SPISP OBJECTIVES

1
Partnerships for Irrigation Sustainability The
Case of Southern Philippines Irrigation Sector
Project
Presentation by E. B. Domingo, E. B. Biasbas,
R. A. Mohammed, A. S. Waldstein, R. C. Lazaro, L.
P. Eleazar and T. Miyazato
2
Presentation Outline

• General Context
• Distinct Features of the SPISP
• Background on the SPISP
• Overview on the Partnerships
• Objectives and Principles of the Partnerships
• Profiles of the Two Case Study Areas
• Case Study 1 Partnership for Communal Irrigation
  Development
• Case Study 2 Partnerships for Technology
  Demonstration on High Value Crop Production
• Lessons Learned / Conclusions and Recommendations

3
General Context
4
General Context
Focus of Recent Irrigation Development Projects
Physical infrastructure rehabilitation with
capacity building
Transfer of irrigation assets and/or management
Equity contributions (cost sharing)
Linkages and partnerships for project
sustainability
5
Distinct Features of the SPISP
1. INTEGRATION of CIS and NIS participatory
processes
Project Development
System Management
Farmers Participation
?
?
CIS
NIAs current practices
?
?
NIS
??
??
SPISP Process
6
Distinct Features of the SPISP (contd)
2. EXPANSION of CIS and NIS participatory
processes to cover all phases of development
About 6 years for IA Capacity Building
½
½
About 2 years
3 years after completion
FS
DD
Construction
System Management Agricultural Development
FS Feasibility Study
DD Detailed Design
7
Distinct Features of the SPISP (contd)
3. CASCADING SYSTEM of on-the-job training and
small group action


Consultants and NIA

Federation of IAs

Irrigators Associations

TSA Groups
Legend
On-the-job Training Supervision and
Support Decision Making


8
Distinct Features of the SPISP (contd)

• COST CONTRIBUTION by farmers to emphasize their
  ownership of
• the project 25 of the cost of construction
  sourced from labor,
• material and land (right-of-way)
  contributions
• 5. Promotion of PROPORTIONAL WATER DISTRIBUTION
  
• STRUCTURES
• 6. LEAD ROLE OF LGUs through Local Government
  Code
• 7. WOMEN PARTICIPATION at least 25 of IA
  officers
• 8. HOUSEHOLD MEMBERSHIP in the IA

9
Background on the SPISP
Total Project Cost Pesos 4,168.36
Million (US 103.0 Million) Executing
Agencies National Irrigation

Administration (NIA) NIS SRIS Provincial
Government of Agusan
del Norte (PGAN) CIS
Financial
Institution Asian Development Bank
Implementation Period 2000-2005 (6
years) ADB Board Approval 18 December
1998 Loan Agreement Signing 01 March
1999 Loan Effectivity 29 October 1999
10
Location Map of SPISP Subprojects
Region VI
Region VII
Region XIII
ARMM
11
Overview on the Partnerships

• Funding for agricultural extension had not been
  included in the SPISP
• High value crops had never been widely grown
  before in irrigated areas
• Very few farmers had experience in producing high
  value crops and
• Markets for locally grown high value crops had
  not been developed.

Linkage building / partnerships, have been
adopted as strategy for development of the
technology demonstration trials on rice and
vegetable production
12
Objectives of the Partnerships
Produce outcomes of mutual benefits to all
partners

• Results
• Sufficient supply and equitable distribution of
  irrigation water
• Routine maintenance of dams and service area
  facilities
• Greater utilization of transferred skills and
  technologies
• Increased irrigation efficiency, cropping
  intensity, and crop yields as projected
• Higher incomes of farm households
• Better financial status of the IAs
• Reduced incidence of poverty

13
Principles of the Partnerships
Five key principles guiding the partnerships
established by the SPISP subprojects

• Decide on the purpose and scope of partnership
  with all parties involved, in the form of
  Memorandum of Agreements
• Select partners with authority and commitment to
  participatory irrigation development,
• Share resources and perform roles according to
  agreements,
• Maintain an informed partnership for a balanced
  participation in collective decision making, and
• Create mutual learning platforms.

14
Profiles Two Case Study Areas

• Note US Pesos 54.0

15
Case Study 1 Partnership for Communal Irrigation
Development
16
Case Study 1 Partnership for Communal Irrigation
Development (contd)
17
Case Study 2 Partnerships for the Technology
Demonstration on High Value Crops Production
18
Case Study 2 Partnerships for the Technology
Demonstration on High Value Crops Production
(contd)
19
Case Study 2 Partnerships for the Technology
Demonstration on High Value Crops Production
(contd)
20
Case Study 2 Partnerships for the Technology
Demonstration on High Value Crops Production
(contd)
21
Lessons Learned/Conclusions

• BENEFITS OUTWEIGHED COSTS of partnerships in
  irrigation development
• Partnerships REDUCED GOVERNMENT SPENDING by
  national irrigation authority for irrigation
  development
• Partnerships ENHANCED the INTEGRATED and
  PARTICIPATORY APPROACH to irrigation development
• Pooling of resources ENABLED the IAs and THEIR
  PARTNERS to OVERCOME INDIVIDUAL GROUPS
  LIMITATIONS with regard to authorities, finances
  and competencies to achieve their shared
  purpose/s
• Collaborative and joint actions HELPED to CHANGE
  ATTITUDES and PERCEPTIONS of partners toward
  participatory development
• Most appealing opportunity created by the
  partnerships is for LGUs and beneficiaries to
  GAIN MORE CONTROL over the DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
  that directly affects them.

22
For More Information
Tetsuro Miyazato tmiyazato_at_adb.org SPISP Team
Leader moham_at_itextron.com
Web site www.adb.org