A federated and curated metadata registry of agri-food datasets and data services

Senegal - Irrigation and Water Resource Management


This evaluation report presents findings from the baseline data collected for the Irrigation and Water Resources Management (IWRM) project, which serves as the primary data source for evaluating the activities of the IWRM project. This report provides an overview of the current irrigation and agricultural situation in the Senegal River Valley. Additionally, the report provides a comparison of treatment and comparison households to check for systematic differences between groups at the time of the baseline survey.

In the IWRM, the selection of areas to receive the project interventions was not random. Rather, it was based on a variety of factors, including political, social and environmental. In the absence of random assignment, we will use a Difference-in-Differences (DID) methodology combined with propensity score matching (DID-PSM) to estimate the impact of the IWRM activities. The baseline data includes community level and household level data. Community level data includes information about regional and socioeconomic characteristics of the village. Household level data sets were collected in 3 waves, one for each agricultural season.

Our goal is to propose the most rigorous and feasible evaluation design that answers the following research questions of interest to MCC:

Have there been changes in the amount of land used for agricultural production? Is land being used for production in different seasons than before?*
Has crop production improved? Have production methods, including the choice of inputs, changed? Have there been changes to the types of crops produced?*
What factors are contributing to or constraining changes in agriculture inputs and production? Why are households changing or not changing agriculture production decisions, and how do those reasons vary depending on crop type, growing season, or income level?**
How have changes differed by gender and among different income levels?*

Have there been changes in the sources of water used for agricultural production?*
How has water availability changed, and have barriers or costs to accessing irrigation been reduced? Has the water supply become more reliable?**
Has the amount of irrigated land increased?*
Has the role of WUAs changed and how do they impact the use and availability of water?**

Have household income levels changed, including changes in components of household income, and has income shifted between agricultural and nonagricultural sources?* **
Do farmers perceive an improvement in their living standards?**
Have agricultural profits changed?*

Have perceptions of land tenure security changed? Is there increased confidence in the land tenure system? If so, why?* **
Has the extent of land formalization changed? Is there greater awareness of the process for formalizing land?* **
Has demand changed for formalized land rights and are the costs of formalizing land rights perceived as reasonable?**
Has the number or severity of land conflicts reduced? Has the type or nature of land conflicts changed?* **
How has the IWRM Project affected women's access to land and irrigation? How has it affected the landless?**
How have changes in land security perceptions, formalization, conflict, or conflict management affected investments on land?**
What have been the constraints or barriers to land access? Do these differ depending on gender, income levels, or age?**

Have local government agencies become more effective at land management, including land allocation, land formalization, and conflict resolution? Is there greater confidence in the efficacy of these institutions?**
Do institutions receive adequate support to carry out their functions?**

What are the prospects for the sustainability of project activities post-Compact?**
What impacts did the project have outside of project areas?**
Who benefitted from each IWRM activity? Where and when did each activity occur?**

* = Impact analysis using a difference-in-differences methodology
**=Descriptive outcomes and implementation analysis using qualitative and quantitative methods

We will address these research questions by using two key analytical methods, as noted in the research question list above. For some research questions, we will employ an impact analysis that uses a difference-in-differences (DID) approach to estimate the causal effects of some IWRM Project activities. Through this approach, we will compare beneficiaries (the treatment group) to nonbeneficiaries (the comparison group) before and after the intervention, using existing baseline data and data we plan to collect through two follow-up survey rounds. Due to differences between the two regions and in activities implemented, we will analyze impacts of the project separately for the Delta and Podor intervention areas, using the household as our unit of analysis.

We also will conduct a descriptive outcomes and implementation analysis that uses a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods to address additional questions of interest to complement the impact analysis. These include questions about activities that occurred before the baseline survey and those that occurred at the commune level and may have had commune-wide or institutional effects. We will also use mixed methods to examine the mechanisms that brought about project impacts and to better interpret the estimates produced through the DID analysis. For example, if we find that commune-level activities affected outcomes for both the treatment group and a portion of the comparison group, our DID impact estimates will not be able to capture the effects of these activities; instead, we will examine those commune-level activities and their effects qualitatively. Our mixed-methods analysis will draw on an array of data sources, including the household and community surveys, project documentation, secondary literature, and administrative data provided by MCC and local government agencies. In addition, we will conduct key informant interviews and focus groups with project stakeholders and beneficiary groups.

Belongs to network: 
Geographic coverage: 
Country where the service is managed: 
United States of America
agINFRA The RING is part of the agINFRA project EC 7th framework program INFRA-2011-1.2.2 - Grant agr. no: 283770