The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Public Disclosure Authorized
Public Disclosure Authorized
Documentof
Report
No. 6820
Public Disclosure Authorized
PROJECT COMPLETIONREPORT
INDIA
NATIONALCOOPERATIVEDEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONPROJECT (NCDC I) (CREDIT 871-IN)
1987
Public Disclosure Authorized
June 10,
South Asia Projects Department General Agriculture Division II This document hasa restricteddistributionand may be used by recipients only in theperformanceof
their officialduties. Its contentsmay not otherwisebe disclosedwithoutWorldBank authorization.
THEWORLDBANK Washington. D.C.20433 U.S.A.
lot
USXONLY
04k. of Oveclar-Giwai O - atinrs Ivalutto
June 10, 1i87
NEMORANDUM TO THE EXECUTIVEDIRECTORSANDTHE PRESIDENT
SUBJECT: ProjectCompletionReport on India NationalCooperative Develoi,ment CorporationProiect (NCDC I? (Credit871-IN) Attached,for information,is a copy of a report entitled'Project CompletionReport on India NationalCooperativeDevelopmentCorporationProject (NCDC I) (Credit871-IN)"preparedby the NationalCooperativeDevelopment Corporation,togetherwith an Overviewpreparedby the South Asia Regional Office. Furtherevaluationof this projectby the OperationsEvaluation Departmenthas not been made. Attachment
I This documentha arstted distributon andmaybe usedby scipIrtsonlyin te perfoancem of their oMic dutWs.Its contents maynot oterwie be disloed withoutWoddbnk auftoztion.
FOR OMCIAL USE ONLY
PROJECTCOMPLETION REPORT INDIA CORPORATION PROJECT(NCDCI) NATIONALCOOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT CREDIT871-IN
T-Le of Contents Page No. Preface
. ..
9
Is ..
..............
...........
. ....
......
,
a.....
i
gasic Data Sheet ................. ii evaluationmrr ........ ,,ii
OVERVIEW -
..... ...... . ,.......................... General Project Objectives and Rationale .......... Identification,Preparation andAppraisal ProjectImplementation Project Impact ............... 9.99...99999999.9999999.5 and Economic Evaluation Financial ..... Institutional Performance and Development 9 IDA Supervision Efforts . Lessons Learned .9.9.9999999.9999999.9.99.99..... 0
1 I 2 2 7
7 9
PROJECTCOMPLETIONREPORT I. II.
Background9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 ProjectFormulation . . ...............
1 9999999999999
9999999999999999999999999999999999999..*999..... III.Implementation
IV.
Assessment Impact
V.
Conclusions
.9999999. ...............
6 23
............
,
67 87
Annexes I-XV 4nnex mIV -
.r...nts
Received
from NCDC on IDAts Draft
Report ........
This documenthas a restricteddistributionandmay be used by recipientsonly in the performance of their offcialduties.Its contentsmaynot otherwisebe disclosedwithoutWorldBankauthoriation.
127
- i -
PROJECTCOMPLETIONREPORT INDIA NATIONALCOOPERATIVEDEVELOPMENTCORPORATIONPROJECT (NCDC I) (CREDIT871-IN) PREFACE Attached is a ProjectCompletion Report (PCR)on the NationalCooperative DevelopmentCorporation Project (NCDC I) (Credit 871-IN). The Credit, US$30 million equivalent,was made to the Governmentof India February 1979 for onlendingto NCDC. The planned Closing Date was December31, 1984; the final disbursementwas made in June 1985. The PCR was prepared by NCDC, the executing agency. An overview pro,idingadditionalcommentswas prepared by the South Asia Regionalstaff, incorporatingdata from IDA records. This report has not been subjectedto audit by OED. The draft reportwas sent to the Borrower for their comments. The commentsby NCDC receivedfrom the Borrower are attachedto the PCR as Annex XVI, and their content has been taken into consideration in the final preparationof the report.
INDIA NATIONAL COOPIIIUTl DtVISLOPIV
-ORPORATION (CREDIT87 1-1)
PROJECTCOM)UETION RRPOW
Lasi Date Sh et
IR?: PRtOlECT D^AA Actual or estmated Actual
Actual a X of Appraisal Estiete
549.9 ?,854 1.100
586.9 5,573 200
106.5 73.8 18.2
1.013 so 30 12/31/78 02/02/79 5/3/79 12/31/84 16-211 222 5.7
830 15 30 12/31/78 02/02/79 5/3/79 12/31/84 18-30X 11-182 5.7
Apprsiaal Esthete Total Project Coat (Rs Million) Va. of odowna - ne - rehabilitation Total Storage Capacities (00C tona) - a" - rebabilitation Credit Mount (US$ Million) Date Board Approval Dat ot Credit Agrezeant Data effectiveness Closing Date financial RAte of Return Econooic Rate of Return Number of Benetfiiaties (ailliot;mili*s)
81.9 18.6
CUIMUATIVE DISSRMEMPS
Appraisal Estihte dS$ Million) Aetual 1US$ Million) Actual as 2 of estimate Date of Final Disburtemnts 6/11/85 PrincipalRepaids firstrepynt due 6/15/1989
FY79
FM
2.2 0 0
6.9 8.4 121.7
EY8t 12.5 14.5 116.0
fY82 18.5 19.3 104.3
EY3
EU
E8
24.9 24.1 96.8
30.0 25.9 86.3
30.0 100.0
-
MISSIONDATA Mission Preparation Mission Appraisal Supervision II Supervision III Supervision IV Supervision V Supervision VI Supervision VII Supervision VIII Supervision IX Supervison Y Supervision XI
Date No. of t(Mouth/Year) Persons 11/76 5/78 10/79 7/80 11/80 12/81 5/82 2/83 11/83 5/84 12/84 7/85
5 4 4 1 4 1 1 2 2 2 1 3
Mandays in the field 75 88 41 n/A _/ 20 _/ 20 4/ 15 n/ 42 4/ 38 4/ 26 p/ 19 I/ 215/
Specialisrtions Representedt/ A.B.D A.B.D A.B.C.D A A.8.D B A A.g E.0 CC A E.E.a
1/ A sFinance anAemoent B Cooperatives Specialist C Marketing Specialist D En5ineer g Z Agro-Industrias Specialist I AS. Credit Specialiot C AS. gconomist H = Economist 2/ 3/ 4/ 51.
Supervision by NDWresident staff Combined uith MCDCII Appraisal Combined with MCDC II Supervision Combined with NCDCII 6 III Supervision OTER PROJECTDATA
Borrowers Gverornnt of India Ezcuting Agency: National Cooperative Developeent Corporation fiscal Year ot the Borrower: April 1 - March 31 NaMeof Currency (abbreviation)s Rupee (Re) Currency Ezchange Rates: Apprista Report US$1.0O a Re 8.60 Appraial YearAverage US$1.00 R a 8.19 Intervening YearsAverage US$1.00a Rs 8.84 Completion Year Average USS.00 Rs 11.36 follow up Projects$ NIet Credit No.s Credit Amount (SDR Mn) Date oard Apptovalt
NCDCIS 1146-IN 102.8 5/21/81
CeC iSS 1502-IN 210.2 6/19/84
(CDQC)
tia Status
1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 I 1
d
I 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2
ypes of problems
N H M H-O M-O 1-0 N-0 M-0 M-0
-
iii
-
PROJECTCOMPLETIONREPORT INDIA NATIONALCOOPERATIVEDEVELOPMENTCORPORATIONPROJECT (NCDC I) (CREDIT871-IN)
EVALUATIONSUMMARY Introduction The projectwas IDA's first direct attempt in India to assist the rural cooperativesector broadly,althoughthe Bank Group had previouslyprovided fundingfor farm credit and dairy projectswhich had also supportedcooperatives. Indianmodels of developmentof agriculture- the Five Year Plans recognizedthe cooperativesector as a balancingfactor betweenthe private and public sectors. The advent of Planning,with its moorings in democracyand socialism,the emphasison growthwith social justice,and the adoptionof a socialisticpattern of societyhave added a new significanceand positiverole tv cooperativesin supportingthe farmer,the worker, the artisan and the consumer. The democracticcharacterof the movement,combinedwith its federal structurein which an individualmember of the primary societyin a village could draw support from a nationallevel cooperativeorganization,rendersthe movement an effectiveinstrumentfor decentralizedplanningand implementation of various economicactivitiesby the people involvedin these activities. It has been the deliberatepolicy of the GOI to foster and developa strong and viable cooperativenucleus in every villageof the country. Oblectives The physicalobjectiveof the Projectwas to constructgodowns in 3 States - Haryana, Orissa and Uttar Pradesh. However,the primary objectives, accordingto the World Bank,were in institutionbuilding. First, the aim was to make NCDC grow into a more effectiveand viable developmentinstitution. Second, constructionof godownswaw meant to promote a strongercooperative infrastr-Acture in rural areas. Godownsconstructionactivitywas selected becauseof the urgent need to provide storagein rural a-eas for agricultural inputs and outputs and the need for supporting
the development of the cotpera-
tive sector. Other supportingcomponentsfinancedunder the projectwere technical assistance,vehicles and engineeringequipment. Total projectcost was estimatedat US$63.9million. The IDA creditwas for US$30.0million. Implementation Experience Physicaltargetswere largelyachieved,the main institutionalobjectives were met, and the Creditwas fully disbursed. As highlightedin the
- iv
-
Overview,higher than expectedcost escalations,aggravatedby various delays, necessitateda scalingdown of the constructionprogram in order to keep costs within limits of allocatedfunds. Hence, in terms of storagecapacity,only about 80% of the total planned constructionprogramwas completed,varying Uttar Pradesh and Orissa. somewhatbetween the three project States--Haryana, NCDC, the prime onlendingand executingagency,performedsatisfacand its organizationand staff was torily during project implementation, benefitsalso considerablystrengthenedunder the project. Institutionally, accrued to the participatingState CooperativeBanks,where the project introduced appraisaland lending criteriathat led to a greateremphasison proper credit-worthiness and general appraisalof subprojects,borrower-cooperatives' credit discipline. However,loan recoveriesfrom primary societieshave been mixed; they were low in Orissa,decliningin Uttar Pradesh,but good in Haryana. Results The direct impact of the g&,ownson higher turnoverof farm inputs, mainly fertilizerand consumergoods,was far above the expectationat appraisal. However, littleuse of the godownswas made for marketingand storage of surplus farm producetexcept in Uttar Pradeshwhere primary cooperative societieswere involvedin governmentgrain procurementoperationsunder price support schemes. Incrementalcrop productionresultingfrom investments in godowns supplyingfertilizerwas difficultto quantify,althoughthe benefits must be significant. Similarly,indirecteffectson incomeand employmentof the farmingcommunitycould not be assessed. However,the economicrate of returnwas recalculatedat 18% for Haryana, 12% for Uttar Pradeshand 11% for Orissa,which compareswith the appraisalestimateof 22% for the total project. The financialrate of return to a PCS owning a godown exceededthe SAR estimate of 16%. Based on actu&' resultsit was recalculatedat 30% in Haryana, 21% in Uttar Pradeshand 18% in Orissa. Sustainability The prciect has not yet had a significantimpacton improvementof overall and financialmanagementof the primary cooperativesocietieswhich is constrainedby the lack of adequatetraining. This is being remediednow under the NCDC II and III follow-upprojects. Such positiveresponseto feedbackof informationon performanceconstraintsoffers good prospectthat project achievementswill be sustained. Findingsand Lessons The series of projectshas also brought out the need to give increased attentionto the overall administrative and businessenvironmentaffecting cooperativesand the type of directgovernmentinterventionin the operationsof cooperatives,all with a view to generatingthe commercialand managerial autonomyneeded for cooperativesto operateprofitablyon a sustainedbasis.
PROJECTCOMPLETION RRYORT INDIA NATIONALCOOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION PROJECT(NCDC I) CREDIT871-IN OVERVIEW General i. The attached Project Completion Report (PCR) on the NCDCI project was prepared by the National Cooperative Development Corporation (NCD(), the project executing agency. The overview, prepared by South Asia Regional staff, is intended to aumuarize several observations, warranting special reinforcement or points not fully covered in the draft PCR prepared by NCDC. ii. The project was consistent with the government' overall agricultural development strategy. GOI had given a high priority to aking inputs and credit readily available to farmers. A key element in this strategy was the development of primary agricultural cooperative societieo (PCS) into viable multipurpose societies, by amalgamating small PCS, expanding their inputs supply package and. adding assembling and marketing of farm produce, distribution of consumer goods and mobilization of savings deposits to their existing functions of supplying credit and farm inputs (mainly fertilizer). Project
Objectives
and Rationale
iii. The project objectives were sound and in keeping with agricultural eeds and the government's development priorities. The objectives covered two areas: institutional development and construction of godowns. The first aim of institutional development was to make NCDCgrow into a more effective and viable development institution to serve the cooperative sector, providing funds and technical assistance. The second aim was to promote a stronger cooperative infrastructure in rural areas through construction of godowus. It Was recognized that to handle agricultural inputs and outputs more effectively it was essential for rural cooperatives to have a multifunctional storage facility at their disposal. Consequently the project was to provide additional and improved storage facilities to PCS and their marketing federations at village and larger rural market level respectively, in three States (Haryana, Orissa and Uttar Pradesh). iv. Cooperativesplay an importantsupportingrole in both production and marketing in rural areas. The project was designed to improve conditions for increasing production and improving marketing. Godown construction was selected because of the urgent need to provide storage in rural
-2-a
areas for agriciltural lnputs and otitputs and also to fa:ilitate the sale of consumer goods by village level cooperatives, The simple design of the project also facilitated its easy adoption in the States chosen for the project. The three States provided a representative picture of the varying level of cooperative development in India. Hatyana was high on the scale of cooperative development, whereas Orissa was low, and Uttar Pradesh (UP) in au intermediate stage of development. Finally, the project supported IDA's strategy for assisting India in attaining self-sufficiency in food production. Identification, Preparationand Appraisal v. The projectwhich was appraisedin May 1978,was IDA's first directattempt to assist the rural cooperativesectorbroadly,although the Bank Group had providedfundingfor farm credit and dairy projects which had also supportedcooperatives. From the outset,IDA focussedon institutionalmatters. An IDA mission which visited India in October/November 1976, concluded that with changes in NCDC's corporate structure and procedures as outlined fi its report (April1977) NCDC would be a suitable institution for onlending to the cooperative sector. Subsequently, NCDCengaged the Management Development Institution of India (MDI) in 1978 and following their recommendations introduced a number of changes in organization, management and procedures. vi. The appraisal mission, by and large, focussed on the right issues (institutional matters, creditdeliverysystem,lending policiesand procedures, and technical aspects). While it accqpted the scope and size of the original project proposed by NCDC, it did not accept NCDC's proposal to includethe State of Rajasthanin additionto Haryana. Orissa and UP. The mission maintained (in retrospect, probably correctly given execution delays which occurred anyway) that the first project should be conceptually and technically simple and not be geographically diffused. 1/ ProjectImplementation vii. On the whole, impgementation was successfulalthoughphysical targetshad to be scaled down becauseof higher cost ascalationsthan expected. The tablebelow shows that in terms of new storagecapacity82% of total projecttargetswere achieved. In the three States the marketing federationsprogressedmuch fasterwith their constructionprogramthan the PCS. In Haryanaand UP, some godownswith 100 ton capacitywere constructed instead of the planned 50 tons cap'city units because of
1/ The projectwas followedon with two IDA projects,NCDC II and NCDC III, for SDR 101.8M and SDR 210.2 M respectively.
-3-
expandedbusinessactivity. The rehabilitation programsin Orissahad to be reducedto 200 godownsfrom the 1,100 plannedat appraisaldue to much lower than expecteddemandfor rehabilitating existinggodown facilities, Generally,the qualityof construction of ruraland marketinggodownswas good and the designschosen provedto be practicaland functional.
CONSTRUCTION TARGETSAND ACHIEVEMENTS
-O-R STart No. of Total "doomu GCpacity (000 ton)
Fexdeatiom (AM)
70
=eh q 'is Godmw
on
5
TOWoa Capacjty (000 tose)
Capaity Achieed a of TaSret
Tota Aehiiredn No. of Total Godowne Capacity (000 tons)
1050 1.570
214 125
57 86
185 6
86.4 68.8
57 945
339
918
271
79.9
002
35 4.600 4.635
50 410 460
18 3. 3396
SQ 348
100.0
18
4 L Total CapacItY acuhe e X of Tagoet
185 95
86.4 76.0
30 M3 398
100.0 84.9 86.
Utter Pradeab Federation (P10) 2/ PCs Orisan federation
(OSYVcN 3/
TDOC C Ra8 PCS
.586
23
20
19
20
100.0
9
20
6 280
10 80
100.0
5 192
7 53
70.0 66.3
10 198
10 55
100.0 68.7
104 21',
710 926
63 143
60.6 66.8
758 985
67 152
_71.0
830
81.9
1.040 1.349
TotalNoW Godo4na
8M.
6_4*
7,554
1.013
5.430
812
80.2
Z=U=u
axtu"
SUESUM
Sama
aa
639 374
5.139 291
497 315
77.8 84.2
5.227 302
S10 320
79.8
80
200
15
mum
18.2
-
200
15
18.2
Of WIbiab: Rural Godowns 7.140 MarketingGodowns 414
5.573 "Un
ns=
-
85.6
g!o4do Rkhabilitation Orissa (PCs)
1.100
#|l~m
1/ artyama StateCooperative Supplya"dHarketin8 Federation. / Uttar Pradesh Cooperative Marketing Federation. Oriasa State Cooperative Marketing Federation. O/ 4/ Tribal Development Cooperative Corporation. Regional Cooperative
6/ As per supplemental
Marketing Societies. information provided by
4CDC.
-sS
mut _
-4-.
viii. By and large, the delay in construction was due principally to the of building cost escalation financing strain of covering significant materials, aggravated by managerial and administrative start-up delays, and, in some cases, lengthy sub-loan processing procedures and difficult Cost escalations occurred almost procurement procedures. inappropriate immediately after appraisaland continuedthroughoutthe proj'ctperiod. Unit costs of !00 ton godowns in Haryanaincreasedfrom the base cost (per an SAR estimate) of Rs 58,000 to Rs 96,000 by September 1982 (i.e. were Similar increases base cost). overall increase of 65.5% over SAR Price contingencies provided in the recorded in Uttar Pradesh and Orissa, to cover these increases. project (17% over base costs) were insufficient ix.
The underlyingreasonsfor increasesin constructioncostswere:
(a) higher pricesof cementand steel due to shortageand international price hikes; 1/ (b) higherprices of bricks due to greaterdemandand reduced supply1/; decreasedbrick productionhad been due to shortageof problems: and coal arising from nationwide transport (c) varying distancesof the brick kilns from constructionsites, necessitating higher transportcosts than estimatedin the SAR, Shortagesof cementwere particularlysevere and continuedto plague in all the three projectStates. NCDC played a project implementation criticalrole by interveningat variousGovernmentlevels to get favorable for the project. allocationsof buildingmaterials X. While some of the causesfor cost increasescan be tracedto it would appear that the appraisal conditions after time of appraisal, mission should have been more careful in determining price contingencies. mission. March Cost escalations were reported in the first supervision 1979, threemonths after Board approval. were exacerbated by start-up xi. Problems related to cost escalation Staffing problems caused delays weaknesses. delays due to institutional during especially and approval and in tendering, appraisal in subproject in Haryana and While project authorities the early part of the project. proper procedures to complete the Uttar Pradesh were able to establish reduced construction program by mid-1985, the institutions in Orissa
1/
From January 1979 to January by 93%, steel by 422, bricks paras 3.27, 3.28).
1985 prices of cement in US$ increased by 84% and skilled labor by 1002 (PCR
-5-
proved unable to introduce project closing.
changes to complete their
reduced program by
xii. Lengthy sub-lcan procedures and reappraisal of subprojects caused excessive delaysand contributed to the rapid rise in costs. In early 1983. an IDA supervision mission suggested that to avoid re-appraisal of subprojects, sensitivity analyses should be applied to evaluate the impact of higher costs on the viability of rural godowns. Sensitivity analyses combined with streamlined sub-loan processing. procedures would have helped cut down preparation time and high costs. xiii. implementation delays were also caused by inadeqtate flexi.bility in adherence to prevailing procurement procedures. especially in remote areas and in areas with large ongoing irrigation and industrial works. Tenders often had to be recalled because of insufficient response or because bids were above the fixed ceiling. IDA objected to awarding contracts to labor and construction societies or to state agencies without competitive bidding procedures. IDA later agreed that in the event of an unsuccessful tender or in cases where no response could be expected, the PCS could be allowed to build the godowns themselves or under a labor contract. In these cases supervision and supply of materials were to be provided by the SCBs. xiv. TihePCR mentions (paras3.54-3.55) that strict application of the project approach" caused delays in some cases. This was because a comr piete loan application, accompanied by financial projections and other necessary documentation, was required for each subproject. even for small rural godowns. Although the PCR recognizes the advantage of the proj ect approach, it indicates that the suggestion discussed with an IDA review mission to require detailed loan applications only from 10 of the societies and a shorter version from the rest, might have been useful. IDA. however, took the position that not only should the viability of the cooperative be taken into account, but also the feasibility of the operations after a godownwas constructed and that a full appraisal of each subproject was considered to be essential. IDA agreed that NCDCwould review on a sample basis 10% of the loan applications. Project
IJact
xv. Looking to stimulate growth in the rural ec nomy, GOI officials felt that a rural cooperative with a godown would be better suited to service the needs of farmers than one without a godown. 1/ The SAR envisaged that the availability of godowns would have an 0xpansionary
1/
The equally important project objective of the cooperative finance institutions zxxvi.
of strengthening the perfozzance is discussed in paras xxxiii to
-6-
impact on creditas well as on non-creditbusiness of the societiesand would also have various indirectbenefits. Zvi, The impact of rural godowns are at three levels: The first-order impact is the direct impact which enables societies with rural godowns to channel credits to members, to undertake the supply of agro-inputs and consumer goods in rurAl areas, to act as procurement agency for apex marketing federations and for the Food Corporation of India (FCI), to assist farmers in marketing their surplus produce, and to function as a service center for village community development. the second-order impact is the incremental crop production resulting from the first-order impact. While undoubtedly large, this impact is somewhat difficult to quantify reliably because agricultural production is dependent also on various other factors such as weather, extension and research and prices. The effect on income and employment, third-order impact which is the positive both direct and indirect, is equally difficult to measure. xvii. NCDC's Evaluation Division has carried out numerous studies on the order basis of random sampling in the three States to assess the first impact. The results, summarized in the PCR (paras 4.10 to 4.24 and that creditas well as non-creditbusinessof the Annex IV), illustrate sampled2CS had increased considerably in all States. SAR projections for projectyear 5 for total turnoverof the cooperativesin the three States together were Rs 320 M for fertilizers, Rs 950 M for farm produce and Rs 400 M for consumer goods, This compares to actual turnovers of (PCR paras 4.26-4.30 Rs 1,017M, Rs 1,223 M and Rs 2,013 M respectively and Annex VI), which exceeds appraisalprojectionssignificantly. However, except in UP, where PCS were involved in grain procurement under goverument price support operations, little use of the godowns was made In Haryana farAers can for marketing and storage of surplus farm produce. only sell surplus grain at regulated markets at which the Haryana State Marketing Federation (HAZED)is a buyer for the State Government and for that fawmers preferred to sell their FCI. Moreover, the studies indicate grain at regulated markets rather than using PCS for marketing and storage at the time of harvest and because PCS could not offer adequate liquidity storage was not profitable because of the uniform support price for the whole season fixed by the Government. xviii. NCDC's EvaluationDivisionis now taking steps to collect data in impact of storage order to carry out studies on the second and third-order investments. Although incremental crop production is not quantified in the iCR, it can probably be assumed that, based on the fact that incremental fertilizer distribution through project godowns is far above SAR projections, the net value of additional crops in the three States also exceeds expectations at appraisal.
-7-
xix. Direct employmenteffects (manager,storekeepersand watchmen) were lower than expected in the SAR, because the number of godownt co-r structed fell about 2,000 short of the target of 7,554. No attempt was made in the kCR to estimate indirect employment and income effects (third-order impact) ao a result of higher crop production. Financial
and Economic Evaluation
xx. In estimating the Financial Rate of Return (ERR) of a godown, the SAR took into account the entire businessof the PCSD includingthe forecastedexpansionas a result of the new godown. Conservatively, the FRR was computedfor a model in Haryana where costs were higher than in UP and Orissa. Based on this methodology the ERR for a society's investment in a godown was estimated at 16X in the SA. Using a similar methodology the PCR recalculated the FRR on the basis of a sample of 33 societies in Haryana, 142 in Uttar Pradesh and 21 in Orissa. On this basis, the FRR was 301 in Haryana, 21X in Uttar Pradesh and 18 in Orissa. xxi, For calculation of the Economic Rate of Return (ERR), the SAR took into account two primary benefits: (i) reductionin storagelosses, expected to be about 21 of the value of farm produce and fertilizer handled by the societies;(ii) savingsin transportcosts as a result of the availabilityof godownsin the vicinity of the farms, also estimated to be 21 of farm inputs and outputs. On this basis, and taking into account projectinvestmentcostsand incrementaloperatingcosts of godowns, the SAR estimatedthe ERR at 221. To re-compute the ERR, NCDC carried out some empirical studies to assess (i) reduction in storage losses with societies in Haryana and in Uttar Pradeah;and (ii)savings in transport costs as a result of godovns in two distri'ots in Orissa. Based on these studies, NCDC concluded that reduction in storage losses was close to the 21 assumed at appraisal and also tnat savings in transport costs were equal to 2% of the total value of fertilizer and agricultural produce handled by the PCS. Applying these coefficients and taking into account project investments and incremental operating costs. the updated ERRwas estimated at 182 in Haryana, 122 in Uttar Pradesh and 11X in Orissa. xxii. NCDCalso recalculated the number of farm families benefitting from the godowns at 5.7 M which is similar to the figure estimated at appraisal. InstitutionalPerformanceand Development xxxiii. The principalinstitutionalchanges introducedas a result project were the following:
of the
-8-
(a)
various departments in NCDC, and strengthening Restructuring and Methods Department and upgrading setting up the Organization NCDC's zonal offices;
(b) Using the three State CooperativeBanks as onlendingchannelsfor the first time, and allowingNCDC to emphasizeimprovementsin subproject preparaVion, appraisal and implementation, including engineering and supervision of godown construction; (c)
improved with consultants, entities Supporting participating accounting and management information systems and new operational manuals;
accrued to benefits "institutional" The PVC notes that significant xxiii. Very early in the of the project. NCDCand SCB through the implementation project period (February 1979) the NCDCBoard approved a major reorganization of its staff and zonal-offices, as envisaged in the SAR, which was subsequently implemented. NCDCalso used consultancy services judiciously staff training and setting up a managereorganization. in institutional ment information system. In 1981, NCDCcreated an Evaluation Cell to and in 1982 it established undertake project monitoring and evaluation, the Evaluationand StatisticsDivision. In additionto projectmonitoring, the Division undertook a variety of evaluation studies which provided a very useful feedback on overall operations of NCDCand externally aided Overall, therefore, the project projects in the cooperative sector. NCDCplayed an of NCDCwere met, regarding strengthening objectives and preparation, appraisals subproject role in expediting instrumental approvals of financing requirements. by the three SCBs produced somewhat mixed xxiv. Use of consultants delays in In starting the actual studies. there were initial results. Haryana did not by all the three States. appointment of consultants until the end of 1980 (i.e., more than formally appoint consultants on the part of There was also reluctance 18 months after effectiveness). with the staff to work bank counterpart to appoint three SCBs all the those for recommendations, consultants. With regard to the consultants' SCBs in Orissa and UP were judged to be satisfactoryand acceptable,but In June 1982, followingdiscussions this was not the case for Haryana. Finance (Agriculture the consultants mission, w Zh the IDA supervision Cc Roration of India) agreed to assign more specialists and to revise Because of these problems, the June 1982 supervitheir recommendations. from this component might anticipated sion mission reported that "benefits because of the lack to the extent envisaged at appraisal, not materialize banks and their of enthusiasm on the part of NCDCand the participating staff to work with the to assign counterpart and inability reluctance staff during the investigation." consultants'
-9.-
banks did derive benefits However, overall the three participating XXv. as a result of the project in spite- of problems encountered on the effective
Not only were the banks'
use of consultants.
strengthened,
but also the project
introduced
engineering
appraisal
staff
and lending
led to a greater emphasis by the banks on proper which eventually criteria expected teturns from credit-worthiness, of borrower-societies' appraisals Intervention than in the past. and generalcredit discipline investments
of NCDCin this process established
a fruitful
relationship
for onlending
However, recovery performance of SCBs for the sector. in the cooperative numbers loans to PCS declined with the increasing long term construction
of repayments falling
due.
Cmpared to the figures
in the PCR (pars 4.41)
for December 12, 1984, recoveriesin Orissa as of May 31, 1985 were 42 (RCWS). only from PCS, 302 from Regional Cooperative Marketing Societies (OSa4P) whereas they bad remained 1001 for the State Marketing Federation rate recovery (UTDCC), The average and the Tribal Development Corporation Comparative average recovery for total demand in Orissa stood at 391. rates as of that date were 991 for Haryana and 671 for Uttar Pradesh, the being a decline from the 97S figure given in the PCR for December latter recovery 1984. NCDCurged SGBs to take steps to improve or regain earlier missions in the NCDCfollow-up projects. performance. Future supervision will check on the resultsof these efforts. xxvi. The projecthas not yet had a significantimpact on improvementof financialmanagementof PCSs nor on their overallmanagementeffectiveness. Lack of trainedmanpower,particularlyqualifiedmanagers.was a key constraintin the cooperatives. Under the NCDC II and NCDC III projectsextensivetrainingprogramsfor PCS staff are being implemented, which also cover the three project States assistedunder NCDC I. IDA SupervisionEfforts was satisfactorythroughoutthe projectperiod. xxvii. IDA supervision Between projecteffectivenessand closing,IDA undertook11 supervision missions,averagingat six monti'intervals. There was fairly good continuityin supervisionstaffing. More importantly,1'--ever,the supervision missions focussedon key issues adequatelyand measureswere recomof godowns. mended to accelerateconstruction LessonsLearned xxviii. The projectexperienceshighlightthe critical importanceof arranorganizational proper attentionto institutionalaspects-staffing, of proceduresetc.-project implementation. gements,appropriateness Executiondelays and project shortfallsin terms of physicalachievements were reflectionsof weaknesseswhich were encounteredin these areas. Fortunately,timelycorrectiveaction allowed the project to still meet overall success. The projectexperiencesillustratethat trainingshould have been emphasizedmore from the outset. With proper attentiongiven to
-10-
training needs at all levels of the cooperative structure, including NCDC and the participating banks, management problems might bave been less serious during project implementation. xxix. Implementation results of this project and experiences to date under the follow-upNCDC II and III projects suggest that, in future project appraisals and P:udies of the cooperativesector. the overall regulatory and policy framework for the operations of cooperatives should be esamined closely to help ensure that cooperatives could operate profitably along commercial lines with minimal direct public sector intervention or control over decisionr-making. m.0 Finally. the project shows the importance of the monitoring and evaluation system in terms of improving the quality of investments and of the assistance provided by cooperative banks.
PROJECTCOMPLETION REPORT
INDIA
PROJECT NATIONALCOOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (Credit 871-IN)
March 30, 1985
NATIONALCOOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (EVALUATION DIVISION) Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Department of Agriculture & Cooperation, Area, Hauz Thas, 4, Siri Institutional NEW DELHI - 110016
ABBRBVIATIONS ARDC
-
Agricultural
CWC
-
Central
DCB
-
District
FCI
-
Food Corporationof India
GOI
-
Government of India
GOS
-
Government of State
HAEED
-
Haryana State CooperativeSupply and MarketingFederation
IDA
-
International DevelopmentAssociation
IDC
-
IndianDairy Corporation
IFFCO
-
IndianFarmers'Fertiliser
MDI
-
ManagementDevelopmentInstituteof India
Refinance
Warehousing Central
Credit
Corporation
Corporation
Cooperative
Bank
Cooperative
Limited
NABARD -
NationalBank for Agriculturaland Rural Development
NDDB
-
NationalDairy DevelopmentBoard
NCDC
-
NationalCooperativeDevelopmentCorporation
OSCMF
-
Orissa State CooperativeMarketingFederation
PCC
-
ProjectCoordinationCommittee
PCF
-
Uttar
PCS
-
Primary Cooperative
Pradesh
Cooperative
Marketing
Societies
Federation
(also known as Mini Bank, PACS
and LAMPS)
RBI
-
Reserve Bank of India
RCMS
-
Regional
RCS
-
Registrarof CooperativeSocieties
SAR
-
StaffAppraisalReport
SCB
-
State CooperativeBanks
SWC
-
StateWarehousingCorporation
TDCC
-
Tribal
PMS
-
Primary Marketing
Cooperative
Marketing
Development Cooperative Society
Societies
Corporation
WEIGHTSANDMEASURES Metric 1 kllogram (kg) 1 metric ton (ton) 1 quintal. 1 meter (m) 1 kilometer (km) 1 hectare (ha) 1 sauare kilometer 1 lakh . 10 lakhs 100 lakhs
Units
are used. 2.20 pounds = 1,f)OOkg = 0X98 long = 10C kg
(km2 )
1 1,09 yards = 0.62 miles = 2.47 acres u 0,386 square 100°000 = 1 'illion Icrore
miles
ton
PRlOJECTCOiPLETIONREeORT INDIA NATIONALCOUPEATIVE Dr,VWIOPI 2JT C(RPORATIGNPROJECT (CREDIT 071 - IN) TABLU OF CCU4iTS
Page Nog I
II. III,
e BAC.KGROUND
1
PROJECT F0ORLiULI'iUN
6
IMPLIWI;TATIuN
23
IV. IMVPACT A.LJ,;,iIENT
67
V. CUNCLUSIUNS l. Agricultural
Production,
07
Fertiliser
use and
StorageCapacityin ProjectStates. 2. AmoubtReleasedunwaor NUDC-I(IDA)Cooperative Storage Project and year-wise Expenditure by ProJect States. 3. FinancialIndicatorsof State Cooperative Banks, 4. Diversificationof Business Turnoverof Sampled Societies (EvaluationData). 5. Business Turnoverof Sam led Societies. (Project6tateel Studies) 6. Business Turnoverof all PACS in t.heProject S.pates 7. Income# Expenditure,Profit/Loss, Cash Flow and FinancialRate of Return of Sampled Societies in Project states., b0 Reductionin StorageLosses Haryana.
9. EconomicRtateof Return of Sampled Societiesin
Project States. 10 Percentagecapacityutilisationof Marketing godowns. 11, Business Turnoverof stateMarketing Federations, 120 Annual Profit/Lossof state MarketingFederations. 13. PercentageCapacityUtilisationof RCMS Godoins in Orissa.
14'o BusinessTurnoverof RoC.L.S.
15.Business Turnoverof Orissa State Tribal Development CooperativeCorporation,
INDIA (NCDC-I) PROJCT CORi-ORATION VEiOaUNT C0OP!AITIV&DL± NATIONAL 1 CREDIT 871-IN REPORT PROJECTCOK.PLETION lo9 BACsGFI,OUND
Introduction The NCDC-IWbrld Bank Cooperative Storage was appraised 1,01 in February#1979 and reached in lay-June, 1978X,became effective completion on 31st December,1984, The Project was formulated and designed to strengthen the institutional framework responsible for promoting and finrancing development of cooperatives, particularly viillage level multipurpose cooperative societies and help NCI)Cand State Cooperative Bdriks to introduce a more disciplined, approach to finncing xlnsic (storage) facilities project-oriented .for villaige cooperative. societieup regional ma;keting cooperatives and Jtate-level cooporative feder;itionse The successful formulation and implementation of NCDC-I 1.02 Project has spawned NCDC-II and NCDC-III Projects wihich include, cooperative storage component for uieeting the unsatisfied interalia, The lessonsand experience of storage demands of the States. NCDC-Ihave been of immensevalue in improving procedures, methods ancd 3ystems,
institutions
and implementation
of subsequent
projects. Genesisof the Project has been the main theme The development of agriculture 1.03 sector of India's Five Years Plan after independenceo Agricultural force, contributes working a' the total provides livelihood to 60%
product and accounts for 35% of the nearly 40% of the net national country's exports. In the models of development of agriculture, the Five Year Plans recoganisedthe cooperativesector as a balancingfactor betweenthe privwate and public sector.The advent of PlanninL[ with its moorings in democracyand socialism the thrust on growth with social jtustice and adoptionof socialistic pattern of sociotyhave added a new significance.and positiverole to cooperativesin supportingthe farmer, the worker, the artisan and the counsumere The democracticcharacterof the movement
combined with its federal struci;ure of the primary society in a village
in which an individual member could draw support from a
-2-
national level cooperativeorganisation,renders the movement an effectiveinstrumentfor decentralisedplanningand implementationof variouseconomicactivitiesby the people involved force in these activities. Cooperativesoffer a countervailing that develop in the propensities against the exploitative of the weaker economy, and thus protect and promote the interest GOI to of the policy deliberate the It has been sections. nucleus- in every foster and develop strong and viable cooperative to a Vast net-work of services -village of the country radiating the fna.-mers. 1.04 There are 2.88 lakhs cooperativesocietiesin the country A wide range of with a total membership of 115 millions. have been organised on cooperativebasis. economic activities for supoly of inputs and services These include rural credit, creation agro-based cottage and small industries, agriculture, of economic infrastructure and minor of agricultural
for processing, produce, forest
and marketing storage dairy animal husbandry,
construction labour, housing and public distribution and fisheries, diversification Recent years have witnessed successful system. manufacture. including- fertiliser of cooperatives of activities credit disbursed by the coopera1.05 The total agricultutal in 1960-61 to nearly from Rs.2140 millions tives increased produce The value of agriculzural in 1983-84. Rs.29000 millions millions Rs.24000 was over during 1983-84 marketed by cooperatives In the distribution of in 1960-61. as against Rs.1690 millions have crossed the mark of 3.3 million fertilisers, cooperative tonnes of NPK during 1983-84 accounting for nearly 44% of the The cooperatives in the country. of fertilisers distribution have a emerged as a major sector in the sugar industry In dairy of sugar. accounting for 55% of national production are playing a Flood', cooperatives programme of 'Operational significantrole. The IndianParmers FertiliserCooperative accountsfor 14% nitrogenousfertiliserproduction Ltd. (IPFPCO) and 29% of phosphaticfertiliserproductionin the country. Rationale Rural
Godowns
1l06 The dimension, depth and sweep of the cooperativesector in India should not lead us to the conclusionthat all is well and movement for a The cooperative front. quiet on the cooperative structure long time at the village level had a pre-dominantly and provide the agriculturists designed to relieve rural indebtedness
with cheap and timely finance. However, it only touched the fringe of the problems of agricultural credit and left other problems of production, marketing distribution, storage of agricultural commodoities mostly outside its ambit of operating. It was felt that the village cooperative society should ensure increased agricultural production, employment and income to the community in the village and bring about efficiency in management of the cooperatives, With this end In view the Government have re-org-anised the Primary Agriciltural Credit Societies to form into economically viable and managerially efficient units, capable of providing credit, supplies and services to the farmers. The programme envioaged for a society a minimum business of short term loans of Rs.2.00 lakhs, coverage of gross cropped area of 2,000 hectares, grouping of villages within a radius and construction of 10 kms and appointment of a full time Secretary of godown-cum-office for the villace society. 1.07 The rationale of rural and marketing godowns is der.Vative of the basic hypothesis that a cooperative entity operating at' in villacre, mandi, district and state level will be more efficient the performanceof its activitiesthan a cooperativeentity without a godown. The GOI emphasison institutionalisation of distribution of inputs and marketingof outruts for the benefitof rural storage programme. producers has given an impetus to cooperative The Cooperative storage is regarded as an essential adjunct to In inputs. cooperative marketing and a supply of agricultural satisfy all the needs and order that the Primary Credit Societies essential for services required by the farmers, it is absolutely nultifunctional rural godown each of the societies to have a captive societies should at its disposal. The model of development of village in societies be akin to the model of development of cooperative as a single contact Japan which have developed village cooperative needed by them, members for the services point by all the agricultural 1.08 The integration of credit, agricultural production and the developdistribution functions at the grass root level reauires ment of viable, autonomous, self-reliant and democratic cooperative enclaves responsive to the needs of the farmers, Th.is structural transformation of the village economy could not be broughtabout without giving village credit societies concrete physical identities. The village societiescould not be allowed to continue to exist in 'Registers'. Rural Storage godowns are thus importantentries in the
cooperative
matrix
of the
village
economy.
They serve
as an
--
instrument of democratic planning, medium for the regeneration of the country's socio-economic life, provide physical identities to thd village'society, serve as a vehicle for the realisationof hopes and aspirationsof the farmersand rpllylng.plateform for their economic strengthbesides creatingvidblemarketingchannels for The rural storage godowns are rightly regarded inputs and outputs.
as growth centres for the economic, social and cultural uplift the rural community.They are missing infrastructurals par excellence for the economic growth of the village economy.
of-
-4Mark-etin_ Godowns 1o09
The marketing
goclowvns1have the same importance
to the
godowns to as rural and Apex Eederations Societies Malketing is a pruduce agricultural of societies. The marketint, villiage by the farmers, required link in the network of services crucial The marketing lhas widened recently, The concept of term 'marketinrg' and sale of goods but to merely purclase does not tantamount the goods in bringing involved covers a large spectrum of services begins at the to the consumurz, Marketing from the producers as (i) collection farmers' fieldo It inicludes iall such activities of uurpluse3 from the inriividLuul Irmor's; (ii) transport to the
nearest assembling centre; (iii)grading and standardlsation; (iv) pooling; (v) proceo;siig; (vi) stock.ng; (vii) packing; (ix) bringing the to the cOnSuming centre; (viii) transport buyersand sellersto6etherand (x) sale to the ultimatecornsumer, output is discontinuous, The flow of agricultural 1.10 being concentrated during certain periods whereas the consumption of produceis continuous necessitating stockingafter agricultural the harvest and relea&wng in a regulated manner throughout the year. The problems of the marketing are also compounded due, lell to exiztence of a vast numberof smalland marginalfarmets sunk in indebtedness and at i.Lliterate, gener.lly ill-orgarnised, the mercyof a handfulof middlemenand traderswho are wellorganised horizontally and vertically.In this unequaleconomic conflict between the famers and the traders, cooperative marketing not only strengthens the position of the farmers viz-a-viz the of marketingand production traders but helps in the integration capaStrong and viable cooper;ative marketing so :icties operations# all the functionscovereCunder rho term ble of performing and operatingat the manditdistrictend State level 'marketing' powerto the bargaining counteracting can providesufficient farmers to compete w'th the tracLers,In the past,it lhasbeen experienced that lack of godowms has been one of the constraining the growth of cooperative marketing in factors in inhibiting the coutntry. Moreover, the marleting societies have been called 1.12 upon by the State Governments and the Central Government to perform of fertilisers, diverse functions like storc.ge and distribution whichhave to be stockedat vantage Improvedseedsand pesticides points near to the place of consumption so that famers are assured at the time they are needed, of obtaining adequatequantities increase has manifesteditselfin spectacular The greenrevolution resultingin heavyarrivalsin the of food-grains in production terminalmarkets,many of whichare not able to copewith the gluts, stockingat mandi,districtand Statelevel,necessitating role in the are playingsignificant The cooperatives 113 marketsupportoperations. procurement of foodgrains and undertaking At the apex lcvel, State Ilarketing Federations act as the agents of the nationalagencieslike F.C.I.NAFEDetc. for the procurement of like potatoand oni±ca,However,the foodgrains-and other commodities State Marketing Federations operate through the Primary Marketing
-5 -
societies which have assembling markets. and Primary Marketing order to fulfiltheir
been established-
in all the wholesale Federatiojs need marketing godowns in
Thus, the State
Societies obligations.
Marketing
Speci-fic E-conomicCriteria 1.14 The cooperative storage godowna confer ce:.taiin direct and indirect benefits to the society in general and the farmersin particular. In the language of benefit cost analysis, the benefits are in the shape of an increase in the aggregate consum'tion which emanates from the operation of the project over a period of time. The practice of treating consumption as the unit of account is largely a result of practical significance of aggregate consumption vis-a-vis other objectives. The consumption benefits flow from the increase in the reial income of the mmbers of the society. 1.15 Cooperative storage godowns are real,tangible and durable assets of the economy giving a long streamof benefits over the economic life of the.godowns. They add to the nation's wealth and capital. Beingr instruments of production (services), they yield returns to the farmers in many forms, some of which are discussed below:1.16 It is well known fact that substantial quantity of agricultural produce during! post-harvest period is being wasted in the country due to iack of proper and scientific storage facilitieso The quantity of losa of foodgrains in unscientific storage is est4imated at 6.5% which is reduced to 1% in proper storage. Moreover, unscientific storage results in. qualitative deterioration. of the produco. A study based on sample survey has revealed that in unscientific storage, 50%6of the samples were found to be unfit for human consumption even the remaining samples had suffered heavy lo&se3
in commercial
value.
On the
most conservative
estimates,
it has been estimated that on account of unscientific storage, qualitative losses could be put at around 10% in value and quantitative losses at 5.5%. 1.17 Another quantifiable benefit of storage godowns is savings in transport cost on accomt of bulk deliveries of inputs anid bulk collection of farm produce, These benefit&' would result from a switch from the use of bullock carts used for small loads to the motor transport that would be justified by larger volumes. Storage godowns bring economies of scale resulting in reduction in overhead costs, 1.8s In the absence of storage facilities near the villages, the small and marginal farmers are forced to resort to distress sales after the hamest thus depriving themeselves of securing remunerative prices for their produce.
4-6 Rural godownasat the village level and marketing godoans at the mandi and district level enable the farmers to store. their produce after the harvest and sell during the lean season at remunerative prices. This will lead to re-distribution of income from traders and middlemen to small and marginal farmers. Such re-distribution of income will subserve the goals of ecquity, In technical term, money is transferred from persons who have comparatively lower marginal utility of money to those who have high marginal utility of money resulting in addition to the overall benefits to the society. 1.19 The cooperative storage facilities also perform the job of buffer ste t' ing, i.e. of dempening the fluctuation in inter and intra-sexonal prices and ensuring better returns to thtprimary producers w' iloutadversely affecting the interests of the consumers, The marketing functions such as assembling, gradiny, pooling, processing, financing; insidriig, standardising, sale, transportation and exportt can be performed more efficiently with the stor.age facilities at the disposal of the societies and Pederations. the net effect of storage facilities would be an increase in the income of the farmers. 1,20 Thus, the economic rationale of cooperative storage godowns stems from the economies of ical,; `rdd%ction in quantitative and aualitative losses, savings in transport
cost, increase in real income of the farmers - all these will be instrumental in enabling the farmers to move to higher consumption frontier than that could be possible in the absence of the storage facilities. II
PROJECT FORMULATION
Origin
2.01 Prior to the Second Plan period, no planned efforts were made for creating storage capacity within the cooperative sector. However, mar}eting cooperatives and agricultural credit societies had, to a limited extent, undertaken construction of godowns mainly out of their own resources. In 1955-56, the storage capacity available wi,i the cooperative sector was about 66,000 tonnes. Recognising the fact that the availability of the proper storage capacity.. within the cooperative sector is crucial aid to the developmdnt of the marketing and distributing operations of cooperatives, cooperatives were assisted under the Sfcond and Third godowns at market centres and in the rural Plans to construct areas. In the Second Plan, assistance was provided for the construction of about 1700 godowns of marketing 3ocieties and 5000 rural godowns. In addition to these godowns, a fairly large number of godowns at market centres in the rural areas were built by cooperatives with theiz own resources or under other development schemes.' In the Third plan nearly 800 godowns of marketing societies and 6600 rural
godowns were assisted.
-7-
2.02 The National Coovercitive Devclopment ;:orporation (NCDC) which was established as a statutory organisation under the National Cooperative Develon.ment Corporation Act 1962 initiated a large number of schemes to step up the In 1964-65, the construction of godowns in the country. at the village level* Credit Societies Primary Agricultural Marketing Cooperatives at the Mandi level were provided financial an;:istitnc for the construction of godowns under the Central-Aided State Plan Schleme to meet 100% cost of the godowns. In 1965-66 ;and *3uriny 1968-69, construction' of grdowns under the Ccuttal Srponsored Scheme was taken up to augment the storage capacity of cooperatives for inputs and marketing of distribution of agricultural agricuitural produce.' In 1972-73, a new Central Sector Scheme was introduced for cooperative storage on the recomnendations of the Expert Committeeon storageconstituted by the PlanningCommission. This scheme was in operation during the years 1972-74. From 1974-75onwards, this Central Sector Scheme was extendedonly to the cooperatively under-developedStates to remove regionalimbalancesand to speed up construction of godowns in these States which hitherto, due to paucity of resources under the State Plan not keep pace with the developments in the Sector-could assistance under The pattern of financial other States. and 50% this scheme for backward States was also liberlised of the capital cost of the godowns was provided as loan and 50% as of godowns by cooperaFor assisting construction subsidy. tives in the cooperatively developed States, NCDCsponsored a scheme in 1974-75, funded from its own resources, under which 62.5% ok the-cost of the godowns was provided as loan outside State Plan Ceilings, wlhile State Government themselves met the balance 37.5% cost as subsidy from State Plan resources. This pattern was further modified by NCDCduring 1977-78 and since then NCDCstarted providing 60% cost of e-odowns .-s term to-ins to the State Governments who would provide balance 40% cost *is subsidy from State Plan Funds. 2.03 By the end of 1977-78, 28492 rural and 5950 marketing godown4 were completed under the NCDC's schemes. However, the gap betwean demand for and supply of godowns was too resources. big to be abridged by IUCDCthrough its own financial 2.04 Under the reorganisation and amalgamation programme of the Reserve Bank of Indlia (R.'3I) in collaboration with the were State Governments, the number of Primary societies reduced from 175000 in 1973 to 125000 in 1977. During 1978-79 their number declined further to 94952. Of these 88464 societies were active while the remaining societies
were dorment.
The active
societies
whose area of operation
covered 93% of the villages extended over 544887 villages were.However, only 25% of the societies in the country. having rural godowns at their disposal. Huge backlog of in the cost of storage godowns coupled with increase construction made it difficult for NCDCto undertale massive construction of rural godowns.
.
-8It was realised that keeping in view the growing 2,05 demand for storage godoums in the rural areas in the country NCDCwith its limited financial resources tied up with certain ongoing programmes would have to take recourse to the International Development Association (IDA,) Aid from Agencies like International of the World Bank, Zuropean Economic Community (EEC) etc. 2.06 An amendment to NCDCAct in 1974 enabled it to seek aid with the approval of the Central Government, international For larger investment, NCDCtook recourse from the year 1978-79 aid from agencies like IDA of the World Bank, to International European Economic Commuzi;ty(SEC) etc. to fulfil its programmes commitmients,
2,07 lending
Since NCDC had hitherto not been used by World Bank as onchannel, a Bank i.valuation Mission visited India on
October/November,1976
to review
its
organisation
policies,
procedures
The Mission concluded that N.-DCwould be a suitable and performance. on-lending charaiel subject to implementation of various recommendations concained in its Evaluation Report dated the April 8, 19779 NCDC accordingly engaged the service of the Management Development Institution of India (MIDI)to review its orgcnisation, management and procedures. NCDChas since made a number of adjustmentsin its organisation, management and proceduirese ErgeRaration and Appraisal NCDC startedwork on the formulationof World Bank Storage 2.08 Projectwith a series of discussionwith the State Governmentandofficials.ofHaryanasU.P. and Orissao The steps involvedfor the formulationof projectwere as follows: a. Designationof a number of qualifiedprofessionals
in NCDCwith the State level as formulation units; b,.Collection
counter-parts
to work
of data;
c. Discussionwith the State Agenciesregardingpreparation of sub-projects,supervisionand follow-upof projects; da Writing
2.09 Teams,
and updatingof ProjectReports.
The initial project formulation was done through 3 separate The following Project Reports were prepared by the Teams; 1) Project Report on Cooperative Storage in U,P. for World Bank ssistance, 2) Project Report.on Cooperative Storage in Haryana for World Bank Assistance. 3) Prooject Report on Cooperative Storage in Orissa for World Bank Assistancea,
-9-
2.10 At the instance of the World iank, NCDCteams collected additional data and prepared following reports on World Bank Project: i) Supplement to the Project Report, Additional Data on Cooperative Storage Programme, Uttar
Pradesh.
ii) Supplement to the Project Report, Additional Data on Cooperative Storage Programme, Haryana. iii) Supplement to the Project Report, Additional Data on Cooperative Storage Programme,Orissa. iv)
Supplement to the Project Report on Cooperative Storage Progranune, flaryana, Uttar Pradesh, Orissao Arrangement for Project Implementation and Monitoring.
2.11 The information.and data compiled by NCDCprovided a large number of parameters on economy of the 3 States, U.P., Haryana an4 Orissa with special reference to cooperative developments, storage availability with the public agencies like the Food Corporation of India (PCI), Central Warehousing Corporation (CWC), State Warehousing Corporation (SWC) and State Governments, business turnover of Apex Marketing Federations, requirements for marketing and rural godowns etc. 2.12 In December, 1977, NCDCforwarded a revised Project Report to the World Bank for providing storage.to the cooperatives in Haryana, U.P. and Orissa. Subsequently, some more information was called by the World Bank in April, 1978. 2.13 'rhe World Bank Mission appraised the Cooperative Storage Projects in Haryana, U.P. and Orissa frow 10th May to 2nd June, 1978. They visited a number of Cooperative institutions in each State and had detailed discussions with the Officers of the Central and Cooperative Banks, State Marketing Federations and Officers .of the Cooperative and Agriculture Departments. They had a final round of talks on 31st May, 1978 at New Delhi with the senior officers of the concerned States, NCDCand the Department of Economic Affairs, Government of India, The Mission had then worked out the requirements of Storage capacity under the project to 1.01 million tonnes costing about 500 million rupees including physical contingencies (like Consultancy services, Cars, Jeeps, Bicycles, Surveying instruments, etc.) and price escalations. However, after their return to Washington, the Mission re-worked and intimated that the revised project estimates would have an outlay of Rs.536 million. These, however, could not be taken as final estimates. The final project was to be negotiated in October-November, 1978 and expected to be approved by the Board of Directors of the World Bank sometime in January, 1979 becoming operational from 1st April, 1979.
10
The AppraisalMission during final discussionsuggested 2.14 to phase the constructionover a period of 5 years treating the period from 1st July 1978 to 31st March, 1979 as a pre-project years for the completionof the Project and period followedby the last 6 months for settlementof accounts. The World Bank Mission also intimatedthat they would be recoumending retro-activefinance for the pre-projectperiod from 1st July, 1978 to 31st March, 1979 to a limitedextent of onemillion dollars.
41
also indicatedthat the NCDC would receive The M4ission 2o15 a Summary on Project for VWorldBank around 10th of July. 1978. the World Bank issued a document Report 2i89 - IN Subsequently, titled 'IndiaNationalCooperativeDevelopmentCorporation Project,Staff AppraisalReport',December,1978o The Document embodiedthe final version of the Project in all its details. Descriptionof the Proiect Project Objectives 2o16
The physical
objective
of the Project
was to construct
godowns in 3 States - Haryana, Orissa and Uttar Pradesh. Howevers according to World Bank, were in the primary objectives, institution building. First, the aim was to make NCDCgrow into Second, a more effective and viable development institution, promote building a stronger construction of godowns was meant to Godowns construction in rural areas. cooperative infrastructure was selected because of the urgent need to provide activity storage in rural area for agricultural inputs and outputs and the need for supporting the development of the cooperative sector. Selection
of States
2.17 Only 3 States were included in the Project to keep the The geographical spread within a convenient1ly manageable scale, States selected for the Project also provide a representative picture of the varying levels of cooperative development in India. Haryana is higb.on the scale of cooperativedevelopment whereas Orissa is low on the scale, Uttar Pradesh is on an
intermediate
and also in a mixed stage of development - certain
parts of the State are very well developed are poor in development of cooperatives,*
whereas
other
parts
oMponents of ProAect 2.18 NCDCwas provided with funds to help the primary Cooperative Societies(PCS),MarketingSocieties & Cooperative *Federationsin the three project States and TDCC in Orissa facilitiesand improve constructadditionalstorage-cum-office existing infrastructure at village and rural market levelso The storage provided under this project was for the most from, ard part at the village level and of a type different
-
Li
-
comnlementary to, the facilities -rovi,red bv the Centr.-al larehousinc, C :rpor;ltion, (C;,C), State 'larehousing Cor-or-tion (S;C) and Yood Cor:;rti,n of InM3ia (PCI). 2.19 The World Bcnrk worked out the storage requirements of the Primary Societies at the vill.ge level on the basis of following d .ta: Stor "e recuiremen s tiunder ITCDC-I l-lorvana Uttar Pradesh Orissa 'I'ota1 Ilumber of Coo-er-ntive 2,409 12,994 3,358 18,761 Irim.-try Societies Juno, 1976 Number of societies 2,168 8,002 2,745 12,915 May, 1978 Target Number of viable 2,200 8,000 2,500 12,700 societies Number of societies owning 600 3,200 1,800 5,600 Godoiwns Number of Societies Godowns 1,500 4,600 1,040 7,140 to be constructed under the Project Number of Members in all Societies (Million) 0.8 7.0 2.2 10.0 Number of Members in Project Societies (million) 0.5 3.9 1.3 5.7 2.20 Storage capacity required at the rural level was directly related to farm inouts usage and agricultural production. In planning storage capacity in 3 States it was assumed that rate of growth of fertiliser demand during 1978 to 1983 w,ould ranc!e from 10 to 17% per annum and foodgr3ins output from 4 to 7% per annum in the Project States. The actual and nrojected data on agricultural production, fertiliser use -ind storace canacity in -roject States is cgiven in Annex 1, table - I. 2,21 Additionalstoragecapacitywas requirednot only to satisfy the existing unmet demand of about 0.170 million tonnes in Haryana and 0.5 million tonneseach in both U.P. and Orissa on the basis of 1976-77estimatesbut also to accommodatethe project demand increase, Total Investmentand PhsiaTorets 2.22 The Project envisageda tot-alinvestment of U.S. $63.9 million equivalentto Rs.549.9millionsand constructionof 7140 rural godownsby Primary cooperativesocieties(PCS) at a Cost of Rs.333.8 millions, the rehabiliationof 1100 godownsof Primary cooperativeSocieties in Orissa only at a cost of R5s8.2 million
-
12 -
and construction
of 280 go(lowns bv Primniry Cooperitive Marketing societies (Prs) in Orissa onl.y at the' cost of Rn.20.8 millionzs ;andconstruction of 134 qlodowna hy Lho !Jt:tte Marketing Federf,ti- na in thiorsol throo St:ttcoznd the Tribi.il Devolopment Coopera.tive Corporation in Orissa at a car)ital cost of Rs.79.7 millions. The WvIorldBank had also approved in addition to the above mentioned capital cost on the godowns, an amount of r,36.5 millions for technical assistance, vehicles and engineering instruments, Ps.22.3million for physical contingencies and Rs.78.6 millions for prices contingencies. 2.22
The State-wise State-wise
Beneficiary Haryana V'edror.jtion (HAEED) Primary
Coonerative Societie3s
details
are given below:-
Summ_ay of Projectcosts and Physical Targets Capacity : Tonnes Unit No. of Total Cost Cost capacity Godowns capacity (Ps. in (U.S. $ millirn) million) 1 -
50
-
5000
70
100
Sub Total
214000
57.8
6.7
1500
125000
68.5
7.9
1570
339000
126.3
14.6
Uttar Pradesh Federation(PCF) 1 - 2000 Primary CooperaI tive Societies 53 - 100
35
50000
14.5
4600
410000
220.0
15.6
Sub Total
4635
460000
234.5
27.3
2000
23
20000
5.0
0,6
1250 -
2500
6
10000
2.4
0.3
2t0 -
500
200
noooo
50 -
100
1.7
Orissa
Federation
250
-
(OSCMF)
Tribal
Dev-.
lopment Coop. Corporation (TDCC) -Regional Coooerativa Marketing
socinties Primary Societies
Sub Total
20.8
2.4
Coop. 1040
104000
45.3
5.3
1349
214000
73.5
8.6
-
13
-
Capacitr: Beneficiary
Unit
Capacity
Godown Rehabilitation Orissa: Technical Assistance vehicles, EngineerIng instruments Total base costs
50-100
Ilo. of Total Godomns capacity 1100
Tomnes
Cost
(Rs. in million)
80000
Cost
(U.S. $ Million)
8,2
0.9
6.5
0.8
449.0
52.2
22.3
2.6
78.6
9.1
549.9
63.9
Physical contingencies Price
contingencies Grand Total:
8654
1093000
2.23 The total cap;acityenvisaged under the project was 0.719 million tonnes for the rural codowns at the level of PCS; 80000 tonnes at the Mandi level by the PMS and 0.294 million tonnes
by the State
Marketing
Federations
and Orissa
TDCC.
2.24 This Programme of construction of 1.093 million tonnes of storage capacity with IDA credit was a part of the overall storage programme envisaged for the Sixth Plan during which
it was proposed to sanction an additional capacity of 4.5 million tonnes for rural godowns and 1 million tonnes for the godo-,ns of Primary Coo,oerative Marketing Societies and State Federations. On completion of this capacity as ;ilsothe capacity sanctioned upto 1977/-78 but still under construction, the cooneratives would have about 10.86 million. tonnes capacity of which 7.26 million tonnes would be in the rural areas and 3.6 million tonnes in marketing centres. Bu 2.25
IL
s and Specifications Since the societies
godowns denendingj
at village
upon busines :- turnover
level
required
rural
and divernification
of services, godowns of 50 tonnes and 100 tonnes were proposed for PCS. Many of the PCS goclowns were desiqned to have a Manager's residence attached. Because of windy conditions prevalent in certain areas, many godownq were proposed to be constructed with reinforced cement concrete roofing while others were to be constructed with wood trunses and asbestos sheets. Two-third of the PCS new godowns were to have attached Manager's residence and a similar proportion requ1ired reinforced concrete roof.
-14of four All buildings were based on standard-designs 2.26 capacities - 50 tonnes and 100 tonnes for use by PCS different Designs drawings and 250 and 2,000 tonnes for RaUISand Federations, with Godowns appraisal. during for all capacities were agreed tonnes 250 a of 500 tonnes capacity were to be double the length unit and 1000 tonnes capacity were to be half as long as the 2000 tonnes modelo Godonms of 3UuOand 5000 tonnes wrere similarly based on the 2000 tonnes model, having their lengths proportionately provided I'or PCS included storage space for Facilities increased. separated from -Dr.ce for farm producee space for fertiliser consumer goods storage und sales, society office, drinking water veranda, patio for meetings, and parkinig yard,. supplyt WCfacilities, Technical
Com.onent
The Project also made provision for technical assi:tance. 2.Z7 60 man-months service totalling in the form of local consultants to assist the new Organisations and MIethods (0OM) Departments set up in the NCDCand State Cooperative Banks (SCB) in the three project The Consultants were to help the 08&IDepartment in States. and in staff iLAprovements of these institutions organisational training,
improving
accounting
and management information
and
systems
of procedure manuals. To ensure mobility of the executiVe and technical staff 2,28 of NCDC State Cooperlative Bank (SCB) and of the participating provision was ma.de in the Project for vehicles cooperatives, suitable for field conditions - 33 motor cars for executives in
preparation
NODC's Zonal Offices
and engineers
in SCB Head Quarters
and
Divisional Offices, 150 motor scootersfor juniorengineersand Development Officers to be employed by SCB, and 8200 bicycles PCS were provided for the for the managers of the participants Provision was also made for supply of 110 sets of Project. engineering instruments for use by the engineerinG staff of SCB and IICDCe Godowns cost The project cost over a 5 years development period, 2.29 estimated at about RS.550 million (US $ 64 milliors) was based The average cost on mid - 1978 price for labour and materials. in Haryana and U.P. per tonne capacity
exclusive
of land cost
sized godowns were estimated as follows:for different a) 50 tonnes godovin without a Manager's residence and with an asbestos sheet roof b) lOO tonnes godowu wtith residence and two-. thirds having reinforced cement concrete slab roofs c) 250 tonnes godown without residence and with asbestos sheet.koof (Orissa) d) 2,000 tonnes godovm without residence and with corrugated steel sheet roof
P.480/-
.
ton
Rs,420/. ton Ps,270/- ton as*245/m ton
-
Pattern
of assistance
15
-
and lending
terms
2.30 As regards pattern of financial assistance it was decided that each society for construction of godown in Haryana and U.P. would be getting 60% of the capital cost as loan from the State Cooperative Bank and 35% of the cost as share capital from the State Govt. Balance 5% would be met by the society from its own funds. As regards Orissa State, the society in Tribal areas would be getting loang upto 50% of the godown cost from the State Cooperative Bank, 25% of the cost as share capital and 20% as subsidy from the State Government and the balance 5% would be met by the society from its own funds. In are-ls other than tribal areas in Orissa the loan assistance upto 50% of the godown cost would be available to the society from the State Cooperative Bank. The State Govt. in this case would provide 45% of the cost as share capital to the societies and the remaining 5% of the capital cost would be met by the societies from their own resources.
2.31 An IDA credit of US $ 30 mil! `ns representing SW. of the total project cost net of duty & J taxes was proposed to meet about 47% of the planned investment. The remaining 53% was to be met by the participating cooperatives, Governments of the project States and NCDCas indicated below: Project
Financing
Table Percentage of total Rs. ProiectCosts Millions
i) NCDCthrough SCB, as loan to Beneficiaries
47
256.5
US $ Millions 30,0
(Representing IDA Credit)
ii)
NCDCthrough
$CB, as loan
13
71,9
8.3
15
83.0
9.5
20
110.8
12.9
95
522.2
60.7
5
27.7
3e2
100
549.9
63e9
to Beneficiaries (NCDC own funds) iii) NCDC to State Govts, as
loan iv) State Govt. to beneficiaries
(From State Budget Funds) *
Beneficiary Cooperatives
16 LendingTerms.
2e32
The loans to the participatingsocietiesfor construction
of godowns were made available for a period of 15 years with a moratorium of 3 years. The instalments were to be recovered during the period of 12 years after the period of moratorium was over. The interest rate structure and margin to be retained by the financing institutions under NCDC-I project are given below:
Borrowin Government of India (IDA) Funds
NCDC State Cooperative Society
rate N-argin
Lending rate 6.75%
-
Banks
6.75% 7.25% 9.500)6
0.5C0) 2.256
7.25% 9,50)6
2.33 NCDChad agreed to offer a rebate of 0.25% of interest to the SCB for prompt payment, The SCB also in tur offered a rebate of 0.25% to the participating cooperatives for prompt repayment of loan instalments and interest, Orgnoisation _a
MAnageMe
2.34 The World Bank Project laid great emphasis on the reOrganisation and staffing of the participating agencies particularly the Apex Cooperative Banks which were advised to strengthen their staff for appraisal, supervision and monitoring the godowns sub-projects, organise a training programue and improve their management information and accounting systems and procedures. The godowns were owned and operated by various multipurpose cooperative societies (PCS), Marketing Societies (RCMS) and the State level CooperativeFederations(HAFED,PCF, OSCMF and TDCC). FinancialRate of Return 2.35 The Project had calculatedfinancialrate of return on investment on a model of rural godown (100 tonnes) in Haryana, In the calculations, the costs were estimatedto grow beyond year 5 at 7% ratep sawe rate as before years. The growth of benefits were estimated to drop from over 206 in the first 5 years to 10 percent in the.years 6-10 and to 76 in the years 11 to 20. Based on the margins obtained for the different activities of the PCS, financial rate of return for the society'sinvestmentwas estimated at 16%.
2,36
variables
A sensitivity
analysis
was performed to ascertain
were most crucial for success of investment
in rural godownso It was found that FRR was most sensitive to changes in interest margin on credit. Reduction of this margln from 2.5% to would reduce FRR to 12.e60,
which
-17financial In the case of the marketing Pederations, 2.37 cialculatit'ns were made for a 2,000 tonnes model godown. An, per tonne of godown capacity was average annual net benefit and calculated by taking into account last 3 years profits adjustments relating to making interest and depreciation godowns already being operated by the federations. The cost streams of newlgodowns were based on 1977-78 2,38 actual costs incurred for similar-godowns. Based on these, as'umptions,FRR was estimatedat 16.7%. PRR was not found sensitive to moderate changes in any cost or benefit item as was evident from the sensitivitytests. Cash Flow for The World Bank made cash flow calculations 2,39 State, The typicalPCS and Federation*s in each project to shoted that PCS would have difficulties c-.lculations during the the lonn takrn for godown construction service it.nrn i to 3 .,ftor tho complntion*s of the buildlngs. Although th. annual net cash flow would be negative also in the years 4 to 5, the cumulative surplus would allow repayment to commence in the fourth year. Payment of dividend on ecruity could be started 2.40 by the society of State-held from the year 5, and re-puichase redeemable eauity could be completed by the year 10. If the as separate business new godowns were considered Federation's part of the Federation, entities, and not as an integral in year 4 and the loan servicing by them could also start cumulative cash flow would be positive thereafter. Benefits
and Justifications
Economic Rate of Return 2,41 In the calculation of the economic rate of return in storage losses and the World Bank had taken reduction side of the storage transport cost savings on the benefit project. According to the World Bank, the project facilities would save about 2% of the farm produce and fertilisers would have been wasted. handled by the PCS which without project The transport cost saving would arise from the use of the truck bullock cart and would amount instead of individual transport PCS the For the typical to about Rs.4 per tonne/Ailometer. average
benefit
in savings
in transport
Rs.28 per tonne which was estimated produce handled.
would total
about
at 2% of the fertilisers
and
full account 2,42 In the economic analysis calculations, was made of the economic value of project investment and costs, In calculating these costs, a Standard operating Conversion Factor of 0.8% vas applied to all domestic expenses.
-
18
-
For unskilled labour, a shadow wage rate of 50% of market value was used to take into account the high levels of rural unemployment and under re-employment in the project States. Salaries of semi-skilled technical and administrative personnel were costed at market rates. The economic prices for traded goods were based on their border prices at the official exchange rate, and 20 years wtlsassumed to be the project life, 2,43 Based on forging assumptions, the economic rate of return was estimated at 22%. The cost and benefits streams were al followssCosts Project
Years Investment
Incremental Costs
1
2
3
4
80.6
93.4
101.9
107.8
56.5
-
9.1 15.5
22.7.
27.5
44.6
53.5
53.5
33,1
49.8
69.7
34.6
51.7
69.0
42.7
Operating
5
6
7-20
Benefits Reduction in Storage Losses
3.3 10.5 19.1
Transport Cost Savings Economic Rate of Return RLnpioynent
3.3 11.2 22%
20.3
7% (growth per annum) Is
Effects
2.44 The Project would have a substantial employment impact. Godown construction itself was estimated to provide about 46,000 man-years of employment during the 5 years project implementation period. Once construction was complete, 8000 PCS managers, 6,000 storekeepers and 8,000 watchmen were estimated to be needed by the participating cooperatives. Thropgh its indirect impact on farm production, the project would result in substantial additional farm employment. It was estimated that this could be as much as 34,000 man-years by project year 5. Institutional and Social Benefits 2.45 Institutional and social benefits of the project were estimated to be considerable. The project would strengthen the
links -sector,
project
between NCDCand other particularly
planning,
State
appraisal,
institutions Cooperative
in the cooperative Banks,
and financial
and'introduce
standards
soun'd
and procedures.
The strengthening of cooperatives at the village level would provide a focal point for expanded economic activities. 2.46 The project would also help promote regionally balanced development. The project would benefit about 5.7 million farm families. Over 65% belong to the categories of landless, marginal and small fanmers. Conseauently a large percentage of the project participants would be part of the 48% of India rural population that are considered by Government of India living below the poverty line.
-
Project
19
-
Monitoring
2.47 The Project Report suggested that each of the pa -ricipating cooperatives and the State Coonerative Banks as well as NCDCwould have arrangemenis for monitoring sub-project implementation and operation. Management at various levels of the resFactive institutions will maintain key records, summaries of which would be distributed internallto executives for information, feed-back and follow-up action. 2,48 generally
Yoxreach level include
of project
quarterly
org,tnisation,
progress
reports*
reporting Annual
would
Accounts
and Board reports, Audit reports, half yearly review reports, ropogt and adhoc reports an annual monitoring and evaluation developments. significant 2.49
All reports
wouild be avail-able
to IDA Review Mission
of in
additional to Annuaalwork programmes and budget, quarterly project progress reports and audited annual account and reports prepared by SCB and NCDC. NCDCquarterly progress reports would comprise
three
main sections,
the
first
part
outlining
over-all
progress and problems relating to Project implementation and lending activities. The second part would be the report on to SCB, NCDCZonal Offices and progress and problems relating in the Project States. The third part would relate to activities physical progress of the sub-projects which would be at varying stages of developments. The Project Report also specified the information content of tables prepared by NCDCand quarterly progress report. Evaluation for project evaluation would be 2.50 Over-all responsibility that of NCDC. It was agreed during aprraisal that project unit in NCDCwould be formed. The evaluation unit evaluation and would be headed by an Economist and supported by a statistician a cooperative specialist. The Evaluation Unit would follow up project implementation, identify problem areas and deviation6 from appraisal estimates, ,asses effectiveness of the participating cooperatives, their members and the fanming cbmmunity served by the cooperatives. Project evaluation would cover physical, technical, financial, managerial and econ6mic aspects of the project. Implementation
Procedures
procedures laid down by 2.51 According to the implementation the major implementing agency the World Bank, NCDCwas designated agencies. project activities of all the participating. coordinating of and monitor the activities NCDCwould assist, coordinate other participating agencies at all phases of project implementation and maintain active liaison with the Government of all the three StatXs and Government of India.
- 20 Primary responsibilities for proect promotion sub2.52 project identification was that of the RCS of each State* RCS staff PCS and RCMSto prepare sua,was to assist the participating NCDd's Zonal Office staffwas to provide additional projects. support in the promotion and sub-project identification work. SCB was designated
as NCDC's on lending
channel
and implementing
SCB's Project Development Officers were to agencies at State level. help the Managers of the cooperatives to prepare sub-project Report and loan application forms. A detailed sub-project Report format was suggested by the World Bank which embodied comprehensive information
on background,
agricultural
production$,
availability
of
storage facility, business turnover of the society, description of and management, business the project, project cost,reorganisation and financial
matters,
economic and social benefits
and projectrisks,
2.53 The sub-project Report would contain vital information to establish the need for the godowns of the size planned its financial viability and related social benefits.' The project Officers in NCDC's Zonal Offices were to provide guidance to RCS and ;J stufLf and the Cosrngittee Members and Mlanagers of the participating cooperatives in finding the most suited sites for godownlocations and on data collectior. for preparation of subproject reports. The Federations and TDCCwere to appraise their sub-project reports, 2.54 The sub-project reports were to be completed in quarduplicate original sent to SCBg one copy to RCS and second copy to NCDCZonal This would Offices and 3rd copy was retained by the cooperatives, independently enable all the three parties to review the sub-project and simultaneously
and to avoid delays.
2.55 RCS was to review sub-projects and loan app::ication in undertaken by cooperatives order to give GOSapproval for activities in the State and also to arrange for the provision of its share of finance for the investment. The NCDCZonal Office was to review the sub-project cooperative because NCDCwas required to refinance SCB loansto tha cooperatives. Detailed appraisal of every sub-project was the responsibility of SCB. Unless RCS or NCDCZonal Office staff intimated to SCB, within 5 working days, any reservations connected with the sub-project, the latter was entitled to assume GOSwas that the other two parties would honour their obligations. to provide 20)6 out of budget towards equity or grant in some cases in Orissa
and to borrow 15% from NCDCto be passed
as equity
cooperatives and NCDCwas to lend 15% to Govto of State SCB for loans given to ultimate borrowers.
to the
and 6C0 to
2,56 Appraisal of the sub-projects by SCB would include a thorough irioludi.g financial feasibility of technical and review These appraisals were to by the SCB staff, field investigation established in agreement between NODOand IDA, be based on criteria
-21for all go-.ot.fn of 1000 tonnes and for the first 5 godo%.nsof each of different ca;p.acities in every participating full appraisiAl and approval. £tate was subject to NCi)C's were to be reviewed anda)proved by NCDC Subsequent sub-projects a selected nuraber of subon the sample basis, IDA was to ruvieow Subjectto positive projects during tiia follow-up visitso appraisal by SCB, $CB was to eniter into a loan agreement!with SCB wias to submit to RCS and NCDC the borrowng cooperatives, periodical statements of such loan approvrals based on which GOl and NCDCwere to honour their financial ooriunitments, V,57 TN'-1w V'uiier;ttion aznd i)OC' VIeuo to lJuwleZlotlieir oiv Once they received nrocurement, and construction supcviL;ion, from SJCI the confir:.iation of lo&aneXpproval they would proceed to prepare detail building designsand tender documents for award of (PCS and The other cooperativis godown construc Lion contracts, IRCMS) were to depend on engineering, division of SCB for this It was laid uio.:n by the World Bank that detail teclmicJ.l su:port. would be based on stardard designs and tenders would specification contracts which would as far as be invited for construction practical be bulked based on geographical and time scatter. Sub-project
2,58 SCBwas made the kingpin for the construction phase of the Project. The loan Department of SCB was given special SCB was suggested to for project implementation, responsibility make arrangement to strengthen their staffing capacity to appraise, supervise and monitor godown constructions sub-projects. This depcprtlment would have an engineorin" division to take care of the technical a3pocts of the sub-projects, 2.59
The engineerings
division
in each
of the
SCB .. as to be
Executive Engineer based at the bank headheaded by a qualified quarters. An assistant engineer twas to be stationed at each of the DivisionalOfficesof the SCB-.About 100 junior Engineersand Officerswere to be employed. All these were to 46 Developz,xent spend most of their time in the field, assisting
the
managers of
cooperativescounsellingon completionof sub-projectsreports
and loan aoplica.tions certificAtion
in addition
to appraising,
monitoring
and
of constructionfor paymentse
NCDC's Policy.Circular 2.60
On January 15, 1979 NCDC issued a comprehensivepolicy
Production conmissioners/Secretaries, circular to the Agricultural Cooperation and Manmging Directors of the S ate Cooperative Banks, major features of . The circular incorptrated of the project States. World Bank (IDA) Cooperative godowAing project and operating procedures for the implementation of the project. a set of proforma for The NCDChad earlier circulated 2.61 the preparation of sub-projects at 'the lovelof PrimaryCredit and State Cooprative Primary Marketing Societies Societies, Federations. It was, however, found that the proformae for the
village societies, primary cooperative marketing societies were too cumber3ome to be followed by the personnelof the societies, NCDChad, thkefore,
prepared
simpler proformae which were shown
to the World Ban': at the time of negotiations
at Washington,
-
22 °
to States no change
Copies of the revised profonma were circulated As regards State Marketing Federations, 1978. proforma was made. sub-project to
by
be provided
to the
loans
with
term
U.P.
and
tion
in the share
25% in
of
extent
As far
suggested
as
the
release
mode of
by NCDC that
State
the
to
basis of
be
reimbursed to the
the State cost
project
participa-
for
Government
funds
as soon as sub-project
the to
Government
in Haryana*
from the
This assistance
of the societies
capital
NCDC would also be on reimbursement 2.63
the
15% of
help
to
Orissa
would
finance
by the NCDC. NCDCwould also
banks in full upto
Banks
Cooperative
State
the
to the societies
the loan assistance
to the circular,
According
2.62
in December, in the
State Governments. the societies, it was
was approved
and sanctioned
the by the society by the State Cooperative Bank and land was acquired bank may release 50% of the loan assistance in lumpsum in favour of the selected societies as ways and means advance so that the construction work was taken up. The balance 50% loan assistance would be released as soon as the godown construction reached plinth level. The State Govta, would also endeavour' to sanction and release its share capital assistance The entire loan to the society soon after the project was sanctioned. released to the society would, however, be capital assistance and share kept with the authority charged with the responsibility for construction Bank would immediately after the of godown. The State Cooperative release of the loan instalments make request to NCDC for the reimbursement the State Similarly, society, of assistance released to the selected to the NCDC for reimbursement of a would make a request Government to the society. The State Cooperportion of the Share capital released State Govt. informed periodically the and NCDC keep also ative Bank would
In the construction about the progress proforma designed for monitoring.
of the godowns in the prescribed
that It was also laid down in the policy circiilar 2.64 sanctioned podowns programme would be for loan assistance Cooperative
the
Bank.s against
Ba.nk would Cooperative in the amount involved assistance.
have project
State
also
to with
the Corporation's to the State The State
Government's guarantee. agreement into ehter getting for NCDC the
for the financial
total
at a time by Since godowvn project would involve small investment 2.65 and since the the State individual cooperatives spread throughout in time and dispersed for the godowns individually were small contracts on the basis of be awarded and space, contracts for civil works shall
local
competitive
biddings.
Copies of the invitation
to bid,
specifica-
be tions, evaluations, contracts and other relevant document shall submitted to the State Cooperative Bank for its retention and for periodical innp ction by the representative of the IDA. to thu.NCDC audited The State Cooperative Banks would furnish accounts and reports. with respect of each sub-project refinanced by NCDC 6 months of the end of each financial loan under the IDA Project within year by the State Cooperative Bank. The State Cooperative Banks would ilso ftirnish its nnnunl work programmes, Annual Projects and Quarterly Progress Reports in regard to sub-projects regularly for submission to IDA. 2.66
In the light of above observations and guidelines NCDC s1ggested 2.67 that necessary action for processing sub-projects proposal might be initiated and sapctton issued so that the construction for the first phase in the pre-Project period was completed within 3-4 months.
-23-
III
INPLI'I2ZTATION
3.01 The imnylemontation phase of Cooperative Storage Project (NCDC-I) has been divided into two parts, Part I deals with the uchievement of physical targets andl aisbursement schedules and Part II records achievement wJith regard to institution building of the participating agencies, Physical
Proe
ofe
ct
3.02 Import;.nt facts o- IDA Credit No.871-IN for NCDC-IProject in 3 L'rojuct 6t.toe are Lgiven below: 1. 2. 3. *4o 51, 6, 7, 8,
Date of Agreement Date of effectiveness Total cost of Project Amount of credit Project Completion date Credit closing date Conversion rate (assumed) Retro-c.ctive finance
9.
Disbursement schedule IDA BY 79 IDA FY 80
IDA PY 81 IDA FY 82 IDA EY 83
IDA FY 84
2.2.79
3,5,79
$63.90 Millions $30 Millions 31 o12083 31012.84 US $1.00 -Rs,8,60 $1.00 Million (after 1,7,78)
2.16 6*94
12*48 18446
24o90
30.00
(31.3,84)
3.03 The implementation of the physical schedule of the Projecthas been attempted ittith special emphasis on problem areas which hampered the progress of the project in the initial years. No attempt has been made to record historical sequence of events. Attention has been focused on certain key problem areas and prescriptive guidance for formulation of policies in the light of feed-back from the implementation of construction programme of the Project to ensure better progress in the future.
dm24.
3.04 separately
The physical progress of the Project for each of the ProJect Stateso
has been given below
UTTARPRADES 3.05 The following two tables give Project targets,, sanctioned and completed number of rural godowns and marketing godownsfrom 1978-79 to 1984-85. TABLEN021
Project
Target,
Project Target 8400 T6t aJ
Year
100
to, 360
460
200 200 100
720 720 360
920 920 460
~~~.
1978-79
197980 1980-81 1981-82 1982-83 1983-84
1984-85 Total:
and Completed Number of rural
Sanctioned
200 * 720 720 200
-
-
1000
3600
50
Sanctioned Godom 100 To1tal 50
torme
torme _o 68 1000 1068
920 920
4600
3400
168
168
3568
751 1136 664
808 1183 710'
3400
3568
200
200
-
de
220 447
217 432
57 47 46
g 200.
200
d
tonne P
3 15
-M-
_
Completed Godowns 100 Total.
-
1750 1750 550 450
100
godowns
TABLENea2
of PCF Godowna
ad C2mpleedumer ProjectTarpnt.Sanctioned Project Taggt
Year
NCapact
1978-79 197940 198081 1981-82 1982-83
3 7 7
5000 10000 10000. 10000
198344
.7 7 4
Total:
35
50000
10000
Sanctioned G~~odowns No,
Caoacl
6 12
17000 33000
-
5000
-
18
_
50000
Completed Godown No, Cho 22a -
5 11 2 dod _
18
14000 30000 6000
50000
3,06 The table - I reveals that 2he Project envisaged construction of 4600 rural godowna, 3600 of 100 tormes capacity each in the plain areas and 1000 rural godowns of 50 tonnes capacity in the hilly areas. At the end of the Project period, the implementing Authority, U..P had constructed 3568 rural godowns, 3400 rural godowns of 100 tonnes each and 168 rural godowns of 50 tomnes capacity each.
-
25
-
A mid-term review of the Project revealed that due to 3.07 the target it wjould not be ;rossible to attain cost escal&tion, the target Theirefore, capacity. tonnes of 410000 of 4600 qodo;ns and capacity tonnes 50 of was reduced to 3500 aodo ns ( 168 The actual of 0.3416 million tonnes. 3332 of 100 tonnes capacity) of 0.3484 million tonnes w:s sli-.htly sanction of 3568 v0idovns higher than the revised targ2t. Achievement of rural godowns against Project Target 3.08 in U.P. was 1608% in c.ase of rural r:odo.wns of 50 tonnes e:Ich and 94.4%4in cese of rural godowns of 100 tonnes eoichand of godowns had The progresn of construction 77.6% in total. two yeara and with the placement been slow Auring the inltial of building st-aff .,nd availability of Adeqaate tec;nical the proc'ress pickod up rarpidly from 1981-82 to 1983-84 meterials and also 1984-85. by PCF. As Marketing godownswere constructed 3,09 PLCVwas able to complete all the reveals, data in table-II marketing godowns much ahead of the schedules given under the Though the number of godoi*mswas reduced from 35 Project. remained unaltered. to 18, the cap-city HARYANA Table Nos,III and IV below give Project target, 3 10 and completed number of rural and marketing godowns sanctioned in Haryanas TABLFEIU0.111
Projeet TajrSt
and Completed Rural Godowns Completed godownas
Total
Sanctioned godotwns 100 tonnes
100 200 200
IS0 300 300
240 210 300
19 132
100
200
300
-
148
100 50
200 100
300 150
125 70
197 310
50 tonne
Project *raraet 100 tonne
1978-79 1979-80 1980-81
50 100 100
1981-82
1982-83 1983-84
Year
1984-85 (upto
anctioned ,
-
-
-
-
-
55
500
1000
1500
945
861*
31.12.84) Totals-
up to plinth level 38 godowzs are up to roof level.
* 46 godowns are
and
- 26
-
TABLENO. IV
_
tTarqets,
Sanction.d
_arke ti_ng God.:n s
-nd Con: eted
Capacity Iroject Taraet
Year
: '000'
tonnes
Completed
sanctioned Godowns
Godowns
No.
__a_pqty
No,
Ca.,-i*city
No,
Cs_citv
1978-79 1979-80 1980-81
10 15 15
30 45 45
13 18 39
40 66 108
12 5 12
38 15 44
1981-82 1982-83 1983-84 1984-85
13 12 5 -
40 37 17 -
-
-
14 5 3 6
44 14 9 21
70
214
214
57
185
-
(upto 31.12.84)
Total:-
70
The World Dank Sunervii.cnn IFlission whidc reviewed the 3.11 progress of p,roject in Wrirch, 1979 suggested that some of the business having substantial Crediit Soci-ties Primary Cooperative in:)uts and consumer aQods may require ind other agricultural turnover storaqe
accommodation
of
100 tonInes
each.
In the
light
of
observation of the World 3.ink, the Government of Haryana shelved the construction of godo,.ns of 50 totnes each and it was decided all the godowns of 100 tonnes each. to construct A Mlid-term ReviXw of thloProject revealed that in the liaht 3.12 to achieve Project it would not be nossible of cost escalation target of 1500 godowns of 0.125 million tonnes canacity. The target was reduced to 945 godotmns of 0.0945 million tonne. At the end of December, 1984, SCD in Ilaryana was able to comnlete 861 rural godowns wi'.h 84 godow.ns at various scage of construction. The revised target of 945 godowns twouldi be completed. Project target 3.13 In case of marketing godomns, the Original after the of 70 godowns of 214000 tonnes capacity was retained the State Govt. decided However, subseralently, mid-term review. of 0.029 with a total capacity to dron 13 godo,.ns at 9 locations According to million tonnes which had been approved by NCDCalso. other agencies such as Haryana the State Govt. at many locations, Pood Central IJarehousing Corporation, Warehousing Corporation, godowns as per reauirement Supplies Department etc. have constructed Therefore, the godowns reauirement was anticipated. and no further target was fixed at 57 godotms of 0.185 million tonnes effectivand completed. all of which were sanctioned capacity, ORISSA 3.14 In Orissa, it was envis-ged to construct - rural and rehabilitation types of beneficiary marketing godowns for Oris;.- Statc Cooperative
godowns for four godowns for the PACS, Mar]eting Federation
-
(TDCC)e
Corporation
Tribal Development Cooperative
(RCMS) and
Societies
Marketing
Cooperative
(OSCMF), Regional
27 -
sanctioned The following two tables give Project target, 3.15 rural godowna: and completed number of new and rehabilitated TABLE N0Oll
Project
1978-79 1979-80 198081 1981-82 198283
19834 1984-85 Upto
10 16 10
95 159 155
10
120
14 20
Total
100
105 175 165
215 260
201 240
-
-do
80
970
Completed
Sanctioned
Targ,et
50
Feb.,
gLodown (new) Orissa
Project
Year
and Completed
Targe , Sanctioned
number of rural
130
50
100
To-
o
tonne
t
_
-
-
78 249
29 64
12 66 _a
50
100
-
25 235 _
37 301
587
758
-
8 8
2 49
41 62
189 140
167
543
107 313
27 21
Total
t
tonne
80 83
10 57
107 104
230 202
85
Total:
1050
171
710
TABLEJN02 Project
Target,
Sanctioned
and Completed
LodgMns-rislA nmaberof rehabilitation Year 1978-79 1979-80
ProJect Target 100 200
198081
200
1981-82 1982-83 1983-84
300 200 100
1984-85
-a
Total:
1100
Sanctioned
Com No,
let t_ Capacit3F
-
-
-
-
-
11
-
-
44 115
3550 8160
41
3450
200
15160
189 _
200
3.16 A mid-termreview of the Project revealed that in view of the to attain target of 1050 it would not be possible cost escalationt
Therefore, the target was godowns of 0.101 million tonnes capacity. revised to 758 godowns consisting of 171 godowns of 50 tonnes, 587
-28 godowna of 100 tonnes each. By the ejhd of February, 1985. 543 godowa of 100 tomes each and 167 godowns of 50 While sanctioning ruwal tonnes each have been completed. godownst the OSCBhas sanctioned a large mmber of 50 tonnes godotna than proposed in the Project. The revision has been done on the basis of actual needs and financial viability.. 3.17 The rehabilitation programue was a special component incorporated in NCDC-I Project in (Jrissa only,. The rehabilitation component was in fact the weakest link in the 1roject. A as it 200 godowns was found realistic target of rehabilitating to identify and prepare a large number of was found difficult By the end of February, 1985 sub-projects. rehabilitation all the 200 Zodowns have been rehabilitated, &aket In Godg= 3e18 The following three tables record the progress in the completion of marketing godowna allotted to OSCMFW RCQSand TDCC:-
ProJect
and Completed*
Target 9 Sanctioned
Number!of OSC?IFRodown in 9issaL.. Project Tar it
Year
1978-79 1979-80 1980-81 1981-82
1982-83 1983-84
1984-85 Total:
San¢lon*d
_
2 4 5 5 4
2000 4000 4000 4000 4000
5 7 4
3
2000
-
-
5000 7000 5000 3000
3
-
-
-
23
20000
19
20000
Target,
-
1000 3000 8000 2000
5 1
5000
19
20000
1000
and Completed
Sanctioned
NmbDerof RCM.S ZoLowA
-
1 3 8 1
-
-
Project
Completed
-Wmis
.~' Year 1978-79
0ted
25
6000
1979-80 1980-81 1981-82
50 55 65
13500 15000 17500
19 26 16
1982-83
65
19000
137
i 98 -84 Tfi
20
9000
-
-
-
4750 7500 4750 37250 -
-
3 3 5 3
-
750 750 1250 10250
32250
-29w TABLE NO.3 ProJectTargettSanctionedand Completed Numbbeof TDCC of god2vn Or0s-Jj
Year
Pr-oject Target No Cp4J aDaciy
Sanctioned No. CaDaCit
1978-7S
1
2500
-
-
-
1979-80 1980-81
2 2
3750 2500
2 3
5000 2000
1
2500 de
1981-82 1982-83
1
1250
5 _
3000
-
4
_ 4500
5
7000
-
-
_
1983-84
-
.
Total:
6
10000
.
ComDleted No.
_
10
10000
3.19 The ProJect fixed a target of 23 marketinggodownasor OSCIF with the capacityof 20,000 tonnes. However,for effective marketing the number of marketing godowna were reduced to 19 without change in ProJect targetted capacity. 3020 In case of RCI4Sgodowns, the mid-term review revealed that due to cost escalation, the original target could not be achieved. The target was scaled down to 198 RCMS godowns with 52,000tonnescapacity.However,the actualsanction was slightlyhigherat 54250tonnes. By the end of February,1985, 192 godownshave been completed and the remaining6 godowns are under construotion and above plinth level. The actual achievement against Project target would be 67,8% in terms of number and 70.71% in terms of capacity. 3.21 In case of TDCCthe Project target of 6 godowns of 10,000 tonnes capacity was revised to 10 godownsa, capacity remaining the same. By the end of 1983-84* 5 godowns have been completed of the capacity of 7,000 tonnes. 4 godowns accounting for 2500 . tonnes capacity are in the final stage of Construction. One remaining godown is above plinth level. The Project target of TDCCgodowns would be achieved in terms of capacity.
~~~~~30a
*
3.21 The implementing authorities of Cooperative Storage Project in Haryana,U.P. arndOrissafaced certain problems during the course of implementation of construction phase of project. Most of these problemiare commonto all the 3 States, Some of the major problems
discussed
and the
In the following
steps
taken
paragraphs.
to resolve
them are
AdvancePlanni" 3.22 Once the Project has been approved,selectedand programmedto be commissioned by a particulardate as in case of the WorldBank Cooperative StorageProject,the focus of attention shiftsto its implementation which involvesthe completionof numerous project components by fully mobilisingin advance physical and financial resources, men, materials, machines, money and time, streamlining systems, procedures for preparationo implementation, and appraisal of sub-projects under a well-knit functional organisation especially created to achieve specified purpose.
3.23 For the proper planning, scheduling and control of activities of the project, given their inter-relationship and constraints on the availability of resources, advance planning is a sine quo non for the successful implementation of the Project. 3,24 In case of Cooperative Storage Project, advance planning consisted of (i) preparation of a list of societies to whom rural godowa are to be allotted (ii) selection of locations for godowna (iii) preparation, appraisal and scrutiny of sub-projects (v) adequate staffJ.ng, v() procurement of materials viz. bricks,
wood, cement and steel etc (vi) arrangements for monitoring control nnd feed-back Handing over the godown to the societies/federations viii) planning for their optimum utilisation.
vii5
3.25
Advance planning helps the project
3.26 reveals
The survey of the construction phase of the Project that the project States started slowly in
authorities
to work
out a time-bound schedule of the.implementation of the project in a phased manner covering all essential components of the project.
terms staff,
of preparation of sub-projects, recruitment of procurement of building materials, adequate provisions
in the State budgets. However, the construction of godowns pickedup momentumand the completionof the physicalcomponent of t1heProjectwas almostcoincidental with the targetschedulee
-
31
-
Cost Es5calation One of the major cotn:3traints in the im4lementation 3.27 escalatLon lhas been continuous Stor-.ge Project of the Cooperative Lgesof brick3s, in the prices of input:; like coe.iont, .teel, etc, which resulted in steep increase in the cost of labourers States. godowasin the project of rur.-l and marketing construction Con-equentlyProject'sestimute of cost of constructionof irodowns which were based on thebasis of May,1978 prices had to be revised table records many times, By wiayof 111ustratlon,the folloow.ing durin- the project the prices of various construction;.iterials Hlowever, increacein the )rices of cement, period in U.P. in other 2 Project steel and bricks are uiore or less a lic;ble States. Prices
Si. No.
of Construc%ion
_
Jan ~
7j
1, Cement Per Mt.(Rs.) 600 (includingcartage) 2, Tar Steel Per MIt. (Rs.) 3900 3, Bricks per 1000 245 Bricks (Its.)
4, Skilled
as on
Prices
Name of the Mla erial
-
llaWLrials
Jan. 198 600
Jan,
191
600
Jan, 1282
an, an. 83 1984 1100
1160
4850
5550
400 to 450
450 to 500
450 to 500
18 20 15,
30 30 25
30 30 25
30 30 25
10
15
15
15
800 1000
4050 4750 4750 4850 260
260
18 20 15
18 20 15
9
9
an, 1985
320
labour
'Per (a) Wlason )nit (b)Carpenter t'per (c)Black SmithIday
15 16 12
labour 5. Unskilled per unit per day(Rs.)6.5
The above table reveals that from Janua-y,1979to January, 3.28 1985 the cost of cement increasedby 93%, Stee1 42.3% bricks 83.7%,, skilled labour 100A,and unskiledl labour 130.8,% 3.29 Some broad idea of the effect of increase in the cost of in the base cost miiaterials could be gauged from increase building of 6odowns, of construction
. 32_
3,30
The following
two t;b'W1Ls,g,ive idtea of th11eincreaze of rurol godo-.nsMin Utt;Sr Pr,-ionh,, TABLE NO. 1
in the base cout of con:struction
Increase in Bade cost of 3368 godoVnsc100 N.T. capacity -P nti b.y t..te tovt,WCDC in UttarPradesh, S. Year of
No. of
No,sanction 6'a7ocieties
Base cost of construction Ns Anri:L, 1918
(Sept. 1979)
(Au,.ustq 1960)
eW7:O0/-F-5115m/m
(Febo, 1982)
(Nov., 1983
1. 1978-79
1000
206
169
35
590
-
2, 1979-80
1750 450
-
139 24
1251 426
-
-
360 -
-
-
206
529
3. 1980-81
4, 1981-82 Total:
-
3200
200
198
2267
200
TAM, NO.2 Cost of constrniction of rural Goionms of 50 tonnes of each in hill Areas in U.b,. Year of S..nction
No. of Soit4eo
SNO(X)7-
Base cost of construction
7
1978-79 1979-80
68 100
-
15
25
Total:
168
25
0:.3 rt/X 94;57ffi.
3
W
-
22 22
31 52
1
15
44
83
1
3e31 It would bc _cn frouL the above tables that the base cost of a 10O tonnes rural godouzn wfith RCCroofinS and residence for the Manuger increw;:ec from 4, 58,0U0/- to is.1,l5,000/1Out of 3368 rural godoums constructed in U.P., 22o7 rurail godo;.na vwere ,anctioned at the base cost of Ri;.98,000/- por [;odown. Only 206 ruru1 godowns xere sanctioned at the original base cost of Rs.58 000/-. In hilly areas, out of 168 rural godowns sanctioned and constructecl, 83 rural godo.sn were sanctioned at the base cost of fl;.84,500/. and 25 rural godo=ms at the original base coutof Xts.24,000/-. 3.32 In Orissa also the cost of 100 tonunes Godow'nwith RCC roofing and reSidence of -dhe .Jecvtary increase from h,58,000/in April, 1973 to Rs.72,,000/- in February, ls8O and further tU Rs.819000/in Augusto 19l, Ls.98,000/- in June 1982 and further to Rs, 1,06,000/-in November, 1983 TRare has been corretspondifng increaLses in the cost of construction
-
33 -
of godowns of other specialisationrevealed in the following tablesIncrease in Cost of Constructionof Godowna in OrissaL (Rs.in thousand) Date of
Type of the godown t.78102e80
50 50 50
.50 100
100 100
T(ACR) WR T(RCC) WR T(ACR) R T(RCC) R T(RCC) llR TD(KC) 14 T(ACR) R
J
r- val
--
17,8.81 25 25 38
28 32 44
46 58 53
5s 72 68
32 52 61
81 77
216.8213 42 44 64 68 78 98 95
44,5 48.0 68.0 73.5 84.0 106e0 100.5
79.0 57 75 52 41 100 T(ACR) WR Note:- ACR - Asbestos Concrete Roof, RCC - Reinforced Concrete CGmont. ti - Without iosidenco, R - With Residence.
of 100 tonnes 3.33 In H1aryanaalso the original b-asecost of Rs.58,000/residence the Manager's RCC roofing and godown with capacity rural increasedto Rs.75,000/in October, 1979, Rs.82,000/in May, 1981, in September, 1982. PRs,88,000/in December, 1981 and Rs.96,000/3,34 The World Bank Review Mission which visited India many times during the currency of the Project took note of the escalationin States and made of the godoins in project the cost of construction in this respect. many useful suggestions 3,35 'the worli Isank Review Mission which visited India in May, 1982 was due to general the view thtt the cost of esc.lation expressed and also due to delays' materials, in the construction price increase delay in anpraisal of suh-project at b4ink's in callinn of tenders, cost by implementing in agreeing to increased level and time-leg th.t in order to avbid reThe World B.ink suqgested Authorities. sensitivity due to cost escalation, of the sub-project appraisal miqht analysis of the unit uto which it could absorb cost esc'lation delays. to avoid the time of the appraisal be worked out by the BanK at in January/February, 1983 suggest3d that The Review.Mission 3.36 order to keep further cost escalation at the minimum, increased efforts were required to speed up nroject implementation; progress staffing problems had monitoring needed to be imoroved furthers to be resolved quickly: levy cement and imported cement needed to and the time-leg between qu.intities in increased be made available and construction. si.irting which was excessive loan sanctioning had to be reduced.
in
should analvsis The World Bank had suggested that sensitivity .3.37 be applied in order to work out economic viability of the rural However, the World Bank did godowns as a zesult of cost escalation, not relax the stipulation that SCB would have to seek fresh approval in the cost from NCDCand State Government for agreeing to increass escalation In the construction of rural godowns even If the subon the project was found viable after increase in the cost escalation caused in the delay In many cases, analysis. basis of sensitivity
-34-
seeking aporoval of tho State Govts. to the construction of godowns resulted in further of construction requiring fresh approval of Such delay in seeking approval defeated the and also caused slippage in the progress of
revised cost of revisior. in the cost NCDC and State Govts. purpose of revision construction.
3.38 It is gen^erally not enough to use sensitvity analysis which deals with the study of impact changes in costs and. returns on the profitability of the project, Sensitivity analysis become more useful only if it is backed by changes in procedures and systems so as to speed up the decision making process. In case of this Projec.t the Implementing Authority should have been authorisod to take decision without seeking fresh approval from NCDCand St;ite Government* if after the sensitivity analysis, the project w;s found viable, In these cases the Implementtnq Authority should have only intimated to NCDCand State Government about it, decision and should have called tenders on the basis of enhanced costs and negotiate terms and conditions and take n.icessary actions for construction of godowns. 3.39 The Implementing Authority could keep ready the viability of the project on the basis of a large number of changes in crucial variable affecting the cost of godowns. In any case, the modes operandi of the implementation of the project should have been such as to hasten the decision making process. Some sort of trigger mechanism could have been decided on the basis of sensitivity analysis. $ensitivity analysis coupled with trigger mechanism for decision making would have but down the cost escalation by minimising the time-leg between increase in cost of construction and decision to go ahead with the implementation. Short SxUwlX of Construction
taterials
3.40 Considerable difficulties were experienced during the earlier years in the procurement of building materials like bricks, cement and steel, Neither the project authorities nor the contractors were able to procure bricks even at high prices due to shortage of railway wagons and hike in the prices of diesel. Due to shortage of Railway wagons the brick kilns could not get adequate and timely supply of coal. In this .regard NCDCadvised the State Governemts to start brick kilns in the cooperative sector with a view to easing the tight situation. The supply position of bricks improved, but prices continued to be high. 3.41 The non-availability of cement at approved rates ha4 been a serious impediment to the construction programne. The NCDC advised the SCBS to take suitable steps to arrange special quotas of cement from the State Governments- for the purpose. NCDC itself took up the matter with the Government of India and Cement Controller of India for making special allocation of cement for construction of godowns in the Project States.
35m
In many cases, the State Governmentswere not able to provide cement required for construction of godowns within the State quota as the State. for schemes cncrully gave priority Governments relating to irrigation projects. Even in case where cement allocationswere made, adequate quantitiescould not be procured on account of closureof cement factoriesdue to power-cut,strike etc., in some cases. there was a severe 3.42 Durin,gthe period, constraint on the availability of bars and tor steel
required for the construotionof godowns, The Project ImplementingAuthoritiescould not get adequate and timely supply of steel at controlled rates, As such constructionschedule got hampered,
3,43
The NCDCtook up the matter with the
concerned authorities repeatedly. As a result, the project States were able to receive special quota of for construction of godowns. The construction and covered the initial godowns gathered momentum slippages.
Award of Tenders 3.44 The response of reputed contractorsto tenders floated by SC3s had not been encouraging mainly due to scattered and interior locations of the godownso This was further compounded by the steep rise in prices and non-availability of building cement and steel as a result materials like bricks, discontinued the conistrucof which some contractors tion works and contractors were not forthcoming to take up the works for the godowns at places where large irrigation works of Government and industrial developmentworks was going on as they found tenderingfor irrigationworks etc. more profitable than that for rural godowns. The poor response to tenders for rural godowns was of the contractors brought to the notice of he World Bank Review Missione Apart from poor response of contractors to tenders, there had been some practical difficultiesin method ofawardingtenders. The Second World Bank Mission in its report 3.45
-36-
dated 25th August.1980 quoted incidence of w:arding of tendiers to the Cooperativo Labour and Construction Societies by Haryana State Cooper tive I3ank in Haryana without following
3t;.,c tion:; noted wure under
competit.wlv
biiiuing
Qroci.dure.s,
In some cases,
the
Cooporativoe Baks in 1I;ryuna awaided tenders by negotia. flowever, it was %;ithiut followin; tonwcr procodures. that 'the cost of those godolons nllotted by negotiatlon , however, in rtii-e of the lo-aest price contlracts awarded the tendler procedures.
3.46 The ;Jorld Banl; iReview Iiission was of the viJw th.^t t'is sy;;t;:m of allotment by neLotiation mi:)it lead t coamplaints contractors 2nd mi.;ht also be considered from the potential in violation of section 2.03 of the Development Credit Agreement, The Mlission also took note of the Govt. of U.P. proposal of PCS godo%=s to the 3tate assigning construction of zsome5:)CX 'Rural Engineering
Departmente
3,47 In a meeting; with World Bfaik Review Mission on diff3culties experienced in implementaltion of Legal Convenants menitioned representative of Project on 17ol2,80, the INCDC that the Agreement provided that Civil Wlorks of rural goCo-.o.ns constructions would be awarded on the basis of local bidding in accordance with the procedure acceptable to the Association, In thliS context the W'.orldBank Supervision Mission had suggested two tenders being floated for each rural godown, had to incur which were time consuming, and the societies additional expenditure. 3,48. In consultation with the W.lorldBank, it was decided that wdhereas the response was not encouraging, even of tenders, then the PCS could resort to after the refloating "Amanill construction of god_.;ns themselves under technical superv:;ion of the Enginoerin" Staff of the State Cooperative Bmk. However, there was no need for refloating tenders especially in the int4erior and romote n.reas wherethe contractors were unwillingr to tender., The impl-r!zientin-7 autlhorities could be allowed to go alead with the construction of godowns after the first competitive. tendes. 3.49 Due to poor response of the contractors to undertake the construction work of riural godowns, the project States systomz in completion of &odow.ns, For followed different instance, U.P. State Coolxrative Bank adopted 3 systems for completion of godovns namely construction on Contract basis, construction by the societies under technical supervision of the SCB and lastly Labour Contract with Departmental supply of 2164 rural godonms were completed construction materials, under contract basis, 428 by the societies under the technical supervision of the S(B and 776 godowns under the third system.
-37It was experienced by SCB in U.P, that the godowra 3.50 which were completed on labour contract under direct supervision of Junior Engineers were completed in lesser time with better quality of work while those oompletAd under contract system took more time with tolerable quality of worko The godowns which were completed. by PACSthemselves were of good quality but took more timeto complete. were given to the In Haryana 296 ruralgodowna 3.51 However, the progress was not PACSfor construction. of With effect from 1.7,83 the construction satisfactory, residual rural godowns were entrusted to theConstruction Cell of the HARCOBANKe, nsufficien
v.ailabiliV
of Tehia
ta
of The SCBs were entrusted with the responsibility 3.52 construction of rural godowns in all the 3 project States after
they were sanctioned
by the NCDC. In order to carry
out the works efficientlyt the Engineering Cells with adequate man-power specified in Project Report was to be NCDCadvised the States created in each project States. Cooperative Banks to recruit and position the professional engineering staff envisaged in the Projeot Report for the The Protect State encountered implementation of the project. suitable in the initial years in fining many difficulties technical staff for construction of rural godowns. During the review of the staffing pattern in 1980, it was found that the field level staff particularly at the level of Junior Engineers was most inadequate in the project States. It was not possible for the technical project staff
conduct field . to undertake day to day supervision, and visit every godownunder construction.
studies
The recoruitment, training and deployment of staff 3.53 duringthe project period has been dealt at length under the building, section institution Limitations
of&Poject A2prgach
In the formulation appraisal, implomentation and 3,54 supervision of thisProject, the World Bankfollowed Project Approach to the letter even for small rural godowas of 50 The tonnes located in the interior of the ProJect States. major components of the Project Report are as follows:i) Treatment of construction of each godownas a separate sub-project. ii) Preparation of loan application and sub-pxoject report for each godown. iii) Appraisal of each sub-project by SCBs on the basis of Technical Criteria, finanxcial management criteria, and viability criteria. iv) Periodical physical supervision by SCBconcerned, NCDCand IDA.
-38w
-In some cases strict application of Project Approach delayed the sainctioning of the odownsand upset the construction schedule. In 8rissal, the progress of rural godowas was staggered as the State Government initiated a system of locational studies after the approval of subprojects by the Banks. 3.56 The Project approach has definite as it enables the implementing authorities a particular
system in formulation,
advantages to follow
preparation,
appraisal, implementation etc. of the project. Nevertheless, it may be usefulto have a fresh look on documentation required for thesanction of the godownse 3,57 A suggestion was mooted during discussion with the World Bank Appraisal Mission for NCDC-In, that only 10 percent of the societies to be selected at random basis at diatrict level should fill in a detailed loan application form and the rext of the societies will only fill in a shorter version of the loan application, It will help in quick disposal of the applications and availability of more reliable information, 3.58 In case of godowns of higher denomination, project approach covering technical, financial, managementand financial criteria would be necessary,
-
39
-
Disbursement 3.59 The project cost of NCVC-I over a period of 5 years for the constructionof 8654 rural and marketing godowns, technicalassistance for 0 & M Studies, purchase of ,engineering equipment and vehicles, physical and price contingencieswas estimated at ls.549.9million and was to be financed as under:
Agency
Uttar Pradesh and Haryana 47
1. NCDC through SCB as loan to Beneficiaries (World Bank Fund) 2.
(Percentage) Orissa 47
NCVU through SCB as loan to Beneficiaries (NCDLi''s own funds)
13
3
3. NCDC to State Govt. as loan (2 4. State Govts. to Beneficiaries
15
25
20
20
5 100
5 100
5.
Beneficiary Cooperatives Tl'otal:
~
(1
State Govts. will pass Cooperativesas equity
this to the beneficiary contribution.
(2
State Govts. will pass this to the beneficiary Cooperativesas equity except in tribal areas of Orissa where this 20 percent wc4i'd be given as a grant.
3,60 The IDA credit of $30 million was to meet 47h of the cost of the Project. The remaining53 percent was to be met by NC*DC(28percent), State Govts. (20 percent) and participating cooperatives(5 percent). In other words, NCDC was on-lending agency for 75 percent of the tost of the project - 47 percent contributionby the WiorldBank and 28 percent NCDC's own funds. 3.61 The claim filed with IDA through Controllerof Aid accounts as well as the claims in pipeline upto the end of December,-1984 wouid account for $29.7 million of the total IDA credit of $30.0 milli6n. The IDA credit closing date was 31st December, 1984 and the WVorldBank Review Mission which visited India in November/ December, 1984 has agreed to honour withdrawal applications received upto the end of 30.6.85.
-40-
3.62 NCDC from 1978-79 to 11th Feb., 1985 has released Rs.439.28millions to the three beneficiaryStates under various items of expenditure,the details of which are given in table-I in Annex-II. A Summary table iS given below:.Amount Released under NCDC-I ttpto11th Feb.. 1985. State
Release to SCB
Uttar Pradesh 207.28 Haryana -83.58 Orissa 51.82 Total: 342.68
(Rs.in millions) Total
State Govt.
_
50.67 20.45 25.48 96.60
257.95 104.03 77.30 439.28
3.63 Thus by the end of 11th Feb., 1985, NCDC has released Rs.439.28millions which could roughly be taken as'75 percent of the likely expenditureincurred by the beneficiary States by that date. 3.64 NCDC had, however, sanctioned project cost of the order of Rs.586.9653 millions before the end of Ju'ne,1983 except for R.23 millions which was sanctionedin June, 1984 in respect of 200 godowns in U.?. The sanction of the fresh programmein June, 1984 was due to a accretion of additional IDA credit in terms of Rs.on'afcount of fluctuationin fs.valueof dollar. 3.65 Disbursementof financial assistanceunder the Cooperative Storage Project (NCDC-I) has gone ahead, by and large, according to the schedule except in the case of technicalcomponent of the Project. 3.66 An outlay of Rs.6.5million was provided for technical assistance. Against this Rs.4.1695million was sanctionedupto June, 1983. The actual expenditurewas of the order of Rs.3.8450 millions which is 59 percent of the estimated cost under this head. 3.67 The main reasons for low utilisation of assistance provided under technical componentwas less expenditure on 0 & M studies as compared to appraisalestimates, and nil expenditureon purchase of motor-cyclesand paddled bicycles. Exienditureby State Govts. 3.68 The total expenditure on rural and markoting godownsincured by the 3 Project States has been collectedand given in table 2
'.41 of Annex-II. Total expenditure underCooperative
Storae ProJect by Benefiiar Sttea (IRs.inMillions) E2Menditr
State2 Haryana (UptoDec., 1984) Uttar Pradesh (UptoJune, 1984) Orissa (UptoFeb., 1985)
99.53 278.88 51.27 Total:
Payment which have been made after mentioned are not included.
InstituLtion 3,69
429,68 the dates
MD16dnas
The physicalobjectives of the project,
according
to World Bank, is to construct godowna in three States of
Haryana, OrisSa and UttarPradesh, However,the primary obJectives are in institution building. First, the aim is to mnko NCDCgrow into a more effective and viable development institution,' The Plroject would strengthen NCDCas a development finance institution for the cooperative sector not only for rural storage but also for other agricultural processing, industrial and marketing type activities. By becoming a stronger and more professionally oriented organisation, NCDC's autonomy would be increased and its dependence on government contribution wouldbe reduced. 3,70 Apart from strengthening NCDC, the Project is meant to promote a stronger cooperative infrastructure in.rural areas. The Project would also assist other participating institutions to strengthen their capacities and procedures. *The Project would greatly assist in institution building at lower levels which is in accordance with Government of India policy to create growth centres at the level of Panchayato
Conce2t of Institution
42 Building
Bank has elaborated on the objectives of The WYorld 3.71 institution building but have not precisely defined institution building. 'The intention perhaps is to strengthe1 horizontally and vertically the entire cooperative structure in the Institution building may be identified beneficiary States. with the building of organisational frame-work within which
the objectives, plansand policiesare formulated; systems, are rationalised rulesand regulations methods,procedures, and streamlined; men, money,matarialssmachinesand methods men are motivatedand are assembledfor theiraccomplishment; their coordinated; resources are and human directed;physical monitoredand evaluatedand performance are supervised, in.line with the objectives. controlled of Institution Building Objectives and Key Indicators and Key 3e72 The ProjectReporthas tabulatedmajorobjectives buildingof NCDC and Stat in respectof institution indicators buildingof NCDC and SCBs Cooperative Banks. The institution
has been dealt separately
in the following paragraphs.
InstiLtution Building of NCDC World Bank' a K.eyIndicatorA 3.73 The major objectives of institution building of NCDCare to develop it Into a more effective development financial for the cooperative movementand as a new channel institution for Bank Group Funds. The key indicators of Institution building of NCDC,according to the Project Report are as follows:0-
-
restructuring alongwith lines of MDI organisational Study and recommendations of IDA, implementation of improved accounting and management information systems. preparation of procedure manuals. purchase and use of about 110 sets of engineering and measuring equipmente purchase and use of thevehicles. disbursement by IDA and utilisation by NCDC(through Government of India) of US $30 Million IDA credit for storage lending.
The World Bank has assigned the key role to NCDCin the 3.74 implementation and performance of World Bank Cooperative Storage
agency Project. NCDC, as the primeimplementing 9 assist, of other participating and monitor the activities coordinate and maintain agencies at all phasesof projectimplementation of all the threeStatesand activeliaisonwith the Governments of India, Government
43
The major stepstakenby NCDC to developitself'intoan 3s75 and and to assist,coordinate institution effectiveon-lending agenciesat all phases of otherparticipating monitorthe activities are: of projectimplementation and and staffin,the Fertiliser/Inputs a) restructuring Storage Divisions at headquarter giving greater. godown construcemphasis to investment appraisal, tion anid monitoring; its RegionalOfficesinto and upg!rading b) reorganising Zonal Offices whichwouldfunctionas NCDC'sbranches with adequate delegation of powers to the Zonal Managers; c) appointment of Project Officers at the Zonal Offices specially assigned to help the implementation of this project; (O&M)departd) formation of an Organisation and Mlethods meat at headquarters; Division; e) setting up Evaluation and Statistics of a computer; f) setting up MIS Division with the facilities g) opening of new officesin Madras, Simla, Ahmedabad in and supervision. orderto providemore effectivesuppokrt building Some importantaspectsof institution 3.76 describedin detailsbelow:-
of NCDC are
Division nd Statistics Esvylug1tion of the ProjectReport, with the recommendation In accordance 3.77 Division in 1982 an Evaluation and Statistics NCDC has established headedby an Economistand supportedby one DeputyDirector, three with the following AssistantDirectorsand 6 Assistants(Statistics) major functions:in makingperiodicassessment i) To assistthe Corporation undertaken of the schemes/projects of the performance by NCDC in differentStates, on all completed evaluations ii) To carryout performance Aid e.g.,WorldBank, projectsfinancedby international EEC. policies and iii) To conduct Evaluation Studies on operational to on subjectsthe ManagingDirectordetermines rulc with a view to identify areas for wnrruntexamination of policiesand procedures in thieformulation improvement and their applications. iv) To conductspecialstudiesdesignedto evaluatethe total by NCDC on the undertaken impactof the schemes/projects farmingcommunities* data on statistical v) To collect,maintainand dissemlnate to of the NCDC and provideinformation the activities forms. appropriate in MIS D'vision
44
-
vi) To assist the Appraisal Team in its work, vii) To bring out annual publications giving statistical information in suitable tables graphs etc. regarding activities of the NCDC. viii) To highlight the porformance of WCDCand strengthen cooperative cause through contribution of Articles and Papers in newspapers and cooperative journals. Salient Achievements of the Evauaton
and Statisticg
Division
3.77 Within a short period, the 43valuation and Statistics Division lhas finalised systlem, procodures, methods and design of a large number of Evaluation Studies relating to rural and marketing godowns financed under the godown component of the World Bank Cooperative Storage Project and other important studies assigned by the Board of Management from time to time, 3.78 This Division has completed the following Evaluation Studies in respect of World Bank Cooperative Storage Project: Name of the Study Beneficiary Date of
Ste
comDletion
lo Report of the Evaluation Study of World Bank Cooperative Storage Project.
Haryana
November, 1983
2, Report of the Evaluation Study of W.forldBank
Uttar
November, 1983
3. Report of the Evaluation Study of World Bank Cooperative :Jtoragq Project.
Orissa
March, 1984
4. Evaluation Study on the impact of rural godowns on the farming community
Orissa
Under final stage of completion.
Cooperative Project.
3e79
Pradesh
Storage
In addition to above studies, this Division has couple.; ed a large number of evaluatlon studies relating to other spheres of the activities of the NCDCsuch as fruit and vegetable cooperative processing societies 9 availability of oilseeds in selected districts of Orissa, availability of rapeseed in Nehsana and Banaskantha districts of Gujarat, Adoption of villages scheme etc.
3.80 The Division is also engaged in appraisal of the various projects which are posed to NCDCfor financing by the Cooperative institutionsin vurious states. This Divisionis also called upon to give advice on many matters on policies eag. district planning,traininggermane to the working of NCDC. 3.81 The World Bank Review Mission which visited India during October/November, 1983 has assessed the achievementof Evaluation Divisionin the followingwords; "Given the present staffingarrangementthe small evaluationteam has done a remarkableJob"* Re-organisationof Staff 3.82 In order to enable the Corporationto become channelising agency for tho ID)A aid/crodit, the World Bank suggested strengthening and re-organisation of the structure of the NCDC along with improvementin staffingand introductionof an acceptableaccountingand managementinformationsystems. The issue of reorganisationof the set-up of the Corporation was considered in depth by the Sub-Committee appointed by the Board of Management, NCDC. The NCDCimplemented the recommendations.of the Sub-Committee. The staffing pattern as on
24,2.1979 reflect
the effect
of Sub-Committee recommendationse
With increase in work load of NCDCas a resalt of NCDC-XI 4.E.C.Projects,NCDC-III,the staff strengthof Officersf level increasedconsiderablywith more induotionof technical expertise,field staff and trainingcomponent,the details of which are given below:Sanctionedposts of officersin the NCDC Prior to reorganisation as on ManagingDirector GeneralManager Financial Adviser ChiefDirectors Chief Directors (Topic) Management Consultant Director/ Regional Directors Consultant/Technologist/ Specialist Trainer (R,1500-2000/-) Trainer (Is.1100-1600/-) Deputy Directors Deputy Directors (TOPIC) 3yatom AnAly0t 1
1
After Present reorganisa- Positionas tion as on on 30.12.84 1 1 1 4
1 1 -
1 1 1
4 -
1
1
1
5
17
18
12
20
30 2 3 28
-
13 d-
am 18
-46. fter reor,'ni:ation -s 'n 24.2.79
Prior to reorqanisaticn as on 23.2,79 'Senior Programmor .. : t.Dir./Vi+lt ... Officers As tt.Dir('lOi lC) Project Officers Asris3t.ant rl1itor Commrnrcial Artint
1
49
-
8
1
1
2 8 1 1
1
1
1
1
1
53
102
147
-
Officer
itindi
-
27
....... 17
Libr.,r1 i;.n
Prasent position 30.12.84
I
as on
Training
the NCDChis been role, As a part of its promotional 3.83 the managerial in improving and up-grading t;iking ictive interest functionaries of the various Professional comnretence and skills in the societies markoting and procescing of the coonerai-ive country. 3.84
In this
itself
with
direction,
the
National
(NCCT) in evolving various citegories has been providing cost of organising through its n-twork
the Coz,oration
has been associating
Council for CooDerative Training
suitab)le tzaining of such personnel, assistance financial useful functional of 16 Conpervtive
programmes for the and for this purpose, tothe WCCTtowards programmes training Training Colleqes,
since 1974-75, Unto the year 1983-84, a total assistance of Pr.0.552 million was provided to the NCCT towards cost of such of Ps.28,200/- was also provided An assistance nrogrammes.
t- NCCT fcirnw-ard of c.1.wh prftns
to the meritorious
trainees.
the cost of specialised The NCDCh.is also been subsizising 3.85 progiammes conducted attending for staff of Cooperativos training in the country, by reputod management develornment institutes at Ahmedabad, Mana;ement(IIM) like the Indian Institute-of Staff College of India, the Administrative B1angnlore and Calcutta, New Delhi, Hyd, rabad, the Management Develo ment Institute, Pune, Management of Coop. Institute Natinnal the Vaikunth Mtshta addition, In etc. Delhi New of India, the FertiliserAssociation the NCDC has also been financingsome special programmes in the sphere of its activitiesin coll& oration with the above mentioned managementinstitutes. training has also b,eensnonsorinqspc:tqific 'The Cor,oration 3.86 like acencies with international progrnmm-s in collaborntion and Technic,ues of Coop. Management), a subsidiary M4ATCCM(M4aterial
,f Il,O foi t1h-'hrntfit
-oir
1111t12,
thtl
14-n;gement btsed
of Con-- rtivo
the ptroon-tl.Duiring
'roqrn,mrm on Transport A specialised at VWINICiI,Pune, on MiXi'CONmateri-.l tNtUCxntoroiml
.o
progi, immefor the m.lnagers of Cooi,eratiLve cold storaiqes, covnreol unde:r the Wiorld 13ankProjo t, wis org-nisod in with tlh. Xnstitutc of Coo!er.Itive M-n-!gament, collaboratinn Reserach &.Train ing, Lucknow.
-47-
Project
Topic
3.87 In the meeting held on June, 4, 1981 the Board of Management, NCDC, had approved the establishment of Project TOPIC (Training of Personnel in Cooperatives) for a neriod of 5 years i.e. from 1981-86, The main objectives of project TOPIC are to identify traintng needs, design training r)rogrammles, train the trainers, produce trnininq materitil and ev;Alu.;te the training programmes for ner-sonnal workine in primary, secondary and apex level agricultural cooperatives in tlie ten States covcre.dA nd'.-r NCDC-I & II and EE1CRural Stor.tqo Project. 3.88 The establishment cost of this Project was to he shared equally between the NCDCand the imnlementing agancies i.e. the implementing banks and the marketing feder-vtions in the participating ten States.covered under NCDC-I/EEC and NCDC-II Project (Storage). 'As contribution were being received from several agencies. The TOPIC was given a separa.te identity although, it hns not spocific leonl statuo. The funding of tralining programmes were shared amongst NCDC#the implementing banks, marketing federations, state Govts. and the training institutes. 3.89 The programiues were conducted in the existing cooperative Training Collecges and Coooer;itive Training Centres who had training pro'jrammes of their own. As such the proglress of Project TOPIC has not been very satisfactory. 3.90 Under the NCDC-III ;13 the World Bank and the NCDC will be meeting the entire cost of the training programme and moreover as the Projcect TOPIC weas establi,hed only for the period 1981-860 it has been decided to merge he Project TOPIC with NCDC. This has been approved by the Board of Management in $ts 31st Meeting held on 12.9.1984. Henceforth, the training programmies under the NCDC-II will also be looked after by the Triiniag Wing of the NCDC. 3.91 As a part of the World Bank assisted NCDCStorage Project-IIX,' the NCDCpropose to supoort establisl'ment of 6 new Cooperative Training Institutions in the project States of Uttar Pradesh, Orissa (NCDC-I beneficiary States), Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Bihar and Karnatakca. Mobile Training Centres for the Junior personnal are also proposed to be introduced. A Cooperative Trainer's Training-cum-Material production Centres may also bo setup for the production of training materials. 60 coonerative Training Centres are proposod to be strengthened under the' Project, The schemes are being imolemented in financial collaboration with IDA.
-483.93
The progress and 4achieveinentsof Project TOPIC as on 1S.8.84 .are is under:TtPIC (under 1Ueview of Achievement of Project F3CfA-I .,II World flHt,k ":l.eme -;tor.ic';oCoMpgnqnt S.1lo. States
-
1, 2.
_
11aryana Orissa 3. U.P. 4. A.P. 5, Bihar 6. Ii.P. 7 .iaharashtra 0. Punjab
Nlo.of Managers of P.ACS trdlned upto _;15.8.1984 11il 51 333 904 1284 297 241 3110
No. of Managers of PM1.5 traiind upto
15.8.84
No. of Coon. Trg. Colleges/ enga.ged Centres trg. in imparting of Managers
No. of trainers in faculty of coop. trg. Colleges training undergone at the NCDC's
2gnised. urse
_ora_
NoA,
116 -
N.A. 1 N.A. 6 1 3 5 1
208
17
135
Nil * *
11
81
in column Included N.A. Not available.
Ntlr.s *
36 42 40
1 6 10 -
3
to information available as on October* 1984, According 3.94 on operitional managewtentfor Managers of PACS and 57 courses for trainers'-training programmes has been PAMS and 11 courses Training conducted for Project TOPIC at the various Cooperative Colleges under the NCCT. The World Bank's observations in their Aide Memoire of 3,95 April-May, 1984 Review Mission (para 3.5) hed suggested that NCDC should examine the possibility of utilising the sum to the to impart training savings of the NCDC-II Project TOPIC and also backlog of per%onnel covered under Project A detailed Manpower the on-going nrogrammes. for organising Progr.-mme under NCDC-II has been and Training Development lines a.sthn t.inr.nowr Dnvolopmnnt Tr.aining dr-iwn on simtl.r Pregrasm_ whichtw:a posed to telueorldl Bank as a part of the N4CLC-11l Project. The plan has been aoproved by the Board of Mana1iomentin the 31st Meeting held on 12.9.1984. This plan with an outldiyof Rs.95.28millions h-s been worked out and 9553 IC' category stiff for Lhe train-ng of 7252 'D3 c.ategory staff. D MANAGEMENT INFO _IATION I_PROVW
SYSTEM?
its need to have a systematic flow of information Recognising 3.96 at different levels for sotunddecision making, NCDC created a Manacement Information Systems Division with objectives to design system (MIS). manatgement information and operate an integrated The M.I.S. Division a.sists in monitoring the various 3.97 activities of the NCDC with the aiA of an in-house comouter. The ori'ie objectives of the r)iv1sion is to mqintain
-49-
-a data b -se on thie v,rioun roj"-ct_ k_^istadhy the Cor, or.ation .nd ev.;lu:te the prog-es3 ,ndperfotr.;ance of the Iproject assisted by the Cornor)ti--n. 'rlhc inF!rn; ,tirn system is ,irned it enh.,ncingJ *. systematic flow of inform.rtioul for -nalysis of nrojlots in o er.ition 4ntl under dCe!vlo - nt to 'i!lpin sotundl 5. CF P.CS HARYA.A Particulars No. of Societies by ^3s Total
in lakhs)
1978-79
1979-I 0
1980-81
1981.-82
2062
2075
2038
2089
9437.86
8901.11
2482.84
2026.94
2781.33
3907.99
3613.72
68.25
329.37
624.61
312.95
308.23
1-93Ti91983--8-4
--
financed
Zrelit
Distributi±n of fertilisar Distributi_n of consumer articles
Zou-rc
: Recistr-r
12404.07
of Coo-erR.Sive
6ocieties,
14888*85
2122
2180
17705.2>
18371.01
Htnry-alna.
4146.44 300,53
T1ABL 2
BUSINES:
U.-IUVEROF PACS VtLAR PRADE:SH 1975-79
No. of Total
PAS Cr-_it
Distribution 'No. of PAS Value
of Fertiliser
Distribution No, of ;AZ:S
of
consumer
Pesticides
Distribution Value
of
Seeds
Procurement of Foodgrains wheat price spport policy Quantity (lakh,tonne) Value
1981-82
1982=83
1983-44
8611
8616
8607
8602
8602
179.74
217.88
188e93
221.28
239.71
357.98
4720 125.S0
6296 120e92
7157 107.35
7570 139.91
NeA. 137.58
NeAo 203.49
3256
4878
7157
7570
7594
7600
104.06
195.60
goods 5.42
of
1980-81
s in Pse crores
8654
Value
Distribution
9-0
Value
14.84
69.27
72.64
-
0.03
0,002
0.004
0.007
-
0.71
0.37
0.28
0.55
0e54
NeA.
Negl.
-
_
-
485
_
_
_
Source
.
Registrar
of Cooperative
77,15
Societies,
U.P.
80.2 121.98
-105ANNE§ V 8UjINES,TURNOVER OF-PACS OJUS2Q
1979-80
(Rs. inr lakhs) 1280-81
1981-82
1282-83
No. of PACS
2793
2793
2793
2795
Total
6270
6719
6965
10514
2Zi51
2569
2544
1252
1170
1613
Credit
Distribution -ferti liser
of
No, of PfkA
.1837
Value
806
Distribution goods
of consumer
No. of PACS
1660
1795
2218
Value
1128
1297
1229
2011
20
32
30
27
298
206
938
333
Distribution
2505
of seeds
ValUe Marketing produce
.
of Agricultural
Source
s
Registrar
of
Cooperativs
Societies,
Orissa.
-106-
c
TABLE !ncomeand Expenditure,
Profit/Loss
tte societks pamoleA in
In9=1-B80 1%808net Io. o° Societies
S
16
rm'
of
Z000'
1981_8,2 33
in
V8 a-S 8 3.3
Marqa on creditturnover
41,7
307.84
737,88
907.50
margin on non-credit turnover
17.0
104,48
219.12
284.46
TOTALINCOME
58.7
412,32
957900
1191.96
Salaries/gstablishzmnt
43,49
216,96
414,81
454#74
Others
14,56
65*92
123,42
171,60
TOTAL WXMINDITURS
58*05
282,88
538*23
626e34
129o44
418,77
565.62
_;ND~XTR
PROF1
!/Loss
source
0,65
s Evaluation
Division*NCOC.
~~~~~~~~t
---
1.
1990
00
FLMU'*~
.1()010
MNYh
7
*aa
.0
a)
I)01
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
a.
ga19o9
19
a.
i3oo"
Ion
o,S O0s"
0493
3.&6 o3 6.
3W
D7156l L 9R 51
"I'*I
12.15ffl
¢o 9|$
99o ~ ~20J4 ~
c9 0,11 a;:8
0
8ER
32S
~ o.20b ~ ~ ~ 0 1,a 21. 0. 212 lee~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~20 022f 5.16 ri0,7 24,4
10
Sg
1L 19
12
la
.~
_
0-1
t
*
-
00.5
*
a
an
2z12k 8
6
1
-9
()0-
s
0.7
11:
,j:
1
X
a
.
Sba a
j,9a
0.336
I
wwo. ~~
~
i3 .S.
ot
44
"
lo * ,5** *.510 223 6.
~
11A2Z
*
50
~
~
1
-108x
Table 3
0
03.63
0 X
8.00
. 001
a
12.35
149
3
0024
4.01
40
,
4.
SO6 7,56
0024
S
8.53
e024
6
9.62
7.
0.24
8
0.24
9.
0.24
12.19
10
0024
13.69
11
0024
14.6S
-12
0.24
15.67
13
O.24
16.77
4
0.24
17.94
0.24
19920
16
0.24
20.54
17
0.24
21.98
0.24
23.s2
0,24
25.16
'
15
Il
*
19 Fiaaclel
Sour
lte
of Retura
8avalustUO
Dlvlol)s.
M0.83
29.6s5 ROe
TABL-
ta;;.led
scieties
19t79_80
Iio.
ofi societies
in utcar
rradesh.
19081
14
.-
4
s6 An
000)
1YlI -SI->C28
75
142
142
Income isar,in on crecit zurnover
o6.38
477.75
1126.06
1221.20
i,,argin on non-credit turnover
54.04
660.00
1989.42
26bd.18
income
140.42
1137.75
3115.48
388W.38
aiSaflisdnt
104.30
690.00
1652.68
1949.66
462.92
>46.70 2496.36
tfotal 44Denditure bay/
sta
'taors Total
ProXits
35.14 expenditure
150.QO
139.44
840.00
2115.80
0.98
297.75
999.68
Source:
3valuation
Division,
MCDC*
1393
02
8Xo
yea
ProEt
Cak
De
pra
zama
no
*ask
amr
O sn
.e~~~~ lst 3e 199s1-2 .5
60
7?
19S2f
so 1I
1m 6
llo 19B9.90 12* 1990*91 Us 1991-92
16
99s
Ile 129
190 1997-93 2010 1S9Bs
O,q
9e99
1-!
IMdl
w
l59 .1} 3b31 33| 331 3J31
O Own* Uj *4
tXl 45X19
31
Sol9w 3o31
()0e6
1039 6se6 15* 79 lae
e82
72:6
32
3o3l
3-ig$08$3j[
325*2 M¢l
6F
36*16 41:3
5e1W1 g501 s e1
4elIIl 400 3*7
;
0wi
95
76g7 36
;*5 SB a 2:06
681~-6eg wo6W
p-
I
t
Ne
eas
Crt
o_lBl1 _,
e9
__6l1
2*72
15e la'
WI1
do
¢1 5"Si
ISO~~~~~~~~~~~~~~d 110
5697g
_0)0X
U&L
_.
00F
o
13o16
6617t
wU9,04 9
o.a 44
"20
lW 1" 1Z_3ie
Ol
5l oI*0
o90
_
S
t
BOO
°4Xl7 | o; ~-9
(_}04
2
11 ea
'
19el2
a
* 1s W3
16Zi74
*ge
g f
40
1W
-111-
S.
,
Tabl 6
maw
.
o
mU OW1!Z
0
,,,10o
1
44.15
0001
a
51b7,l>09
5ti03
.
3.
1.10
-4
1*0
13,93
.5
1.10
19.10
6
1.10
21.99
7
1.10
2503
8
1.10
26.54
9
1.10
32048
10
1.10
36eS
11
1.10
39.47
12
1.10
42,23
13
1.10
45019
14
1.10
46.35
15
1.10
51.74
16
10
55036
17
f11
5,o23
1o
1010
63.36
19
1.10
67.62
Flea*al
Rote of
Sou1e 8 awmuatim
btw
u
D1ih@
9099
19,62 % 90
-112of
Profit/Loss
Xncoum and Eoenditura.
Mmtin
000
1980-81
198142
198283
2
21
21
1973
418,25
514.61
7,80
200.42
251.22
27.53
618,67
765.83
7.52
293.42
362,98
Otlhors
33.68
321.24
274*46
Totalexpeditur
41.20
614,66
637.44
13.67
4*01
128.39
No. of SocietlQe
Margin on Credit
turwver
Margin on non-reidit turnoer Total
Income
EXPINDItSS
Salaries/gtablisthment
Profit/Loss
-)
source I Evaluation
Division, NGDC.
CASH FLOW 0
SAX2LMD
CIZ?T:S
iI
OFISSA
T
8
(DAIn lalshs) S1. No.
Year
E-rofit
13
2
3
1. 1980-81 2. 1981-82 3. 1982-83
4. 5. 6. 7.
1983-84 19B4-85 1985-86
1986-87 8. 1987-88 9. 1988-89
(-)0.14 0.04
1.28
1.54 1.85 2.02
2.22 2.44 2.68 2.94
Depreciation
4 0.03 0.37
0.37
0.37 0.37 0.37 0-37 0.37 0.37
3.15
0.37 0.37
12. 1991-92 13. 1992-93
3.37
0.37
14.
10. 1989-90
11. 1990-91 1993-94
15. 1994-95
16. 1995-96 17. 1996-97 18. 1997-98 19. 1998-99
Cash accrual
Principal
5 (. 4)
7
(-)0.17 0.91
_
-
-
-
0.05 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55
0.06 0.76 0.71 0.66 061
2.57
0.55 0.55
0.56 0.51
1.20 -151
0.46 0.41 0.35
c.04
0.30
2.64
2.31
0.37
3.86
0.37
4.13 4.42 4.73 5.01 5036
0.37
3.49
0.55
3.76 4.05 4.4*3436 4.64 4.99
0.55
20. 1999-2000 5.74
0.37 0.37
0.37 0.37
(-)0.17 0 ()0.33 0.91
1.17 1.48 1.69 1.89 2.07
0.55 0.55 0.55
0.37
i;et cash accruals azt er pay:e-.t of Principal & Tnterest
5.37 Source:
0.25
1.06 (.0.17 0.43 0.68 0.91 77
2e34
0.19
2.96 3.35
_
_
-
0.51
Evaluation
Rtepurchase of equity
Ailvidend
Let ;a accruals
9
10
112 t852910)
_
_
(-j0.17
-
-
(-0.33
-
-
8 (5.46+7)
_
(-)0.33
2.78 3.00 3.24
3.61
Interest
_
_
-
-
0.49 5.89 4.69
0.04 O.47 0.38
3.50
0.38
2.30 1.10
_
0.18 0.09
_
0.91
0.17
-
0.50
*
0.41
1.47
-
1.54 4.14
_ 4e16
_
8.30
_-2.68 f_ 0.97
-
0.58
-
10.98 11.95 11.37
2.04
+ +
-
1.64
9.33
2.34
_
6.99
2,64
-
4.35
-
1.39 1.96 6.32
_
2.96
-
-
3.35
4.64
-
_
-
4.99
-
-
5.37
-
-
NCDC.
-
1.06 (.0.17 0.10 5.68
-
Divisions,
CuG!lative uet cash accruals
4.36 4.64 4e99
5.37
* +
10.96
+
21.32
15.95
1
-114FINANCIALRAT OF REURN OF SOCIETIES IN ORtSSA SAMD (tS. in lakha) Inflow
Outflow
Year
O
1.09
1
12e22
0.04
2
0,13
1.28
3
0.13
1.53
4
0e13
1.84
5
0.13
2.02
6
0.13
2,22
7
0.13
2.44
8
0*13
2.68
9
0,13
2.94
10
0.13
3.15
11
0.13
3.37
12
0.13
3.61
13
013
3*86
14
Oe3
4.13
15
0.13
4.42
16
0*13
4.73
17
0.13
5.01
18
0.13
5.36
19
0.13
5*74
(-)
0,14
E OF RETURN AINCIRATL Source
: Evaluation
Division,
17.80 NCDC.
flaIryatia * o of 14att.
.
sLA
SlN.m........ n;;;e
~~1.
Cdolouri
4°
U.
*s *¢'ao:4l{A 55 1, . ¢(W
4wUt
#
OX U;oeown
wilu stora,e
12. ~~190 -- #.
tluR
4S
aundru
0._
lura4,wali
4
.5
L.khwana;
l%ularb n
i
an2
id;lSlaslag ier
;i-i)
ASuLrura
Sli..1pur
Sourc
14ew.4;odow
v_
XU4a6uwu'ra.
i4.
20.
'
S
5i
Vauto
Diiin,_
24~~~~NNEX X
-116.
Years
1
2
3
4
331
702
1124
-
5 to
20
Cogts investment
Project
Incremental
operating
cOsts
Total Benefits
-
22.6
116.5
213.6
272.3
272.3
'9.6
179.6
344.9
477.0
7 percent
Sconomic
Rate
of Retum
a
18,00
percent
UTTARPRADESH Project
investment
751
Incremental operating costs
3564
.72
Total Benefits
S. Economic
4821
408
1087*
1303
441
1196
1764
Rate
of Return
1303 7 percent
* 12.15 percent
OR1ifSA, Yewas
Project
investment
Incremetal operating Total
costs
1 92
2 1035.
3
6
9S
105
105
142.0
7 percent
Sconamic
Rate
percent
States 5945
1174
5301
100.6 62.50
619.5 1405.6 1680,3 723e94 1682*9 2241.0
Sconomic
Sources
= 8.66
of Return
hree Prolect Total Project Investment Incremental operating costs Total Benefits
-
103.34
1.90
Benefits
4 tO 20
Rate of Return
Evaluation
Division,
-
-
11.32
NCDC.
-
1680.3 7 percent
peoment per am
*.
-
-117-
TAB
U$ij±satioU rerenomkt~ QARaC±tvX
Plotrict
Axamw.t NauE
ira} Ln
(l 4ovn
oi i-1jorket1g
Qaa
eornai
20.3
21.4
24*1
20.2
22.1
Kuz'uk1ugwltra '14.!j
4Xub
61.6
471.1
41.7
44,4
2e6
2.6
2*6
*2,5
Ambala
Sonepat
-vanlltXl
-
53.2
27.5
40.4
59.5
47.8
53.6
7t3e
69-9
7'/1.6
'/4.5
7149
/3.2
_
_
66.5
55.9.
61e2.
32,
22.2
27.3
i-d
1-ijisar
-
-
Uurgaon
37.5
33.8
35.6
43.7
38.6
41.2.
Faridabadd
vg.
86,4
Q.N1
93.4
88.2
90.8
60.2
4b.O
53.1
51.9
45.7
48.8
State .ihole
as a
Source
s Evaluation
Division,
NCDC.
-118-
Percentage Constt_ed_ District/ centre
of Marketing Utilisation p,inttPradesh
Capacity
unde
ANNX
X
Godowns
NCDC-I
1980-81
1982-83 1981-82 Mini. nMaj AverMinimum mum age mum
mum
mum
age
Maximum
Bulandshahar
27.6
14.6
21.1
60.9
53.6
57,3 73.7
60.7
67.2
Nainital
75.0
59,5
67.2
79.4
65.2
72,3
91,0
73.3
82.8
Jalaun
-
-
-
36.2
36.2
36*2
77.4
62,2
69.8
Allahabad
-
-
-
97.1
81.4
89,2
87.5
54.7
71,1
Gorakhpur
76.4
27.0
51.7- 109.0
84.4
96,?
100.6
74,3
87,5
Dooria
76,0
45e2
60.6
102.3
85,3
93,8 101.8
72.9
87e4
,Jaunsur
84.8
84.4
84.6
108.1
90.0
99,0
55.5
57.6
53.8
67.0 76,0
62.2
69.1
i3arabanki
M
-
-
-
(30.2
59.8
age
Oha-*ipur
59,8
25.2
42.5 105.5
91,8
98.6 71,4
56*5
63,9
A1gra
41,8
31.0
36,4
94.2
77e3
85.8 98.3
71,8
85.1
Kmnur
-
72.0
48.6
60.3
96,0 84,9
71.2
.78.1
58,7 76.7
62e7
69.7
73.S
82.3
Pilibhit Aligarh Rampux
Ghaziabad
33.3
56.2
10,4
7.9
7.9
7.9
27.7
28.8
30.0 -
-
-
_
-_
-
84.8
107.3
64.7** 52.6 80.0
68.3
74.2 91.0
59.4
37.9
48,7
83.8 62,4 73.1.
Muzaffarnagar
94.8
29.8
62.3.
115.3
69,8
92.6 98.5
45.4
72.0
State as a Whole
57.3
31.9
44.6
85.4
67.8
76,6 84.1
63,0
73,6
Source
I Ekvaluation
Division,
NCDC.
-119-
ANNEXX Table 3
egenta,e C42gjtX c
*~
Balasore.
.
Uti-itL .
*
~
.
.
.
.
Of
Widd*-
*
..........
.
.
.
b465
148.2
;6,4
47.2
34.7
41 .0
27.3
2506
26.5
3607
29.4
33oe
-
5203
33.4
42,9
m
17.9
*l o2.
16o6
w&ayur bha= Dken
d
mxal
-
JUXloriorh
-
'
Sam'balpur
80.3
70*3
75,J
61,3
51.7
5605
Loraput
26.8
16.1
21.5
f4.4
54.9
64e7
1ri
27.7
16.2
21.4
25.1
14o2
19.7
Uuttack
4545
39e6
42.6
26.8
20.3
23.6
Uar4am
6801
43e1
556
6606
57.1
61.9
60.5
47.5
54*0
46,2
35.6
40.9
(risaa
State
Source
8 Evaluation
Division,
NCDC.
Buiness S.1o.
Items
1. Fertiliser 2. Sed 3. 4.
Electric Marketing (a)
5.
Hbtor/Apoliances
Own account
(b) Other %beat
6. 7. 8.
Paddy Sugar
9.
Edible
10.
11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.
qccount
Turnover of UTAR PRADSH
PC'Tc
1977-78
1978-79
1979-80
1980-81
1981-82
198283
73.08 00.40
100.35 0.44
95.43 0.79
127*84 0.18
130.15 0.96
114.88 0.50
0.01
0.01
0.09
3.37
2.11
2.08
3.21
3.71*
3.25
8.05
S.35
7.21
7e32
4.54
6.55 54.81
5.12 85*88
5.91 83.38
at-
9.46
8.28
S9.91 7*06
76.52
101,53
in
crores)
205.45
227.97
10.52
-
-
3.87
3.18
3.15
coal
0.22
0.12
0.80
2.23
2,41
11.80
Rogin/Tezpntine Vinco (vanaspati) Medicines Pres's Marketing of Patato Cottage Industry Others
0.11 0.9S 0.16 0.20
0.17 1.02 0.25 0.20
0.11 0.84 0e34 0.23
0.19 0.98 0,23 0*26
0.02 1.68 0.23 0.25
0.30 "2,25 0.21 0.36 0.19 0.11 0.05
TOTALs-
-
-
0.13
3.50 175e49 SourceS-
0*13 4.21 227.20
PC1? t!TAR PRADB
-
0.11 3.17 184.S5
-
0.11 0.37 314.42
172,04 4.10
-
0.11 0.32 420.45
Seel
130.30
9.68 Oil
-
134.27 2.60
33.00 11184
7.S3 6.63
-
Cloth
198334
. 11.35
490,33
'
0.24 2.52 019 0.26 -
0e13 0.31 515.9S
Busineps Turnover U;o4erta.-.ve .y-zr= .aae
xi
of FeIeration
AketinJ
~~~~~~~~~~~~Iteiu
1 Sh-9
I i-z0
1:0. 'Wheat
28..7
p2.95 a
77.60
u2.70
-lue:
9b2-u
57.539
44
!8.41
1 .b 4
1iot
.40
I ;b~84
69.74
50.94
4. Graw
0.
