WATER MANAGEMENT TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 65A
Skogerboe, Lowdermilk Sparling, Hautaluoma
Development Process for Improving
Irrigation Water Management on Farms
WATER MANAGEMENT TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 65A
Prepared under support of
United States Agency for International Development Contract AID/ta-C-1411
All reported opinions, conclusions or
recommendations are those of the authors
and not those of the funding agency
or the United States Government
Gaylord V. Skogerboe
Max K. Lowdermilk Edward W. Sparling Jacob E. Hautaluoma
Water Management Research Project
Engineering Research Center
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, Colorado
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES . . . . . . iii
ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . v
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . 1
THE SETTING . . . . . . . . . . 2
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS . . . . . . . . 5
Interdisciplinary Approach . . . . . . 7
Client Involvement . . . . . . . . 8
PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION . . . . . . . 9
Reconnaissance . . . . . . . . .. 9
Problem Diagnosis . . . . . . . . 11
DEVELOPMENT OF SOLUTIONS . . . . . . 13
Identification of Plausible Solutions . . . . 13
Testing and Adaption of Solutions . . . . 14
Assessment of Solution Packages . . . . 16
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION . . . . . . . 17
Project Authorization . . . . . . . 17
Project Organization . . . . . . . 17
Project Operation . . . . . . . . 20
LIST OF FIGURES
Flow diagram for the Problem Identification
phase. ...... ......... ..........10
2 Flow diagram for the Development of Solutions
phase. ...... ........ ...........14
3 Flow diagram for the Project Implementation
phase. ...... ........ ...........18
LIST OF TABLES
1 Phases and subphases of the development
process for improving irrigation water
management on farms. ...... ............5
The "Development Process for Improving Irrigation Water Management on Farms" is directed toward increasing the productivity of existing irrigated lands, improving the equity of income distribution, and resource conservation; thereby ensuring the long-term viability of the system. This process has two important themes: (1) an interdisciplinary approach; and (b) farmer-client involvement. Physical and social scientists work together with farmers in identifying major constraints to i-ncre-asi-ng... agricultural -prpsluc tivity while cons servin g natural resources. Acceptable solutions are developed for priority problems in collaboration with, ,farmers.. Finally, a solution package is implemented that utilizes both the resources of the farmers and the government. A manual has been prepared for each of the three phases in this development process: (1) Problem Identification Manual, (2) Development of Solutions Manual, and (3) Project Implementation Manual. These three manuals present guidelines for projects that have been given the task of improving on-farm water management in large scale irrigation systems. Although the approach advocated is general in application, it is particularly intended for use in developing countries. These manuals are especially designed to guide project managers in motivating and coordinating interdisciplinary development projects and in establishing farmer participation in the project.
A major campus activity under contract AID/ta-C-1411 has been the preparation of this "Development Process for Improving Irrigation Water Management on Farms." This has been an interdisciplinary effort
involving William Franklin and William Stewart, Agronomy; Doral Kemper and myself, Agricultural Engineering; Ed Sparling, Economics; George Radosevich, Water Law; David Freeman, James Layton and
Max Lowdermilk, Sociology; and Jack Hautaluoma, Psychology.
This development process consists of three phases: (1) Problem Identification; (2) Development of Solutions; and (3) Project Implementation. Dr. Lowdermilk served as team leader for the preparation of the Problem Identification Manual; Dr. Sparling and Dr. Kemper were in charge of the Development of Solutions Manual; and the leadership in completing the Project Implementation Manual was provided by Dr. Hautaluoma.
Besides this Executive Summary and the three manuals, there is a publication authored by Wayne Clyma, Max Lowdermilk and Gilbert L. Corey, "A Research-Development Process for On-Farm Water Management" (Tech. Report No. 47, Water Management Research Project, Colorado State University, 1977), which should be consulted by the reader for the philosophies and concepts used in describing this particular development process.
This has been one of the most difficult tasks that I have ever undertaken. Bringing together many disciplinary viewpoints regarding on-farm water management is an extremely time consuming task; however, the end result has been a very rewarding experience. I am indebted to all of the authors of these manuals, but I especially express my gratitude to the team leaders for each manual. In addition, I am extremely appreciative of the tremendous job of editing these manuscripts by Ms. Annette Ward.
Gaylord V. Skogerboe
Water Management Research Project
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, Colorado 80523
These three manuals present guidelines for projects that have been given the task of improving on-farm water management in large scale irrigation systems. Although the approach advocated is general in application, it is particularly intended for use in developing countries. Such countries lack established agricultural research and extension organizations. As a consequence, knowledge of farmers' problems is slow to reach appropriate government agencies. By the time an agency recognizes a need for improved on-farm water management, the problems are acute and numerous. Faced with such urgency, on-farm water management projects do not have the luxury of isolating small problems which can be solved in the realm of a single discipline such as agronomy, engineering, or law. Instead the project must grapple with multi-faceted problems which require expertise of several disciplines plus management skills not inherent in any of the disciplines. In addition, lack of an effective agricultural extension service means that the project must establish two-way. communication- with. farmers in order to understand their problems, enlist their aid in solving the problems and then to discriminate the-changes which embody the solution. These manuals are especially designed to guide project managers in motivating and coordinating interdisciplinary research and development and in establishing farmer participation in the project.
During the 1960's agriculture became a focus of attention in the theory and practice of economic development. Soon many individuals were citing that traditional agriculture needs new inputs if it is to become more productive. For example, the world soon became aware of new _.genetic technologies op 1 In
the 1970's it became clear that impacts of the Green Revolution varied greatly between countries and between regions within countries. As agricu a sts looked for explanations of this variation, it became clear that high potential yields can be realized only with precise control of inputs to genetically improved grains. In particular, water control and management was seen to be a fundamental requirement. Fifteen years after the beginning of the Green Revolution, it is evident that areas with adequate irrigation and drainage have profited significantly from new grain varieties, while those without irrigation have at best remained unchanged and at worst suffered due to market competition with regions where new varieties are irrigated.
Public investment in water control is a prerequisite to significant gains from high yielding crop varieties. The spread of irrigation to fodder and coarse grain crops in the high plains of the American West illustrates that the productivity of irrigation is not peculiar to labor intensive agriculture. Clearly, improved water control and management increases the productivity of agricultural lands.
A less obvious benefit of good water management is the gain in labor productivity. Seasonal labor shortages can be avoided through control of water inputs, while the potential for multiple cropping allows fuller utilization of labor during off-peak periods. Furthermore, the control of water inputs increases flexibility in scheduling farm equipment. Countries with abundant labor but seasonal labor shortages can use this flexibility to take advantage of economies of scale inherent in certain labor saving mechanical technologies while retaining labor intensive technologies appropriate to off-peak seasons. The increase in labor productivity resulting from improved water control and management practices will benefit landless laborers and farmers with relatively smaller acreages at least as much as farmers with larger landholdings.
In conclusion, public investment in irrigation can help increase
agricultural productivity and improve equity of income distribution in
Irrigation systems pose unique but well-known management
problems. The water resource must be captured and controlled; proper amounts must be delivered to crops at appropriate times. Equally
important but often overlooked is removal of wastewater from croplands.
Associated management functions include: construction and operation of large scale facilities; coordination of spatially dispersed conveyance systems; provision and enforcement of rights to water use; and collective good problems of maintaining productivity of both land and water resources. All of these functions suggest some form of collective action. In theory, indivisibilities and collective action are most efficiently managed by centralized, hierarchical authority. In practice, hierarchies do well in management of problems where subordinates are easily monitored. Consequently, construction and operation of large scale facilities is usually satisfactory. But, centralized organizations are inefficient at controlling multitudes of subordinates each Iof whom has a slightly. different set of circumstances. Thus, local water
management is either (a) subject to inflexible standard procedures appropriate to few situations; or (b) itis .the object of benign neglect.
The results are often inefficient conveyance and application of water from year to year, and to degradation of land and groundwater
resources in the longer run.
The source of the problem is not the fault of one institution or
another, rather it is one of missing communication links. In countries with highly .productive agricultural sectors, there are formal. and informal communication linkages between farmers and technical experts.
These linkages keep the research and development efforts of government and private technicians pointed in the direction of farmers' problems. When these linkages are weak or missing, research may have
little impact on farmers and vice versa.
Irrigation authorities in such countries recognize local water
management problems only after they become quite serious. Their
understandable response is an attempt to establish such linkages on a temporary basis. Such projects are then faced with problems more
comprehensive and at the same time ill-defined than those usually faced by agricultural technicians. The need is therefore to establish communications with farmers in order to better understand the problems., But the comprehensiveness of the problems means that their causes and solutions require simultaneous involvement of several disciplines. Thus, the approach used must rest upon the two basic principles advocated by these manuals: (1) farmer involvement in problem solving; and (2) interdisciplinary research.
This series of manuals on the "Development Process for Improving
Irrigation Water Management on Farms" is directed toward increasing the productivity of existing irrigated lands, improving the equity of income distribution, and resource conservation; thereby ensuring the long-term viability of the system. This process has two important themes: (a) an interdisciplinary approach; and (b) farmer-client involvement.
Physical and social scientists work together with farmers in identifying major constraints to increasing agricultural productivity while conserving natural resources. Acceptable solutions are developed for priority problems in collaboration with farmers. Finally, a solution package is implemented that utilizes both the resources of the farmers and the government. A manual has been prepared for each of the
three phases in this development process:
1. Problem Identification Manual;
2. Development of Solutions Manual; and
3. Project Implementation Manual.
The three phases have also been subdivided into subphases as listed in
Table 1. Phases and subphases of the development process for
improving irrigation water management on farms.
V" Problem Identification Reconnaissance
Development of Solutions Identification of
Testing and Adaption of
Assessment of Solution
Project Implementation Project Authorization
Together, the three manuals describe three phases that comprise an entire development process. In the Problem Identification phase,, the projettstaff (also referred to in these manuals as the program team, program staff, or team) seeks to understand and diagnose the agricultural system as it exists. In the Development of Solutions phase, alternative designs to correct problems in the system are identified and evaluated. In the Project Implementation phase, the program staff attempts to change the present system to a better one by implementing a solution.
Described in this manner, the three phases in this development process seem distinct. In reality they usually overlap because information is rarely complete from any particular phase before the next phase begins. There is also a continuous recycling through earlier phases as new facts *reveal a need for further information. For example, in the process of developing solutions, researchers discover new facts about farmer management practices. These new facts may necessitate a redefinition of the problem and a reordering of the associated priorities. Thus, it is likely that problem definitions will continue to change- as solutions-evolve and are-implemented.
When one constraint is relaxed in a production system, other constraints will become critical. Because implementation occurs on a larger scale than the development of solutions, it is likely that unforeseen constraints will emerge. This requires that solutions be flexible. enough, to be adapted-to, unexpected problems. Such flexibility involves a refinement in the development of solutions and the appearance of these unforeseen problems provides additional knowledge about problem identification.
Although the development process is a continuous recycling through phases, the manuals are organized in a separate and sequential format. Hopefully, allocating specific blocks of time and effort to each phase will encourage program members to recognize the limits of program resources and to keep sight of the goals they must reach.
At the same time, the three manuals should be used together, for, while they describe discrete steps, each has information relevant to the other two. The Problem Identification Manual contains much detailed
information about where to look for problems and therefore lays emphasis on types of measures and tests used in diagnosis. The
Development of Solutions Manual deals primarily with allocation of team resources to priority problems and therefore emphasizes strategies for conducting adaptive research which will lead to practical solutions. The Project Implementation Manual involves organization on a grander scale and therefore emphasis is upon management of interdisciplinary, clientoriented organizations. While it is fitting that the Problem Identification Manual emphasizes diagnostic techniques, it is clear that effective management of interdisciplinary research and strategies for choosing solvable problems are also important to problem identification. Similarly, the other two handbooks depend upon their companion volumes as necessary complements.
The "Development Process for Improving Irrigation Water Management on Farms" requires an effective interdisciplinary project team, consisting of some personnel trained in the physical sciences and others in the social sciences, in order to develop an adequate understanding of the farm irrigation system. Along with technically qualified and experienced professionals in the disciplines required, other essential ingredients are a commitment to the project, management skills, open communication, and close collaboration of team members with each, other and with the farmer clients. Some of the most essential elements for effective interdisciplinary teamwork include a respect for the contributions that each discipline can make; a _desire to establish effective communication with all disciplines and farmers; and the strong desire to learn from each other and from farmers in particular.
Achievement of such communication is not a trivial task. Staff members have learned to concentrate on variables and relationships within the province of their own discipline, ignoring or depreciating the significance of factors relegated to other disciplines. An interdisciplinary perspective therefore requires special effort, especially by project managers.
Special focus must be given to listening to the farmer-client, understanding his needs, and his perceptions of major farm constraints. This procedure helps to build credibility with the farmers by increasing their awareness and interest in solving farm problems.
Client involvement is an effective method for gaining information about the dynamics of the farm system and for identifying sources of support or obstacles to change. Farmers generally have extensive
relevant information, as well as an intuitive understanding of how their system works; yet, they are often ignored by outside experts.
Client involvement and an interdisciplinary approach are recurring, interconnected themes in all three manuals.
The intent of the Problem Identification manual is to provide an understanding of the sequence of specific activities, such as the use of reconnaissance findings for designing detailed diagnostic field studies, conducting diagnostic field studies, analysis and interpretation of findings, selection of criteria for ranking significant problems, and reporting of priority problems and their apparent causes.
A sequence of the major activities which can be used for problem identification studies during the two subphases of reconnaissance and problem diagnosis are shown in Figure 1.
The reconnaissance subphase is basically an initial learning situation that provides a general understanding of the farm situation.
First, there is a need for clearly stated preliminary objectives. The general objectives may, for example, be one or more of the following:
a) increased agricultural production;
b) increased equity of income distribution; and~
c) resource conservation.
These general objectives must be supplemented with more specific preliminary objectives so that they provide definite focus to the development process. Examples of more specific objectives would be to increase yields of a particular crop by a certain amount by a particular year, increase income of tenants and farmers with small landholdings, provide increased work opportunities in a particular region, alleviate waterlogging and salinity problems, or reduce erosion of topsoil.
Reconnaissance includes the,, survey and. summary,. of ,previous,
available investigations. Visits should be arranged with officials -of o rganizations related to agriculture,. such as governmental. departments, niversities, and"'selecte'd "personnel at research institutes. Informal interviews with farmers give the project team a feeling for farmers' views of their own problems.
PRELIMINARY PROGRAM OBJECTIVES
a. Increased Agricultural Production
b. Increased Equity of Income Distribution
c. Resource Conservation
DEVELOP GENERAL OVERVIEW OF SYSTEM
cn CONDUCT RECONNAISSANCE FIELD INVESTIGATIONS
-n a. Plant Environment
z b. Farm Management Practices
z c. Water Supply and Removal
d. Institutinal Linkages
PRELIMINARY LISTING OF PROBLEMS
REFINE PROGRAM OBJECTIVES
DESIGN DIAGNOSTIC STUDIES
CONDUCT DIAGNOSTIC FIELD STUDIES
a. Plant Environment Ub. Farm Management Practices
0 c. Water Supply and Removal
z d. Institutional Linkages
2 I ANALYSES AND INTERPRETATION OF FINDINGS
n,. IDENTIFY CRITERIA FOR SELECTION AND RANKING
C.. OF PROBLEMS ACCORDING TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES
REPORT FINDINGS OF PRIORITY PROBLEMS iAND THEIR APPARENT CAUSES Figure 1. Flow diagram for the Problem Identification phase.
Reconnaissance also includes preliminary- ield ,surveys, not to be confused with the more detailed diagnostic surveys to be conducted later. The preliminary field survey is designed to provide an overview of the farm system and to identify potential subjects for intensive ,stujy. Preliminary field surveys will focus on four components:
(a) the plant environment; (b) farm management practices; (c) water supply and removal; and (d) the institutional linkages supporting the system.
The members of the reconnaissance team should collect data for planning the detailed field studies, but they should attempt to limit the amount of data they bring to the planning sessions of the team. Their information will be used to prepare the more detailed diagnostic field studies to be conducted under the Problem Diagnosis subphase.
Information from the initial, reconnaissance Iis discussed by team members who propose a list of m ajor problem areas. Explicit use should be made of preliminary objectives as criteria for selecting major problem areas. The project team and officials of relevant agencies then refine the preliminary objectives in light of the knowledge gained. The result is a set of operational objectives which should be much more clearly stated and specific than the preliminary objectives.
The next step is to design diagnostic field studies. Close collaboration between disciplines and with concerned agencies outside the project is imperative at this point. There are economies of size in field studies since the same sites and personnel may simultaneously be used to gather data relevant to several problems and from several disciplinary perspectives. Furthermore, there is always the possibility that project studies can complement studies being done by other agencies or that they are duplicating or confounding work being done by others.
Communication and consultation between the many people involved will require time and effort. There will be a natural eagerness to get on with what seem to be obviously important tasks. It is the duty of the project manager to keep team personnel aware of the pitfalls of hastily designing field studies.
After the data are collected, data analyses and interpretation must be completed as a team activity. The data analyses must be planned before doing the field studies and should be designed to relate problems to project objectives. To provide a long list of problems without showing, their relative significancein relationship to each other is not sufficient. Problems or constraints must be ranked in relationship to agreed upon criteria.
Ranking of priority problems may reveal inconsistencies or inadequacies of criteria previously agreed upon. New information about political or organizational realities may reshape objectives. Therefore, the last step in the Problem Diagnosis subphase--refine program objectives- -should develop a final set of criteria reflecting the realities which determine the priority ranking of problems. Those criteria will guide allocation of project resources in the Development of Solutions phase.
The findings, of the- diagnostic ,field. studies should be reported to, two major audiences. Brief summary reports without much technical language should be prepared for policy-makers who need to be kept informed of the field studies. More technical reports are required for the persons who will be working in the Development of Solutions phase to provide them with background information and benchmark data for their applied, adaptive, and evaluative research efforts in order to determine acceptable solutions for the identified priority problems.
DEVELOPMENT OF SOLUTIONS
The transition from the Problem Identification phase to the Development of Solutions phase occurs when the staff agrees to change emphasis from understanding problems to actual attempts at solution. The development of solutions is characterized by three subphases:
(a) identification of plausible solutions; (b) testing and adaption of solutions; and (c) assessment of solution packages. These subphases are represented diagramatically in Figure 2.
The Development of Solutions phase marks a change in the relationship of project staff to their clients. During the Problem Identification phase the staff had a relatively passive role while observing the system. The Development of Solutions phase requires a more action oriented, manipulative role. This assumption of initiative brings with it a temptation for "experts" to ignore the farmers in the rush to define solutions. But, in the Development of Solutions phase the farmers' opinions and _suggestions.. are very important. First, the farmers are intimately familiar with details peculiar to the local situation. Second, farmers are, by necessity, interdisciplinary in their approach to the system. Their critical judgment can help project specialists become aware of the dynamics of the agricultural 'system.
Identification of Plausible Solutions
Faced with a situation where solutions are not obvious, a worthwhile technique to elicit ideas is a "brainstorming session." All members of the staff are encouraged to spontaneously submit ideas with no threat of judgment. Inputs from farmers can be included indirectly through the staff members. After many ideas have been exhausted for each problem, they are evaluated with respect to program objectives and constraints to eliminate obviously impractical or implausible solutions. The criteria used at the initial screening should be quite general because subsequent steps involve more detailed consideration of each potential solution.
After initial screening, the remaining solutions are subjected to detailed analysis for potential costs and benefits to each interest group within the society. This exercise is time consuming; it is an important
DEVELOPMENT OF SOLUTIONS GENERATE POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS
TO PRIORITY PROBLEMS
SCREEN POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS DISCARD
a. Program Objectives .zIMPLAUSIBLE o 2 [b. Program Constraints SOLUTIONS
2: c. Strategic Considerations
E RANK PLAUSIBLE SOLUTIONS
Z L a. Groups Affected
e b. Uncertainty
CL c. Disciplines Involved
d. Time Requirements e. Resource Requirements f. Complementarities with other Solutions
DEVELOP WORK PLAN
a. Set Goals
b. Design Tests c. Allocate Team Resources d. Specify Feedback Mechanisms e. Specify Deadlines
CL Jn PERFORM TESTS
o CONDUCT DEMONSTRATIONS,
o, FIELD DAYS, etc.
OBTAIN FEEDBACK FROM CLIENTS a. Farmers
REFINE SOLUTIONS WITH PHASED WITHDRAWAL OF TEAM RESOURCES
ASSESS SOLUTIONS ACCORDING TO PROGRAM OBJECTIVES a. Technical Adequacy b. Farmer Acceptance c. Former Participation d. Economic Adequacy e. Social and Political Feasibility W f. Organizational Adequacy
f.MOE No- Yes
SYNTHESIS OF ACCEPTABLE SOLUTIONS INTO ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION PACKAGES
REPORT ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION PACKAGES
Figure 2. Flow diagram for the Development of Solutions phase.
part of identifying those relationships which need study. It also reminds team members of the inter- connectedness of their discipline oriented tasks.
Classification of benefits and costs by interest group facilitates comparison of solutions by economic efficiency criteria, as well as equity criteria, and it improves the quality of estimates of aggregate effects which must include indirect as well as direct impacts. Finally, identification of interest groups helps to identify sources of potential support or resistance for each solution.
Other criteria which must be considered include the demands made upon project resources. Does the project have the expertise, manpower, financial resources, and time to both develop and implement the solution in question? Finally, since the ultimate feasibility of a given solution will generally be uncertain, the staff must consider the risk of allocating its resources to one or two promising solutions instead of developing several alternative solutions. A general rule is that plausible alternatives should be retained as long as possible to maintain flexibility in project planning. Thus, after plausible solutions have been evaluated according to expected benefits and costs to various clients, for their demands upon project resources, and for their probable feasibility, the project staff must agree upon a strategy for detailed development of a group of solutions with the understanding that some potential solutions will be discarded or significantly modified as results of tests and field trials are evaluated.
Testing and Adaption of Solutions
Agreement upon an overall strategy is then translated into a set of tests to gain necessary information about potential solutions. Project staff will be assigned to various information gathering tasks with agreed upon deadlines. There is a natural tendency for staff to develop vested interests in "their" solutions. Therefore, it is important that staff agree ahead of time upon decision points and criteria to be used in choosing between alternatives. The tendency to develop proprietary attitudes toward particular solutions can be offset by assigning individuals to development of multiple solutions as far as practical.
Detailed development then proceeds through testing of parts of solutions to field trials where farmers and other interested parties can observe and evaluate the solutions. It is particularly important to keep officials of relevant agencies appraised of field trial results. While government agencies have different interests than farmers, they are an important part of the farmers' environment. Ignoring them may lead to overlooking important matters which could either block or, enhance implementation. Conversely, consulting government agencies can allow for necessary adoptions while gaining potential support for subsequent implementation proposals.
An important aspect of solution development is the phased withdrawal of support of the project staff. Implementation will be
carried out on a larger scale by less highly trained staff. Therefore, an ideal final solution would be one which can be implemented by farmers totally independent of technical or financial assistance. Short of this, the development of a feasible solution must assure that the solution can succeed with such support as will be available to farmers during implementation.
Assessment of Solution Packages
When field tests are finished, the solutions are given a final, thorough assessment for technical adequacy, farmer acceptance, farmer participation, economic adequacy, social and political feasibility, and organizational adequacy. The next step in solution development is to synthesize the acceptable solutions into alternative solution packages. Finally, these alternative solution packages must be presented in a formal report in a format that can be used by decision -makers.
A flow diagram for this final phase in the development process is shown in Figure 3. The Project Implementation phase consists of three subphases: (a) project authorization; (b) project organization; and
(c) project operation.
After a set of solutions has been suggested from the preceding phase, it is necessary to select one solution and to act on it. The Project Implementation Manual discusses the process of selecting a solution. It makes recommendations on how the technical staff, who were involved in the Problem Identification and Development of Solutions phases, can contribute to the selection which includes political and other considerations.
Once the solution is chosen and the general purpose of a project is defined, it is necessary to prepare a proposal to secure funding from donors, the government, etc. The manual lists criteria of good
proposals and offers suggestions for the analyses that would be done and the kinds of evidence that should be included in making a convincing presentation. A general approach for preparing executive proposals is described.
Some of the legal arrangements required for a project have to be dealt with before a proposal is accepted, but other legal actions are necessary after the project is approved by the donors. The manual describes important legal issues and discusses means of dealing with them.
The project's organizational form should have been considered in writing the proposal; however, a final decision on the structure can only be made after the 'project has been authorized. The manual
examines differences between projects and other organizations and points out management concerns for the project staff. Four forms of project organization are described. In one form the staff is made of people from one agency who are on temporary assignment to do the
REVIEW ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION PACKAGES AND IDENTIFY PROJECT APPROACH
0 PREPARE PROJECT OBJECTIVES
J PLAN AND DEVELOP PROJECT PROPOSAL
OBTAIN PROJECT AUTHORIZATION No
MAKE LEGAL ARRANGEMENTS
ESTABLISH PROJECT ORGANIZATION
z [-SELECT KEY PERSONNEL I
W < REFINE PROJECT OBJECTIVES
-. a DEVELOP INSTITUTIONAL LINKAGES
SPECIFY MODE OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT
SELECT AND TRAIN PROJECT PERSONNEL
OPERATIONALIZE OBJECTIVES I
DEVELOP WORK PLAN AND SCHEDULE OF EVENTS
INITIATE PROJECT FIELD OPERATIONS
ESTABLISH FIELD TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES
.J -.OBTAIN FARMER PARTICIPATION AND TRAIN FARMERS 0"
0o ORGANIZE FARMERS
DEVELOP LINES OF COMMUNICATION WITH OTHER ORGANIZATIONS
MONITORING, EVALUATION AND REFINEMENT
PHASED TRANSFER OF RESPONSIBILITY
Figure 3. Flow diagram for the Project Implementation phase.
project. The second form is where the project is done by a relatively permanent staff from an agency whose job is to go from one project to another. Another approach is the matrixix? model, a form used by organizations who deal with much change or who strictly follow a managemen t-by -goals scheme. Finally, a common form of project organization is to have the key persons be contract personnel whose careers are directed toward doing the kind of work required on the project. All of these forms are acceptable and the manual describes
some of the consequences of using each approach.
After the project organizational form is chosen, it is necessary to
recruit the remainder of the high level project staff. In writing the proposal, and in doing some of the other work to prepare the project, several key persons may have been committed to be on the staff. After authorization, the other principal technical and project management positions must be filled. The manual describes some criteria of good project staff persons and advocates recruiting procedures for obtaining
The style of managing the project must be established early. The
manual recommends establishing teamwork and describes important features of attaining interdisciplinary teamwork. The necessity of having an interdisciplinary project is discussed as are some of the
One of the bases of interdi ciplinaaryjeamwork,,on a project is the 'use of a participative management style. The style is also applicable to
utilizing the contributions of persons from different cultures, although it is not used in many parts of the world. The advantages and
disadvantages of the style and some issues about its use are considered. A model for using the style in a meeting is presented.
Good project teams resolve their conflicts rather than avoid them.
Some good means of dealing with conflict are described and discussed,
and a recommended approach is covered.
Managing through goals to produce teamwork is strongly
advocated. A goal setting process, the changes that take place in the organization because of using goals, and the need to monitor progress
toward goals and refine goals are considered.
Dealing with cross-cultural issues is one of the overlooked areas of project management. The project managers! responsibilities are to emphasize the importance of cross-cultural issues and to model good practices in confronting them. Several practical steps are described in the manual for training, inducing sensitivity, and meeting the issues effectively.
Once the central project staff is assembled, they must set the project in motion. One of the first tasks is to refine the project's objective into operational goals. Milestone points of progress should be identified and the work plan of the project should be laid out in a manner similar to the Critical Path Method (CPM) or the Program Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT).
Next, the remainder of the project staff should be hired including lower level administration, technical and labor personnel. Again, some desirable qualifications for these people are discussed and a recruitment procedure is outlined.
The need for training of the staff a ,nd the farmer is recognized. Principles of training relevant to on-farm water development 'projects are listed. The manual recommends that much training of farmers be done within the context of, a. water management advisory' service. which is similar to an extension service, but mainly for on-farm. -water management topics.
An important job for the project's manager is to make the project function effectively in the social, cultural, political and technical context in which the project is nested. A main concern is obtaining the involvement of the farmers. and .,maintaining, their participation through recognition, good reward practices, training, and the development of
frer oriznztos.,. Steps are described on how to assess and ensure farmer participation.
The network of different types of organizations affecting the project is presented. Much of the manager's task here is to analyze the networks that exist and then practice good public relations to foster
the development of an infrastructure favorable to continuing the project's aims. Water users associations are a part of this organizational network.
Throughout the various phases of the development process, evaluation and improvement of results have been stressed. In this final phase of the project, it is most important to have carefully considered a specific system for, monitoring, evaluation and refinement of ,the project."'. activities and methods. Monitoring consists essentially of inspecting key indices of the progress and quality of performance of the project. Monitoring may utilize existing data collection programs by other agencies; but invariably, such data will have to be supplemented by a monitoring network operated by project personnel.
Evaluation involves relating the changes in resource availability and use to production costs and yields, which develop into socioeconomic impacts. These relations are, in turn, evaluated against project goals and targets to determine the effectiveness of project implementation. Besides evaluating the monitoring data (which is done on a continual basis), it is usually necessary to do supplementary field evaluations which involve the collection of additional data.
Refinement is concerned with implementation of changes resulting from the evaluation process, which involves a reassessment or "tuning up" of the project plan. Refinement can consist of minor adjustments to project implementation or even major revisions to the project. The primary purpose of refinement is to continually readjust the mechanics of project implementation and the package of solutions, which is a recognition that successful project planning and implementation are reiterative and dynamic processes. The project plan needs to be sufficiently flexible so experience and evaluation can result in continual improvement.
In the Development of Solutions Manual, a procedure of phased withdrawal of technical support is suggested as a means for ensuring a balance of farmer and project involvement, which transfers as much
rsonsibility to the.,_farmers as, is practicable. During the Project Implementation phase, the capability of farmers and their associations to assume project activities after the staff leaves must be developed. To
ensure that this is done in a gradual and orderly way, the phased withdrawal of support should be programmed at the outset so that there is a full understanding about the transition of responsibility by all parties involved. Ideally, the innovation should be completely integrated into the agricultural system before the project personnel move on to other assignments. But this integration is unlikely to
happen if total responsibility for innovations has not been transferred to users well before the end of the project.