Note No 19 February 1996 Involving Farmers: Social Assessment in the Estonia Agriculture Project Countries in transition from centrally planned to market economies face several challenges when planning investments. These include a lack of information about beneficiary groups, particularly those in rural areas; and the collapse of institutions maintained by the state prior to transition. During preparation of the Estonia Agriculture Project, the government sought World Bank technical assistance to undertake a social assessment (SA) to fill information gaps and initiate a process of building new local level institutions. The SA was divided into three phases, with the overall objective of building institutional capacity at both the local and the national level. Phase I has been completed. It has enabled the government to assess farmers' commitment to rehabilitation of field drainage systems, and their willingness to form farmer-managed Land and Water Associations and to share costs and assume responsibilities for operation and maintenance. The Challenge ments, collect farmers' contributions of 20% of the reha- bilitation costs (in cash or in-kind), and assume new and Since regaining independence in 1991, Estonia has sole responsibilities for managing and financing drain- stabilized its macroeconomic situation and moved rap- age system operation and maintenance. idlytowardsamarketeconomy.Livingstandards,which declined dramatically in 1992 and 1993, have begun to When selecting target areas, the Ministry of Agricul- rise in urban areas where enterprises have been priva- ture(MOA)appliedameticulousscreeningprocessbased tized and industrial production has begun to revive. on technical and environmental criteria, but lacked However, similar results have not materialized in rural knowledge of farmers' attitudes towards the proposed areas. Estonia has the potential to be competitive in ag- project. It was also unclear whether all the farmers in a riculture if certain constraints are overcome. The Agri- catchment area would continue farming, or whether the culture Project, as the first Bank-supported operation, is uncertainty over land ownership would be a major dis- expected to address some of these, principally the reha- incentive to investment in drainage improvements. The bilitation of field drainage systems. MOA reasoned that if farmers did not consider drainage rehabilitation as pivotal to raising their living standards, The artificial drainage systems that were con- were unable to pay construction and maintenance costs, structed over the past forty years enabled Estonian farm- orweredisinterestedinactingcollectivelythroughLWAs, ers to raise the productivity of 740,000 ha, or 66 percent, the proposed investment would not be feasible or sus- of the country's arable lands. As was characteristic of tainable. Soviet agriculture, drainage systems were engineered to the scale requirements of collective farms and were The Social Assessment centrally managed with little or no input from farmers. When collective farms were dismantled after 1991, rou- To fill in the information gaps and to develop a par- tine maintenance of the drainage infrastructure was ne- ticipatory process for involving farmers, the MOA re- glected, to the point where irreparable damage to the quested World Bank technical assistance to carry out a systems will occur unless repairs are made and mainte- SA of rural households. The objectives of the SA were to: nance is restored. · identify key stakeholders and obtain their views; Rehabilitation of the entire drainage system would · be technically complex and economically unjustified. collect information on social factors for screening of The Government of Estonia has therefore requested target areas; funds from the World Bank to rehabilitate drainage sys- · strengthen the MOA's ability to communicate with tems in five counties on 60,000 ha of the most fertile farmers; lands. In order that these investments are sustainable, farmers are required to form Land and Water Associa- · develop a process to enable farmers to identify tions (LWAs). The LWAs in these five counties will ne- drainage problems, analyse constraints and propose gotiate with the government on the design of improve- solutions; · identify procedures for decision-making and · Farmers were most concerned with local planning of LWA functions; contractors' expertise and the possible impact of poor rehabilitation work on their future · anticipate the types of support (such as training maintenance obligations and costs (see Box 1). and technical assistance) required by LWAs; and · Outcome of Phase I generate commitment and ownership for farmers' participation in drainage rehabilitation and management. The first phase of the SA achieved the following objectives: The SA was divided into three phases: during Phase I, training was provided to key stakeholders in SA and · Farmers' interests and needs were identified. The participatory planning, and an SA process was farm profiles provide a basis for identifying launched in two of the five counties selected for drain- households' assets and the conditions which affect age rehabilitation; during Phase II, SAs will be con- LWAmembers'abilitytoutilizeimproveddrainage ducted in the remaining three counties; and Phase III and apply new farming practices. This information will focus on consolidation of stakeholder knowledge will be available to LWAs, MOA facilitators and and participation through workshops and farmer-to- design engineers when planning and budgeting farmerexchangeevents.Theassessmentteamsincluded for the rehabilitation works. county level engineers in the Amelioration Bureau of the MOA who will interact with LWAs on a daily ba- Box 2: Engineers Practice Systematic Listening sis, municipality staff concerned with land issues, It had been assumed that the Estonian social scientists Farmer Union representatives and social scientists from would be the appropriate resource for conducting SA. the Estonia Agriculture University in Tartu. The teams This was not the case. Instead the MOA engineers were conducted mapping exercises, developed farm profiles more adept at learning from farmers and setting the and catchment maps, and carried out resource analy- participatory tone of the fieldwork. In fact, they were ses with farmers. so determined to build on the techniques they were learning, they recommended that the MOA form a Na- Findings of Phase I tional Training Team for Social Assessment which would be in place for Phase II and become the resource unit for the project. This recommendation has been The SA has produced some unanticipated findings endorsed by both the MOA and the Bank. In the mean- and clarified key issues. For example: time, the Estonia Agriculture University is reviewing · its social science teaching and research methods to in- Farmers' perceptions of land tenure issues were corporate the new techniques gained from the SA. less of a bottleneck to LWA formation than anticipated by the MOA and the World Bank. · A participatory process was set in motion. The farm · Prior to the SA, the MOA and the World Bank profile became a means for giving voice to farmers. expected that formation of LWAs and their The catchment map enabled farmers to articulate operation would be standardized across counties. their priorities and assess how they could The social diversity apparent during Phase I cooperate and agree on the modalities for LWAs. illustrated that a more flexible and contextualized During Phase II of the SA, the MOA and World approach would be necessary if farmers were to Bank team will test a participatory planning process develop a sense of trust and be committed to their to design improved schemes and management LWA. plans. · Strategiesforcapacitybuildingweredeveloped.The Box 1: Farmer Concerns MOA will continue to support technical assistance One important lesson to emerge out of the fieldwork to LWAs during implementation in order to was that farmers had difficulty understanding the fi- strengthen farmers' planning and management nancing arrangements for the drainage rehabilitation abilities. During Phase III of the SA, performance work. Many of the questions raised at the large feed- indicators for LWAs will be developed as part of back meetings demonstrated this confusion and con- this capacity building. cern about financial disbursement and control. The SA teams eventually decided that a summary of the project The Task Manager for the Estonia Agriculture Project is Brian Berman should be prepared, with a sample catchment map and . For further information on the project, contact Florian Grohs, The flow diagram, as a briefing paper on the financial pro- World Bank, 1818 H. Street, NW, Washington, DC 20433, Fax No. cedures and potential obligations for farmers. This (202) 522-0073. For further information on SA, contact Miranda briefing paper will be used early in the public consul- Munro or Kathryn McPhail, on the above address, Fax No. (202) tation process. 522-3247. See Social Development Dissemination Note #13 for gen- eral information on SA.