to 9,142 families (farmers) from 38

communes affected by flood 2011.

provided vegetable seeds to 2,349 families (farmers) from

49 communes affected by flood 2011 in May 2012.

provided vegetable seeds to 51,536 families (farmers) from

108 communes affected by drought in 2012.


9/28

ACHIEVEMENTS OF EFAP.III- Third component:- Sub-Decree to establish Cambodia Food Reserve System

(CFRS) was approved by Prime Minister on September 2012.

- The CFRS includes both Food (in terms of rice) and SeedReserves (Rice and Vegetable seeds).

- The debt collected from EFAP fertilizers sale and seed sale, and

existing food reserves under the Green Trade Company are themain initial sources for the CFRS.

- SOP for the CFRS was prepared.


10/28

EFAP-ADDITIONAL FINANCING

The focus is on

Increased availability to and awareness of nutritious food and hygiene:

- Cash for Work (including civil works contract)

- Health, Nutrition & Sanitation

Increased access to improved agricultural inputs and technologies among food-insecurefarmers and women:

- Quality Seed and Fertilizer Distribution

- Quality Seed production

- Diversified Livelihoods- Emergency preparedness and response in agriculture (Formation of SHG & FOs,implementation of Community Projects, etc.)

Improved capacity to mainstream food security:

- Coordination structure for emergency response and FSN

- Information and data management for emergency response and FSN


11/28

CASH FOR WORK(CFW) AND SCHOLARSHIP

EFAP has implemented CFW and Scholarship activities with the

following objectives:

I- CFW: to provide gainful short term employment opportunity to vulnerable households through

rehabilitation/ improvement of rural infrastructures;

to meet the immediate requirements of vulnerable families and promote savings; to demonstrate effective grass root level programs involving all the concerned stakeholders

to increase capacity of the competent Ministries and Institutions involved in the sector;

to fulfill the gaps of the RGC budget for social protection activities temporarily;

to improve access of the poor people in obtaining food, medicine, education, agricultureinputs, etc.

II- Scholarship: to improve regular attendance in school, increase retention of poor students, and act as a

relief through the provision of temporary financial support to the poor people whose children

study in grade 5, 6, 8 and 9 as the drop out rates were higher in these grades. to encourage the students go to schools and focus on study.


12/28


I- CFW: (Cost effectiveness, Risks and Benefits) Total No. of HHs engaged= 38,931 (13% of total poor HHs of the seven target provinces)

Average payment per family ($)= 110.20

Average income = 15.24% of annual HH income

Employment created per HH=30.42 days

Grand total cost of the program ($)= 4,705,763.09a. Wages and structures ($)= 4,335,763.09 (92%);

b. Salary- Officials and consultants ($)= 180,000.00;

c. Operational cost ($)= 190,000.00

Benefits:a. 92.7% HH able to reduce food gap in between 1 to 3 months and 6.3% HH able toreduce food gap in between 4 to 6 months

b. 56.3% HH stopped borrowing food or money

c. 275 HH benefitted per irrigation project and 294 hectares of irrigation potential created


13/28


I- CFW: (Cost effectiveness, Risks and Benefits). Benefits

d. 79.2 % road projects connected to 3 villages with an average HH beneficiaries of 466 perproject;

e. 74% of road projects connected to schools with an average students beneficiaries of 193per project;

f. 65.6% of road projects connected to health center with an average HH beneficiaries of220 per project;

II- Scholarship: (Cost effectiveness, Risks and Benefits) In the school year 2009-2010, over 99% of the grade 5 and 8 students in the primary and

secondary schools of EFAP target communes went onto the grade 6 and 9, and over 97%of the grade 6 and 9 students passed onto the grade 7 and 10.


14/28

CASH FOR WORK(CFW) AND SCHOLARSHIP..

II- Scholarship: (Cost effectiveness, Risks and Benefits). In the school year 2010-2011, over 98% of the grade 6 and 9 students passed onto the

grade 7 and 10. These rates are considered as higher than the provincial average rates;

In the school year 2009-2010, the average drop-out rate of students was only 0.38% andthat in the school year 2010-2011 was only 1.84%. These rates are considered as muchlower than the provincial average rates;

The program helped reduce the financial burden on the parents as they spent less on the

children for schooling purposes. This has directly contributed to their increased ability tospend money on other necessary goods/items.


15/28

TARGETING MECHANISM

The project targeting mechanisms are as follows:i) Based on baseline survey;

ii) Based on consultation with relevant stakeholders;

iii) Based on ID poor, a national targeting mechanism

developed by MOP;

iv) Based on Consultation with relevant local authorities

including village leader;

v) Based on open village meeting;

vi) Based on alternative criteria developed for targeting

eligible beneficiaries for suitable activities.

Independent Monitoring System to maintain transparency

(reporting to both senior Government and ADB

representatives);


16/28

DELIVERY MECHANISMS

As the project has many activities, the flow of funds anddelivery mechanisms are different.

Fund Flow1. From ADB:

- Loan and grant funds go to EA Account;

- TA funds go directly to TA inputs.

2. From EA:

- Account for daily payments;

- Second generation accounts for Provincial Units/TSUs for

administrative expenditure;


17/28

DELIVERY MECHANISMS3. Delivery of benefits:

- Goods procurements and delivery by the successful bidders to

commune councils. Delivery of goods and distribution to

beneficiaries monitored by independent observers (e.g. rice,

seeds and fertilizers distribution)

- Works done by beneficiaries measured by the village/project

committee and cash/rice distribution carried out in presence of

committee, commune councils, provincial departments,

provincial authority and sometimes central authority (e.g.

CFW,FFW)- Works procurements and delivery by the successful bidders.

Evaluation carried out in presence of commune councils,

provincial departments, provincial authority and central

authority (e.g. CW)


18/28

FINANCIAL AND FISCAL SUSTAINABILITYElements that determine the size of assistance Needs- Poverty rate: 2004 53.2%

2011 - 20.5% and we expect

2013 - less than 19% Resources- GDP per Capita: around USD 1,000.00 (2012);

- GDP Growth for last 5 years: 6.7% in 2008; 0.1% in 2009;

6.0%in 2010; 6.4% in 2011; and 7.3% in 2012.- Agriculture share is around 30% of GDP.

- Revenue as % of GDP in 2012: around 14%

- - Tax Revenue: around 12%

- - Non-Tax Revenue: around 2%.


19/28

ELEMENTS THAT DETERMINE.

Current Spending in 2012- Education:around 14%- Health: around 13%- Social Protection: RGC utilizes government budget and

especially more external financial resources in terms of grant,

loan and TA.

- Only for Emergency Food Assistance Project (EFAP) from 2008 to 2015,a total budget of around US$ 61.29 millions is to be spent.


20/28

CRITICAL DECISIONS

- Activities through budgetary support like free education till 12

grade and free medical treatment for the poor people are

extended step by step.

- Policy support like providing social concessional land to the

poor people; developing infrastructure (road, irrigation and

telecommunication networks); access to small fishing families

for family scale fishing; and others will continue.

- Project based supports like EFAP will continue up to project

life/period. In case of EFAP, may be up to 2015


21/28

KEY ISSUES

Need of a program based approach for providingassistance/CCT??

- Increase in dependency;

- Burden on exchequer;

- No guaranteed improvement in living standard;

- Hand holding is necessary during the crisis but not always;

- Poverty reduction and improvement of living standards might be

achieved through:

- adoption of key policy measures;

- improvement of under utilized sectors like agriculture, agro-

industry, tourism, handicraft, etc.,

- Sustainability is not guaranteed;

- Need innovations and not to think within the box;

- Need to link with domestic economic growth and local conditions.


22/28

NOTABLE INNOVATION UNDER EFAP

Successfully conceived and implemented a CFW program by engaging

government institutions that too in a large scale is a new initiative and an

innovation in Cambodia;

Successfully sold fertilizer on credit and collected the debt after harvest of

the crop which was originally not planned is an innovation;

Successfully producing the rice and vegetable seeds originally not planned

and by using a grant savings and then selling them at affordable prices to

the beneficiaries is a new innovation. The produced seeds become the main

sources of seed supply during the flood 2011 and drought 2012;

The establishment of Cambodian Food Reserve System (CFRS) is a new

initiative, and the debt collection (around 2 million USD) contributing to food

reserves and rice seeds (around 2,000 tons) contributing to seed reserves

is a new innovation;

The debt collection by engaging MFI and the exposure of villagers to the MFI

and the MFI to potential clients is a new innovation.


23/28

LESSONS LEARNED DURING IMPLEMENTATION OF CFW AND

SCHOLARSHIP ACTIVITIES

1. CFW and scholarship programs are timely and effective government measures

during the difficult periods with quick outputs and outcomes ( for just 4 years,EFAP could (1) improve rural roads of around 800 km, (2) improve small irrigationcanals having potential to irrigate around 20,000 ha of rice fields; (3) createtemporary jobs of around 2,000,000 labor days.)

2. These programs are workable based on (1) the project budget ; (2) local needs;

(3) availability of labor; and (4) additional income needs.

3. These programs could be implemented well with the existing governmentinstitutions.

However, CFW and Scholarship programs could not be guaranteed

based on the budget and sustainability issues. Why?

1. During implementation, some places have difficulties in finding labor eitherbecause of a universal unit rate OR past history OR alternative employment with a

higher wage at a little bit far away place;


24/28

LESSONS LEARNED DURING IMPLEMENTATION OF CFW AND

SCHOLARSHIP ACTIVITIES

2. For a long life and better quality purposes, rural infrastructures should be

improved by the skilled personnel and with the use of the appropriateequipments and machines.

3. As the allocation to commune development fund increases and improvesstep by step, any small rehabilitation/improvement activity could be done byrespective commune authority using local contractors.

4. As the country moves toward creating a better service sector, finding peopleto do this kind of temporary job would be difficult.

So from my point of view, these activities could not be efficient andsustained by using Government budget .


25/28

OVERALL LESSONS LEARNED UNDER EFAP

- Social protection activities should be linked with domestic

economic growth and prosperity and also with specific local

conditions.

- Productivity enhancement support to smallholders, especially

to help them in building capacity to increase productivity and

diversify their jobs and income generation activities are very

important.

- Effective Public -Private partnership could bring positive

economic growth, create job and generate income insustainable ways.

- Effective Government-DP partnership is crucially important for

rehabilitation and development of Cambodia as of now,

especially for poverty reduction .


26/28

OVERALL LESSONS LEARNED..

- Risks can be managed successfully by

(a) partnering with the private sector to use the established

storage and distribution system,

(b) distributing agricultural inputs in a transparent and

participatory manner, and

(c) empowering the community to carry out supervision,

monitoring, and implementation of food-for-work and cash-for-

work (CFW) schemes.

- Coordination, collaboration and mutual respect for each other

are key to implement a multi-sector interventions and achieve

the intended outputs and outcome without any major delay.


27/28

CONCLUSION

The strong policies and commitments of the RGC and

the cooperation and collaboration of the Development

Partners and other stakeholders in macro-economic

stability, GDP growth, job creation and poverty

reduction are bringing the desired results.

dkc

nig


28/28

sYge

sdkc nig h

irBav

* *

Documents

SSL-CCT: Country Presentation_Cambodia Experience