ICRISAT Archival Report 2006 - The seedlings of success in the ...

watershed development and bring prosperity in the rainfed areas, for which novel methods, policies and suitable
forward and backward linkages need to be delivered.
7B.4: Social impact assessment of the integrated watershed project in Thailand and Vietnam
RP Mula, SP Wani, T Wangkahart, and NV Thang
A rapid appraisal of the social contributions of the integrated watershed project in Thailand and Vietnam was made.
Findings on the biophysical aspects of the watershed were used as the starting point for investigating the impact on
the agricultural and social system of farmers. Significant findings are as follows:
• Awareness and adoption of the different technological packages are high except on the installation of soil and
water instruments. Less interest by farmers on the latter should be dealt with by proper inculcation of their
importance.
• Modifications in farmers’ agricultural systems included a change in cropping system such as addition of new
crops (legumes and fruit trees), new varieties, and adjustment in the cropping calendar and some investments
in aquaculture as well as poultry. Apparently, these have contributed to the improvement of the livelihood
system, enhancement of community participation, and fulfillment among household members such as having
more time to visit temples and some boost in their self-esteem.
• Trainings and exposure opened windows for self-help group formation and alliances/partnerships.
• A contributing factor to gains obtained in the watershed project has been due to the inculcation of the sense of
ownership among the farm households. And this explains the clamor for continuous capacity building to
ensure sustainability of initial gains.
• Expressed needs are technical assistance, various types of information and communication (IEC) materials,
and market price information. The SWOT analysis and transects, which are validated from implementers’
perspective showed a strong resemblance with farmer-respondents’ needs assessment. Alongside the
development of other potential resources, there were expressions of relevant extension support, market and
credit assistance, and more innovations in agri-related livelihoods like pasture-based livestock and
agroforestry.
• On the social aspect, an understanding of coping mechanisms can elicit the extent of problems and the ways
in which affected farm households respond. This can be used as an enabling mechanism for watershed
initiatives specifically in developing appropriate framework for evaluating, informing, and educating farm
households.
7B.5: Mid-Term Evaluation of NWDPRA Watersheds in Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and Tamil Nadu S
Marimuthu, TK Sreedevi, AVR Kesava Rao, SP Wani, P Pathak, Piara Singh, S Nedumaran, TS Vamsidhar Reddy,
R Mula and Ch Srinivasa Rao
The National Watershed Development project for Rainfed Areas (NWDPRA) was launched by the Department of
Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India during the Eighth Five Year Plan and it is continuing during the
Tenth Five Year Plan in 28 States and two Union Territories, to increase productivity and income and conserve
natural resources in rainfed areas. Government of India had issued revised guidelines (WARASA-
JANSAHBHAGITA) for the implementation if NWDPRA programs in the country, where it aims for improving
popular participation and collective action in managing natural resources. A mid-term assessment has been called
for to review the progress of the NWDPRA programs and make mid term corrections in the process of
implementation wherever necessary. ICRISAT was assigned the task of a multi-disciplinary assessment of the
program in the three States of Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and Tamil Nadu.
i. Objectives of Mid-Term Evaluation: Mid-Term Evaluation (MTE) aims at evaluating the progress, achievements
and problems in project implementation of NWDPRA program so as to provide critical and timely information and
guidelines to project management and decision support. The basic objectives of the MTE were: to assess the
qualitative performance of the program, to cross examine the information furnished by states on implementation of
the program, to assess the impact of the program, and to insure implementation of the program in accordance with
the revised WARASA-JANSAHBHAGITA guidelines.
ii. Approaches: ICRISAT’s review team adopted a fully participatory approach for evaluating the watersheds in
three states by co-opting a senior member handling watershed program from the Department of Agriculture, to
255