Balancing Hardware with Software for Sustainable AWM<br />IFAD HQs<br />18thApril 2011<br />Luca Di Mario<br />Water and I...
objectives<br />Introduce the H:S issue;<br />Show where the problem is (our perspective);<br />Share results of a prelimi...
we invest in hardware because<br />“… infrastructure is pivotal element for AWM, and consequently for economic growth and ...
… and in software because<br />“Sustainability of water infrastructure depends largely on people’s motivation and organiza...
since project resources are limited…<br />HARDWARE<br />SOFTWARE<br />>who does not agree?<br />
Problems arise …<br />where governments and other investors prefer high-visibility, quick-impact and fast-cost recovery<br...
bad/inefficient<br />>not clever I would say!<br />$$$$$$<br />
“water: is largely a crisis of governance…”<br />>WWDR(UNESCO, 2006)<br />“So far the focus has been on the HARDWARE side ...
The way forward?<br />“Making irrigated agricultural investment packages for hardware and software development more compre...
beyond broad statements …<br />Is there any guideline* or study to support stakeholders in DM for a well-balanced H:S? <br...
How do we ensure this?<br />
Can we think to something like this?<br />2<br />1<br />
Is it clear?<br />WHAT<br />HOW MUCH<br />WHEN<br />… should we invest/develop in H and S for sustainable AWM? <br />
The importance of how and when…<br />“Many of today’s water bureaucracies were set up to construct major water infrastruct...
we looked at literature<br />IFAD<br />WB<br />IWMI<br />FAO<br />ADB<br />IFPRI<br />issue is recognised but only two stu...
beyond broad statements …<br />We did not find much!<br />
IWMI cost and performance SSA vs. other regions<br />EIRR >10% = success<br />EIRR < 10% = failure<br />Project success is...
Can we learn something on H:S from IFAD’s experience?<br />>that’s one of the reasons I have been hired for… <br />
What is an ideal project for the analysis?<br />
project selection<br />
projects sample<br />116projects reporting some water component/indicator<br />70closed or at closure before end 2011<br /...
what was considered as hard and as soft?<br />HARD<br />Civil work<br />Equipment<br />Labour for construction<br />SOFT<b...
common features for the IRRIGATION investments<br />8%-26% of TOT IRR budget is invested in SOFTWARE for successful projec...
common features in TOTAL budgets (not only irrigation) for the projects analysed<br />every dollar spent in ‘hardware’ 0.8...
need for future<br />need for field confirmation (before saying this study is valid) = RESULTs very TENTATIVE!<br />An agr...
Problems during the analysis<br />PPMS is not really precise in defining project components, needed to check with <br />De...
limitations<br />Analysis still preliminary;<br />Details gathered from Appraisal Reports<br />Desk only/report only data;...
need for future<br />need for field confirmation (before saying this study is valid)<br />Analyse also FAILURES!;<br />An ...
basically<br />this is just the beginning…<br />
Thank you!<br />l.dimario@ifad.org<br />
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Balancing Hardware with Software for Sustainable AWM

20,069
-1

Published on

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
20,069
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • ----- Meeting Notes (4/7/11 14:15) -----Morning every one and welcome to the seminar balancing hardware with software for sustainable water management.
  • STUDY is not definitive and has to be corrected and enhanced. But it is a point to stimulate the debate.
  • ----- Meeting Notes (4/7/11 14:51) -----I do not need to quote you different studies, for instance, from ADB, WB that prove this.
  • ----- Meeting Notes (4/7/11 14:15) -----morning every
  • Balancing Hardware with Software for Sustainable AWM

    1. 1. Balancing Hardware with Software for Sustainable AWM<br />IFAD HQs<br />18thApril 2011<br />Luca Di Mario<br />Water and Institutions Desks<br />Policy and Technical Advisory Division<br />
    2. 2. objectives<br />Introduce the H:S issue;<br />Show where the problem is (our perspective);<br />Share results of a preliminary analysis we conducted at IFAD (limitations + next steps).<br />
    3. 3. we invest in hardware because<br />“… infrastructure is pivotal element for AWM, and consequently for economic growth and poverty reduction.”<br />>Infrastructure and poverty reduction – what is the connection? (ADB, 2003)<br />
    4. 4. … and in software because<br />“Sustainability of water infrastructure depends largely on people’s motivation and organizational capacity to provide the necessary operation and maintenance.”<br />>Transforming rural institutions in order to reach MDGs (IFAD,2003)<br />
    5. 5. since project resources are limited…<br />HARDWARE<br />SOFTWARE<br />>who does not agree?<br />
    6. 6. Problems arise …<br />where governments and other investors prefer high-visibility, quick-impact and fast-cost recovery<br />it is difficult to advocate for ‘software’ because less visible and straightforward (most of our decisions are taken by looking at economics)<br />heavy investments go in ‘hardware’ development <br />
    7. 7. bad/inefficient<br />>not clever I would say!<br />$$$$$$<br />
    8. 8. “water: is largely a crisis of governance…”<br />>WWDR(UNESCO, 2006)<br />“So far the focus has been on the HARDWARE side with only little attention to the software side of irrigation management.”<br />>Pro-poor Intervention Strategies in Irrigated Agriculture in Asia (IWMI, 2005)<br />“The ‘software’ side of infrastructureprovision has too often been ignored, leading to a great waste of resources and a lack of results.”<br />>Transforming rural institutions in order to reach MDGs (IFAD, 2003)<br />
    9. 9. The way forward?<br />“Making irrigated agricultural investment packages for hardware and software development more comprehensive by integrating investments in infrastructure, management and service delivery in agriculture.”<br />>Pro-poor Intervention Strategies in Irrigated Agriculture in Asia (IWMI, 2005)<br />
    10. 10. beyond broad statements …<br />Is there any guideline* or study to support stakeholders in DM for a well-balanced H:S? <br />* context specific/no blueprint/no silver bullet <br />
    11. 11. How do we ensure this?<br />
    12. 12. Can we think to something like this?<br />2<br />1<br />
    13. 13. Is it clear?<br />WHAT<br />HOW MUCH<br />WHEN<br />… should we invest/develop in H and S for sustainable AWM? <br />
    14. 14. The importance of how and when…<br />“Many of today’s water bureaucracies were set up to construct major water infrastructure facilities. This heavy focus on infrastructure sometimes led to institutions and practices that were well suited for construction, but less well suited for the adaptive management needed to operate long-lived, multipurpose.”<br />>Water for food, water for life – Comprehensive assessment (IWMI, 2007)<br />
    15. 15. we looked at literature<br />IFAD<br />WB<br />IWMI<br />FAO<br />ADB<br />IFPRI<br />issue is recognised but only two studies show empirical evidence on the matter<br />
    16. 16. beyond broad statements …<br />We did not find much!<br />
    17. 17. IWMI cost and performance SSA vs. other regions<br />EIRR >10% = success<br />EIRR < 10% = failure<br />Project success is achieved by a software share above 22%-18%, in non-SSA<br />Software share has positive impact on probability of success;<br />the higher share of software components in the total investment reduces the unit hardware cost of irrigation projects.<br />
    18. 18. Can we learn something on H:S from IFAD’s experience?<br />>that’s one of the reasons I have been hired for… <br />
    19. 19. What is an ideal project for the analysis?<br />
    20. 20. project selection<br />
    21. 21. projects sample<br />116projects reporting some water component/indicator<br />70closed or at closure before end 2011<br />50have reported irrigation or soil water conservation amongst main components/subcomponents<br />16 projects preselected<br />32projects irrigation/soil conservation (closed or at closure before end 2011)<br />5 APR<br />4 ESA <br />3 NEN<br />(2) WCA<br />(2) LAC<br />11 APR<br />8 ESA <br />7 NEN<br />4 WCA<br />3 LAC<br />>project approved after 2000 - (source PPMS (subcomponent type), RIMS (1st level)<br />
    22. 22. what was considered as hard and as soft?<br />HARD<br />Civil work<br />Equipment<br />Labour for construction<br />SOFT<br />Capacity Building<br />WUAs support <br />Salaries<br />Buildings/Vehicles<br />Training<br />O&M <br />Investments in Project Management have been reported but not considered as soft investment – very difficult to discern their water component<br />
    23. 23. common features for the IRRIGATION investments<br />8%-26% of TOT IRR budget is invested in SOFTWARE for successful projects (EIRR above 12% + PSR scores >4);<br />The S investments stabilize around 10% for projects of soil/water conservation;<br />Generally speaking – beneficiaries participation and contribution (cash/labour >10%) is essential to contribute to project sustainability;<br />O&M budget is present in all project to assist first stages;<br />
    24. 24. common features in TOTAL budgets (not only irrigation) for the projects analysed<br />every dollar spent in ‘hardware’ 0.80 (average) was spent in ‘software’<br />
    25. 25. need for future<br />need for field confirmation (before saying this study is valid) = RESULTs very TENTATIVE!<br />An agreed definition of H and S;<br />Context specific/institutional analysis;<br />Link it with WUAs parallel WUAs PIM/IMT assessment study (on going in APR)<br />Establishing a collaborative partnership for consultation and peer review;<br />
    26. 26. Problems during the analysis<br />PPMS is not really precise in defining project components, needed to check with <br />Defining what is hard and what is soft when reading projects documentation;<br />Budgets sometimes too general<br />Lack of further documents<br />
    27. 27. limitations<br />Analysis still preliminary;<br />Details gathered from Appraisal Reports<br />Desk only/report only data;<br />No field verification;<br />Focus a lot on HOW MUCH, less on WHAT. Nothing on WHEN;<br />Need peer review;<br />Just IRRIGATION – water is wider <br />
    28. 28. need for future<br />need for field confirmation (before saying this study is valid)<br />Analyse also FAILURES!;<br />An agreed definition of H and S;<br />Context specific/institutional analysis;<br />Link it with WUAs parallel WUAs PIM/IMT assessment study (on going in APR)<br />> establish a collaborative partnership for consultation and peer review!<br />
    29. 29. basically<br />this is just the beginning…<br />
    30. 30. Thank you!<br />l.dimario@ifad.org<br />
    1. A particular slide catching your eye?

      Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

    ×