64% of the ADP under the discretion of district governments (i.e. excluding CCBs). This relatively high allocation for water and sanitation is particularly surprising given that legally this sector is a responsibility of the tehsils and not the districts. That districts have intruded into this area is also indicative of the priority attached to it.

The other defining feature of the district ADP is the small size of the typical scheme. As Figure 7 left panel shows, there were, excluding block allocations, over 17,000 schemes in the development portfolio of these districts in Punjab. Of these 4685 were roads schemes, 6248 water and sanitation schemes, 1586 electrification schemes, 880 education, and 201

**Figure 6: Consolidated Punjab district ADP**

<!-- Start of picture text --> 2006/07<br>Distribution of district ADP 2006/07<br>Education<br>Rs.1152m, 5% Health<br>Rs.447m, 2%<br>Others<br>Rs.4721m, 21%<br>Roads<br>Rs.7274m, 32%<br>Rs. 22,640 Million<br>CCBs<br>Rs. 5987m, 26%<br>Water & sanitation<br>Electrification Rs. 1769m, 8%<br>Rs. 1289m, 6%<br><!-- End of picture text --> _Note_ : District ADPs are based on data received from 33 out of the 35 districts of Punjab _Source_ : Concerned district governments health schemes. The size of a typical road scheme was roughly Rs.1.5 million, and of a water and sanitation scheme only Rs.0.3 million (Figure 7, right panel). These were typically neighborhood-specific schemes – construction or rehabilitation of a small road or drains (what is referred to as ‘soling’).

**Figure 7: District ADPs in Punjab, 2006/07: number and average size of schemes**

<!-- Start of picture text --> Number of schemes in district ADP 2006/07 (excluding CCBs) Average allocation per scheme (Rs.)<br>2,500,000<br>Others 1827<br>2,250,000 2,174,010<br>Union schemes 1976 2,000,000<br>1,750,000<br>Electrification 1586 1,481,089<br>1,500,000<br>1,287,978<br>Water & sanitation 6248 1,250,000<br>1,000,000<br>Roads 4685 733,861<br>750,000<br>Education 880 500,000 280,508<br>250,000<br>Health 201 0<br>Education Health Roads Water & Rural<br>- 17,403 sanitation electrification<br><!-- End of picture text --> _Source_ : District governments It should be noted that due to a number of block allocations the above is not a complete picture of sectoral district development spending. For example, most districts provide a block allocation for schemes to be identified by the union councils, and anecdotal evidence suggests that these are also mostly small infrastructure projects the details of which are unknown. Similarly, the details of CCB schemes, where formed, are also not available. Therefore the total number of schemes is likely to be larger, and the focus on physical infrastructure greater, than what is portrayed in these figures.

How do these allocations compare to that of the provincial government in the post-devolution period? Figure 8, provides the average sectoral composition of the provincial ADP for 2001/02 to 2006/07. Roads and large-scale infrastructure projects are also a priority for provincial policymakers, but education also features as a priority sector. Specifically on average 27% of the ADB was allocated to roads, 16% to education, 12% to irrigation, and 5% to health. The provincial government has therefore prioritized social sectors much more than the district government.

13