and Integrated Pest Management - part - usaid

172 I'S1ICIDE MANAG BENT AND 1PM IN SOUTIEAST ASIA
Table 3. Cost of IPM projects per ha arable land. Investment cost over 10
years, follow-up cost per annum in USS (Daxi & Schubert 1986,
Doppler et al. 1986, Grosse-Ruschkamp et al. 1985, Ncutatz et al.
1985).a
Philippines Thailand Nicaragua Cape Verde
.....................................................---------------------------------------------...
Area in '000 ha 8,390 9,600 151 33
Investment '000 USS 6,300 9,250 4,650 4,050
Follow up cost in
'000 USS per annum 130 465 135 140
Investment cost US$/ha 0.75 0.96 30.79 122.72
Follow lp cost USS/ha 0.01 0.05 0.89 4.24
aPhilippines: maize, paddy, cotton; Thailand: paddy; Nicaragua: maize, cotton,
beans, soya; Cape Verde: maize, beans, pigeon peas, vegetables.
It is generally difficult to estimate the size of the counterpart contribution.
This is due not merely to a lack of relevant documentation, but also to the fact
that only those costs actually occasioned by the project should be attributed to
the IPNI program. Around 25% of the costs arising during the first ten years
must be met by the partner country. Personnel costs are estimated to represent
30-40% of the follow-up costs (Table 4). The donor's investment budget,
however, can be more easily broken down into the individual cost categories ­
commonly 32% is accounted for by personnel costs, while materials and running
costs each take up 25%, 8% is used for counterpart training, and the remainder
covers the GTZ overheads.
The Economy as a Whole
When assessing the economic cost and benefit of IPM projects, it is
advisable to concentrate on the directly measurable effects. It is often perceived
that the cost of IPM projects is far in excess of their directly measurable benefit,
and efforts are therefore made to quantify indirect effects such as those of an
ecological nature. Such approaches, however, often suffer from lack of clarity.
For the four projects analyzed in this paper, all the costs incurred by both the
donors and recipients over a period of twenty years were first compiled.
Table 4. Estimated proportion of personnel and matcrial/operational cost of
follow-up cost in % (Doppler ct al. 1986, Grosse-Ruschkamp et al.
1985, Ncutatz ct al. 1985)
Philippines Thailand Nicaragua Cape Verde
......................................................-------------------------------------------.....
Personnel 38 25 n.a. 33
Material/oper- 62 75 n.a. 67
at ional