An investigation on the impact of FADAMA II project implementation in Imo State

Transcription

1 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH 2010, Science Huβ, ISSN: X doi: /ajsir An investigation on the impact of FADAMA II project implementation in Imo State 1 Echeme Ibeawuchi I. and 2 Dr. C.C Nwachukwu, 1 (Ph.D. Candidate) Project Management Technology, Federal University of Technology, Owerri. 2 ANIVS, FCRMI, Lecturer, Department of Project Management Technology, Federal University of Technology Owerri, Imo State, Nigeria, West Africa. GSM; , ; nedumchisma@yahoo.com ABSTRACT Project success (all things being equal) depends on the implementation strategy adopted during the process especially at the execution phase. The implementation process could make the project succeed, fail or even be abandoned midstream. In Nigeria, especially in the rural areas, there are a lot of factors associated with project implementation, ranging from poor project funding, low level of local government support, poor community support, low capacity building. One hundred and five respondents assessed the influence of these independent variables in the success level of project implementation in rural development projects. Regression Analysis of collected data revealed that FADAMA II projects and similar projects obtained a correlation coefficient (R) of 45.5% between successful implementation of development project and the 5 variables of project implementation. These variables explained a percentage of coefficients of determination (R 2 ) of 20.7% of the total variation in project implementation objectives among FADAMA II. The F-test of the hypotheses confirmed that the variables are significantly related to, and have significant effect on success level of project implementation. In view of these findings, the study recommends timely and adequate funding; consistent government and community support, improved economic environment and enhance the capacity of FADAMA User Groups (FUGs) and FADAMA officials needed to implement FADAMA III rural development projects. Keywords: Project Implementation, Rural Development, Community Support, FADAMA II, Project Management INTRODUCTION National development is predicated on the development of the rural areas. This development is achieved through the use of development projects. Fadama is a World Bank development agent that is collaborating with the Federal Government of Nigeria to achieve the needed national development in the country. The word Fadama is a Hausa name for irrigable land usually low-lying and flood plain areas underlined by shallow aquifers and found along Nigeria s river system (Fadama Publication, 2007). The Second National Fadama Development Project was initiated to address some of the factors that militate against the full realization of the potential benefits of agricultural production activities some of which are poor development of rural infrastructure, storage, processing and marketing facilities. Low investment in irrigation technology, poor organization of Fadama farmers as well as lack of adequate techniques for greater productivity in particular, the lessons learnt in implementation of the First National Fadama Development Project (NFDP) will be addressed. The NFDP II came with a lot of innovations and revelations that: ( i). The participation in the project should not be limited to Fadama crop farmers, but extend to all users of Fadama resources- pastoralist, fisher folks, hunters, service providers as well as vulnerable and marginalized groups. (ii). The NFDP II activities investment should not be limited to crop farming, but extended to other agricultural sub-sectors and even rural non-farm enterprises. (iii). The implementation approach in the project is Community Driven Approach (CDD), employing a bottom-up approach whereby communities and other lower government entities are empowered to develop participatory and social inclusive Local Development Plans (LDPs).

2 (iv). Multi- stakeholders institutions are established at various levels. These are the State Fadama Committee (SFDC) at state level, Local Fadama Development Committees (LDFC) at the Local Government level and Fadama Management Association at community level to evolve and enhance an efficient and effective implementation of the project. Twelve states benefited under the Fadama II projects,(adamawa, Bauchi Gombe, Imo, Kaduna, Kebbi, Lagos, Niger, Ogun, Oyo and Taraba Federal capital Territory). Fadama Project uses community driven development approach and because of that beneficiaries are given the chance to choose the kind of activities that they want to pursue. However, there are some activities that the project does not support, such as activities that could lead to degradation of natural resources or large-scale change of land use. Fadama project development objective (PDO): The NFDP II has three major PDOs, which according to Oredikpe (2007), are: i) 20 percent increase in the income of 50 percent of the Fadama Users that participated in the project. ii) Empowering communities to take charge of their development agenda so that 60 percent of the Local Development Plans prepared by Fadama Community Associations are implemented. iii) 50 percent reduction in conflicts by users of Fadama resources. Projects realization within time, cost and specification are the criteria for judging project success. However, a successful project implementation occurs if the project: * Come on-schedule, * Comes in on-budget, * Achieves all the goals originally set for it, *Is adopted and used by the clients, for whom the project is intended. The existence of poor implementation culture is a bane to proper development. For projects to be fully implemented, they must be adequately budgeted for and funded. Failed projects throw a nation backward through different ways and these include; the financial loss of the failed projects, the loss of the alternative projects, the mortgaging of future development of the nation through the servicing of the debts used in funding the failed project from sources other than internally generated revenue (Okorafor,1997). The panacea for the under-development of the social welfare of the populace is the institution of sound project planning and implementation culture and practices. National development depends on the level of development of the rural areas which reduces poverty. Unfortunately, the development level of rural areas through development projects in Imo State is relatively low. It was observed that out of 2,000 development projects embarked by FADAMA II, 427 have been completed representing 21.35% of the projects by registered Fadama User Groups (FUGs) while 1,573 (78.65) are stucked at various stages of completion (FADAMA Status Report, 2008). This is in spite the huge sums of money committed to them. It is believed that the internal and external constraints created by the depressed rural economy are responsible for the low success rate of FADAMA development projects. Experience and literature reveals that some Local Government who should provide a framework for the supervision and monitoring of FADAMA development projects, see it as an external aid and does not fully participate and/or assist in the funding and monitoring of FADAMA projects affected FADAMA II development projects. This pre-supposes the need for the existence of appropriate policy and legislative frameworks, which are also, key aspects of FADAMA programme. Conflicts among the leaders of the FADAMA communities project priorities, locations, etc. coupled with poverty in rural areas have in most cases delayed the prompt release of project funds. This also delays the project implementation because prompt release of project funds fosters project implementation. It is generally accepted that proper monitoring and documentation provide the basis for accountability, transparency and tracking of project planning and implementation. But the low level of monitoring of the FADAMA sub-projects has been a persisting problem to the successful delivery of FADAMA development projects in Nigeria (Oredikpe, 2007). He therefore calls for diligent monitoring of these sub-projects to successfully deliver their mandate. This creates the need for training and retraining of FADAMA User Groups (FUG S ) and the project staff on the need for proper monitoring of the projects to fruition. Staff and various FADAMA User Groups (FUGs) involved in planning and implementation of FADAMA II development projects does not have the required 533

3 technical and managerial skills and this forms a part of the problems faced by FADAMA during FADAMA II project implementation. The work is based on the World Bank-assisted FADAMA II projects in Nigeria with regard to their projects planning and implementation capabilities. In view of the apparent low level of success achieved in project planning and implementation, the key object is to identify the problems and determine ways to improve the quality of project implementation by FADAMA, given that projects require to meet cost, time and performance specifications. The relevance of FADAMA project implementation in rural development Nigeria and their real impacts on the lives and developmental needs of the rural communities constitute a major problem of this study. METHODOLOGY Data for the study were collected from primary and secondary sources. Questionnaire was designed based on Likert s five point scales, such that respondents could indicate how strongly they agree or disagree with each of the statements (Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neutral, Agree, Strongly Disagree), for example, strongly agree = 5, agree = 4, neutral = 3, disagree = 2, strongly disagree = 2, strongly disagree = 1. Research Hypothesis: The following hypotheses will be tested in the course of the study; H O1 : Project funding is not a limiting factor to successful implementation of FADAMA II projects. H O2 : Local government support does not contribute to the successful implementation of FADAMA II projects. H O3 : Community awareness and participation does not have any positive effect on the implementation of FADAMA II project. H O4 : The depressed economic environment does not have a significant impact on the successful implementation of micro projects H O5 : The level of capacity building does not have any positive impact on the success level of FADAMA II micro-project implementation. was employed in the investigation to determine the level of relationship between the dependent variable (PI) successful implementation of FADAMA II development project objectives and the five independent variables; project funding (PF), local government support(lgs), community sensitization/support (CS),depressed economic environment(dee), capacity building (CB). The ANOVA result will be used to obtain the F-ratio which will be used to test the significance of the five major lapses of project implementation processes of FADAMA II. Hence; b 1 = (PF)(PI) (CS) 2 - (CS) (PF)(CS) (PF) 2 (CS) 2 { (PF)(CS)} 2 b 2 = (CS)(PI) (PF) 2 - (PF) (PF)(CS) (PF) 2 (CS) 2 { (PF)(CS)} 2 b 0 = PI (b 1 PF + b 2 CS) So the complete model is expressed as; PI = a +b 1 PF + b 2 LGS + b 3 CS + b 4 DEE + b 5 CB + E Where b 1 and b 2 indicate the influence of project funding and community sensitization / support on project implementation. The F-statistic (F*) = Mean Square Regression = MSR Mean Square Error MSE With K and N-K-1 degrees of freedom and H O is accepted at the 5% level of significance if, F* F(1-α) k, n-k-1. Otherwise H O is rejected and H A accepted. Method of Data Analysis: The data collected will be analyzed using regression analysis and the ANOVA test at 5% level of significance. Regression Analysis 534

4 Nworuh (2001) then define the test statistic as: )( 1 - )( 2 tn 1 +n 2-2= SP 1/n 1 + 1/n 2 Where SP= (n 1-1)S (n 2-1)S 2 2 With n 1 + n 2-2 degrees of freedom and Sp is the pooled variance. X 1 and X 2 are sample means computed from samples of sizes n 1 and n 2 respectively, S 1 2 and S 2 2 are sample variances for the samples. Decision Rule: Reject H O, if the calculated t- value is greater than critical t- value, otherwise accept H O and reject H A. Theoretical Framework: An Overview of FADAMA II: Smallholder agriculture is the dominant occupation of rural Nigerians which is mainly rain-fed and characterized by low land and labour productivity. Yet, Nigeria has a potential comparative advantage in the production of a variety of fresh and processed high value crops, especially vegetables during the dry season and livestock product (meat and milk) and fisheries products throughout the year. This is n 1 + n 2-2 b) Deciding and preparing of micro- projects required to address the identified needs; c) Co- financing the micro- projects; d) Continue to operate and maintain the micro- projects thereby ensuring sustainability; because the country is endowed with underground e) Learn to do things for themselves and in so doing and surface water reserves, rich pastures and favourable agro ecological conditions in the country s low-lying plains with alluvial deposit called fadama. The desire to realize the full potential of Fadama resources in Nigeria led to the design of the National Fadama Devepment project, mainly funded by the World Bank, with counterpart funding by the federal and benefiting state government. Fadama II project is a follow-up to the implementation of Fadama I, and seeks to address the noted shortcomings in the design and implementation of the Fadama I. The second National Fadama development project (Fadama II project) is a comprehensive six (6) year action programme designed to sustainable increase the income of the beneficiaries. Fadama II strategy represents a shift from driven development approach. The project activities were, centered on Fadama user groups (FUG) having common interest termed economic interest groups (EIG). The major productive sectors that Fadama II supports include crops, livestock, agro forest fishing and fish farming (fisher folk). Fadama II also supports non-productive activities that are closely linked to the productive enterprises and rural marketing services providers. Fadama II also provides special preferences to groups of youth, women (especial widows), physically challenged, the elderly and people with HIV/AIDS. Implementation strategy of fadama II: The FADAMA II development projects adopted the Community Driven Development (CDD) approach. Ejiofor (2007) explained that the CDD strategy makes it possible for beneficiaries to play leading roles in:- a) Identification and prioritization of their needs; their capacities are built; f) Ownership of the micro- projects is guaranteed by active participation of beneficiaries in all the phases of the micro-projects cycle (identification, planning, prioritization, designing, implementing and maintenan ce of intervention measures). Fadama II implementation: an overview: Below is a review progress of the implementation of the project based mainly on the medium term review (MTR) report (Anon, 2007). Annual Mid Term Review was completed in May 2007 by the World Bank to assess the achievement of the implementation of Fadama II project. The review noted the following achievements of the project; Capacity building: In most of the states, the capacity of FCAs and their constituent FUG s was built in the area of record keeping, participatory rural appraisal, group dynamics, business management, organizational principles, agricultural insurance policy, participatory monitoring and evaluation, community based procurement, financial management, conflict management and 535

5 environmental management. All these trainings were supply-drive at the commencement of the project, but later became demand driven after the capacity to demand these advisory services was built. The Mid Term Review report describes very strong achievements of the capacity building component of the project for example, most of the LDPs in the 12 participating states were approved and all approved LDPs were implemented in7 out 12 states. This indicates the significant achievement of the capacity building component. However, the interesting question is whether this capacity will be sustainable and welfare of the participating communities, especially after the end of the project. Results of post-training evaluation carried out by FCT, Gombe, Kaduna, Kebbi, Lagos, Niger and Imo showed positive impacts on beneficiaries knowledge on, (i) Procurement processes; (ii) Ability to list financial disbursement requirements; (iii) Organization and management of groups and subprojects; (iv) Management and resolution of conflicts (v) Keeping of records and minutes of meetings; (vi) Ability to make savings (vii) Conflict resolution among Fadama resource user; (viii) Linkage with NGOs for sustainability, (ix) Identification of market outlets for products of beneficiaries activities. (x) Women involvement in group activities and (xi) Participatory monitoring and evaluation. Advisory services : The Fadama II project has implemented a pluralistic advisory service, under which both public service providers and sources of funds were addressed. The providers of the advisory services are largely private, as only 5% of the services are provided by public advisory service providers. However, funding of the advisory services is mainly public, as the beneficiaries of the advisory services paid only 10% of the cost as counterpart contribution while 90% was paid by the Fadama group. Hence the Fadama II project has formed a foundation for developing demand-driven advisory services using a pluralistic approach, which is an important step in establishing sustainable demand driven advisory services. The MTR report states that the advisory service component achieved most of its objectives, though it is not clear how the achievements were measured. For example, the report states that 1,700 advisory services were provided to 1,026 FUG s. However, this achievement affected only 12% of the 8577 FUGs. It is clear why about 88% of the FUG s did not receive advisory services. The MTR also observed collusion between advisory service providers and the FCA/FUG officials. This has compromised the independent recruitment of providers and serves as one of the examples of elite capture in Community Driven Projects in developing countries (Mansuri and Rao, 2004). Pilot productive asset acquisition support: According to the MTR, the Pilot Asset Acquisition (PAA) component was readily accepted by beneficiaries in comparison with other components like infrastructure development, capacity building or advisory services, the impacts of which are not as quickly or readily felt or seen. A total of 7,511 subprojects were undertaken, representing 67% of the total number of subprojects undertaken under all the components of Fadama II. At the time of the MTR, at least 67% of all PAA subprojects under the LDPs have been completed while 27% are ongoing. This, indicates a high demand for this component by Fadama users and rapid achievement of the outputs of this component. Rural infrastructure: By the time of the MTR, a total of 2,817 rural infrastructure projects had been initiated and 63% of these were completed. This significant achievement is likely due to the large maturing funds paid by the Fadama group (90%), a level that certainly contributed to the fast acceptance and implementation of this component. An important issue is the sustainability of the rural infrastructure program after the end of the project. The commitment of beneficiary communities to adequately maintain the infrastructure using their own resources is not yet clear, but might have undermined by such a large matching contribution provided by the project will be costly to replicate in other areas. Contribution of this study: In general, the MTR report indicates quite positive accomplishments of the Fadama II projects in all the components of the project (except monitoring and evaluation, which was rated as marginally satisfactory). However, the MTR did not quantify the impacts of the project on community or household wealth and income, or other expected outcome of the project. Hence the major contribution of the study is its approach of investigating the actual problems that faced Fadama II project implementation in the benefiting communities and households and the use of a 536

6 sophisticated statistical software to analyse the impact of the identified factors. Suggestions were made to improve the level of fadama III project success and its impact on the beneficiaries. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS The drafted questionnaires were distributed to one hundred and twenty respondents out of which one hundred and five were returned representing 87.5%. Table 1.1: Allocation of Questionnaire to Respondent Groups. Category of Respondent Allocation FADAMA II Facilitators Project Management Officers / Contractors Community leaders Number Returned Rural Dwellers / Beneficiaries Total The regression result revealed that an average of is the level of success achieved in project implementation as a result of the five factors identified. This implies that, if these factors are well taken care of, the level of performance of Fadama will greatly improve in Fadama III that just kicked off. Thus, the derived Model: SPI = PF LGS CS DEE CB To illustrate the model above, PF = indicate that the level of project implementation increases by for every one unit increase in project funding, when all the other factors are held constant. Similar argument can be made for all the other factors. Hypothesis I (Ho1): Project funding is not a limiting factor to successful implementation of Fadama II projects. at 00 = 0.05 level of significance t c = while t 0.05 (104) = Since t c = > t (104) = 1.654, we reject H O1 and conclude that project funding is a limiting factor to successful delivery of Fadama II projects. Hypothesis II (Ho2): Local Government Support does not contribute to the successful implementation of Fadama II projects. t c = while t 0.05 (104) = The result shows that at 5% level of significance, local government support is not significant to the successful implementation of Fadama II projects. Hypothesis III (Ho3): Community Sensitization and Participation do not have any positive effect on the implementation of LEEMP development projects tc = while t (101) 1.654, tc > t 0. 05(101), so we reject H O3 and conclude that community sensitization and participation have a positive effect on the implementation of Fadama II development projects. Hypothesis IV (Ho4): The depressed economic environment does not have a significant impact on the successful implementation of micro- projects. tc = while t (101) 1.654, tc > t 0. 05(101), so we reject H O4 and conclude that depressed economic environment is significant to the implementation of Fadama II micro-projects. Hypothesis V (Ho5): The level of capacity building does not have any positive impact on the level of Fadama II microprojects. tc = while t (101) 1.654, tc > t 0. 05(101), so we reject H O5 and conclude that the level of capacity building have positive impact on the implementation of Fadama II projects implementation. Testing for the inclusion of the five critical factors affecting FADAMA II performance in the model; H O : PF = LGS = CS = DEE = CB..b K = 0 H A : not all b K = 0; k = 1, 2 The regression analysis (ANOVA) shows calculated F-test value of At 5% level of significance, F(5,104)=2.21 implying that H O is rejected and we confirm the significance of the inclusion of the five variables in the model: From the analysis above, it means that, these five critical factors contributed to the high level of project abandonment witnessed in FADAMA II projects all over Nigeria. CONCLUSION The study reveals that the success level of Fadama II project delivery is 38.4%. The five factors identified mostly interacted to achieve the low level. From the 537

7 findings of the analyzed data, the following conclusions can reasonably be drawn. (i) Timely and sufficient injection of funds is critical for proper project implementation. But most times Fadama experience late and insufficient supply of fund from the recipient communities. (ii) Local Government Councils should be admonished to assist the poor communities in their localities in paying their counterpart funds. (iii) Adequate orientation and participation of the benefiting communities are needed for successful implementation of rural projects. Unfortunately, this is not sufficient in some Fadama intervention communities, hence resulting to misunderstanding between Fadama officials, FCAs/FUGs and Town Union members. (iv) The level of personnel with requisite accounting, skills available is too low to promote efficient project planning and implementation. RECOMMENDATIONS The study therefore recommends as follows: That sufficient sensitization of the communities to make the community counterpart funding a priority and pay on time. This will help to ensure prompt disbursement of project funds. Again, the Local Government Councils should be admonished to assist the poor communities in their localities in paying their counterpart funds. That Fadama and other rural development promoters should enhance their orientation programmes to properly create awareness among the selected communities. This will create a sense of understanding among the rural dwellers. They will see the project as their own, and hence contribute to its successful implementation. That the use of non-professionals in the management of rural development projects should be re-evaluated by Fadama. Project management is best where it is really employed, will result in outstanding performance. Fadama should build up the capacity of their project support teams/ officials, FCAs and FUGs by training and re-training them in relevant areas such as procurement and project management. REFERENCES Agu, V. C. (2007): Accessing Project Resource, A Paper presented at Facilitators Seminar, NUT House, Owerri, May 15. Ephraim M. et al (2008): An Assessment of Fadama II Project; PCU NFDO, Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Abuja Facilitation Guide (2008): Guidelines for subproject; project implementation manual facility, vol. 2 annex. Fadama Handbook (2009): The Paradigm shift under Fadama Developemnt Project; Internet search: extracted on 15 th May. Fadama Project Coordinating Unit (2003): Terms of Reference for Judiciary staff mgt; Fadama Publication Gwagwalada, Abuja, FCT, November. Imo state Fadama II Status Report (2008), A report presented to Fadama Stakeholders, 16 th 18 th April. Oredipe, A. A. (2005); Poverty Reduction and Increased Producivity Through Empowerment PCU NFDO, Fadama Development Projects, October, pp.4 Oredipe, A. A. (2007): Second National Fadama Development Project:The Journey so far, pp.1 Nworuh, G.E. (2001): Fundamentals of Applied Quantitative Techniques for Management Decision, Nigeria Bon Associates HRDC, pp