Independent Evaluation - Home > Search

Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review - Livestock

1. Project Data:   
ES Date Posted:
Project Name:
Project Costs(US $M)
 38.6  28.3
Loan/Credit (US $M)
 19.8  19.4
Sector, Major Sect.:
Cofinancing (US $M)
 8.5  3.7
L/C Number:
Board Approval (FY)
Partners involved
Closing Date
06/30/1999 06/30/1999
Prepared by: Reviewed by: Group Manager: Group:  
Ridley Nelson
G.T.Keith Pitman Gregory Ingram OEDST

2. Project Objectives and Components:

a. Objectives
The main objective of the project was to promote livestock production for domestic consumption and exports through adjustment and investment. The project was designed as a package of policy reforms, supported by an institution building component and a production development component.

b. Components
The project had a very large number of components. Main policy reforms were: redefinition of roles of government and the private sector; promotion of Farmer Associations to take over responsibility for feed supply, seed multiplication, breed improvement, and milk collection etc.; promotion of private veterinary practice; improvement of public sector entities; and an improved pricing mechanism for dairy products.

Main institutional strengthening was: strengthening the Livestock Department; strengthening training in livestock and veterinary science; and, streamlining government's role.
Main production development included: support to extensive cattle production in the western and northern regions; and dairy development in the central highlands.

c. Comments on Project Cost, Financing and Dates
See above. No comments.

3. Achievement of Relevant Objectives:

After considerable initial delays the project achieved most of its objectives except for those related to the extensive beef production component. However, the export objective was seriously impacted by the loss of the EU export quota, a risk that, to some extent, could have been planned for.

4. Significant Outcomes/Impacts:

The Bank played a lead role in adjustment of the livestock sector and exhibited commendable flexibility during implementation.The Economic Rate of Return for the milk production component is estimated at 19% which is at the high end of the appraisal estimate. The ERR for the extensive cattle production component is uncertain and likely to be significantly lower than the approximately 20% estimated at appraisal. The Ministry of Livestock shifted out of feed mill operation, fodder production, input supply, breed improvement, and veterinary practice. Institutional strengthening made considerable progress but was substantially delayed. Service contracts, introduced after the midterm review, significantly improved performance. A private veterinary profession has been achieved and a consultant review confirms that 80 percent are doing an effective job. The highlands dairy development component fully achieved its objectives. Effective extension programs and support for Farmer Associations was developed. 83 percent of the appraisal target of twelve thousand farmers in Farmer Associations was achieved and, following the midterm review, the IDA credit was amended to finance the establishment of savings and loans associations within the Associations. Under the adaptive research component, improved varieties of fodder maize, oats, and rootcrops were adopted. After considerable delays, the Livestock Promotion Fund became effective and was, in the end, fully disbursed. Significant progress was made with genetic improvement and Research and Development.

5. Significant Shortcomings (include non-compliance with safeguard features):

Local funding was a problem at some periods during the project. Implementation of the extensive beef production component was delayed several years due to weak Livestock Department management and lack of health coverage by private veterinarians in the more remote areas so it did not, during the project period, achieve its development objectives. (Improved health coverage had been assumed to be the main factor leading to increased offtake.) The situation was exacerbated by marketing problems. The water supply component, introduced at the mid-term review, although only half complete appears to be having a significant impact on beef production. Only 216 km of the target of 1000 km of roads was completed due to the suspension of CCCE funding between 1994 and 1998. With respect to Bank performance, the risk of losing the beef export quota to the EU, which occurred during the project period, was not identified.

6. Ratings:ICROED ReviewReason for Disagreement/Comments
Institutional Dev.:
    Private sector activities still quite new and fragile and needing continued government support, and public institutional reform in infancy. Promising but still uncertain.
Bank Performance:
Borrower Perf.:
Quality of ICR:

7. Lessons of Broad Applicablity:

1. Strong government commitment towards divestiture is important where activities are being privatized, but the corollary of that lesson is that sectoral policy adjustment projects should not proceed to appraisal where strong commitment is not evident. 2. It is important to have analytically demonstrated complementarity between policy reforms, institutional development, and investments. 3. Management and accountability are important, not just for the overall project, but for individual components. It was weaker in the least successful component. 4. Good roads and credit access are particularly important for rural and private sector development. Investment in these areas may be sub-optimal in Bank lending. 5. Experience here, and in other projects, suggests that privatization of services can leave the more remote, and therefore less profitable, areas unserviced, at least initially. This can be foreseen during preparation and appraisal and a strategy developed to deal with it which balances efficiency and equity.

8. Audit Recommended?  No


9. Comments on Quality of ICR:

Satisfactory. One would have liked a little more exploration of: 1. the lesson that privatization, at least initially, tends to disadvantage the more remote and less profitable areas. 2. the ERR; 3. whether the large number of components impacted on overall project performance.

© 2012 The World Bank Group, All Rights Reserved. Terms and Conditions