ESSP-II Policy Conference
                                          22-24 October, 2009
                           Hilton ...
Rationale of the research project

• Agriculture is back on the international development
  agenda,
   • but providing agr...
Social and economic services
and infrastructure in rural areas

                                 Health and
              ...
What are the challenges of providing
 rural services?

• Challenges to make the market mechanism work
   • Public good – m...
Oliver Williamson’s cost-effectiveness approach
    to identify the efficient governance structure
                       ...
Oliver Williamson’s cost-effectiveness approach
    to identify the efficient governance structure
                       ...
National / State-level      National / State-level
                  Political Representatives (NP)     Ministries (NM)


...
Focus of the study in Ethiopia

• Access to agricultural extension
   • High policy attention to extension, and increasing...
Study Design and Research
        Methods
Local Political
               Representatives (LP)




 Household                                Public Sector
Members (H...
Survey Design

                                   Kebele level survey

                           Local Political Represen...
Survey Design



 8 weredas total, in 7 regions: Afar, Amhara, Beneshangul-
  Gumuz, Gambella, Oromia, SNNP, Tigray
 Fou...
Survey Design

 Household survey (quantitative):
    – in 4 randomly drawn kebeles of each of the 8 weredas
    – 35 rand...
Agricultural Extension
5%

                                                  0%
                                                            10%
 ...
0%
                                                  5%
                                                       10%
       ...
Access to extension by survey site
                    (percent of respondents)
60
     54
50
          39   39         37...
Access to extension and livestock services in India
 (Percent households with contract during past year)
80

70           ...
Access to agricultural extension in Ghana
 (Percent households visited by agent during the past year)
20%
18%
16%
14%     ...
Gender composition of extension staff
        (Percentage in sample)




             ISEC / ISSER / EEPRI - IFPRISurveys
Satisfaction with agricultural extension
               (percent of respondents)
100
 90
 80
 70                          ...
Adoption of new technologies
 During the past two years, did you start to use some farming
practice for the first time, su...
Variables associated with visit by extension
       agent and uptake of new practices
Variable                            ...
Conclusions and Policy Implications

• Reducing regional disparity in access to extension
   • Federal support to emerging...
Conclusions and Policy Implications

• Making extension more demand-driven
   • Trade-off
       • Better supervision in c...
Drinking Water
Access to drinking water
               (Primary water source)
National
average:
11%
(2004, WDI 2008)




                ...
Primary water source is improved source
Gender                          -0.287   *

 (1 = male)                    (0.169)...
Average time to get water from different
      water sources (in minutes)

Water source                Wet season       Dr...
Identification of public services with greatest
        problem, by socioeconomic status
                       Education ...
Identification of public services with greatest
                 problem, by region
                   Afar-   Amhara- Amh...
Identification of public services of greatest
              concern, by gender
Public
                                    ...
Particular concerns with drinking water supply

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%                                             Not enough...
Satisfaction with quantity and quality of
          drinking water supply




                       EEPRI-IFPRI Survey, 2...
Tendency to complain when dissatisfied
          with drinking water
Question: During the past 1 year, did you approach an...
Capacity of Water Committees

• Water committees receive limited training on technical
  issues concerning water facilitie...
Accountability and consultation in water
                      provision

• Local knowledge and priorities in water servic...
Conclusions and Policy Implications
• Access to safe drinking water sources is very low
   • 32% of study households—which...
Conclusions and Policy Implications
• Water committees, the lowest level service providers, are
  still insufficiently inc...
Conclusions
National / State-level      National / State-level
                  Political Representatives (NP)     Ministries (NM)


...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

The Governance of Service Delivery for the Poor and Women:A Study of Agricultural Extension and Rural Water Supply in Ethiopia

1,418 views
1,285 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,418
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
26
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The Governance of Service Delivery for the Poor and Women:A Study of Agricultural Extension and Rural Water Supply in Ethiopia

  1. 1. ESSP-II Policy Conference 22-24 October, 2009 Hilton Hotel, Addis Abeba, Ethiopia The Governance of Service Delivery for the Poor and Women: A Study of Agricultural Extension and Rural Water Supply in Ethiopia Regina Birner, Mamusha Lemma, Tewodaj Mogues, Fanaye Tadesse
  2. 2. Rationale of the research project • Agriculture is back on the international development agenda, • but providing agricultural and rural services has remained a major challenge! • How to reach millions of farmers even in the most remote areas? • Governance reforms worldwide • Decentralization – involving local communities in service delivery – public sector reforms • What works where and why? • What works for the rural poor and for women? Three-country research project: Ethiopia, India and Ghana
  3. 3. Social and economic services and infrastructure in rural areas Health and education Rural roads Electricity Drinking water Agricultural extension Agricultural input supply Page 3
  4. 4. What are the challenges of providing rural services? • Challenges to make the market mechanism work • Public good – merit good – externalities • Challenges for the public sector • Transaction-intensive in terms of space and time • Requiring discretion – difficult to standardize (extension) • Challenges of involving local communities • Local elite capture, social exclusion • Capacity problems • Special challenges to reach women with agricultural services • Perception bias: ―Women don’t farm.‖ • Key to meeting the challenge: Creating accountability!
  5. 5. Oliver Williamson’s cost-effectiveness approach to identify the efficient governance structure TCA $ Extension provided Total costs with adjusted incurred for packages achieving a TCP defined Extension provided TCD under standardized outcome Extension package approach provided with discretion of extension agent Difficulties of supervision a1 a2 Attributes Diversity of agricultural conditions Page 5
  6. 6. Oliver Williamson’s cost-effectiveness approach to identify the efficient governance structure TCA $ Extension provided Total costs with adjusted incurred for packages achieving a TCP defined Extension provided TCD under standardized outcome Extension package approach provided with discretion of extension agent Difficulties with increased of accountability supervision a1 a2 Attributes Diversity of agricultural conditions Page 6
  7. 7. National / State-level National / State-level Political Representatives (NP) Ministries (NM) Political Parties (PP) Local Political Development Representatives (LP) Agencies / Advocacy NGOs (DA) Community-Based Organizations (CO) Household Public Sector Members (HH) Service Providers (PS) NGO / Private service providers (NG) Services Accountability Framework based on World Bank (2004)
  8. 8. Focus of the study in Ethiopia • Access to agricultural extension • High policy attention to extension, and increasing adaptation of packages • Knowledge gap: How much outreach has been actually achieved so far in different regions? How well does the delivery mechanism work? • Gender dimension of agricultural extension • General government commitment to gender equality • Knowledge gap: To what extent do agricultural extension services address the needs of female farmers? • Drinking water supply • Government efforts to increase water supply through decentralized provision, and water committees • Knowledge gap: How do these delivery methods actually work on the ground?
  9. 9. Study Design and Research Methods
  10. 10. Local Political Representatives (LP) Household Public Sector Members (HH) Service Providers (PS) NGO / Private service providers (NG) Services Page 10
  11. 11. Survey Design Kebele level survey Local Political Representatives - Kebele chair (156) - Kebele council member (312) - Kebele council speaker (156) - Wereda council member (156) Household survey Kebele level survey Household Members Service Providers - Both HH head and spouse - Development agents (312) separately (1,761 respondents: - Agricultural cooperative head (156) 843 men, 238 female-hh- - Water committee head (156) heads, 680 female spouses)
  12. 12. Survey Design  8 weredas total, in 7 regions: Afar, Amhara, Beneshangul- Gumuz, Gambella, Oromia, SNNP, Tigray  Four paired weredas (in proximity to each other): One wereda of a pair in “leading” locally decentralised region, one in an “emerging” region.  In the case of one pair: Amhara and Tigray—de facto differences in history of local empowerment Page 12
  13. 13. Survey Design  Household survey (quantitative): – in 4 randomly drawn kebeles of each of the 8 weredas – 35 randomly drawn households in each selected kebele – total of planned 1120 households, with up to two respondents in each household  Kebele-level surveys (quantitative): – in all kebeles of each selected wereda – total of planned 156 kebeles  Case studies (qualitative): – in one kebele in each of four weredas (in Amhara, Beneshangul-Gumuz, Oromia, Tigray); ie weredas are subset of the above 8 weredas – interviews at the wereda and kebele level in these four weredas  In this first set of studies:  We mostly take a descriptive-analytical approach Page 13
  14. 14. Agricultural Extension
  15. 15. 5% 0% 10% 15% 20% 30% 25% Extension visits farm/home Attend extensionist's community meetings Visit demonstration plots Visit demonstration homes Trained at Farmer Training Centre Service by cooperative Men Agricultural EEPRI-IFPRI Survey, 2009 input credit Women Access to different forms of extension
  16. 16. 0% 5% 10% 20% 25% 30% 15% Extensionist at farm/home Extensionst's community meetings Demonstration plots Demonstration homes education Farmer Training Centre Service by cooperative Poor Access to extension, by poverty and Literate Illiterate Agricultural Non-poor EEPRI-IFPRI Survey, 2009 input credit
  17. 17. Access to extension by survey site (percent of respondents) 60 54 50 39 39 37 40 30 27 27 25 24 24 20 18 15 13 11 10 8 2 1 0 Visited by extension agent at farm or home Attended extension agent’s community meetings EEPRI-IFPRI Survey, 2009
  18. 18. Access to extension and livestock services in India (Percent households with contract during past year) 80 70 67.8 60 Male-headed 50 households (owning land/livestock, 40 respectively) 30 27.2 Female-headed 20 households (owning land/livestock, 10 4.4 respectively) 1.0 0 Agricultural Livestock services extension ISEC-IFPRI Survey, 2006
  19. 19. Access to agricultural extension in Ghana (Percent households visited by agent during the past year) 20% 18% 16% 14% 12.3% 11.7% 12% 10.9% 10% 8% 6% 4% 1.8% 2.1% 2% 1.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.5% 0% Forest Zone Transition Zone Savannah Zone Male-Headed Households Female-Headed Households Female Spouses ISSER-IFPRI Survey, 2008Page 19
  20. 20. Gender composition of extension staff (Percentage in sample) ISEC / ISSER / EEPRI - IFPRISurveys
  21. 21. Satisfaction with agricultural extension (percent of respondents) 100 90 80 70 Very dissatisfied 60 50 Somewhat 92.5 95.4 dissatisfied 40 Somewhat 30 satisfied 20 Very satisfied 10 0 HH Heads Spouses
  22. 22. Adoption of new technologies During the past two years, did you start to use some farming practice for the first time, such as a new variety, new crop, new input, new cultivation technique, new breed, etc.? 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 89.7 50% 96.6 no 40% yes 30% 20% 10% 10.3 0% 3.5 Head Spouses
  23. 23. Variables associated with visit by extension agent and uptake of new practices Variable Visit by Started new extension agricultural agent practice Gender (1=male) + *** Education (1=literate) Household status (1=head) Wealth (consumer assets owned) + ** Household size + *** + *** Male dependents Female dependents -* District dummies included included Observations 1,753 1,740 Likelihood ratio chi-square test 250.69 *** 167.08 *** EEPRI-IFPRI Survey, 2009
  24. 24. Conclusions and Policy Implications • Reducing regional disparity in access to extension • Federal support to emerging regions already ongoing • What additional strategies could be used? • Strategies to better target female farmers • Linking extension with women’s groups • Increasing female staff among extension agents • Evaluating agricultural extension services • Challenges in measuring farmers’ satisfaction • High satisfaction rates in spite of low adoption rates • Need for further methodology development, especially if satisfaction data are to be used for management purposes • Measuring adoption rates and productivity • Further research needed if goal is to establish causality
  25. 25. Conclusions and Policy Implications • Making extension more demand-driven • Trade-off • Better supervision in case of package approach • Limitation to adapt to diverse local conditions • How to increase discretion of extension agents, while using other mechanisms to create accountability? • Recent policy changes (Implemented after this study) • Development of packages based on ―best practices‖ of local model farmers • Shifting of responsibility for monitoring from supervisors to Subject Matter Specialists • Increased role for kebele councils/cabinets • Assessment of new approaches topic for future research
  26. 26. Drinking Water
  27. 27. Access to drinking water (Primary water source) National average: 11% (2004, WDI 2008) EEPRI-IFPRI Survey, 2009
  28. 28. Primary water source is improved source Gender -0.287 * (1 = male) (0.169) Education 0.017 Afar-D -0.334 (1 = literate) (0.133) (0.217) Respondent status 0.119 Amhara-D2 0.239 (1 = head, 0 = spouse) (0.127) (0.182) Wealth (No. of consumer 0.046 * Benesh. G.-D -0.088 asset types owned) (0.024) (0.173) HH size (No. of -0.019 Gambella-D 0.437 *** HH members) (0.018) (0.164) Working age women -0.010 Oromia-D -1.579 *** (% of HH members) (0.009) (0.241) Working age men -0.010 SNNP-D -1.193 *** (% of HH members) (0.009) (0.205) Female dependents -0.011 Tigray-D 0.165 (% of HH members) (0.009) (0.185) Male dependents -0.009 constant 0.595 (% of HH members) (0.009) (0.932) No. of obs.: 960, LR χ2: 196.53*** EEPRI-IFPRI Survey, 2009
  29. 29. Average time to get water from different water sources (in minutes) Water source Wet season Dry Season River, lake, spring, pond 58 91 Rainwater 6 – Well without pump 74 102 Well with pump 71 82 In Ghana: Public standpipe 30 29 Less than Household’s private 30 minutes standpipe/ tap 3 3 Water vendor 63 80 Other 24 153 EEPRI-IFPRI Survey, 2009
  30. 30. Identification of public services with greatest problem, by socioeconomic status Education status Wealth status Public service/ infrastructure: Literate Illiterate Non-poor Poor Drinking water 28% 34% 28% 36% Sanitation/drainage 0% 0% 0% 0% Small-scale irrigation 1% 1% 1% 1% Health 17% 19% 18% 15% Education 6% 3% 7% 3% Electricity 14% 8% 17% 13% Roads 16% 6% 15% 11% Livelihood opportunities 2% 1% 3% 3% EEPRI-IFPRI Survey, 2009
  31. 31. Identification of public services with greatest problem, by region Afar- Amhara- Amhara- Benesh. G- Gambella- Oromia- SNNP- Tigray- D D2 D3 D D D D D Drinking water 65% 29% 25% 35% 28% 36% 19% 34% Sanitation/ drainage 1% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Small irrigation 1% 3% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 1% Health 21% 31% 22% 31% 8% 9% 11% 14% Education 1% 8% 3% 3% 1% 9% 2% 5% Electricity 0% 10% 21% 7% 6% 6% 16% 40% Roads 0% 10% 22% 9% 6% 8% 33% 1% Livelihood opportunities 2% 4% 4% 1% 2% 1% 6% 3% EEPRI-IFPRI Survey, 2009
  32. 32. Identification of public services of greatest concern, by gender Public Diff. sign. service/Infrastructure: Men Women Drinking water 31% 34% Sanitation/drainage 0% 0% Small-scale irrigation 1% 0% * Health 17% 19% Education 5% 3% Electricity 16% 11% ** Roads 14% 12% ** Livelihood opportunities 2% 3% ** EEPRI-IFPRI Survey, 2009
  33. 33. Particular concerns with drinking water supply 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% Not enough drinking water supply 30.0% Drinking water is of poor quality 20.0% Problems with collecting fees for water use 10.0% Other problems with water 0.0% Men Women Men Women problem 7 years ago problem today EEPRI-IFPRI Survey, 2009
  34. 34. Satisfaction with quantity and quality of drinking water supply EEPRI-IFPRI Survey, 2009
  35. 35. Tendency to complain when dissatisfied with drinking water Question: During the past 1 year, did you approach anyone when you were dissatisfied with the water quantity or quality? Male respondents Female respondents 5% 3% 6% 16% 77% 91% Yes No Never been dissatisfied Ye s No Ne ve r be e n dissatisfie d EEPRI-IFPRI Survey, 2009
  36. 36. Capacity of Water Committees • Water committees receive limited training on technical issues concerning water facilities • But receive no training on ―soft skills‖: Community mobilisation to maintain water systems; community education and persuasion to use improved sources; etc. • In several of the sites, receive little technical and other support from wereda water desks • In all case study sites except for one, water committee heads were men (although other water committee members included women)
  37. 37. Accountability and consultation in water provision • Local knowledge and priorities in water service provision • Sense of a lack of consultation with local water committees in siting and construction of water facilities • Found to be the case irrespective of facility provider (government or NGOs) • Problematic relationship between water committees and water users • Water committees unable to persuade users to participate in maintenance and pay fees • Collapse of water facilities as well as water committees • Fall-back to use of unimproved water sources when facilities don’t work, rather than use complaint mechanism • In Tigray, better ―short route‖ accountability mechanisms than elsewhere • Though everywhere, much dissatisfaction about level of financial fees for construction and maintenance of systems
  38. 38. Conclusions and Policy Implications • Access to safe drinking water sources is very low • 32% of study households—which is substantially higher than nation-wide rural access of 11% (2004, WDI 2008) • Weak accountability links may be a hindrance in translating rural residents priority concerns into policy priorities Placing access to safe drinking water higher on the priority list (noting that it also has implications for productivity) • Households identify drinking water as their main priority concern • yet they report relatively high satisfaction rates and hardly take any action to complain. Treat satisfaction data with care.
  39. 39. Conclusions and Policy Implications • Water committees, the lowest level service providers, are still insufficiently inclusive Take measures to make committees inclusive – or consider alternatives (Making it a responsibility of councils?) • Water committees not able to counter-act top-down facility provision. Draw on local knowledge and local considerations in selecting sites – more discretion. • Water committees have high discretion in setting rules, fees, etc., but unable to effectively use this discretion due to nearly no training on “soft skills” Train water committees on community relations Page 39
  40. 40. Conclusions
  41. 41. National / State-level National / State-level Political Representatives (NP) Ministries (NM) Political Parties (PP) Local Political Development Representatives (LP) Agencies / Advocacy NGOs (DA) Community-Based Organizations (CO) Household Public Sector Members (HH) Service Providers (PS) NGO / Private service providers (NG) Services Accountability Framework based on World Bank (2004)

×