External Evaluator: Hiroshi Oita (OPMAC Co., Ltd.)JBIC ODA Loan Project Mid-Term Review
Time of Mid-Term Review Field Survey: June 2006
Project Title: Thailand: “Project for Revitalization of the Deteriorated Environment in the Land Reform Areas throughIntegrated Agricultural Development (Stage I) (L/A No. TXXIII-10)[Loan Outline]
Loan Amount/Contract Approved Amount/Disbursed Amount: 3,617 million yen/2,125 million yen/1,703 million yen (end June 2006)
Loan Agreement: Entered September 1998
Loan Completion: Six years following issuance of loan agreement (January 2005, extended to January 2008)
Executing Agency: Agricultural Land Reform Office (ALRO) of the Thai Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives[Project Objective]
The objective of this project is to foster integrated agriculture in four land reform provinces in northeast Thailand (Mukdahan, Sakon Nakhon, Maha Sarakham, Khon Kaen) by
supporting the construction of farm ponds, the repair of farm roads , and the introduction of micro-irrigation for farmers who have received farming rights on cultivated land by ALRO,and thereby contribute to bettering the lives of farmers in the target regions, help them become independent, and strengthen the overall community through farmer group activities aimed
at “capacity development.” In addition, by conducting this project, the goal is to restrain the use of protected forests adjoining the farms, and thereby contribute to forest conservation.
Consultant: A joint venture comprised of Sanyu Consultants forming the nucleus together with TEAM Consulting Engineering and Management Co., LTD. (Thailand) and another fourcompanies.
Contractor: All Thai enterprises (Ludee Prayong Co., Ltd., Sahabun Engineering Co., Ltd., ESRI (Thailand) Co., Ltd., Umphon Engineering Co., Ltd. etc.)
Item[Relevance](1) National policy level(2) Policy level

Results of ex-ante evaluation (March 2001)
In its Eighth National Economic and Social Development Plan
(1997-2001), it shifts its focus from economic development of Bangkok,
Metropolitan Area which was promoted under up to the Seventh Plan.
Instead, decentralized economic activity and the development of local
and rural villages became urgent government policy themes.

Ex-post evaluation results as estimated at time of mid-term review
In Thailand’s Ninth National Economic and Social Development Plan
(2002-2006), poverty reduction was a prominent issue. Northeastern region
the northeast is poor and has traditionally been a focus of support in theagriculture sector. In addition, the “Sufficiency Economy” advocated by theking upon the economic crisis of 1997 suggests that the people should spend
what they can afford.

Based on the above, from the standpoint of creating jobs for employees
following the 1997 currency crisis, the Ministry of Agriculture andCooperatives established the Economic Policies and Measures by theMinistry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, which was approved by thecabinet in 1998, as a way to promote rural development. Moreover, in theLand Reform Act enacted in 1975, if aims to promote distribution of land
to poor farmers in Northeastern region who had no land title,
establishment of agriculture management, and improvement of peoples’
livelihood.

Thailand’s Ninth Agricultural Development Plan (2002-2006) stipulates thatthe government should promote economic and social stabilization andindependence of farmers through helping them improve the quality of theirlives. According to the plan, it should also establish farmers development
networks to strengthen farmer-run organizations while conforming to theregion’s local wisdom and traditional knowledge and culture. The present
project is designed to farmers become independent through integrated
agriculture, and as such can be said to conform to government policy.

1(3) Planning level[Effectiveness]

The present project was designed to promote integrated agriculture byproviding farm ponds and other basic agricultural infrastructure tofarmers in the land reform area in northeast Thailand. As such the project
was a matter of high priority.

The present project was conducted in accordance with initial plans whichwere based on a feasibility study by Japan International Cooperation Agency.
Although certain revisions were made, work on basic infrastructure such as
farm ponds and farm roads have proceeded as planned. It continues tostrengthen networks among farmers by developing local markets andfostering leaders in the community.

(1) Operation and Effect indicators
Quantitative effects
At the time of the ex-ante evaluation, no indicators were set. However,
JICA feasibility figures were recorded below under Output as baseline
estimates for such things as the number of farm ponds, etc.

(1) Operation and Effect indicators
Quantitative effects
The indicators below were set based on the project’s work contents.

1) Operation indicators
Number of farm ponds provided, length of farm roads serviced, dam- or
pump-based irrigation area.

1) Operation indicators
Number of farm ponds provided, length of farm roads, dam- or pump-based
irrigation area, number of micro-irrigation projects conducted.

1) Number of farm ponds provided
2) Number of farm ponds expanded
3)Number of community ponds
provided4) Length of farm roads (km)5)Irrigation area (rai)6)Locations
targetedformicro-irrigation

Initial target(July 1998)
10,714
1,607
20

Revisedtargets

Present(May 2006)(January 2005)

1) Number of farm ponds provided
4,232
4,089
2) Number of farm ponds expanded
649396
3) Number of community ponds
2923
provided4) Length of farm roads serviced
830
828(㎞)
5) Irrigation area (rai)
5,519
5,457
6)
Locationstargetedfor
1,624
1,623
micro-irrigation
Note 1: See below for figures for each target province.
Note 2: Revised figures were set based on the past result achieved by the timethat extension of the yen loan expiration date was being considered.
Note 3: 1 rai = 0.16ha
Note 4: Micro-irrigation was added to the plan in December 2002.

504
13,800NA

There is a wide gap between the initial target figures and the revised onese.g., as the number of farm ponds. When the topographical map was puttogether, it was determined that there were many farm water surfaces, a great2

deal of land for public use, and community forests. Furthermore, ponds could
only be developed on farmlands for which farming rights had been granted
and considerable time was needed between the application for farming rights
and its approval, which caused significant change in the target number (there
are no plans to build new farm ponds). At present, the forecast is that therevised targets will be attained for the development of farm roads, irrigation,and micro-irrigation.
To protect forests, the government grants legal permission for farmlands andprevents the destruction of forests through illegal expansion of farmland.
However, no measurements have been taken to assess the quantitative effectof these measures.
2) Effect indicators
While the present project has partly contributed to raising farmer incomesthrough higher production due to micro-irrigation or dam-based irrigation, theThai government and executing agency (ALRO) have focused ontransitioning from rain-fed agriculture dependent on a solitary crop—such as
rice, cassava, or sugar cane—to a more integrated and independent form ofagriculture. In other words, the main purpose of the present project is notincreasing income per se, but rather on having people learn to resolve theirown problems—the emphasis being on raising the farming communities’
capacity by developing integrated farm agriculture.
In addition, the state of pond usage, the number of networks that village
leaders are participating in actively, and the number of community markets
were established as indicators. The state of farm pond usage is to be judged
according to four grades (excellent, good, fair, to be improved) set by ALRO
for farm ponds built under this project. (Details are attached below.) Because
the loan expires in January 2008, the target figures are the fugures
confirmation of objectives will take place at the time of the ex-post evaluation(estimated).

3

Number of networks in which village
leaders are taking an active role.
Number of village
Number of village
leader networks
leader networks
Number of target
active in the tambons
active at the time ofvillages (tambons)(June 2006)
the ex-post evaluation(January 2010)33
28
28
Note 1: A tambon is an administrative unit at the village level in Thailand.
Note 2: See below for figures by target province.
With support from Village Foundation, a Thai NGO, village leader activities
have been developed. A part of those activities take the form of anorganization named In Pang, which has regional span. However, rather thanhaving entire tambons act under their leaders, it is organized by the farmer
farmers who support their leader’s guidance.

Number of community markets established
Target number of
Number ofcommunity markets
Number of target
community markets
at time of ex-post
villages (tambons)(June 2006)
evaluation(January 2010)33
818
Note: See below for figures by target province.
The number of community markets is increasing in response to theheightened demand for organic farming. In addition, some tambons aresending a team to study community markets in other tambons, and are setting
up similar markets of their own. It is expected that they will be reaching theirtargets.
(2) Factors which may influence the effectiveness and impact
・ Institutionalization of village leaders. Shifts from organizations
composed only of farmers who agree, to those in which all of the target
village’s farmers participate.
・ Maintenance of expanding community markets. Currently, manyvillages are sending a team to study community markets, and there is aneed to disseminate the markets’ management methods.
4

・ Withdrawal from integrated agriculture a shift to the farming of solitarycrops. There is a chance that some will withdraw from the practice ofintegrated agriculture by turning towards the easier-to-maintain solo
crop cultivation such as cassava. Others may relinquish farmlands on
account of increased chances for other sources of income.
・ Stagnation of farm income due to sluggish crop prices. This includes adrop in prices due to overproduction of particular crops.
(3) Factors which may influence the sustainability
While the items in (2) above affect project effectiveness or impact, they also
have a direct or indirect effect on sustainability.

Information for reference[Efficiency](1) Outputs

・ Transfer of control of operation and maintenance to each target village.
Control of operation and management for farm roads, community ponds,dams, and pump stations is being transferred to each target village. But
because the operation and maintenance fees for individual target villages
are insufficient, operation and maintenance may not be conducted
continuously.
・ Sustainability of integrated agriculture and successorship. There is a trend
for the younger generation to head to the cities in search of education anda better life, and the population of those engaged in agriculture is aging.
Given this, it is vital that the attraction of agriculture itself be heightened,and secure a new generation as a capable successor.
Ex-post evaluation results as estimated at time of mid-term review

Results of ex-ante evaluation (March 2001)(1) Outputs(1) Outputs (same as the revised target)

1) Basic agricultural infrastructure(a) Construction of new farm ponds (approx. 10,000locations/1,200m3 scale)(b) Expansion of existing farm ponds (approx. 1,600 locations)(c) Community ponds(20 locations/100,000m3 scale)(d) Construction of farm roads (approx. 500km, 6/4/3 m wide)(e) Construction of irrigation facilities(f) Making of 1/4000-scale maps

1) Basic agricultural infrastructure(a) Construction of new farm ponds (4,232 locations)(b) Expansion of existing farm ponds (649 locations)(c) Community ponds (29 locations)(d) Construction of farm roads (830km)(e) Construction of irrigation facilities(including micro-irrigation)(f) Making of 1/4000-scale maps

2) Procurement of construction machinery (about 20 excavators andother equipment)
3) Environmental measures (soil and water preservation activities)4) Support for the organization of agricultural institutions, training of

2) Procurement of construction machinery
Construction machinery was not procured because there was a switch fromhaving ALRO directly manage the work to having the work contracted out toanother party.

5personnel
5) Low-interest loans for farmers6) Consulting services(Foreigners: 33 man-months/local consultants: 480 man-months)

3) Environmental measures
Farmers’ consent to conduct soil erosion was not obtained. On the otherhand, because tree planting was already their standard approach for soil
conservation, planting was used instead under ALRO’s budget.
4) Support for the organization of agricultural institutions, training ofpersonnel
In addition to fostering village leaders, learning centers provided a venue forfarmers to share their experiences and disseminate knowledge about organicfertilization.
5) Low-interest loans for farmers
While it is outside the scope of the yen loan for this project, financing within
farmer groups is taking place in a way that they can obtain loans under themost favorable terms possible. Loans from ALRO’s fund are being used forbuying materials to expand integrated agriculture, financing livestock
purchases, expanding ponds, and purchasing pumps for micro-irrigation
6) Consulting services (Foreigners: 63 man-months; local consultants: 753
man-months (forecast))(2) Project period(2) Project period
January 1999-June 2003 (54 months)(2) Project period
January 2002-October 2007 (est.) (70 months)

Lessons Learned andRecommendations

・Indicators set for use attime of ex-post evaluation

In small-scale, decentralized endeavors like this project, one should conduct enough discussions with the executing agency in accordance with local
conditions regarding the flow of money from JBIC, the loan provider, to loan end users in the land reform areas, and to conduct timely and adequate
discussions to determine administrative risk.
・ At the time of the project ex-post evaluation, it is difficult for a third party to conduct it alone if it does not get the assistance of the currently hiredconsultant. In addition, it would be desirable for the evaluation to be done in conjunction with the Thai side. There needs to be a prior discussion toreview the content of this project with ALRO before the completion of this project (final loan disbursement) to determine what needs to be the focusof evaluation, what items to be evaluated, who is to evaluate, and how the evaluation is conducted.
N/A(1) Operation indicators
1) Number of farm ponds provided
2) Number of farm ponds expanded
3) Number of community ponds provided4) Length of farm roads serviced (km)5) Dam-based irrigation (rai)6) Locations targeted for micro-irrigation(2) Effect indicators
1) Number of networks where village leaders are active2) Number of community markets established3) Farmer income (in the case if it becomes an ex-post evaluation item)61. Operation Indicator2) Pond Enlargement (Site)

1) Farm Pond (Site)
Original

Modified

Original

ActualActualKhon Kaen

380

400

183605Maha Sarakam

110

184

148788730

Sakhon Nakhon

7906565

2,194290

278

Mukdahan327--

10,714

4,232

4,089

1,607

649

396

Khon Kaen

2,550

2,549

2,476

Maha Sarakam

720

605

Sakhon Nakhon

5,250

Mukdahan
Total

Modified

Total4) Main, lateral & On-Farm Road (Km)3) Community Pond (Site)
Original

Modified

Original

ActualModified

ActualKhon Kaen

71010

Khon Kaen

241333333

Maha Sarakam

111

Maha Sarakam

6986

83

Sakhon Nakhon

81611

Sakhon Nakhon

111

236

236

Mukdahan421

Mukdahan

83

175

175

202923504

830

828

Total

6) Micro Irrigation (Plot)

5) Water Resources Development (rai)Original
Khon Kaen

Modified

Actual

8,100

3,926

3,905

Maha Sarakam000

Sakhon Nakhon

000

5,700

1,593

1,552

13,800

5,519

5,457

Mukdahan
Total

Total

Khon Kaen

Original(additional)
1,685

Modified

Actual819

722

Maha Sarakam

422

248

249

Sakhon Nakhon

861

223

245

Mukdahan

275

334

407

3,243

1,624

1,623

Total

7

2. Effect Indicator1) Utilization of Farm Pond
Excellent：Scores 75 and above／Good：Scores between 61 and 74／Fair：Scores between 41 and 60／To be improved：Scores below 40.
Pond Enlargement (Site)

Farm Pond (Site)
OriginalExcellent

Khon Kaen

Fair

To be
improved

400605Maha Sarakam

110

184

5,250788

Sakhon Nakhon

790

65

2,194

290

Mukdahan327-

10,714

4,232

1,607

649

Maha Sarakam

720

Sakhon Nakhon
Mukdahan

Total

Number of Tambon
Level Leader
Networks (2006)

Target Number ofLeader Networks still
active (2010)

Total Number ofTambons under
the Project17(16)

1616

Khon Kaen

Maha Sarakam

544

Sakhon Nakhon

9(8)4435(33)

Total-Fair

To be
improved--3) Number of Community Market established2) Number of Leader Networks
Total Number ofTambons underthe Project

Mukdahan

GoodExcellent

380

2,549

Khon KaenGoodUtilization of Enlarged Farm Pond

Modified

Khon Kaen

2,550

Total

Original

Utilization of Farm Pond

Modified

Number ofCommunity Markets(2006)

Target Number ofCommunity
Markets(2010)17(16)

17

Maha Sarakam

5234

Sakhon Nakhon

9(8)

3544

Mukdahan423282835(33)

818

Total

Note: There were basically no beneficiaries in the two tambons of Khon Kaen to Sakon Nakhon. Actual farmlands belonged to other tambons, and so this project did not conduct activities inthose areas8

9