Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No: ICR00005011 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT 5087-IN ON AN INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION CREDIT IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 39.60 MILLION (US$60.0 MILLION EQUIVALENT) TO THE REPUBLIC OF INDIA FOR A KARNATAKA WATERSHED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT - II August 26, 2020 Agriculture And Food Global Practice South Asia Region This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective December 31, 2019) Currency Unit = Indian Rupee (INR) INR 71= US$1 US$1.3860 = SDR 1 FISCAL YEAR April 1 – March 31 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS CFTRI Central Food Technological Research Institute CPF Country Partnership Framework CPS Country Partnership Strategy CRM Customer Relations Management DAH&VS Department of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services DATC District Agriculture Training Centers DEA Government of India Department of Economic Affairs DoH Department of Horticulture DoLR Department of Land Resources DPR Detailed Project Report DSS Decision Support System EMF Environmental Management Framework ERR Economic Rate of Return FAO-TCIN Food and Agriculture Organization Investment Center Division FBO Farmer-based Organization FIG Farmer Interest Group FPO Farmer Producer Organization FRR Financial Rate of Return GIS Geographic Information System GoI Government of India GoK Government of Karnataka ICAR Indian Council of Agricultural Research ICAR-IIS&WC ICAR - Indian Institute of Soil and Water Conservation ICAR-NBSS&LUP ICAR - National Bureau of Social Survey and Land Use Planning ICR Implementation Completion and Results Report ICRISAT International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics IFHD Indian Foundation for Humanistic Development IIHR Indian Institute of Horticultural Research IRI Intermediate Results Indicator IRR Internal Rate of Return ISR Implementation Status and Results Reports IUFR Interim Unaudited Financial Report IWMP Integrated Watershed Management Program KSDC Karnataka State Data Center KSNDMC Karnataka State Natural Disaster Management Center KVK University Extension Center (Krishi Vigyan Kendra) KWDP Karnataka Watershed Development Project LRI Land Resource Inventory M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MOU Memorandum of Understanding MWS Micro-watershed NPV Net Present Value NRAA National Rainfed Area Authority NREGS National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme NRLM National Rural Livelihoods Mission PAD Project Appraisal Document PDO Project Development Objective PEC Project Empowered Committee PMKSY Prime Minister Krishi Sinchayee Yojana Plan (Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana) PPAR Project Performance Assessment Report PPMU Project Planning and Management Unit PTC Project Technical Cell RD-PR Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department REWARD Rejuvenating Watersheds for Agricultural Resilience through Innovative Development RSK Farmer Contact Center (Raitha Samparka Kendras) SHG Self-help Group TA Technical Assistance TERI The Energy and Resources Institute TWS Telemetric Weather Station UAS University of Agricultural Science UHS University of Horticulture Science WDD Watershed Development Department WOP Without Project WP With Project Regional Vice President: Hartwig Schafer Country Director: Junaid Kamal Ahmad Regional Director: John A. Roome Practice Manager: Mary Kathryn Hollifield Task Team Leader(s): Grant Milne, Jacqueline Julian, Ranjan Samantaray ICR Main Contributor: Ayala Peled Ben Ari TABLE OF CONTENTS DATA SHEET .......................................................................................................................... 1 I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES ....................................................... 6 A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL .........................................................................................................6 B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................9 II. OUTCOME .................................................................................................................... 13 A. RELEVANCE OF PDOs ............................................................................................................13 B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY) ......................................................................................14 C. EFFICIENCY ...........................................................................................................................21 D. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING ....................................................................22 E. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS .........................................................................................22 III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME ................................ 24 A. KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION ...................................................................................24 B. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION .............................................................................25 IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME .. 26 A. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) ............................................................26 B. ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE .....................................................27 C. BANK PERFORMANCE ...........................................................................................................28 D. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME .......................................................................................29 V. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................. 30 ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS ........................................................... 32 ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION ......................... 53 ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT ........................................................................... 55 ANNEX 4. EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... 56 ANNEX 5. BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS ... 67 ANNEX 6. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS .................................................................................. 70 ANNEX 7: RESULTS FRAMEWORK CHANGES ......................................................................... 73 ANNEX 8: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE LAND RESOURCE INVENTORY, DIGITIZED LIBRARY, DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, AND PORTAL.......................................................... 82 ANNEX 9: PROJECT MAP ...................................................................................................... 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) DATA SHEET BASIC INFORMATION Product Information Project ID Project Name P122486 Karnataka Watershed Development Project - II Country Financing Instrument India Investment Project Financing Original EA Category Revised EA Category Partial Assessment (B) Partial Assessment (B) Organizations Borrower Implementing Agency Watershed Development Department, Department of Republic of India Horticulture Project Development Objective (PDO) Original PDO Project Development Objective is to demonstrate more effective watershed management through greater integration of programs related to rainfed agriculture, innovative and science based approaches, and strengthened institutions and capacities. Page 1 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) FINANCING Original Amount (US$) Revised Amount (US$) Actual Disbursed (US$) World Bank Financing 60,000,000 45,000,000 40,181,397 IDA-50870 Total 60,000,000 45,000,000 40,181,397 Non-World Bank Financing 0 0 0 Borrower/Recipient 25,700,000 0 0 Local Communities 0 0 0 Local Govts. (Prov., District, 0 0 0 City) of Borrowing Country Total 25,700,000 0 0 Total Project Cost 85,700,000 45,000,000 40,181,397 KEY DATES Approval Effectiveness MTR Review Original Closing Actual Closing 06-Sep-2012 23-Apr-2013 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2019 RESTRUCTURING AND/OR ADDITIONAL FINANCING Date(s) Amount Disbursed (US$M) Key Revisions 24-Jul-2015 2.79 Change in Results Framework Change in Components and Cost Change in Procurement 31-Oct-2017 15.36 Change in Results Framework Change in Components and Cost 19-Dec-2018 26.45 Change in Results Framework Change in Components and Cost Change in Loan Closing Date(s) Cancellation of Financing Reallocation between Disbursement Categories KEY RATINGS Outcome Bank Performance M&E Quality Satisfactory Satisfactory Substantial Page 2 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) RATINGS OF PROJECT PERFORMANCE IN ISRs Actual No. Date ISR Archived DO Rating IP Rating Disbursements (US$M) 01 09-Dec-2012 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0 02 31-May-2013 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0 03 05-Nov-2013 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory .08 04 21-Apr-2014 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory .32 05 27-May-2014 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory .48 06 31-Oct-2014 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory .53 Moderately 07 25-May-2015 Moderately Unsatisfactory 1.42 Unsatisfactory Moderately 08 15-Dec-2015 Moderately Unsatisfactory 3.64 Unsatisfactory 09 09-Jun-2016 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 8.68 10 12-Dec-2016 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 10.05 11 08-Jun-2017 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 13.78 12 02-Jan-2018 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 15.83 13 20-Jun-2018 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 21.80 14 13-Sep-2018 Moderately Satisfactory Satisfactory 24.45 15 14-Mar-2019 Satisfactory Satisfactory 28.60 16 29-Aug-2019 Satisfactory Satisfactory 32.89 17 08-Jan-2020 Satisfactory Satisfactory 36.52 Page 3 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) SECTORS AND THEMES Sectors Major Sector/Sector (%) Agriculture, Fishing and Forestry 88 Agricultural Extension, Research, and Other Support 45 Activities Crops 12 Irrigation and Drainage 10 Public Administration - Agriculture, Fishing & Forestry 21 Industry, Trade and Services 12 Agricultural markets, commercialization and agri- 12 business Themes Major Theme/ Theme (Level 2)/ Theme (Level 3) (%) Private Sector Development 100 Jobs 100 Urban and Rural Development 20 Rural Development 20 Rural Infrastructure and service delivery 10 Land Administration and Management 10 Page 4 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Environment and Natural Resource Management 103 Climate change 24 Mitigation 12 Adaptation 12 Environmental Health and Pollution Management 24 Air quality management 8 Water Pollution 8 Soil Pollution 8 Renewable Natural Resources Asset Management 20 Biodiversity 10 Landscape Management 10 Water Resource Management 35 Water Institutions, Policies and Reform 35 ADM STAFF Role At Approval At ICR Regional Vice President: Isabel M. Guerrero Hartwig Schafer Country Director: N. Roberto Zagha Junaid Kamal Ahmad Director: John Henry Stein John A. Roome Practice Manager: Simeon Kacou Ehui Mary Kathryn Hollifield Grant Milne, Jacqueline Julian, Task Team Leader(s): Grant Milne Ranjan Samantaray ICR Contributing Author: Ayala Peled Ben Ari Page 5 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL Context 1. Country context. In 2012, when the Karnataka Watershed Development Project–II (KWDP-II) (also referred to locally as Sujala III 1) was approved, agriculture accounted for around 16 percent of India’s gross domestic product and approximately 60 percent of India’s population depended on agriculture as a primary livelihood, largely from rainfed agriculture. Rainfed lands were also critical to maintain the nutritional requirements of India’s growing population. Poverty rates were higher in rainfed areas, often with large variability in water availability, affecting agriculture, livestock, and household needs. Lower population densities and topography often made access to markets, employment, and other services difficult. Karnataka painted a similar picture; with the fourth largest rainfed area in the country, it demonstrated low agricultural productivity and was susceptible to droughts and deepening environmental stress and degradation. Longer-term climate changes added another worrying dimension. The potential of rainfed areas to contribute to poverty reduction, nutrition, and growth was considered important. 2. Sectoral context. When the project was prepared, the national Integrated Watershed Management Program (IWMP) was the cornerstone of the support of the Government of India (GoI) to watershed development, supporting participatory watershed management, preparation of soil and water conservation plans, and livelihood development through self-help groups (SHGs) (composed mostly of marginalized women) in several states. In parallel, there were several central and state agricultural schemes, which focused on rainfed agriculture areas and community development, the largest being the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (also known as the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS) and the National Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM). 3. Rationale for World Bank support and government strategies. The World Bank had a history of partnership with India in watershed development, supporting 11 watershed development projects, since 1981, for a total of US$808 million. Projects pioneered and scaled up participatory watershed development planning integrated with livelihood improvement and improved monitoring and evaluation (M&E). KWDP-II was a follow-on intervention to the Karnataka Watershed Development Project (KWDP) (Cr. 35280), which closed in FY09 and was implemented by the Government of Karnataka (GoK) Watershed Development Department (WDD). The GoI requested a different model of support which would ensure that watershed management was implemented more effectively. While the project was to finance mostly technical assistance (TA), the IWMP was to finance physical investments at the field level. It was considered that a successful pilot project would provide valuable lessons for wider implementation in Karnataka and throughout India. 4. Identified gaps. Three weak watershed management aspects were identified by the GoK: (a) Poor integration of the national rainfed support program with other schemes. The IWMP’s convergence with other national programs, particularly NREGS, needed to be strengthened to augment limited budgets under IWMP and improve the effectiveness of overall public expenditures on watershed management. (b) Lack of up-to-date, site-specific, and comprehensive scientific inputs into watershed management planning. The IWMP relied on local watershed management plans informed by inadequate scientific knowledge, with an overly strong focus on soil and water conservation works, and insufficient support for crop and input 1 Watershed development projects in Karnataka are popularly known as Sujala (‘sweet water’ in Kannada). The project was considered a third in a series of watershed management projects: Sujala I was the first World Bank-financed KWDP (see below), and Sujala II was a National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD)-financed watershed management project (2008–2014). For the purpose of this Implementation Completion and Results Report (ICR), the title KWDP-II, as it appears in the Financing Agreement and Project Appraisal Document (PAD), is used. Page 6 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) selection (including horticulture), animal husbandry, post-harvest aspects and market links, alternative income sources, and other watershed elements. (c) Limited capacity of central and extension staff and farmers to plan and implement more efficient interventions. Capacities at the state and local levels were insufficient to bridge these gaps and advance more effective watershed management. 5. Higher level objectives to which the project contributed. The project was closely aligned with the priorities set by the GoI in the 12th Five Year Plan for 2012–2017, which called for inclusive growth through increasing agricultural production and food security, with attention to rainfed agriculture. The project was particularly relevant to the plan’s priorities of (a) supporting the implementation of the IWMP through better planning, capacity building, and post-harvest value addition; (b) focusing on technology generation to better understand local needs; (c) expanding the scope of rainwater harvesting and groundwater recharge; and (d) developing agroclimatic zone- specific technology to enable rural communities to better adapt to the effects of climate change. The project also contributed to the fulfillment of the World Bank Group’s FY13–FY17 Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) for India, 2 particularly the improvement of the country’s rainfed agriculture’s productivity by supporting the implementation of the national IWMP; helping farmers diversify products, lower the cost of production, and identify stable markets for their goods; supporting self-employment opportunities; and developing in-demand skills, particularly for women. Theory of Change (Results Chain) Figure 1. Theory of Change Note: DSS = Decision Support System; FBO=Farmer-based Organization; IWM=Integrated Watershed Management; LT = long term; LRI=Land Resource Inventory; MT = medium term; MWS=Micro-watershed. ST = short term. 6. The project’s Theory of Change is derived from the project description in the PAD. The project was to improve the effectiveness of watershed management interventions in defined rainfed areas in Karnataka. Effective management was defined by three outcomes which were considered key management aspects and corresponded with the key identified gaps: (a) greater integration of national programs supporting watershed management, (b) availability of innovative and science-based tools/systems for planning and implementation, and (c) stronger capacity 2 Report No. 76176-IN. Page 7 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) of entities to plan and implement watershed management interventions. In the long run, it was expected that more effective watershed management would result in increased agriculture and horticulture production with improved food security and livelihood opportunities to communities across India. This was to happen assuming that (a) the IWMP, in convergence with NREGS, would finance soil and water conservation investments identified in the newly developed watershed management plans (nationally called Detailed Project Reports (DPRs) and (b) this new watershed management approach would be replicated in other states. Another assumption was that the state-based technical entities would have sufficient capacity to develop the science-based tools in partnership with the GoK. While improved productivity was not a project objective, the GoK and the World Bank were expecting to see first indications of this change toward the end of the project. Project Development Objectives (PDOs) 7. The PDO, as articulated in the Financing Agreement and the PAD, was to demonstrate more effective watershed management through greater integration of programs related to rainfed agriculture, innovative and science-based approaches, and strengthened institutions and capacities. ‘Watershed management’ was defined in the PAD as the integrated use/management of land, vegetation, and water in a geographically discrete drainage area for the benefit of its residents. The drainage area/watersheds included the districts of Bidar, Chamarajanagar, Davangere/Ballary, 3 Gadag, Kalaburagi, Koppal, and Yadgir. Key Expected Outcomes and Outcome Indicators 8. The indicators linked to the PDO statement were the following: • Greater integration of programs related to rainfed agriculture o Percentage of micro-watersheds with improved convergence and integration • Innovative and science-based approaches o New science-based approaches and tools adopted into wider watershed operations (number) • Strengthened institutions and capacities o Improved M&E capability in Watershed Development Department (WDD) (M&E cell established and functioning) 9. A fourth PDO-level indicator measured the long-term outcome of increased agriculture production. • Incremental change in agricultural and horticultural productivity in project areas for selected crops (ton/hectare) Components 10. The project was structured around five components as follows: (a) Component 1: Support for Improved Program Integration in Rainfed Areas (Original allocation 4: US$22.13 million, actual cost: US$17.86 million): (i) developing an LRI of the pilot MWSs (500 ha each) and DSSs for improved integration of watershed management site selection and interventions; (ii) developing a spatial digitized library with the LRI data, DSS, and a portal for access by stakeholders, housed in the Indian Council of Agricultural Research - National Bureau of Social Survey and Land Use Planning (ICAR-NBSS&LUP); (iii) conducting hydrological assessments of selected catchments within the targeted area as input to the LRI and digitized library and generating and disseminating water availability maps to farmers; (iv) developing MWS master plans for soil and 3 During project implementation, the Harpanahalli block in Davangere District shifted to Ballari District. Hence, the ICR refers to Davangere Districts as Davangere/Ballary and considers it as one district when presenting the project’s results. 4 Costs in this section reflect the IDA credit amount and the GoK financing combined. See Annex 3 for breakdown project costs and an explanation of the difference between the original and actual costs. Page 8 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) water conservation investments integrating NREGS and IWMP plans; and (v) strengthening community-based monitoring and documentation. (b) Component 2: Research, Development, and Innovation (Original allocation: US$19.57 million, actual cost: US$21.75 million): (i) conducting applied research studies on integrated landscape management and agricultural intensification, agriculture value chains and support, and climate-smart agriculture, adaptation, and mitigation; (ii) conducting hydrological monitoring and piloting community-based groundwater management in project areas; (iii) developing or adapting planning and training tools, maps, and climate information for use by farmers in decision-making, agroclimatic advisory risk systems, web-based information on markets, post-harvesting and value addition, and on-farm participatory field trials and technology demonstrations in project areas; and (iv) strengthening the institutional arrangements for rainfed agriculture and watershed management research and technology transfer. (c) Component 3: Institutional Strengthening (Original allocation: US$9.14 million, actual cost: US$1.61 million): (i) developing and delivering training modules, awareness raising activities, and structured exposure visits on extension, integrated watershed management, and value addition for village-level extension agents, community institutions, local administration bodies’ (Gram Panchayat) members, farmers, and women SHGs in the project area; (ii) training WDD and Department of Horticulture (DoH) staff on in-house M&E systems and conducting national and international exposure visits for state-level stakeholders; (iii) improving the capacities of farmer contact centers (Raitha Samparka Kendras, RSKs) 5 in project areas; and (iv) upgrading government training centers’ servicing in key project areas and strengthening their information technology and communication systems. (d) Component 4: Strengthening Horticulture in Rainfed Areas (Original cost: US$27.57 million, actual cost: US$14.93 million): (i) demonstrating productivity improvement in annual and perennial crops, nutrition gardens, crop diversification, and crop-soil-water relationships; (ii) strengthening model nurseries in the existing DoH farms to ensure continuous supply of quality seed and planting materials to farmers; (iii) establishing soil and leaf tissue analysis laboratory facilities and providing training to farmers on their use; (iv) conducting feasibility studies, participatory value chain investigations, and field demonstrations of low-cost post-harvest equipment and expanding the DoH skill development programs on post-harvest management, value-addition, and market linkage support; and (v) establishing producer companies. (e) Component 5: Project Management and Coordination (Original cost: US$7.29 million, actual cost: US$3.84 million). Ensuring effective and efficient project management by financing (i) specialized consultants in headquarters and field offices; (ii) incremental administration costs for field travel, a project website, financial management and internal audits, procurement, and project management equipment; (iii) a communication strategy to ensure wide awareness of the project; and (iv) third-party M&E. 11. The project was to implement watershed management planning and capacity-building activities in two phases: support a small number of sub-watersheds in the first phase and apply lessons learned and experience from the first phase in additional sub-watersheds under a second phase. B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION 12. The project underwent three Level 2 restructurings: in July 2015, in October 2017, and in December 2018. 5RSKs are the main field extension units of the Department of Agriculture. They are managed by agriculture officers at the local municipality level (taluk in Kannada) and form contact points for farmer facilitators and farmer groups for agriculture inputs, and information on agricultural schemes and technologies. Page 9 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Revised PDOs and Outcome Targets 13. The PDO was not changed; however, the PDO indicators were revised in the July 2015 and October 2017 restructurings. Revised PDO Indicators 14. The July 2015 restructuring expanded the definition of ‘approaches and tools’, under PDO indicator 1, from hydrological assessments to also include the digitized library, the DSS and the portal and reduced the end-of-project target of PDO indicator 4 from 70 to 25 percent. The October 2017 restructuring dropped all four PDO indicators and introduced the following PDO indicators: (a) Sub-watershed management plans based on innovative science-based approaches and community consultation (number) (b) Data from science-based approaches adopted by other departments/institutions in the state for planning (number) 15. The 11 Intermediate Results Indicators (IRIs) were revised in all the three restructurings and new ones were added. See annex 7 for further details on the Results Framework changes and the reasons behind these changes. Revised Components 16. The components and their costs were revised in the three Level 2 restructurings. (a) In July 2015, three new activities were introduced under Component 2: (a) a peri-urban watershed management pilot, (b) demonstrations of improved rainwater and surface water harvesting, and (c) demonstration of biophysical and economic impacts from full treatment coverage/saturation 6 in selected MWSs. (b) In October 2017, the first and the second new activities were dropped, the host of the digitized library and portal changed to the Karnataka State Data Center (KSDC), and three new horticulture demonstration priorities were added: (i) post-harvest management, including value addition support to the FBOs; (ii) value chain development; and (iii) linking with the state’s ‘e-market’ system for auctioning farmers’ produce. (c) The December 2018 restructuring shifted the value addition support from FBOs to Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs) with a greater focus on smaller farmers 7 and horticulture, which reduced the Horticulture component costs. See annex 3 for details on component cost changes. Other Changes 17. The December 2018 restructuring introduced two additional key changes: (a) Cancellation of US$15 million (SDR 10.8 million) from the IDA Credit. (b) Extension of the closing date by 12 months, from December 31, 2018, to December 31, 2019. Rationale for Changes and Their Implication on the Original Theory of Change 18. Changes to indicators. The 2015 restructuring modified the targets of several indicators to reflect improved clarity on the number of IWMP-supported MWSs in the targeted districts, and the addition of four districts to the targeted project area (Bijapur, Chikkamagalur, Raichur, and Tumkur) 8 to use available resources from exchange rate fluctuations (8 percent depreciation of the Indian rupee from the time of appraisal) and deepen the impact. The 6 ‘Saturation’ is the WDD’s term for implementing the full range of recommended biophysical interventions identified in the watershed plan, also referred to as a ‘ridge to valley’ approach. This would usually require increased investments than provided for under national government watershed programs. 7 FPOs are formed in India under the GoI’s National Vegetable Initiative to provide inputs to member farmers on time and in a price competitive manner. FPOs comprise mostly small and marginal farmers, owning less than 2 ha of land, while FBOs comprise farmers with larger plots of land. 8 These districts were chosen because they had Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers-supported programs in operation, which the WDD felt would lead to synergies. Page 10 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) reduction in the integration target reflected an understanding of the long time it took to access NREGS funding. New indicators were introduced to measure the new activities and impact of the LRI and digitized library on the IWMP planning process and introduce a core sector indicator on demonstration of technologies. 19. The more comprehensive revision of the Results Framework in the 2017 restructuring reflected implementation delays during the first two project years and a change in the national watershed support program. The IWMP, which was expected to finance the implementation of project-supported DPRs, was cancelled and the Prime Minister’s Krishi Sinchayee Yojana Plan (Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana, PMKSY) 9 was established instead with a watershed component. Since the IWMP resources were no longer available, it was decided to use the project resources to finance implementation of DPRs within several MWSs (called a saturation area), thus demonstrating the innovations and technologies supported by the project. The PDO indicator that measured productivity was dropped as signs of increased productivity could no longer be expected within the remaining project time frame, and the PDO indicator which measured the integration outcome was reduced in scope to measure adoption of science-based data by departments/institutions in the state for watershed planning. The new PDO indicator (sub-watershed management plans based on innovative science-based approaches and community consultations) was a composite indicator which spoke to both the innovation and capacity outcomes with the state having the capacity to use the new approaches. The 2017 changes also ensured measurement of activities which had not been assigned indicators at appraisal and refocused on the horticulture component (see paragraph 21). 20. The 2018 changes increased the size of the saturation area to use additionally available local currency because of the continued depreciation of the Indian rupee, accommodated the shift from the FBOs to FPOs, and added a measurement of another original activity. 21. Changes to components. The new peri-urban watershed management activity was to expand effective watershed management demonstration to peri-urban settings; the improved rainwater and surface water harvesting demonstrations were to encourage small farmers to grow higher-value crops in low rainfall areas; and the saturation activity intended to supplement the IWMP (while it was still operational) with project resources to allow for the implementation of the full range of MWS plans’ activities by using excess project resources. 10 In 2017, the peri-urban watershed management pilot was dropped because it had not progressed as envisioned and there was insufficient time to complete the planning process and subsequent physical investments. The improved rainwater and surface water harvesting demonstration activity was dropped because it had begun receiving support from other government-financed programs. The host of the digitized library and portal changed to the KSDC due to its mandate to host various government agencies’ applications, and the three new demonstration priorities further reflected the refocusing of horticulture interventions on post-harvest support. The shift in 2018 to FPOs was to enhance equity by benefitting lower-income farmers, especially in horticulture. The greater focus in Component 4 (Horticulture) to provide more intensive support to a small number of FPOs and selected horticulture product lines, allowed a shift in resources to Component 2 and increased project support for building farmer capacities to apply LRI information. 22. Resource cancellation. Implementation delays in the first two years and currency fluctuations resulted in a low disbursement rate. Consequently, the GoI and the World Bank agreed to cancel a portion of the project’s IDA Credit and reallocate it for disaster management activities. A cost analysis, carried out by the WDD, determined that US$15 million could be cancelled without negatively affecting the achievement of the PDO due to availability of additional Indian rupees in the project account and efficiencies in the use of resources. The cancellation also 9 See https://pmksy.gov.in/default.aspx. While the change took place in July 2015, it was not reflected in the July 2015 restructuring because the World Bank team and the WDD had assumed that the PMKSY would still fit the original project model. 10 The IWMP allocated between INR 12,000 and INR 15,000 per ha, depending on the MWS’s slope (steeper sloped MWS received a higher allocation), while the full implementation of management plans/DPRs required, on average, INR 23,000 per ha, as demonstrated in the saturation zones. Page 11 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) reflected cost savings in: Component 5 (Project Management) from scientific and technical partners being used as implementation agencies and WDD being able to draw on existing government staff, Component 3 (Institutional Strengthening), where government training institutions such as District Agriculture Training Centers (DATCs) and University Extension Centers (Krishi Vigyan Kendra (KVKs) were used as opposed to commercial vendors; and Component 4 (Horticulture) where because of capacities being built in partner universities, decisions were made to reduce the number of soil, water and leaf analysis laboratories from five to one. 23. Closing date extension. Concurrent with the cancellation, the closing date was extended to allow for the completion of several delayed key activities, including the expanded LRI, digitized library, DSS, portal, and several horticulture-related activities. After project closure, the end disbursement date was extended by two months (from April 30, 2020, to June 30, 2020) because of COVID-19-related payment delays. 24. Implication of the modifications on the Theory of Change. On the one hand, the changes expanded the focus of interventions both geographically (more MWSs) and at the local level (providing more capacity-building and institutional support to farmers and non-farming individuals) to further support the achievement of the PDO. On the other hand, the integration outcome’s scope was reduced as explained. Project-financed investments in the saturation area replaced the expected IWMP resources and expanded project interventions beyond TA. The cancellation of the US$15 million did not have implications on the Theory of Change, as in 2018 it was offset almost entirely by the depreciation of the Indian rupee against the U.S. dollar. Figure 2 presents the Theory of Change post restructuring. Figure 2. Theory of Change Post Restructuring Assumption 2: The databases Assumption 1: There are capable will be accessible to relevant technical institutions in the State departments in the of Karnataka which can support implementation of watershed- the GoK in developing the needed related interventions databases Problem Activities Outputs ST outcomes PDO/ MT LT Outcomes 1. Inventoryi ng MWS’ Outcome Ineffective condi tions watershed 2. As s essing ca tchments’ management hydrol ogical Greater planning and pa ra meters integration of implementation 3. Conducting a pplied 1. MWS-s pecific LRI, programs related res earch studies a nd di gi tal library, thematic to rain-fed Increased More effective watershed hydrol ogical monitoring ma ps, DSS, a nd public agriculture porta l agricultural 4. Devel oping a digital deci sion s upport 2. “New generation” production s ys tem a nd tools wa tershed and food ma nagement plans security management Ineffective integration of national support Innovative and 1. Conducting extension science-based programs training and related approaches exchange visits for 1. Tra i ning, exchange extension staff 2. Upgrading extension vi s i ts a nd Assumption 3: demonstrations to Additional states Outdated and services‘ IT and training facilities departments’ and generic 3. Training farmers and extension staff and to will replicate the institutions on IWM Enhanced approaches fa rmers new approaches 4. Conducting demonstrations on 2. Soi l, water a nd weather rural for watershed improved horticulture a dvi sories to farmers Insufficient production for farmers Strengthened livelihood management capacities of 5. Upgrading/establishing horticulture support 3. Soi l a nd l eaf a nalysis institutions and opportunities facilities l a b facilities central and 6. Supporting SHGs 4. Horti culture production capacities extension 7. Establishing FPOs fa ci lities services, and of 8. Building post-harvest structures for FPOs 5. Producer companies farmers Implementation of management plans in a saturation area Note: LT = long term; MT = medium term; ST = short term. Page 12 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) II. OUTCOME A. RELEVANCE OF PDOs Assessment of Relevance of PDOs and Rating Rating: High 25. The PDO is relevant to the India Country Partnership Framework (CPF) (FY18-FY22 11) focus area of ‘promoting resource-efficient growth’, Objective 1.1 ‘promoting more resource-efficient, inclusive, and diversified growth in the rural sector’. According to the objective, the project (a) diversified income generating opportunities for farmers with the introduction of horticulture production, post-harvest technologies and services, and alternative income- generating activities in animal husbandry and aquaculture; (b) improved efficiency in the use of water and land resources in agriculture by developing a data-driven DSS which determines type, location, and quantity of water and soil conservation investment and demonstrating the implementation of the system in a saturation area; and (c) deepened support for climate resilience by supporting soil and water conservation, intensification of agriculture, diversification out of water-intensive crops, integration of a crop-agroforestry approach, and provision of agroclimatic advisory to farmers. The inclusiveness aspect of Objective 1.1 was reflected in integrating women’s SHGs into rural value chains through skill development training, providing women farmers access to extension services, and giving women voice in the preparation of watershed management plans. The project fulfilled the objective’s call for knowledge exchanges across states by exchanging on the project’s innovative design and achievements with decision-makers in other states. An example is the LRI training provided by the WDD to the Government of Kerala staff in 2019 in preparation for the First Resilient Kerala Program Development Policy Operation (P169907). 26. The three cross-cutting themes of climate-smart engagement, addressing gender gaps, and harnessing high- impact technology were reflected in the design and implementation of the project. Climate change considerations were embedded into watershed management planning and advice to farmers as noted. The gaps of income opportunities for women in the rural sector were addressed by providing training on income-generating activities to women SHGs, and various technologies were supported to collect data, inform decision-making, and disseminate knowledge. The project embodied the World Bank Group’s shifting emphasis in India from serving as a ‘lending Bank’ to playing the role of a ‘leveraging Bank’ with contribution of knowledge, convening, and implementation platforms. 27. The PDO is relevant to the GoI’s strategies as articulated in its 2022 vision, the Strategy for New India@75 (November 2018). In particular, it is relevant to the objectives of (a) optimizing the use of water through watershed development in rainfed areas; (b) enhancing farmers’ income by strengthening extension activities, promoting high- value horticulture crops, promoting FPOs, creating a knowledge hub to disseminate best practices, and providing recommendations across the farming value chain; (c) reducing gender gaps by enhancing women’s skills in SHGs; (d) optimizing the use of land resources by updating and modernizing land record systems; and (e) achieving data-led governance and policy making by integrating data in a state repository. The PDO is also relevant to India’s commitment to reach Land Degradation Neutrality by 2030 with watershed management seen as an important mechanism for restoring the ecological balance in the degraded rainfed ecosystems. The PDO’s relevance to the GoI and World Bank Group strategies is further demonstrated in the ongoing design of a multi-state watershed program (the Rejuvenating Watersheds for Agricultural Resilience through Innovative Development (REWARD) project). The US$180 million PforR will replicate and scale up the science-based watershed management approach of KWDP-II with Karnataka considered a ‘lighthouse state’. The relevance to the GoK’s strategies is shown in the replication of the project’s objective and approach in additional watersheds with an allocated budget (see section IV.D for more detail). 11 Report No. 126667-IN. Page 13 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY) Assessment of Achievement of Each Objective/Outcome 28. The achievement of the PDO is based on the assessment of the three project outcomes before and after the October 2017 restructuring, which was the most profound revision of the Results Framework in terms of indicators and set targets. The assessment uses the project’s original Results Framework and current Results Framework, respectively, as well as other attributable results. Annex 1 provides further details on the achievements. Efficacy before Restructuring Outcome 1: Greater integration of programs related to rainfed agriculture Table 1. Indicators, Targets, and Results of Outcome 1 before Restructuring Indicator Target Result PDO indicator: Percentage of micro-watersheds with improved convergence and integration 70% 0 IRI: Micro-watershed master plans are integrated with larger scale sub-watershed assessments 935 Not measured 29. The outcome, as measured by the original indicators, was not achieved. Convergence with the IWMP and NREGS largely did not take place as planned because the IWMP ceased to exist in 2015 and the mobilization of the NREGS resources until then had been slow. Several cases of operational convergence with national programs did take place. Watershed management entry point activities, such as community mobilization, and awareness creation among communities were financed by the IWMP and later taken up by the project in the development of the DPRs. In addition, in Davangere/Ballary District, the project financed the demonstration of perennial horticulture crops, protected cultivation, and soil and water conservation in a horticulture farm while NREGS supported soil conservation activities such as creation of tree basins in that farm. In several project areas, farmers were assisted by the project with data, planting materials, seedlings, drip irrigation system, and nutrition kits while receiving subsidies for farm ponds from the Krishi Bhagya scheme of the Department of Agriculture to address irrigation needs. Income generation training was provided to SHGs, while members were also provided with financial support from the NRLM. According to the definition of the PDO indicator, DPRs integrated agriculture, groundwater, forestry, horticulture, and livestock activities as planned, as well as other income-generating activities, such as animal husbandry and aquaculture, as relevant to the area they covered. The intermediate result was not measured because the Government had begun preparing assessments at the sub-watershed level independently of the project. Outcome 2: Innovative and science-based approaches Table 2. Indicators, Targets, and Results of Outcome 2 before Restructuring Indicator Target Result PDO indicator: New science-based approaches and tools adopted 2 (hydrological assessment and 4 (LRI, hydrological into wider watershed operations DSS) assessment, digitized library, DSS) IRI 1: Digitized database library fully operational covering all 935 MWSs 2,534 project watersheds IRI 2: New hydrological monitoring systems installed and 150 advanced units/25 community 179/0 functional (advanced monitoring/community monitoring) monitoring units IRI 3: Improved technologies for processing and value chain 108 demonstrations 60 improvements in selected horticulture crops 30. The outcome, as measured by the original indicators, was partially achieved. An LRI, the first in the country, was developed by a consortium of state-based agencies/technical partners (see annex 5 for the full list), based on comprehensive site collection and analysis of MWS-level data, such as variations in soils, landforms, and water and land uses. The LRI data, together with hydrological data from intensive hydrology assessments at the sub-watershed Page 14 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) and MWS levels, cadastral data for the entire state based on satellite imagery and maps, high-resolution images for dozens of thematic layers, dynamic weather data, socioeconomic data, crop information, information on soils and nutrient status, and information on crop prices, were fed into a digitized library, offering nine decision support modules (see annex 8 for further information and illustrative videos). 31. At the intermediate level, the digitized library is operational at the KSDC in English and Kannada for registered users, providing customized real-time plot-level information within 2,534 MWSs. The library is linked to real-time updates on weather forecast, market prices, official land records, and census information sources through a built-in migration tool. It generates thematic maps for soil erosion, soil depth, water availability, land availability, land suitability, and other aspects used for the preparation of the DPRs. A web-based portal is featured as an interface between the digitized library, DSS tools, and the public through an Android mobile application with the option to receive technical support from the WDD local contact centers. The project financed 179 advanced monitoring units within 14 hydrological monitoring stations, all containing state-of-the-art probes measuring various hydrological parameters. The generated data are sent to a central service in the Karnataka State Natural Disaster Management Center (KSNDMC) at 15-minute intervals, relevant government entities who use them for modeling, and registered farmers through a mobile application with real-time weather forecasting information. Community hydrological monitoring was not supported because it was linked to operations financed by the closed IWMP. Sixty processing and value chain improvement demonstrations took place for selected horticulture crops. 12 The contracts for the design, establishment, and maintenance of the digitized library were financed by the project, as was the hydrological equipment. The project also financed the demonstrations’ equipment and training costs. Outcome 3: Strengthened institutions and capacities Table 3. Indicators, Targets, and Results of Outcome 3 before Restructuring Indicator Target Result PDO indicator: Improved M&E capability in WDD Cell produces M&E reports Cell produces M&E reports on a regular basis on a regular basis IRI 1: Improved information for farmers on climate change 73 RSKs distributing 78 and risk management information IRI 2: Value addition and marketing system improved 3 commodities Numerous (depending on local availability) IRI 3: New aquifer user groups/CIGsa functioning 450 0 IRI 4: Adoption of improved conservation practices and 60% of farmers 89% production technologies IRI 5: Improved capacity of farmer contact centers/RSKs 90% of offices 100% IRI 6: Adoption of improved horticulture techniques 60% of farmers 28% Note: a. Common interest groups. 32. The outcome, as measured by the original indicators, was partially achieved. The M&E cell within the WDD produced timely progress reports and developed a database within the WDD, which tracked and analyzed progress at all levels. The M&E meetings took place regularly by the Project Technical Cell (PTC) and the project’s Steering Committee (titled Project Empowered Committee (PEC)). The project financed the costs of the hired staff and contracts with third-party monitoring agencies. 12 The demonstrations included turmeric powdering, turmeric steam boiling, micro encapsulation of cardamom, preparation of mango jam, osmatic dehydration of mango slices, minimal processing of fruits and vegetables, fruit juice processing, preparation of mango nectar, ripening of fruits, tomato crush processing, mushroom-ready to fruit bag, dry flower processing, mango hot water treatment, collection centers for aggregation of produce, primary operation and packing for marketing to markets/buyers, community pack houses for aggregating and handling produce, farmer one-stop shops, solar dehydration chambers for fruit, custom hiring centers with mobile application services, and solar coding-based fruit and vegetable vending vans. Page 15 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) 33. At the intermediate level, 78 RSKs provided climate and other LRI-based information to farmers using the LRI cards with plot-specific instructions and training. A value addition and marketing system was developed, solar coding- based vending vans (20 units), which were provided to 10 FPOs as a marketing system of numerous horticulture fruits and vegetables; 13 89 percent of farmers adopted (used) improved conservation practices and production technologies; 14 all 78 RSKs had improved capacities in terms of staffing, access to the digitized library through computers, and capability to provide farmers with the LRI and weather/climate-related information; and 28 percent of supported farmers adopted (used) improved horticulture techniques. The project did not provide support to aquifer user groups/common interest groups as mentioned. The project financed RSKs’ training and equipment, the vans, and project management costs except for the salaries of government staff. Efficacy after Restructuring Outcome 1: Greater integration of programs related to rainfed agriculture Table 4. Indicators, Targets, and Results of Outcome 1 after Restructuring Indicator Target Result PDO indicator: Data from science-based approaches adopted by other 5 departments/institutions 5 departments/institutions in the state for planning IRI: Departments and institutions are provided access to information from the Yes Yes Digital Portal and Decision Support System 34. The outcome, as measured by the current indicators, was achieved. At closing, five departments/institutions (other than the WDD and DoH) adopted project-supported science-based data for planning: (a) the Department of Agriculture used the LRI data and crop planning DSS to determine the suitability of crop introduction in watersheds; (b) the Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department (RD-PR) used hydrological monitoring data and the farm pond and check dam planning DSS to determine the need for check dams in Karnataka; (c) the University of Agricultural Science (UAS) Dharwad and UAS Raichur used the LRI data and crop planning and nutrient management DSSs to revise their package of practices for crop selection and nutrient planning and management; (d) the Department of Forestry used the LRI data and crop planning, land capability, and other DSSs to determine the type, location, and timing of perennial tree crops’ planting; and (e) the Department of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services (DAH&VS) used socioeconomic and farmer data and experience to upscale animal husbandry technologies in other areas in the state. At the intermediate level, these and other state entities have direct access to the project- financed digitized library and its nine DSS modules and 24 datasets. The data collection and LRI dissemination workshops were financed by the IDA Credit, while the GoK paid for technical partners’ overhead costs. Outcome 2: Innovative and science-based approaches Table 5. Indicators, Targets, and Results of Outcome 2 after Restructuring Indicator Target Result PDO indicator: Sub-watershed management plans based on innovative science-based 9 11 approaches and community consultation IRI 1: Innovative and relevant science-based knowledge is used to develop Land Resource 1,931 MWSs 2,534 Inventories IRI 2: Digitized database library fully operational covering all project watersheds 931 MWSsa 2,534 IRI 3: New hydrological monitoring systems installed and functional/advanced monitoring 14/120 14/179 units IRI 4: Pilot demonstrations on watershed treatments saturation in selected micro- 87 MWSs 89 watersheds 13 See a short video describing the vending vans at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwoUrNN4wbk&feature=youtu.be. While the video indicates that 11 FPOs received vending vans, only 10 FPOs benefitted from the vans. 14 Source: (a) TERI (The Energy and Resources Institute). 2019. Rapid Assessment of Horticulture Component Project Activities under KWDP-II (Sujala III). Bengaluru, Karnataka, India; and (b) TERI. 2019. Report on Impact Study of Karnataka Watershed Development Project II (Sujala III). Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. Page 16 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) IRI 5: Sub-watersheds in which soil and water conservation investments are made, based 11 sub-watersheds 11 on Land Resource Inventory (LRI) recommendations IRI 6: Pilot demonstration of crop production technologies 9 sub-watersheds 11 IRI 7: Post-harvest technology demonstrations introduced 30 demonstrations 60 Note: a. The digitized library’s MWS coverage target was not upscaled to 1,931 in the December 2018 restructuring by mistake. 35. The outcome, as measured by the current indicators, exceeded its target. Upon closing, 11 sub-watershed DPRs were prepared. Their preparation was informed by the LRI, intensive hydrological monitoring data, and other data which were generated for the respective sub-watersheds. The plans were developed with input from, and confirmation of, the residing communities as required by the 2011 Common Guidelines for Watershed Development Projects and were approved by the relevant Gram Panchayats. The LRI and the digitized library covered 2,534 MWSs, respectively. A total of 179 advanced hydrological units were established, and 14 hydrological stations were established and made functional as planned. Demonstrations on watershed treatment saturation and soil and water conservation investments (such as continuous trenching, contour bunding, graded and trench cum bunding, terracing, farm ponds, check dams, agroforestry plantations, and horticulture-related catchment and on-farm treatments) took place in 89 MWSs within the 11 project sub-watersheds based on the DPRs. The abovementioned crop production technologies were demonstrated in the 11 project sub-watersheds, and 60 post-harvest technology demonstrations were carried out as noted. 36. Other project-supported innovations, which were not measured by the Results Framework, were the following: (a) Improvements to the KSNDMC 24/7 call center (Varuna Mitra), which disseminates Gram Panchayat-level weather information and advisories to calling farmers. The project helped improve the accuracy of forecasts and the quality of operational advisories by installing additional Telemetric Weather Stations (TWSs) within the 11 districts, strengthening the follow-up and monitoring of farmers in project locations, and improving its customer relations management (CRM) software to allow it to handle a broader range of farmer queries. The call center received close to 2 million calls during the time of the project for weather advisory, including planning of agricultural activities, with considerable economic benefits as discussed in annex 4. (b) Television display units installed in all the RSKs in the project area, at the partner institutions, and the WDD offices for dissemination of live meteorological information to farmers and planners. (c) Production of LRI atlases for the 2,534 MWSs with thematic data and crop suitability maps at the plot level, superimposed with Cartosat imagery based on real-time data access pertaining to geology and weathered zones, soil type, land capability, land utilization, soil fertility, groundwater, and water quality. (d) Production of hydrology atlases for 425 sub-watersheds, covering a catchment area of around 1.4 million ha. (e) Adoption of a holistic end-to-end approach in horticulture support across the supply chain, that is, crop production, soil health, post-harvest management, and product aggregation with information from the LRI and hydrological assessments through FPOs. Box 1 provides information on the disruptive technologies supported by the project. Box 1. Disruptive Technologies Supported by the Project Several state-of-the-art technologies were put into use by KWDP-II: FPOs were provided by custom hiring centers, which were linked to consumers through the phone application TRRINGO, facilitating the rental of farm tools and equipment, while generating income to FPO members. A Geographic Information System (GIS) laboratory was established in the DoH to map project beneficiaries and facilities, identify production clusters for different crops, monitor horticulture crop production at the cadastral level, and receive attributable data from farmers using mobile applications. In developing the DSS, the GoK used district-level data made available by earth observation and drones to inform watershed planning. The project mainstreamed the use of mobile applications as a feedback loop between the state and farmers on MWSs conditions and farming solutions. Page 17 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Outcome 3: Strengthened institutions and capacities Table 6. Indicators, Targets, and Results of Outcome 3 after Restructuring Indicator Target Result IRI 1: Farmers in each micro-watershed willing/intending to adopt at least two climate- 60% of farmers 74% adaptation and/or climate-mitigation practices recommended by LRI knowledge and sub- watershed management plans IRI 2: Farmers trained in each sub-watershed intending to adopt practices that are based on 70% of farmers 78% integrated land resource knowledge generated by the project IRI 3: Technical staffa trained on the use of LRI data for assisting farmers 60 172 IRI 4: Farmers expressing satisfaction with the LRI-based assistance that Farmer Centers provide 75% of farmers 93% IRI 5: FPOs organized 2 11 - value addition support to FPOs 5 5 - primary processing facilities completed 20 20 - output business plans developed 11 11 - logistics infrastructure provided 10 10 IRI 6: Strengthened women Self-help Groups supported 250 360 IRI 7: Labs established and operationalized 2 2 IRI 8: M&E system established and operational in WDD Yes Yes Note: a. Including the WDD and DoH staff and officials, extension personnel, and watershed assistants. 37. The outcome, as measured by the current indicators, exceeded its target. At project closure: (a) 74 percent of farmers expressed willingness/intention to adopt (use) two or more climate-adaptation and/or climate-mitigation practices recommended in their LRI cards and respective DPRs. These included site-specific soil and water conservation practices, adapted soil and drip irrigation, structures which prevent soil and water runoff, and solar pumps. (b) 78 percent of trained farmers expressed intention to adopt practices that were based on integrated land resource knowledge generated by the project. (c) 172 technical staff from the Agriculture Department, the DoH, University of Horticultural Sciences Bagalkot, (KVKs), and LRI extension managers were trained on the LRI. (d) 93 percent of farmers expressed satisfaction with the RSKs’ LRI-based assistance. 38. In terms of support to FPOs, 11 FPOs were organized and registered with a strong, but not exclusive focus on horticulture. 15 Five FPOs received more intensive value addition support such as technologies for reducing post- harvest losses, storage equipment, prefabricated storage units, and other technologies for increasing value of commodities. The FPOs also benefitted from 20 primary processing facilities and 11 five-year commodity-centered business plans (one per FPO). Ten FPOs received a total of 20 solar coding-based vending vans. A total of 360 SHGs received basic organizational training, such as group and funds management, and entrepreneurship and skills training for livelihood activities, and two DoH laboratories were established and made operational: (a) a soil, water, and leaf laboratory was established in Koppal District to conduct analysis of samples brought by farmers and (b) a GIS laboratory was established in Bengaluru to map major crops, horticulture farmers and facilities, FPOs, market locations, and horticulture crop production clusters, superimposed with agriculture information from the digitized library. 16 Finally, an operational M&E system was established in the WDD as outlined earlier. All the inputs to these results were financed by the project, except government extension and laboratory staff costs. 39. Other project-supported capacity enhancement results, which were not measured by the Results Framework, are (a) technology-driven model demonstration centers for crop-soil-water relationship set up in six 15 See a video on the establishment of the 11 FPOs and the support they received at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeB6vJ5K65M&feature=youtu.be. 16 A video on the GIS laboratory is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zt5ebwe0J-s&feature=youtu.be. Page 18 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) WDD farms (in Bidar, Chamarajanagar, Davangere, Gadag, Kalaburagi, and Yadgir) to disseminate information on watershed concepts and soil and water conservation structures to farmers; (b) two upgraded regional training centers, in Mysore and Bijapur; (c) preparation and distribution of manuals/guides to field staff and partners on various technical subjects related to project-supported activities and facilities; (d) exposure visits and field days to project staff, government officials and technicians, and farmers abroad and within the country on related topics; (e) state-level workshops and training to government staff, technical project partners, and farmers; (f) demonstration of animal husbandry and aquaculture improvement techniques in saturation areas; (g) a small ruminant semen station at the Veterinary College in Bengaluru (the first of its kind in India); (h) applied research on development of climate-resilient and disease-resistant crops and dissemination of findings to farmers; (i) research of soil microbials and soil carbon status in the project area and development of a hydro-economic model for optimal extraction of groundwater; (j) studies on the effectiveness of indigenous technologies and integrated disease management practices and a socioeconomic analysis of groundwater management practices; and (k) multiple communication products on the project and related topics. 40. Additional aspects of watershed management effectiveness beyond the three outcomes are the following: (a) Reduced DPR preparation and implementation time. The DPRs’ preparation and implementation timelines in Karnataka were reduced by 30–45 percent (Table 7), while introducing additional entry point activities such as awareness campaigns and establishment of local governance mechanisms. This reduction in the DPR timelines was brought about by several factors, including (i) the use of the plot-level LRI database and other information collected and compiled in the digitized library, and increased capacities of the Government to use them, compared to the traditional use of remote sensing data and cadastral maps and field observations by surveyors of various capacities; (ii) an expedited DPR development process by trained department staff who used the digitized library’s thematic maps and DSS tools to determine the type, quantity, and location of soils and water conservation investments, inputs, crops, livelihood support, and so on compared to repetitive field data collections done before; and (iii) faster completion of activities due to live viewing of progress without a need to conduct multiple site visits. (b) Reduced preparation cost per hectare. The DPRs’ preparation cost per hectare was reduced by almost 70 percent, due to the availability of the LRI information and reduced preparation time (Table 8). Table 7. Comparison of DPR Preparation and Execution Time before and after the Project (Months) Action Project Timeline Timeline Before the Project Attainment and analysis of field-level data: pre-field activities, field activities, laboratory 3 — and GIS works, generation of thematic maps, reports and atlas, training to watershed and line departments Entry point activities: awareness campaigns, establishment of watershed committees, 3 — SHGs, user groups, and establishment of user agreements Development of DPR: preparation of conservation plan, crop plan, plans for horticulture, 2 18–24 forestry, animal husbandry and other activities, a drainage line treatment plan, agreement on institutional execution arrangements for execution of DPR, and preparation and validation of the DPR with stakeholders Watershed works: implementation of conservation plan, drainage line treatment, 24-30 24–36 development of water harvesting structures, nursery for fodder, timber and horticulture crops, crop demonstration, animal husbandry, and fisheries and other activities Consolidation and withdrawal: completion of all ongoing activities, intensification of 6 12–18 production activities, and putting in place of sustainability mechanisms M&E: technical evaluation, process M&E, and participatory monitoring Entire period Total 38–44 54–78 Source: ICAR - Indian Institute of Soil and Water Conservation (ICAR-IIS&WC). Page 19 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Table 8. Comparison of DPR Preparation Cost before and after the Project (INR) Cost Item Project Cost per Hectare Cost Before the Project per Hectare LRI generation 438 — DPR preparation 220 1,740 Total 558 1,740 Source: ICAR-IIS&WC. (c) More accurate planning. Watershed management planning also became more accurate and site specific due to the availability of plot-level information compared to the traditional use of watershed-level thematic maps. Advice and support to farmers became more specific to their plots and were based on multilayered analyses of various biophysical and socioeconomic factors. For example, information coming from the advanced hydrological monitoring units informed the location of water harvesting infrastructure and the types of crops to plant to make the best use of water resources. Similarly, different land slopes and soil types determined the water and soil conservation structures to be constructed. According to the WDD, lack of such site-specific information resulted in less effective flagship programs in the state and elsewhere in the country due to a mismatch of interventions and needs, resulting in loss of soil, water, and nutrients from sites. (d) More comprehensive interventions. While the common approach to watershed treatment in India focuses on water and soil conservation, the LRI and other project-generated data, coupled with increased capacities of staff, informed a more comprehensive set of interventions, including advice on crop selection and inputs (agriculture and horticulture), post-harvest support to FPOs, animal husbandry support, and income generation support to marginalized women. Soil and water conservation interventions became more responsive to climatic conditions such as droughts and intensive rainfall owing to weather and hydrological information made available. (e) Better use of public resources. Implementation of the DPRs in the saturation zones made better use of resources while producing better results for farming communities. An LRI-based ‘package of practices’ is now set to determine the management of inputs for supporting cultivation as opposed to a blanket approach used elsewhere, and micronutrient deficiency maps and organic carbon status mapping, which have been a bottleneck so far according to the WDD, are now being used by the GoK to support decision-making for effective crop cultivation. Data on excess runoff were used to determine the number and capacity of water harvesting structures to be constructed within a watershed, resulting in lower cost per hectare of constructions (INR 14,228 under the project compared to INR 18,739 under the IWMP in 2019 price terms)—a drop of 30 percent. 17 In terms of horticulture cultivation, the new laboratories and the digitized library information combined with trained DoH staff and FPOs allow greater crop diversification, cultivation of high-value perennial horticulture crops, expansion of area under horticulture, and stronger links to markets. 41. Beneficiaries. The project directly benefited 207,617 people, 22 percent of whom were women. Direct beneficiaries included farmers who benefited from saturation works, including horticulture interventions, at the farm level and through training, FPO members, SHG members who received training, LRI card recipients, students, and others. When added to the number of people who were exposed to communication campaigns (radio and TV) and weather data users, the number of direct beneficiaries was 1,182,000 people, 34 percent of whom were women. However, these additional numbers may include already-counted beneficiaries. 17 According to the WDD data. Analysis of rainfall and groundwater data, slope maps, soil texture, and results of infiltration and runoff studies resulted in an optimization of watershed soil and water conservation plans. An example of the improved use of resources is Halayapura MWS in Tumkur District, where the WDD constructed six check dams for a total cost of INR 3,000,000 (US$42,253), while water tanks with a capacity of 555,991m3 had already been on site. The LRI showed that the excess runoff in this MWS was only 366,757 m3. Had this information been available to the WDD when the decision was made, the six check dams would have not been constructed and the funds could have been used elsewhere. Other examples are available in the project files. Page 20 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) 42. A video on the project’s key achievements is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Toph3IlqC4 Justification of Overall Efficacy Rating Overall rating before restructuring: Modest Overall rating after restructuring: High 43. Project efficacy is rated Modest before the 2017 restructuring due to the negligible achievement of the integration outcome, and modest achievement of the innovation and capacity outcomes. Project efficacy is rated High after the October 2017 restructuring due to the high achievement level of the three outcomes. The additional aspects of effective watershed management are counted toward efficacy before and after the restructuring as they were a result of activities carried out throughout the project. C. EFFICIENCY Assessment of Efficiency and Rating Rating: Substantial 44. The cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses show that the project demonstrated better efficiency compared to the values at appraisal. In the cost-benefit analysis, the project compared well with past watersheds projects and considerably better than the predecessor KWDP. Using conservative assumptions and datasets, the ERR at completion is 27.4 percent. Using a discount rate of 12 percent, 45 percent of the economic net present value (NPV), which drive this ERR, come from the full suite of project interventions in saturation areas, 5 percent from realized benefits to the WDD from improved watershed planning and implementation, and 50 percent from incremental incomes to farmers due to weather advisories. The latter is an unexpectedly high source of positive impact contributing to farmers’ climate resilience, aided by the higher outreach of these advisories. This compares favorably with the two ERR scenarios estimated at appraisal: an ERR of 19.7 percent was estimated if the IWMP and incremental NREGS funds came through, and an ERR of 17 percent was estimated with only the IWMP resources. The FRR is 18.8 percent compared to 17.2 percent at appraisal. The total project financial cost at current prices per project farmer was INR 11,625 over the project period compared to INR 24,194 at appraisal. The cost per hectare of designing and implementing watershed management interventions was INR 14,786 during the project compared to INR 20,479 in non-project watershed management planning and implementation under the IWMP, showing a drop of 28 percent because of project interventions. The ERR is sensitive to incremental increases in income per farmer. Implementation Efficiency 45. The project achieved its results as defined post-restructuring and exceeded several of them while using 67 percent of the original IDA allocation and 100 percent of the revised IDA allocation. 18 The project caught up with the delays experienced during the first two years with a one-year extension while expanding the project's geographical scope (from 7 districts to 11 and from 935 MWSs to 2,534 MWSs); scope of the digitized library, data portal, and DSS tools to include additional features; and the beneficiary reach (11 FPOs compared to 2 planned and 360 SHGs compared to 250 planned, among others). Further, available resources were used to implement DPR interventions in a saturation zone—an activity which was not budgeted originally. This was feasible owing to (a) several key items purchased at a lower cost over time, such as the LRI-related surveys due to experience-related efficiencies by the technical partners and (b) available resources from the depreciation of the Indian rupee compared to the U.S. dollar even after the cancellation of the US$15 million IDA Credit. From a broader perspective, the project generated efficiencies for the GoK in watershed management planning and implementation, as described earlier. Project 18Although the ICR’s datasheet is showing a revised IDA allocation of US$45 million, the IDA amount available to the project following the US$15 million cancellation was US$40.18 million due to the US$-SDR exchange rate at the time of the cancellation and the SDR depreciation against the U.S. dollar before the restructuring. See annex 3 for more information. Page 21 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) management and coordination costs were 6.47 percent of the IDA amount compared to 8.50 percent allocation at appraisal, and 6.32 percent of both the IDA and government allocations compared to 7.29 percent at appraisal, which is commendable considering the additional year of project implementation. Some inefficiencies were observed in the advertisement of procurement items above US$10,000 in national and local newspapers despite a World Bank threshold of US$100,000, and frequent turnover of senior officials during the first two project years and of procurement staff throughout implementation. D. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING Rating: Satisfactory 46. The overall outcome rating considers the high relevance of the project’s objective to national, state, and World Bank priorities at project closure, the modest and high efficacy of the project as measured by the original and current indicators, respectively, and the substantial efficiency of the project. Before the October 2017 restructuring, the overall outcome rating is Moderately Unsatisfactory with 38 percent disbursement of the total disbursed IDA. After the restructuring, the project disbursed the remaining 62 percent of the total disbursed IDA, with the overall outcome rated Highly Satisfactory. Applying the World Bank’s split rating evaluation methodology results in an overall outcome rating of Satisfactory. Table 9. Calculation of Outcome Rating Before Restructuring After Restructuring Relevance of PDO High Efficacy (PDO) Modest High Outcome A Negligible High Outcome B Modest High Outcome C Modest High Efficiency Substantial 1 Outcome rating Moderately Unsatisfactory Highly Satisfactory 2 Numerical value of the outcome ratinga 3 6 3 Disbursement (US$, millions) 15.36 24.82 4 Share of disbursement 0.38 (or 38%) 0.62 (or 62%) 5 Weighted value of the outcome rating 1.14 3.72 6 Final outcome rating Satisfactory (1.14 + 3.72 = 4.86, rounded to 5) Note: a. Highly Unsatisfactory (1); Unsatisfactory (2); Moderately Unsatisfactory (3); Moderately Satisfactory (4); Satisfactory (5); Highly Satisfactory (6). E. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS Gender 47. Although the project design did not specifically seek to close gender gaps in the sector, it provided women and men farmers equal access to extension services’ advice and inputs and enhanced women’s voice in the preparation of watershed management plans through participatory and inclusive local consultations. The project also supported job creation for marginalized women in the communities by providing training on income-generating activities to women SHGs. In total, 2,194 women SHG members benefited from training, 22 percent of whom were Page 22 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) landless. Interviews with a sample of women trainees point to the trainings’ usefulness in empowering them and providing them with new employment opportunities. 19 48. Youth were engaged in the project as students using the LRI data to conduct postgraduate-level research (a total of 52 students) and 586 young graduate students were trained on the LRI fieldwork, conducting soil profiles in laboratories, preparing GIS maps and atlases, and conducting socioeconomic surveys. These skills are expected to help them find jobs in Karnataka’s highly competitive job market. Institutional Strengthening 49. In addition to the achievements described under Outcome 3, several institutional changes took place or are about to take place likely because of the project. The key one is changes reflected in the GoI’s new watershed management guidelines (for projects starting in April 2020). The changes include (a) an increase in cost norms from INR 12,000–INR 15,000 per hectare to around INR 22,000–INR 25,000 per hectare to accommodate a wider range of watershed management aspects; (b) a reduction in the planning and implementation period from 7 to 4–5 years; and (c) the use of science-based planning, management, and monitoring based on hydrogeologic and aquifer characteristics and climate and soil site suitability data with an information network, portal, and advisories. 20 In addition, the GoK is launching a ‘center of excellence’ to build the capacity of FPOs in Karnataka in a way similar to that undertaken by the project, to be incorporated into the state’s FPO Policy (2018). Mobilizing Private Sector Financing 50. The project did not intend to mobilize financing from the private sector. Nevertheless, it created partnerships between project supported FPOs and horticulture commodity vendors and companies. Four functional partnerships were formed under a private-public integrated horticulture development marketing model, where companies provided government-subsidized training and inputs and post-harvesting technical services and bought outputs from the FPOs. This scheme secured supply and markets, and also increased the post-harvest value of commodities. Several FPOs also registered as vendors with the Agricultural Produce Market Committee and signed agreements with large retail companies, mainly for horticulture products. Poverty Reduction and Shared Prosperity 51. The innovations and training extended to farmers enhanced their ability to select optimal crops, cropping patterns, and soil and water conservation actions and inputs and adjust agricultural activities and practices to potential climate change impacts. An impact study in 9 of the 11 project-supported sub-watersheds showed that the average annual income of families increased by 18 percent compared to an 11 percent increase in control areas. The average value of durable assets owned by communities increased by 31 percent compared to a 23 percent increase in the control areas. Saturation activities were carried out in areas where small and marginal farmers resided (this was one of the selection criteria of the area). An impact study specific to this area showed a 33 percent increase in the average household income primarily because of a change in cropping patterns and introduction of new crops and technologies. In 2018, the project shifted its horticulture support focus from larger farmers to small and marginal farmers in FPOs to enhance equity. At project closure, the DoH reported 9–10 percent average profitability of the 19 An SHG beneficiary from Gadag District indicated greater visibility (‘respect’) in her community owing to a stronger economic status; an SHG member from Raichur District stated, “we were given 30 days of tailoring training in Raichur. It provided a lot of new ideas and guidance on how to sew clothing for school children…now I earn eight to ten thousand Rupee monthly. I can take care of my family. I have been doing all the sewing work in our surrounding villages. There is great benefit in marriage seasons. Now I am earning my bread and butter. I am self-sufficient because of this.” Other examples are available in the project files. 20 According to a presentation made by the National Rainfed Area Authority (NRAA) to the World Bank in January 2020. While the presentation does not make direct reference to KWDP-II as a factor in these changes, discussions with the task team and the Country Management Unit point to the fact that most of the state governments and national government officials in the watersheds sector, including senior Department of Land Resources (DoLR) and NRAA officials who wrote the guidelines, had visited the project. The GoK staff also presented the project’s experience in other states as noted. Therefore, it is believed that these changes were informed by experience from the project to a large extent. Page 23 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) new FPOs, which was considered positive compared to mostly unprofitable FPOs across India. Finally, the project generated a total of 1,150 short-term and 1,611 long-term jobs, including for farmers, SHG and FPO members, students, and new extension and demonstration personnel. 21 Other Unintended Outcomes and Impacts 52. The project resulted in a consortium of 14 expert state-based agencies, the first of its kind in Karnataka. The group exchanged information on watershed management, agriculture, and horticulture and continues to provide technical support to state departments upon request. The project also generated a direct dialogue between the technical partners and farmers because of their interaction during the development of the LRI. This new ‘lab to land’ setting allowed farmers to have direct access to plot-level data on the one hand and direct access of scientists to field-level information, on the other hand. The LRI and digitized library work were recognized nationally and internationally, winning four awards: (a) the ‘SKOCH Order-of-Merit,’ a national award by SKOCH group in recognition of innovative and science-based LRI; (b) the ‘Asia Geospatial Excellence Award,’ an international award by Geospatial Media and communications Pvt. Ltd. in recognition of application of geospatial technologies in watershed management; (c) an international award by the World Bank and the Government of Nigeria during an international geospatial conference in Nigeria, in recognition of the project’s contribution to space technology; and (d) a World Bank South Asia Vice-President Unit Award in 2020. Finally, the solar vending vans that were provided to the FPOs have proven useful in the context of the COVID-19 lockdown as produce is being supplied directly to consumers. III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME A. KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION 53. Soundness of background analysis. The design of the project was informed by sound technical studies, 22 which provided insights on elements that had not been part of the first KWDP, such as hydrological monitoring interventions, baseline socioeconomic factors in the targeted areas, and convergence conditions. Interventions were further informed by an impact assessment of the KWDP, 23 a stakeholder workshop on sub-watershed planning approaches, and wide consultations with farmers and Gram Panchayats. Requisite safeguards, procurement, and financial management assessments were carried out by the GoK and World Bank. 54. Reflection of lessons learned. The project design reflected well lessons from the KWDP and a number of World Bank and GoI studies/analyses of past watershed development projects. 24 The key lessons were (a) the value of combining watershed management activities with structured livelihoods interventions to create strong multiplier effects on equity and livelihood links; (b) the importance of framing watershed projects around basin or sub-basin hydrology with an understanding of underlying geology and soil systems; (c) the importance of creating links with 21 Source: WDD and DoH. A breakdown of new jobs is available in the project files. 22 Hendrickx, J. 2011. Study Report on Hard Rock Aquifers and Hydrological Monitoring in Karnataka - Recommended Hydrological Modeling, Strengthening Local Monitoring Systems, and Community Participation in Groundwater Management. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India; Government of Karnataka. 2011. Social Assessment Report and Supplementary Social Assessment Horticulture Components - Karnataka Watershed Development Project-II (Sujala III). Bengaluru, Karnataka, India; and Government of India, Ministry of Rural Development, Department of Land Resources. 2009. Guidelines for Convergence between NREGS and Integrated Watershed Management Programme (IWMP) of Department of Land Resources (DoLR). New Delhi, India. 23 Government of Karnataka, Watershed Development Department. 2011. Post Project Impact Assessment, Sujala I Phase III Watershed Project. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. 24 (a) A World Bank learning note on global experiences in watershed projects (World Bank. 2009. Rural Watershed Management - The Power of Integration. Issue 28: Water Sector Board Practitioner Notes Series published by the Water Sector Board of the Sustainable Development Network of the World Bank Group. Washington, DC. Report No. 47358); (b) an Independent Evaluation Group analytical sector report (World Bank. 2006. Managing Watershed Externalities in India. Washington, DC. Report No. 61065); and (c) a World Bank review of its global watershed projects (World Bank. 2008. Watershed Management Approaches, Policies, and Operations: Lessons for Scaling Up. Water Sector Board Discussion Paper Series. Paper No. 11. Washington, DC. Report No. 44222). The strengths of the KWDP approach were also assessed in relation to other donor- and government-funded programs in a series of studies prepared by the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) for the GoI (Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture and Ministry of Rural Development. 2008. Impact of Watershed Program and Conditions for Success, A Meta-Analysis Approach. New Delhi, India). Page 24 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) other sectors and making services accessible and demand driven; (d) putting focus on institution building and implementation capabilities at all levels to ensure sustainability; and (e) using a phased approach to implementation to test methodologies. The project also adopted the participatory approach of the KWDP in watershed management planning and implementation. 55. Assessment of risks. Overall, the risks and mitigation measures were adequately identified and rated. However, forming a multidisciplinary project management team to mitigate implementation delays due to the multiplicity of technical partners was later proven an insufficient mitigation measure with delays experienced as explained in section B. In addition, the risk of changes to the national watershed program was not identified. 56. Appropriateness of project design. The project design fulfilled the GoK’s request to put in place the enabling conditions which would allow it to carry out watershed management independently. It offered a new model of watershed development which supported mostly TA while relying on government resources for the implementation of the DPRs. The model also leveraged the World Bank’s ability to convene a large group of capable state-based agencies/technical partners to pilot new approaches for watershed management. While risky (because of the complexity of the procurement process and needed coordination), this execution scheme allowed for an integration of various technical knowledge and enhanced partners’ collaboration, capacities, partnership with the GoK and farmers, and preservation of knowledge within the state. The existing extension services were reinforced and mobilized to ensure more effective reach to farmers and marginalized segments of communities, while reducing the cost of capacity building compared to using private agencies. Interdepartmental integration was ensured at the highest levels through the PEC and the WDD Commissioner acting as the project director, bringing in technical and managerial capacities. The objective was realistic and clear (despite the use of ‘through’, which at the time was acceptable), and the sequencing of tasks ensured learning by doing. Design weaknesses were the reliance on the IWMP for implementation resources without a risk mitigation measure in case it changed; a component structure which was thematically based and not entirely aligned with the project outcomes, which made connecting between intermediate results and outcomes difficult; and several M&E weaknesses as described in section IV.A. 57. Readiness for implementation. Negotiations were delayed by five months (from February to July 2012) because of a new request from the GoK during the February 2012 negotiations to have the DoH as a separate implementing agency in addition to the WDD. 25 This necessitated a second appraisal/pre-negotiations mission and new assessments. In addition, it took three months to receive the state’s legal opinion on the signed Financing Agreement and over seven months from Board approval to reach effectiveness because of management staff changes in the counterpart team, which needed time to understand the project. At effectiveness, the project had in place the required preparatory documents and reports, safeguards instruments, financial management and procurement manuals, and a first 18-month Procurement Plan. The WDD and DoH were officially designated by the GoK as the project implementing agencies, key terms of reference were prepared, and the WDD Commissioner was officially authorized to act as the project director. The project did not have effectiveness conditions. B. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION 58. Implementation delays during the first two years. Little progress was achieved in the first two years due to the steep learning curve of the new counterpart team and frequent turnover of senior officials. The bulk of the second year was spent on bringing 10 of the 14 technical partners on board, with definition of Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs), which had to be explained to all, followed by procurement training. Consequently, in mid-2015 only 2.5 percent of the IDA Credit was disbursed. 25The request came after it had been agreed at appraisal to negotiate the project with only the WDD as an implementing agency and add the DoH later through a restructuring in an attempt to expedite approval of the project. Page 25 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) 59. Slow procurement. Disbursement began to pick up in the third year but at a slow pace due to the difficulty of technical partners to disburse in accordance with agreed procedures and overall slow procurement. Procurement was slow because of (a) procurement clearance at a high level; (b) a large volume of contracts; (c) high turnover of trained procurement staff at the DoH and WDD for reasons of promotion or transfer to other units; (d) the use of the GoK’s lower shopping threshold; (e) procurement of several highly technical items; and (f) inherently complex procurement arrangements, where both technical partners and the GoK carried out shopping. 60. Change of counterpart team. Project performance began to improve in the fall of 2016 with a change in senior counterpart officials who expedited procurement and overall execution of work plans and provided in-time guidance to the technical partners. The GoK also issued a Government Order, which shifted the overall procurement clearance authority to the WDD Commissioner, PEC, and Project Planning and Management Unit (PPMU). 61. Change of the national watershed management program. Following the 2014 general elections, the IWMP was closed and the PMKSY was launched. The ramifications of this change were not immediately clear as national guidelines and funding levels to states were still to be discussed. This posed planning problems for the project as it was unclear to what extent the original project design (of linking project technical inputs with follow-on physical investments by the IWMP) was still valid. The October 2017 restructuring alleviated these uncertainties by reorienting a part of the project funds toward financing physical investments in demonstration saturation areas. In parallel, the project expanded the generation of high-quality LRI data across a wider geographic area and extended the design of the digitized library, data portal, and DSS tools to include additional features, such as disaster risk management and agriculture/crop suitability by partnering with additional technical partners. 62. Strategic project restructuring. The three restructurings allowed the project to achieve most of its targets and exceed several, despite the delays and a changing national policy environment for watershed management. The one-year extension in December 2018 provided the GoK with enough time to complete all the delayed activities and disseminate its new knowledge to other states. 63. Technical and operational support provided. The project benefitted from collaboration with a group of highly capable and committed technical partners in project design and execution. The partners participated in World Bank missions and contributed their time and ideas beyond their MOUs. The project also benefitted from a strong technical capacity of the GoK staff who coordinated highly technical assignments. Finally, the project profited from continuity on the World Bank side, maintaining the same core team from concept to closing. See section IV.C for further information on World Bank performance. IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME A. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) Rating: Substantial M&E Design 64. The project was designed to support an effective M&E system, including ongoing progress and results monitoring, thematic studies, and impact evaluations by third-party agencies. The KWDP’s M&E cell was reestablished with the WDD staff to gather information from stakeholders and executing entities and produce consolidated semiannual progress reports. Adequate IDA and government budgets were allocated for the execution of the M&E system. The project Results Framework presented several weaknesses; however, (a) the PDO-level indicators included a measurement of the long-term outcome (increased productivity), going beyond the PDO; (b) the PDO-level indicator for the increased institutional capacity outcome measured a narrow capacity aspect (M&E capabilities); and (c) several central project-funded activities were not captured through indicators, including the LRI Page 26 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) and support to SHGs and the GIS laboratory. In addition, linking results to outcomes was complicated due to the components’ structure as discussed. Overall, the restructurings improved the ability to measure the outcomes; adjusted measurements and targets based on increased knowledge of costs, timelines, and national and local settings; and added indicators to measure additional results. However, the revised Results Framework did not adjust all the relevant targets and presented several editorial errors. 26 M&E Implementation 65. M&E was implemented as planned. The M&E cell collected data on project-supported activities on an ongoing basis and, in 2016, when the project began to show results, third-party agencies began to conduct impact evaluations. Semiannual progress reports provided detailed information on the progress of all activities, while the evaluations assessed progress based on Results Framework indicators. Thematic studies were prepared on a variety of project-financed interventions such as the benefits of livestock and feed management activities supported by the project. M&E Utilization 66. The information presented in the progress reports and impact evaluations informed the World Bank on project progress and aspects requiring restructuring; supported decision-making during semiannual PEC meetings; and informed quarterly interim unaudited financial reports (IUFRs), work plans, and budgets. The technical project partners conducted monthly monitoring meetings to discuss the physical and financial status of activities, and the PTC met every two to three months to discuss activities’ technical soundness. Information was also used by the GoK to produce quarterly electronic newsletters showcasing progress and early success stories to government stakeholders. Justification of Overall Rating of Quality of M&E 67. Overall, M&E quality is rated Substantial because of the effective M&E arrangements put in place by the GoK and the importance that the Government and the technical partners attached to collecting data and using it for decision-making. Results Framework weaknesses were mostly fixed in the restructuring, facilitating the evaluation of implementation progress and PDO achievement. B. ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE Environmental and Social 68. The project was classified as environmental category B and triggered the Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) and Pest Management (OP/BP 4.09) policies due to potential impacts of horticultural activities. When soil- and conservation-related works in the saturation area were added, the Environmental Assessment category was maintained without triggering additional environmental policies. Social policies were not triggered because land acquisition and impact on tribal communities were not expected. The required safeguard instruments, a project-level Environmental Management Framework (EMF), and a supplementary EMF for horticulture activities were prepared and disclosed ahead of project appraisal.27 In addition, the GoK prepared a stand-alone Pest Management Plan for horticulture crops in May 2019 at the advice of the World Bank to inform horticulture farmers and extension staff on safe and effective use of pesticides. It was confirmed that tribal communities did not reside in the project saturation areas. 26 The targets of the IRIs ‘digitized database library fully operational covering all project watersheds,’ ‘technical staff trained on the use of LRI data for assisting farmers,’ and ‘FPOs organized’ were not upscaled in the October 2017 restructuring although their results had already surpassed the end-of-project targets. Consequently, these indicators present 272 percent, 286 percent, and 550 percent achievement at project closure, respectively. Errors include a ‘no result’ target for the IRI ‘M&E system established and operational in WDD,’ later corrected; the use of number instead of percentage to measure training impact; and the positioning of the laboratories’ indicator as a breakdown IRI under ‘FPOs organized,’ instead of a stand-alone indicator. 27 Report No. E2879. Disclosed in-country on October 26, 2011, and at the World Bank’s InfoShop on November 1, 2011. Page 27 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) 69. The project complied with the safeguard policies. The provisions of the EMF, including for pest management, were implemented, and works in saturation areas were carried out using international good practice construction management measures. The DoH installed fire safety equipment in the soil, water, and leaf laboratory and post- harvest facilities, and on-site fire safety training was provided to the facilities’ users. Grievance redress was implemented using the Government’s systems. It included a right-to-information cell accepting and addressing complaints at state, district, and taluka levels and a citizen charter posted on the WDD’s website. Gram Panchayats used their grievance redress mechanism to address disputes at the local level. All applications and complaints (37 in total) were recorded and addressed satisfactorily. Procurement 70. The project complied with procurement procedures. Weaknesses during implementation were delayed processes and frequent turnover of procurement staff as noted earlier. A particularly delayed item was the development of the digitized library, DSS tools, and portal because of disagreement between the World Bank and the WDD management on the procurement approach. 28 With the new counterpart team in place in the fall of 2016, the issue was quickly resolved, and procurement proceeded. No mis-procurement was reported. Financial Management 71. The GoK’s financial management system was used in full compliance. Quarterly IUFRs and annual external audits were produced by both the WDD and DoH until FY15 and merged into single reports/audits at the request of the World Bank afterward. They were submitted on time and audits’ findings were addressed timely by the GoK. Staffing was adequate with low turnover and no issues were identified, except an erroneous payment to government staff in 2015 using the IDA Credit, which was resolved. Compliance with Legal Covenants 72. The project had two legal covenants: issuance of a Government Order granting the WDD and DoH access to the credit proceeds within three months after effectiveness and appointment and attainment of internal auditors within 12 months after effectiveness. The first covenant was complied with on time, while the second covenant was complied with after a one-year delay. C. BANK PERFORMANCE Rating: Satisfactory Quality at Entry 73. The project took 22 months to prepare, which is 5 months above the average preparation time in India, because of the negotiation and signing delays. The project was designed by a team comprising the required expertise, including fiduciary, environmental, social, natural resource management, hydrology, operations, research and development, and watershed management experts. It was supported by the region’s quality assurance unit and natural resource, agriculture, and M&E experts from the Food and Agriculture Organization Investment Center Division (FAO-TCIN). The team applied lessons learned and good practices from the first KWDP, while establishing a new model of watershed management support, which was highly innovative and relevant to the GoI/GoK and World Bank strategies. It carried out multiple missions and meetings with stakeholders both at the national and state levels to make sure that the design was widely endorsed and technically sound. The World Bank adequately fulfilled its fiduciary role by carrying out procurement and financial management assessments of the implementing agencies and ensuring the development and disclosure of necessary safeguard documents before appraisal. It made sure that funding was available to generate missing background information and knowledge and conduct a socioeconomic 28 Officials in the WDD and higher levels in GoK wanted to single source a specific agency, while the World Bank team was of the opinion that the agency did not have the requisite technical qualifications to carry out the task successfully and that these items should be procured through a competitive process. Page 28 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) assessment of and consultation with affected communities. A quality at entry weakness was the structure of the components and Results Framework and the lack of a mitigation measure for changes in the national watershed management program. Quality of Supervision 74. The World Bank conducted two to three implementation support missions annually, with technical visits in between by the Delhi-based co-task team leader and fiduciary experts. Missions typically comprised operational and technical meetings with the implementing agencies, technical partners, and M&E agencies; field visits; and high-level discussions with state and central government officials. Aide Memoires contained considerable detail on progress and presented a frank evaluation of the technical and operational challenges with concrete action plans. Implementation Status and Results Reports (ISRs) reflected these findings with justified ratings. Missions also informed official communication between the GoK/GoI and World Bank management on key issues, and ISRs resulted in guidance from management to the task team on performance improvement measures. The continuity of the headquarters-based task team leader from concept to closing and continuous engagement of the Delhi-based team members allowed for the preservation of institutional memory, establishment of a solid relationship with the counterpart team, and avoidance of potential handover-related delays. The World Bank provided several procurement trainings to staff and government officials and timely operational, fiduciary, and technical support to counterparts. It shared good practices and mobilized additional resources for learning from other countries. 29 The World Bank strategically used project restructurings to adjust the project to national and local contexts, overcome delays, and use project resources effectively. It performed its fiduciary role well in making sure that the credit proceeds were used as intended. The World Bank ensured that an exit strategy was approved by the GoK before project closure (see section D). Justification of Overall Rating of Bank Performance 75. The World Bank performance is rated Satisfactory to reflect the relevance of the project from when it was prepared up to the present and the efforts taken by the task team to prepare an innovative project that responded to the GoI and the GoK’s changing needs and the dedication it demonstrated during implementation in making sure that the project reached its objective. M&E shortcomings at entry are considered minor as they did not affect project performance. D. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME 76. The project results are expected to be sustained by the GoK and local beneficiaries. The 14th PEC meeting of July 2019 approved an exit strategy to ensure continuous updating and maintenance of the LRI data to the digitized library, DSS, and portal in sample sites by the technical partners through MOUs with the GoK. It also confirmed the continuation of hydrological monitoring and maintenance of the 14 hydrological stations, operation and maintenance of the semen station in Bengaluru in the next five years, and continuation of LRI training to farmers. The items were costed, and a budget was approved accordingly, for a total of INR 403,782,000 (US$5,687,070). In addition, the DoH has been operating and maintaining the two laboratories as part of its departmental budget, and while several FPOs are already showing profitability, it is expected to provide technical and operational support to others for an additional year. The FPOs’ post-harvest facilities will be maintained thereafter using the FPOs’ revenues. At the local level, extension staff will receive training in the upgraded training centers; farmers in the project areas will be trained on the use of the digitized library by the company which established it in the next five years (as part of its contract); and farmers in the saturation areas are expected to maintain soil and water conservation techniques and horticulture 29 IDA resources were supplemented with US$433,000 South-South Knowledge Exchange Program Trust Fund resources (South-South Learning and Knowledge Sharing for Watershed Management, Infrastructure, and Agriculture, TF0A6777), which supported agriculture development-related learning between China, India, and Nigeria in 2017–2019. The Trust Fund was originally linked to the closed Neeranchal National Watershed Project (P132739), and one of its results was a technical cooperation agreement between Indian Space Research Organization and the Nigeria Space Institute, as agreed to by all parties. Page 29 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) activities using their experience and revenues. Animal husbandry demonstrations by the DAH&VS will continue under its Fodder Security Policy (2018) with an allocated budget, and common assets established in the sub-watersheds (such as check dams) will be maintained in the first five years by using beneficiaries’ 10 percent contributions collected and maintained by the sub-watershed committees. After this period, the GoK will maintain them as needed. Finally, SHG members’ new business development capacities and links to finance are likely to be put into use with the support of voluntary organizations. 77. Beyond these results, the GoK’s new approach for watershed management planning and implementation is expected to be maintained and scaled up within the state and in other states. The abovementioned institutional changes are expected to be applied in the WDD watershed management programs, including in the upcoming five- year State Watershed Program, which was allocated a budget of INR 1,000,000,000 (US$14,084,507) in 2019–20, in addition to using up to INR 5,000,000,000 (US$70,422,535) from NREGA. Due to COVID-19, the program has since been postponed and resources may be redirected to urgent support and recovery actions; however, the REWARD Project will replicate Karnataka’s data-driven approach to watershed management in additional areas in Karnataka, as well as in the states of Andhra Pradesh, Odisha, and potentially Gujarat. V. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 78. Science-based approaches should be a central element in the next generation of integrated watershed projects. The project successfully demonstrated a new model for integrated watershed development support, based on stronger science. Previous World Bank-supported watershed development projects in India, including the first KWDP, pioneered and scaled up participatory watershed development planning integrated with livelihood improvement and improved M&E. KWDP-II improved the effectiveness of integrated watershed management by developing, through technical partners, better science-based planning, decision support tools, and the capacities to use them. The GoK now has better systems and capacities to conduct improved watershed development and disseminate this knowledge to other states and countries. This model is of particular relevance in states/countries where watershed management programs can be supported by available technical expertise and resource. 79. In particular, the LRI is a valuable tool for managing watersheds effectively. The project was successful in developing an LRI at the MWS level and combining it with additional layers of data in a digitized library and DSS tools. This multilayered database resulted in a 35–40 percent reduction in watershed planning time and a 70 percent reduction in planning costs per DPR per hectare. It also made watershed management interventions more relevant to the specific conditions in the field and made better use of government resources because of the accuracy at which investments could be made. Future watershed management projects could benefit client countries by adopting this tool as a core element in their design, adjusted as needed for local conditions, capacities, and data availability. For example, new lending operations in Malawi and Nigeria are exploring adopting a suitable LRI program. 80. The LRI can integrate/converge government agencies’ interventions and be a useful extension tool. The establishment of the portal and the dissemination workshops carried out within the GoK allowed government agencies to access the digitized library and make use of the information to plan their watershed development interventions in an integrated manner. The wide outreach to farmers through RSKs enabled farmers to access plot- level information from their mobile phones and use it to better manage their lands in terms of crop and soil conservation techniques, selection of crops and inputs, and timing of interventions. Agricultural development projects should consider favorably establishing land resource inventories as measures of integration and extension. 81. Where available, establishing a consortium of capable local scientific and technical partners can be an effective arrangement for supporting the Government in the design and implementation of watershed Page 30 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) management interventions. Instead of hiring consulting firms, the project partnered with a group of highly capable state-based scientific and technical agencies, which took an active role in the design, development, and implementation of key project activities. This structure had several advantages, pertinent to the context of watershed management: (a) it allowed an integrated design of interventions, taking into consideration a variety of technical aspects; (b) it enabled coordinated implementation of actions; (c) it facilitated preservation of knowledge in the state and the country; (d) it generated improved dialogue between these agencies, state departments, and farmers; and (e) it enabled partners to capitalize on their engagement by providing learning platforms for students. Given the complexity of establishing MOUs compared to signing consulting contracts (procurement and financial assessments need to take place by the World Bank for each partner before MOUs are signed), partners should be identified and assessed, and their roles and responsibilities should be agreed on during project preparation. They should also receive training on funds management before the project is launched to minimize implementation delays. This consortium approach can lead to better coordination of implementation and cost savings in project management. 82. In countries where government staff turnover is frequent, allocate additional implementation time to accommodate repeat trainings and learning curves and agree on a delegation of the procurement clearance authority. Implementation delays occurred due to frequent turnover of senior officials (an issue which was recognized in the country’s CPS as a key implementation bottleneck of projects) and of trained procurement staff in the WDD and DoH. An important solution was a Government Order which gave the procurement clearance authority to the WDD Commissioner, PEC, and PPMU. The one-year extension was also needed to complete key project activities and accommodate the GoK staff and management learning curves. 83. Using government training centers can reduce capacity building costs. The project was able to take advantage of existing and new government training centers/facilities for much of the capacity and institution building. This can save funds compared to private sector suppliers, if the government centers are high quality and can develop suitable programs. 84. Since national programs may change over time (because of changes in the Government or setting of new national priorities), projects which rely on their implementation should remain flexible to accommodate changes. The 2014 general elections resulted in the closing of the IWMP and the launch of the PMKSY. As a result, it was unclear whether physical conservation investments would be financed. This challenge was eventually overcome by making use of available project resources to implement physical interventions in sample MWSs. The restructuring mechanism helped the project achieve its objectives despite this change. Page 31 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS A. RESULTS INDICATORS A.1 PDO Indicators Objective/Outcome: Innovative and science-based approaches Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Sub-watershed management Number 0.00 9.00 9.00 11.00 plans based on innovative science-based approaches 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 and community consultation Comments (achievements against targets): ACHIEVED (122%). The indicator measured the number of newly developed sub-watershed management plans (also called "Detailed Project Reports" (DPRs)), which incorporated Land Resources Inventory (LRI), hydrological monitoring, and other relevant data, and which offered recommendations which were based on these data. Following their development, DPRs were to be approved by local governance bodies. At closing, eleven DPRs were developed for sub-watersheds in the following districts: Bidar, Chamarajanagar, Chikkamagaluru, Davangere/Ballary, Gadag, Kalaburagi, Koppal, Raichur, Tumkur, Vijayapura, and Yadgir. Their preparation was informed by the LRI, hydrological monitoring data, and other data, which were generated for the respective sub-watersheds. The DPRs were developed with input from, and confirmation of the residing communities as required by the 2011 Common Guidelines for Watershed Development Projects. The plans were approved by the relevant Watershed Committees (Gram Panchayat) in 2016-2018. The Committees were formed under the Karnataka Panchayat Raj Act Section 61A (1993) and were composed of elected community members. The DPRs’ preparation and the collection of the data which supported their preparation were financed by the project, while consultations’ costs were jointly financed by the project and Integrated Watershed Management Program (IWMP) resources. Data source: review of sample sub-watershed DPRs, World Bank mission reports, the project’s third-party M&E agency - the Indian Council of Agricultural Research - Indian Institute of Soil and Water Conservation (ICAR-IIS&WC), and sample Watershed Committee approval proceedings. This indicator was introduced in the October 2017 restructuring. Page 32 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Objective/Outcome: Greater integration of programs related to rainfed agriculture Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Data from science-based Number 0.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 approaches adopted by other departments/institutions in 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 the state for planning Comments (achievements against targets): ACHIEVED (100%). The indicator measured the number of departments/institutions other than the Watershed Development Department (WDD) and the Department of Horticulture (DoH), which had access to the LRI data and other data made available by the project, and utilized them for their planning. At closing, the following entities fulfilled these requirements: (i) Department of Agriculture, which used LRI data to determine the suitability of crop introduction in watersheds; (ii) Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, which used hydrological monitoring data to determine the need for check dams as part of the Jalamrutha Program (a water harvesting intervention program for the State of Karnataka); (iii) University of Agricultural Science (UAS) Dharwad and UAS Raichur, which used LRI data to revise their package of practices for crop selection and nutrient planning and management; (iv) Department of Forestry, which used LRI data to determine the type, location and timing of perennial tree crops’ planting; and (v) Department of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services, which upscaled demonstrated technologies in other areas in the State of Karnataka. The data were generated with the financing of the project and Government of Karnataka (GoK) co-financing (the GoK paid for technical partners’ overheads while IDA resources paid for all other data collection and analysis costs, such as equipment, software, field work, and transportation), and LRI dissemination workshops and training were financed by the project and executed by the WDD at different levels, involving all the line departments. Data source: Project Empowered Committee (PEC) meetings’ proceedings. This indicator was introduced in the October 2017 restructuring. A.2 Intermediate Results Indicators Component: Support for Improved Program Integration in rainfed areas Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Page 33 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Innovative and relevant Number 0.00 1931.00 1931.00 2534.00 science-based knowledge is used to develop Land 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 Resource Inventories for micro-watersheds Comments (achievements against targets): ACHIEVED (131%). This indicator measured the number of micro-watersheds for which ground and surface water, soil, geological, crop suitability, cadastral, spatial, and other data were gathered and analyzed as part of the LRI. The names of the micro-watersheds, which have the above analyzed LRI data, are available in the digitized library and portal at the Karnataka State Data Center (KSDC) at http://sujala3lri.karnataka.gov.in/. The data were generated with the financing of the project and the GoK co-financing as above, and LRI dissemination workshops and training were financed by the project and executed by the WDD at different levels, involving all the line departments. Data source: World Bank mission reports, ICAR-IIS&WC, and review of the digitized library and portal. This indicator was introduced in the October 2017 restructuring. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Digitized database library Number 0.00 935.00 931.00 2534.00 fully operational covering all project watersheds 23-Apr-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 Comments (achievements against targets): ACHIEVED (272%). The indicator measured the number of micro-watersheds for which information was available in a fully operational digitized library. The Project Appraisal Document (PAD) defined "fully operational" as "in place as per design with all nodes linked and database accessed on real time basis for planning". At closing, the digitized library was available at the KSDC in English and Kannada for registered users, including State departments’ staff and farmers, providing customized real-time information. A public portal was also featured as an interface between the digitized Library, Decision Support System (DSS) tools, and users. The Project Technical Cell (PTC) confirmed on December 21, 2019 that all the specifications outlined in the library’s design contract were met. The library includes nine DSS modules: (i) soil and water conservation planning; (ii) crop planning; (iii) land capability grouping; (iv) nutrient management; (v) runoff; (vi) farm pond and check dam planning; (vii) crop water requirements; (viii) soil moisture and water balance; and (ix) water budgeting, with 24 datasets available for each plot of land within the micro-watersheds. The datasets include LRI data from the surveyed micro- Page 34 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) watersheds, cadastral data for the entire State, high resolution images for dozens of thematic layers, dynamic weather data, socio-economic data and national census at village level, crop information, soils and nutrient status, hydrology, and crop prices. Geoportal functionalities are customized with COTS software, spatial and non-spatial databases are integrated, precise thematic maps and report generation functions are available for users, and measurement tools are in place. The library is linked to real-time updates on weather forecast, market prices (from the GoK Agriculture Produce Market Committee), official land records and census information sources through a built-in migration tool. The data are valid for 23 years except for data on nutrient and water content, which will be updated every three to five years by the WDD. Users can access the library and portal via an Android mobile application and can receive technical support from local contact centers. The LRI includes an option of sending queries to the WDD, and a helpdesk was established at KSNDMC to respond to queries. The contracts for the design, establishment, and maintenance of the digitized library were financed by the project. The Android mobile application, LRI training to farmers and other stakeholders, and the helpdesk (training of WDD staff) were also financed by the project. The vendor is responsible for the system’s maintenance in 2020-2024, after which the WDD will be responsible for maintenance. Data source: World Bank mission reports, report of the PTC and a live review of the digitized library/portal at http://sujala3lri.karnataka.gov.in/. This is an original indicator whose target was revised in July 2015. The target was not upscaled to 1,931 micro-watersheds in October 2017 due to an error; had it been upscaled, the result would have still been achieved. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Departments and institutions Yes/No N Y Y Y are provided access to information from the Digital 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 Portal and Decision Support System. Comments (achievements against targets): ACHIEVED (100%). The result was achieved as explained under PDO Indicator 2 above. The abovementioned departments and institutions have direct access to the digitized library and its nine DSS modules and 24 datasets. The data were generated with the financing of the project as explained above. Data source: World Bank mission reports, PEC meetings’ proceedings, and a live review of the digitized library/portal. This indicator was introduced in the October 2017 restructuring. Page 35 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Component: Research, Development and Innovation Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion New hydrological monitoring Number 0.00 150.00 120.00 179.00 equipment installed and functional 23-Apr-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 Advance Monitoring Number 0.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 23-Apr-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 Comments (achievements against targets): ACHIEVED (149% for parent indicator and 100% for breakdown indicator). The parent indicator measured the number of equipment units installed and functional within the advanced monitoring station units, which are measured by the breakdown indicator. The PAD defined "functional" as "being able to generate data at specified intervals" and advanced monitoring referred to state-of-the-art techniques, which measured hydrological factors such as soil moisture content, temperature, electrical conductivity, and evapotranspiration. These data were used for water budgeting and decision making on the construction of water harvesting infrastructure, such as check dams. At closing, there were 14 hydrological monitoring stations in place within the districts of Bidar (one unit), Chamarajanagar (two units), Chikkamagaluru (one unit), Davangere/Ballary (one unit), Gadag (one unit), Kalaburagi (two units), Koppal (one unit), Raichur (one unit), Tumkur (two units), Vijayapura (one unit), and Yadgir (one unit). All units contained state-of-the-art probes, which measured various hydrological parameters, including electrical conductivity, temperature, soil moisture, and leaf area for evapotranspiration (179 units in total). The generated data were sent to a central service in the Karnataka State Natural Disaster Management Center (KSNDMC) at 15-minute intervals and to relevant government entities who used them for modeling, and to registered farmers with real-time weather forecasting information to aid in making more effective planting/sowing decisions through mobile phones. The equipment and its installation were financed by the project. The supplier’s contract also includes maintenance costs until 2022, after which the WDD will be take over maintenance costs. Data source: World Bank mission reports, ICAR-IIS&WC, and a visit to a sample station. This indicator was revised in the July 2015 and October 2017 restructurings. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Page 36 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Pilot demonstration of crop Number 0.00 9.00 11.00 production technologies 23-Apr-2013 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 Comments (achievements against targets): ACHIEVED (122%). The indicator measured the number of sub-watersheds where crop production technologies were demonstrated. At closing, demonstrations took place where sub-watershed DPRs were developed (see PDO Indicator 1). Crop production technologies demonstrated include (as relevant to the site): organic mulching, varietal introduction, integrated nutrient management/ integrated pest management, drip irrigation, microbial consortium, plant population, line sowing, mechanized sowing of finger millet, pigeon pea transplanting and nipping, dose response to micronutrient deficiencies during production, cultivation in polyhouses and shade nets for high value vegetables, and crop diversification. The equipment and training were financed by the project. Data source: World Bank mission reports, ICAR-IIS&WC, and visits to sample demonstration sites. This indicator was introduced in the July 2015 restructuring and modified in the December 2018 restructuring. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Pilot demonstrations on Number 0.00 11.00 87.00 89.00 watershed treatments saturation in selected micro- 23-Apr-2013 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 watersheds Comments (achievements against targets): ACHIEVED (102%). The indicator included a typo and should read "Pilot demonstrations of watershed treatments saturation in selected micro-watersheds". It measured the number of micro-watersheds where demonstrations took place based on gaps identified in their respective DPRs. "Watershed treatment saturation" referred to full implementation of the recommendations of a given DPR "from ridge to valley", including arable and non-arable lands, runoff areas, etc. At closing, 89 micro-watersheds within the saturation area benefited from saturation treatment. The preparation of the DPRs, community consultation and training, equipment, and labor (often by the beneficiary farmers) were financed by the project with co-financing by the IWMP (for consultations with communities). Data source: World Bank mission reports, ICAR-IIS&WC, and visits to sample sites. This indicator was introduced in the July 2015 restructuring and its target was changed in the December 2018 restructuring. Page 37 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Farmers in each micro- Percentage 0.00 60.00 60.00 74.00 watershed willing/intending to adopt at least two climate- 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 adaptation and/or climate- mitigation practices recommended by LRI knowledge and sub- watershed management plans. Comments (achievements against targets): ACHIEVED (123%). The result is based on a survey conducted by The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) in nine of the eleven project-supported sub- watersheds (Bidar, Chamarajanagar, Davanagere, Gadag, Kalaburagi, Koppal, Tumkur, Vijayapura, and Yadgir) where intensive dissemination of LRI and DPRs’ information was taken and where demonstrations took place, all of which were financed by the project. The result is based on the response of 491 LRI trained farmers and is an average of the percentage of farmers indicating willingness to adopt at least two climate change adaptation/mitigation practices (70 percent) and percentage of farmers indicating intention to adopt practices (78 percent). Data source: review of the study, including the methodology used and results. This indicator was introduced in the October 2017 restructuring. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Sub-watersheds in which soil Number 0.00 9.00 18.54 11.00 and water conservation investments are made, based 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 on Land Resource Inventory Page 38 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) (LRI) recommendations Comments (achievements against targets): ACHIEVED (100%). The formally revised target of this indicator presented a mistake and should be 11. The mistake stems from a suggestion discussed between the WDD and the World Bank team before the December 2018 restructuring to measure the total amount (in US$ million) of soil and water conservation investments made in the saturation area within the 11 sub-watersheds, which was to reach US$18.54 million. This suggestion was eventually rejected and replaced with the number of sub-watersheds with investments; however, the target was not replaced accordingly. Soil and water conservation investments were made under components 1, 2, and 4 in all eleven sub-watersheds starting in 2016. Data source: World Bank mission reports, ICAR-IIS&WC, and visits to sample sites. This indicator was introduced in the October 2017 restructuring and revised in the December 2018 restructuring. Component: Institutional Strengthening Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Farmers trained in each sub- Number 0.00 70.00 70.00 78.00 watershed intending to (Thousand) adopt practices that are based on integrated land 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 resource knowledge generated by the project Comments (achievements against targets): ACHIEVED (111%). The unit of measure presents a mistake and should be Percentage. The end of project result is based on a survey conducted by TERI in the above nine sub-watersheds where 491 farmers who attended LRI training and were asked about their intention to adopt LRI-based practices. The result represents the overall intention rate and not the intention rate in each sub-watershed. Data source: TERI project impact study. This indicator was introduced in the October 2017 restructuring. Page 39 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Technical Staff trained on the Number 0.00 60.00 172.00 use of LRI data for assisting farmers 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 Comments (achievements against targets): ACHIEVED (286%). The December 2018 restructuring paper defined "technical staff" as "including WDD and DoH staff and officials, extension personnel, watershed assistants, and others". It was further indicated that trained staff would be tested on their knowledge of LRI data after the training to ensure that they had the necessary knowledge to share with farmers. At closing, 89 watershed assistants and 83 LRI extension managers from the Agriculture Department, the DoH, University of Horticulture Science (UHS), and University Extension Centers (Krishi Vigyan Kendra, KVKs) were trained by the ICAR- National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning (ICAR-NBSS&LUP) in December 2018 through two and three-day training sessions and through one- day exposure visits. A questionnaire was distributed to the trained staff, checking their knowledge of LRI aspects and tools, soils types, micronutrients, etc. The results ranged from 15 to 100 percent of understanding, with seven of the nine presented topics scoring above 50 percent and two topics scoring below 50 percent. The training and visits were financed by the project through an MoU between the WDD and ICAR-NBSS&LUP. Data source: World Bank mission reports and the TERI project impact study. This indicator was introduced in the October 2017 restructuring and was revised in the December 2018 restructuring to include broader definition of trainees. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Farmers expressing Percentage 0.00 75.00 75.00 93.00 satisfaction with the LRI- based assistance that Farmer 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 Contact Centers provide. Comments (achievements against targets): Page 40 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) ACHIEVED (124%). The LRI-based assistance provided by Farmer Contact Centers (Raitha Samparka Kendras, RSKs) was distribution and explanation of LRI cards to farmers. The end of project result is based on the TERI project impact study, interviewing 752 farmers who sought assistance from RSKs in the nine project-supported sub-watersheds. The farmers were first asked on the information/advice given to them by the Centers to confirm attribution, and were then posed the question "Are you satisfied with the above information provided to you by the RSK?" with a Yes/No answer. Data source: TERI project impact study. This indicator was introduced in the October 2017 restructuring. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Strengthened women Self- Number 0.00 250.00 360.00 help Groups supported 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 Comments (achievements against targets): ACHIEVED (144%). The mid-term review (MTR) report indicated that Self-help Groups (SHG) would receive training on livelihood activities. At closing, 360 SHGs received basic organizational training such as group and funds management, and entrepreneurship and skills training for livelihood activities. The training was provided by non-Government Organizations (NGOs) and by the Rural Self Employment Training Institutes (government-supported organizations) between 2017 and 2019, both operating under project-financed MoUs. Data source: World Bank mission reports, ICAR-IIS&WC and a meeting with sample SHG members. This indicator was introduced in the October 2017 restructuring and slightly reworded in the December 2018 restructuring. Component: Horticulture in Rainfed Areas Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Post-harvest technology Number 0.00 30.00 60.00 demonstrations introduced 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 Page 41 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Comments (achievements against targets): ACHIEVED (200%). This indicator measured the number of post-harvest technologies introduced to farmers, including for storage, processing, and marketing. At project closing, the following technologies were introduced (purchased, constructed/assembled and trained on) by the Indian Institute of Horticultural Research (IIHR) and the Central Food Technological Research Institute (CFTRI): (i) turmeric powdering; (ii) turmeric steam boiling; (iii) micro encapsulation of cardamom; (iv) preparation of mango jam; (v) osmatic dehydration of mango slices; (vi) minimal processing of fruits and vegetables; (vii) fruit juice processing; (viii) preparation of mango nectar; (ix) ripening of fruits; (x) tomato crush processing; (xi) mushroom - ready to fruit bag; (xii) dry flower processing; (xiii) mango hot water treatment; (xiv) collection centers for aggregation of produce, primary operation and packing for marketing to markets/buyers (five units); (xv) community pack houses for aggregating and handling produce (five units); (xvi) farmer’s one-stop shops (five units); (xvii) solar dehydration chambers for fruit (five units); (xviii) custom hiring centers with mobile application services (7 units); and (xix) solar coding-based fruit and vegetable vending vans (20 units). The project financed the equipment, labor (often by the beneficiary farmers), and training under contracts with IIHR and with CFTRI. Data source: World Bank mission reports, ICAR-IIS&WC, and visits to sample sites. This indicator was introduced in the October 2017 restructuring and was revised in the December 2018 restructuring. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion FPOs organized Number 0.00 2.00 11.00 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 Value addition support to Number 0.00 5.00 11.00 FPOs 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 Primary Processing Facilities Number 0.00 20.00 20.00 Completed 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 Output business plans Number 0.00 11.00 11.00 Page 42 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) developed 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 Logistics Infrastructure Number 0.00 10.00 20.00 provided 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 Labs established and Number 0.00 2.00 2.00 operationalised 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2019 06-Dec-2019 Comments (achievements against targets): ACHIEVED (550%). At project closing, small and marginal farmers (owning less than 2 hectares of land) within the targeted sub-watersheds were mobilized into eleven Farmers Producer Organizations (FPOs, one in each project district) and registered with the Registrar of Companies, making them official organizations/companies in the State of Karnataka. The FPOs are: (i) Kondukuri Horticulture Farmer Producer Company Limited (Davangere/Ballary District); (ii) Kayakalpa Horticulture Farmer Producer Company Limited (Bidar District); (iii) Negilayogi Horticulture Farmer Producer Company Limited (Kalaburagi District); (iv) Dayasagar Horticulture Farmer Producer Company Limited (Yadgiri District); (v) Kapilateertha Horticulture Farmers Producer Company Limited (Koppal District); (xi) Puttarajagavayi Horticulture Farmer Producer Company Limited (Gadag District); (vii) Udigala Horticulture Farmer Producer Company Limited (Chamarajanagara District); (xiii) Bijapur Horticulture Farmer Producer Company Limited (Vijayapura District); (ix) Hebburu Farmer Producer Company Limited (Tumkur District); (x) Lingasuguru Farmer Producer Company Limited (Raichur District); and (xi) Veeranjaneya Farmer Producer Company Limited (Chikmagaluru District). The project financed a contract with the Indian Foundation for Humanistic Development (IFHD) to mobilize the farmers, and with the Small Farmer Agribusiness Consortium of GoI to help the farmers with the registration of their FPOs. Data source: World Bank mission reports, ICAR-IIS&WC, and meetings with sample FPO members. This indicator was revised into its current form in the December 2018 restructuring. 1. Value addition support to FPOs: ACHIEVED (220%). This breakdown indicator measured the number of FPOs receiving value addition support. The above eleven FPOs received value addition support such as technologies for reducing post harvest losses, storage equipment (crates, baskets), prefabricated storage units, and other technologies for increasing value of commodities. The project financed all the value addition inputs. Data source: World Bank mission reports, ICAR-IIS&WC, and visits of sample FPOs supported with value addition equipment/facilities/training. This breakdown indicator was introduced in the October 2017 restructuring. 2. Primary Processing Facilities Completed: ACHIEVED (100%). At closing, the project financed the establishment (equipment and labor) of five collection centers, five community packhouses, five solar drying chambers, and five farmer one-stop shops for selling inputs and outputs – one in each of the districts Page 43 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) of Vijayapur, Chamarajanagar, Davangere/Ballary, Koppal, and Kalaburagi. Data source: World Bank mission reports, ICAR-IIS&WC, and visits to sample processing facilities. This breakdown indicator was introduced in the October 2017 restructuring. 3. Output business plans developed: ACHIEVED (100%). At closing, five-year commodity-centered FPO business plans were developed for each of the eleven FPOs (one per FPO). The business plans looked at marketing of focus commodities, including product selection, procurement of products from farmers, storage and processing, grading and packaging, and marketing and sales. The project financed their development by hiring an agribusiness support agency (the IFHD), which networked and coordinated between farmers and butyers. Business plans were developed on the basis of this information. Data source: World Bank mission reports, ICAR-IIS&WC, and review of sample business plans. This breakdown indicator was introduced in the October 2017 restructuring. 4. Logistics Infrastructure provided: ACHIEVED (200%). At closing, twenty solar coding-based vending vans were provided to the FPOs in Bidar, Chamarajanagar, Chikkamagaluru, Davangere/Ballary, Gadag, Kalaburagi, Koppal, Raichur, Tumkur, and Vijayapura (two per FPO) to demonstrate hygienic selling of fresh fruits and vegetables to customers. The vans were developed by IIHR under a project-financed contract. Data source: World Bank mission reports, and ICAR-IIS&WC. This breakdown indicator was introduced in the October 2017 restructuring. 5. Labs established and operationalized: ACHIEVED (100%). The result of 2 was to include one soil, water and leaf analysis laboratory in Ginigera Horticulture Farm in Koppal District and one Geographic Information System (GIS) laboratory in Bangalore under the DoH. A soil, water and leaf laboratory was established in Koppal in January 2019, and it is operated and maintained by the DoH since to conduct analysis for samples brought by farmers in northern Karnataka. The GIS laboratory was established in December 2017 to capture, store, analyze, manage, and present spatial and non-spatial information on horticulture activities, linked to the digitized library. The GIS laboratory includes two workstations with Arcgis software and a plotter (a printing station). The laboratory is used to map major crops, DoH-supported beneficiaries, horticulture facilities, FPOs, Farmer Interest Groups (FIGs), market locations, and horticulture crop production clusters. The water and leaf laboratory’s structure, the two laboratories’ equipment (hardware and software), a consultant hired in the GIS lab to feed data into the system, and training of staff for both laboratories were financed by the project. The technicians operating them are DoH staff. Data source: World Bank mission reports, ICAR-IIS&WC, and discussions with the DoH. This indicator was introduced in the December 2018 restructuring as a breakdown indicator instead of a standalone indicator by mistake. Component: Project Management Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Page 44 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) M&E system established and Yes/No N N Y Y operational in WDD 18-Nov-2016 31-Dec-2018 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019 Comments (achievements against targets): ACHIEVED (100%). The MTR report defined the term "operational" as consisting of (i) a cell in the WDD; (ii) field staff; (iii) M&E and reporting system procedures; (iv) a database; (v) data collection, entry and analysis; and (vi) the use of system-generated findings to support watershed management. Starting in 2016 and until project closing, the WDD maintained three staff members to gather information from ICAR-IIS&WC, TERI, and WDD and DoH field staff and hired field level personnel, and to prepare status reports; a comprehensive Project Implementation Plan was prepared prior to effectiveness and updated to reflect the restructurings, and ICAR-IIS&WC and TERI had comprehensive M&E and reporting terms of reference in place with specified procedures; a database was established in the WDD to track and analyze progress at all levels; and all project partners at the central and district levels conducted monthly monitoring meetings to discuss the physical and financial status of all project activities. In addition, the PTC met every two to three months to discuss technical performance of activities, and the PEC met every six months and more frequently when necessary to review status reports and agree on measures accordingly. The project financed the hired field staff costs and contracts with IIS&WC and TERI. Data source: review of ICAR- IIS&WC and TERI’s terms of reference and status reports, discussions with the M&E cell staff, and review of sample PTC and PEC meetings’ proceedings. This indicator was a PDO Indicator in the PAD. In the October 2017 restructuring it was placed as an Intermediate Result Indicator under Component 5. The original "No" target was set by mistake and corrected in the December 2018 restructuring. Page 45 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) 1. KEY OUTPUTS BY COMPONENT Objective: Demonstrate more effective watershed management Sub-watershed management plans based on innovative science-based approaches and community Outcome Indicator consultation Intermediate Results Indicators n.a Key Outputs by Component Development of 11 management plans/DPRs in Bidar, Chamarajanagar, Chikkamagaluru, (linked to the achievement of the Davangere/Ballary, Gadag, Kalaburagi, Koppal, Raichur, Tumkur, Vijayapura, and Yadgir based on LRI, Objective/Outcome 1) hydrological, and socioeconomic data. Outcome 1: Greater integration of programs related to rainfed agriculture Data from science-based approaches adopted by other departments institutions in the state for Outcome Indicator planning Departments and institutions are provided access to information from the digital portal and Decision Intermediate Results Indicators Support System 1. Establishment of a public portal as an interface between the digitized Library, DSS tools, and users in 2019. Users can access the portal through an Android mobile application and can receive technical support from local contact centers. 2. Organization of an international convention on soil science in Bengaluru in December 2015, where the LRI work was showcased. Key Outputs by Component 3. Hosting of a five-day knowledge sharing workshop in December 2017 for representatives of all (linked to the achievement of the nine states and DoLR. Objective/Outcome 1) 4. Presentation of the LRI work during a two-day workshop in April 2017 in Pune. 5. Development of three demonstration models on (a) soil fertility management in MWSs for sustainable crop production and soil health by using organic manures, (b) integrated nutrient management for major kharif (monsoonal sowing season) and rabi (winter/dry sowing season) crops in rainfed areas, and (c) water harvesting and improved production technologies for enhanced food and fodder production. Outcome 2: Innovative and science-based approaches Outcome Indicator n.a. Page 46 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) 1. Innovative and relevant science-based knowledge is used to develop Land Resource Inventories for micro-watersheds 2. Digitized database library fully operational covering all project watersheds 3. New hydrological monitoring equipment installed and functional (Advance monitoring) Intermediate Results Indicators 4. Sub-watersheds in which soil and water conservation investments are made, based on Land Resource Inventory (LRI) recommendations 5. Pilot demonstrations on watershed treatments saturation in selected micro-watersheds 6. Pilot demonstration of crop production technologies 7. Post-harvest technology demonstrations introduced 1. LRI in 2,534 MWSs in the 11 project districts across 1.3 million ha, encompassing detailed socioeconomic baseline surveys (from 91,236 households), extensive biophysical site and geospatial data, including soil profiles and analysis, soil nutrient analysis, and water availability. 2. Establishment of a digitized library and DSS in English and Kannada. The library includes nine DSS modules: (a) soil and water conservation planning; (b) crop planning; (c) land capability grouping; (d) nutrient management; (e) runoff; (f) farm pond and check dam planning; (g) crop water requirements; (h) soil moisture and water balance; and (i) water budgeting, with 24 datasets available for each plot of land within the MWSs. The datasets include the LRI data from the surveyed MWSs, cadastral data for the entire state, high resolution images for dozens of thematic layers, dynamic weather data, socioeconomic data and national census at village level, crop information, soils and nutrient status, hydrology, and crop prices. Geoportal functionalities are customized with COTS software, spatial and nonspatial databases are integrated, precise thematic Key Outputs by Component maps and report generation functions are available for users, and measurement tools are developed. (linked to the achievement of the The library is linked to real-time updates on weather forecast, market prices (from the GoK Objective/Outcome 2) Agriculture Produce Market Committee), official land records, and census information sources through a built-in migration tool. The LRI includes an option of sending queries to the WDD, and a helpdesk was established at the KSNDMC to respond to queries. 3. Preparation of crop suitability maps at the farm plot level, superimposed with Cartosat imagery based on real-time data access pertaining to geology and weathered zones, soil type, land capability, land utilization, soil fertility, groundwater, and water quality for 2,534 MWSs. 4. Production of LRI atlases with thematic data and crop suitability maps for 2,534 LRI-covered MWSs. 5. Production of hydrology atlases for 425 sub-watersheds, covering catchment area of around 1.4 million ha. 6. Development of 14 advanced hydrological monitoring stations within the districts of Bidar (one unit), Chamarajanagar (two units), Chikkamagaluru (one unit), Davangere/Ballary (one unit), Gadag (one unit), Kalaburagi (two units), Koppal (one unit), Raichur (one unit), Tumkur (two units), Page 47 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Vijayapura (one unit), and Yadgir (one unit). All units contain state-of-the-art probes, which measure various hydrological parameters, including electrical conductivity, temperature, soil moisture, and leaf area for evapotranspiration (179 units in total). 7. Establishment of a 24/7 helpdesk for local weather-related information and advisories for farmers, covering all 11 districts, with close to 2 million calls from farmers between July 2015 and project closure. 8. Installation of 134 LED display units in all RSKs, partner institutions, and project offices at state, district, and taluka levels for dissemination of live meteorological information (rainfall, temperature, relative humidity, wind speed and direction, and solar radiation) to farmers and planners. 9. Implementation of the management plans/DPRs through demonstrations on watershed treatments saturation: soil and water conservation investments within 46,000 ha including continuous trenching, contour bunding, graded and trench cum bunding, terracing, 1,377 water harvesting structures such as farm ponds and check dams, agroforesty plantations within 11,235 ha, and horticulture-related catchment and on-farm treatments within 10,834 ha. 10. Demonstration of crop production technologies in the 11 districts, including organic mulching, varietal introduction, integrated nutrient management/integrated pest management, drip irrigation, microbial consortium, plant population, line sowing, mechanized sowing of finger millet, pigeon pea transplanting and nipping, dose response to micronutrient deficiencies during production, and crop diversification. 11. Construction of 52 polyhouses with rainwater storage and 51 shade nets for high-value vegetables for more than 100 farmers within the 11 districts. 12. Distribution of nutritional kits for vegetables and fruits (including bio agents and organic inputs) to farmers for productivity improvement in existing horticulture plots in all 11 districts. 13. Introduction of post-harvest technologies to farmers in the project districts: turmeric powdering, turmeric steam boiling, micro encapsulation of cardamom, preparation of mango jam, osmatic dehydration of mango slices, minimal processing of fruits and vegetables, fruit juice processing, preparation of mango nectar, ripening of fruits, tomato crush processing, mushroom-ready to fruit bag, dry flower processing, and mango hot water treatment. 14. Establishment of processing facilities for high-value horticulture commodities based on a needs’ analysis for FPOs (collection centers, community pack houses, farmer one-stop shops, solar dehydration chambers, custom hiring centers and solar coding-based fruit and vegetable vending vans, see Outcome 3). 15. Provision of value chain equipment and tools to FPOs in Chamarajanagar, Gadag, and Davangere/Ballary engaging in value addition commodities (turmeric and onion) based on a value chain and market studies. Outcome 3: Strengthened institutions and capacities Page 48 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Outcome Indicators n.a. 1. Farmers in each micro-watershed willing/intending to adopt at least two climate-adaptation and/or climate-mitigation practices recommended by LRI knowledge and sub-watershed management plans/DPRs 2. Farmers trained in each sub-watershed intending to adopt practices that are based on integrated land resource knowledge generated by the project 3. Technical Staff trained on the use of LRI data for assisting farmers Intermediate Results Indicators 4. Farmers expressing satisfaction with the LRI-based assistance that Farmer Contact Centers provide 5. Strengthened women Self-help Groups supported 6. FPOs organized: newly organized FPOs, value addition support to FPOs, primary processing facilities completed, output business plans developed, logistics infrastructure provided. 7. Labs established and operationalized 8. M&E system established and operational in the WDD 1. Upgrading of two regional training centers (in Mysore and Bijapur) with additional space, furniture, information, and information communication technology tools. 2. Setting up of technology-driven model demonstration centers for crop-soil-water relationship in six departmental farms (in Bidar, Chamarajanagar, Davangere, Gadag, Kalaburagi, and Yadgir districts) to disseminate knowledge on watershed concepts and soil and water conservation structures (for example, trench cum bunding, farm ponds) to farmers in MWSs. 3. Distribution of customized LRI cards (plot-specific instructions for mapping agricultural lands’ soil profiles which are based on LRI information) with training on their interpretation and use to 84,769 farmers in the 11 districts by trained technical staff, with focus on land and soil nutrition and crop Key Outputs by Component selection and management. (linked to the achievement of the 4. Provision of support to 360 SHGs (with 5,638 members from 1,733 households), in the 11 districts Objective/Outcome 3) of which 2,250 members (2,194 women) received skill development training for livestock rearing, tailoring, vegetable nursery management and cultivation, preparation of business plan and establishment of bank linkages, and links with other government programs. 5. Formation of 500 FIGs of 20 members each on average (training, obtaining registration and licenses, and linking with relevant business ventures and marketing opportunities), with appointed lead coordinators and operation manuals. 6. Support for formation (with members, Board of Directors and a Chief Executive Officer) and registration (under the Registrar of Companies Act and with trade licenses) of 11 horticulture FPOs in 2016-2018 as above, with a total of 10,154 farmer members. 7. Development of 11 five-year commodity-centered business plans for all 11 FPOs (one per FPO). Page 49 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) 8. Establishment of processing facilities for high-value horticulture commodities for the FPOs in the districts of Vijayapura, Chamarajanagar, Davangere/Ballary, Koppal, and Kalaburagi: • Five collection centers for aggregation of produce, primary operation and packing for marketing to market/buyers: prefabricated structures with receiving/dispatch dock and platform weighing scale • Five community pack houses for aggregating and handling produce: prefabricated structures with receiving/dispatch dock, platform weighing scale and precooling chamber • Five farmer one-stop shops—marketing outlets to meet farmers’ needs and exhibit/promote new products: prefabricated structures with receiving/dispatch dock and platform weighing scale, input store-bulk and retail, output/produce store, office and meeting room) • Five solar dehydration chambers for fruit: multi-wall polycarbonate glazed chambers with ventilation fans and temperature and humidity control systems. 9. Construction of seven custom hiring centers with mobile application services: prefabricate structures which store small and large farm machinery and equipment for hiring by farmers. 10. Provision of 20 mobile fruit and vegetable vending vans to 11 FPOs to demonstrate hygienic and direct vending from farmer to consumer and better marketing of primarily fruits and vegetables. 11. Establishment and operation of a GIS laboratory in the DoH in Lalbagh, Bengaluru, in December 2017 two workstations with Arcgis software and a plotter (a printing station). The GIS is used to map major crops, DoH-supported beneficiaries, horticulture facilities, FPOs, FIGs, market locations, and horticulture crop production clusters. 12. Establishment and operation of a soil, water and leaf analysis laboratory at Ginigera Horticulture Farm in Koppal District in January 2019 with trained staff, outdoor landscaping, scientific equipment and tools. The laboratory carries out awareness campaigns, training programs, and testing of soil and water for farmers. 13. Preparation and distribution of manuals/guides to field staff and partners: • Field guide for LRI • Guidelines for using LRI data while preparing watershed development plans • Land evaluation manual • Agrohydrological monitoring manual • Socioeconomic data collection and interpretation manual • Laboratory manual • GIS and remote sensing manual 14. Exposure and exchange visits: Page 50 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) • Four in-country exposure visits for project staff/GoK to demonstration plots on sustainable perennials and annuals, new Integrated Nematode Management/Integrated Pest Management/Integrated Water Management and cropping techniques, and FPO success factors. • Four overseas exposure visits for project staff/GoK to Vietnam and Brazil in August 2017 to study watershed management approaches and integration of hydrological modeling into catchment planning; and to Malawi and the Netherlands in July 2017 to learn about the various components of water management, water quality and DSS tools applied to natural resource management. • Five exposure visits for farmers on successful integration of scientific practices in dryland horticulture and farming, dryland techniques, and FPO success factors. • Field days to livestock farmers on fodder production. 15. Training: • Organization of a state-level workshop for project implementing officers on ‘Insight to Implementation of World Bank Assisted KWDP-II (Horticulture component)’ in 2016. • Training of technical staff from the Agriculture Department, DoH, UHS, KVKs, and LRI extension managers on the use of LRI data for assisting farmers. • Delivery of capacity-building programs for LRI partner institutions and RSKs on field orientation and monitoring. • Training of FIG lead farmers on dryland horticulture, soil and water conservation, pest and disease control, FIGs and FPO concepts, marketing of horticulture produce, and post-harvest handling of fruits and vegetables. • Training of FPO members on preparation of value chain analyses and business and marketing plans for high-value horticulture crops with well-established markets (turmeric, onion, ginger, and tomato) and a five-day residential program on post-harvest and marketing aspects, visits to markets, retail chains, and processing units. 16. Technology transfer to farmers: • Demonstration of activities related to animal husbandry and small-scale fisheries in all 11 project districts: summer management of buffaloes, dry fodder enrichment, calves management, early detection and control of sub-clinical mastitis, silage making through introduction of silo bags for storing grain in the open, balanced feeding, stall-fed goat rearing, fodder nurseries, establishment of rural hatchery units for chicken, introduction of rams/bucks, breed improvement and support for downer cows, 30 on-farm goat trials on transition period, and small-scale aquaculture. 30 Downer cows do not rise during examination due to trauma, metabolic issues, or a disease. Page 51 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) • Establishment and operating of a small ruminant semen station at the Veterinary College in Bengaluru, with a standardized cyro-preservation protocol, semen collection, and field trials for validation of the quality of cryo-preserved semen. • Development of nine livestock health improvement training modules. 17. Communication and awareness raising on project themes, progress and success stories: • Production and broadcasting of 19 TV and radio talk shows and jingles. • Production of 70 videos in English and Kannada used in training and workshops and several posted on YouTube. • Production of 20 quarterly electronic newsletters starting in 2014 and dissemination to project partners, line departments and stakeholders outside Karnataka. • Development of a project website under the WDD at https://watershed.karnataka.gov.in. • Production of publications: 29 technical manuals and books, 143 brochures and leaflets, 100 research publications, • Presentation of project achievements and innovative design at the World Bank New Delhi office and to senior ministers and staff in Kerala in 2019. 18. Research: • Completion of applied research on development of climate-resilient chickpea, pigeon pea, and higher yield rabi sorghum using genomics-assisted breeding and on improving popular groundnut varieties for foliar disease resistance and high oleate trait and dissemination of results to farmers in the project area. • Completion of a socioeconomic analysis of groundwater management practices in watersheds. • Completion of research on soil microbials and soil carbon status in the project area and development of a hydro-economic model for optimal extraction of groundwater for efficient and sustainable use. • Completion of studies on the effectiveness of indigenous technologies and integrated disease management practices and on short-duration finger millet varieties. 19. Provision of data for 52 postgraduate and doctoral researches on LRI and animal husbandry. 20. Establishment of a monitoring cell in the WDD. Page 52 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION A. TASK TEAM MEMBERS Name Role Preparation Grant Milne Task Team Leader Reena Gupta Co-Task Manager Yuka Makino Natural Resources Management Specialist Anju Gaur Water Resources Specialist S. Krishnamurthy, Manvinder Mamak Financial Management Specialists Debabrata Chakraborti Procurement Specialist Anupam Joshi, Nicole Andrea Maywah Environmental Specialists Satish Suryanarayan, R.R. Mohan Social Development Specialists Juan Carlos Alvarez Counsel Pai-Yei Whung Research and Development Specialist Glenn-Marie Lange, Urvashi Narain Environmental Economists Jacqueline Julian, Caroline Mascarell, Rohan G. Operations Specialists Selvaratnam Jan Hendrickx Hydrology Specialist Crispino Lobo Watershed Institutional Specialist Jai Mansukhani, Vibhuti Narang Khanna, John Program Assistants Prakash Jim Hancock Natural Resources Consultant, FAO-TCIN S. Selvarajan Economist and M&E Consultant, FAO-TCIN Ben O’Brien Agriculture Consultant, FAO-TCIN Supervision/ICR Grant Milne, Jacqueline Julian, Ranjan Samantaray Task Team Leader(s) Jacqueline Julian, Rohan G. Selvaratnam Operations Specialists Anantha Krishna Karur, Neha Dhoundiyal Financial Management Specialists Priti Jain, Debabrata Chakrabort Procurement Specialists Anupam Joshi, Banu Setlur, Sonakshi Mishra Environmental Specialists Satish Suryanarayana, Moho Chaturvedi Social Development Specialists Joy Iganya Agene Natural Resource Management and Geospatial Specialist Anju Gaur Water Resource Specialist Yuka Makino, Nicole Andrea Maywah, Moho Safeguards specialists Chaturvedi Leena Malhotra, Gizella Diaz Munoz, Ama Esson, Program Assistants Sarita Rana, John Prakash Badda Rajshekar Sambasivarao Chandramouleswara Environmental Consultant Karuna Krishnaswamy Economist Consultant, FAO-TCIN Page 53 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) B. STAFF TIME AND COST Staff Time and Cost Stage of Project Cycle No. of staff weeks US$ (including travel and consultant costs) Preparation FY11 28.339 128,088.46 FY12 64.883 298,089.95 FY13 11.848 52,829.93 Total 105.07 479,008.34 Supervision/ICR FY11 0 0.00 FY13 8.946 40,223.10 FY14 29.406 122,090.17 FY15 42.405 170,605.21 FY16 36.265 159,727.04 FY17 28.414 130,218.05 FY18 34.066 163,322.85 FY19 39.984 244,156.70 FY20 22.532 195,311.28 Total 242.02 1,225,654.40 Page 54 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT Components Amount at Approval Amount after Cancellationa Actual at Project Closing Percentage of Approval (US$, millions) (US$, millions) (US$, millions) World Bank Government World Bank Government World Bank Government World Government Bank Component 1: Support for 15.5 6.63 11.97 5.11 11.86 6.00 76 90 Improved Program Integration in Rainfed Areas Component 2: Research, 13.7 5.87 14.93 6.40 15.31 6.44 111 110 Development, and Innovation Component 3: Institutional 6.4 2.74 2.09 0.89 1.14 0.47 17 17 Strengthening Component 4: Strengthening 19.3 8.27 8.42 3.61 9.27 5.66 48 68 Horticulture in Rainfed Areas Component 5: Project 5.1 2.19 2.77 1.18 2.6 1.19 51 54 Management and Coordination Total 60.00 25.70 40.18b 17.19 40.18 19.76 67 77 Note: a. US$15 million IDA cancelled, approved in the December 2018 restructuring. b. The total IDA allocation after the US$15 million cancellation is showing as US$40.18 million and not US$45 million due to SDR-US$ exchange rate changes. The Financing Agreement currency was in Special Drawing Rights (SDR) and SDR 39.60 million was the total credit amount signed. At the time of the Financing Agreement signing, the SDR-US$ exchange rate was 1.54, that is, the credit amount was US$60 million. During the project period, the SDR depreciated against the U.S. dollar, leading to the decrease in the U.S. dollar amount from US$60 million to US$55 million during the 2018 restructuring. The revised credit amount post cancellation was SDR28.72 million, which translated to approximately US$40 million as per the US$-SDR exchange rate. Page 55 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) ANNEX 4. EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS 31 Introduction 1. This annex is organized as follows. First, the key assumptions, methodology, and the results of the efficiency analysis at appraisal are summarized. Next, the actual benefits to farmers and watershed development implementing departments, modified assumptions, methodology, data used, and results are presented. The efficiency analysis primarily presents a cost-benefit analysis by computing the ERR of the project at completion, where the ERR is the IRR of the annual net incremental benefits stream over 12 years from the date of project effectiveness. The annual net incremental benefit is the difference between the annual incremental benefits to project stakeholders and the annual project economic costs, and the annual incremental benefit in a given year is the incremental benefits in monetary terms to various project stakeholders compared to a ‘without project’ (WOP) scenario. Annual incremental benefits are the incremental income of project farmers compared to WOP farmers and cost savings for watershed development implementing departments compared to the costs of traditional watershed development practices that were used under the IWMP. Annual project economic cost in a given year is the sum of project disbursements and community contributions, net of taxes, and so on. The ERR represents the annual IRR of the stakeholders’ total incremental benefits as a profits stream, against the project’s economic costs stream. The case for value for money of the project is made by comparing the ERR at completion against that at appraisal and those of similar completed World Bank-financed watershed development projects. The FRR is computed at completion because it was also presented at appraisal. The FRR is similar to the ERR except that it uses actual project costs instead of economic costs. Additionally, a measure of cost-effectiveness is presented by computing the cost per beneficiary at completion and comparing it to the cost per beneficiary at appraisal, as well as comparing the project unit cost of watersheds planning and implementation to the unit costs under the IWMP. Efficiency at Appraisal Methodology and Assumptions Used 2. Following the lines of typical watershed development projects in rainfed areas, the appraisal efficiency analysis assumed a long run productivity increase for 160,000 farmer households 32 with a total cropped farm area of 319,550 ha. This was to result from increases in the irrigated area and cropping intensity, adoption of improved production technologies, and diversification to horticulture. Higher availability of moisture was expected to improve production, including during drought-like conditions, which were expected to occur twice in a five-year period. A significant amount of additional public funds was expected through the NREGS, a workfare program, to supplement the IWMP investments in implementing project-supported watershed management plans (DPRs). The investments included soil and water conservation structures. The expected FRR and ERR were presented. An economic analysis was conducted after adjusting for financial benefits and costs. The adjustments included (a) netting out price contingencies, taxes, and subsidies (20 percent); (b) using appropriate parity prices for traded items; and (c) using a standard conversion factor varying from 0.8 for labor costs to 0.9 for other non-traded items. Project costs and benefits were estimated at 2012 prices over 20 years with a 12 percent opportunity cost of capital. 3. Broadly, the improvement in the quantified ‘with project’ (WP) benefits listed earlier over the WOP scenario were drawn from secondary data and literature; however, it should be noted that the data used, specific assumptions, and the calculations done at appraisal were not available for the efficiency analysis at completion because of the unfortunate passing of the author at the end of his assignment. Hence, it is unclear 31 This annex was prepared by Mr. Karuna Krishnaswamy, Economist Consultant, FAO-TCIN. 32 The PAD refers to “160,000 farmer households” twice and “160,000 farmers” once. The analysis uses the former definition. Page 56 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) how the above benefits were converted to monetary terms. Wherever possible, costs and benefits identified in the original design are compared with the costs and benefits in the revised design in addition to new benefits as discussed later in this annex. Results of the Efficiency Analysis 4. Against the total project costs, the FRR for the project was estimated at 17.2 percent with a financial NPV of INR 2.3 billion. The undiscounted average annual incremental economic benefit from project investments was INR 1.4 billion, of which crop production was to contribute 20 percent, horticulture production (34 percent), drought mitigation (25 percent), and sustainability impacts (21 percent). The ERR for the project was estimated at 19.7 percent with an economic NPV of INR 2.9 billion assuming availability of both the IWMP and NREGS funds. Without the NREGS funds, the projected ERR was 17.0 percent. The ERR of 19.7 percent was in line with what was expected in other watershed development projects. Efficiency at Completion Benefits at Completion Benefits to the WDD and Other Relevant Departments 5. Time and cost savings due to improved data and watershed design and implementation. In contrast to the IWMP, the project collected comprehensive and accurate science-based data on soil, topology, surface, groundwater, and so on. These data were compiled in the LRI and a DSS, which automated production of the MWS design recommendations. Consequently, (a) the time taken for DPR preparation was reduced from 18–24 months under the IWMP to 8 months under the project. 33 The total time for the entire watershed development lifecycle was reduced from 54–78 months to 38–44 months; (b) the preparation cost per DPR per hectare was reduced to INR 558 compared to INR 1,740 under the IWMP; (c) under the IWMP, some soil and water conservation structures, which were inappropriate in terms of size/capacity, number, and location, and, hence, would not contribute to soil and moisture conservation outcomes, were built based on rules of thumb and not on scientific site-specific data. Such structures were avoided by the project, thereby leading to lower total cost of structures’ construction, with cost per hectare of constructions at INR 14,228 under the project compared to INR 18,739 under the IWMP. The above led to total savings of INR 5,693 per hectare (in 2019 price terms)—a drop of 30 percent. 6. Time and cost savings due to the LRI database and its use by other departments. At closing, five departments/institutions (in addition to the WDD and DoH) adopted project-supported science-based data for planning (refer to section II.B and annex 1 of the ICR for details). 7. Expected time and cost savings to departments in future LRI-based watershed development interventions. The project created an LRI database for 2,534 MWSs covering 1.4 million ha. Government departments implementing the watershed development interventions are expected to benefit from time and cost savings from using the LRI approach compared to the IWMP approach as explained earlier. Selected projects which intend to use the LRI approach for watershed design and development are listed below. (a) WDD. The GoK intends to use the LRI approach for future watershed development in its annual plans according to an internal 2019 GoK policy directive to the WDD. The WDD intends to implement watershed projects to cover additional 475,000 ha over the next five years with an allocated budget according to a GoK Order and a Cabinet approval of the budget. 33 Source: ICAR-IIS&WC independent study report, 2019. This and the remaining evidence presented in this paragraph are drawn from this report. Page 57 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) (b) Other GoK departments. While others have expressed interest, the analysis includes the RD-PR, which, according to the WDD, has committed to develop 43 MWSs covering about 22,157 ha. (c) Other states. The REWARD Project, an upcoming World Bank-funded project, is expected to design and implement watershed development activities covering 100,000 ha in demonstration sites and LRI databases for 1 million ha to support government scale-up investments in three states. Karnataka will support this initiative as a ‘lighthouse’ state. 8. Benefits not monetized. Qualitative project benefits include the following: (a) Reduced cost of future watershed development projects in Karnataka. Agriculture universities and other LRI partners have developed protocols and have in place test laboratories with trained staff who are expected to continue and use their newly acquired soil and water testing skills in new areas. This sunk cost and skills obtained in this project can be leveraged in the future for agro-advisories and soil testing. (b) Reduced costs of other departments using the LRI’s DSS. Because the DSS produces recommendations on a variety of watershed management-related subjects, the same need not be repeated by other government entities (in areas where the LRI and DSS have been developed in this project) as part of the larger national soil health card scheme 34 or other site-specific interventions and advice to farmers. This is expected to reduce the cost of these implementing departments. 9. The abovementioned two benefits are not monetized because of the lack of data on the subject. Benefits to Farmers 10. The farmer beneficiaries reside in saturation and non-saturation areas. The following benefits are monetized in the ERR analysis based on evidence of incremental income to them. 11. Saturation area farmers. A total of 45,296 farmers within the saturation area benefitted from a suite of interventions, which potentially contributed to incremental incomes. The interventions and expected benefits are the following: (a) Livelihood interventions. The project provided intensive farmer interventions in the saturation area though farmer training; demonstrations; advisory; and technical support in farming (production technology support and diversification to horticulture); value chain support through the FPOs; non-farm skill development and employment of SHG members and others; and fodder management and health services in goatery, livestock, poultry, and fishery. In addition, demonstration sites were set up on lands of selected farmers to show the benefits of these technologies to foster further adoption. These livelihood interventions are expected to increase incomes. (b) Improved soil and moisture conservation interventions. The proximate benefits of improved watershed development are improved soil and moisture in farmlands in the catchment areas. This is supported by findings in 2019 of increases in vegetation cover and water availability for cropping based on soil moisture measurements (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index). These, in turn, are expected to improve agricultural productivity, and, hence, potentially incomes of farmers. 12. Saturation and non-saturation area farmers. KWDP-II supported the Varuna Mitra Project, which provides downscaled, weather forecast-based advisory to farmers to better schedule farm operations, such as harvesting and application of fertilizers. This weather-informed planning led to higher production and lower cost of inputs. The project contributed to improving Varuna Mitra for its farmers in three ways: 34 A GoI scheme launched in 2015 to issue soil health cards to farmers with, among others, existing soil deficiencies and crop-wise nutrient management and fertilizer application recommendations. Source: www.india.gov.in/spotlight/soil-health-card#tab=tab-1. Page 58 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) (a) It improved the accuracy of forecasts and the quality of operational advisories. Previously, across the state, TWSs were installed for every 250 km2. In 2015–16, KWDP-II installed, in its watershed treatment sites in the 11 districts, a denser network of 179 TWSs, each covering a radius of 5 km2. (b) It improved the follow-up and monitoring of farmers in project locations for improved adoption of these advisories by the farmers. (c) It added features to the CRM software to enable the call center to handle more types of farmer queries. From 2015 to 2019, 259,329 farmers (including the watershed investments beneficiaries) called the toll-free number to receive advisories. These improvements led to a higher incremental impact on the annual income of WP over WOP farmers. 13. Benefits not monetized. This section summarizes the expected benefits for which anecdotal and suggestive evidence is available through reports and from WDD discussions, but for which credible studies and data are not available, and are, hence, not included in the ERR calculations. 14. Improved soil and moisture conservation benefits to farmers in future LRI-based watershed development projects. Improved soil quality due to decreased erosion and increased soil moisture are expected to improve farm productivity, and, hence, farmer incomes in future LRI-based watershed development projects. A comparative study commissioned by the project 35 estimated that project watersheds had a decrease in runoff water by 3.2 percent and an increase in soil moisture content by 30.5 percent compared to the IWMP sites. The study also found an increase in average income per hectare due to improved conservation from INR 12,800 per ha in 2016–17 to INR 23,950 per ha in 2017–18 and to INR 37,362 per ha in 2018–19 using a small sample and a ‘before and after’ approach. 36 15. Decrease in use of fertilizers. A consequence of reduced runoff and soil erosion in farmlands is a reduction in the wastage of fertilizers. This represents reduced wasted input costs for the farmer, and/or reduced productivity and higher input costs for those who may reapply fertilizers. A 2019 study 37 of the soil in sites in the proximity of the project’s watershed area found that up to INR 1,070 per ha worth of fertilizers may potentially be washed away due to runoff. 38 16. Horticulture plantation. In saturation and non-saturation areas, the project demonstrated plantation of horticulture crops (primarily mango, guava, lime, and coconut) for the benefit of 6,227 farmers. This is expected to lead to an increase in farmers’ income after three to six years as the plantations begin to grow. 17. Improved recommendations to farmers. Crop selection and nutrient management recommendations based on LRI data and the DSS are expected to be more accurate than agro-advisories previously prepared by agricultural universities and recommended to farmers by the Government. Under the project, 84,769 farmers received LRI cards, which provided recommendations on suitable crop diversification and inputs use. By using LRI information, farmers are expected to apply the correct type and quantity of fertilizers and nutrients based 35 A case study in Dotikol prepared by the University of Agricultural Sciences Raichur, 2019. 36 Because the accuracy of these estimates is uncertain, these benefits are only monetized and included in the ERR calculations for farmers in the saturation areas above (as part of the incremental farmer income increases) but not for farmers who will benefit from improved soil and moisture outcomes in future LRI-based watershed projects. Farmers’ income was measured before watershed structures were built for 2016–17 and afterward for 2017–18 and 2018–19. The income had increased substantially in the two following years. However, it is not possible to say to what extent this increase was driven by improved soil and moisture conservation outcomes, compared to other factors such as weather, change in market prices, and the other livelihood interventions. The percent of the change in income is much higher than that measured by more rigorous evaluations of farm livelihood interventions, thereby casting doubts on the accuracy of measuring causal impact through a difference between the baseline and follow-up survey rounds. 37 According to a note from Dr. Sc. Ramesh Kumar, Principal Scientist, NBSS&LUP, 2019, Karnataka, India. 38 While it is expected that the LRI approach would reduce the amount of wasted fertilizers, there are no data on the reduction in the amount of wasted fertilizers for project farmers; therefore, this benefit is not included in the ERR calculations. Page 59 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) on site-specific soil deficiencies. They are expected to benefit from improved productivity and higher farm incomes. 39 18. Other interventions. The project helped establish the FPOs and related interventions for small and marginal farmers in non-saturation areas to augment their incomes through value chain services. Methodologies and Assumptions Used for Cost-Benefit and Cost-Effectiveness Analyses Cost-Benefit Analysis’ Methodology and Assumptions 19. Farmers’ incremental income increase calculation. Farmers’ incomes were measured through an end- of-project evaluation conducted by New Space India Limited in 2019, which measured the annual incomes in 2018–19 of WP and the IWMP (WOP) farmers through a sample survey. 40 WP farmers were sampled from saturation and non-saturation areas, while WOP farmers were sampled from purposively selected IWMP- supported villages. Baseline data on these farmers were taken from surveys conducted by the project’s partners during the watershed design phase. Farmers’ annual incremental increase in income because of program participation was computed as follows using a case-control methodology. Using the survey datasets, the difference in inflation-adjusted mean annual baseline incomes between the WP and IWMP groups was subtracted from the difference in mean incomes between the WP and IWMP groups at the time of the end line survey. This was done to adjust for pre-project differences in income levels between the two groups. Due to lack of adequate data, this was done without applying typical statistical methods, such as propensity score matching to identify WOP farmers who were similar to WP farmers or the regression-based difference in differences estimator. Hence, the extent of bias of this estimate of incremental farmer income and its statistical significance is unknown. The incremental income calculated was INR 22,919 applying the above double differences of means methodology on the survey data. To be conservative, 75 percent of this figure (INR 17,189) was taken as the primary impact size for the analysis. 20. Agroclimatic advisory benefits. The difference in the increase in the average annual farmers’ income attributable to Varuna Mitra between KWDP-II and non-KWDP-II districts was INR 5,382 41 per ha per year in 2016–17 prices. Causal attribution is made based on the following: (a) The number of calls made by all farmers from KWDP-II districts in the reference period of the study according to Varuna Mitra records is very similar to the number of calls made by KWDP-II farmers according to project records, suggesting high usage by project farmers (as opposed to non-project farmers from project districts). (b) KWDP-II was not randomly assigned. Hence, it is theoretically possible that KWDP-II farmers were different from non-KWDP-II farmers in other ways, which influenced the difference in their impacts on income. However, the two sets of districts are similar in terms of selected time invariant farmer characteristics such as number of family members engaged in farming, age, percentage of male household members, and education. Moreover, the sample was limited to districts with similar average annual rainfall of 600–900 mm for comparability. 39 As no data are available on the incremental benefits of this intervention to farmers, they are not included in the ERR calculations. 40 The end line survey interviewed 1,277 WP and IWMP control farmers. Approximately 30 saturation watersheds farmers from each of 30 MWSs in 11 project taluks were selected using a randomized selection procedure. Non-saturation and IWMP farmers were similarly selected from 18 MWSs from 32 villages in eight districts. 41 The evidence presented in this paragraph is based on discussions and data provided by the lead author of the impact evaluation study and the author’s calculations from the data reported in the evaluation report. The impact evaluation of Varuna Mitra surveyed a representative sample of 1,350 farmers in 10 districts who had consulted the Varuna Mitra helpdesk in 2016–17. The impact of Varuna Mitra services on, among others, income was estimated considering two situations—with and without weather information—thereby asserting causal attribution to the intervention. Source: Economic Impact Evaluation of Varuna Mitra on Agriculture. 2018. A.V. Manjunatha, Agricultural Development and Rural Transformation Centre, Institute for Social and Economic Change. Page 60 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) (c) The expected improved accuracy of weather forecasts in project areas is reflected in the higher share of respondents (30 percent) reporting accuracy rates of forecasts of over 80 percent in KWDP-II districts compared to 13 percent of respondents in non-KWDP-II districts. 21. Limitations of the analysis include the following: (a) The sample included non-KWDP-II villages in the KWDP-II districts where the denser network of TWS was not installed. (b) The non-KWDP-II village respondents have a higher percentage of farmers growing more impactful crops such as arecanut and coffee, while project respondents grew more less impactful crops such as cereals. (c) The incremental impact of the improved CRM application is not factored in because it was available in KWDP-II and non-KWDP-II districts. 22. The above three factors led to an underestimation of the true incremental impact. However, to be conservative, 75 percent of INR 5,382 per hectare per year or INR 4,037 was taken as the total impact per project farmer across all five years of the duration of the service in the project, although each WP farmer, on average, made a little over 10 calls for advisory over the five years. No incremental impact beyond the project period is factored in although it is likely to sustain in future years. 23. Duration of farmers’ benefits. The portion of the incremental farmer income that comes from the suite of livelihoods interventions (apart from improved conservation outcomes) is assumed to be 50 percent and is conservatively projected to last for five additional years, tapering down each year. No additional sustainability benefits of the project’s soil and moisture conservation outcomes over the IWMP are assumed. 24. Watershed planning and implementation benefits calculation. Cost savings because of watershed design and development using the LRI approach were calculated by the ICAR-IIS&WC in 2019. It found that the total cost per hectare was INR 14,786 under the project compared to INR 20,479 under the IWMP. Time and cost savings of DPR preparation were computed based on several consultations with the GoK and technical partners and by using administrative data. The reduced cost by avoiding construction of needless structures was calculated by comparing two similar soil and water conservation structures: one which was project supported and one which was supported by the IWMP, retroactively applying the LRI approach to DPR preparation to a traditional IWMP-financed structure, and documenting the differences. 25. Calculation of benefits from replicating the LRI approach in future watershed development projects. A policy guidance was issued in Karnataka in 2019 to adopt the LRI approach in future watershed development projects, ranging from planning, design, implementation, and maintenance of interventions. The analysis lists three benefit scenarios: Project Completed watershed development, Budget Committed watershed development (watershed development in future years for which budgets have been allocated by the Government), and Planned but Budget Uncommitted watershed development (watershed development in years for which plans have been made but budgets have not yet been allocated by the GoK and other departments) (see table 4.1). In the Project Completed watershed development case, only the benefits realized to farmers and the WDD from the project’s completed activities are counted. In the Budget Committed watershed development case, in addition to the benefits in the Project Completed watershed development case, benefits to the Government due to future use of the LRI-based approach are calculated based on a budget commitment for 43 MWSs in the RD-PR and the 1,000 MWS approved under the WDD for five years. These add up to 497,157 ha of investments. In the Planned but Budget Uncommitted watershed development case, in addition to the benefits of the Committed watershed development case, the analysis factors in benefits to implementing agencies due to planned projects such as the World Bank-financed REWARD Project. However, since there is no evidence available from project’s evaluation studies of the incremental income gains to farmers from improved Page 61 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) soil and water conservation outcomes alone, in the Budget Committed watershed development and Planned but Budget Uncommitted watershed development cases, the analysis only includes benefits of the LRI approach to implementing departments stemming from these future watershed development projects. The cost savings to the departments are computed by multiplying the area under watershed development by the cost saving per hectare. 26. The efficiency analysis only considers the Project Completed watershed development case. However, the ERRs in the other cases are also presented. Table 4.1. KWDP-II Project Actual and Potential Outreach of Watershed Investments of Future LRI-based Watershed Development Projects Implementing Body/Project Year Outreach Scenario I: Project Completed Watershed Development KWDP-II watershed development in saturation areas 2016–2018 46,709 ha Project farmer benefits 2015–2019 45,296 farmers Scenario II: Scenario I + Budget Committed Watershed Development Karnataka WDDa 2020–2025 475,000 ha Karnataka Department of Rural Development and Panchayati Rajb 2020–2021 22,157 ha Sub-total 497,157 ha Scenario III: Scenario II + Budget Uncommitted Watershed Development World Bank REWARD Project sites (demo + 50% scale up)c 2022–2024d 600,000 ha Sub-total 600,000 ha Note: a. Source: Karnataka Government Order and cabinet approval of budget, email communication from the Project Commissioner, WDD. Source: Communication from the KWDP-II project staff. b. Target areas to be covered under watershed investments using the LRI approach. Source: REWARD Project Concept Note. c. Estimated based on REWARD Project Concept Note. 27. Financial costs. Project disbursements are used to determine the financial costs. Expected community contributions are excluded because the project and IWMP are assumed to have had similar community contributions for post-project maintenance. 28. Methodology for ERR and FRR computation. Financial costs were converted to economic costs to exclude tax payments, and so on by multiplying financial costs by the standard conversion factor of 0.9 as is common in other World Bank efficiency reports on rural livelihoods projects in India, for example, the North East Rural Livelihoods Project (ICR number ICR00005094). The net economic benefits were computed by subtracting the yearly economic costs from the incremental benefits. The net financial benefits were computed by subtracting the yearly financial costs from the incremental benefits. All farmer benefits were inflation adjusted by using the actual and projected India Consumer Price Index in different years. The ERR was computed by calculating IRR on the yearly stream of net benefits. The FRR was computed similarly using the net benefit and financial cost streams. Cost-effectiveness Analysis’ Methodology and Assumptions 29. Cost per beneficiary. Cost per farmer, which is one measure of cost-effectiveness, is not an ideal metric to gauge efficiency in this project for three reasons: (a) government departments are also project beneficiaries through cost savings, and because they are not comparable to farmer beneficiaries, they cannot be added for cost per beneficiary computation; (b) farmer beneficiaries received substantially different levels of support, ranging from light-touch training on crop selection or weather advisories to a full suite of interventions; and (c) there are no similar projects to compare with. However, for a perspective, two unit costs are presented to demonstrate better cost-effectiveness at completion compared to that at appraisal. The cost per direct Page 62 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) beneficiary is based on estimated 355,402 42 distinct beneficiaries of saturation treatment and a suite of interventions, weather advisories, training on crop selection and nutrient management, horticulture demonstrations and support, and FPO members. It uses project budgets, actual disbursements, and the number of farmer beneficiaries at completion compared to what was planned at appraisal. The cost per hectare of watershed planning and implementation under the project is compared to the business-as-usual scenario in Karnataka. Limitations of the Used Data and Methodologies 30. The following are the main limitations of the ERR analyses: (a) Estimates of benefits from rigorous causal impact evaluations are not available. Hence, the impact size has been reduced to be conservative. (b) Due to lack of data, several of the expected benefits are not factored into the analysis and conservative estimates are used. Hence, the ERR may be underestimated. (c) Externalities such as carbon sequestration and soil/moisture quality changes to downstream farmers are not factored in. Differences in Efficiency Analysis Assumptions between Appraisal and Completion 31. The differences in the assumptions and expected benefits used for the ERR calculations at appraisal and at completion are listed in table 4.2. Key differences in outreach relate to the number of farmers and the total farm area. Two key differences in the assumptions are that project-financed conservation structures would last longer than those financed by the IWMP and the leveraging of NREGS funds, both of which are not assumed at completion. In terms of benefits, higher farmers’ productivity during seasons with low rainfall was not monetizable due to lack of data, while the benefits of weather advisory and cost savings to government departments were added. Table 4.2. Differencesa in Efficiency Analysis Assumptions between Appraisal and Completion Objective Deviation Outreach Number of direct beneficiary households Assumed to be 160,000 households at preparation but 355,402 beneficiaries at completion. Benefits Increased number of years of soil and water conservation Both project and non-project watershed structures are outcomes due to higher longevity of project structures presumed to be functional for the same number of years. Reduced productivity fluctuations due to mitigation impacts of Not considered at completion, because farmers’ income data in deficient rainfall occurring 2 out of 5 years 2018–19 are available but not for deficient rainfall periods during the project. More efficient use of NREGS public funds for water and soil Not applicable because NREGS funds were not used by the conservation structures construction project. Cost savings to the WDD and other departments and in future Added at completion watershed development projects Weather advisory Added at completion Note: a. Assumptions used for the analysis at appraisal are from the PAD and assumptions at completion were presented earlier in this annex and referenced. Results of the Efficiency Analysis at Completion 42 Author’s calculations based on discussions with the WDD. This number is different from the value in section B.II of the ICR because it includes weather advisory beneficiaries as direct beneficiaries due to the high measured impact on them. Page 63 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) 32. The analysis focuses on the efficiency analysis at completion under the Project Completed watershed development scenario, which excludes future projects. The analysis uses 75 percent of the estimated incremental incomes of farmers. 33. The actual total project expenditure was INR 4.132 billion at current prices. The economic NPV in 2012- 13 terms of the project’s costs was INR 2.097 billion. The ERR in the Project Completed watershed development scenario was 27.4 percent. Using a discount rate of 12 percent, 45 percent of the economic NPV 43 of the benefits, which drives this ERR comes from the full suite of project interventions in saturation areas, 5 percent from realized benefits to the WDD from improved watershed planning and implementation, and 50 percent from incremental incomes to farmers due to weather advisories. 44 The latter is an unexpectedly high source of positive impact contributing to farmers’ climate resilience, aided by the higher outreach of these advisories. 34. The ERR at completion compares favorably with the two ERR scenarios estimated at appraisal. An ERR of 19.7 percent was estimated if physical investment funds from NREGS in convergence with the IWMP came through. Without these funds, as was the reality due to the closing of the IWMP, the ERR at appraisal was 17.0 percent. This being an innovative project, similar past projects were not available for ERR comparison. Hence, the project’s ERR is compared with completed watershed management projects, such as the first KWDP. The KWDP had an ERR of 17.7 percent and its efficiency was rated Satisfactory at completion. Moreover, a review 45 of the World Bank-funded watershed development projects in various countries from 1990 to 2015 found that the average ERR of projects was 22 percent, with half the projects varying substantially from 3 percent to 51 percent. Among the completed projects for which data were available, the Independent Evaluation Group outcome rating was Satisfactory or higher in about half of these projects and was Moderately Satisfactory or higher in about three-quarters of these projects, giving a sense for where this project’s ERR fits in this landscape (the efficiency rating of these projects is not available). The FRR is 18.8 percent in the Project Completed watershed development case, compared to 17.2 percent at appraisal. Cost Effectiveness 35. The total project financial cost at current prices per project farmer was INR 11,625 over the project period. By comparison, at appraisal it was INR 24,194. The cost per hectare of designing and implementing watershed management interventions was INR 14,786 during the project compared to INR 20,479 in non-project watershed management planning and implementation under the IWMP, showing a drop of 28 percent because of project interventions. Sensitivity Analysis 36. The ERR is sensitive to incremental increases in income per farmer. Table 4.3 presents how the ERR corresponds to varying values of income and if future projects, which are stated replications of the project’s LRI- based approach, are added. Even if one of the sources of farmer impact is set at 66 percent and the other at 75 percent of what was estimated, the ERR ranges from 21.9 percent to 23.2 percent, which does not alter the conclusions materially. In the Budget Committed watershed development case with 75 percent incremental benefit estimates, the ERR was 42.2 percent. In the Planned but Budget Uncommitted watershed development case, the ERR was 46.6 percent. 43 To be compatible with the analysis at appraisal, the NPV was computed only to describe the relative magnitudes of the contributions of various benefits. The relative magnitudes do not vary much with varying discount rates. The discount rate is not used in ERR calculations. 44 Percentages computed by dividing the NPV of each source of benefits by the total NPV. 45 Source: Watershed Management Portfolio Review FY90–FY15, World Bank Working Note, October 2015. Page 64 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Summary 37. Conservatively, both in the cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses, the project demonstrated better efficiency compared to the values at appraisal. In the cost-benefit analysis, it compared well with past watershed projects and considerably better than the predecessor KWDP Page 65 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Table 4.3. Sensitivity Analysis Incremental Income Due to Weather Advisories 25% of estd. 50% of estd. 66% of estd. 75% of estd. 100% of estd. 125% of estd. 150% of estd. ERR (%) ERR (%) ERR (%) ERR (%) ERR (%) ERR (%) ERR (%) Incremental I II III I II III I II III I II III I II III I II III I II III income: saturation interventions 25% of estd. n.a. 10.6 21.7 -18.4 18.2 27.6 -8.9 24.0 32.3 -2.4 27.7 35.2 18.1 39.7 45.0 39.8 54.0 57.4 61.2 70.2 72.2 50% of estd. - 16.7 25.8 -0.3 25.0 32.5 9.1 31.3 37.6 14.9 35.2 40.9 32.6 47.5 51.4 51.4 61.7 64.2 70.6 77.6 79.0 11.8 66% of estd. -3.3 20.6 28.6 8.5 29.3 35.7 17.6 35.7 41.1 23.2 39.7 44.5 39.9 52.1 55.4 57.7 66.3 68.4 75.9 81.9 83.1 75% of estd. 0.9 22.8 30.2 12.9 31.6 37.5 21.9 38.2 43.1 27.4 42.2 46.6 43.6 54.7 57.6 60.9 68.8 70.6 78.7 84.3 85.4 100% of estd. 11.6 28.8 34.8 23.5 38.0 42.7 32.2 44.8 48.6 37.4 48.9 52.2 52.7 61.4 63.6 69.0 75.3 76.7 85.8 90.5 91.3 125 of estd. 20.7 34.6 39.4 32.6 44.2 47.8 41.0 51.1 54.0 46.0 55.2 57.8 60.6 67.7 69.4 76.1 81.4 82.5 92.3 96.2 96.9 150 of estd. 28.9 40.3 44.1 40.6 50.1 52.9 48.8 57.0 59.3 53.6 61.2 63.2 67.7 73.6 74.9 82.6 87.1 87.9 98.2 101.6 102.1 Note: estd = estimated; Column I = Project Completed watershed development scenario; Column II = Budget Committed watershed development scenario; Column III = Planned but Budget Uncommitted watershed development scenario. Estimated variables refer to hypothetical scenarios of varying fractions of the estimated incremental incomes. Page 66 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) ANNEX 5. BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS 1. The project was implemented with the support of a consortium of technical partners as follows: • ICAR-IIS&WC, Bellary. Technical M&E of the project’s scientific activities. • ICAR-Agricultural Technology Application Research Institute, Bengaluru: Coordination of LRI trainings to farmers through KVKs. • Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru: Provision of hydrology input to the DSS, development of protocols and proforma for collection of data on hydrology, and development of hydrology-related training modules and organization of training. • ICAR-NBSS&LUP, Bengaluru: Coordination of LRI work by all technical partners and establishment of the digitized library and DSS. • ICRISAT, Hyderabad: Capacity building for farmers and extension staff on a variety of subjects, demonstration of productivity enhancement technologies to farmers, and input for the procurement of the digitized library and DSS. • Karnataka State Natural Disaster Monitoring Center: Provision of weather parameters for watersheds and weather analysis. • Karnataka State Remote Sensing Application Center: Provision of geo-referenced cadastral maps at the taluk level and satellite imagery for the state; generation of base, land use/cover, and other maps and images for all MWSs; development of training modules and manuals for remote sensing and GIS; participation in the development of the portal and data processing and authentication for MWSs in Chamarajanagar and Davangere/Ballary; provision of inputs for the digitized library, DSS, and project website; and input for the procurement of the digitized library and DSS. • Karnataka Veterinary, Animal, and Fisheries Sciences University, Bidar. Participatory research work on fodder enrichment and animal husbandry activities. • TERI, Bengaluru: Project impact M&E, learning and documentation, including beneficiary surveys. • UAS, Bengaluru. Soil surveys and ground truthing and analysis of soil samples; development of maps and reports for the surveyed watersheds; and development of DSS in Chamrajnagar, Davangere/Ballary, and Tumkur Districts. • UAS, Dharwad. Soil surveys and ground truthing and analysis of soil samples; development of maps and reports for the surveyed watersheds; and development of DSS in Bijapur, Gadag, and Koppal Districts. • UAS, Raichur: Soil surveys and ground truthing and analysis of soil samples; development of maps and reports for the surveyed watersheds; and development of DSS in Kalaburagi, Raichur, and Yadgir Districts. • University of Agricultural and Horticultural Sciences, Shivamogga: Soil surveys and ground truthing and analysis of soil samples, development of maps and reports for the surveyed watersheds, and development of DSS and extension support in Chikkamagalur District. • UHS, Bagalkot: Soil surveys and ground truthing and analysis of soil samples, development of maps and reports for the surveyed watersheds, and development of DSS and extension support in Bidar District. 2. The following are comments received from Mr. Prabhash Chandra Ray, Project Director and Commissioner, WDD and Ex-Officio Secretary to Government Agriculture and Horticulture Department, GoK, on May 13, 2020. The comments were addressed in the ICR as relevant. The Borrower’s Completion Report, dated April 30, 2020, is available in WBDocs. Page 67 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Page 68 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Page 69 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) ANNEX 6. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS • Aggarwal, P. K., et al. 2008. Quantification of Yield Gaps in Rainfed Rice, Wheat, Cotton, and Mustard in India. Global Theme on Agroecosystems Report, No. 43, Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India: International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT). New Delhi, India. • Annual external audit reports and response letters. • A. V. Manjunatha, D. T. Preethika, C. M. Devika, and Y. Nagaraju. 2018. Economic impact of Weather Advisory Services: A Case of Varuna Mitra Scheme in Karnataka. Agricultural Economics Research Review, 31 (Conference Number). • Development Project Reports (DPRs) prepared by the Government of Karnataka. • District Watershed Committee meetings’ proceedings. • FAO. 2017. Watershed Management in Action - Lessons Learned from FAO Field Projects. Rome, Italy. • Farmer Producer Organizations’ business plans. • Government of India FPO Policy (2018). New Delhi, India. • Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture and Ministry of Rural Development. 2008. Impact of Watershed Program and Conditions for Success, A Meta-Analysis Approach. New Delhi, India. • Government of India, Ministry of Rural Development, Department of Land Resources. 2009. Guidelines for Convergence between NREGS and Integrated Watershed Management Programme (IWMP). New Delhi, India. • Government of India, Planning Commission. 2012. Twelfth Five Year plan (2012–2017): Faster, More Inclusive and Sustainable Growth. Volumes 1, 2. New Delhi, India. • Government of India. 2011. Common Guidelines for Watershed Development Projects. Ministry of Agriculture, National Rainfed Area Authority. New Delhi, India. • Government of Karnataka Agriculture Department. 2019. Approval of the KWDP-II Exit Strategy. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • Government of Karnataka semiannual status reports. • Government of Karnataka, Department of Horticulture. 2018. Sujala Samrudhi – Success Stories and Lessons Learnt. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • Government of Karnataka, Department of Horticulture. 2019. Pest Management Plan for Dry Land Horticultural Crops under KWDP-II, Sujala - III. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • Government of Karnataka, Department of Horticulture. 2020. report on environmental safeguards and compliance for the horticulture component implemented by the DoH. • Government of Karnataka, Watershed Development Department and Karnataka Veterinary, Animal and Fisheries Sciences University, Bidar. 2018. Success Stories on Livelihood through Production of Livestock and Fisheries. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • Government of Karnataka, Watershed Development Department and National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning. 2016. Field Guide for Land Resource Inventory. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • Government of Karnataka, Watershed Development Department, The Energy and Resources Institute, and National Bureau of Soil Survey and Land Use Planning. Inspiring Insights from Sujala - III. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • Government of Karnataka, Watershed Development Department. 2011. Post Project Impact Assessment, Sujala I Phase III Watershed Project. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • Government of Karnataka, Watershed Development Department. 2011. Environmental Management Framework. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. Report No. E2879. • Government of Karnataka, Watershed Development Department. 2019. Sujala III Project (booklet). Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. Page 70 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) • Government of Karnataka, Watershed Development Department. 2019. Integrated Farming System under Sujala (brochure). Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • Government of Karnataka, Watershed Development Department. 2019. Sagas of Sujala III: Success Stories and Case Studies. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • Government of Karnataka, Watershed Development Department. 2019. Case Studies: Bidar, Chamarajanagar, Davangere, Gadag, Kalaburagi, Koppal, Tumkur, Vijayapura, Yadgir Districts. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • Government of Karnataka. 2011. Social Assessment Report and Supplementary Social Assessment Horticulture Components - Karnataka Watershed Development Project-II (Sujala III). Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • Government of Karnataka. 2018. Men and Women in Karnataka, 2016–17. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • Government of Karnataka. 2019. Watershed Development Department’s 2019-2020 Budget. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • Hendrickx, J. 2011. Study Report on Hard Rock Aquifers and Hydrological Monitoring in Karnataka - Recommended Hydrological Modeling, Strengthening Local Monitoring Systems, and Community Participation in Groundwater Management. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • ICAR-Indian Institute of Soil and Water Conservation. 2019. Independent Study report. • IDA Financing Agreement. Credit No. 5087-IN. • IDA Project Agreement. Credit No. 5087-IN. • Interim Unaudited Financial Reports and response letters. • ISR sequences 1–17. • Joint Director of Agriculture, Raichur District. 2018. Success Stories of KWDP-II (Sujala III) in Killara Hatti Sub- Watershed, Lingasugur Taluk, Raichur District. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • National Rainfed Area Authority Watershed Guideline – Approaches for Revision presentation, January 2020. • New Space India Limited (in association with Pixel Softek Pvt. Ltd.) 2019. End of Project-Impact Evaluation Study. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • Official communications between the World Bank and the Government of Karnataka and Government of India. • Project Concept Note and Concept-stage Project Information Document and Integrated Safeguards Data Sheet. • Project Empowered Committee meetings’ proceedings. • Project Implementation Plan, Financial Management and Procurement manuals, and Procurement Plans. • Project newsletters. • Project Technical Cell meetings’ proceedings. • Restructuring papers and corresponding amendments. • Shenggen, F., and C. Chan-Kang. 2004. Returns to investment in Less Favored Areas in Developing Countries: A Synthesis of Evidence and Implications for Africa. Development Strategy and Governance Division, International Food Policy Research Institute. Washington, DC. • TERI and ICAR-IIS&WC Terms of References. • The Energy Resource Institute. 2019. Rapid Assessment of Horticulture Component Project Activities under KWDP-II (Sujala III). Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • The Energy Resource Institute. 2019. Report on Impact Study of Karnataka Watershed Development Project II (Sujala III). Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • University of Agricultural Sciences, Raichur. 2020. Report of Impact of Soil and Water conservation Measures in Dotikol (4D5B7O1d) Micro-watershed. Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. • World Bank Aide Memoires and Back-to-Office Reports. • World Bank financial management and procurement assessments and reviews. Page 71 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) • World Bank. 2007. India: Karnataka Watershed Development “Sujala” Project: Innovation in Participatory Watershed Development to Improve Natural Resource Productivity and Rural Livelihoods. South Asia Rural Livelihoods, Series 1, Note No. 3. Washington, DC. • World Bank. 2008. Watershed Management Approaches, Policies, and Operations: Lessons for Scaling Up. Water Sector Board Discussion Paper Series. Paper No. 11. Report No. 44222. Washington, DC. • World Bank. 2009. Karnataka Watershed Development Program ICR. Report No. ICR00001205. Washington, DC. • World Bank. 2009. Rural Watershed Management - The Power of Integration. Issue 28: Water Sector Board Practitioner Notes Series published by the Water Sector Board of the Sustainable Development Network of the World Bank Group. Report No. 47358. Washington, DC. • World Bank. 2010. Sustaining Water for All in a Changing Climate: World Bank Group Implementation Progress Report of the Water Resources Sector Strategy. Report No. 57125. Washington, DC. • World Bank. 2011. Karnataka Watershed Development Project: Using Satellite Imagery to Develop Land and Water Resources. Innovations in Development, Issue 2. Washington, DC. • World Bank. 2011. Project Performance Assessment Report. Independent Evaluation Group. Report No. 61065. Washington, DC. • World Bank. 2012. Project Appraisal Document. Report No. 65035-IN. Washington, DC. • World Bank. 2013. Country Partnership Strategy for India for the Period FY13–FY17. Report No. 76176-IN. Washington, DC. • World Bank. 2014. Watershed Development in India: An Approach Evolving through Experience. Agriculture and Environmental Services Discussion Paper 04. Report No. 88056. Washington, DC. • World Bank. 2015. Watershed Management Portfolio Review FY90–FY15. World Bank Working Note. • World Bank. 2018. Country Partnership Framework for India for the Period FY18–FY22. Report No. 126667-IN. Washington, DC, USA. • World Bank. 2019. South-South Learning and Knowledge Sharing for Watershed Management, Infrastructure and Agriculture, ICR. Washington, DC, USA. • YouTube links to videos developed by the GoK on the project. Page 72 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) ANNEX 7: RESULTS FRAMEWORK CHANGES PDO (unchanged): To demonstrate more effective watershed management through greater integration of programs related to rainfed agriculture, innovative and science-based approaches, and strengthened institutions and capacities PDO (unchanged): To demonstrate more effective watershed management through greater integration of programs related to rainfed agriculture, innovative and science-based approaches, and strengthened institutions and capacities Revised Indicators Revised Indicators Revised Indicators Original Indicators (following October 2017 (following December 2018 Rationale for Change (following July 2015 Restructuring) Restructuring) Restructuring) PDO indicator 1: New Revised: New science-based approaches and tools Dropped — The July 2015 change incorporated key science-based approaches adopted into wider watershed operations. innovative tools, which were developed and tools adopted into wider under the project. The indicator was watershed operations The definition of ‘approaches and tools’ was dropped in October 2017 because of a expanded from hydrological assessments only to also shift in the national watershed include the digitized library, decision support management program (from the IWMP systems (DSSs), and the portal. to the PMKSY) and insufficient understanding at the time of the extent to which the PMKSY would adopt these tools. Another reason for the removal of this indicator was implementation delays during the first two years and concerns that there would not be enough time to implement the tools at a large scale as planned during the remaining project period. PDO indicator 2: Improved Unchanged Dropped — The indicator was dropped in October M&E capability in WDD 2017 as it measured only a narrow capacity element in the WDD (M&E capability). It was rephrased instead as an IRI under Component 5 and several IRIs were introduced under Components 2, 3, and 4, measuring a wider range of capacities, both at the government level and at the local level (farmers and women SHGs). PDO indicator 3: Incremental Unchanged Dropped — It was dropped in October 2017 because change in of implementation delays and concerns agriculture/horticulture that productivity changes would not be Page 73 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Revised Indicators Revised Indicators Revised Indicators Original Indicators (following October 2017 (following December 2018 Rationale for Change (following July 2015 Restructuring) Restructuring) Restructuring) productivity in project areas evident within the remaining project for selected crops: Cereals, period. Pulses, Vegetables, fruits PDO indicator 4: Percentage Revised: End-of-project target reduced from 70 Dropped — The end-of-project target reduction in of micro-watersheds with percent to 25 percent July 2015 reflected an understanding of improved convergence and the longer-than-expected time that was integration needed to access NREGS funding, with which sub-watershed planning was to converge/integrate. The indicator was dropped in October 2017 because of the abovementioned shift in the national watershed management programs and an uncertainty about convergence/integration possibilities. New: Sub-watershed Unchanged The management plans were to management plans based on incorporate the three outcomes of innovative science-based project-financed innovations, 46 approaches and community integration of the GoK programs and consultation increased capacities of the government to use them, as opposed to traditional watershed management, which relied on common watershed treatment guidelines of the GoI for all of India. The assumption was that by incorporating these innovations and capacities into watershed management planning at the MWS level, soil and water conservation planning and execution, crop planning, nutrient management, and livelihood interventions would be more effective as they would generate stronger results while better targeting government resources. 46 Namely plot-level LRI (incorporating hydrological assessments), digitized library, DSS and portal, combined with gathered socioeconomic data, information on access to credit and marketing facilities, and other information collected and compiled with the support of the project. Page 74 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Revised Indicators Revised Indicators Revised Indicators Original Indicators (following October 2017 (following December 2018 Rationale for Change (following July 2015 Restructuring) Restructuring) Restructuring) New: Data from science-based Unchanged The use of data generated with the approaches adopted by other support of the project by other departments/ institutions in government entities for planning was the state for planning considered more achievable given the shift in the national watershed management program. Component 1: Support for Improved Program Integration in Rainfed Areas IRI 1: Micro-watershed Revised: End-of-project target reduced from 935 to Dropped — The 931 target was set at appaisal based master plans are integrated 931 on an estimate of the number of MWSs with larger scale sub- which the IWMP would support. The watershed assessments July 2015 change reflected the actual number of IWMP-supported MWSs, which was announced before the restructuring. The indicator was dropped in October 2017 because the Government had begun preparing assessments at the sub-watershed level independently of the project. IRI 2: Digitized database Revised: End-of-project target reduced from 935 to Unchanged Unchanged The July 2015 change was due to the library fully operational 931 knowledge of the number of MWSs to covering all project be supported by the IWMP. The target watersheds was not upscaled to 1,931 with the addition of four districts in October 2017 (see below) due to an oversight. New: Percentage reduction of time taken for net Dropped — The indicator was introduced in July planning at micro-watershed level (MWS) 2015 to reflect the efficiency introduced into the planning process. It was dropped in October 2017 because of concerns about its measurability. New: Innovative and relevant Revised: the target number The indicator was introduced in October science-based knowledge is was removed from the 2017 to measure the LRI, which had not used to develop Land Resource indicator been assigned an indicator at appraisal. Inventories for 1,931 MWSs Its target reflected a scale-up of the LRI scope to 11 districts as opposed to 7 districts at appraisal. The revision in December 2018 was editorial. Page 75 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Revised Indicators Revised Indicators Revised Indicators Original Indicators (following October 2017 (following December 2018 Rationale for Change (following July 2015 Restructuring) Restructuring) Restructuring) New: Departments and Unchanged The indicator was introduced in October institutions are provided 2017 to complement the unchanged access to information from the indicator on an operational digitized Digital Portal and Decision library and reflect the LRI data access to Support System relevant departments and institutions in support of programs’ integration. Component 2: Research, Development, and Innovation IRI 1: New hydrological Revised: Target for the parent indicator was kept at Revised: Community Unchanged The July 2015 reduction in the advanced monitoring systems installed 14, while the target for the advanced monitoring monitoring breakdown monitoring target was due to better and functional: breakdown indicator was reduced from 150 to 120. indicator was dropped understanding of the number of stations • Advance monitoring 47 The community monitoring target was unchanged at needed within the 14 hydrological • Community monitoring 25. monitoring systems. Community monitoring was dropped in October 2017 because it was linked to operations financed by the IWMP and it was unclear whether the new PMKSY would support community monitoring. IRI 2: Improved information Unchanged Dropped — The indicator was expanded under the for farmers on climate new IRI below which measured change and risk management expressed intention of farmers to use the information. New: Farmers in each MWS Unchanged The indicator was added in October willing/intending to adopt at 2017 to expand the above dropped IRI. least two climate-adaptation and/or climate-mitigation practices recommended by LRI knowledge and sub-watershed management plans IRI 3: Value addition and Unchanged Dropped — The indicator was merged into a new IRI marketing system improved under Component 4 (value addition support to FBOs, see below), which was more specific and indicative of project- funded support. 47 Should read as ‘advanced monitoring’ to indicate advanced monitoring techniques. Page 76 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Revised Indicators Revised Indicators Revised Indicators Original Indicators (following October 2017 (following December 2018 Rationale for Change (following July 2015 Restructuring) Restructuring) Restructuring) New: Pilot demonstration of water harvesting and Unchanged The indicator was introduced in July Revised: Pilot demonstration production technologies of crop production 2015 to measure a new activity technologies. (demonstration of improved rainwater Water harvesting was and surface water harvesting to support removed from the indicator.high-value cash crops grown under poly- houses in low rainfall areas), in support of the innovative and science-based approaches outcome. The December 2018 revision was made because this activity had begun receiving support from other government-financed programs. New: Pilot demonstrations on watershed treatments Unchanged Revised: The target was The indicator was introduced in July saturation in selected micro-watersheds scaled up from 1 micro- 2015 to measure a new activity watershed in each of the 11 (demonstration of biophysical and sub-watersheds to 87 micro economic impacts from full treatment watersheds in total coverage in selected MWSs, as identified in MWS plans), meant to supplement the IWMP resources in selected MWSs. The December 2018 scale-up was due to the availability of further savings, which presented an opportunity to further demonstrate project impact. New: Peri-urban watershed planning, management Dropped — The indicator was introduced in July 2015 to measure a new activity (a peri- urban watershed management pilot), to demonstrate effective watershed management in additional watershed settings. The indicator was dropped in October 2017 because the launching of this new activity was delayed and there was insufficient time to complete it witin the remaining project period. New: Sub-watersheds in which Revised: Sub-watersheds in The indicator was added in October soil and water conservation which soil and water 2017 to measure the number of sub- conservation investments are watershed where soil and water Page 77 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Revised Indicators Revised Indicators Revised Indicators Original Indicators (following October 2017 (following December 2018 Rationale for Change (following July 2015 Restructuring) Restructuring) Restructuring) investments are made, based made, based on LRI conservation investments were made. on their management plans. recommendations. End-of- In December 2018, the indicator’s project target increased from phrasing and its target were revised to 9 to 11. make a clearer link to the LRI data and reflect the expanded works’ scale. Component 3: Institutional Strengthening IRI 1: New aquifer user Unchanged Dropped — This indicator was dropped in October groups/CIGs 48 functioning 2017 due to lack of progress of this activity and insufficient time to complete it . Intermediate Result Indicator Revised: end of project target reduced from 60 to 30 Dropped - The target was reduced in July 2015 2: Adoption of improved percent of farmers because of delays in the first two years conservation practices and of the project, which meant that fewer production technologies practices and technologies could be adopted by the closing date. It was dropped in October 2017 and replaced with the below Intermediate Result Indicator, which measured intention to adopt project-supported practices and technologies instead of adoption, which was considered more realistic to the remaining project time. New: Farmers trained in each Unchanged The indicator was added in October sub-watershed intending to 2017 to replace the above Intermediate adopt practices that are based Result Indicator as explained. on integrated land resource knowledge generated by the project Intermediate Result Indicator Unchanged Dropped - The indicator was dropped in October 3: Improved capacity of 2017 because of the delays in the first farmer contact centers/RSKs two years of the project, and uncertainty about the project’s ability to increase RSKs’ capacity within the remaining project period. 48 Common interest groups, which are groups of 10–20 community members of similar interests, such as use of a common aquifer. Page 78 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Revised Indicators Revised Indicators Revised Indicators Original Indicators (following October 2017 (following December 2018 Rationale for Change (following July 2015 Restructuring) Restructuring) Restructuring) New: Watershed Assistants are Revised: Technical staff The indicator was added in October trained on the use of LRI data trained on the use of LRI data 2017 to measure an activity which had for assisting farmers for assisting farmers not been part of the original project design. In December 2018, the recipients of the training were changed to include other extension staff. The revised indicator also measures trainees’ level of understanding (specified in this indicator’s definition). New: Farmers expressing Unchanged The indicator was added in October satisfaction with the LRI-based 2017 to measure the effectiveness of assistance that Farmer Centers extension staff’s training. provide New: Strengthened Self-help Revised: Strengthened The indicator was added in October Groups, which consist of women Self-help Groups 2017 to measure a project-supported women and which coordinate supported activity which had not been assigned an activities for improved indicator at appraisal. In December livelihoods 2018, the indicator was rephrased to improve attribution. Component 4: Strengthening Horticulture in Rainfed Areas Intermediate Result Indicator Revised: end of project target reduced from 60 to 30 Dropped - The target was reduced in July 2015 1: Adoption of improved percent of farmers because of delays in the first two years horticulture techniques of the project, which meant the adoption level would be lower by the closing date. The indicator was dropped in October 2017 with the refocusing of the horticulture component on demonstration of horticulture post- harvest techniques and post-harvest support to Farmer-based Organizations (FBOs) instead of supporting horticulture supply chains, which had already been well established in the country. Intermediate Result Indicator Revised: end of project target reduced from 108 Dropped - The indicator’s target was reduced in 2: Improved technologies for improved technology demonstrations to 71. July 2015 due delays in the first two processing and value chain years of the project. In parallel, a Page 79 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Revised Indicators Revised Indicators Revised Indicators Original Indicators (following October 2017 (following December 2018 Rationale for Change (following July 2015 Restructuring) Restructuring) Restructuring) improvements in selected decision was made to conduct horticulture crops demonstrations at department farms 49 as opposed to private farms, which would allow more farmers to participate. The indicator was dropped in October 2017 as part of the refocusing of the horticulture activity as explained above. New: Technologies demonstrated in the project Dropped - The indicator was added in July 2015 as areas (Core Sector Indicator for Agriculture Extension a Core Sector Indicator on and Research) demonstration of technologies. It was • Technology for storage and processing dropped in October 2017 and replaced • Technology for value chain with the below Intermediate Result • Technologies for marketing Indicator, which measured the impact of technologies’ demonstration (strengthened knowledge base). New: Through the Revised: Post-harvest The indicator was added in October demonstration of post-harvest technology demonstrations 2017 to replace the above indicator and techniques the knowledge introduced measure the refocused post-harvest base on horticulture potential activities. In December 2018, the in watersheds is strengthened measurement of impact was removed since there was insufficient time to measure impact despite the one-year extension. New: Value addition support Revised: FPOs organized The indicator was introduced in the to FBOs • Value addition support to October 2017 restructuring to measure • Number of FBOs FPOs the refocused Component 4 design with • Primary Storage • Primary Processing post-harvest support to the FBOs. In • Logistics Facilities completed December 2018, the focus shifted from • Quality Assurance (labs) • Output business plans the FBOs, whose members were well- developed established farmers, to FPOs, whose • Logistics infrastructure members were marginal and small-scale provided farmers in support of equity. The • Labs established and revised breakdown indicators reflected operationalized the FPOs’ identified post-harvest needs. 49 Department farms conduct demonstration trials for farmers. Page 80 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) Revised Indicators Revised Indicators Revised Indicators Original Indicators (following October 2017 (following December 2018 Rationale for Change (following July 2015 Restructuring) Restructuring) Restructuring) The laboratory breakdown indicator was meant to be a stand-alone indicator as explained in annex 1. It was added to measure an activity which had been described in the PAD but was not assigned an indicator (establishment of a soil, water, and leaf laboratory), and an activity which was added later in implementation (establishment of a GIS laboratory at the DoH). Component 5: Project Management and Coordination IRI 1: Effective project Unchanged Dropped — The indicator was dropped in October management 2017 and replaced with the below IRI for a more specific measurement of the WDD’s project management performance. New: M&E system established Unchanged The indicator was added in October and operational in WDD 2017 to replace the above dropped IRI as explained. It also incorporated the dropped PDO indicator 2 on ‘Improved M&E capability in the WDD’. Note: Current indicators are shaded in blue. Page 81 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) ANNEX 8: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE LAND RESOURCE INVENTORY, DIGITIZED LIBRARY, DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, AND PORTAL 1. The LRI, digitized library, and portal functionalities were developed by integrating multiple primary and secondary spatial (LRI, GIS, remote sensing data, and scanned copies) and nonspatial data, including management information system data from the KSDC. These tools were made available to all the stakeholders (farmers, planners, administrators, research institutions, and other stakeholders) on a real-time basis. The datasets included in the digitized library are listed in table 8.1. Table 8.1. Maps and Datasets Housed in the Digitized Library Maps Datasets Administration layers For the entire state, at district, taluk, block, panchayat, village, and MWS levels Cadastral maps Geo-referenced cadastral maps (1:7,920 scale) for all watersheds and villages Satellite imagery State-wide higher resolution Cartosat/QuickBird imagery Elevation maps Digital Elevation Model Geology maps Rock types, lineaments, depth to weathered zone, landforms, physiography, elevation, contour, and other features Geomorphology maps For the entire state Land use/land cover data Land use/land use patterns of the state: total geographical area, cropped area, sown net area, cropping patterns, area sown more than once, area under different crops, net irrigated area, non- agricultural use, barren lands, uncultivated areas, fallow lands, and so on Soil maps Soil maps at 1:250,000 and 1:50,000 scale for the entire state LRI database Maps of site and soil characteristics, land use, and other details from the LRI covering the project area. This includes all morphological, physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the soil, land use, and other details of the project area Hydrological data and maps Surface runoff, infiltration, evaporation, evapotranspiration, groundwater recharge, sediment load, base flow, water quality, aquifer information, and so on Drainage data and maps Drainage pattern and location of water bodies, rivers, and streams Drought prone area maps Generated by KSNDMC and ICAR-NBSS&LUP Agroclimatic zones map Prepared by the state agricultural universities and ICAR-NBSS&LUP Degradation map State-wide degradation status map prepared by ICAR-NBSS&LUP and other agencies Irrigation related data Net irrigated area, major and medium irrigation schemes, groundwater and surface water schemes, tank commands, groundwater irrigated areas, area affected by waterlogging, salinity and sodicity, consumption of electricity for lifting water, and so on Crop coverage Dynamic database, including data of current crop coverage, reference MWS, farmer data, crop sown, area sown, sowing date, harvest date, and so on. Weather and climatic data Weather and climate data like rainfall, temperature, humidity, wind speed and direction, solar radiation, and so on, from all the rain gauge and automatic weather stations located in the state Socioeconomic data Various socioeconomic parameters, existing infrastructure, and marketing facilities collected by the LRI partners and from the Census Survey of India Farmer data Basic information on farmers available from Bhoomi like farmer name, address, area, contact number, and so on Marketing and infrastructural Marketing channels and marketing infrastructure in the state facilities Communication and transport Road and rail connectivity and communication facilities available at village and state levels services Programs and schemes Details about the schemes and programs that are in operation under various departments 2. Nine decision support modules were developed, interpreting the various spatial and nonspatial information. The 9 DSS modules available in the digitized library are (a) soil and water conservation planning. (b) crop planning, (c) land capability grouping, (d) nutrient management, (e) runoff, (f) farm pond and check dam planning, (g) crop water requirements, (h) soil moisture and water balance, and (i) water budgeting. 3. The portal is a web-based platform used to search and access geospatial information and remote sensing Page 82 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) data and associated services, such as display, editing, and analysis. A functional portal with this breath of data and specific information per plot of land is not available elsewhere in India, and its data manipulation capabilities and number of uses are unique in the world according to the World Bank task team. 4. For an animated description of the LRI and digitized library, 50 see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EabwsE90mbc&feature=youtu.be. For a video which summarizes the project’s support to horticulture, including demonstration of technologies and post-harvest support, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ff8FukPg8XY&feature=youtu.be. 5. A short video illustrating the LRI, digitized library, DSS, and portal is available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_FJcBI5LvI. 50 The information in the video is relevant to the time it was produced (April 2019). Some information has since changed, for example, the number of MWSs covered by the LRI and digitized library. Page 83 of 84 The World Bank Karnataka Watershed Development II (P122486) ANNEX 9: PROJECT MAP Note: Map cleared on August 27, 2020. Page 84 of 84