Synthesis of Existing Knowledge and Experience on the Provision of ...

• Agro-pastoralists’ priorities are 1) Health posts, 2) Schools, 3) Water. Water ranks lowerbecause these communities are usually already settled <strong>and</strong> have existing water sources.• Dropouts’ priorities are opportunities for income diversification.Communities express dem<strong>and</strong> for water. However, the type <strong>of</strong> water point selected is a technicaldecision in the woreda water bureau, <strong>and</strong> the decision depends on the water resources available, theagro-ecological context, <strong>and</strong> the funds available. Interventions are also meant to be checked againstWorld Bank Environmental <strong>and</strong> Social Screening Lists to make sure that environmental <strong>and</strong> socialimpacts are considered. This, however, rarely occurs.The main types <strong>of</strong> water points constructed under PCDP I were ponds, shallow wells, deep wells,spring development, micro-dams <strong>and</strong> river diversion, to serve both humans <strong>and</strong> livestock (WorldBank Implementation Completion <strong>and</strong> Results Report, 2009). It was also noted that for wet seasongrazing areas, smaller water catchments were more suitable – large enough to hold water for alimited period but small enough so as not to encourage settlement – whereas in dry season grazingareas, focus was on rehabilitating existing water points <strong>and</strong> enabling community access to rivers(Assaye Legesse, personal communication).For PCDP I, some challenges encountered include:• A scarcity <strong>of</strong> skilled human resources <strong>and</strong> high turnover <strong>of</strong> staff at woreda level.oooThe CDD approach had a “positive impact on local stakeholders’ (sector <strong>of</strong>fice experts,etc.) attitude to communities <strong>and</strong> their ability to initiate, implement effectively <strong>and</strong>ensure the development sustainability <strong>of</strong> community-based projects” (BeneficiaryAssessment, May 2007, p.19 in World Bank Implementation Completion <strong>and</strong> ResultsReport, 2009). However, “training [<strong>and</strong>] responsiveness to community needs identifiedduring implementation, was not sufficiently addressed, <strong>and</strong> as a result the introduction <strong>of</strong>CDD processes fell short <strong>of</strong> the high expectations set” (World Bank ImplementationCompletion <strong>and</strong> Results Report, 2009: 6). During implementation, it was also observedthat project stakeholders sometimes ignored <strong>and</strong> bypassed communities’ advice onwater point development. This was put down to high turnover <strong>of</strong> staff at woreda level,<strong>and</strong> the associated lag-time in training <strong>and</strong> orientation on the CDD approach (Ibid).Mobile Support Teams were stretched beyond their capacity, <strong>and</strong> the teams weretherefore not spending sufficient time on the ground consulting with <strong>and</strong> trainingpastoralists, resulting in dissatisfaction <strong>and</strong> insufficient involvement <strong>of</strong> communities indriving development efforts (Ibid).The number <strong>of</strong> projects implemented far exceeded the manpower available forsupervision <strong>and</strong> follow up. Implementation thus <strong>of</strong>ten deviated from the planned course<strong>of</strong> action (Ibid).• Environmental <strong>and</strong> Social Screening Lists were not used in most cases, <strong>and</strong> a budget was notmade available for mitigating environmental <strong>and</strong> social impacts. It was observed during fieldassessments that birkado are contaminated <strong>and</strong> poorly maintained, <strong>and</strong> poor environmentalconditions were observed at a number <strong>of</strong> water points (Participatory Assessment Report, MoFA,2007 in World Bank Implementation Completion <strong>and</strong> Results Report, 2009).• Performance indicators emphasized delivering targets rather than clear measureable outcomes<strong>of</strong> capacity <strong>and</strong> livelihood improvement. Focus on delivery overshadowed the quality <strong>of</strong>community development processes <strong>and</strong> the sustainability <strong>of</strong> outcomes (World BankImplementation Completion <strong>and</strong> Results Report, 2009).Under PCDP II the World Bank Project Appraisal Document (2008) emphasizes:49