1. Document of
The World Bank
Report No: 23555-IN
PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT
ON A
PROPOSED CREDIT
IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 80 MILLION (US$98.9 MILLION EQUIVALENT)
TO
INDIA
FOR THE
KARNATAKA COMMUNITY-BASED TANK MANAGEMENT PROJECT
March 22, 2002
Rural Development Sector Unit
India Country Unit
South Asia Regional Office

2. CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS
(Exchange Rate Effective Man:h 21, 2002)
Currency Unit = Indian Rupee
Rs. I = USSO.020
US$1 = Rs. 48.75
FISCAL YEAR
April 1 - March31
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
ANGO Anchor Non-Governmental Organization PIP : Project Inplementation Plan
CAS Country Assistance Strategy PMP : Pest Management Plan
CFT Cluster Facilitation Team PR : Panchayati Raj Institution
DMI Department of Minor Irrigation RAP : Resettlement Action Plan
DPU District Project Unit RWSSP : Rual Water Supply and Sanitation Project
DRG: District Resource Group SC : Scheduled Case
EMP : Environment Management Plan SEA : Social and Environmental Assessment
FMM Financial Management Manual SHGs : Self-Hlip Groups
GAP : Gender Action Plan SPU : Stae Project Unit
GoK Government of Karnataka SRG : State Resources Group
GP Grain Panchayat ST : Scheduled Tribe
HRD Human Resource Development TDP : Tnbal Development Plan
IPDP Indigenous Peoples Development Plan TMP: Tank Maintenance Policy
ITDP Integrated Tank Development Plan TP : Taluka Panchyat
JSYS Jala Samvardhane Yojana Sangha TUC : Tank Users Committee
KERP Kamataka Economic Restructuring Program TUG : Tank Users Group
KVK Krishi Vigyan Kendra UAS : Univerity of Agricultur Sciences
MOA Memorandum of Agreement WDP : Watershed Develop1m Ptoject
MTFP Medium Term Fiscal Plan WUCS : Water User Coopeaive Society
NGO Non-Government Organization ZP : Zilba Prishad
O&M : Operation and Maintenance
Vice President: Mieko Nishiminu
Country Director. Edwin R. Lin
Sector Director Constance A. Benard
Sector Manager Gajanand Pathmanathan
Task Team Leaders: E. V. JagannathaaManish Bapna

3. INDIA
KARNATAKA COMMUNITY-BASED TANK MANAGEMENT PROJECT
CONTENTS
A. Project Development Objective Page
1. Project development objective 2
2. Key performance indicators 2
B. Strategic Context
1. Sector-related Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) goal supported by the project 2
2. Main sector issues and Govermment strategy 3
3. Sector issues to be addressed by the project and strategic choices 5
C. Project Description Summary
1. Project components 6
2. Key policy and institutional reforms supported by the project 7
3. Benefits and target population 9
4. Institutional and implementation arrangements 9
D. Project Rationale
1. Project altematives considered and reasons for rejection 13
2. Major related projects financed by the Bank and other development agencies 14
3. Lessons learned and reflected in the project design 14
4. Indications of borrower commitment and ownership 16
5. Value added of Bank support in this project 16
E. Summary Project Analysis
1. Economic 16
2. Financial 17
3. Technical 17
4. Institutional 18
5. Environmental 20
6. Social 23
7. Safeguard Policies 26
F. Sustainability and Risks
1. Sustainability 27

4. 2. Critical risks 28
3. Possible controversial aspects 30
G. Main Conditions
1. Effectiveness Condition 30
2. Other 30
H. Readiness for Implementation 33
I. Compliance with Bank Policies 33
Annexes
Annex 1: Project Design Summary 34
Annex 2: Detailed Project Description 38
Attachment 1: Map and List of Selected Districts and Taluks 45
Attachment 2: Organizational Structure 46
Attachment 3: Linkages with Bank-Assisted Programs and Projects in Kamataka 53
Attachment 4: Summary of Social and Environmental Assessment 55
Attachment 5: Gender Strategy and Action Plan 64
Attachment 6: Human Resources Development 66
Attachment 7: Monitoring and Learning 68
Annex 3: Estimated Project Costs 69
Annex 4: Cost Benefit Analysis Summary 70
Annex 5: Financial Summary 76
Annex 6: Procurement and Disbursement Arrangements 77
Annex 7: Project Processing Schedule 91
Annex 8: Documents in the Project File 92
Annex 9: Statement of Loans and Credits 93
Annex 10: Country at a Glance 96
MAP(S)
IBRD No. 31779

5. INDIA
Kamataka Community-Based Tank Management Project
Project Appraisal Document
South Asia Regional Office
SASRD
Date: March 22, 2002 Team Leader: E. V. Jagannathan
Country Manager/Director: Edwin Lim Sector Director: Constance A. Bemard
Project ID: P071033 Sector(s): AI - Irrigation & Drainage, VM - Natural
Resources Management
Lending Instrument: Specific Investrnent Loan (SIL) Theme(s): Rural Development
Poverty Targeted Intervention: N
Project Financing Data
[ Loan [X] Credit [ Grant [ ] Guarantee [ ] Other:
For Loans/Credits/Others:
Amount (US$m): SDR 80 million (US$98.9 million equivalent)
Proposed Terms (IDA): Standard Credit
Grace period (years): 10 Years to maturity: 35
Commitment fee: Standard Service charge: 0.75%
Financing Plan (US$m): Source Local Foreign Total
BORROWER 21.16 0.00 21.16
IDA 84.73 14.17 98.90
LOCAL COMMUNITIES 4.91 0.00 4.91
Total: 110.80 14.17 124.97
Borrower: GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Responsible agency: JALA SAMVARDHANE YOJANA SANGHA
and Water Resources Department (Minor Inigation)
Government of Karnataka.
Address: 16/1, S.P. Complex, 5th Floor, Lalbagh Road, Bangalore, India: 560 027
Contact Person: Mr. Madan Gopal, Executive Director, JSYS
Tel: 080-2995623 Fax: 080-2995622 Email: jsys@vsnl.net
Estimated disbursements ( Bank FY/US$m):
FY 2003 2004 2005 2006 - 2007 2008
Annual 7.42 18.64 27.08 30.22 12.56 2.98
Cumulative 7.42 26.06 53.14 83.36 95.92 98.90
Project implementation period: FY 2003-2009
Expected effectiveness date: 08/31/2002 Expected closing date: 01/31/2009
MCSWPIf F . . M,-

6. A. Project Development Objective
1. Project development objective: (see Annex 1)
The project development objective is to improve rural livelihoods and reduce poverty by developing and
strengthening community-based approaches to improving and managing selected tank systems*.
The project proposes to cover approximately 2,000 existing tank systems* in the south Indian state of
Kamataka. The project aims to demonstrate the viability of a community-based approach to tank
improvement and management by returning the main responsibility of tank development to village-level
user groups. If successful, the project would provide a useful model for scaling up this programmatic
approach statewide. The poverty focus of the project is based on geographic targeting of sub-districts (i.e.
taluks) across the state with a high incidence of poverty.
* Tanks are small, man-made bodies of water that historically have served a wide range of village water needs
across India. Tank systems include the catchment, tank structure, and the command (which is the area designed to
be irrigated by the tank).
2. Key performance indicators: (see Annex 1)
The project impact/outcome indicators are:
* community-based, self-supporting, and sustainable tank development institutions in place and
functioning
* meaningful participation of traditionally marginalized tank users
* agriculture production (productivity and area) covered by the tank system increased
* household incomes of direct stakeholders increased
* amount of funds generated and retained by user groups/local governments for operations and
maintenance
* percent of local governments (i.e. Panchayati Raj Institutions) involved in planning and coordinating
technical support for improving tank systems
B. Strategic Context
1. Sector-related Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) goal supported by the project: (see Annex 1)
Document number: 22541-IN Date of latest CAS discussion: April 5, 2001
The proposed project fits well with the Bank's Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) objectives and is
consistent with the CAS program priorities and principles. The CAS is built around the Govemment of
India's Ninth Five Year Plan in which the objective is to 'strengthen the enabling environment for
development and sustainable growth and support critical interventions of special benefit to the poor and
disadvantaged'. To support India in achieving this objective, the strategic principles defined in the CAS are
selectivity, partnership, and a programmatic approach.
Kamataka is one of the reforming states supported by the Bank through a multi-sectoral approach.
Extensive dialogue on a set of wide-ranging issues, anchored on establishing a sustainable fiscal framework
and undertaking key administrative reforms, has been initiated through the Karnataka Economic
Restructuring Program (KERP). The First Karnataka Economic Restructuring Loan/Credit (Cr.
3527-IN/Ln. 4620-IN) was approved in June 2001 and helped introduce a multi-year framework for fiscal
adjustment and provided support to the Government of Kamataka (GoK) in administrative reforms, private
sector development, and the establishment of a poverty and human development monitoring system. The
Second Karnataka Economic Restructuring Loan/Credit (Cr. 3617-0-IN/Ln. 4652-0-IN) was approved in
-2 -

7. March 2002 and was based on satisfactory GoK performance in advancing the overall reform program.
This second loan/credit deepens the reforms already initiated in the above areas with a continued emphasis
on the medium-term fiscal plan.
In addition to fiscal and govemance reforms, the Bank's assistance strategy to Kamataka focuses on
accelerating rural growth and supporting key pro-poor interventions in line with the strategic priorities of
India CAS. This assistance strategy supports the broader program objectives of the KERP and the India
CAS. GoK has specifically requested the Bank to support rural development on a priority basis, focusing
on poverty reduction through development of watersheds and tanks as points of entry and continued
support for rural water supply. Therefore, the Bank approved the Kamataka Watershed Development
Project (Credit 3528-lN) in June 2001 and the Second Kamataka Rural Water Supply and Sanitation
Project (Credit 3590-IN) in December 2001. The proposed tank development project is part of this broader
and deeper collaboration between GoK and the Bank. (refer to Annex 2, Attachment 3 for details on the
linkages between these projects)
The project's emphasis on improving tank systems will help increase water efficiency and agricultural
productivity in poor, rainfed districts and taluks across the state (where a large percentage of rural poverty
is concentrated). The integrated approach to water management and agriculture should help overcome an
important obstacle that has limited rural growth in the past. The project also aims to empower the rural
poor and help them use resources in a more sustainable manner by using tanks as the point of entry and
natural resource management as the basic framework Important principles that have been incorporated in
the project design are: (i) an emphasis on village level involvement and empowerment; (ii) use of altemate
service providers (especially NGOs) to complement public initiatives; and (iii) capacity building at village,
local, district, and state govenmment levels.
2. Main sector issues and Government strategy:
Rural Poverty in Karnataka
Kamataka has the second largest arid zone in India. Rural poverty in Kamataka continues to be high at 37
% in 1994/00 (based on official figures from India Planning Commission) notwithstanding reasonable
growth of the agriculture and allied services sector in the 1990s. This sector grew at 2.1% per annum in
the 1980s and 3.8% in the 1990s (which was slightly higher than the All-India average of 3.4%). 70% of
the population in the state is dependent on, and 80% of rural income is derived from, agriculture and allied
services. Inter-district disparities are sharp with districts without large or medium irrigation facilities
exhibiting a significantly higher concentration of poverty. The role of irrigated agriculture (especially
tank-based irrigation) is critical to increasing agricultural growth in such areas. The latest comparative
estimates indicate that Karnataka has one of the lowest shares of gross irrigated area as a percentage of
gross cropped area among major states in India. (Karnataka's share is 26% compared to 52% for Tamil
Nadu, 67% for Uttar Pradesh, and 39% for the all-India average.) The potential to expand tank-based
irrigation especially in low rainfall districts is therefore a top priority issue for GoK.
Issues in the Sustainable Management of Natural Resources and Tank Systems
Public sector approaches to natural resource management in India have historically tended to ignore
community involvement and participation and the need to integrate land and water management.
Consequently, natural resource management interventions have been limited in their effectiveness on
improving agricultural productivity and sustainability. At times, these top-down approaches have even
further restricted access to natural resources by the very poor. These issues are evident in the management
- 3 -

8. of tank systems in Karnataka. Traditional (user-based) forms of tank management have been undermined
as communities have become increasingly dependent on the State. Integrated planning and management of
the entire tank system has not been adequately adopted by GoK nor Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs).
Broadly, the main issues in the tank system sector include: (a) significant changes in the village
environment (e.g. migration to urban areas, unregulated groundwater exploitation, degradation of tank
catchments) that have affected the ability of stakeholders to manage the tank resource; (b) human and
financial resource constraints both in the Water Resources Department (Minor Irrigation Wing) and in the
PRIs; (c) adoption of a piece-meal approach to tank development which fails to recognize the
inter-dependency of tank systems (e.g. interdependency between upstream and downstream tank systems in
a cascade and interdependency between the catchmnent, tank, and command within a single tank system);
and (d) an inadequate strategy for tank system development and a limited knowledge of tanks systems for
planning.
Issues in Rural Decentralization
Karnataka has received some acclaim as a leading state in terms of decentralization as policies for political
decentralization are already in place. Nevertheless, there are concerns that: the political establishment and
state-level bureaucracy exercise a disproportionate role in panchyat governance; PRIs still have a very
limited amount of untied funds; and the quality of local governance is low. In the context of tank systems,
PRIs have been assigned responsibility for managing tank systems with a command area less than 40 ha.
However, PRIs have invested minimally in tanks because of several important constraints -- not the least of
which are (i) limited skills and funds available to them to develop tank systems effectively and (ii)
complexities associated with managing a common property natural resource.
Government Strategy
GoK has issued a State Water Policy which emphasizes community participation in water management.
Recently GoK also approved a Vision Statement describing the state's long-term strategy for the
development of minor irrigation tanks. GoK is commnitted to 'community-based' and 'demand driven'
approaches for tank development and is initiating a process to transfer management of all minor irrigation
tanks in Karnataka to village-level user groups. GoK recognizes that a programmatic approach will be
more suitable for the community-based project as it involves policy and institutional changes and some
degree of experimenting and piloting. Learning and adjusting will take place as the project implementation
progresses and the state-wide scaling up of the program will be done as successes are confirmed. A Tank
Maintenance Policy has also been adopted by GoK which confers the right to collect and retain 90% of
water charges and the responsibility to operate and maintain the tank system to user groups. Finally, draft
legislation on Community Based Integrated Tank Management is proposed to be developed in order to give
a solid legal basis for implementing the proposed strategy.
GoK has made significant progress in its agricultural and decentralization policies. GoK has adopted an
Agricultural Policy (1995) that establishes the framework for the integrated and sustainable development of
the agricultural sector over the medium to long term. The policy statement is comprehensive and focuses
on promoting broad-based rural development as opposed to agricultural development alone. Subsequently,
GoK organized an Agro-Summit (2000) which reviewed the state Agricultural Policy and concluded with
the Dharwad Declaration on Agriculture. The emphasis on rural credit and marketing in the Declaration
will help overcome important constraints in agriculture and thereby help achieve increases in farm
productivity and incomes. GoK is also reviewing its decentralization policy and has constituted a Task
Force to recommend changes to the Karnataka Panchayati Raj Act (1993) to further deepen rural
decentralization. The Task Force recommendations are under discussion and the Bank is supporting GoK
- 4 -

9. in this dialogue through technical assistance and a detailed study on fiscal decentralization. GoK's strategy
on rural decentralization is consistent with and will further support the project in devolving tank system
responsibilities to user groups and strengthening the facilitative role of PRIs.
3. Sector issues to be addressed by the project and strategic choices:
The proposed project will focus on targeting assistance to thirty-four taluks in nine predominantly rainfed
districts of the state where rural poverty is concentrated. The core strategic choices made by the project
include:
* building local level ownership and responsibility for the development and management of tank
systems: The project is premised on building broad community-level ownership for the development and
management of the entire tank system. The project supports: (a) formation of Tank User Groups (TUGs)
registered under the Karnataka Societies Act that comprise all residents in a village(s) associated with a
tank system - not just command area farmers as has historically been the case; (b) constitution of Tank
User Committees (TUCs) that have representation from all interest groups including vulnerable segments
such as women and tribals; (c) transfer of the main development, operation, and maintenance
responsibilities from government (state or local) to the user group through planning and implementation of
integrated tank development plans; (d) cost sharing arrangements for tank development initiatives to help
assure TUGs are committed to the proposed interventions; and (e) strengthening interfaces between user
groups and PRIs to help improve post-project sustainability. (see below). Operation and maintenance of
tank systems has been historically dismal often because of limited user participation and human and
financial resource constraints within GoK and PRIs. The Tank Maintenance Policy transfers responsibility
to TUGs to collect and retain water charges for the operation and maintenance of the tank system. The
water charges, tank rehabilitation grants (on a declining basis), and revenue generated from other
tank-related uses (e.g. leasing rights for fishing) would provide the necessary revenue to TUGs for adequate
tank maintenance.
* deepening rural decentralization: The institutional design of the project seeks to balance support
to GoK's efforts in decentralization with the development of effective and equitable local community-based
organizations for tank development and management. Both the implementation structure and the options
for local organizations reflect the desire to optimize links to the PRI system and local line departments,
while recognizing the current issues which exist in relation to transparency, accountability, responsiveness,
party politics, and resource capture. More specifically, recent studies indicate that stand-alone user groups
rarely sustain themselves after external financing ends. Linkages between user groups and PRIs are
therefore important; however, imposing a single model as the interface between user groups and PRIs may
undermine village-level ownership and ignore the particular characteristics of the local institutional
landscape. The project therefore offers four different models of TUG and TUC membership that represent
varying degrees of collaboration with PRIs. The TUG will have the choice to select one of these four
models or define another interface with PRIs that suits its own preferences. This choice is an innovative
and important element of the project design that allows TUGs to define how devolution of tank
development and management responsibilities can best take place. The models and their implications for
financial and service support, sustainability of project induced benefits, and permanence of the TUG/TUC
are presented in Annex 2, Attachment 2.
* fostering an integrated approach to water and land management in tank systems: GoK and
PRI tank interventions in the past had focused on the tank itself and have rarely taken into consideration
development and maintenance of the entire system. In this project, the tank-specific, locally-defined
-5 -

10. development plans cover the entire system including catchment treatment; improvements to the tank
structure and distribution systems; on-farm demonstrations and technical training in water management,
agriculture and horticulture development; and small-scale fisheries, forestry, and livestock enterprises . Of
particular importance is the linkage between improved water efficiency and increases in agricultural
productivity. This integrated approach requires all legitimate users of the tank to be involved in the
planning and implementation of the tank development plans - which has been addressed through the
formation process of TUGs via the Village Assembly.
increasing agriculture productivity: Over the last decade there has been a decline in productivity,
a shift in cropping pattem, and a decrease in value of production in the tank-based agricultural system in
Kamataka. The main reasons for these changes are siltation and reduction of tank storage capacity,
weakening and deterioration of tank bunds, outlets and waterways, encroachment of impounding areas,
improper management of the catchment area, lack of knowledge of communities of more suitable cropping
pattems and crop technologies, and weaknesses in extension systems. However, there is considerable scope
to reverse these trends and conditions and increase agricultural productivity and family incomes of these
tank communities. In addition to physical works, this would be achieved through (i) increasing farmer
knowledge, based on location-specific, on-farm demonstrations of improved on-farm water management
practices and improved cropping systems and crop practices and (ii) a range of technical training for
farmers and tank water users.
* improving groundwater management: Groundwater exploitation in and around tank irrigation
command areas has increased dramatically over the past decade in part because of populations increases,
un-metered and low levels of energy consumption charges, and siltation which has reduced the storage
capacity of tanks. Three out of 34 taluks in the project area are classified as dark (draft levels have
reached greater than 85% of the annual recharge) and nine as gray (draft at 65%). Overexploitation
prevents sustainable and holistic use of water in the tank system and can divert tank improvement benefits
to large farmers who own pumps in and around the command. This can lead to a breakdown in
management of this common property resource. Several steps have been or are planned to be taken by
GoK to address this important problem and include: (a) 65% increase in power tariffs awarded by the
Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission has now been made effective; and (b) revision of the
Karnataka Groundwater (Regulation and Control) Bill, 1996 which provides for creation of a groundwater
regulation authority. The project would further contribute to improved groundwater management through
(a) involvement of pump-owning farmers in the TUG/Village Assembly and in decision-making related to
regulation of groundwater extraction and overall water management; (b) suitable provisions in the
forthcoming Community Based Integrated Tank Development Act (draft) to empower TUGs/Gram
Sabhas/Gram Panchayats to regulate tank-related groundwater extraction; and (c) lessons learned from the
proposed study under the project on the conjunctive use of surface and groundwater in each agro-ecological
zone.
C. Project Description Summary
1. Project components (see Annex 2 for a detailed description and Annex 3 for a detailed cost
breakdown):
The project adopts a programmatic approach to community-based tank management and covers the first
phase of this program - 2,000 tanks of the estimated 37,000 minor irrigation tanks in the state or 72,000 ha
of the 685,000 ha (11%) of the estimated command area irrigated by tanks. The project consists of three
components: (a) establishing an enabling environment for the sustainable, decentralized management of
tank systems; (b) strengthening community-based institutions to assume responsibility for tank system
- 6 -

11. development and management; and (c) undertaking tank system improvements. The third component is
further sub-divided into: (i) improving the operational performance of selected tank systems through a
menu of physical interventions identified and executed by local users and (ii) facilitating technical training
and on-farm demonstrations in water management, agriculture and horticulture development, fisheries,
forestry, and fodder production to help ensure that improved water storage and efficiency is translated into
increased household incomes. (refer to Annex 2, Detailed Project Description)
Indicative Bank- % of
Component Sector Costs % of financing Bank-
_ _ _ __ (US$M) Total (US$M) financing
A. Establishing an Enabling 14.22 11.4 9.81 9.9
Environment for Tank Development
B. Strengthening Commnunity 19.65 15.7 19.27 19.5
Development
C. Undertaking Tank System 91.10 72.9 69.82 70.6
Improvements
Total Project Costs 124.97 100.0 98.90 100.0
Total Financing Required 124.97 100.0 98.90 100.0
2. Key policy and institutional reforms supported by the project:
Exemption of TUGs from the Irrigation and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Act (2000): GoK has
issued the Karnataka Irrigation and Certain Other Law (Amendment) Ordinance (2002) which provides a
legal basis for forming and registering TUGs under the more flexible and self-autonomous Societies Act
(1860). Under the new Ordinance, the organizational boundaries of the TUG can be framed on a hydraulic
basis and the composition of the executive committee can be determiined by the Village Assembly with
adequate representation afforded to vulnerable groups. Previously, the Irrigation and Certain Other Law
(Amendment) Act (2000) mandated that village-level water user groups (including tank user groups) must
be registered under the Karnataka Cooperative Societies Act (1959) and formed based on a geographic
basis with a tightly-defined executive committee biased in favor of command area farmers. This approach
was not at all suitable for forming sustainable and inclusive village institutions for management of
multi-use tank systems. The Ordinance is critical in building meaningful TUG ownership for the
development of tank systems.
Finalization of the Proposed Community-Based Integrated Tank Management Act: The project will
support further preparation and consultation on a proposed legislation which will specify the rights and
responsibilities of different stakeholders on the development and management of tank systems. The early
experimentation and learning from the proposed project will help ensure that the draft legislation is both
comprehensive and relevant. Moving beyond the Ordinance (see above), the proposed Act would be
important in building community-level ownership of and civil society support for tank development across
the entire state. A first draft of the legislation has already been prepared by a Sub-Committee of the JSYS
Executive Committee. GoK has agreed to prepare preliminary draft legislation conceming tank system
development and management and the assignment of usufruct rights for consideration by March 31, 2003.
The approval of this legislation will provide a strong legal basis for community-based tank development
and management and would be a critical prerequisite for future Bank assistance in this sector.
Support to the Rural Decentralization Agenda: The project introduces a new approach to develop
linkages between user groups (in this case TUGs) and PRIs. Early lessons leamed from these experiments
- 7 -

12. will feed into the evolving discussions on rural decentralization promoted by GoK. During the first
mid-term review, JSYS will consolidate experiences on decentralization and present them to GoK to help
mainstream these lessons into the broader rural decentralization strategy.
Establishment of JSYS: GoK established JSYS (Government Order) in October 2000 to serve as the
'nodal agency' for community-based tank management. The literal meaning of Jala Samvardhana Yojana
Sangha (JSYS) is water management improvement society. The flexibility and autonomy afforded to JSYS
(as an independent society) helps it overcome many of the human and financial resource constraints which
affect WRD and PRIs. The formation of JSYS, however, has led to the potential for conflicting
approaches and duplication of activities since the Water Resources Department (Minor Irrigation) retains
responsibility for tanks (over 40 ha command) that do not come under the purview of JSYS (i.e. that are
not financed by an extemal agency). Some of these institutional concems raised by the formation of JSYS
have been addressed by GoK's Vision Statement for Tank Development (executed through a Govemment
Order).
The Vision Statement and subsequent discussions state that JSYS and WRD (Minor Irrigation) would both
continue with responsibility for managing tank systems over 40 ha command with JSYS assuming sole
responsibility for tank systems in the project area. Therefore, as a first step, GoK intends to transfer all
development and management responsibilities for tank systems in the project area (having a command area
of over 40 hectares) from WRD to JSYS. This will be accompanied with the transfer of requisite technical
and support staff to carry out the participatory process. PRIs would retain responsibility for tank systems
under 40 ha command but JSYS would also help PRIs transfer many of these development and
management responsibilities to village-level user groups. During project implementation, a study will be
conducted to examine the state-level institutional arrangements for implementing community-based tank
management (and especially the respective roles of JSYS and WRD). Based on the study, GoK would
prepare a strategy and institutional development plan for consideration by the first mid-term review.
Implementation of the Tank Maintenance Policy (TMP): The TMP defines the respective rights and
responsibilities for the maintenance of tank systems. It recognizes the right of TUGs to: (i) collect water
charges and retain 90% of the amount collected and (ii) assume responsibility for tank system maintenance
including how the water charges and other tank-based revenue is allocated for system maintenance. The
TUG may decide to maintain the tank themselves or contract services to assist them. The broad objective
is to transfer financial responsibility for tank maintenance to TUGs gradually over three years. The new
roles of GoK and PRIs in tank maintenance have also been defined in the TMP. The proposed
Community-Based Integrated Tank Management Act (see above) would supersede the Tank Maintenance
Policy if and when it is approved . (It should be noted that water charges in Karnataka were raised to
approximately 2.5 times their previous levels in the year 2000.)
- 8 -

13. 3. Benefits and target population:
The estimated number of command area farmers (in the 2,000 tank systems) is 266,000 households and the
estimated number of households served by the project tank systems is 1.5 million households. The major
economic benefits of the project are in agriculture and horticulture production, fisheries, forestry, time
savings in fetching water, and livestock. Crop production is expected to increase from 725,000 to 800,000
tons per annum with the major increases in paddy, ragi, groundnut, potato, and greengram. Based on
estimated average farm holding sizes for each agroecological zone and tank size, net incomes to farmers are
projected to increase by 13% to 64% based on increased crop production -- more than enough to offset the
water charge increases to 400 rupees per ha. Fisheries production will increase by an extra 375 tons in
project year one to an extra 7,200 tons in project year five benefiting largely non-command area farmers
who take up tank-based fisheries. The benefits to women from time saved in fetching water are very
substantial given low rainfall in the project area. Finally, employment opportunities (especially for
marginal farmers and landless) are significant. The manual desiltation of tank systems (50% of silt in
medium tanks and 25% of silt in large tanks removed through manual labor) would generate over 83,000
person-years of labor in the project area.
In addition to these 'economic' benefits, the project will provide important (less quantifiable) benefits
including increased social capital and empowerment through the formation and strengthening of
village-level institutions and the return of the common property back to user groups; a more equitable share
of benefits by providing vulnerable groups with a greater stake in tank system development and
management; improved tank ecology and environment through increased awareness in the sustainable use
of tank systems; and broad capacity building for user groups, PRIs, and state officials.
4. Institutional and implementation arrangements:
Institutional Arrangements for Project Implementation
The institutional arrangements for project implementation attempt to take into account the (a) dynamic
nature of the village environment and local institutional landscape in rural India and (b) constraints
manifested in earlier public sector interventions in tank system management. These considerations are
reflected in the primacy afforded to village-based user groups as the main decision-making and
implementing authority; the role of local NGOs to engage in the facilitation process; the proposed
interfaces between user groups and PRIs; and the formation of JSYS at the state level. Overall
responsibility for project implementation rests with JSYS and Cluster Facilitation Teams who are
responsible for field-level engagement with user groups. Responsibility for the development and
management of individual tank systems (as specified in each tank-specific Integrated Tank Development
Plan) rests with the Tank User Group (represented by a Tank User Committee). Anchor NGOs and the
State and District Resource Groups will support JSYS and CFTs in carrying out their responsibilities by
providing additional outside expertise and experiences in community-based natural resource management.
PRIs are involved in coordinating support of line departments and providing assistance in project
monitoring. Figure I in Annex 2, Attachment 2, presents the vertical structure for implementation
describing the above groups upon whom successful implementation of this project is dependent. These
groups and their roles are summarized below:
Jala Samvardhana Yojana Sangha (JSYS): JSYS is a registered society established by GoK to serve as the
nodal agency in the state for community-based tank management. JSYS has been formed to help facilitate
the transfer of tank system development and management from the state back to communities (via user
groups). The relationship of JSYS to the Water Resources Department (Minor Irrigation) has been
described in Sections B2 and C2. JSYS is overseen by a Governing Council (chaired by the Chief
-9-

14. Minister) and reports directly to an Executive Committee (chaired by the Additional Chief Secretary).
JSYS is managed by an Executive Director. JSYS has an office located in Bangalore called the State
Project Unit (SPU) and district offices called District Project Units (DPUs) each headed by a District
Project Coordinator. The staffing complement in the district units will increase to the full level based on
the uptake of tank systems in each district. JSYS has multi-disciplinary staff drawn from both the public
and private sectors subject to a screening process to ensure commitment to the project objectives and
technical competence. The staffing and skill mix of JSYS is described in more detail in Annex 2,
Attachment 2. An experienced NGO has been engaged to assist in developing and operationalizing a
human resources development strategy for JSYS.
Cluster Facilitation Teams (CFTs): CFTs are multi-disciplinary teams responsible for establishing and
supporting about 30-40 tank user groups over the course of a contract. CFTs will be selected on a
competitive basis and will possess in-depth experience and skills at a minimum in social sciences (often the
CFT leader); engineering; agriculture/watershed; gender and human resources development; resettlement
and tribal development; and financial management. These teams will be contracted by JSYS for between 4
and 5 years and will total up to 55 in number during the most intensive phase of project implementation. 15
CFTs will be in place by March 2002. Contracts will be signed between CFT host organizations and
JSYS. CFTs will relate directly to subject specialists in the DPUs and to the district CFT Support Officer.
Tank User Groups/Tank User Committees: The TUG is the general body of tank stakeholders that is
represented by a TUC which is elected by the TUG. The TUG (through the TUC) will be responsible for
preparation and implementation of the ITDP including assuming responsibility for the relevant safeguard
action plans and the operation and maintenance of the tank system. Through discussion facilitated by
Cluster Facilitation Teams, tank users will choose between four options for the TUG/TUC composition.
The options for this local management body are: (i) an independent village association; (ii) a sub-committee
of the Gram Panchayat; (iii) the Gram Sabha; and (iv) the Gram Panchayat. These options and their
relative advantages and disadvantages are described in detail in Annex 2, Attachment 2. All options
adhere to principles of community control and inclusion of vulnerable groups but each differs in terms of
its TUG and TUC membership and relationship with the Gram Panchayat. Given the dynamic nature of the
local organizational landscape and the serious efforts of GoK to decentralize development management to
communities, a sample of tanks, representing each of the four options, will be tracked for at least the
duration of the project with an initial summary provided by the first mid-term review.
Zilla Parishad Joint Committee and the Taluka Production Committee: The Zilla Parishad (District
Govemment) Joint Committee will be specially convened in each project district and will work closely with
the DPU. It will be responsible for district-level coordination between line departments and between other
development initiatives and the project, overall project monitoring, ensuring responsiveness of line
departments, and making decisions about major changes in project strategy or approach. The Taluka
Panchayat (sub-District Govemrnent) Production Committee is an existing entity which meets on a regular
basis on agriculture and allied activities. CFT members will attend these meetings and use them to solicit
support and develop convergence between line department activities and the project.
Anchor NGOs: ANGOs will assist JSYS in implementation by (i) facilitating the building of a shared
vision amongst JSYS, CFTs, PRIs, and TUGs by designing and conducting programs at state, district, and
field levels; (ii) assisting in the establishment of DPUs; (iii) providing support to JSYS for recruitment
services of host organizations to form strong CFTs; and (iv) assisting host organizations in the formation,
capacity building and professional support needs of CFTs. Three ANGOs are functional and five ANGOs
will be contracted by the beginning of PY02 and present throughout the project period.
- 10 -

15. State and District Resource Groups (SRGs and DRGs): At both levels these groups will comprise a loose
affiliation of multi-disciplinary specialists who will be called on for advisory, capacity building, or
implementation activities as required. They will be drawn from the nonprofit, public, and private sectors.
The interdepartrnental committee (chaired by the ACS), which has already been formed to coordinate the
World Bank-assisted Watershed, Rural Water Supply and Tanks projects, forms part of the SRG.
Funds Flow
GoK will provide the budget for the project as an identifiable budget line item each year under WRD
(Minor Irrigation). The annual budget will be based on the annual action plan and financial requirements
prepared by JSYS. JSYS on a quarterly basis will request the release of funds from WRD (Minor
Irrigation) which will forward the requisition to the Finance Department and obtain a Letter of Credit
(LoC). Based on the LoC obtained, WRD will issue an order sanctioning the quarterly allocation for
JSYS. JSYS will draw the funds from Treasury after obtaining a countersignature from WRD. JSYS will
make the funds available in advance to the DPUs also on a quarterly basis. DPUs will in turn provide
funds to the TUGs as per the payments schedules in the TS sub-project agreements (i.e. ITDP and MOA).
Each sub project agreement will specify the payments schedule based on the requirement of the TUGs to
reach the physical milestones (including TUGs own contributions to the sub-project costs). Though the
number of installments are expected to differ, the quantum of funds released in each installment would be
calculated to provide (a) 100% of the funds required by the TUG to complete the associated physical
milestone and (b) 20% of the fund requirement for the next milestone. As a general principle, the arnount
of the first installment will be calculated to be not more than 35% of the total sub-project costs. Moreover,
15% of the fund requirement for the final milestone will be retained from the last installment to be released
only on receipt of the certification for the completion of works. TUGs will open separate bank accounts for
project funds. Where TUGs are part of the GPs, the GP will open separate bank accounts earmarked for
this purpose. These fund flow arrangements will be reviewed after implementation of the first 100 TS sub
projects.
User Contribution: User contributions of 12% (6% in cash and 6% in kind) of the ITDP costs will be
collected in the following manner: contributions in cash - 3% before the signing of the contracts and 3%
before the release of the second/third tranche. Contributions in kind (6%) will be built into the performance
milestones and accounted for on the completion of the milestones and certification by the CFTs.
Contributions in kind will form part of the project costs but cash contributions will be retained in a separate
bank account of the TUGs for future capital cost of repairs etc. resulting from unforeseen events after the
completion of the rehabilitation works. Though contributions in kind form part of the project costs, these
do not qualify as eligible expenditures for disbursement from the IDA Credit. This has however been
factored into the disbursement percentages for the Tank System Sub Project category. Therefore, the
disbursement percentage will be applied on the total sub-project expenditures (including user contributions
in kind or labor).
Integrated Tank Development Plan.
The ITDP will provide the basic framework to guide project implementation. The ITDP is a tank-specific
development and management plan (sometimes called a microplan) that is based on an assessment of
problems and causes, sound technical analysis of the water resource system, social and environmental
analysis, analysis of farming systems and alternatives, and a basic assessment of total water demand for all
uses in the system. The ITDP presents baseline village and tank data, the selected option for the local
management body (see four models above), safeguard mitigation plans (e.g. R&R Action Plan, Tribal
- 1 1 -

16. Development Plan, etc.), and the actual physical interventions to be supported by JSYS (e.g. desiltation,
repair of the sluice, crop demonstrations, etc.). The major elements of the ITDP would be decided by the
TUG but the actual document will often be prepared by the CFT. Two challenges that will require careful
attention during implementation is (i) the limited capacity of CFTs to assist in the preparation of
comprehensive, sound ITDPs with careful consideration given to the applicable mitigation plans; and (ii) a
sense of broad and comnnitted ownership by the TUG itself to the activities and approaches described in the
ITDP. 30 ITDPs have already been prepared by JSYS and CFTs.
Human Resource Development (HRD)
The objective of HRD is to develop the organizational cultures and human capital required for sustainable
management of tank resources and benefits. There are two primary elements of HRD (i) Institutional
Development -- which focuses on building effective implementing agents (JSYS, CFTs, PRIs, technical
service providers) and community based organizations (TUGs/TUCs) through establishing the shared
values, and rules of engagement among different stakeholders which are consonant with the needs of a
process intensive, decentralized project; and (ii) Capacity Building - which seeks to ensure that the
knowledge base and skills level of different stakeholders are appropriate for the new roles they are to
perform. These elements are fully described in Annex 2, Attachment 8. JSYS recognizes the need for
extemal assistance as it seeks to engage in a process of institutional development more commonly found in
cutting-edge private sector organizations, rather than those rooted in a governmental tradition. JSYS has
therefore contracted an experienced, extemal support agency to assist in both institutional and capacity
building activities. The ANGOs will also provide support in developing the CFTs and TUGs.
Monitoring and Learning System
The monitoring and learning framework consists of: (i) monitoring core indicators that would comprise
both simple, easily quantified indicators and process indicators attempting to assess social and institutional
objectives emerging directly from the ITDPs; (ii) tank user self-assessments and 360 feedback focused on
self-learning of tank user groups and other stakeholders in the project on a pilot basis; (iii) internal leaming
through multi-disciplinary, multi-stakeholder working groups constituted at Taluk, District and State levels
that would benefit from Process Documentation Research and Exchange visits; and (iv) impact evaluations
periodically over the project period and development audits undertaken by the contracted M&L facilitating
agency (see table below). In supporting the monitoring and learning framework, an independent consultant
would be contracted to support JSYS in undertaking selected components of M&L as decided by JSYS in
consultation with the Bank which would include providing broader technical guidance on M&L. The
information emerging from the M&L exercises would be discussed in the working groups proposed above
in addition to the respective. TUG/Village Assembly - when and where applicable. The monitoring and
learning system for the project would include:
Proposed Pro'ect M&L System
M & L System Subject Instrument Frequency
Component
i. Performance Tracking inputs/outputs/ . ITDP Monitoring and . TUG- CFT- monthly
outcomes Learning component and its * DPUs - SPU- quarterly
consolidation
ii. Institutional Tracking organizational * Self Assessments at TUG and . Annual
learning and JSYS internal unit levels
_____________________p_e_r formance
-12-

17. iii. Internal Leaming project processes * Process Documentation * Quarterly
Research * Annual (minimum)
* Exchange Visits
iv. Evaluation project impacts and * Development Audit * Biennial
outcomes * Baseline survey and Impact * Before and after project.
Evaluation
D. Project Rationale
1. Project alternatives considered and reasons for rejection:
The major alternative considered was a large-scale tank desiltation project. Siltation of tanks has been
considered as the main reason for the reduction in tank system productivity. Earlier state and NGO
tank-improvement initiatives therefore emphasized tank desiltation, but limited attention was placed on: (i)
the sustainability of the entire tank system - for example, tank desiltation not inclusive of sufficient
catchment treatment and management measures to arrest processes of progressive degradation would not
restore the catchment ecosystem to a healthy, sustainable condition nor would it prevent further siltation of
the tank; (ii) the efficient operation of the tank itself - investments to improve the sluices, bunds,
distribution channels for the additional capture and use of water may be more cost-effective than
desiltation; and (iii) optimization of the end uses of water - interventions in tank-based activities such as
agriculture and fisheries may dramatically improve the productivity of a fixed quantum of water. For these
reasons, the historic emphasis on desiltation in isolation from any other intervention has been rejected. The
table below presents this and other alternatives considered and reasons for rejection.
Alternative Key Observations (Reasons for Rejection)
Tank Desiltation Project * Desiltation of tanks without integrating the treatment of catchment area would not be
sustainable as the degraded catchment would continue to erode.
* Desiltation is expensive and needs to be done sparingly and in accordance with the
expected benefits. Investments on other components of the tank may be more efficient.
* Optimization of the end uses of water is critical to ensuring satisfactory returns
* Poor community involvement and management after desiltation
Project to increase the crest level o * The submergence of foreshore area would lead to crop loss, waterlogging and increase
the surplus weirs in conflicts between the foreshore area/catchment farmers and the command farmers.
* Evaporation losses would increase due to increased waterspread area
* Recharge benefits or dead storage benefits would not accrue significantly
Project with all other interventions * Water capture in the tank may not increase
except desiltation * Some targeted desiltation may derive water storage and recharge benefits given the
significant siltation of the tanks
* Lack of improvement of dead storage could result in continued problems to water users
(e.g. for drinking, livestock fisheries, irrigation)
Integration of tank project with * A combined project would be complex and involve many more implementing agencies
watershed development * Appropriate for cascades of tanks in particular microcatchments
* Tanks would probably not get much attention
* Priority areas for watershed development may not coincide with prioritized tanks
No Project Scenario * Comparison against the no-project scenario is described fully in the SEA.
- 13 -

18. 2. Major related projects financed by the Bank and/or other development agencies (completed,
ongoing and planned).
Latest Supervision
Sector Issue Project (PSR) Ratings
(Bank-financed projects only)
Implementation Development
Bank-financed Progress (IP) Objective (DO)
Irrigation management projects Kamataka Tank Irrigation U S
Project (completed)
AP Economic Restructuring S S
Project - rrigation Component
Watershed projects Integrated Watershed S S
Development Project (Hills II)
Karnataka Watershed S S
Development Project
Rural water supply and sanitation Karnataka Rural Water Supply S S
projects and Sanitation HI
Kerala Rural Water Supply and S S
Sanitation Project
Agriculture projects Uttar Pradesh Sodic Lands S S
Reclamation Project Phase I
(1993) and Phase 11( (999)
Rural decentralization projects Andhra Pradesh District S S
Poverty Initiatives Project
Madhya Pradesh District S S
Poverty Initiatives Project
Other development agencies
UK DFID, Dutch, DANIDA, KSW, Community-based rural
French Technical Cooperation, SIDA development, watershed, and
water supply projects in India
IP/DO Ratings: HS (Highly Satisfactory), S (Satisfactory), U (Unsatisfactory), HU (Highly Unsatisfactory)
3. Lessons learned and reflected in the project design:
The project attempts to draw lessons from a wide range of rural development projects - especially
community-driven natural resource and other rural development projects - in India and worldwide. These
lessons are summarized below:
- 14 -

19. * active community participation: The unsustainability as evidenced in the Bank-financed Karnataka
Tank Inrigation Project (1981-1989) is mainly due to the lack of involvement of tank users in the project.
The objective of the project was to improve incomes and relieve poverty by improving the efficiency of
water use. The main project component consisted of construction of 120-160 irrigation tanks (revised to 78
with 34 finally completed) to irrigate a command of around 25,000 ha. The project (PCR No. 8668) was
considered successful with respect to physical and institutional aspects but slow with respect to
implementation. Increased costs, initial delays, and commodity price reductions substantially reduced the
rate of return from 20% at appraisal to 4% at completion. Minimal farmer (and village) involvement in the
planning and implementation of the project contributed to its failure. The primacy of user participation in
the development and O&M of tank systems -- and the approach required to elicit strong user participation
-- was a crucial lesson emerging from the project. After the project was completed, the limited farmer
interest that did exist declined, with many tanks now in a state of disrepair.
* sustainability: Provision should be made for adequate time and support at start-up to fully involve
all sections of the tank community in defining their own needs and aspirations and the initiatives they wish
to support. Emphasis should also be placed on building and strengthening community level institutions not
only during planning but throughout the planned intervention.
* empowered PRls: Project implementation arrangements at the PRI level should empower elected
officials and not undermine their authority. Suitable arrangements linking village organizations with PRIs
should be developed to help ensure post-project sustainability.
* public sector reorientation: The challenge in substantively changing civil servant mind-sets and
practices to one that places people (i.e. villages) in a position of power and responsibility should not be
underestimated. A rigorous training program for all (public and private) project staff should be developed
and undertaken from the outset.
* marginalized groups: Specific measures are needed to support meaningful participation of
women, scheduled castes, tribes, landless, and other vulnerable groups. The limited influence extemal
interventions may have in changing power dynamics within a village should be recognized.
* environment, natural resources, and agriculture linkages: The interdependent relationships
between the environment, natural resources, and agriculture should be recognized in the design of the
project.
* monitoring and learning: The design of monitoring and learning systems should be based on a
clear understanding of what learning is important for whom. Priority should be placed on the needs of the
local stakeholders themselves rather than extemal organizations such as the World Bank.
- 15-

20. 4. Indications of borrower commitment and ownership:
The project has broad stakeholder ownership from GoK and civil society. GoK commitment to the new
model of community-based tank system management has been demonstrated by the following important
steps that they have completed: (a) approval of the Karnataka Irrigation and Certain Other Law
(Amendment) Ordinance, 2002; (b) formation of JSYS chaired by the Chief Minister and staffed with
multi-disciplinary expertise from both the public and private sectors; (c) GoK endorsement of a Vision
Statement indicating GoK commitment to community-based tank development and appointing JSYS as the
lead agency to facilitate this new approach (January 2002); (d) approval of the Tank Maintenance Policy;
(e) approval of the State Water Policy which highlights the importance of user participation in tank
management; and (f) GoK's affirmation to adopt similar community-based approaches in non-project areas
whether the rehabilitation is funded by other external or Govemment sources. (Refer to Section C2 for
more detailed descriptions of these reforms). Civil society (e.g. NGOs, academic institutions) organizations
have repeatedly endorsed stronger community-level involvement in tank management and have been
actively involved in helping prepare the project design and in undertaking the pilot tank initiatives.
Moreover, three NGOs have already agreed to serve as project ANGOs and another NGO has been
contracted as the Human Resource Development support consultant. Most of the proposed Cluster
Facilitation Teams will be housed within existing NGOs in the state.
5. Value added of Bank support in this project:
The Bank's comparative advantage is in its extensive experience in rural development worldwide and in
India with a broad array of projects and sector work in water resources, watersheds, agriculture, forestry,
and rural decentralization - many of which embody community demand-driven principles in areas of high
poverty concentration. The recent analytical work on rural poverty and on rural decentralization in India
has also strengthened the ability of the Bank to contribute to developing a strong project concept. Finally
and importantly, the Bank has engaged in a strong partnership with Karnataka. The broader dialogue on
and support for the state reform program (anchored on a sustainable medium-term fiscal plan) and the
recent approval of two rural development projects provides a solid base for a successful collaboration with
respect to the proposed project.
E. Summary Project Analysis (Detailed assessments are in the project file, see Annex 8)
1. Economic (see Annex 4):
* Cost benefit NPV=US$ million; ERR = 17.6 % (see Annex 4)
O Cost effectiveness
O Other (specify)
The overall project economic rate of return (ERR), inclusive of all project costs including the full
investment and recurrent costs of JSYS and TUGs, is estimated at 17.6%. The ERR is robust to changes
in both cost and benefit flows. Switching values for costs and benefits are estimated at +43% and -34%
respectively. Economic rates of return for the individual model tanks, where only the direct costs of tank
improvement are included in the analysis, range from 16% to 34%, with generally large tanks exhibiting a
higher rate of return than the medium-sized tanks. Most of the benefits are due to increased agricultural
production (63%), followed by fisheries (18%), forestiy (11%), time savings in fetching water (6%),
livestock and forage production (1%) and the nutrient value of silt (<1%). At full development after 9
years, crop production would have increased from about 725,000 tons to about 800,000 tons production
per annum. The major increases (in terms of quantity) would come from paddy, ragi, jowar, groundnut,
potato, and greengram. Most of the increase in agricultural output will come from improved production on
existing irrigated areas. Fish production is forecast to increase from an extra 375 tons in year I up to
- 16 -

21. 7,200 tons from year 5. The project will have a significant employment generation impact, creating 93,305
person-years during the 6-year project implementation period, about 90% of which would be the temporary
labor required for manual desiltation. Following project implementation, incremental agricultural and
fisheries production attributable to the project are estimated to create an additional 4,039 and 480
person-years of labor per annum respectively.
2. Financial (see Annex 4 and Annex 5):
NPV=USS million; FRR = % (see Annex 4)
The financial analysis focuses on the financial impact of the project at various levels: (i) the model tanks;
(ii) farmers; (iii) fish production to TUGs or individuals; and (iv) Tank User Groups (TUGs). The
financial intemal rates of return (FIRR) range from 12% to 26%. On average, FlRRs of the model tanks
are about 4 percentage points below their respective ERRs reflecting primarily the moderate rates of
explicit and implicit taxation on tradable farm outputs, and duties and taxes levied on farm inputs. At the
farmer-level, incremental net farm incomes are estimated to rise quite substantially from 13% to 64%
across the agro-climatic zones and tank sizes analyzed, which indicate that farmers should be able and
willing to pay full O&M costs. Net income from fisheries is estimated to rise over 100% and will be a
significant source of income for TUGs. (In fact, for the tanks where fisheries development potential exists,
estimated to be half of the 2,000 tanks (see Annex 2), income from fisheries should be more than sufficient
to cover the full O&M costs (estimated at Rs 350 = Rs 400 per ha per annum) of the tanks plus the 10%
service fee proposed to be paid to JSYS.
Fiscal Impact:
The project costs and their fiscal implications have been incorporated within the medium-term fiscal plan
(2001/2002) developed by GoK and discussed with the Bank as part of the KERP. The annual
expenditures (in rupees) are as follows for PYOI to PY06 respectively: 431 million; 1,162 million; 1,764
million, 2,092 million, 875 million, and 255 million for a total of 6,579 million over the course of project
implementation. These expenditures have already been incorporated into the minor irrigation budget in the
2001/2002 medium-term fiscal plan. The net project fiscal impact for GoK over the estimated life of the
project (25 years) is -9,187 million rupees (discounted at 12%). The fiscal analysis undertaken from the
perspective of the GoK considers incremental oufflows including: (i) project loan commitments in terms of
interest and principal repayments based on terms and conditions of onlending from Gol to GoK; (ii) lost
revenue from foregone water charges; (iii) GoK contributions to project investment and recurrent costs; and
(iv) continuing recurrent costs and capital replacement for JSYS operations; and incremental inflows
including: (i) saved tank system O&M costs; (ii) revenue collected after project (10% of water charges) for
JSYS establishment costs; (iii) and increased agricultural cesses collected because of increased crop
production.
3. Technical:
0 estimation of desilting requirements: The Hydrology Study (as part of the preparation exercise)
has developed agro-climatic zone based rainfall-runoff relationships as a first approximation to estimate the
monthly inflows into the tank based on rainfall data. Simulation runs for 20-25 years based on such
estimation of inflows coupled with estimation of demands of tank water for various uses enables an
assessment of the frequency of spilling and the average annual quantum of spillage. Such an analysis
allows an estimate to be made on the extent of desiltation which is possible to allow additional capture of
water. The cost of desiltation along with the potential benefits will be factored into decisions on the extent
of desiltation. The project proposes to use some modem equipment to desilt to ensure that desiltation
operations can be completed within a short period of time (since the tanks are likely to be dry only for
about 5 months in a year).
- 17 -

22. * quality-control for civil work improvement: Construction supervision and quality control would be
the responsibility of the TUGs with the help of JSYS and CFT staff. Selected members of the TUG will be
trained in construction supervision and quality aspects of the civil works. In view of the geographic breadth
of the works, it is essential that a high-quality control management system is established to ensure that the
implementation of improvement measures conforms to acceptable quality standards. Towards this end, a
quality management system will be adopted in the project and suitable oversight mechanisms have been
developed. To further enhance this quality management system, third-party quality monitoring of civil
works -- as proposed by WRD (Minor Irrigation) will be extended to the tank systems under this project.
* agiculture and horticulture development: On-farm demonstrations would be established in a
cluster of about 20-30 local tanks, with 80 tank clusters defined for the 2,000 tanks to be included in the
project. For each cluster, a total of five demonstrations covering improved on-farm water management and
field and horticulture crop production improvement would be conducted in both kharif and rabi/summer
seasons over a two-year period following completion of tank rehabilitation works. Demonstrations would
be designed and supervised by staff from the University of Agriculture Sciences (UAS) and Krishi Vigyan
Kendra (KVKs) in project districts and implemented by farmers.
* fisheries. forestry. and livestock development: The importance of promoting small fisheries,
forestry, and livestock enterprises in the tank system emerges from the need to provide other tank users
with a stake in the common property resource. The project has developed small tank-based models for
fisheries, forestry, and livestock/forage development that can be easily tailored to participating tank
systems. The design and economics of these models were originally premised on earlier studies conducted
as part of preparation of the Watershed Development Project. Annexes 2 and 4 and the project files
provides detailed descriptions of these models.
* technology development: Two pilot projects on: (a) the application of on-demand water delivery
technology and efficient irrigation methods (i.e buried pipe system, sprinklers and drip); and (b) a study on
the effect of tank rehabilitation on ground water and its implications on conjunctive use and management of
tank irrigation system have been proposed under the project. In addition the project proposes to develop a
decision support system on sub-basin/watershed basis for detailed water resources planning/management
for each agro-ecological zones. The terms of reference for the water resources planning study would be
developed through a detailed consultation with stakeholders during the first year of implementation.
4. Institutional:
India's 73rd Constitutional Amendment (1993) and the subsequent State Acts created a policy environment
conducive to decentralized govemance and management of rural development. The decentralization
measures now being undertaken in Karnataka in many rural development initiatives are expected to
increase the efficiency of service delivery, improve transparency and accountability to rural people, and
assist in local resource mobilization and management. In this evolving environment, a number of local
organizations and institutions emerge as increasingly important for rural development. These include: (i)
the three levels of PRIs; (ii) a range of local organizations, formal and informal such as CBOs, NGOs, user
groups, self help groups; and (iii) district and block offices of line departments. However, the comparative
advantage of each local institution in this new era of community empowerment and client responsiveness
has yet to be resolved, and these multiple local organizations have rarely been able to fully embrace their
emerging roles.
In addition to providing organizational structures which promote equity in the management of the tank
resources and its related benefits, the project will address issues of govemance in several other ways. First,
- 18 -

23. the project will pro-actively institutionalize the goals of two innovative pieces of legislation: Right to
Information Act and the Transparency in Tenders and Procurement Act. Second, transparency will be
promoted under the project through a multi-audience, multi-media communications component. This will
target audiences within and outside of the project. The core principle of placing infornation in the public
domain will be supported in villages through the use of notice-boards and village meetings, and more
broadly through the use of printed and web-based media. Third, transparency in the business transactions
of the TUG/TUCs, including procurement, will be heavily promoted and TUGs/TUCs monitored for their
performance in relation to this. Fourth, the project will focus attention on establishing functional
accountability mechanisms in part through establishing local level self-monitoring. Information residing at
different levels of the M & L system will ensure that stakeholders know what is happening; social audits
will enable public discussion of events, transactions, and decisions; and, in addition to existing PRI and
civil service accountability rules, new rules evolved during ITDP preparation, will be closely monitored for
use and effectiveness.
4.1 Executing agencies:
See Section C4
4.2 Project management:
See Section C4
4.3 Procurement issues:
* Procurement Capacitv: An assessment of the Borrower's capacity to implement the activities
under the project following the Bank's procedures was made during preparation. GoK has implemented or
is implementing several Bank-assisted projects and there is a general awareness in Karnataka about the
Bank's systems and procedures. However to ensure that the project staff are fully trained to deal with
procurement, JSYS has appointed a Procurement Consultant to advise them on procurement matters and to
build up the capacity of the implementing entities. The nature of the project (community driven) is such that
most of the procurement would be done by community-level organizations such as TUGs and local NGOs
and an outside Procurement Agent would not be a practical solution.
a Community Participation: To inculcate ownership, ensure project sustainability and achieve the
development objectives, the TUGs would be involved in planning, rehabilitation, and operation and
maintenance of the tank systems. The execution of the physical works of the ITDP would be carried out
through community-driven processes. Appropriate procurement procedures and contract agreement formats
have been finalized. Procurement arrangements are detailed in Annex 6.
4.4 Financial management issues:
The project has a financial management system which is adequate to account for project resources and
expenditures. A financial management manual for the project has been prepared. The Manual documents
the accounting policies and procedures applicable to the project. JSYS is developing an integrated
computerized system - in the interim the manual accounting system would be followed.
A detailed staffing plan for financial management has been drawn up which is a part of the project
implementation plan (PIP). The finance function will be managed by a Chief Finance & Accounts Officer
(CFAO) and a Finance Manager (FM) at JSYS State Office. The District Project Units (DPUs) will be
staffed by Accounts Superintendents.
Since the capacity of TUGs and GPs (which are to handle a large amount of funds) is clearly not adequate,
one of the critical functions of the Cluster Facilitation Team (CFT) will be to provide hands on support in
- 19 -

24. order to enhance capacity of TUG office bearers in bookkeeping and accounting. The CFTs will also work
with the TUGs to assist in the process of financial planning for the post-rehabilitation period with a view
to building self-sustainability. Training on the project's expectations of the accounting arrangements at the
TUG level will be provided to the CFT team members. The implementation of the tank rehabilitation
works will be through bi/tri-partite contractual arrangements between JSYS, CFTs and the TUGs. These
agreements will be based on ITDPs and will be lump sum contracts with payments based on performance
milestones agreed in the ITDPs and documented in the contracts. The achievement of the performance
milestones will be certified by the CFTs.
Disbursements: Disbursements from the IDA credit would initially be made in the traditional system
(reimbursement with full documentation and against statement of expenditure) and could be converted to
the Financial Management Report based disbursements at the option of the GoK and Gol. Given the nature
of contractual arrangements with TUGs, all payments or releases of funds to the TUGs are accounted for
as expenditures in the books of accounts of JSYS and will be eligible for reimbursement. JSYS will
include all such payments to TUGs in the SOEs or documented claims submitted for reimbursement from
the Credit, depending on the value of the contract.
Retroactive Financing: Retroactive financing up to an amount of US$1.3 million (SDR I million
equivalent) would cover eligible expenditures for implementing activities after July 31, 2001 until credit
signature. (See Annex 6 for details)
Audit: The Accounts of the Project will be audited by a firn of Chartered Accountants appointed with
Terms of Reference satisfactory to the Bank. The annual project financial statements audited by the firm
of Chartered Accountants would be submitted within 6 months of the close of GoK's fiscal year (as
required under the Bank's operational policies). For the Special Account, it was confirmed that the
Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) and his appointees would constitute an acceptable
'independent auditor'. Finally, JSYS will appoint a separate audit firm to certify the use of funds by TUGs
on a sample basis. The TORs of these firm/s has been agreed to with the Bank.
5. Environmental: Environmental Category: B (Partial Assessment)
5.1 Summarize the steps undertaken for environmental assessment and EMN preparation (including
consultation and disclosure) and the significant issues and their treatmnent emerging from this analysis.
A Social and Environmental Assessment (SEA) was conducted as part of project preparation. An
Environmental Management Plan (EMP) including a Cultural Property Action Plan, Tank Safety Plan and
a Pest Management Plan (PMP) were prepared as part of the SEA. The SEA was based on extensive
consultation and field visits to 50 representative tanks. In addition, state-level workshops were held to
solicit opinion from a wide variety of stakeholders, including villagers, PRIs, NGOs, govermment officials,
academics, and other experts. The project is expected to have an overall positive impact on the
enviromnent. The main environmental issues examined in the SEA (and shown in a spatial context in
Figure El) include inter alia: (i) degraded nature of the tank system (e.g. loss of an important common
property resource; land degradation in the catchment); (ii) the spatial and sectoral context of the systems
(upstream soil erosion and downstream siltation - both in single tank systems and in cascades - with silt
accumulation reducing storage and groundwater recharge and increasing the need for expensive
desiltation); (iii) the physical characteristics of the tanks (inadequate dead storage, tank safety concems due
to weak bund structure, damaged sluice and surplus/waste weirs leading to shortages, waterlogging, and
poor water efficiency); (iv) encroachment (of tank bed, foreshore area, streams and feeder channels) and
potential effects on cultural property; (v) inefficient use of water in the command (ill-defined irrigation
distribution systems and damaged main and field canals lead to low productivity of water and distributional
- 20 -

25. inequities); (vi) increasing fertilizer and pesticide use and declining use of organic manure/compost/green
manure; and (vii) contamination of tank water including poor hygiene and possible contamination of
drinking water and associated public health concerns. (Please refer to Annex 2, Attachment 4 for a
summary of the SEA including all the safeguard action plans.)
.>SoilE rosion &la nd degradation
>Diverted and clogged/weeded/silted feeder
channel
>Encroachment on feeder channels
>Unsustainable lanid use
Catchmen a 5_Degradegdr azing lands
1>Sparse vegetation
> lligh erosion rates
>Feeder channel clogging/weeds/siltation
Foresho ra
>Accumudation of silt
5>Tankb ed infested with weeds
Tank Structure/Bed / >Weak and damaged dam -tank safety
>Damaged sluice and waste weir Waterspread Area >Encroachment
)iWater quality and associated public health
impacts
>Groundwater recharge
>Damaged main and field canals
>Mono-cropping with low yields
>Declining use of organic compost r>ncrease in agro-chemical use
Command Area ->Exploitation >Low participoaf gtirooinunn ddwecatiesrion-makinfogr
tribalsw, omen and other vulnerable goups
Figure El: Tank System and Major Issues
The following framework will be utilized to address these issues:
. Consider tanks as part of an integrated system at an individual level (e.g. catchment area, tank and
command area) and well as at a collective (e.g. tank cluster, rnicrowatershed setting) level
* Develop an adequate EMP screening and rnitigation framework
* Ensure adequate attention to appropriate catchment treatment to improve investment sustainability
* Design of measures to include and manage conflicts across multiple demands from various stakeholders
(irrigation, drinking water, groundwater recharge, livestock, additional downstream dependent areas,
etc.), often competing within and across spatial and sectoral boundaries
* Consider induced impacts (e.g. pesticide use) in the Pest Management Plan/EMP
. Mainstream environmental issues into ITDP preparation, implementation, and monitoring utilizing a
highly consultative framework
* Develop adequate capacity for environmentally-sustainable tank management.
5.2 What are the main features of the EMP and are they adequate?
In the EMP, measures have been incorporated to enhance the activities that could have a positive impact on
the environment such as: improving tank ecology; improving environmental awareness and general tank
- 21 -

26. water use hygiene to improve water quality and associated public health (e.g. mixing of village wastewater
runoff into tank, protection of drinking water and drinking water recharge areas, management of waste and
manure on tank beds, etc.); promoting the holistic planning of tank systems (catchment, tank, command)
for individual tanks and cascades; improving cropping and input practices to reduce chemical pesticide and
fertilizer use; and improving tank safety. The project will however have some negative impacts for which
mitigation plans (e.g. EMP, PMP) have been developed. Possible adverse environmental impacts include
proper disposal of silt; uncertain impacts on groundwater; introduction of fish and trees to the tank system;
potential induced impacts of increased pesticide use in the area due to command area rehabilitation
(although the project will not finance pesticides); and potential adverse impacts on public health through
impacts on the local hydrology and induced pesticide and fertilizer use. These potential changes in
hydrology, combined with induced increase in pesticide and fertilizer use and any pre-existing pollution
(e.g. from village sewage) into the tank, may change the quality of water in the tank and the groundwater
and could potentially have adverse impacts on public health. These changes in hydrology and other
impacts will be closely monitored, especially in the initial stages to help guide further project
implementation. In addition, potential impacts on cultural property and tank safety has led to the
formulation of a separate Cultural Action Plan and Tank Safety Plan as part of the EMP. The provisions
of the EMP and the PMP are designed to enable the activities to be in compliance with national and Bank
policies and guidelines. Please refer to Annex 2 Attachment 4 for a summary of the SEA and the EMP.
5.3 For Category A and B projects, timeline and status of EA:
Date of receipt of final draft: January 2, 2002
5.4 How have stakeholders been consulted at the stage of (a) environmental screening and (b) draft EA
report on the environmental impacts and proposed environment management plan? Describe mechanisms
of consultation that were used and which groups were consulted?
Extensive stakeholder consultation has been conducted as part of the SEA preparation both at the initial
screening stage as well as for various drafts of the SEA report. Consultations were carried out with a
variety of village-level stakeholders (including farmers, representatives from the PRIs, women and other
vulnerable groups, affected households, and other local organizations), government agencies, researchers
and expert groups, NGOs, and the World Bank. These consultations were held in all fifty tanks (and in
more depth for six tanks) surveyed by the SEA team. Moreover, the JSYS team conducted extensive
meetings with tank users as part of their pilot interventions in about 30 tanks. State-level workshops on the
SEA held in July and September 2001 were a source of excellent feedback from a variety of stakeholders.
A gender assessment and consultation has also been conducted. Consultations have been held using oral
and written conmmunication in Kannada and English as appropriate. In addition, the project proposes to
mainstream a highly participatory framework for the development of ITDPs through CFT-facilitated PRA
exercises, joint walkthroughs, and a strong emphasis on community capacity-building activities.
5.5 What mechanisms have been established to monitor and evaluate the impact of the project on the
environment? Do the indicators reflect the objectives and results of the EMP?
The EMP has recommended a number of key indicators to be monitored as part of the project to reflect the
environmental and social objectives and issues. These impact, process, and output environmental
indicators and strategies for monitoring, reporting, and use in decision-making are outlined as part of the
SEA. The monitoring information would include participatory indicators to be monitored at the TUG level,
baseline information to be collected as part of the PRA exercises and surveys, special studies, remote
sensing surveys, photographs, and third-party monitoring. Some informnation will be computerized and
spatially referenced in a GIS to facilitate analysis where appropriate. The objective of the environmental
monitoring would be to enable quick mid-course corrections in project activities to ensure that the project is
environmentally sustainable.
- 22 -

27. 6. Social:
6.1 Summarize key social issues relevant to the project objectives, and specify the project's social
development outcomes.
The project's social development outcomes are intended to be equitable, efficient and sustainable
management of tanks and tank related benefits. The main social issues related to achieving these include:
* differential access to project benefit: The project recognizes the importance of properly identifying
different user groups in a tank system and ensuring that their interests in this common resource are
protected and optimally developed. However, the diverse nature of stakeholder interests in tanks means
that economic returns vary and thus, project benefits will be unevenly distributed. So, while women may
benefit from having dead storage assured and better access to washing facilities, or owners of small plots of
land gain access to assured irrigation, an important implication of improving water storage capacity of tank
systems is that larger farmers in the tank command derive greater financial benefit compared to other
members of the community. In addition to diversity of interest, water distribution between headend and
tailend farmers within the command area will be an issue which TUGs will need to manage. TUGs/TUCs
are faced with a complex situation in which they will need to: maximize returns to investment in any
interest - be it an economic or non-economic benefit; ensure relative equity within benefit streams; and
explore ways of providing tank related opportunities (e.g. small livestock enterprises, fisheries
development) to those not receiving irrigation water. This will require representative and transparent
decision-making processes, good monitoring, and public availability of information of tank-related
transactions.
* marginalized groups: Despite the slow but steady change in village power relations, people such as
women, tribals, landless and low-caste groups often remain marginalized in local decision-making. The
project will therefore establish organizational structures and norms which legitimize and support the
inclusion of these groups in decision making and benefit distribution. Inclusion will be closely monitored
and results made public and used, initially by CFTs but in the longer term by tank stakeholders, to improve
performance of TUGs/TUCs. Special measures will be taken to assist groups who are particularly
disadvantaged. CFTs will work with women to build their capacity to engage meaningfully in public fora
and to develop tank related economic activities. In locations where tribal people are found, ITDPs will
include tank-specific TDPs. In addition, the impact of proposed changes in current tank use will be
examined as part of the ITDP preparation, such as potential increases in water charges on poorer people.
* resettlement and rehabilitation: The project aims at rehabilitating existing tanks and does not
involve construction of new tanks. Therefore, acquisition of private land and physical displacement are
expected to be minimal. However, encroachment particularly in tank beds is a major issue. During
planning and implementation at the tank level, efforts will be made to minimize adverse impact in terms of
economic losses by limiting the construction activities to the technical interventions. The GoK has adopted
a 'Policy for Resettlement and Rehabilitation of Persons Affected by the Community-Based Rehabilitation
of Minor Irrigation Tanks in Karnataka'. The policy is consistent with the Bank's OP4.30 on Involuntary
Resettlement. The objective of the policy is to avoid or minimize displacement (physical and/or economic)
and where inevitable, to minimize the hardship on affected families and enhance (or at least restore) their
livelihood opportunities. The policy contains an entitlement framework and guidelines for implementation.
Based on the census survey of potentially affected families in sample six tank areas, GoK prepared a
Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) demonstrating their capability to plan to mitigate adverse impacts under
the project. Besides the R&R activities to be implemented under the project, the RAP specifies the
institutional arrangement, approval process, monitoring and leaming indicators, grievance redress
mechanism, time plan, and budget estimates. The TUG (with the assistance of the Cluster Facilitation
- 23 -

28. Teams) will be responsible for preparing, implementing, and monitoring the Resettlement Action Plan
(RAP) at the individual tank level. Technical assistance will be provided by resettlement specialists on the
Cluster Facilitation Teams (CFTs) and in the District and State Project Units of JSYS. Moreover, an
independent agency will review all first-year RAPs to ensure consistency with the R&R policy objectives
and entitlement framework. After the first year, a decision will be taken on whether to review all future
RAPs or only on a sample basis. The RAP will be an integral part of the ITDP and no construction will
begin until all entitlements are extended and the process of economic rehabilitation has started. The
voluntary surrender of land will be well documented.
* tribals: Scheduled Tribes (ST) constitute around 4% of the state population and in the nine project
districts account for 1.3% to 14.6% of the population. The study concluded that STs in the project area are
generally not distinct in terms of social, cultural, and economic attributes from the rest of the population.
Their social and political rights are often adequately represented and protected by various legislations.
However, there are some groups which are currently not categorized as STs but are distinctly different
from a social and cultural perspective. Since tribals are an important stakeholder under the project, there
could be a situation of differential access to project benefits both by the tribals and other vulnerable groups
(including scheduled castes). For this purpose, based on the findings of the SEA and the detailed study of
six tanks, a Tribal Development Plan (TDP) and model tribal development plans at the tank level have been
prepared which will cover both ST and SC groups. The process of preparing such model plans and their
approval will follow the same pattem as described for R&R. (See Annex 2, Attachment 4 for a summary
of the SEA including the resettlement and tribal development issues and action plans.)
* capacity building and training: Capacity-building and training -- especially with respect to
safeguard issues -- for TUGs, CFTs, JSYS, and other relevant staff is of critical importance to the overall
success of the project. JSYS has prepared separate Guidelines for the Implementation of the RAP and
TDP. It was agreed that the Annual Action and Procurement Plans would include a special emphasis on
capacity-building and training, especially as relates to social and environmental safeguards, and the above
Guidelines would be reviewed and elaborated in more detail each year at this time. The GoK mentioned
that the ITDPs developed so far were being reviewed in workshops to further streamline and standardize
the ITDPs, further clarify capacity-building requirements and quality control mechanisms. A revised first
year Annual Action and Procurement Plan (including a Capacity-building Plan with a focus on safeguard
issues) should be submitted to the Association by June 30, 2002.
6.2 Participatory Approach: How are key stakeholders participating in the project?
Tank communities were involved during the preparation of the SEA and the Institutional Study. The
different interests of tank users were explored, using participative and interactive techniques, and have
provided major contributions to the overall design of the project. These studies identified the need for a
structured process in which different interest groups could participate to develop a plan for tank
management. JSYS have further developed the framework of the ITDP. This has been pre-tested with
tank communities and is currently being refined in relation to both elements of the ITDP and the way it is
used to ensure inclusion of all stakeholders in decision making and management.
Project preparation activities also resulted in the identification of organizational options most appropriate
for collective and inclusive management of tanks in different locations. Tank communities will be given a
choice of four organizational options for the structure and membership of TUGs/TUCs. While these vary
in terms of the nature of their links with a potentially key stakeholder -- the Gram Panchayat - each
attempts to offer an arrangement which can maximize effective interaction with this elected body while
minimizing problems that might occur in certain locations where panchayat or elected representatives
performance is unpredictable. Linkages with the Zilla Panchayat and district level line departments are
- 24 -

29. built into the project structure through a specially convened ZP Joint Committee on which sit elected,
project and line department representatives. At the taluka level linkages with line departments will be
sought through CFT members attending monthly Taluka Production Committee meetings. (see Section C4
and Annex 2 for details).
Communities participating in the project will: form TUGs/TUCs; prepare and implement ITDPs (including
suitable cost-sharing of investments); assume O&M responsibility for the tank system; and, self monitor
those project impacts and outputs which can increase their management effectiveness. The involvement of
vulnerable groups (e.g. women, landless, and SC/STs) in TUG/TUC activities and decisions will be
promoted and monitored through both the organizational structures of these local organizations and through
the locally developed rules of operation. The project will provide support (including capacity building) to
TUGs/TUCs and PRIs to strengthen their participation in planning, implementation and monitoring of the
project. The infonnation component will seek to both inform stakeholders and the broader public.
6.3 How does the project involve consultations or collaboration with NGOs or other civil society
organizations?
Kamataka has strong NGOs and civil society organizations with significant experience in
community-based natural resource management and rural decentralization activities. The project will: (a)
continue the precedent set during preparation of organizing consultations which provide a forum for a range
of civil society organizations to share insights, experience and knowledge to improve the project's design
and functioning; (b) work with five Anchor NGOs as key support agencies for project implementation; (c)
contract approximately 40-50 NGOs to work as, or host, CFTs with front-line service delivery
responsibility; (d) collaborate with NGOs in conducting M & L exercises and other special studies; and (e)
ask representatives of a wide variety of organizations to become members of the State and District
Resource Groups.
6.4 What institutional arrangements have been provided to ensure the project achieves its social
development outcomes?
The following institutional arrangements will help ensure achievement of social development outcomes: (a)
formation of sustainable and inclusive tank user organizations, processes, and operational rules for
transparency and accountability; (b) special support provided to marginalized groups; (c) creation of space
within the Panchayat system to facilitate dialogue and coordination between communities within a single
tank system, between elected representatives and their constituents, and between the different levels of PRI;
(d) development of a strong monitoring and leaming system; (e) establishment of a communications system
aimed at providing informnation to both increase knowledge and support behavioral change within
communities, PRIs, and government agencies; and (f) an institutional set up at different levels to ensure
that RAPs and TDPs prepared and implemented by TUG are in conformity with the provisions of the
agreed Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy and Tribal Development Strategy -- including the
appointment of an independent agency to review RAPs on a sample basis. In addition to the above
institutional arrangements inherent in the project design, JSYS has proposed a Framework for the
Appraisal of ITDPs. This framework will help ensure that all the elements on a quality ITDP are in place
with adequate oversight mechanisms to facilitate successful implementation. The Framework will be
discussed and reviewed during early workshops proposed by JSYS and focused on preparation, approval,
and implementation of ITDPs.
6.5 How will the project monitor performance in terms of social development outcomes?
Indicators for monitoring performance of project in terms of social development outcomes (i.e. equitable,
efficient and sustainable management of tanks and tank related benefits) and effective empowerment of
primary project stakeholders (i.e. TUGs to sustainably manage tank systems) would be developed in
- 25 -

30. consultation with the TUGs with required support from CFTs, DPUs, and SPU. Each of the following four
components of the proposed Monitoring and Learning system for the project (Performance tracking;
Institutional Tracking; Intemal learning; Evaluation) would focus on performance against clearly identified
indicators for achievement of social development outcomes. The indicators developed to monitor effective
implementation of the Resettlement Action Plan, Tribal Development Plan and Gender Action Plan would
also be regularly reviewed at the TUG, CFT, DPU and SPU levels and used to make course corrections
where required. In the interest of maintaining objectivity and ensuring learning at all levels, the independent
agency to be contracted to provide support in Monitoring and Learning would have a mandate to use these
M&L components to provide periodic feedback on achievement of social development outcomes to project
officials at each level.
7. Safeguard Policies:
7.1 Do any of the following safeguard policies apply to the project?
Policy Applicability
Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01, BP 4.01, GP 4.01) 0 Yes 0 No
Natural Habitats (OP 4.04, BP 4.04, GP 4.04) 0 Yes 0 No
Forestry (OP 4.36, GP 4.36) 0 Yes * No
Pest Management (OP 4.09) 0 Yes 0 No
Cultural Property (OPN 11.03) 0 Yes 0 No
Indigenous Peoples (OD 4.20) * Yes 0 No
Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) 0 Yes 0 No
Safety of Dams (OP 4.37, BP 4.37) * Yes 0 No
Projects in International Waters (OP 7.50, BP 7.50, GP 7.50) 0 Yes * No
Projects in Disputed Areas (OP 7.60, BP 7.60, GP 7.60)* 0 Yes * No
7.2 Describe provisions made by the project to ensure compliance with applicable safeguard policies.
Policy Compliance Measures and Comments
Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01, BP * An integrated environmental and social
4.01, GP 4.01) assessment was conducted, consultations were held,
altematives were analyzed and an Environmental
Management Plan was developed.
Natural Habitats (OP 4.04, BP 4.04, GP * No critical or semi-critical habitats were located
4.04) in study tanks. The screening framework for future tanks
would ensure that no tanks in these areas would b
considered under the project. In addition, measures are
proposed to be piloted in the project to enhance aquati
and terrestrial biodiversity in tank ecosystems.
Forestry (OP 4.36, GP 4.36) . Catchment and bund treatment would involve
some vegetative treatment to reduce soil erosion, but does
not trigger this policy.
Pest Management (OP 4.09) * Although no pesticides are proposed to b
financed under the project, a pest management plan ha
been developed to enhance strengthening and monitoring
of IPM in project areas. This would complement th
extensive State-level IPM program under the Kamatak
Watersheds Development Project.
Cultural Property (OPN 11.03) * Potential impacts on burial grounds on tank bed,
-26 -