Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY MICROFICHE COPY Report No. 10638 Repor-t No. 10638-MA Type: (PCR) JAMES, E / X31756 / T9057/ OEDD1 PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT MALAYSIA MALACCA AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (LOAN 2147-MA) MAY 14, 1992 Agriculture Operations Division Country Department I East Asia and Pacific Regional Office This document has a restricted distribution and may be used bv reipients only in the perfonnance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. CURRENCY EOUIVALENTS Name of Currency Malaysian Ringgit (M$) Appraisal year (1982) us$1.00 = M$2.34 1983 us$1.00 = X4$2.32 1984 US$1.00 = M$2.42 1985 us$1.00 = M$2.48 1986 US$1.00 = M$2.58 1987 US$1.00 = M$2.52 1988 us$1.00 = M$2.62 1989 (Completion Year) us$1.00 = M$2.71 GOVERNMENT OF MALA'-SIA FISCAL YEAR January 1 - December 31 WEIGHTS AND MEASURES 1 hectare (ha) = 2.47 acres 1 kilometer = 0.62 mile 1 meter = 3.28 feet 1 square meter (sq.m.) 10.76 sq. feet I cubic meter (cu.m.) = 35.31 cubic feet 1 kilogram = 1,000 grams 1 ton = 2,205 pounds ABBREVIATIONS AFO = Area Farmers' Organization BPM Bank Pertanian Malaysia (Agricultural Bank of Malaysia) DID = Drainage and Irrigation Department DLM = Department of Land and Mines DOA = Department of Agriculture DOF = Department of Fisheries DVS = Department of Veterinary Services ERR = Economic Rate of Return FAMA = Federal Agricultural Marketing Authority FDC = Farmers' Development Center FOA = Farmers' Organization Authority GOM Government of Malaysia GPC = Group Processing Center LPN = Lembaga Padi Dan Beras Negara (National Padi Board) MARDI = Malaysian Agricultural Research and Development Institute MCC = Milk Collection Center MOA = Ministry of Agriculture NPV = Net Present Value O&M = Operation and Maintenance PD = Project Director PCR = Project Completion Report RISDA = Rubber Industry Smallholders Development Authority SAR Staff Appraisal Report FOR OMCIL USE ONLY TI!E WORLD BANK Washington. D.C. 20433 U.S.A. Okice of DirectwCewleal Opeathmn Evhalatbn May 14, 1992 MEMORANDUM TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS AND THE PRESIDENT SUBJECT: Project Completion Report - Malaysia Malacca Agricultural Development Project (Loan 2147-MA) Attached, for your information, is a copy of a report entitled "Project Completion Report on Malaysia - Malacca Agricultural Development Project (Loan 2147-MA)", prepared by the East Asia and Pacific Regional Office. No audit of this project has been made by the Operations Evaluation Department at this time. Attachment This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authoriation. FOR OMCIAL USE ONLY PROJFCT ONMILZTION REPORT MALACCA AGRICULTURAL DNVZWPNZNT PROJECT (LOAN 2147-xo TABLZ 0F CONTENTS Paoe No. Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i Basic Data Sheet ... . o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i. i Evaluation Summary . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . v Io BACKGROUND Introduction .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . 1 Project Description ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 organization and Mlanagement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 II. IMPLEMENTATION EXPERIENCE General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Monitoring and Evaluation . . .. 5 Resporne from the Target Groups ... . . . . . . . . . . .... 7 Project Scope .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . ..... . 7 Project Finances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Smalliolder Rubber Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Irrigation Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Drainage of Agricultural Lands . . . . . . . . . . .. . 11 Cash Crop Diversification . .. 12 Dairy Development .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Fish Pond Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . 14 Farm Roads .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Farmers' Development C nters . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 14 Equipront, Vehicles and Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Consultanoces and Overseas Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Project Physical Accomplishments . . . . . ..5 . . . . . . . III. PROJECT RESULT, BENEFIT AND ECONOiIC EVALUATION Smallbolder Rubber Developyent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Irrrggtion Improvement ............ . . 18 Draingg Improvee nt . . 20 River Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Dairy Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Fish Pond Development ... . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . 22 Cash Crops . ........ . . . . . . . . .... * . 22 Total Project .. ... . . . . . . . . . .... ...... 23 Cost Recovery . ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 Other Agricultural Services Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. TABLE 2y CONTENTS (Cont'd) Paae No. IV. PERFORMANCE OF THE BORROWER, THE BANK AND LESSONS LEARNED Performance of the Borrower .. . ....... 25 Performance of the Bank .. .......... 27 Lessons Learned . . . . **... . . . .. . . . . . . . 27 LIST OF TEXT TABLES Table 1: Budget Allocation in Comparison with SAR Estimates (MS million) . . . ...... ....... ........... ........ ........ ...... 8 Table 2: Withdrawal of the Loan Proceeds . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Table 3: Crop Development Program, 1982-89 (ha) . . . . . . . . . 13 Table 4: Physical Indicators of Project Accomplishments . . . . . 15 Table 5: Phasing of Rubber Replanting (ha) Appraisal vs PCR..... .......... . 16 Table 6: Rubber and Oil Palm Area (ha) for Time-Slice Financing of Maintenance Cost Replanted between 1976-1981 (Rubber) and 1976-1985 (Oil Palm) (Appraisal vs PCR) . . . . . . 16 Table 7: Estimated Rubber Production ('000 ton) . . . . . . . . . 17 Table 8: Comparison of Price of Rubber between Appraisal and PCR (in 1989 prices) .17 Table 9: With Project: Padi Cropping Pattern, Yield and Production (Appraisal and PCR) .18 Table 10: Derivation of Economic Farm Gate Price of Padi (Constant 1989 Price.)... . 19 Table 11: Household Monthly Income Among Padi Farmers, 1989 . . 19 Table 12: Phasing of Incremental Benefitted Areas with River Improvement Program. 20 Table 13: Phasing of Freshwater Fish Ponds Development . . . . . . 22 Table 14: Phasing of Cash Crops Development . . . . . 23 Table 15: Economic Rate of Return, PCR Compared to SAR . . . . . . 24 Table 16: Performance of AFO and State Farmers' Organization from 1986 to 1989 . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . 25 APPENDICES 31 List of Appendices 32 Appendices 1 thru 115. 41-176 Formats 1-3 . . ...... .......177 COMMENTS FROM THE BORROWER Annex 1: Comments from the Ministry of Agriculture . . . . . . . 181 Annex 2: Comments from the Economic Planning Unit . . . . . . . . 183 MAP IBRD 16173R - i - PROJECT COMPLETi,N REPORT MALAXYIA MALACCA AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (LOAN 2147-MA) PREFACE Thli ie the Project CompletLon Report (PCR) for the Malacca Agricultural Development Project in Malaysia, for which Loan 2147-MA in the amount of US$25.4 million was approved on May 18, 1982. The loan closed on schedule on June 30, 1989. Following a cancellation on July 17. 1986 of US$7.65 milllon, the remaining loan balance of US$17.75 million was fully disbursed and the last disbursement was on October 25, 1989. The PCR was prepared by the Project Director's Office assisted by the staff of the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA). and the Preface, Basic Data Sheet and Evaluation Summary were prepared by the Agriculture operations Division, Country Department I, East Asia and Pacific Region. This PCR was read by the Operations Evaluation Department (OED). The draft PCR was sent to the Borrower for comments and they are attached to the Report (Annex). The comments have been incorporated and the errors noted have been corrected. - 1ii - LIL ULMk2LEZflLMRQ MaLAC AGRZCUT=UAL DEVELOPMENT PR=OlCT (LOAN 2147-iA) KEYpAO3ECT DCAT Apraisal Acual or Actual as Z of *zc.tion cureut eatimato appraisal .s.iat. Project costs (US$ million) 76.4 33.0 43.0 Loan amount (USS million) 25.4 17.75 70 Data board approval - 05118/82 - Date effectiveness - 01/03/83 - Data physecal components completed 06/30/88 06/30/89 - Proportion then compLeted (Z) 100.0 98.0 98.0 Closing date 06/30/89 06/30/89 - Economic rate of.returu (1) 15.0 14.0 _ Financial rate of return (1) - -- TIstitutional perforace _ Excellent Agronomic performance - Satisfactory _ Number of direct beneficiarLes 8,300 At least 10,000 - CMMTTVE DISB1XRSEMENT nu ma ma Ea ML ML M En mu apprel" egtimt (VI) 0.7 2.0 8.1 O.S 118 38. 24.0 33.4 As L (USSIu) : * e2.S S. 6.0 1.? 14.7 16.3 £7.6 MAasal a.s fmutmI ST 348 Its 91 St 16 To 7 bat. of final 4101251 Iiaseal reqS to( 47! rw) (SwSInO-1 uLCMase- * d "_ 3. 199 III"8SOI ,~ ~ ~~~~Dt 3. . . ..d @6160 2 6 u.a. ft.pp~~~~a1aa1 @1161ill 3 325 Aph.616 @1161 4 6 ,,, upsw e 1 111 1 * * 1 2 S qp.telon 116 12 .2 v Sap.IY;sL eal I so a. Ia l 6q.zaisi 4 @3164 a 14 0a 1111111ft S"rwupavtl. £I" I s a 21112 - 6u#gY1.146 @316 1 4 a 2111211 - Supervulon 7 03166 1 1 11111.. PCXs O@0 3 a.at b OTM1 PROJECT DATA Total Tim (toafflnek) Reorded by licalA Ywar/Activitv 1F12 116s nu P63 FM6 n167 nu6 n166 Who n1l m2 Total um U. LUa 17.1 * * . . . . . . 17.1 LUZ 7.3 - 7 . - . . . 7.3 sy 0.1 4. .1 3. O.; 2. 1.4 1.3 3 . . 0.3 PC4 - S. 2.0 4.6 6.3 total 2. 4.4 Li ad hLu Ad I adf Uj 4u . arrozer o romat of Malayci. tecutS8ng Agency Mtnitry of Agriculture Cthrough the Project Director's Office) together with cooperatin agencia.. piacal Ter of orrwer Calendar y"r lame of Currency (abbrviation) Appraisal yer average 1982 US$1.00 a H12.34 Intervent g year average US$1 .00 a 112.49 Complettoa yer era 1989 US$1.00 u H$2.71 lollo-on projects lone J a b agu- gultual economist; a - engier;t d * irriatiao ongeer; * - treocrope tSgI f * financil na lyat or miLnor problem.; 2 a moderato problemJ and 3 a major problms I a £Sprowl"I 2 - st tloa I a deterioratg o I financial; U a r ta tcsiei P a pol;tlca1 at O - other. Prom 1986 the ratinge were for ssallable fundsiproject muengement/devolopment Uipect/overal* status. s.&. - not available. v PROlECT COMPLETION REPORT ti ~~~~MALAYSI t^ MALACCA AGRICMLULRAL DEVELOPMERT PROJECT (LQAN 2147-MA& EVALUATION SUMMARY Prolect Objectives and Descrlitign The Nalacca Agricultural Development Project (MADP) was one of a series of multi-component agricultural development projects proposed by the Govern- ment of Malaysia (GOM) under the Fourth Malaysia Plan (1981-85) to promote growth in rural areas and alleviate rural poverty. The MADP was to benefit 8,300 smallholder families in Malacca State belonging to the major poverty groups--rubber smallholders and padi and mixed annual and perennial crop farmers having smaliholdings with low productivity. The project provided mainly for development of rubber areas, construction and improvement of irri- gation and drainage works, farm roads construction, smallholder dairy development, fishpond development, crop development, and improvement of agricultural support services. Smallholder rubber development included re- planting with improved clonal materials of about 9,000 ha of old, low yielding rubber; maintenance until commencenent of tapping of some 5,300 ha of rubber replanted in the years 1976-81; and planting of new rubber totalling about 320 ha. Infrastructure development included construction of a new irrigation scheme for about 66 ha of padi and improvements to five existing irrigation schemes serving about 1,850 ha; improvement of three drainage schemes serving about 1,000 ha and six river channels serving about 1,600 ha of padi and other crops; and construction of farm and access roads totalling about 140 km. Dairy and fisheries development program included distribution of 2,500 crossbred dairy heifers to 1,000 new and 500 existing dairy farmers; estab- lishment of some 250 ha of on-farm fodder grass production; construction and equipping of a milk collectiou center handling up to 1,350 liters of milk per day; and construction and stocking of about 260 ha of freshwater fishponds. Crop developmentc included establishment of a padi seed multiplication program; planting of about 380 ha per annum of various cash crops; and rehabilitation of smallholder orchards and backyard fruit lots totalling about 810 ha. The project also provided for local and overseas training for staff; buildings, vehicles and equipment for training, agricultural support services, and operation and maintenance; and about 366 person-months of consultant ser- vices (336 local and 30 foreign) to the Drainage and Irrigation Department (DID) for detailed designs and construction supervision of infrastructure works and to the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) for (i) design and planning of pilot perennial crop development schemes on 160 ha of largely idle agricultural land and a comprehensive study on the utilizaticn of about 4,000 ha of idle agricultural land in Malacca State; and (ii) expert advice on - vi - planning, programuing, coor4iuation, and monitoring and evaluation (M&O) of multi-component projecte. The NOA was to be the lead agency for project implementation and it had already appointed a Project Director (PD) before project commencement. The PD wae to coordinate v-rious departments and agencies under the MOA which were to participate in the project and the Rubber Industry Smallholders Development Authority (RISDA), tnder the Ministry of Land and Regional Divelopment, which waS to be responaible for the rubber component. The PD whs to be guided on policy matters by a Steering Committee, composed of representatives irom all government agencies with project responsibilities, and co-chaired by the Secretary General of MOA and the State Secretary of Malacca (who was the highest-ranking civil servant in Malacca and, consequently, had the executive authority). Implementation Experience Project implementation was generally free of problems, though project completion was delayed by one year to June 30, 1989. The organizational and management factors including appointment of a Project Director before project commencement and his proRence until completion, capable and effective project management, delegation of powers to the Project Director to mal budgetary allo-ations to the cooperating agencies, establishment of comm2.ttees at the leve_ of the project participanta, and effective support from the Steering Committee, greatly facilitated project implementation. At pruject completion, appraisal targets for all major components were either met or exceeded. Financing of RISDA's replanting of old rubber with oil palm was iacluded in 1986 and that with various other crops (except cocoa) in 1989. Problems were experienced mainly with minor components vis., irrigation and fisheries development. As early as July 1982, the new irrigation scheme proposed in Brisu was cancelled when found economically unviable. Later, two irrigation schemes targeted for improvement were also cancelled whmn they were found unviable after en indepth stud . Irrigation improvement (1,415 ha) was thus onl,y 76Z of appraisal target. Fishpond development (about 61 ha) was only 232 of appraisal target, mainly bec_uoe of decline of farmer interest after termination of Government subsidies in *nd-1983. Another minor component, fruit orchard rehabilitation, was dropped in 1986 for the same reason (termination of subsidies). Very little of consultancy funds were used. This was mainly due to the reduced scopfr of irrigation works and deletion of the idle padi land study since Malacca was not considered a granary padi area under the new National Agricultural Policy adopted in 1984. However, one foreign consultant was employed for 13 months to assist in establishing the project's monitoring and evaluation (M&H) system. Part of the Bank loan was also utilized for the detailed engineering design of Bekok Dam under the Second Western Johor Agricultural Development Project (Loan 2740-MA). Project /1 Th Borrover's comment point out that, with these adjustments, the economic IRR of the irrigation component weo 122. 80 Annex It p.2. - vii - implementation was somewhat affected by the national budgetary constraints in the mid-1980s. Project management actively pursued adjustments to the project scope and financing during implementation. As a result, the Loan Agreement was amended threa times and various appraisal targets were revised. At comple- tion, the project cost was only US$33.0 million equivalent, or about 43Z of- the appraisal estimate of US$76.4 million. This difference was mainly due to overestimation of coats at appraisal, particularly for coutingencies, and also due to the reduced scope of irrig'"'ton works and lower expenditures on fish ponds, dairy development (mainly beoause of restrictions imposed by the Government on the import of crossbred heifers), consultancy !.rvlnes and engineering and supervision. The Bank loan was correspondingly r4duced from US$25.40 million to US$17.75 million. Results Overall, the project v;as satisfactory and had a substantial insti- tutional impact. Its contribution to the beneficiaries' productivity and incomes '.s actually and potentially positive. The number of beneficiaries is at least 10,00C, compared to the appraisal target of 8,300. The overall project economic rate of return (ERR) is a satisfactory 14X, only slightly lower than the appraisal estimate of 151, mainly because of lower world prices projected for rubber and palm oil. The ERRs of most individual components viz., rubber replanting and maintenance, oil palm repl&nting and maintenance, irrigation improvement, drainage improvement, and river improvement, range from 12% to over 50X. However, the potential returns from the irrigation improvement component a-e questionable, since farmers' interest in padi is declining, re.ulting in an unsatisfactory cropping intensity and decreasing area planted with padi. Farmers' interest in padi is low because, with the small size of holdings, incomes from padi are unattractive even though sub- stantial Government subsidies are offered. For three minor components viz., dairy development, fish pond development, and cash crops, the ERRs are 2%, less than 1X, and 3Z, respectively. The dairy activity is not competitive at import parity prices, though current Government subsidies provide attractive incomes to project farmers. For fish ponds, low yields resulting from lack of farmer interest after termination of subsidies aake both economic and finan- cial returns low. The cash crop diversification component, aimed at utilizing idle land (mostly padi land) with more remunerative alternative short-term cash crops, cocoa and othei tree crops, *was also not very successful as 43% of the area planted went idle again, though initially, when subsidies and services were being provided by the project, farmers' participation was high. The project achieved some success in its group extension efforts, particularly in small area development achmes for the planting of idle lands with short- term cash crops (vegetables), but was not very successful in making the farmers' organizations self-financing. - vilL - Sustainability Overall, the project is sustainable. The Project Director's office exists and is wvll-funded and vwll-managed. The nroject'e main components, rubber and oil palm, are financially and economically viable and are super- vised by RISDA, which is a long-established institution, is well-funded, and being supported by the Bank und,r the RISDA Project (Loan 3139-MA). The irrigation and drainage works are also being supervised by a well-established agency, the DID. However, the dairy and fishpond activities, padi and some cash crops under the project are unlikely to survive without subsidies. As regards cost recovery, project costs are expect i to be fully recovered by the early nsxt century through coss and export duty on rubber and zakat for padi. Findirgs and Lessons Learne' The integrated area development approach can be successful if appro- priate organizational, management and funding arrangements are in place (PCR, paras. 1.11, 1.13, 1.18, 2.01-2.06, 4.01, 4.02, 4.21 and 4.31). An effective M&E system, which was a noteworthy feature -f the project, can greatly facilitate corrective act'ons during Vi:oject implementation (PCR, paras. 1.18, 2.02-2.06, 2.12, 4.06, 4.18 and 4.19). Grassroots planning of project activities with participation of bene- ficiaries can enhance project impact (PCR, paras. 1.12-1.15, 4.02, 4.23 and 4.24). Inclusion of project components, which depend on subsidies for successful implementation, should be carefully reviewed during preparation and appraisal (PCR, paras. 2.11, 2.28, 2.35, 3.10, 3.28, 4.15 and 4.17). Building self-reliant and self-financing farmers' organizations is a task which cannot be achieved in a few years (PCR, paras. 3.42, 3.43, and 4.26 and 4.27). Close coordination with marketing organizations (such as with the Federal Agricultural Marketing Authority in this case) facilitates project planning for crops (PCR, para. 3.45). Continuity and appropriate skill mix of Bank staff during supervision facilitate project implementation (PCR, paras. 4.09 - 4.11). More detailed preparation, particularly of irrigation and drainage components, would have improved project implementation (PCR, paras. 4.12 and 4.15). PROJECT COMPLET'ON REPORT MALAYSIA 4ALACCA AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (LOAN 2147-MAt I. BACKGROUND Introduction 1.1 In the late seventies the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) had adopted the integrated agricultural development approach to rural development as the vehicle for promoting growth in rural agricultural sector and eradicating poverty. I.hroughout Malaysia, some 15 Integrated Agricultural Development Projects (IADP) were implemented, at an average of one project for every state except Sabah. fome were locally financed, whlle others were financed through foreign sources. 1.2 In 1979, MOA prepared a project identification brief which proposed World Bank financing for smallholders in Malacca who did not benefit from any specific irrigation or commodity project. A local management consultant was engaged in April 1980 to compile a project implementation plan. Its final report was issued in January 1981 and reviewed by a January-February World Bank preappraisal mission. 1.3 A World Bank mission appraised the Project in September-October 1981. Loan 2147-MA amounting to US$25.4 million was approved on May 18, 1982. The Loan Agreement was signed on October 7, 1982. Proiect Description 1.4 The Project would benefit some 8,300 smallholders in the major identifiable groups with the highest incidence of poverty - rubber smallholders, padi and mixed annual and perennial crop farmers having small holdings with low productivity. 1.5 The objectives of the Project were to eradicate rural poverty, increase income and agricultural production through land-use intensificatLon, crop diversification and improvements to agricultural support services, resulting also in increasing job opportunities. The Project was also intended to improve the socioeconomic livelihood of farmers. All agricultural and related agencies were to be coordinated under one project agency to serve the farming community in Malacca. The smallholders were to benefit from a range of programmes designed to solve various constraints and problems in the smallholders5 sector and provide the target groups various opportunities to improve their farming activities. - 2 - 1.6 The description of the Project as per Loan Agreement dated October 7, 1982 was as follows: (a) Smallholder rubber development, including replanting with improved clonal materials of about 9.000 hectares of old, low yielding rubber; maintenance until commencement of tapping of some 5.300 hectares of rubber replanted between 1976 - 1981 planting of about 320 hectares of new rubber; development of a new 48 hectares rubber nursery; and construction of 72 aroui rubber processing centres, 3 smokehouses and central storage facilities. (b) Infrastructure development, including construction of a new irrigation scheme (66 hectares); improvement of 5 existing irrigation schemes (1.850 hectares)s and improvement of 3 drainage works and 6 river channels (2.500 hectares); and construction of farm and access roads totalling about 140 kilometers. (c) Cron develoiment, including establishment of a padi seed multiplication program; planting of about 380 hectares of various cash crops annually; rehabilitation of smallholder orchards and backyard fruit lots totalling about 810 hectare; and implementation of pilot schemes covering 160 hectares of fragmented idle agricultural land for perennial crops. (d) Dairy and fisheries develoment, involving distribution of 2,500 crossbred dairy heifers to 1,000 new and 500 existing dairy farmers; establishment of some 250 hectares of on-farm fodder grass production; construction of a milk collection center able to handle 1.350 liters of milk per day; and construction of about 260 hectares of freshwater fish ponds. 1.7 In addition, the Project would construct buildings, purchase equipment and vehicles, and provide agricultural support services and operation and maintenance, staff training, and consultancy services for studies, detailed design and construction supervision of project works. 1.8 The Project area was identified as all agricultural areas in the State of Malacca. orcanization and Manaaement 1.9 The Malacca IADP organizational structure was set up on a coordinative model where the effectiveness of a Project Director (PD) lies in his ability to motivate the co! ponent staff without having full executive control over them. The implementing arms of the Project were the existing line agencies who had their own set of priorities. The main participating agencies were RISDA, DID, DOA, FOA, DVS and DOF whereas the supporting agencies included FAMA, MARDI, BPM, LPN and DLM. 1.10 The PD was to be guided on policy matters by a Steering Committee composed of senior representatives of all agencies with project implementation - 3 - responsibilities under the joint chairmanship of the State Secretary and the Deputy Secretary General of MOA. This Committee was to meet twice a year to provide policy guidance for project implementation which was also obtained from MOA and other central agencies from time to time. 1.11 For coordination purposes, the PD was to be a member of the Malacca State Agricultural Portfolio and Agricultural Task Force, under the chairmanship of State Executive Councillor and the Chief Minister respectively. At the PD office level, several committees on specific subjects such as the Implementation Committee (Co-chaired by Under Secretary of Monitoring and Evaluau.ion Division, Ministry of Agriculture) and Working Committees on Crop, Infrastructure, Livestock, Aquaculture, Training, and Special Project Development were set up to plan, coordinate and monitor the implementation of various identified programmes. This arrangement was satisfactory and effective in providing much needed rapport among implementing agencies and State Government. 1.12 At the Project level, Project Action Committees were set up by the Project to establish channels of communication from project participants to smoothen ground level implementation. These committees provided feedback and solutions to emerging problems. The Village Development and Security Committees set up by the State Government also played important roles and some were very active and rendered much help to the Project. 1.13 Ground level project identification and planning of farming activities and infrastructural facilities (farm roads, drainage and irrigation facilities) were given primary attention by the PD. The target groups were given the opportunity to identify their own needs, and applications were scrutinized by the Project. These covered all types of projects, i.e. crop, infrastructure, livestock etc. The planning process started with identification of project by target groups - individual farmer, Village Development and Security Committee, Headman, contact farmer or group farming units. At this level, they had to determine among others: (a) The type of project (drainage, irrigation, small farm road, culverts, bridges, commodities etc.). (b) Number and names of participants with their backgrounds. (c) Location, with detailed cadastral maps, sketch plan and passages. 1.14 If the project was initiated by a group of farmers, the group had to ensure that all members were interested and ready to participate in the project. They also had to furnish comments and recommendations from technical staff in charge of their area, so as to ensure the project's technical viability. 1.15 All completed documents were then forwarded to PD for further action. This grassroot planning became an integral part of the project cycle and was initiated as early as 1983. An example of area development planning is shown in Chart I. -4- Chart Z AREA DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CHART ----------------------- - -- - --------------------- Identification Of Area (Farmer, Village Development & Security Committee, Headman, Contact Farmer, Technicians) j Technician / Assistant Agricultural Officer -------------------------------------------------- | State DOA Headquarters -------------------------------------------------- | PD Office a Planning Committee Level -------------…------------- - --------…- ------ ---- (PD Office, DID, DOA) I…------------------ - ---…--------------- NMeting With Participants -------------------------… ----------------------- (DOA, DID) Setting up the Project Action Committee (PAC) I Detailed Planning With Participants (PD Office and various component agencies) ------------------------- | Meeting With PAC I Construction Of Infrastructure a Ploughing a I Distribution Of Inputs a supervision, Monitoring & Evaluation -------------------------------------------- 5 - 1.16 In terms of the dLvision of work, the organization of the PD Office was quite in balance between planning/development and administration/finance. The PD was assisted by a Deputy Director who took charge of plcnning/development, x especially the monitoring and evaluation of projects. The implementation of projects in each district (Central Malacca, Alor Gajah, Jasin, Masjid Tanah and Merlimau) was carried out and monitored by one staff in the PD's office and supported by staff from various participating agencies. 1.17 There were some posts created under the Project. Their creation was to boost the participating departments and lt was never intended to house them under one roof wlth the PD. The PD had no control over them and, therefore, some put departmental priorities ahead. This normal attitude of certain departments did not in any way deter project implementation. The PD played his role well and tried to accomplish agreed targets. 1.18 The PD had full control over annual budgetary allocation and could ensure that identified projects were implemented as per schedule. He also monitored progress and monthly expenditures. Having control over finances gave the PD an added advantage since he was made fully aware of the direction in which the Project was heading. He signed all vouchers and kept abreast regularly with payments and progress. The flag system (red, yellow, green) was utilized for physical projects, so as to signal minor derailments and provide remedial measures before problems could occur. This method worked well and proved its worth since, during implementation, no serious delays occurred. 1I. IMPLEMENTATION EXPERIENCE General 2.1 This Project has had the benefit of having a PD who continued from the beginning of the Project until completion. This continuity unquestionably helped to ensure smooth planning and implementation of the project. He was able to prepare the ground work, created a system of coordination among participating departments and established rapport with the State Government (civil servants and politicians alike). He also maintained close contacts with the target groups ensuring constant feedback on project implementation. Mon$torino and Evaluation 2.2 Regular dialoques, discussions, visits and feedbacks were very important features of the Project. Data collection right from the initial stage of project implementation was the rule rather than the exception. Sequential data were kept in various books each titled according to components and districts. In the Project office various records were made available to those interested and annual summaries were produced. Socioeconomic data of projects were also collected, to be utilized later on ior various project reviews and reports. -6- 2.3 A good monitoring and evaluation system was established from the initial project period. The objective of the system was to ensure that all programmes were implemented as per schedule and met expected targets. Apart from frequent committee meetings to monitor implementation of projects, the Project Directors Office also designed a special system to monitor and evaluate projects that were implemented. 2.4 As mentioned earlier, the implementation of projects in each district was carried out and monitored by one staff from the Project Director's Office and supported by implementing staffs from various agencies. This officer was given multifaceted responsibilities ranging from project identification and sifting applications, reporting status of project and attending ground-level meetings to writing special project reports as well as acting as an intermediary to the Project Director. These officers maintained close rapport with the staffs of implementing agencies and the project participants. Constant and close contacts were emphasized. Approximately 70% of their working hours were spent outside the office, visiting projects and preparing reports on the current development of the projects. These officers were made accountable only to the Project Director. Reporting was done in prepared M&E format after each project visit and had to be submitted to the Project Director within 24 hours. The Project Director would scan through the reports and advise immediate actions to be taken by the officer. These 'Rapid Observation Reports' were a very important feature of this Project which helped to ensure smooth implementation. The system was also taken up by some participating departments. (Format 1 on page 177 shows a specimen of this M&E format). To ensure that the projects were implemented as intended, the PD often made field visits. Apart from tho M&E 1 format, the Project office also devised various formats to suit each case. Updating these formats to tally with current needs was a normal procedure. Several M&E formats currently used by the Project are shown in Formats 2 and 3 (pp. 178 - 179). 2.5 Formal monitoring was also done through Term Reports. 'Logical Framework Matrix' (LFM) was used by this Project for the Term Reports. Several evaluation surveys had also been conducted to obtain feedback on project achievements. 2.6 As mentioned above, feedback played a very significant role in the daily affairs of the Project Office and enabled the management to keep abreast with the implementation process and initiate corrective measures if there was any deviation. Positive responses to problems, hk #ever minor, remained the characteristic of the Project. Priority was given to farmers' needs since failure on the part of the Project could lead to frustration on farmers' part. Frustration could lead to declining morale and trust in the Project. 2.7 Within the Project Office, this style of project implementation presented no problems. But the same could not be expected from supporting agencies. Some gave positive responses and others did not. Modernization of agricultural management was not an easy task. What the Project office attempted to create was an official/formal communication system between the top management and the lower staff. -7- 2.8 Towards the end of the Project period, the Project office saw some positive uteps being taken by other participating agencies, but a lot still needs to be done. Communication whether verbal or written should be a two-way process. Resoonse From The Target Grouns 2.9 During project implementation, responses from the target groups were varied - some gave very positive responses, some negative and some positive only at the initial stage. clear procedures had been devised for concurrence of land owners, dialogues, choice of crops, upgrading drainage and irrigation facilities, construction of other infrastructural facilities and supervision by staff concerned. All projects were carried out on an Area Development concept, whereby a package deal was implemented. However, farmers' perseverance and consistency dwindled with time and there were different results in the implementation of Area Development Projects. Some failed totally, with some existing only as a fraction of original areas. There were some cases where existing area remained and increased in phases. Those who gave positive responses right from the initial stage managed to improve their income and quality of life. In cases of failures, there were various reasons such as attitude, management, manpower, drought, financial resources and poor extension activity. 2.10 As far as construction/upgrading of infrastructural facilities was concerned, the Project Office did not face any major problems. Land owners readily gave consent for access in the construction of farm roads, bridges, culverts, drainage and irrigation facilities. Planning from the ground was encouraged especially by the active Village Development and Security Committees. Plans of an area detailing infrastructural requirements were done by them and, if found to be viable, the Project would implement them. Payments for land acquisition were generally not required from the early stage of the Project. Payments were, however, made when lands were acquired for construction of buildings, river channeling and drainage improvements. Proiect ScoDe 2.11 During the course of implementation, the Project was affected by a series of policy changes. In 1984 the National Agricultural Policy came into effect and with it there was a reduction of government investment in non-granary padi areas. In 1985 a gradual withdrawal of agricultural subsidies was initiated which affected the implementation of the fish pond and cash crop development components. The curb on the importation of crossbred heifers seriously affected the Project's attempt to replenish farmers, aged stock. 2.12 The Project Office wanted to ensure that thle appraisal targets were realistic. A brief study was done as early as December 1983 which led to certain amendments being made to the Loan Agreement, including an increase in the percentage of disbursementq, in June 1984. A major "Expenditures and Scope Review" was carried out in May 1986 by the Project Office and this led to an overhaul of project implementation schedule identified in the SAR and amendment to the Loan Agreement in July 1986. The cancellation of the New Brisu Irrigation and the Bacang and JasLn II Irrigation Improvement; the reduction of staff quarterup cancellation of dusun rehabilitation scheme; and reduction in the scope of vehicles and quipment and staff overseas training were some of the main results of the 1984 and 1986 amendments. Under the Rubber Development Component, projects such as nursery development, construction of amokehouses and new planting of rubber were cancelled. Oil palm planting was added as a reimbursable. The final review which was done in late 1988 was aimed at fully utilizing the loan and led to some changes in the Loan Agreement in January 1989 mainly as regards additional crops which could be reimbursed by RISDA (see Appendix 115). Proiect Finances 2.13 Project costs were estimated in the SAR at M$175.27 million or US$76.4 million equivalent and these costs included about 10% physical and 20% price contingencies. At an early stage, the Project Office felt that the cost estimates were on the high side. Later, there were also some budgetary constrainto. As mentioned above several projects were cancelled or reduced in scope as a result of a review done in 1986 and the cost estimates were lowered tc about M$80 million. At the time of project identification, there were high expectations and over zealousness and some projects were not given an indepth study. This should not have happened. 2.14 As mentioned above, the 1986 review done by the Project office projected total expenditure to be about M$80 million and the final figure at completion was close to that (about N$88.93 million). Details of the budget allocation are in Table 1. TABLE 1: Budget Allocation In Comparison with SAR Estimates (MS million) I OUDnET ALLOCAXION S A R I PERCENTAGE Y B A R . PD Office . RISDA T Total E Estimate * Budget/ARn 1982 2.00 4.42 6.42 10.70 63.6 1983 3.99 5.93 9.93 20.38 48.7 1984 5.00 6.32 11.32 26.81 42.2 1985 7.22 6.06 13.28 30.49 43.6 1986 7.58 7.11 14.69 34.18 42.9 1987 4.77 8.51 13.28 35.29 37.6 1988 2.66 8.23 10.89 17.38 62.7 1989 2.15 6.96 9.12 - .I TOTAL 35.38 53.55 88.93 a 175.27 a 50.7 l I ii~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - 9 - 2.15 The original loan given by the Bank was US$25.4 million or about 33% of estimated total project cost of M$175.27 million (US$76.4 million) which included 30% contingencies and front end fee of US$0.4 million. Lack of adequate financial planning and over ambitious plan of implementation during the pre- project stage coupled with some budgetary constraints resulted in the annual allocations falling short of BAR's estimates. As a result, the Project Office took its own initLative to scrutinize the whole Project bearing in mind Government Of Malaysia's financial situation, the viability of each project identified in the BAR and the capacity to utilize the Bank loan. 2.16 The Loan Agreement was amended on June 25, 1984 (para. 2.12) and under the Special Action Plan (SAP) the rate of reimbursement was raised to 80%. Not satisfied with the 1984 amendment and doubtful about the ability to utilize the Bank loan, the Project Office carried out a major review of the whole Project in 1986 detailing each item. As a zesult, the Loan Agreement was again amended on July 17, 1986 cancelling US$7,650,000 of the loan. The main items were: adding oil palm planting and maintenance an reimbursables, cancelling one irrigation improvement scheme (Tangga Batu/Sungai Udang), adding two more river channel improvements, reducing the length of farm roads, cancelling the Dusun Rehabilitation Scheme, increasing hectarage under varioui. crops, adding three Milk Collection Sub-contres, and reducing hectarage of freshwater fish ponds. Under the consultancy services, funds were also used for the Bekok Dam Study (West Johore). 2.17 As the Project office was concerned about the capacity to utilize the loan within the stipulated time frame, another review was done resulting in another amendment to the Loan Agreement on January 19, 1989. A high percentage of the loan was utilized by RISDA and realizing this trend the new Loan Agreement included as a reimbursable the planting of tree crops (with the exception of cocoa) between 1982 and June 30, 1989. The Project completion date was also extended to June 30, 1989. As a result, the loan totalling US$17,750,000 was fully disbursed by October 1989, two months before the target date of December 31, 1989. 2.18 The final project expenditure totalling M$82.792 million or US$33.03 million was close to the expenditure expected during the 1986 review (M$79 million) but 47.23% lower compared to original SAR estimates (see Appendices 3 and 4). 2.19 Initial disbursements were ahead of schedule. Total disbursement was US$17.75 million or 70% of the appraival estimate. The foreign loan component amounted to 53.7% of the total project cost (US$33.03 million equivalent), which is higher in comparison with the SAR estimate of 33% (see Table 2 and Appendix 4). - 10 - TABLE 2: Withdrawal of T Lpn Proceeds I AR's Estimate I PCR Actual m PCR/SAR CATEGORY t Us$31i. *t Us$311. % t Civil Works 6.0 23.6 3.52 19.8 58.7 Rubber & Oil palm 13.0 51.2 12.37 69.7 95.2 Equipment & Vehicles 1.7 6.7 0.79 4.5 46.5 Consultant & Training 1.2 4.7 0.69 3.9 57.5 Front-end Fee 0.4 1.6 0.38 2.1 95.0 Dairy 2.1 8.3 - - - Unallocated 1.0 3.9 - _ _ Total 25.4 100.0 17.75 100.0 69.9 l Cancellation in July * 7.65 - - 1986 Total | 25.4 25.40 a 100.0 Smallholder Rubber Development 2.20 This RISDA-executed component was successful and met its main targets. In most years there were adequate budgetary funds derived from Government's replanting cess levied on rubber exports. During the period of national economic constraints in 1984 and 1985, budgetary shortfalls led to a marked decline in the area approved for replanting which resulted in a sharp under-achievement of annual replanting targets for those years. Over the project period, however, the achievement of th4 replanting of old rubber exceeded the SAR's target of 9,000 hectares. Some 10,719 hectares were replanted of which 7,915 hectares or 74% were replanted with rubber (7,614 hectares individual replanting and 301 hectares mini-estate). In addition to replanting, the loan financed the maintenance up to crop maturity of some 5,042 hectares of rubber which is about 68% in excess of SAR's target of 3,000 hectares. 2.21 Some 2,318 hectares of oil palm were planted starting from 1985 when the outlook for this crop was more promising than that of rubber. A further 3,843 hectares of oil palm planted from 1979 were maintained up to maturity with three post-planting grants. About 269 hectares or 12% of oil palm replanted were in mini-estates. From 1986, some 486 hectares of old rubber area were replanted with other tree crops such as fruit trees and coffee. 2.22 Overall standards of crop establishment and maintenance were satisfactory. The replanting programmes were environmentally sound, with legume ground cover routinely planted between the rows of the young crops to provide ground protection from erosion and weeds. - 11 - 2.23 The 48 hectares rubber nursery included at appraisal wau cancelled with the change in RISDA's policy to expand their central nursery in North-West Johore for the supply of planting materials to Malacca. 2.24 Some 104 Group Processing Centres (GPC) were either constructed or rehabilitated. This was about 47% above the number snvisaged at appraisal. The three smokehouses for rubber-sheet curing and central storage facilities that were targeted for construction were cancelled following a change in Government policy eliminating RISDA's role nationally in the processing of smallholder rubber. Irriaation Development 2.25 DID Melaka assisted by their own staff and local consultants executed all civil works under the Project and this included drainage and irrigation improvements, farm roads, river training, and minor works catering for area development. Many programmes were not implemented as originally planned due to policy changes. As early as July 1982 the new Irrigatinn Scheme in Brisu was cancelled when found not economically viable. Two irrigation schemes targeted for improvement were cancelled when indepth study was carried out and found not viable - Jasin II in 1983 and Bacang in 1985. The latter was mainly due to rapid urban/industrial development.' The extension to Merlimau Drainage Area was also cancelled due to lack of detailed investigation. About 76% of the SAR's target was achieved at a cost of about US$305/hectare compared to estimated US$1,100/hectare. Rehabilitation of schemes started slowly due to insufficient design capacity in DID headquarters.2 Only one scheme (Masjid Tanah) was completed in 1985 and the other two (Duyong and Tangga Batu/Sungai Udang) became fully operative in mid-1987 in time for the 1988 dry season crops. All the schemes were highly dependent on rain and river flows for achieving high cropping intensities and yields. Drainace of Aaricultural Lands 2.26 Improvement work has been carried out for two schemes serving about 1,335 hectares (which exceeded SAR's target by 34%) of low lying, frequently waterlogged lands mostly planted with rubber, oil palm and mixed fruit trees. The implementation of improvement works on the Merlimau ard Padang Temu/Alai drainage schemes were carried out smoothly and completed on time, but the completion of the tidal gate was not on schedule due to insufficient capacity of the contractor. 1 Borrower notes that economlc non-viability was also due to implementation of the 1984 National Agriculture Policy, which fostered rice production in designated granary areas. Malacca was not so designated. See Annex 1, p.2. 2 The Borrower's DID points out that this was not the only reason for the slow start, and refers to para 4.4 below, which indicates that delays were not major and that DID performance and relationship with the project were good. See Annex 1, p.2 - 12 - 2.27 Additionally, eLght river channels were trained, draining about 4,621 hectares of both rice and mixed cropping lands which is 189% above the target at appraisal (1,600 hectares). Implementation of this component progressed well and was highly appreciated by area residents. Cash Crom Diversification 2.28 This component promoted crop diversification on idle land (mostly padi land) into more remunerative alternative short-term cash crops, cocoa and tree crops. This was done by providing agricultural infrastructures such as drainage and irrigation system, access roads, bridges, culverts etc.; services (tractor hire, extension, applied research and marketing); and input supplies (fertilizers and pesticides). Project management vigorously pursued the development of con- tiguous areas of land by groups of farmers under the Area Development concept. Various loci were set up and during the first three years the rate of development was high and farmers' participation was excellent partly due to incentives given by the Project in terms of subsidies and services. 2.29 Overall, the vustainability for crops was 57% in which 47% of the original area developed was still utilized with original crops while 10% was changed to other crops. Some 43% of the area went idle again. Tree crop gus- tainability was much better at 72% for cocoa and 63% for fruit trees compared to 47% for padi, 57% for short term crops/vegetables and only 35% for banana areas. However, banana planting should not be regarded as a failure since it was only for a two-year span. Those areas formerly planted with banana were cultivated with alternative crops such as cocoa and other permanent crops. In some areas, banana trees acted as cover crops for young rubber trees. Moreover, thie banana project which was originally implemented on a trial basis on idle padi land has given the Project Office some experience which was also useful for other agencies. 2.30 Inputs and agricultural support service were provided for 2,902 hectares of crops by end of project period with 5,556 farmer participants, at an average cost of about US$625/hectare or US$341/participant. Most tree crop farmers were glven the necessary inputs during the immatu-e period. Some 1,997 padi growers on 1,299 hectares of land received infrastructure improvements and minimum amount of input, normally pesticides, since they were already eligible for free fertilizers. Some 884 farmers participated in vegetables and other short term crops scheme on 523 hectares of mostly idle padi land. For these farmers the total costs averaged about US$538/hectare. Some 2,395 farmers planted various tree crops (cocoa and various types of fruit trees) on 931 hectares of land at an average cost of about US$431/hectare. 2.31 The 8AR's target for cash crop diversification was 2,310 hectares. However, this was increased to 3,000 hectares in 1986 and the achievement of this revised target was about 96.7% (or 25.6% above the original target) with 2,902 hectares of idle land brought in production with various short term and tree crops (Table 3). - 13 _ TABLE 3: Croo Development Prooram. 1982 to 1989 (Hal C R O P * HECTARS S PARTICIPANTS Padi 1,299.34 1,997 Short tarm crops/ vegetables 523.39 884 orchard 179.23 970 Cocoa 701.12 1,369 Orchard/Cocoa 50.61 56 Bananas 148.09 280 TO0T AL 2,901.78 5,556 2.32 A padi seed multiplication program was also implemented from 1983 with average annual hectarage of about 16 hectares. At completion, total area covered under the prog7;am was about 114 hectares and some 260 tons of approved padi seed (MR 71 and MR 84 variety) were distributed to padi farmers through selling or exchanges. 2.33 Some special projects were carried out to test the suitability of local idle padi land. This component included the planting of 'Pisang Mao, (banana), Papaya Exotica (a cross of Subang and Hawaiian Solo variety), Pomeloes and Starfruits. 'Sabah Cnoy' (sweet shoots) and Rock Melon were also tried. The trial plots done with the assistance of MARDI were valuable as a learning process. They were successfully planted and provided a base for further expansion of area. Dairy Develoument 2.34 Through the DVS allocation, 1,063 heifers were supplied and distributed and some 208.5 hectares of pasture and fodder grasses were established. Breed upgrading, improved feeding and care led to an increase in Malacca's dairy herd population to a total of about 3,000 dairy cows. One Milk Collection Center and three Sub-centres were constructed to cater to the increase in milk production in Malacca. Equipment were also provided. Malacca is currently the top dairy state in Peninsular Malaysia. Fish Pond Develooment 2.35 The Department of Fisheries (DOF), with the cooperation of the Pro- ject, assisted farmers with the construction of freshwater fish ponds through an existing subsidy program (M$3,000 for 0.2 hectare pond). Farmers' interest in this project was quite strong in the initial years. On termination of the subsidy program in 1986, only 60.5 hectares or 23% of the project target was achieved, with 303 ponds at an average of 0.2 hectare per pond. Parm Road 2.36 The Project provided for the construction of about 140 kilometers of access and farm roads in 52 segments. During project implementation, the target - 14 - was reduced to 85 kilometers, which was over-achieved. There were 5 local contract packages for about 48.1 kilometers at an average cost of US$13,560/kilometer (which was higher than SAR's estimate of US$12,857/kilometer). The rest (106.3 kilometers) was done through indent work at a lower coat of about US$7,563/kilometer. The State is now well provided with roads for farming communities and production areas. Maintenance has been timnely and satisfactory. Some farm roads were upgraded by the State authorities. About 5,743 hectares of agricultural areas, mostly rubber and oil palm involving 7,082 farmers, have benefited from this farm road construction. Farmers' Development Centreg 2.37 The Project constructed four Farmers' Development Centres (FDC) and three sub-centres at strategic locations in the State. Farmers' Organization Authority (FOA) which was the main occupant and other participating age. ties were provided with office and storage facilities as well as staff quarters where necessary. This proved to be a successful effort in obtaining agency cooperation and allowed decentralization of staff away from Malacca City. All agricultural extension services at the district level were coordinated at these Centres. FDC cost an average of US$143,500 while sub-center cost averaged US$60,000. 2.38 A small Agricultural Marketing Center, operated by the Federal Agricultural Marketing Authority (FAMA) was attached to one of the FDCa (Merlimai). EcuiRment. Vehicles and Materials 2.39 The Project wae to provide DOA, FOA, MARDI, DID, FAMA, DOF and RISDA with substantial facilitie': vehicles and equipment. Given the budget con- straints, most of the equipment/vehicles purchases estimated at US$0.22 million were cancelled. Final expenditures for equipment/vehicles was US$1.10 million, or about 83% of the SAR's estimate. 2.40 Due to the substantially larger area of idle land development with inputs provided by the PD office, fairly large quantities of fertilizers (2,182 tons) and approved agro-chemicals (55,169 kilograms) were locally procured in seasonal batches and given free to the farmers. Consultancies and Overseas Trainina 2.41 Provision was made for 36 man-months of local and 30 man-months of foreign consultants to assist DID and MOA with planning and implementing various components of the Project at a total cost of US$1.0 million. Another US$0.2 million was allocated for overseas training. Due to the reduced scope of irrigation works, some of the funds were used by DID Headquarters with approval from the Bank for the detailed engineering design of drainage works under the Second West Johore Proiect with a cont-act value of M$1.9 million. The proposed idle padi land study was withdrawn since it was no longer relevant after changes in Government policy under which Malacca was not a granary area. Only one - 15 - foreign consultant was employed for a period of 13 months to assist the PD Office in the preparation of a monitoring and evaluation system. 2.42 Budget constraints also provented the proposed overseas staff training programmes. Only two staff members proceeded for 3 months of training in the United Kingdom and Netherlands respectLvely. 2.43 Inclusive of West Johore Project coneultancy, overall coat was about US$0.69 million, which was 43% below the SAR's estimate and 99% of the revised estimate in 1989. Proiect Phyascal Accomolishments 2.44 A summary of project physical accomplishments is given in Table 4. TABLE 4: Physical Indicators of Prolect Accomnlishments | C O M P O N E N T L UITL AR PR PCRAS%OFSAR Rubber Devetopment Rubber Reptanting Indivfdual hectare 6 700 7,614 113.6 Mini-estate hectore 2,250 301 13.4 Oil Palm Replanting hectere - 2,318 Other Crops Reptanting hectare - 486 Maintenance Rubber hectare 5,260 5,042 95.9 Oil Palm hectare - 1,843 New Planting hectare 320 Infrastructure Development Irrigation Improvement hectere 1,848 1,415 76.6 Drainage Improvement hectare 1 000 1 335 133.5 River Improvement hectare 1.600 4,621 288.8 Farm Roads kiLometer 140 154 110.0 Crop Development Padi Seed Nultiplication hectare 96 114 118.7 Cash Crop Diversification and Other Crops hectare 2,310 2,902 125.6 Dairy Development Heifers Supply numbers 2,500 1,063 On-farm Fodder Grass hectare 250 208.5 83.4 Fish Pond Development Fish Pond Construction hectare 260 60.5 23.3 * Supplied uider DVS allocation. III PROJECT RESULT BENEFIT AND ECONOMIC EVALUATION Smallholder Rubber Development 3.1 Rubber Replantinoa Replantlng of rubber went on smoothly even though achievement was less than the appraisal target in 1982 to 1987. Due to the extension of the project period, replanting was continued until September 1989, achieving 113.6% of SAR's target for indlvidual replanting but only 13.4% for mini-estate. The main reason was the high costs incurred on mini-estates as - 16 - campared to implementation by smallholders themselves. The overall achievement was 88% of 8AR's target (Table 5). 3.2 Rubber to Oil Palm Qonversion: A total of 2,318 hectares of old rubber were replanted with oil palm mostly between 1985 to 1987 following the favorable price of that commodity during thoue years. The hectarage suffered a decline in 1988 and increased again in the final year of the Project. 3.3 Rubber to Other Cros ConversLon: About 486 hectares of other crops, mainly fruit trees and coffee, were planted on ex-rubber land under RISDA's replanting schme. Cocoa was not included under this scheme. TABLE 5: Phastnm of Rubber Reolantfn (hectore) - Acerafsal vs PCR 1982 1983 .1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 TOTAL Rubber Re!lantina Appraisal 1,29 1'm 1,420 1,540 1,700 1,700 . 8,950 PCR 1,027 1,067 753 528 1,060 898 1,480 1,102 7,915 X PCR/SAR 79 82 53 34 62 53 . 88 Conversfon to O1l Pelm Appraisal . . . . . PCR . . 226 601 763 222 506 2,318 Conversfon to other Crop Appraisal . . . . . . .- PCR I - _ _ _ 74 195 163 54 486 3.4 Rubb-r Maintenance: The actual maintenance scheme for rubber repltnted between 1976 to 1981 was 5,042 hectares, which was 96% of the SAR's estimate. The malntenance scheme was spread over a period of eight years from 1982 to 1989. 3.5 oil Palm Maintenance: Some 1,843 hectares of oil palm replanted between 1979 and 1985 and given maintenance grant from 1982 to 1989 were reimlbursed, following the amendment to the Loan Agreement in 1986 which allowed reimbursement effective from 1982 (Sae Table 6). TABLE 6: Rubber and Ofl Palm Area (hectare) For Time Slfce Financing of Maintenance Costs ReDlanted Between 1976 - 1981 (Rubber) and 199 - 1985 (Oil Palm) - (Arofrasal vs PCR) __ 1982 1983 1984 1985 __-__-1986 ,__ 1987 __ 1988- ___989 Rubber Malnteta AppraINfsZ 5,260 4,630 3,740 2,940 2,190 1,050 PCR 3,310 2,846 3,796 4,045 5,960 5,548 5,303 4,023 X PCR/Appraisal 63 61 101 138 272 528 Apprevis .... 2,508 1,230 1,106 2,964 1/ X PCR/A,pruf_eat _ . . . I/ Inclusive of 1,728 hectares of other crops. - 17 - 3.6 Yield and Production: Rubber would be ready for tapping by year nine. For individual replanting, the first tapping was in 1990 producing about 390 tons (Appendix 14). Total estimated rubber production for 25 years is 216,000 tons which is 63.7% of 8AR's estimate (Table 7). TABLE 7: Estimated Rubber Productfon ('000 Ton) 1982 1987 -192 1997 1999 2002 2006* Total 25 yrs. RRI^w . 4.68 12.68 13.28 12.43 1l0.36 190.54 S:aIntenance 3.06 3.85 7.76 7.12 6.61 5.99 5.54 148.05 TotaL SAR 3.06 3.85 12.44 19.80 19.89 18.42 15.90 338.59 PCR . 2.25 8.92 14.74 15.36 13.80 8.79 215.75 | PCR/SAR _ 58.40 71.70 74.40 77.20 74.90 55.30 63.70 3.7 Benefit -to Rubber Smallholders: Average size of holding for smallholders was 1.9 hectares for rubber, 2.06 hectares for oil palm and 1. 6 hectares for other crops. With such size, it is estimated that about 9,144 rubber smallholders benefited from the Project as shown below: Rubber replanting - 4,166 Rubber maintenance scheme - 2,654 conversion scheme to oil palm - 1,125 Conversion scheme to other crops - 304 Oil palm maintenance scheme - 895 ------------------------------------------------------ Total: 9,144 3.8 Rubber Prlces: Natural rubber experienced price fluctuations as a result of supply and demand forces. Rubber prices were low in 1982, bullish in 1983 and 1984 but declined again in 1985. Prices appreciated slightly in 1987 but the rise is insignificant when translated into constant prices. TABLE 8: Comparison of Price of Rubber Between Appraisal and PCR (Ln 1989 oricesl 1985 1990 r - _ .________. .______--------_-------- RSSI, US cent/kilogram SAR 199 170 PCR 99 103 drc, financial farm gate SAR 232 198 soen/kilogram PCR 162 238 dre, economic farm gate SAR 360 311 i soen/kilogram PCR 160 189 details in Appendix 17. - 18 - 3.9 Economic Rate of Return: The individual rubber replanting component has an economic rate of return of 12% compared to 14% estimated at appraisal. Mini-estate replanting has an ERR of 29% while, for rubber maintenance, the ERR is 22% which is much higher than the appraisal estimate of 15%. This relatively high rate is because the yields occurred early and therefore enjoyed the benefit of good rubber prices in the early years of the Project. The economic rate of return for ex-rubber land replanted with oil palm is about 26%. Irriaation Imorovement 3.10 CroDina Pattern and Yield: The cropping intensity for padi had declined steadily in 1985, 1986 and 1987 even though the three improvement schemes were completed. This was due to the declining interest in padi planting. None of the areas were double-cropped. The padi production area covered in 1988 when all the three schemes were fully operative was only 407 hectares compared to 1,848 hectares targeted at appraisal. Large areas were either left idle or diversified to short term crops. SAR estimated that the cropping intensity would be about 160% three years after project completion. However, the cropping intensity two years after the completion of the latest scheme was only 88% with yield of 3.6 tons per hectare. 3.11 Productions The projected total. padi production is about 1,570 tons as compared to the appraisal estimate of 11,985 tons. This lower production was due to the declining area planted with padi. This is a healthy change since it is the policy of OA to diversify padi areas to other viable crops in non-granary areas. TASLE 9: With Prolect: PadI Cronoin. Pattern. Yield and ProductIon (Arnraisal and PCR) Croged area (hec) IhetLggn/hsg. Productfon (ton) _AoraisaL PCR AratsPCRal f_sa PCR Main season 2,200 407 3.3 3.6 7a260 1,570 Off season 1,350 * 3.5 4,725 - Total 3,550 407 11,985 1,570 Cropp1ng Intensity 160 88 . . a 3.12 Price of Rice: With 1989 constant price conversion, the economic farm gate price of rice in 1985 was 36% lower than projected SAR's price. Farm gate prices of padi are derived in Appendix 58 and summarized in Table 10. - 19 - TABLE 10: Derivation of Economic Farmgate Price of Padi (Constant 1989 Prices) 1985 1990 Rice, FOB Bangkok S SAR 529 481 US$/ton e PCR 298 239 Padi, Financial Farm gate a SAR 676 615 M$/ton I PCR 635 635 -__ _ __ _ _-__ _ _ _ ----- - ------- … -…--__ __ -__ __ Padi, Economic Farm gate SAR 705 641 M$/ton PCR 448 401 3.13 Farmerg' Income: The survey conducted by PD's Office in 1989 showed that 8.5% of the 2adi farm families lived in poverty with monthly household incomes of less than MS350 (Table 11). The average income was about M$843/month while the padi sector contributed only about 11% (i.e. M$90) to the total monthly household income. A large portion of the income was from off-farm sources, a normal trend among Malacca's farmers. TABLE l1: Household Monthly Income Among Padj Farmers. 1989 Income Bracket Percentage of (M$) Farmers Leos than 100 j - 100 - 200 1 2.8 201 - 350 5.7 351 - 500 j 20.0 501 - 700 17.2 701 and above 54.3 TOTAL I 100.0 Average total income: MS843.00 Contribution of padi oector: M$90.00 Source: MIADP, Farm Survey, 1989. 3.14 Economic Rate of Return: The SAR's estimated ERR was 24%. The PCR calculation gave an economic rate of return of 12%, if padi bonuses at $16.50/100 kilogram of padi sold were excluded from the production cost since these payments were made outside the farm gate prices. However, if padi bonuses were to be considered as an element of the production cost, the ERR is nil. - 20 - Drainaae Improvement 3 15 Benefits Some 541 hectares of agricultural areas (rubber, oil palm and fruits) have bonefited through avoidance of flooding and water saturation as a result of improvement works to three drainage schemes. The area is about 54% of SAR's target of 1,000 hectares. 3.16 Since data on incremental benefit was not available, the calculation of production war based on marginal benefit from all additional areas. With the project life of 25 years, it is expected that total production from benefiting areas will be about 76,182 tons with 58%, 37% and 5% under oil palm, fruits and rubber respectively. 3.17 Economic Rate of Return: The estimated ERR at appraisal was 11%. The PCR calculation gave an economic rate of return of 24%. This relatively high percentage was due to the lower capital and production costs involved (for details, see Appendix 67). River Improvement 3.18 gnefij: About 1,800 hectares benefited directly (not affected by flooding and water saturation) after the completion of eight river improvement schemes. The phasing of incremental benefited areas is shown in Table 12. TABLE 12: Phasing of Incrementat Benefited Areas With River Improvumont Proaram Flooded Land Land Incremental YEAR ___Taraet__ Before _ Use Before Use After BenefIted Areas_ 1984 448 210 238 448 210 1986 3,323 1,365 1I958 3,323 1,365 1987 490 225 265 4 2252 Total 4.261 1.800 2.461 4.261 1 800 3.19 Production: Calculation of production was based on marginal benefit from all additional areas. Out of eight benefited areas, three agricultural areas (Sungai Baru, Sungai Alor Gajah and Sungai Tuang) were planted with padi monocrop while the areas adjacent to Sungai Tedong, Sungai Duyong, Sungai Lereh, Sungai Umbai and Sungai Punggor were utilized with mixed cropping, mostly rubber and oil palm (also about 20 hectares with padi in Sungai Tedong area). The expected annual production after completion is about 48,075 tons of various crops. Some 326,877 tons of various crops are expected to be produced from the areas in 25 years (about 93% of the tonnage will be from oil palm). Appendix 72 provides details. 3.20 Economic Rate of Return: PCR calculation gave the ERR of this program at 12% which is lower than the SAR's estimate of 14%. - 21 - Dairy Development 3.21 Benef$tt There were 313 active dairy farmers who regularly sent their milk production to various collection centres in 1989. This number is slightly smaller than that in the previous year (355 farmers). The number of active farmers from 1982 is shown in Appendix 81. 3.22 The number of dairy cattle increased from about 1,910 heads at the start of the Project to 3,772 heads in 1990 and is estimated to increase to some 6,674 in the final year of project life (25 years). It is estimated that about 46% of the total cattle population are active milkers. The other 30% are males and small calves in stock, while about 24% are aging and non-productive. 3.23 Progtgtgao: Milk sold to the MCCs was nearly 2.0 million liters during early Pxoject yeaLs and increased steadily until 1987 when it reached a record of 3.97 uillion liters. From that year onwards, the production decreased slightly and at completion, total production went down to 3.2 million liters. This decreasing trend was due to various problems faced by the sector such as: (a) the increase in stock more than 10 years old; (b) non-replacement of stock during the years 1987 to 1989; (c) new pricing scheme under which milk was paid according to quality (solid contents) which resulted in better quality control; (d) the increasing cost of production, especially the price of feeds, and prolonged drought in the State affecting grazing areas; and (e) discouragement by the estates of rearing of cattle in their areas. 3.24 With the new program to increase dairy cattle population through replacement of old stock in the Sixth Malaysia Plan and the construction of a Milk Plant, it is expected that milk production will increase steadily in the years to come. Malacca will be the dairy state to be reckoned with. 3.25 Price: The average price of fresh milk increased from M$600/1,000 liters in 1982 to M$810/1,000 liters in 1989. However, the relatively high price included Government's price subsidy of M$200/1,000 liters in 1982 and 1989 plus bonus payment of N$10/1,000 liters from 1984. When translated into economic price, the farm gate price was M$421/1,000 liters in 1982 and increased to more than MS500/1,000 liters in 1988 onwards (see Appendix 87 for details). 3.26 Farmers' Income: Farm Survey undertaken by the PD Office in 1989 found that the average farmers' household income was M$847 per month and dairy farming contributed about 37% or M$317 per month. Those who were in the poor group with income of less than M$350 per month constituted about 13% of the total farmers while more than 80% were getting an income higher than M$500 per month. 3.27 Economic Rate of Return: At completion, the ERR was calculated at 2.3% which is lower than SAR's estimate of 10%. This is because of very low returns due to high cost of production, especially the feed cost. Besides, the - 22 - price subsidy given by the Government has been excluded from the economic farmgate price. Fish Pond Develonment 3.28 Phasina of Development: The Project managed to construct 60.48 hectares of freshwater fish pond during the project period, which was about 23% of the appraisal target (Table 13). The areas developed with fish pond were below target because pond construction subsidies were withdrawn in 1985. TABLE 13: Phasina of Freshwater Fish Pond Devetomnent |Pond Area Chec) 1982- 1983 - 1984 1985 - 1986 1987 1988 Total Appraisal 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 20.00 260.00 ; PCR___ ___24.48 _ 27.3( -__ 8.64 - _ _ _ 60.48 X PCR/Appraisat 61.20 68.40 21.60 - - 23.30 3.29 Performance: Assessment of the ponds performance was conducted regularly. Only about 43% of the ponds produced regular yields. The average annual production for fish ponds recorded in 1987, 1988 and 1989 was 0.9, 1.03, and 0.93 tons/hectare, respectively. This was quite low compared to SAR's estimate of 1.8 to 2.2 tons/hectare. However, some selected active farmers could produce up to 4.5 tons/hectare per year as revealed through a study undertaken by the . Office in 1987. 3.30 x%roduction: At completion, annual fish production was estimated at 24.18 tV.s and about 562.2 tons in 25 years (compared to SAR's estimate of 12,275 tons). This low production was due to reduction in area developed as well as average low yield. 3.31 Benefit: There were originally 224 farmers involved in the project, but at completion, about 57% were inactive due to lack of interest, frequent flooding and drought. Low yield resulted in lower income and average gross income from the pond per farmer was only M$951 per year. 3.32 Prices: The average economic price for 1989 was M$3.91/kilogram. 3.33 Economic Rate of Return: As the yield is lower than expected, the economic rate of return is also very low. The rate of return calculated at PCR was less than 1% compared to 16% at appraisal. Cash Croos 3.34 Phasing of Develooment: The Project managed to develop 523 hectares of cash crops comprising vegetables and short term crops. However, it was found that only about 32% of these areas were sustained with original crops at completion. They are assumed to remain constant through the end of project life. - 23 - The phasing of project development is shown in Appendix 102 and summarized in Table 14. TABLE 14s Phasina of Cash Crops Develovment YEAR New Area Area Sustained Total (Hec) (Hec) (Hec) 1982 - - 1983 78.00 - 78.00 1984 99.25 47.00 146.00 1985 239.17 87.00 326.00 1986 40.42 196.08 236.00 1987 75.64 141.90 218.00 1988 37.77 130.52 168.00 1989 66.87 100.92 168.00 1990- - 168.00 168.00 onwards 3.35 Production: A survey conducted by PD's office shows that the average production of cash crops was about 6.9 tons/hectare which was higher than SAR's estimate of 3.7 to 4.0 tons/hectare. This level of production was obtained from active utilization of farms with 3 crop cycles per year. 3.36 At completion, the estimated annual yield was about 1,159 tons and about 24,382 tons were expected to be produced in 25 years. 3.37 Price:J The derivation of economic price for various selected vegetables and other short term crops is shown in Appendix 107. The economic price at farm gate in 1989 was M$438/ton and this is assumed to remain constant. 3.38 Economic Rate of Return: PCR calculation gave the ERR of cash crops development program at 2.9%. This low percentage was due to low sustainability of area under the crops and high cost of production. Total Proiect 3.39 Overall Proiect Rate of Return: The overall economic rate of return is 14% which is lower than the expected 15% in the SAR. The summary of all economic rate of return is given in Table 15. - 24 - TABLE 15: Economic Rate of Return PCR Cowmared to SAR I SAR PCR Total Project 15 14 Rubber RepLenting 14 12 Rubber Maintenance 15 22 Olt Patm Replanting - 26 Oil Palm Maintenance 3 50 New Irrigation Scheme 19 Irrigation Improvement 24 12 Drainage Improvement 11 24 River lIprovement 14 12 Dusun RehabilItation 14 Dairy Development 10 2 Fish Pond Development 16 <1 Cash Crops 3 Cost Recovery 3.40 Cost recovery is from zakat for padi and from cess and export duty for rubber. Zakat is obligatory for Muslims and the amount is 10% of gross output. Excluding the payment of padi bonus, the collection of zakat based on incremental yield would be about N$0.07 million in 1990. 3.41 For rubber, the replanting cess levied is 10 sen/kilogam, research cess 4 sen/kilogram and export duty varies with the FOB price. It was calculated that the export duty was 24.5 sen/kilogram in 1988, 13.2 sen/kilogram in 1989 and 12.2 sen/kilogram in 1990. Total cost recovery from rubber would be about M$1.65 million in 1990. The peak collection years would be between 1997 and 1999 with the amount of about M$10 million per year, and drop to M$7 million from 2000 when the trees produce less. The cumulative collection would be about M$86 million by the year 2002, which is sufficient to recover all the cost incurred on the Project. Other Aaricultural Services Activities 3.42 Farmers' roranization: There were five Area Farmers' organizations (AFO) under FOA in Malacca. In 1989, a total of 13,800 farmers were members of these APO which was a 51% increase compared to the start of the Project (9,165 in 1982) and this membership was 69% of the FOA's target of 20,130. Members benefited from this organization through various activities such as credit for agricultural inputs, farm mechanization, profit from contracts and business ventures etc. At the end of 1989, some M$0.34 million in members' shares were credited into APO's account. 3.43 The annual business volume of AbOs was quite satisfactory with value of contract works at more than M$1.O million and another M$3.0 million from other business activities. A self-reliant AFO is still a dream since, when management costs are included not a single APO showed profit. There is still a lot to be done and at present financial returno none will be in the self-reliant category in many years to come. A summary of the organization's performance is shown in Table 16. - 25 - TABLE 16: Performance of AFO and State Farmers' Oraanizmtion From 1986 to 1989 _ - _ _____ _ _ ___21987 1988 1989 Membership (Nos) 10,733 11,505 12,807 13,800 Members# Shares (NS) 158,797 211,249 278,687 343,290 Total Volume of Business (NS) 2,866,812 2,991,115 3,606,914 4,325,686 | Total Vatuw of Contract Works (NS) 1.678,737 1,177,135 1,109,397 1.144,889 3.44 Reeearch Activities: Some crop-based research activities by MARDI through the implementation of trial plots were also financed by the Project. The activities included fruits research on starfruit in Duyong and pomeloes in Bukit Meta mainly to determine the suitability of such fruits on idle padi lands. Apart from that, MARDI was also involved in the practical observation on crops including the new variety of papaya, rock melon, vegetables, bananas and cocoa in various areas developed by the Project. Most of the research and observations are on-going and results are produced from time to time for other agencies and farmers. 3.45 Marketina Activities: FAMA'e role was crucial in the marketing of fruits, cocoa, cash crops and freshwater fish produced by farmers. In several strategic places, FAMA had organized farmers' markets as a marketing alternative. FAMA had benefited from the Project through the construction of Agricultural Marketing Center (AMC) in Merlimau. There was no major marketing problem during the project period. Marketing outlets for quality fruits and cash crops were readily available. FAMA also took the initiative through its market intelligence to produce various monthly reports on supply and demand of commodities in Malacca. Apart from easing supply planning, these reports also helped to monitor production areas. Other useful information is also available to those interested. FAMA has been actively involved in the training of farmers, especially in marketing of cash crops and grading of cocoa. Several collection centres in viable cash crop production areas were set up to ease collection and marketing of farmers' product. The Project has been highly dependent on FAMA for market outlets when planning any planting of crops. IV. PERFORMANCE OF THE BORROWER. THE BANK AND LESSONS LEARNED Performance of The Borrower 4.1 As mentioned earlier, the PD's tenure of office right from the initial stage of Project implementation to the end was a very important factor which ensured continuity, particularly of planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation, and thus contributed enormously to the Project's success. Forward planning could be done and remedial measures to avoid any derailment in the implementation process could be adopted. The package deal covering infrastructural, crop, fisheriee, dairy, livestock and other related developments gave slgnificant benefits to the target groups. - 26 - 4.2 Project preparation, especially the ground work, was carried out smoothly. Initial planning was done by having a series of dialogues with the land owners. Meetings were held with the various sub-technical committees to ensure proper Implementation on the ground (especially under Infrastructural and Crop Development). A bigger Area Development Committee was also set up covering the field officers of various participating departments. Development was done on the "Locus Concept" where several loci were developed after initial success. Semi-detailed and detailed planning were normal processes a locus must go through. A locus was divided by hectarage and geographical area. Benefits were only given to interested farmers and Project Action Committees were set up as the voice of the participants. With such mode of implementation, one would expect success but, as mentioned earlier, sustainability was only partial. It should not deter a practitioner. It is an experience one has to go through in human development where multifaceted socio-economic strata exist. One lesson derived by the Project management was with regards to the future areas of concentration where further development of the target groups could be undertaken. These viable areas were given special focus and farmers in these areas derived a lot of benefits and experienced improvement in their livelihood. Close and constant contact as well as systematic monitoring of projects maintained the sustainable percentage. 4.3 Land acquisition faced no major problems since the Project managemlent processed it at an early stage. The State Government was very cooperative in expediting applications. Any hindrances were brought up to the State Government, which solved them early. 4.4 No major delays were experienced as regards the designs of infrastructural works which were completed in-house by DID. Good relationship with DID headquarters expedited the process and some designs were taken up by the State Office. 4.5 Delays were prevented by PD'a office with constant monitoring and esprit de corps at official or unofficial levels. Committees met regularly to clear the path of implementation. The setting up of sub-technical committees helped. 4.6 The Project office set up a good monitoring and evaluation system which started from initial project implementation. Collection of socio-economic data, records on project implementation, audit reports and withdrawal applications were timely. Regular reporting system via the "Rapid Observation" format by the ground officers kept track of project implementation. Various other monitoring and evaluation formats were devised by the Project management to ease the flow of information. 4.7 The Project management did well to adapt to financial shortfalls experienced during implementation and put forward to the Bank three Loan Agreement amendments. These led to the cancellation of a portion of the loan and also reviews of projects to be implemented. 4.8 Generally, the Project has performed up to expectation and this has happened due to the cooperation among the Project management team and participating departments. - 27 - Performance of The Bank 4.9 The Bank's supervision missions visited the Project twice a year during the first few years of implementation. The missions provided much guidance on disbursement procedures and project implementation and also provided valuable solutions to problems faced. These missions, consisting of a tree crop specialist and an agronomist, dealt effectively with the Project management during the course of implementation. The missions never failed to visit on-going projects and provided useful insights and comments. Their sincerity to smoothen the implementation process led to various unofficial meetings in Kuala Lumpur. This occurred when the missions did not include Malacca as part of their itinerary. 4.10 During the final years of Project implementation, missions were handled only by the agronomist who was a great help to the Project Management because of his sincere criticism and comments. He provided a lot of guidance and solutions to problems and this was strongly felt during the time of the preparation of data for this report. The Bank's economist also played a role in providing valuable guidance to ease the preparation of the Project Completion Report. 4.11 Generally, these missions were very effective and greatly helped to smoothen project implementation. otherwise the process might have experienced some significant problems. Lessons Learned 4.12 In retrospect, there appeared to be over-enthusiasm and lack of detailed planning during the pre-project stage which led to non-implementation of a number of projects. This led also to over-estimation of costs to be incurred during implementation stage. Preparation reports were not very satisfactory. This applied particularly to the drainage and irrigation improvement namely Brisu Irrigation (new constriction), Jasin II, Bacang and Msrlimau Extension. The Project management was quick to realize these shortcomings and proposed remedial measures such as the Expenditure and Scope Review and other relevant proposals which led to loan cancellation, amendments to the Loan Agreement and increasing projects' scope in order to fully utilize the loan. Without these measures, the Government would have had to pay a lot of commitment charges arising from loan disbursement delays. 4.13 There also appeared to be excessive provision at appraisal for staff quarters to be constructed and equipment to be bought. Moreover, financial conatraints were faced in times of the downward trend of the economy arid the central agencies then did not give enough budget to implement identified projects. Training of officers overseas was also affected as many courses were identified in the SAR but not considered during budgetary allocations. 4.14 Lack of detailed planning also led to some viable projects not being included in the SAR. The Project management did identify these projects which - 38 - were reimbursed by the Bank. In future, all projects pertaining to the objectives of the Project should be put up to the Bank. 4.15 Some assumptions made in the SAR were not realistic. There was over-estimation of crop yields and some prices. Unrealistic categorization of farmers into models A, B, C and D made comparisons on the% same basis impossible. The farmers' interest in padi farming was also not dealt with deeply. It was assumed that they xuld participate in padi planting after an irrigation improvement. During the Project period this was not so and the expected cropping intensity did not materialize. Infrastructural upgrading should be concentrated in available double cropped areas. 4.16 In the SAR, little emphasis was given to the small scale civil works which were extensively implemented by the Project. The Project management would like to suggest that in future major and small civil works should be given the same platform as, in terms of benefits, both works have the same merit. While major works like drainage, irrigation and river improvement had a wider coverage in terms of area, small scale civil works which normally cover smaller areas and require shorter time to implement provided immediate benefits to farmers. These projects include farm roads, small drainage system, culverts, control gates and bridges. 4.17 The justification of embarking on projects such as the Dusun Rehabilitation was also not studied in detail and this component had to be cancelled. It should not have been in the Project at all. In future, only viable projects should be included. It is also important that the projects have proper objectives; this could ease the monitoring and evaluation process. 4.18 The mainstay of this Project was the monitoring and evaluation of projects and this was fully acknowledged by the Bank. The Project management established the mechanism for data collection, record keeping and studies and these were given due compliments by the Bank. Data was readily available and as such little problem was faced by the Project management when requested by interested parties. 4.19 Careful monitoring of projects implemented, especially in crop development, gave worthy albeit bitter lessons to the Project staff. Sustainability of such endeavors needed a lot of perseverance on farmers' part and a lot of commitment on the official side. Close and constant contact was encouraged and any observation must be reported in the "Rapid Observation Reports". Attention was given to interested farmers and they were the ones who benefited from the Project with increase in their income and improvement in their quality of life. Non-sustainable cases were unavoidable especially in areas with acute labor shortage and high rate of out migration. Close monitoring, incentives, upgrading of ventures, fast solutions to problems and proper choice of crops managed to stabilLze the sustainable rate at the end of the project period. 4.20 Trials implemented on idle padi land with certain tree crops managed to prove their suitability and this should be taken into account in future projects. Proper drainage and irrigation facilities are, however, necessary. - 29 - 4.21 Adopting central control of annual budgetary allocations led to prudent financial management and full utilization of resources. This system was a good move by the Ministry since it gave the PD some authority in utilizing the allocations according to the need and speed of each component. 4.22 Much could be accomplished also if all relevant staff were placed under the direct control and under the same roof with the PD. Even though it may be too much to expect, it is a suggestion to ponder seriously. Such move with a proper controlling system will greatly facilitate project implementation. 4.23 The project had a 'bottom up' approach which helped to ensure that only those groups with firm commitment and that really needed the project got what they asked for. This system was actively practieed from mid-project period. Interested parties planned at the initial stage what they wanted and took the trouble also to get access from land owners if farm roads or drainage and irrigation system were to be constructed. Other simple planning processes were also encouraged from the target groups. As the years went by, the procedures set up were clearly understood by them. It has become a standard procedure with which the target groups have to comply whenever they apply for a project. 4.24 The setting up of the committees helped to get the participating ager.cies' staff closer and expedited implementation. Project visits by officere of the PD's office were made together with relevant ground staff and their rapport was very good. The setting up of ground level committees helped to bridge the communication gap and also solved many problems. 4.25 The tenure of office of the PD helped smooth implementation and continuity of work was ensured. The officere of the PD's office and other responeive staff from participating agencies benefited tremendously from this Project. They gained knowledge and experience of planning and management of projects. They were able to wider their horizons beyond their former fields of training - they acquired knowledge on livestock, fisheries, crop and infrastructural development. 4.26 There were also some lessons learnt from APO's activities. AFO is an organization with members comorilsing of farmers having shares. It played a vital role in uniting its members for an active participation in the agricultural sector. Facilities such as credit for agricultural inputs, farm mechanization and transportation eased some burdens on farmers in the course of their farming activities. But the over-emphasis and concentration on its business enterprises such as contract works and supplies caused AFO's commodity development work for crops, livestock and others to suffer. AFO was also found to be heavily dependent on Government support with funds via the FOA and PD"s office for its management overheads. Self-reliant AFOs are yet to emerge. 4.27 There is still a lot to be done by AFO to achieve the self-reliant category. More viable projects in the agricultural sector should be ventured into. The PD's Office and MARDI did the groundwork in idertifying types of crops best suited to Malacca. There are large areas suitable for cultivation and adequate infrastructure is available. AFO needs to make a bold move to improve its services to lts members and to fortify its financial base. This depends a lot on the dynamism of the Board of Directors and Management, more so on the - 30 - General Manager. The objective of the Project was to achieve equally balanced development ln varlous subsectors of crops, dairy, aquaculture and others. Mevertheles, the overall rate of development was unequal among subsectors. Many crop development programmes faced the problem of areas reverting to being ldle again. Failures were due to lack of manpower, drought, dwindllng lnterest of som partLcLpating farmers ln addltion to marketlng, input supply and farm mechanlzatLon problms. The Project devlied some effectlve implementatLon strategles, lncludlng an improvement of the monitorLng and evaluation system, focussLng on full. tlme commercial farmers and conductlng a thorough envlronmental scannlng' durlng plannlng. 'Scannlng' lncluded a revlew of the compatiblilty of soll, crops and partLclpants to ensure sustaLnability of development and maximize lmpact on agrLcultural development. 4.28 The dalry component showed consLderable success. Mllk productlon and total dalry cattle population Lncreased steadily. Adequate lnfrastructure facilitles such as Mllk Collectlon Centres and Sub-centres, transport servLces for mllk from MCC/MCSC to mllk processLng plants and strLngent mllk quallty control contrLbuted to the lmprovement of the sector. Government's mllk prlce subsLdy also helped to stablilze pricLe and lncomes of dalry farmers. However, towards the end of the Project, productlon decreased alLghtly due to various problems faced by the sector. Nevertheless the scenarLo ls expected to improve wlth the lntroductlon of programmes geared towards the lncrease of dalry cattle populatLon in the years to come. 4.29 The aquaculture sector experlenced the problem of ldle ponds. However, group projects done by actLve farmers turned out to be more successful. important crlterla of a successful venture are actlve partLclpants, established marketLng outlets, and the partLcLpants maLntaLning a rapport wlth Project Actlon' Commlttee and flild offLcers of the FLiherLes Department and the PD'S Offlce. 4.30 In general, the lntegrated approach proved to be an effectlve approach in the development of the agrLcultural sector. The glst of the approach is well-regulated and coordlnated development, quLck actlon in rectlfylng problems faced by target groups, and concerted offorts to prepare a package for each project planned. This ensures manpower and tlme conservatlon. The Project could be implemented smoothly and approprlately. Flnanclal allocatlon could then be channelled to vlable projects after a thorough evaluatlon ls done lnvolving many agencles. - 31 - APPENDICES - 32 - LIST OF APPENDICES Alhmenelix Titl 1 Statistical Annex: Physical Indicators of A-1 Project Accomplishments : Buildings 2 Physical Indicators of Project A-3 Accomplishments : Equipment and Vehicles 3 ProJect Cost Comparison Between SAR A-7 Estimate and Actual PCR 4 Actual Expenditures 1982 - 1989 A-9 5 Conversion Factor To 1989 Constant Prices A-10 6 Age of Replanted Rubber At Given Year A-11 Individual Replanting (Hectare) 7 Derivation of Economic Capital Cost A-12 Individual Rubber Replanting (1989 Prices M$ million) 8 Rubber Replanting Grant Schedule of Payment A-13 Individual Replanting 9 Acreage of Rubber Entitled For Residual A-14 Replanting Grant : Individual Replanting (Ha) 10 Residual Replanting Grant Payable After A-15 ProJect Period : Individual Replanting (M$ million, 1989 Prices) 11 Financial dan Economic Production Costs of A-16 Individual Replanting of Rubber (M$/ha, 1989 Prices) 12 Economic Cost of Production of Rubber at A-17 Given Year Individual Replanting (Constant 1989 Prices, M$ million) 13 Yield of Rubber By Age : Individual A-18 Replanting (Kg/Ha) 14 Total Yield of Rubber at Given Year : A-19 Individual Replanting ('000 Ton) 15 Economic Benefit From Rubber : Individual A-20 Replanting (M$ million, 1989 Prices) - 33 - LIST OF APPENDICES AndixTitl pg 16 Economic Rate of Return (1989 Constant A-21 Prices) 17 Economic Price of Rubber at Farmgate A-22 (Constant 1989 Prices) 18 Farm Budget : Replanting With Rubber by A-23 Individual Farmers and as Simultaneous Replanting (TSS) 19 Derivation of Economic Capital Cost : Mini- A-26 estate Rubber Replanting (M$ million, 1989 Constant Prices) 20 Age of Replanted Rubber At Given Year : A-27 Mini-estate (Hectare) 21 Financial and Economic Cost of Production A-28 Per Hectare for Mini-estate Replanting (M$/ha, 1989 Prices) 22 Economic Cost of Production of Replanted A-29 Rubber At Given Year. Mini-estate (M$ million, 1989 Constant Prices) 23 Yield of Rubber : Mini-estate Replanting A-30 24 Economic Benefit of Rubber Mini-estate A-31 Replanting (M$ million, 1989, Prices) 25 Economic Rate of Return : Mini-estate A-32 Replanting of Rubber (1989 Constant Prices) 26 Farm Budget : Replanting With Rubber as A-33 Mini-estate (TSB) (M$/ha) 27 Derivation of Economic Capital Cost of A-36 Rubber Maintenance For Rubber Replanted Between 1976 - 1981 (M$ million, 1989 Constant Prices) 28 Distribution of Rubber By Age Under A-37 Maintenance Program For Rubber Replanted Between 1976 - 1981 (Hectare) 29 Economic Cost of Production Under A-38 Maintenance Program For Rubber Replanted Between 1976 - 1981 (M$ million at 1989 Constant Prices) - 34 - LIST OF APPENDICES dWtl pu 30 Yield of Rubber by Age Under Maintenance A-39 Program for Rubber Replanted Between 1976 - 1981 (O000 Tons) 31 Economic Benefit From Rubber Maintenance A-41 Program for Rubber Replanted Between 1976 - 1981 (M$ million, at 1989 Constant Prices) 32 Economic Rate of Return Rubber A-42 Maintenance Program (M$ million, 1989 Constant Prices) 33 Derivation of Economic Capital Cost : Oil A-43 Palm Replanting (M$ million, 1989 Constant Prices) 34 Age of Replanted Oil Palm at Given Year : A-44 Individual Replanting (Hectare) 35 Financial and Economic Cost of Production A-45 of Oil Palm per Hectare (t$I/ha, 1989 Constant Prices) 36 Cost of Production of Oil Palm Trees at A-46 Given Year Individual Replanting (M$ '000) 37 Yield of Replanted Oil Palm at Given Year A-47 By Age (000 Tons) 38 Economic Benefit of Oil Palm (1989 Constant A-48 Prices) 39 Economic Rate of Return (1989 Constant A-49 Prices) 40 Derivation of Economic Farmgate Prices of A-50 Palm Oil Fresh Fruit Bunches (M$/ton at 1989 Constant Prices) 41 Farm Budget : Replanting With Oil Palm by A-52 Individual Farmers (MS/ha) 42 Derivation of Economic Capital Cost of Oil A-54 Palm Maintenance for Oil Palm Replanted Between 1979 - 1985 ((M$ million, at 1989 Constant Prices) - 35 - LIST OF APPENDICES Aendix Titl Pag" 43 Age of Oil Palm Under Maintenance at Given A-55 Year (Hectare) 44 Economic Cost of Production Under A-57 Maintenance Program for Oil Palm Replanted Between 1979 - 1985 (M$ million, at 1989 Constant Prices) 45 Yield of Oil Palm by Age Under Maintenance A-58 Program for Rubber Replanted Between 1979 - 1985 ('000 Tons) 46 Economic Benefit For Palm Oil Maintenance A-60 Program (1989 Constant Prices) 47 Economic Rate of Return for Palm Oil A-61 Maintenance Program (1989 Constant Prices) 48 Irrigation Improvement Program : Financial A-62 Capital Cost (Current Prices) (M$ million) 49 Irrigation Improvement Program : Derivation A-63 of Financial Capital Cost (1989 Constant Prices) (M$ million) 50 Irrigation Improvement Program : Economic A-64 Capital Cost (1989 Constant Prices) (M$ milion) 51 Padi Production Build-up Irrigation A-65 Improvement Program 52 Cost of Production of Padi Per Hectare Per A-66 Season (1989 Constant Prices) 53 Economic Cost of Operation and Maintenance A-67 (M$ million, 1989 Constant Prices) 54 Incremental Production Cost A-68 55 Total Incremental Benefit : Irrigation A-69 Improvement Program (1989 Constant Prices) 56 Economic Rate of Return (1989 Constant A-70 Prices) : Irrigation Improvement Program (Exclusive of Padi Bonuses) (M$ million) - 36 - LIST OF APPINDICES A;Sendi3 Title EDAe 57 Economic Rate of Return (1989 Conatant A-71 Prices) irrigation Improvement Program (Inclus;ve ':f pads Bonuses) (M$ million) 58 Derivation of Economic Farmgate Price of A-72 Padi (Constant 1989 Prices) 59 Drainage Improvement Program Financial A-73 Capital C0ot (Current Prices) (MS million) 60 Drainage Improvement Program : Derivation A-74 of Financial Capital Cost (1989 Constant Prices) (t4$ million) 61 Drainage Improvement Program : Economic A-75 Capital Cost (1989 Constant Prices) (M$ milion) 62 Drainage 'mprovement Program Crop A-76 Produetion Build-up :Itensification of Non-Fiooded Agricultural Area 63 Cost of Production of Fruits Per Hectare A-78 per Year (1989 Prices) 64 Economic Cost of Operation & Maintenance A-79 (K$ million, 1989 Constant Prices) 65 Incremental Production Cost of Drainage A-80 Improvement Program 66 Drainage Improvement Program Total A-81 Incremental Benefit (1989 Constant Prices) 67 Drainage Improvement Program : Economic A-82 Rate of Return : Intensification of Non- Flooded Agricultural Area (Exclusive of Padi Bonuses) (MS million) 68 Economic Farmgate Price of Various Selected A-83 Local Fruits (MS/ton at 1989 Constant Prices) 69 River Improvement Program : Financial A-84 Capital Cost (Current Price MS million) 70 River Improvement Program : Derivation of A-85 Financial Capital Cost (Constant Prices 1989, M$ million) - 37 - LIST OF APPENDICES TitE 71 River Improvement Program : Ecco.;.e A-86 Capital Cost (1989 Constant Prices, h$ million) 72 River Improvement Program Increase In A-87 Non-Flooded Agricultural Area And Crop Production 73 Cost of Production of Cash Crops Per A-89 Hectare Per Crop (1989 Prices) 74 Economic Cost of Operation and Maintenance A-90 for River Improvement Program (M$ million, 1989 Constant Prices) 75 Incremental Production Cost A-91 Intensification of Non-flooded Agricultural Area : River Improvement Program 76 Total Incremental Benefit : Rive~r A-92 Improvement Program (1989 Constant Prices) 77 Economic Rate of Return : Intensification A-93 of Non-Flooded Agricultural Area : River Improvement Program (M$ million) 78 Dairy Development : Financial capital Cost A-94 (Current Prices, M$ million) 79 Dairy Development : Financial Capital Cost A-95 (1989 Constant Prices) 80 Dairy Development : Economic Capital Cost A-96 (Constant Prices, 1989) 81 Dairy Cattle Population Build-up A-97 82 Dairy Development Dairy Cattle Producyi,on A-98 Build-up 83 Cost of Production : Dairy Development (M$ A-99 at 1989 Prices) 84 Econom4.c Cost of Operation and Maintenance A-100 : Dairy Development (M$ million at 1989 Constant Prices) 85 Incremental Benefit : Dairy Development A-101 - 38 - LIST OF APPENDICES ARRendix Title Eaae 86 Economic Rate cf Return : Dairy Development A-102 (1989 Constant Prices, M$ miic.n. 87 Economic Farmgate Price of MiLk ($/1,000 A-103 Litres at 1959 Constant Prices) 88 Fish Pond Development Financial Capital A-104 Cost (Current Price, M$ million) 89 Fish Pond Development : Derivation of A-105 Financial Capital Cost (Constant Prices, 1989, M$million) 90 Fish Pond Development Economic Capital A-106 Cost (1989 Constant Prices, M$ million) 91 Fisheries Component : Progress o! Fish Pond A-107 Construction (Ha) 92 Fisheries Component : Yield Produ:ing Pond A-108 By Year of Construction (H` 93 Fisheries Component :Derivation of A-109 Economic Farmgate Price of Fish (M$/kg) 94 Economic Benefit : Freshwater Fish Pond A-11O Construction (M$, 1989 Prices) 95 Incremental Cost of Production Fisheries A-111 Component 96 Cost of Production Per Hectare : Fish Pond A-112 Development (M$ million, 1989 Prices) 97 Cost of Maintenance of Freshwater Fish Pond A-113 98 Economic Rate of Return : Fish Pond A-114 Development (M$ 000, at 1989 Constant Prices) 99 Cash Crop Diversification Program A-115 Financial Capital Cost (Current Prices) (M$ million) 100 Cash Crop Diversification program A-116 Derivation of Financial Capital Cost (Constant Price 1989, M$ million) - 39 - LIST OF APPENDICES &Mnndi x l19 S" 101 Cash Crop Diversification program : A-117 Economic Capital Cost (Constant Price 1989, M$ million) 102 Cash Crops Diversification Program : Crop A-118 Production Build-up 103 Economic cost of Operation and Maintenance A-119 of Cash Crop Diversification Program (M$ million, 1989 Constant Prices) 104 Incremental Production Cost : Cash Crops A-120 Diversification Program (MS million. 1989 Constant Prices) 105 TotalIncremental Benefit : Cash Crops A-121 Diversification program (1989 Constant Prices) 106 Economic Rate of Return : Cash Crop A-122 Diversification Program (M$ million, 1989 Constant Prices) 107 Economic Farmgate Price of Various Cash A-123 Crops (M$S/Ton at 1989 Constant Prices) 108 Derivation of Other ProJect Economic A-124 Capital Cost 109 Economic Rate of Return for Overall Project A-125 110 Total Incremental Yield of Rubber (Tons) A-127 111 Export Duty of Natural Rubber (w.e.f April A-128 18, 1985) 112 Export Duty : Natural Rubber By Year (M A-129 sen/kg) (1989 Constant Prices) 113 Expected Cost Recovery Excluding Padi Bonus A-130 (1$ million) 114 Expected Cost Recovery Including Padi Bonus A-132 (M$ million) 115 Amendment to Loan Agreement (Malacca A-134 Integrated Agricultural Development Project) Loan 2147-MA - 40 - Liat of Few~mAat 1. Format M & F 2 : Report of Visit To Project A-137 2. Format M & E 15B : MIADP's Infrastructure A-138 Project Proposal 3. Format M & E 15C : Monitorina of MIADP's A-139 Infrastructure ProJecte (Farm Roads, Drain, Irrigation, River, etc.) STATISTICRL RNNEX PHYSICRL INDICATORS OF PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENT BUILDINGS : : Buildings Unit : SRR PCR : PCR as of : Estimate : Actual : SAR X PD : : Office renovation : 0 : I : Staff Quarters : : Class E 4 : 4 : a : :Class F 7 ;RISOR:: : Office: s :l: -_ : Stores: # :1: -:-: Staff Ouarters : : : : : Class E : : : - : Class H : 1: - :Clasrs I 10 : -:-: : GPC : # :72 : 104 :144: : Smokehouse : # :3 0: : : Staffl Quarters: # ::::m :Class E ::1:1:100 : m :Class F ::2 :9 :450 ^~ :Class H ::6 i S: 250:°x : MCC I I : MC Sub-C : # 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - a a : ffice : : 1 - : - Stores~~~~ ~~~~~ _: I STRTISTICAL ANNEX PHYSICRL INDICATORS OF PROJECT RCCOMPLISHMENT BUILDINGS Buildings Unit : SAR PCR PCR as of : Estimate : Actual SAR : : Stores : # :I :2 :200: : Staff Quarters: :::: Class E : :I I 100: : Class F ::0 3_ : Class G ::2 . : Class H : :> 5 100 : PMTC a hostel I : 100 : Farmer Group huts : :200 :23 :12: : Livestock unit : # :I : O :- FOR::::: Office 0 : Stores : 4 : 0 SKtT's 4 : 4: 4 100: : Subcenters : :3 :3 : 10 Staff Quarters ' Class E 4 : 1 - Class F : : 3: 3: 1 Class G 2 :7 - : ls : : s: : la: F: hMR : : : : : Rgr i C#D Marketing h : 2 2 : LivCentre t u 1 : 100 : : i : Staff Quarters: :::; :a Class F 1 x Store a _ 1 _ 0: : :ener : 3: 3: :00 C:s 2:3 i: R-2 PHYSICRL INDICRTORS OF PROJECT RCCOMPLISHMENT EQUIPMENT & VEHICLES : : Equipment & Vehicles : Unit : SRR : PCR PCR as of : Estimate Rctual SRR X * I Car 1600 cc :I :: Utility Vehicle : # : 3 : 4 : 133 Office Equipment : LS : LS : - : Lorry 3.5 T : : : - Mini - Bus : # 2: - Water pumps : 8 : - : 25: - Rotohoe 17 - :DID : Excavator O/Line 5/8 cu.yd 2 : Motor grader 125 1 100 Car 1600 cc : I : 1: - Utility 2. 2 100 : Tipper truck, OT 1 : 1 : 100 : Truck 5T, with crane I 8 : 1 : 1 : 100 : Vibrating roller, ST : I 1 I 1 : 100 : Tractor 45 HP : : 3. 2: 67 : : Portable pumps ' 8 ' 12: 2 17 : : Wielding set . 2 .: - . Battery charger : # 2: 0: - I : Plainimeter : # 2 O: Survey instruments ' # ' 2 0. - : : R-3 PHYSICRL INDICRTORS OF PROJECT RCCOMPLISHMENT ______________________ EOUIPMENT & VEHICLES ____________________ Equipment & Vehicles : Unit : SAR : PCQ : PCR as of : : : Estimate :fictual : SR DOR : Combine harvester 35/45 HP : I : 0 : - Tractor 60/70 HP I : : I: 33: Tractor 35/45 HP 2: I 50: : Bus 44 passenger 1: 0: - Tractor 2 whell 9 HP : 5 : 5 : 100 Extension training equipmer.t : a : LS : LS PMTC equipment : L : LS : LS : - : : lMechanisation equipment : a : LS : LS : - Miscellanneous items & tools : : LS LS : - Regrto equipment:LS 4 Daifgryto equipment: : LS : LS :- : Laboratory equipment : : LS : LS :-: : Misc. items & tools : : LS : LS :-: : Tanker : # : -:I:-: B ush cutter : # : -:2:-: : Standbu, generator : : -:4:- : High pressure cleaner : : -:2 : : Rir compressor I # :1:- 0 x R-4 PHYSICRL INDICRTORS OF PROJECT RCCOMPLISHMENT EOUIPMENT & VEHICLES Equipment & Vehicles : Unit SRR : PCR : PCR as of : Estimate : Rctual : SRR : :FOR Combine harvester 35/45 HP : :2 I SO: Tractor 60/70 HP : 5 3 :60: Tractor 35/45 HP : a 5 Car 1600 cc : # :I : 0 Rotovator : # :10 :3 :30 : Disc plough : 5 2 :40 : Disc harrow : 5 2 :40 : Truck 3.5 T Spinkler system I set : : Ut:lt ve i l : : : Min-bs : Utlat e ighi mcn : C : S : O f Trusk 3.5 T 2 t S : :S * S~~~0 :~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~ Cob va : S : Combine harvse 3 5H : " 20: O 150 : : Oushcutter/DH : # : 520: O -:0 : Knapack r35/45H : # : 40: O: -: : Palatform weghn mahna#12:O: - : : RTruaso 3. T a : 10 : 3 : 30 : : Dicpo: : 5: :~ 4: Y : rc35 : a : : :- : :I Q : : :: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------! R-5 PHYSICRL INDICRTORS OF PROJECT RCCOMPLISHMENT EQUIPMENT & VEHICLES Equipment & Vehicles : Unit SAR : PCR : PCP as of Estimate : Actual : SRR : DOF Utility vehicle :0 # :: 50: Truck 3T 0 I : WHater pump I 5 _ FELCRR Spinkler system . # ' - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------! .b> R-6 > O * S S S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4-0 * 5 5~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' PROJECT COST CO"PRRISON BETWEEN SRR EST?"ITE AND RCTURL PCR I I SAR I PCR I I I Itoo I ESTI"RTE I Actual I Percentago I 1' I ("SC000) I C"SOOO) I I I Rubber devolopment 1 64.183 1 39,011 1 60.78 1 I I a I I I Oil pole dovolopmont I I 9,722 1 - I Irrigation ioprovooont I 4.859 1 1,oeI 1 22.25 I I Drainage isprovoemnt I 935 1 326 1 39.04 1 I River improveoment I 1l981 1 780 1 39.37 1 I Far and occoss road 1 3.969 1 3.969 1 100.00 I D ODirg dovelopment I S.950 1 182 1 3.11 I I Padi seed multiplication I 330 1 206 1 62.42 1 I I I a I Cash crop development I 3,09S I 2,869 1 92.70 1 I Fruit orchard rehabilitation 1 910 1 I - I I Fish pond dovelopment t 4,141 1 824 1 19.90 1 I Buiidings 1 7.163 1 4,243 1 59.23 1 I I I I I. I Small scale civil work I - I 5,074 1 - I I Equipment and vehicles 1 3,335 1 2.753 1 82.55 1 I I I I I I Consultancy Services 1 2.280 1 219 1 9.61 1 I Training 1 1.512 1 551 1 36.44 1 I Land acquisition 1 2 41G I 1.762 1 72.93 1 a Enginooring and Supervision i 5.294 1 - I I Encromental administration t 10.419 1 9.550 1 91.66 1 I I Base Proj’et Cost I 122.572 1 82.792 1 67.55 1 X I Contingoncios 1 62.675 1 1 a I Total Project Cost 1 175.2?7 1 82,792 1 47.23 1 a Inclusive of other crops A-7 IRLRCCR INTEGRRTED RGRICLLTURRL [EVELOP?IENT PROJECT ACLT ENOITLRE 1982 - 1999 : : : J19. 19 3 19 4 19B5 1996 : : ~-- -Ya~1 - : -- - Rulbber Drwlop mtt: Rubber replanting : 1,344,275.79 1,949,432.73 1,074,275.19 778,573.10 1,371,498.50 : Iamatur- rubber upb ep : 2,540,544.95 3,459,799.19 4,123,295.82 4,045,917.39 3,526.229.77 : (replanted 1976 - 1991) Palo Oil Replanting - 1,084,62.50 : Pale Oil Maintenance - - 2,585,093.23 : : Other Crops Replnking : - - 90,750.00 : : Other Crops aintennce - - - 199,711.40 : : -rcup PAoo ssing Centre : - - 32,044.24 156,609.30 : S ~~~~-------- ---------- SUB TOTAL 3,984,920.64 5,308,230.92 5,197,561.01 4,856,534.73 9.003,563.70 * - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~-------- ---- Irrigation I-provement Scheme : - 262,900.00 509,992.0W : Darinage I.prve.ent Scheme : - - - 83.292.-0 84.300.00 River Improvement NMrk : 65,400.00 224,790.00 2.289.00 273,910.00 199.948.00 Smallscal. Civil Marks : - 92,859.00 598,203.00 1,217,107.00 1.147.7%.00 : Fm and Rcess Road : 149,637.00 299,530.00 550,931.36 236,409.00 1,302,944.50 : Dairy Development - 10,870. W 20,29. 00 48.260.00 68,561.00 Padi Seed llultiplication : - 22,876.00 24,518.00 34,383.00 17.122.00 : CAdh Crop Development : 90,721.00 166,398.00 609,725.00 1,413,604.00 269,905.00 : : Omsun Rehabilitation : - - - - - Fismpond CanstrLction : 320,339.00 347,742.00 111,000.00 :45,00.0W Pilot Sch : - - - - : 6ildings 40,600.00 390,487.00 1,168,640.00 1,137,315.00 1, 143,973. W Equipment S Vehicles : 137,505.00 471,424.00 132,740.00 596,175.00 731,221.00 Consultant and Studies - 36,461.00 48,836.00 121,501.00 - Training 14,967.00 90,263.00 36,090.00 97,915.00 94,071.00 Land Rcquisition : 90,00W.0W E22,459.00 530,441.00 211,083.00 32,903.00 Engineering and Supervision : - - - - - Incremental Rdmin. Cost : 547,292.00 905,57?.24 1,032,539.25 1,183,247.78 1,567,909.97 Physical Continc- - : : -- --- ---------- : Ste TOTAL 1,446,350.00 3,971,724.24 4,966,771.61 6,917,001.78 7,205,345.47 : TOTFIL (n $) : 5.331,170.64 9,179,955.16 10,064,332.62 11,773,536.51 16,209,909.17 : _ _ _ _ _:__ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ __ _S ENchange Rate 2 2.34 2.32 2.42 2.48 2.59 Total (16 S) : 2,279,278.05 3,956,977.22 4,159,915.13 4,747,393.75 6,202,522.93 :i : : M~~~~~~~~~~~~~- MALACCA INTEGRATED AGRICULTU1RL 0EVELOPMENT PROJECT ACTUAL EXPENDITURE 1992 - 1999 : - I197 1199 199 TOTAL :lA.. -~.... -: - : Rubber Development Rubber replanting 1,340,090.96 2,269,122.64 1,933,965.75 : 11,860,124.56 lmmature rubber upkeep * 3,299,840.10 3,237,447.78 2,574,175.33 : 26,906,239.23 (replanted 1976 - 1981 ): Palm Oil Replanting 1,092,285.42 323,9s2.79 721,391.79 : 3,212,242.50 Palm Oil Maintenance 798,144.59 777,146.62 736,044.31 : 4,996,419.75 Other Crops Replanting 231,703.75 201,934.14 94,942.84 : 619,330.73 : Other Crops Maintenance 287,373.49 300,342.81 227,722.03 : 1,004,149.72 Group Po ing Centra 39,000.0 W 34,129.60 92,674.02 : 344,455.16 : : - :--- : : SUB TOTRL 7,067,429.20 7,144,015.39 6,270,906.07 48,732,960.65 Irrigation Improvement Scheme 308,651.00 - - : 1,091,443.00 : Drainage Iperovement Scheme 120,403.00 - 29,710.00 : 325,705.00 : River Improvement Hark 14,003.00 - - 790,230.00 Smallscale Civil Warks 730,299.00 549,642.00 749,252.00 : 5,074,147.00 : Farm and Rcess Road 524,015.00 433,990.00 151,739.50 3,639,196.36 Dairy Development 33,610.00 - - 182,130.00 Padi Seed Multiplication 26,679.00 53,094.00 27,011.00 205,683.00 Cash Crop Oelopment 197,578.00 49,210.00 93,332.00 : 2,969,473.00 Ousun Rehabilitation - - - 0.00 Fishpond Construction 8 - 924,090.00 Pilot Schem - - - 0.00 Buildings 220,915.00 40,000.00 101,030.00 : 4,242,960.00 : Equipment & Vehicles 509,661.00 140,614.00 33,795.00 : 2,753,135.00 : Consultant and Studies 12,475.00 - - : 219,273.00 Training 90,829.00 59,625.00 77,195.00 : 550,935.00 Land Acquisition 48,945.00 24,487.00 1,465.00 : 1,761,602.00 Engineering and Supervision - - - 0.00 Incremental damin. Cost 1,934,129.61 1,293,216.55 1,195,790.40 * 9,549,560.90 Ph.sical Contingency - 0.00: SUB TOTRL : 4,660,191.61 2,631,978.55 2,460,299.90 34,.059,553.16 Toa -.:- -:-;_________ TOTAL (I I) 11,727,609.91 9,775,89.e93 9,731,105.97 : 82,792,513.91 EKchange Rate 2.52 2.62 2.71 : Total (US $s : 4,653,913.42 3,731,257.23 3,221,910.32 : 33,030,768.06 R-9 - 50 - Appendix 5 LOAN 2147 - MA t MALACCA IADP PROJECIl C.UMPLET ION PEPOPT CONVERSION FAC:TOR TO 198g CONSTANT PRICES ----------------------------------------- *------------------------------------------------------------------ Year Using MUV Index (1) Using CF'I Index (2) 1980 1.32 1.35 1981 1.31 1.23 1982 : 1.33 1.17 1983 : 1.37 1.12 1984 1. 39 1. 0 8 1985 1.38 1. 08 1986 1.17 t 1.07 1987 1.07 1.06 1988 1. 0Q 1.03 1989 1 *00 1 * 00 : 199 : :.95 0:* : 1995 0 0 . 91 0 0 . 91 2000 t .63 : .63 (1) MUV - Manufacturing Unit Value Index Source - World Bank, International Economic Department, January 18, 1990. CPI - Consumer Price Index Source - Department of Statistics, Malaysia. 1989 - Based on preliminary CPI figure 1990 - 2000 - e-timates. A-10 LOR 2147 - MR : 1RLAEA IO13P AGE OF REPLNTD RflER T GIVEN YE ImDIVIcmIF AEPJT ING (HECTIRE) :YQ: 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1995 2000 2006 : : 788 1,O15 753 528 1,060 898 1,480 1,102 - : 2: 788 1,005 753 528 1,060 898 1,480 1,102 3 78 1,005 753 529 1,060 W99 1,480 : 4: 7 1,005 753 528 1,060 998 5 798 1,005 753 5210 1,060: : 6: 7m 1,005 753 528: :7: 789 1,005 753 : :8 : 7 1, : :9: 798 :10: :11 : :12: :13: :14: :15: :16: 17: : 18: 1,102: :19 : 1,480: :D 2: aml: :21 : 1,060: :22 : 528: : a: 753: :24 : 1,005 i : 25: 788: : : - --S :TORL: 79 1,793 2,546 3,074 4,134 5,032 6,512 7,614 7,614 7,614 7,614 7,614 . R-11 OERIVRTION OF ECONOMIC CAPITRL COST INDIVIOUAL RU9ER REPLRNTIN6 (M$ MILLION, 1999 CONSTRNT PRICES) I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ____........ ______ _______________ S ---------------------~~~------------- - -. ----.---.- ----.---- -. 1992 1983 1984 1985 1986 1997 1988 1989 * ---------------------- ---------- - ----------------------------- ---- - Current Ependitur : 1.22 2.67 2.82 2.81 3.62 3.94 5.15 4.32 1989 Prices 1.43 2.99 3.05 3.03 3.87 4.17 5.30 4.32 Economic Prices 1.33 2.72 2.79 2.76 3.52 3.79 4.92 3.93 * ~ ~ ~ --------------------------------------------------------------- Source : RISOR Conversion Factor = 0.91, M.D. Veitch, 1986, pp. 34 A-12 -a REPLFRTI6 G6RRNT SCHEOULE OF PRYMENT INtIUIO.L REPLRNTING INST6tSENT < 4 HR > 4 HR RVERR6E :- S First 1,581.48 1,236.53 1,409.01 : S Second 989.58 494.21 691.90 Third 617.76 494.21 555.99 : I Fourth 617.76 494.21 555.99 Fifth 617.76 370.66 494.21 i Sixth 617.76 370.66 494.21 Seventh 494.21 247.10 370.66 : S : : Source : RISOR, Nalacca R-13 FUMME OF RBER ENTITLED FOR RESIOLAL REPLI3TING G6RUi: INOIIIOUAL REPLWTING (Hm) S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ : flE OF RUGIER : 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1996 a I~~ . ~ ~~ , . :2 : 2 : 1,102 1 * 04ag 148 110 L : 3 : 10480 1,102 : ~~ 52 1:6 1.60m1.8 1,48 1,1Q: 7 : 753 5;:8 1,060 ONe 1,480 1,102 : -:S -14 * q * ~ ~ ~ * tJI RESIDURL REPLANTING GRRNT PRYRA3LE AFTER PROJECT PERIOD INDIVIDUAL REPLRNTING (M$ Million, 1989 Prices) 0 ~~~ _ ________________________ A GE OF RUBBER : 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 : ISS 2 : 0.76 3 : .82 0.61 4 * 0.50 0.82 0.61 * 5 : 0.52 0.44 0.73 0.54: 6 : 0.26 0.52 0.44 0.73 0.54 : :~~ : 0.6 05:.4 .3 05 7 : 0.29 0.19 0.39 0.33 0.55 0.41 TOTRL : 3.14 2.58 2.17 1.6 1.09 0.41 Economic Cost : 2.86 2.35 1.97 1.46 0.99 0.37 Conversion Factor to Economic Cost = 0.91 Source M.D. Veitch, 1986 A-15 FINRNCIRL RND ECONOMIC COST OF PRODUCTION OF INQIVIDUfiL REPLRNTING OF RU8BER (M$/HR, 1989 CONSTRNT PRICES) :: GRICULTURRL INPUT LRBOUR : TOTRL :YERR :- ----- - ---- FINRNCIRL ECONOMIC : FINANCIRL : ECONOMIC : FINRNCIRL ECONO"IC 7 : 335: 305: 560: 459: 895: 764: 8 : 315: 287: 660: 541: 975: 828 9 : 315 : 297: 715: 586: 1,030 873: 10 315: 287: 790 648: 1,105: 935: 11 : 315 : 287 830 : 681 : 1,145 968 12 : 315: 287: 830: 681: 1,145: 968 13 : 280 : 255 : am0 656 : 1,080 : 911 14 : 280: 255: 800 656: 1,080: 911: 15 : 280: 255: 780: 640: 1,060: 89S: 16 : 280 255: 780 640: 1,060: 895: 17 : 280: 255: 78o: 640: 1,060 89s: 18 : 365 : 332 730 : 599 : 1,095 : 931 19 : 365 : 332 : 730 : 599 : 1,095 931 20 : 365: 332: 730: 599: 1,095: 931: 21 : 330 3oo0: 640: 525: 970: 25 : 22 330: 300: 640: 525: 970: 825: 23 : 125 : 114 : 600 : 492: 725 : 606 : 24 125 : 114 : 600 : 492: 725 : 606 : 25 120 : 109o: 600: 492: 720 : 601 * --------- --------- - - -- --- - -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - - - - Source RISOR, Farm Budget Conversion Factors : Rgricultural input = 0.91 Labour = 0.82 (Source : M.D. Veitch, 1986) > Production cost from year 1 to year 6 had been incorporated into replanting grant R-16 ECONOMIC COST OF PRODUCTION OF REPLRNTED RUBBER JT GIVEN YEFR : INDIVIDUAL REPLRNTING (M$ HILLION. RT 1989 CONSTRNT PRICES) YEAR : 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 20 2006 7 : 0.06 0.77 0.57 0.40 0.61 0.68 1.13 0.64 : : 0.65 0.83 0.62 0.44 0.88 0.74 1.23 0.91 9 : 0.69 0.88 0.66 0.46 0.92 0.78 1.30 0.96 10 : 0.74 0.94 0.70 0.49 0.99 0.84 1.39 1.03 :1 : 0.76 0.97 0.73 0.51 1.02 0.87 1.44 1.07 12 : 0.76 0.97 0.73 0.51 1.02 0.87 1.44 1.07 13 : 0.72 0.92 0.68 0.46 0.96 0.82 1.36 1.00 14 : 0.72 0.92 0.68 0.48 0.96 0.82 1.36 1.00 15 : 0.70 0.90 0.67 0.47 0.95 0.80 1.33 0.96 16 : 0.70 0.90 0.67 0.47 0.95 0.80 1.33 0.98 17 : 0.70 0.90 0.67 0.47 0.95 0.80 1.33 0.98 :l 0.73 0.94 0.70 0.49 0.98 0.64 1.39 1.02: 19 0.73 0.94 0.70 0.49. 0.98e 0.4 1.39: 20 0.73 0.94 0.70 0.49 0.98 0.84: 21 : 0.65 0.83 0.62 0.43 0.67 : 22 0.65 0.63 0.62 0.43: : 23 0.48 0.61 0.45: 24 : 0.48 0.61: 25 : 0.47: Total : 0.06 1.42 2.09 2.64 3.61 4.45 5.70 6.72 6.88 7.00 7.05 7.06 7.01 6.95 6.86 6.76 6.55 6.33 6.08 --…… … … … … … … …… … … … ……-- --- -- --- --- -- --- -- --- -------- --- -- --- --- -- ---17 * II~~~~~~~~~~~~~~R1 - 58 - Appendix 13 YIELD OF RUBBER BY AGE INDIVIDUAL REPLANTING (KG/HA) - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I AGE OF I YIELD I RUBBER I I - - - - - - -- - -- - -- - - - - - - - -I- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -- --- : , I _ I : 8 I 0 : 9 1 500 1 10 I 800 1 11 1 1,000 1 : 12 1 1,100 I I 13 1 1,300 : 14 1 1,400 I 15 1 1,500 1 16 1 1,400 1 17 1 1,200 I ^d I 1, 500 19 I 1,300 I 1 20 1 ' 1,100 I I 21 1 1,000 1 22 1 900 1 1 23 I 800 1 I 24 1 1,000 1 1 25 1 900 1 Source : RISDA Project, Crop Yield Profiles A-18 TOTE. VID OF _E 61Sr ff0_ lIvlCElL _ EFL""Ul" cooo roaa : fm : Is 9 1 IS0 aIm 1m to. 9Ss 1a9 17 19S ISS 2000 2001 2002 2003 20 2M 2006 200 200: : a :: : a : S : ? :: : a I : 0.39 0.50 0.37 0.26 0.53 0.45 0.74 0.S5 la 0.0 0.J0 0.6D f.2 0.65 O.?t *.9 0.0 it : 0.7e 1.01 o.n5 0.52 1.06 0.n9 1.49 1.31 : 2 : 0.06 1.o s.22 0.5s a.16 O.rn 1.63 1.21 : a : 1.02 1.30 0.9? 0.69 1.37 1.16 1.93 1.40 :t : U : 1.ao a... 1.05 0.0o 1.43 1.25 2.06 1.54 is 1.1 U .50 1.t3 o.n9 1.sS 1.34 2.23 1.CS 16 1.10 1.40 1.05 0.o 1.40 1.25 2.08 a.54 IT : O." 1.20 0.S0 0.63 1.27 1.0? 7... 1.32 Is 1U .1 1.S1 1.t2 0.19 &.SS 1.34 2.23 1.65 19 1.02 1.30 0.97 0.6g 1.37 1.16 1.93 : ZO : 0.E6 1.t0 0.02 0.56 1.16 0.96 : 21 : 0.79 1.0 0.75 0.52 1.06: : 22 : 0.7D O.S0 0.67 0.4? 23 0.31 0.Q0 0.60 : 4 0.70 1.00: :25 0.70: FO:rE : 0.) 1.13 1.95 2.73 3.02 5.04 6.61 6.12 o.93 9.60 10.14 10.24 9.93 9.59 6.57 6.64 6.39 8-19 ECONOIC BENEFIT fROI RUBBER INDIVIOt.L RPLRBNTING (N* NILLION, 1999 PRICES) : YEX2 : TOTRL YIELD : ECONOMIC : BENEFIT : : C~~~~TOM) :PRICE:: : 1989 :::: : 0m1990 : 30.74 : : 1991 :1,130 : 1,9.0:2.14 : : 1992 :1,950 : 1,@9m.00 : 3.70 : : 1993 :2,730 : 1,ess.00 : 5.18 : : 1994 :3,820 : 1,B9%.0 : 7.25 : : 1995 :5,040 : 2,905.00 : 14.64 : : 1996 :6,640 : 2,905.00 : 19.29 : : 1997 :1e,120 : 2,905.00 : 23.59 : : 1998 : ,930 : 2,905.00 : 25.94 : : 19S99 : 9,600 : 2,905.00 : 27.8 : : 2X000 10,140 : 1,967.001 : 19.94 : : 2001 : 10,240: 1,967.00: 20.14: : 2002 :9,930 : 1,967.010 : 19.53 : : 2000 9,590 : 1,967.001 : 1e.8e : : 2004 : e570 : 1,967.00: 16.85 : : 92W5 8,640 : 1,967.00 : 16.99 : 900 :390 : 1,967.00 : 16.50 : 1992 1-950 : 1,999.00 : 3.70 19943,92 : ,99900R-7.2 ECONOIIC QRTE OF RETLRN (1989 CONTlIT PRICES) ItNIVIMDIA REPLNINS OF RUBBER *_ ______ :CAPITAL : RESIM1F : PROCUCTION : TOTRL : :NET INCREMENTFL: EKRR : COST : cAPITQL : COST : COST : BENEFIT: BENEFIT : ~~: ("m) :CIOST 1: () :(K) 1X: (X 1982 : 1.30 : : : 1.30 : -1.30 : : 1983 : 2.72: : : 2.72 : -2.72 : : 1984 : 2.79: : : 2.78 : ;-2.78: : 1995 : 2.76: : 2.76: : -2.76: : I996 : 3.52: : : 3.52 : -3.52: : 1987 : 3.79: 3.79: -3.79 : :19BS :4.82: : 0.60: 5.42 : : 5.42 : : 1999 : 3.93 : 1.42: 5.35: -5.35: : 1990 : : 2.86 : 2.09 : 4.95 : 0.74 : -4.21: : 1991 : 2.35 : 2.64 : 4.99 : 2.14 : -2.95: : 1992 : 1.97 : 3.61 : 5.59 : 3.70 : -1.989 : 1993 : : 1.46 : .4.45 : 5.91 : 5.18 : -0.73: : 1994 : : 0.99 : 5.70 : 6.69 : 7.25 : 0.56: 1995 : : 0.37: 6.72: 7.09: 14.64: 7.55: :1996 : : : 6.8f : 6.9O : 19.29 : 12.41: 1997 : : : 7.00 : 7.00 : 23.59 16.59 1998 : : : 7.05 : 7.05 : 25.94: 18.89: 1999 : : : 7.06 : 7.06 : 27.89: 0.e82 2000 SS : : : 7.01 : 7.01 : 19.94: 12.93: 2001 zn : : : 6.95 : 6.95 : 20.14: 13.19: 2002 : : : 6.86 : 6.86 : 19.53 : 12.67 : :2003 : : : 6.76 : 6.76 : 18.86 : 12.10 : z004 : : : 6.55 : 6.55 : 16.85 : 10.30 : :2005 : 6.33: 6.33: 16.99: 10.66: :2006 : : : 6.08 : 6.08 : 16.50 : 10.42 : : : NPV at 12X discount factor = mo.493 million ER = Rf-21 ECHOC MICE OF U_ FUTrE cciNSrUF I 199 MUCES) Co:versin: 11S2 1913 16 1965 1W I"? 19 1i119 is" 1SA 2000 : Factor I CIF Price, Europe 1.00 117.CO 133.09 110.00 .31 101.55 20.96 132.6? 310.64 103.00 132.06 Iw.w 2 CIF Price, Europe 1.00 :2.738.CO 3,222.00 2,75.00 2,44.00 2,23.00 3.049.00 3,461.00 2,94.00 2,M.00 4,215.00 3,010.00' MONOt b ' Oco. Freight nd 1.00 . O.CO 119.00 107.00 90.00 101.00 116.00 151.00 124.00 124.00 212.00 149.00 Immuiace Port IMWg to Euroew c ' ____ __ _ _ _ _ i , 4 FM Fri. Port KI' . i2,6S0 co 3.103.00 2,716.00 2,371.00 2,522.00 2,930.00 3,330.00 2,620.00 2,711.00 3,97.00 2,069.00: : 5 rrq_ort. fectory to O.7 : ;!O.CO 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 21.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 ' Eu-factorq. project site. i,16.c00 3.e03.00 2.n4.00 2,351.00 2,502.00 2,910.00 3,310.00 2,100.00 2,16.00 3,13.00 2,069.00 i Processing c 0.82 : 33O3.C0 300.00 300.00 300.00 300.eo 300.00 300.00 300.00 30.00 300.00 300.00 : : O TrmWport froe dealers 0. 73 20.tO 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.W 20.00 : t. fact" c : :_ is 0sele Priac !i313.CO 2.7U.00 2,426.00 2,031.00 2,312.00 2.50.00 2.990.00 2,4e0.00 2,39.00 3,633.00 2,54.00 o10 Dales Handling c 0.6a : 43.CO 600.00 554.00 41.00 1116.00 435.00 521.00 160.00 413.00 109.00 562.00 11 Traspert. fw.rwt. to 0.79 : 20.C0 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 deal rs c ::: 12 Econadc Frnagt. Price I,&M10.CO 2,143.00 1,654.00 1,596.00 1,74.00 2,135.00 2,4.4.00 2,000.00 1,1.00 2,105.00 1.91.00 : . a Sorce a World Sb.. _ ce,r 19. 1110 b Erde rate a I1W c Trade Souces Cowers tactor a n.D. Veitch. 19S -22 *1 W9LAYSIR RIKCA PROJECT Fare Budget Replanting with Rubber BV Individal Farmers Rs Simultaneous Replanting CTSS) a~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~oa Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ol 2: Cost : Yield kg dr&j rber/ha 'D Olopm_nt Costs Larnd Cl-aring GM Terraces 30 - - - - - - - 3 Planting Naterials 485 55 - - - - - 540 . Sub-total 1,505 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.640: o :Inputs' : Fortilizrs 205 235 ISO 335 195 200 200 200 1,700: : Cho ic ls SO 160 160 110 70 SS 30 25 660: : Tools 30 30 20 20 20 20 20 20 ISO * a FSub-total 25 425 310 465 215 275 250 245 2,540 : : 0110H0l ing 165 166 : : Plantirng lS0 IS- - - 165 : : F rtiljizing IS 25 25 25 25 25 IS IS 170 : Tooding & Sanitation 35 130 120 sO S0 40 20 IS 4190 : 2t InfrOstructLr- 2 25 25 20 20 75 25 10 130 : Sub-total 400 195 170 125 95 80 S0 40 I,IS :5 a : Total 2,270 675 480 590 380 355 300 285 5,335: : : FTrtei/h 550 550 525 215 505 250 495 490 1 a aL..a- -~~~~~~~~~~- --- - -- - - - R-23 OPERRTIN6 COSTS FOR INIUVIIWm. RMEBR R£PLRFTING CIS99 PRICESD Vear 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS i6 17 to 19 20: : ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- ------- ---- -: Operating Costs : : :Inputs Fertilizers 100 265 265 265 265 265 235 235 235 235 235 205 205 : Chemical s 1 30 so30 30 30 30 25 25 25 23 25 20 20 : rools 220 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 : Stiel ant - - - - - - - - - - - 120 120 : Sub-totAl 335 315 315 315 315 315 2B0 200 280 200 290 365 365 :Laouwr (Fadl IVa Fertilizing 10 15 IS 15 15 1S IS 15 1S 15 iS 10 10 : : S ding 10 20 20 20 20 20 1S 15 1S 15 15 10 10 : Infrastructur 15 25 25 25 25 25 20 20 20 20 20 15 15 : Tapping 525 600 6S5 730 770 770 750 750 730 7 730 695 695 : Sub-total 560 660 715 790 030 930 9W0 900 790 780 780 730 730 Total 995 975 1.030 1,105 1,145 1,145 1.090 1,090 1.060 1.o60 1,060 1,095 1,095 Nol. of Tree in 280 320 350 39D lq1 410 00 -003g 390 3903 370 370: : : Souce s RISOf F r Sudgot. ICuala Lumpur. 199 fl-24t: o M OPfRa NO COSS FOR IMUIMMA. RUKBR REPLfTIN6 (1969 PRICES) 21 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~roti * 21 22 23 24 25 26 2? 28 29 30 31 32 Operating: Cast : Operating Costs Inputs Fertiliwrs 200 200 - - - - - - - - ,410 Ch Cal s - - 0 - - - -0 Tools 120 120 1ts 115 31o 31o 100 100 95 95 135 135 1,810 : : StUimlent 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 tO 10 10 10 360 :% Sub-total 330 330 125 125 120 120 110 110 105 105 145 145 5.910 : Leow _Fanili) : ----- : : ortiliaing 15 1S - - - - - - - - - 210 : Ueding 20 20 t0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 - 335 : Infrstructure - - - - - - - - - - - - 270 : : TappIng 695 695 660 660 625 625 595 WSS 550 SW 55 S05 16.370 : Sub-totol 730 730 670 670 635 635 595 595 560 560 S15 SOS 17.1SOS Total 1.060 1.060 s 7s 75 7S5 705 705 665 665 660 650 23.095 :lo. of Tro., in 380 390 360 360 340 s0 320 320 300 300 275 275 290 : Tppag." : ": : - -------- : :00 Sow-ce : R1S09 For" Budget. Kuala Luwypu. 1969 CD R-25 p.1. ox wo-f DERIVRTION OF ECONOMIC CRPITRL COST MINI-ESTRTE RUBBER L_PLRNTING ("M MILLION, 1989 CONSTRNT PRICES) ----------------------------------- : : : : 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1997 1998 1989 Current Expenditure : 0.38 0.23 0.31 0.16 0.25 0.18 0.15 1989 Prices : 0.44 0.26 0.33 0.19 0.27 0.19 0.15 - Economic Prices : 0.40 0.24 0.30 0.17 0.25 0.17 0.13 - I……I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Source : RISOR Conversion Factor = 0191, M.O. Veitch, 1996 R-26 m AGE OF REPLRNTEO RUBER RT 6IVE YEAR MINI-ESTATE (HECTARE) : : Rge of : 1982 1993 1984 1995 1986 1987 1988 1999 1990 1995 2000 2006 RuQbber' : 1 :239 62 2 : 239 62 3 : 239 62 4 : 239 62 5 : 239 62 6 : 239 62 7 239 62 a : 239 62 9 : 239 : 12 13 : 62 14 : 239 15 : 16 17 18 : 62 19 : 239 20 21 22 23 24 : 62: 25 : 239: Total 239 301 301 301 301 301 301 301 301 301 301 301Z R-27 FINRNCIRL RNO E(ONMIC COST OF PR00UCTION PER HECTFRE FOR "INI-ESTRTE REPLANTING (MS/HR, 1919 PRICES) __ -__-- ---- ----… --- RGRIICULTtQRL INPUT : LRAOUQ TOTFL: YEAR -------_____-__ -------- : : FIlNlCIRL : ECNOH"IC : FINRNCIRL : ECONOhIC : FIIRNCIRL : ELZRN0IC : ~---:-------:-- ---------- _::: 7 : 250: 228: 50: 41 3:0 269 : 9 480: 437: 530: 435: 1010 872 : : 9 : 290: 255: 620: 508: 763 : 10 : 275: 250: 730 599 1: IO: 949 : : 11 275: 250 765: 627: 1040 877 : 12 : 275 : 250: 765 : 627 1040 : 877 : : 13 : 210 : 191: 730 : S99: 940: 790 14 : 210 : 191 730 : 599: 940 : 790 : 15 : 210 : 191: 715 : 596: 925 : m : 16 : 210 : 191: 715 : 596 : Z: m: 17 : 210 : 191 715 : 586 925 : 777: 19 : 350 : 319 : 60 : 558: 1030 : 877 : 19 : 350 : 319 : 60 : 558: 1030 : 877 : 20 e 350 : 319 : 6s : 558: 1030 : 977 : : 21 : Z30 : 319 : 730 : 599: 1060 : 91B : 22 330 : 319 : 730 : 599 1060 : 918 : 23 : 125 : 114 : 670 : 550: 795 : 664 : 24 : 125 : 114 : 670 : 550: 795 : 664 : 25 : 120 : 109 : 635 : 521 755 : 630 : : : Phoduction cost from year 1 to ypar 6 had bon incorporated into capital cost paid urder RISOR .ini-estate replanting program. R28 ECONOIIC COST OF PROOUCTION OF REPLRNTED RUBBER RT GI6EN YERR : HINI-ESIATE (1$ HILLION, RI 1989 CONSTRNT PRICES) YERR : 1986 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 : : ---- ------ --___--___ ________-_____-._ _ _ _ _ _ __-- 7 :0.064 0.016 : 8 0.210 0.054 9 0.182 0.047 10 0.202 0.053 11 : 0.209 0.054 2 12 : 0.209 0.054 2 @ 13 : 0.019 0.049 o 14 : 0.190 0.049 :2 0.185 0.048 16 : 0.85 0.048 2 17 0.196 0.049 toB 0.209 0.054: 19 0.209 0.054 20 0.209 0.054 2 21 2 0.219 0.057 : 22 0.219 0.057 23 : 0.158 0.041 2 24 0.1580 .0412 25 0.150 Total :0.064 0.226 0.236 0.249 0.262 0.263 0.073 0.239 0.234 0.233 0.234 0.257 0.263 0.263 0.273 0.276 0.215 0.199 0.191 : a - - --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ----------------------- - --- [1 req~~_ _ - 70 - Appendix 23 YIELD OF RUBBEk BY AGE MINI-ESTATE REPLANTING (KG/HA) …---- ----- -------------- -- ---- ---- ------ --- --- -- ----- - I AGE OF I PRODUCTION I RUBBER I KG/HA I ------------------------- - --------------------------- 1 7 1 250 1 8 1 600 I 9 I 950 I 10 1 1,100 1 I 11 1 1,200 12 1 1,250 13 1 1,450 1 * 14 1 1,700 1 1 15 1 1,700 1 16 1 1,650 17 1 1,650 1 e18 1,750 1 I ' 19 1 1,650 1 20 1 1,600 1 1 21 1,500 1 I 22 1 1,400 1 1 23 1 1,500 1 1 24 1 1,400 1 1 25 1 1,300 1 ------------------------------------------------------ Source : RISDA Project, Crop Yield Profiles A-30 ECONOMIC BENEFIT OF N IN I -ESTRTE OEPLRNT I NG (M$ HILLION, 1989 PRICES) YEAR : TOTRL YIELO : ECONOMIC BENEFIT (TON) : PRICE 1968 59.75 : 2,446.00 0.14 : 1999 158.90 : 2,000.00 : 0.31 : 1990 264.25: 1,o99.00: 0.50: 1991 321.80 : 1,998.00 : 0.61 : 1992 355.00 : 1,898.00 : 0.67 : 1993 373.15 : 1,899.00: 0.70: 1994 420.05: 1,998.00 : 0.79: 1995 496.20 : 2,905.00 : 1.44 : 1996 511.70 : 2,905.00 : 1.48 : 1997 499.75: 2,905.00 : 1.45 1999 496.65 : 2,905.00 : 1.44 : 1999 520.55: 2,905.00 : 1.51: 2000 502.85: 1,967.00 : 0.99: 2001 484.70 : 1,967.00 : 0.95 : : 002 :457.70 1 ,967.00 : 0.90 : 2003 427.60 : 1,967.00 : 0.84 : 2004 445.30 : 1,967.00 : 0.8? : 2005 427.60 : 1,967.00 : 0.84 : : 2006 '397.50 : 1,967.00 : 0.7e : : 2006:397.50---1,967.00--- 0.78 A-31 ECONOMIC RRTE OF RETURN (1999 CONSTANT PRICES) nINI-ESTRTE REPLANTING OF RUBBER : ~~~-- - ------------------- :CAPITAL : RESIDUAL : PRODUCTION : TOTAL : :NET INCREMENTRL: YERR : COST : CRPITRL : COST : COST : BENEFIT : BENEFIT : ("MS) [COST (M*-): ("s) ("$) : ("$m) : ("$a) : :~~-------- :--------- ------- -------- ----:----- ---:---------:---- 1982 : 0.40 : 0.40 : -0.40 1983 : 0.24 : - : 0.24 : -0.24 1984 : 0.30: - : 0.30 : -0.30 : 198S : 0.17 : - : 0.17 : -0.17 1986 : 0.25 : - 0.25 : -0.25 : 1907 : 0.17 : 0.17 : : -0.17 1998 : 0.13 : 0.064 : 0.194 : 0.14 : -0.05 1989 : 0.22 : 0.22 : 0.31 : 0.09 1990 : : 0.236 : 0.24 : 0.50 : 0.26 : 1991 0.25 : 0.25 : 0.61 : 0.36 1992 : 0.26 : 0.26 : 0.67 : 0.41 1993 : : 0.26 : 0.26 : 0.70 0.44 : 1994 : 0.24 : 0.24 : 0.79 0.55 1995 : 0.24 : 0.24 : 1.44 : 1.20 1996 : . 0.23 : 0.23 : 1.48 1.25 1997 : 0.23 : 0.23 : 1.45 1.22 1998 : : 0.23 : 0.23 : 1.44 1.21 1999 : : 0.26 : 0.26 : 1.51 : 1.25: 2000 : : 0.26 : 0.26 : 0.99 : 0.73 2001 : : 0.26 : 0.26 : 0.95 : 0.69 : : 2002 : : 0.27 : 0.27 : 0.90 : 0.63 : 2003 : : 0.27 : 0.27 : 0.84 : 0.57 2004 : : 0.21 : 0.21 : 0.87 : 0.66 2005 : 0.20 : 0.20 : 0.84 : 0.64 2006 : : 0.19 : 0.19 : 0.78 : 0.59 :-- --- ------------------------------------------------------- MPV at 26X discount factor = "$0.335 sillion ERR = 29Z 1 R-32 Ln NRLAYSIR RIS3R PROJECT Fa- Budget REPUURTIHG IITH RUDER RS MINI ESTRTE (TSa) (N Sdha) I : Total :Yew t 2 3 4 5 6 7 :DW1 O Fnt: Yi-ld kg dry rubbr/ha : : : : : OllW- nt rAms::: Lard Clearing : O30 - - - - - - 930: : Rgric Road 45 - - - - - - 45 Da-ins : 40 - - - - - - 40: erraes : 429 - - - - - - 420 1 Co_w crop 140 - - - - - - 140: Lining, holing 165 - - - - - - : 165 : Planting : 155 15 - - - - - : 170: Planting Material : 450 45. - - - - - 495: : SLitotal : 2.245 60 0 0 0 0 0: 2,305 : :* ------- -- - - --: :Input- : --- : : * Fertilizers : 300 235 130 335 195 200 200 : 1,675 Chemicals : 120 190 125 85 65 35 30 : 650 : Tools : - 20 20 20 20 20 20: 120 : Subtotal : 500 445 275 440 290 255 2501 2,445 L Abow- (Famil) : ly) Fertilizing . 25 45 25 25 25 25 IS. 185 : : edaing I Sanitation: 90 155 100 65 40 25 20 : 495 : 0 Infrstructur e 35 35 30 25 20 15 : 160 : Subtotal : 115 235 160 120 90 70 50: 840: Total : 2,060 740 435 560 370 325 300 : 5,590 : -S -- -------------:.-----..------- ---- : Trees/ha : 450 450 440 430 420 415 410 R-33 llRLRYSIR RISOR PROJECT Far Budget REPLRNTIN6 MITH RUBBER fAS MINI ESTATE (T59) (N $/ai) a ___________________________ _ _ _ _ :Y*w 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 10 19 20: : per tingi Cost : : Fertilizers :230 230 230 230 230 175 175 175 175 175 205 205 205: : h immcls: 30 so0 Z 25 25X 20 20 20 20 20 I 15 is is : Tools :220 20 20 20 Zo IS 15 IS IS IS IS 1 15 is i: : asti-lant : - - - - - - - - 115 IIS IS : Subtotal :48o 200 2 . 275 275 210 210 210 210 210 350 350 350W :Labour (Family) : : Fewtilizer : 5 is 15 IS IS IS 10 10 10 to 10 IS IS IS : : Nzding : 20 20 20 20 20 IS IS IS 15 IS 10* to 10 : : 5Infrastructur : 10 10 10 10 10 5 5 S S S S S 5 : Tapping 405 575 685 720 720 7W0 700 685 605 85 650 650 650; : Subtotal :590 620 730 76 765 730 730 715 715 115 690 68D 680 : -.-.-.. - -- S : Total :1,010 900 I,OOS 1,040 1,040 940 940 925 925 325 1,030 1,030 1,030: l b. of Trams in :270 320 330 400 400 390 390 380 300 3D0 360 360 360: : T ppingth :. R-34 o *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ oS WFLRYSIR RIS5r PROECT Fwn Budget VMWf MIT NN MUERS M5 IMI ESTATE CTB) * a 2~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Total: :21 22 23 24 25 26 27 2E 29 s3 31 32 Operating : 4a t9 Ct : ::costA :Orati Cost1 : : -- : t Fertilizers : 205 205 175 175 175 175 175 - - - - - 3,925 : Cicals : i 15 1 - - - - - -310 : Tools 2 15 15 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 20 2 20D: Sao Stiilant 110 110 1X W lO 10 95 95 s0 9o 140 133 130 : 1,6w5 : : *a S*total 345 345 285 285 295 280 260 100 .00 160 1S 1SO 6.480 :Laour (Farily) Fertilizer 15 15 10 10 10 11 10 - - - - - : 250: 2 ding 10 10 15 15 15 15 15 10 10 10 10 10: 350: : Inrarstructure 5 5 - - - - - - - - 100 Tapping 610 610 575 575 575 540 540 905 55 SW 470 470 14,470 ' a . * . Subtotal 640 640 600 6W0 600 565 565 515 515 515 400 492 15,170 Total 9B5 985 895 E66 985 845 845 615 615 675 630 630 2>21,620 -- -- -* f No. of Trv" in 340 340 320 320 320 300 300 290 290 290 260 260: a2 Tappirng'ai Sourc: RISOR, F_e* budget, 19199 f-35 DERIWRTION OF ECmO IC CAPITRL COST OF RU-E "RINTENtNCE FOR RUBE REPLANE ETWEEN 1976 - 1981 M ILLIOI, 1989 CONSTANT PRICES) : : ~~~~~1982 19|13 1904 198 198 19B7 1988 19B9: :Current Ependitoe: 2.49 2.32 2.X8 2.01 1.27 0,69 0.35 0.09: : : .99 lgPrievss 2.91 2.57 2.57 2.17 1.36 0.73 0. 36 0.09. : -Eicowmnic Pric : 2.65 2.32 2.34 1.97 1.24 0.69 0.33 0.09 Sore: PO Office amd RlSOR Conv12ion F2ctor 20.91, 2.7. V.itch, 1906 R-36 * S S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * S S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ecanarne P~ics 2.65 2.35 234 1.97 1.24 .66 0.33 0.0 S~~~~t Sa..rce: PD Ovric. inid RISCA~~ ConversionFactor 0.1, 11.0. Vitch, 198 R-36~~~~~~~~~~~~~ U,'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ mu sea. sasC mC ga*s a.Sos &os nao ac': ao:ls aom noes a.6o' &O's iso's a..' aO's "as noes a..': iS O's aso's abeemuo : vu s%tot CM 661 On c : : Ilit .. 01 61 miLL SIC* :a IlCIt 9i1ll 61 siLtnc : R S" %lt 'I101 661 6 s ic :iot %lt e0 61 GU -S: cmi': aC.t'l 0To1 S G ee n n : cmi' %lot 01 661 as sic : e1 orel OIu'I 9i' 1'1 L66 n c : in : ~~~~~~~~~~OSVst %I1t nL t*6L 90 tC : osIi Sftt r' I0 661 efs Site I 1 3 cci': st i' 01 atG on sic : St cs:*:c i'i 01 iL _ nc : o s I cutOi sbtOt o1 is se sic : el oWi lIL IIt' ot e _i si: it * ami*i Smot 01 GU sic : s cm:': ~ ~ OC IiV 01 ia sic : s oWl g %tot GU an1 mit si : I : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~sa OCt1 *|A " e: a OI&SO I' 01 6611 3 5 emi'it Wset" cii 66 3 cmi'i 4*i* of GM & o:t asi'i: i : SOI mmI tow =ai tio uooo u6i n6t JMlI VUEt I666U 5t Cm am isui oiui te i sLlm Sui bat cat ai 31111 ISO - 9161 NIDUiU 03WU 931 SU WUMd 3111111111 301M 3 Ad 5 JO S NOIlUIUASI ECONO"IC COST OF PRODUCTION UNOER "NINTENANCE PROGRAR FOR RtDDER REPLANTED KETUEEN 1976 - 1991 (cS "IULION, AT 1999 CONSTANT PRICES) :VER :1902 1983 1904 1995 1996 199? 1990 1999 199 M 1992 13 1"9 1995 1996 1"? 1999 19" 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 7 :0.24 0.69 0.61 0.37 0.0? %).9: : : 0.26 0.74 0.66 0.62 0.95 0.95 : S : 0.28 o." 0.69 0.65 1.00 1.00 10 0.29 0.03 0.75 0.69 1.07 1.09 11 : 0.31 0.66 0.77 0.72 1.11 1.11 12 : 0.31 0-% 0.?? 0.72 1.11 1.11 13 : 0.29 0.91 0.73 0.69 1.04 1.05 14 : 0.29 0.91 0.73 0.60 1.04 1.05 15 : 0.29 0.79 0.72 0.66 1.03 1.03 16 : 0.29 O.79 0.72 0.66 1.03 1.03 17 : 0.29 0.79 0.72 0.66 1.03 1.03 : is : 0.29 0.03 n.74 0.69 1.0? I.C? : is : 0.29 0.63 0.74 0.69 1.0? 3.0? :20 0.29 0.93 0.74 0.69 1.0? 1.07 :1 : 0.26 0.73 0.66 0.61 0.94 0.95 : 22 : 0.26 0.73 0.66 0.61 0.94 0.95 : 23 : 0.19 0.54 0.49 0.45 0.69 0.70 : 24 : 0.19 o.s4 0.49 .4s 0.69 0.70 : 25 : 0.19 0.53 0.49 O.45 0.69 0.69 : - …---- -- … -------…-…---- -------…- Total :0.24 0.91 1.63 2.29 3.32 4.10 4.56 4.66 4.73 4.70 4.62 4.S5 4.59 4.59 4.59 4.52 4.41 4.14 3.03 3.35 2.57 1.84 1.39 0.69 A-39 YIELD OF RUBBER BY RAE UNDER MRINTENRNCE PROGRRA FOR RUBBER REPLRNTED BETMEEN 1976 - 1991 (TON) : -------------------_---_____________________ ARE : 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1907 1998 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 9 : 158.0 444.0 399.5 371.5 573.0 575.0 10 : 252.8 710.4 639.2 59J4.4 916.8 920.0 11 : 316.0 088.0 799.0 743.0 1146.0 1150.0 : 12 : 347.6 976.9 878.9 817.3 1260.6 1265.0 13 : 410.9 1154.4 1039.7 965.9 1489.8 1495.0 : 14 : 442.4 1243.2 1I10.6 1040.2 1604.4 : 15 474.0 1332.0 1198.5 1114.5 : 16 : 442.4 1243.2 1119.6: 17 : 379.2 1065.5 : la : 474.0 :19: 20 :21 :22 :23 :24 :25 : : : !TOTRL: 158.0 696.9 1425.9 2246.3 3354.0 4710.5 5639.2 6269.5 6615.9 6872.0 : -- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - ---------------------------_________________--- A-39 0 o YIELD OF RUBBER BY RGE UNDER nRINTENRNCE PROGRRA FOR RUOBER REPLANTEO BETWEEN 1976 - 1981 (TON) -- - -- - -- - - --- - - - - -- - --- - - - - - - - - - ------ ---- -- -- -- -- AGE : 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - - --- - - - -- - - - - ------- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - 9 9 10 11: :12: :13: 14 :1610.0 15 :1719.0 1725.0 16 :1040.2 1604.4 1610.0 co 17 : 958.8 891.6 1375.2 1380.0 : 0 18 :1332.0 i1TS.5 1114.5 1719.0 1725.0 19 : 410.9 1154.4 1038.7 965.9 1489.8 1495.0 20 : 347.6 976.8 878.9 817.3 1260.6 1265.0 21 : 316.0 98e.0 799.0 743.0 1146.0 1150.0 22 : 294.4 799.2 719.1 668.7 1031.4 1035.0 : 23 : 252.8 710.4 639.2 594.4 916.8 920.0 24 : 316.0 888.0 799.0 743.0 1146.0 1150.0 25 : 294.4 799.2 719.1 669.7 1031.4 1035.0: :TOTRL:7070.0 6921.5 6431.2 6116.2 5883.1 5244.1 4891.3 4374.0 3413.9 2734.7 2101.4 1035.0 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------- --- - - - - - -- - - - - - R-40 m m w B. O X - 81 - Appendix 31 ECONOMIC BENEFIT FROM RUBBER MAINTENANCE PROGRAM FOR RUBBER REPLANTED BETWEEN 1976 - 1981 (MS MILLION, 1989 CONSTANT PRICES) ---------------------------------------- I YEAR I TOTAL YIELD I ECONOMIC I BENEFIT I I (TON) I PRICE I I 1 1982 1,840.00 1 1 1983 1 1 2,143.00 1 1 1984 1 158.0 1 1,854.00 1 0.29 1 - 1985 1 696.8 1 1,596.00 1 1.11 I 1986 1 1,425.9 1 1,746.00 1 2.49 1 1 1987 1 2,246.3 1 2,135.00 1 4.79 1 1 1988 1 3,354.0 1 2,446.00 1 8.20 1 1 1989 1 4,710.5 1 2,000.00 1 9.42 1 1 1990 1 5,639.2 1 1,898.00 1 10.70 1 1991 I 6,269.5 1 1,898.00 1 11.89 1 1992 1 6,615.9 1 1,898.00 1 12.56 1 1 1993 1 6,872.1 1 1,898.00 1 13.04 1 I 1994 I 7,070.8 1 1,898.00 1 13.42 1 1 1995 1 6,921.5 1 2,905.00 1 20.11 1 1 1996 I 6,431.2 1 2,905.00 1 18.68 1 1 1997 1 6,116.2 1 2,905.00 1 17.77 1 1 1998 I 5,883.1 1 2,905.00 1 17.10 1 I 1999 1 5,244.1 1 2,905.00 1 15.23 1 1 2000 1 4,891.3 1 1,967.00 1 9.52 1 1 2001 1 4,374.0 1 1,967.00 1 P..60 I 1 2002 1 3,413.9 1 1,967.00 1 6.71 1 1 2003 1 2,734.7 1 1,967.00 1 5.38 1 1 2004 1 2,181.4 1 1,967.00 1 4.29 I I 2005 1 1,035.0 1 1,967.00 1 2.03 1 A-41 ECONOMIC RATE OF RETURN (1990 CONSTANT PRICES) RUBBER MRINTENRNCE PROGRRA -_________________________ ("$ NILLION) : ~ ~~~~~----- -: :CAPITAL : RESIDUAL PRODUCTION : TOTRL : :NET INCRE"ENTRL: : YEAR : COST : CRPITRL : COST : COST : BENEFIT : BENEFIT ("$a) :COST cM..): (Ms.) : (1$.) : S.) : (MS.) : :~----- :------- -- - -_-- _------ - --_- - - - -- _-- -- ----- -_- -- -- -- -- -- -- -, 1982 : 2.65 : - 0.24 : 2.89 : -2.89 : : 1983 : 2.35 : - : 0.94 : 3.29 : : -3.29 : : 1984 : 2.34 : - 1.63 : .97 0.29 -3.68 : 1995 : 1.97 : - : 2.29 : 4.26 : 1.11 : -3.15 : 1986 1.24 : - 3.32 : 4.56 : 2.49 : -2.07 : : 1987 : 0.66 : - 4.40 5.06 4.79 : -0.27 : : 1989 : 0.33 : - 4.56 : 4.89 : 8.20 : 3.31 : : 1989 : 0.08 : - : 4.66 : 4.74 : 9.42 : 4.68 : 1 1990 : : : 4.73: 4.73: 10.?0 : 5.97: 1991 : - : 4.70 : 4.70 : 11.99 : 7.19 : 1992 : : - : 4.62 4.62 12.56 : 7.94 : : 1993 : : - : 4.55 : 4.55 : 13.04 : 8.49 : 1994 : : 4.581 4.58 : 13.42 : .84 : 1 1995 : - 4.58 : 4.58 : 20.11 : 15.53 : 1996 : - 4.58 : 4.58 : 18.68 : 14.10 : 1997 : - 4.52 4.52 : 17.77 : 13.25 : 1999 : : 4.41 : 4.41 : 17.10 : 12.69 : 1 1999 : : - : 4.14 4.14 : 15.23 : 11.09 : : 2000 : - : 3.83 : 3.83 : 9.62 : 5.79 : : 2001 : - : 3.35 : 3.35 : 8.60 : 5.25 : : 2002 : - : 2.57 : 2.57 : 6.71 : 4.14 : 2003 1 - 1.94 : 1.84 : 5.38 : 3.54 : 2004 : : - : 1.39 : 1.39 : 4.29 : 2.90 : 2005 : : - 0.69 : 0.69 : 2.03 : 1.34 : : : NPV at 22Z discount factor = "M0.636 ERR = 22X a-42 DERIVRTION OF ECONOMIC CRPITRL COST OIL PRLM REPLRNTING (MS MILLION, 1989 CONSTRNT PRICES) 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 Current Expendature 0.28 1.12 1.89 1.42 1.66 : w 1989 Prices 0.30 1.19 2.00 1.46 1.66 : Economic Prices 0.27 1.08 1.82 1.33 1.51 !------------------------------------------------------------------_------- R-43 RGE OF REPLRNTED OIL POIL RT GIVEN YEM NhDWIVu. REARTrI.G OIEcrE) . :,. *If ism 19 m ISO 37 ism 19B9 1190 1 n 1i192 Inso t1991 i91 196 1997 198 19 i 2000 2001 2VJ2 2003 2004 2s 20006 Mil Palm: a : 22 s5 5s 395 560 2 : 226 675 158 365 560 3 : 226 675 59 US : I 226 17 958 395 560 s : 226 675 ff 30S 560 : s : 226 675 r 8 385 560 : c : 226 675 958 385 560 a : 226 675 958 385 560 : : 226 675 958 365 560 0 9o 226 675 156 305 560 i s : 226 675 95 385 560 : 12 : 226675 95 S 3-5 560 23 : 226 675 58360 560 1I : 226 675 158 385 see 1s : 226 675 950 380 S60 is 226 675 58 385 5 560 : 16 226 675 958 365 560 to : 226 675 ss 305 560 : Is 226 67S 95i 395 : : 20 : as WSi 9sa : : 21 : 226 675 : : 22 226 : : 23 : : 24 25 Total 226 901 1.859 2,241 2.004 2.01 2.804 2,904 2.U01 2.900 2.04 2.804 2.804 2.801 2.801 2.604 2.801 2.801 2,803 2.S0 2.E01 2.601 -- - --- ------------ --- --- -----------------…-…-…------… As acrsap under nini-estate _mena,el.t was sal) * it was *ssuNd tht all r replanted under individual 9umpgwnt. Oil poln including othr crops Cuith th exception of cocoa) I 0-41~~~~~~~~~ FINRNCIRL AND ECONDOIC COST OF PROOUCTION OF OIL PRLM ("$/HR, 1989 CONSTRNT PRICES) RGRICULTURRL INP4UT : LRBOUQ R TOTAL YERQ :----_-___ _:------------------------ FINANCIRL : ECONOMIC : FINRNCIRL : ECONOMIC : FINRNCIAL : ECONOMIC 5 : 320 : 291 : 140 : 114 460 : 405 6 : 395: 359: 240: 196: 635: 555S 7 : 440: 400 330: 270: 770: 670: a : 465 423: 350.: 297 ' es1, 710: 9 : 465: 423: 395 : 324: 860 747 10 : 465: 423: 435 : 356 900: 779: 11 : 420 : 382 : 475 : 389 : 895 : 771 : 12 : 420: 382: 475: 399: 895: 771: 13 : 420: 382: 475 : 399: 995: 771 : t4 : 370: 336: 465: 301: 835: 717: 15 : 370: 336: 465: 381: 835 717: 16 : 370: 336: 440: 361: 910 697: 17 : 355: 323: 440: 361: 795: 694: 19 : 355: 323: 410: 336: 7b5: 659: 19 : 355: 323: 410: 336: 765: 659: 20 : 355: 305: 390: 319: 745: 624: 21 : 355: 305: 390: 319: 745: 624: 22 355: 305: 340 : 279: 695 : 584 : 23 : 320: 291: 340: 279: SW6: 570: 24 : 15 : 13 : 290 : 229 : 295 : 242 : 25 : 5: 13: 280: 229: 295: 242: : : Source : RISOR, Farm Budget Conversion Factors : PAricultural input = 0.91 Labour = 0.82 (Souroe : 1.0. Veitch, 1986) R-45 cosr or rRWmuCTIO OF mL Pr. vmEES Or GIV VE imzvuuwa. n.aBm 3g of : IS 1990 1991 1912 1993 1994 19ff 1996 1997 1996 1999 2000 2001 2002 '2003 2004 2005 2006 Oil P.1e: I: 2: 4 : 5 :91.33 23.37 36.n 15S.92 221.90 6 125.130 31.62 531.69 213.67 310.60 : I51.qZ *52.25 611.86 257.95 75.20 6 : 160.41 4*7.25 60.16 273.35 397.60 9 : 60.62 504.22 715.62 267.59 416.32 10 176.05 525.62 746.26 29.92 431.24 : it : 171.25 520.42 736.62 296.63 431.76 : o 12 : 171.21 520.42 736.62 296.90 131.71 : 0 13 : 17.25 S20.42 73.62 296.63 131.76 I U : 162.04 483.97 696.66 276.0 1 41.52 is 162.01 483.97 616.66 276.04 101.!: U6 :157.52 470.41 61.73 260.34 390.X2 1 * 154.50 411.70 655.2 263.34 300.04 1i : 11.-93 444.62 631.32 25.71 369.04 19 I1.93 44.62 6131.32 253.71 20 : 111.02 2 51.20 "?.TS 21 : 111.02 421.20 22 131.9: 23: 24 2: mm. :91.53 33.00 91.03 300.32 I70.40 1929.20 20614.2 2126.13 2151.53 2154.15 2113.22 2056.96 2019.73 155U.2 1916.63 17.62 10.29 1773.72: It YIEA OF WEPLAM OIL PM.hi ar GIVEN I CODO rm g of : 1999 199 ag1 ISM 1am a9 9A5 1996t7 I"? I M 200 2001 0 200 2X04 2005 2005 Oil Palm: I: 2: 3: 4: 5 : 0.4 1.30 1.90 0.60 1.10 i : 1.40 4.00 5.70 2.30 3.40 7 : 2.30 6.70 9.60 3.60 5.30 a : 2.70 9.10 11.50 4.60 6.10 : 9 : 3.20 1.40 1.40. 4040 7.60 ag : 3.60 10.60 15.30 6.20 9.00 0 X *1 : 4.10 12.10 17.20 6.90 10.10 : 12 : 4.10 12.10 1I.20 6.90 10.10 13 : 1.10 12.20 17.20 6.90 10.10 U: 3.60 11.50 16.30 6.50 9.50 15 : ".60 11.50 16.30 6.50 9.50 1, : 3.60 10.66 35.30 .20 .90. ?7 : 3.60 20.60 15.30 6.20 6.10 o : 3.40 10.10 14.40 S.W .40: U : 3. 10.20 14.40 S.60 20 : 3.26 9.40 13.15: 21 3.20 1.40 22 : 2.70: 23: 25: 25 3 _ _ _ : - :OTS : 0.45 2.70 6.20 15.90 24.30 31.70 36.20 U3.60 47.40 49.10 49.50 46.40 47.30 5.50 44.50 42.6 41.70 31.70 8-17 IW : - :~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - 88 - Appendix 38 ECONOMIC BENEFIT OF OIL PALM (1999 CONSTANT PRICES) I YEAR ITOTAL YIELD I ECONOMIC ITOTAL BENEFIT I I I (TON) IPRICE I ($'000) I 1 1989 I1 452 1 124.00 1 56.05 1 1 1990 I1 2,706 1 43.00 1 116.36 1 I 1991 i1 8,226 1 50.00 1 411.30 1 1 1992 i1 15,980 1 81.00 1 1,294.38 1 1 1993 i1 24,274 1 123.00 1 2,985.70 1 1 1994 1 31,772 1 119.00 1 3,780.87 1 1 1995 I1 38,500 1 159.00 1 6,121.50 1 I 1996 It 43,656 1 159.00 1 6,941.30 1 1997 I 47,462 159.00 I 7,546.46 I1 1998 i 49,126 I 159.1CO I 7,811.03 I 1999 I 49,571 1 159.00 I 7,881.79 I * 2000 i1 48,387 1 128.00 1 6,193.54 1 I 2001 i1 47,327 1 128.00 1 6,057.86 1 I 2002 i1 45,583 1 128.00 1 5,834.62 1 1 2003 i1 44,523 1 128.00 1 5,698.94 1 I 2004 i1 42,779 1 128.00 1 5,475.71 1 I 2005 i1 41,719 1 128.00 1 5,340.03 1 I 2006 I1 39,749 1 128.00 1 5,087.87 1 --- _ _ _I… …--…-……- I - I I TOTAL I 621,792 I - I 84,635.32 1 - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A-48 - 89 - Appendix 39 ECONOMIC RATE OF RETURN, OIL PALM (INDIVIDUAL) (1989 CONSTANT PRICES) ICAPITAL I PRODUCTION I TQTAL I INET INCREMENTALI I YEAR I COST I COST I COST I BENEFIT I BENEFIT I I I (M$m) I (MSm) I (M$m) I (M$m) I (M$m) I I … …_______I--------…I------------ --------……--------_ --------------- 11983 1 _ I _ I 11984 1 - _ I - I I 1 1985 1 0.27 1 - I 0.27 1 1 -0.27 1 1 1986 1 1.08 I - I 1.08 1 1 -1.08 1 1 1987 1 1.82 1 - I 1.82 1 1 -1.82 1 1 1988 1 1.33 1 - I 1.33 1 1 -1.33 1 1 1989 1 1.51 1 0.09 1 1.60 1 0.06 1 -1.54 1 I 1990 1 1 0.39 1 0.39 1 0.11 1 -0.28 i 1 1991 1 1 0.91 1 0.91 1 0.41 1 -0.50 1 1 1992 1 1 1.30 1 1.30 I 1.29 1 -0.01 I 1 1993 1 1 1.73 1 1.73 1 2.98 1 1.25 1 1 1994 1 1 1.93 1 1.93 1 3.78 1 1.85 1 I 1995 1 1 2.06 1 2.06 1 6.12 1 4.06 1 : 1996 1 1 2.12 i 2.12 1 6.94 1 4.82 1 I 1997 1 1 2.15 1 2.15 1 7.54 1 5.39 1 1998 1 1 2.15 1 2.15 1 7.81 1 5.66 1 1999 1 1 2.11 1 2.11 1 7.88 1 5.77 1 ! 2000 1 1 2.05 1 2.05 1 6.19 1 4.14 1 - 2001 1 1 2.02 1 2.02 1 6.05 1 4.03 1 1 2002 1 1 1.95 1 1.95 1 5.83 1 3.88 1 1 2003 1 1 1.92 1 1.92 1 5.69 1 3.77 1 1 2004 1 1 1.87 1 1.87 1 5.48 1 3.61 1 1 2005 1 1 1.83 1 1.83 1 5.34 1 3.51 1 I 2006 1 1 1.77 1 1.77 1 5.08 1 3.31 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NPV at 26% discount factor = MS0.336 Million Economic Rate of Return = 26% A-49 I3ERI9TION OF ECOOMIC F_RM&AE PRICES OF P01M0OIL FRESI FRUIT BUNCHES (TON AT 199 PRICES) I aICOFmRSIONI I COST COMPONENT I FACTOR I 1962 19 1964 1965 19B6 1967 196 I Palo OiI (CP) I I I * I Ia C OIF Price. Eurpe b I 1.00 11,216.00 1,302.00 1,905.00 1,242.00 709.00 916.00 1,145.00 1 I Ocom freight. Port KIag I I I t to Ew-. I 1.00 I 939.00 311.00 49.00 297.00 130.00 14.0 I5.00 I I FOG prio. Poet Kla I I 629.00 991.00 1,407.00 945.00 579.00 77m.00 99.00 1 I Trarnport. oil sill b I I I I to Poat KI* I 0.79 1 16.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 I I Ex-mill prsic. project rea I I 611.00 973.00 1,369.00 927.00 561.00 755.0D 977.00 I I processing cost b I 0.62 1 31.00 31.00 31.00 91.00 31.00 91.00 31.00 I I I-. _-I-- _ _ _ __-_ _ __-_ _ _ __-- I In-mill prioe. project oe -" - I 700.00 942.00 .1s5.00 896.00 530.00 724.00 946.00 1 I Palokarne I I a a u a III I CIF Price. Europe b I 1.00 I 726.00 948.00 1,300.00 722.00 392.00 484.00 700.00 1 I Ocen freiht. Port KI ang I I aOa I to Europe I 1.00 369.00 311.00 496.o 297.00 130.00 143.00 150.00 I I I--- I _ I FOB price. Port Klwng 1 - I 337.00 637.00 8e2.00 425.00 262.00 941.00 550.00 I I Transport. oi I i 11 b I I I to Popt KIng 1 0.79 I 18.00 18.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 10.00 16.00 I I Ex-mill price, project aree I 1 319.00 619.00 664.00 40?.00 244.00 232.00 532.00 1 I Begging b I 0.82 I 9.00 10.00 14.00 10.00 5.00 7.00 9.00 1 I I~~~*- -- - ----- - - - - I In-mill price, project area I I 310.00 609.00 850.00 397.00 239.00 916.00 523.00 1 I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I Freh fruit Cfbuw* I W I P ral oil price equiVl-nt dl - I 148.00 179.00 256.00 170.00 101.00 138.00 132.00 1 I Plm- kerrnl pric equivalent I - I 12.00 7.00 34.00 16.00 10.00 19.00 21.00 1 I In-mill price, project ar-e I - I 160.00 186.00 292.00 166.00 111.00 152.00 153.00 t I _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ ___ I I I *r_rpat. f o-g-t- bII to oil mill I 0.79 I 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 I o IEconomo priom of ffb I I I I-*t farogte I 1 147.00 173.00 279.00 173.00 90.00 19e.00 110.00 1 s1o SJuroe * a s ImRD, Oscember 19. 1990 * Convrrsion factor - M.6. Veitch. 1986 b a Trade sources Exohesug. rate a IW a Rsamming 19S extraction rate d Ramming 4W extraction rato FA-O QERISRTION OF ECONMIC FflRTE PRICES OF PALMI OIL FRESI FRUIT BiCHES CM$1TON AT 199 PRICES), I acormsarnl I COST lle I FRCTOR I 1999 1990 1991 1992 199S 1994 15 "0 1 I Palm Oil CPO) I II | ~ ~~~ _ * I I CIF Prie. Europe b I 1.00 I 4.00 797.00 814.00 941.00 1,191.00 1,126.00 1.295.00 1,165.00 I I Ocean freight, Part KIe a I I I I to Et-p. I 1.00 1 262.00 43.o00 43.o00 493.00 493.0 4.QO0 490.00 490.00 I I FOG price. Port KIlI_ I I 687.00 304.00 931.00 458.00 668.00 643.00 605.00 695.00 I I Transport. oil *ill b I I I I to Port KIang 1 0.79 1 18.00 16.00 19.00 16.00 19.00 19.00 19.00 19.00 I I Ex-sill price. project _arm I 1 669.00 296.00 913.00 440.00 650.00 625.00 787.00 667.00 I I proc.ssing cost b I 0.E2 1 31.00 31.00 91.00 31.00 31.00 31.00 31.00 31.00 I * I- I- --e - e l I In-oill price. project _ Ior - I 6 9.00 255.00 292.00 409.00 619.00 594.00 756.00 686.00 1 I 1 =S = = == 1 * I ~ ~ ~~I I I I Palo Kerrels II I - _ a I I I CIF Price. Europe b I 1.00 I 660.00 511.00 538.00 707.00 767.00 792.00 1.002.00 995.00 I I Ocean freight. Port Klang I I I to Euro-pe I 1.00 1 262.00 263.00 293.00 203.00 293.00 293.00 280.00 490.00 I * S----l- --------------"----------- ee- I FOB price. Port King - I 419.00 22.00 255.00 424.A) 494.00 509.00 722.00 515.00 1 I l=--=l =_==_=-_____: I Transport. oil mill b I I I to Port Kiang 0.79 1 19.00 19.00 16.00 19.00 19.00 1CG.OO M9OD 19.00 I I Ex-mill prico. project _ee I I 400.00 210.00 297.00 406.00 466.00 491.00 704.00 497.00 1 1 Gagging b I 0.82 1 9.00 9.00 9.00 9.00 9.00 9.00 13.00 9.00 1 I I-- - --l- - ---- - - - I I In-mill pric. project _ eo I - I 392.00 201.00 229.00 397.00 457.00 432.00 691.FV. 4fE.00 I I = I _I= = I Fresh fruit bunches CFfb) I I I I --- - c II I Palm oil price equivalent dl - I 121.00 49.00 54.00 79.00 119.00 113.00 144.00 121.001 1 I Palo kernel price oquivalent I - I 16.00 9.00 9.00 16.00 19.00 19.00 29.00 2000 I I In-mill price. project _r- I - 137.00 56.00 63.00 94.00 136.00 132.00 172.00 141.00 0 I I---_ _-- I-_=--=- I Trarnport. f_mg-to b I I I X I to oil mill 1 0.79 1 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 13.00 I - I - _ I I - __ _3 I Economic price of ffb I I I I at far-gte I I 124.00 43.00 50.00 81.00 123.00 119.00 159.00 128.00 I SoLrce a a I*R. December I b a Trde sources c Assuming 19Z extraction rate d Assum%ng -Z extcact1Gn -ate A-SI HAL I RISOR PROJECT Farm Budget REPLANTING WITH OIL PAIN BY INDIVIDUAL FARRERS (N S/ha) Total :Year 1 2 3 4 : Development * S S ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Costs Yield - ton ffb/ha Development Costs Land Clearing S00oo Agric Road 120 -- Terraces * 105 -- * Planting Naterial : 385 s0o Subtotal : 1,410 90 0 0 :1,490: Inputs Fertilizers 60 75 155 230 Chemicals * 50 160 160 110: Tools * 10 10 10 30 Subtotal * 120 245 325 370 :1,060 Labour CFamily) ----------~~~~~~~~~* Lining and Holing : 90 0 0 a~ * Planting 7515 0 Fertilizing 10 25 30 30 Weeding 30 110 11a 70: Sanitation *0 to 50 10 Infrastructure 20 20 20 20: Subtotal 225 1S0 210 130 745 Total * 1,755 505 53 Oo,9 Palo/ha* 148 149 139 130: R-52 MRLAYSIR RISOR PROJECT Fare Bdget REPLUfTINM 1ITH OIL P IEIIVIL FIWS $Aa) Total : :Year 5 6 7 a 9 '0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 sperating: :: : cost: Yield- ten ffbAm O per-tingj Cost : :Fortilizs : 27 345 390 420 420 420 375 375 375 350 360 350 33S 4,425: Ch scals : 0 30 30 25 25 25 25 25 25 - - - - : 240: Tools : 0 20 20 20 20 20 0 20 20 20 20 20 20 2 : Subtotal :320 395 440 465 465 465 42D 420 420 370 37-0 21o 355 :4.925: :Labour (Fami 1y) : : fertilIizer :30 30 30 30 30 30 SD 30 30 30 30 30 25 : 3B5: : S"dn :W i 20 2 0 G IS 15 IS IS 15 IS so 30 30 30 27 : Sanitation : IS I I 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 25 : 2 : 5Infrastructwr : IS IS IS IS 15 15 15 10 IO tO 10 175 HFrvesting ;j 60 260 250 265 310 350 395 395 395 375 375 375 350 4,155 : mSubcoal : 140 340 330 345 390 430 475 5 475 . 465 46 465 440 5235: ToItal 460 735 770 810 e55s 895 M9 M9 S9 OM^83 485 795 10,160. ° T: l : -- 20 20 20 20 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 Pal-al : 120 3925404 4645 120 120 120 40 4 IS 110 110 110 105 : : :~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ : Source : RISDR, Far Euodgt, 1909 R-53 DERIVRTION OF ECONOIIC CAPITAL COST OF OIL PRLN NAINTENRNCE FOR OIL PRL REPLRNTED BETMEEN 1979 - 1985 --.,--------------------------------------- (C* oillion, at 1989 Constant Prices) ------------------------------------- : 1982 1983 1984 1985 1906 1987 1980 l.J9 ; Current Expenditure : 0.11 0.09 0.06 1.07 0.99 0.49 1.55 0.03 1999 Prices 0.13 0.10 0.06 1.15 1.05 0.52 1.59 0.03 : Economic Price : 0.12 0.09 0.05 1.05 0.96 0.47 1.45 0.03 : : S……S~~~~~~"S R-54 OISTRIUTION OF OIL PRLI BY RGE UNDER ?RINTENfNCE P1 ROGR1 FOR OIL PfLM REPULITD BETWEEN 1979 - 1995 :Rg : 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1999 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 : I 151.25 116.85 167.13 576.79 : 2 : 122.62 166.A5 167.13 576.79 3 : 122.62 116.95 167.13 576.78 4 : 122.62 116.95 167.13 576.79 5 : 122.62 116.85 167.13 576.78 6 122.62 116.95 167.13 576.78 7 : 114.42 97.63 361.59 135.16 122.62 122.62 116.95 167.13 576.70 : a : 29.63 114.42 97.63 361.51 135.16 122.62 122.62 116.95 167.13 576.79 : 9 : 29.63 114.42 97.63 361.59 135.16 122.62 122.62 116.95 167.13 576.79 : 10 : 29.63 114.42 97.63 361.59 135.16 122.62 122.62 116.85 167.13 576.79 : I: : 29.63 114.42 97.63 361.59 135.16 122.62 122.62 116.95 167.13 : 12 : 29.63 114.42 97.63 361.59 135.16 122.62 122.62 116.95 : 13 29.63 114.42 97.63 361.59 135.16 1Z.62 122.62 14 : 28.63 114.42 97.63 361.59 135.16 122.62: 15 29.63 114.42 97.63 361.59 135.16 16 : 29.63 114.42 S7.63 361.59 : 17 28.63 114.42 97.63 : s19 28.63 114.42 19 a2.63: :2D 21 22 : - :23:: 24 25 Total : 151 393 697 1,596 1,721 1,843 1,943 1,843 1,943 1,843 1,843 1,843 1,843 1 -- -------- - ----------------------------------55 DISTRIBUTION OF OIL PRUI BY RAE t11E MRINTEHN?CE FR1OGNI FOR OIL PRL) REf 1qITED BETWEEN 1979 - 1915 : --- - - - - - : : np : 1995 1996 190'? 1999 1999 200YJ 2001 2U02 2003 2004 2nO6 2006 ' : 1 i 2 4 5 :6 7 9 10:a 11 : 576.79 12 : 167.13 576.79 13 : 116.95 167.13 576.78 14 : 122.62 116.85 167.13 576.79 15 : 122.62 122.62 116.85 167.13 576.79 16 : 135.16 122.62 122.62 116.95 167. 13 57A. 78 : 17 : 361.58 135.16 122.62 122.62 116.95 167.13 576.78 19 97.63 361.59 135.16 122.62 122.62 116.85 167.13 576.78 19 : 114.42 97.63 361.59 135.16 122.62 122.62 116.95 167.13 576.79 20 : 29.63 114.42 97.63 361.59 135.16 122.62 122.62 116.95 167.13 5766.79 21 :29.63 114.42 97.63 361.59 135.16 122.62 122.62 116.95 167.13 576.78 22 :29.63 114.42 97.63 361.58 135.16 122.62 122.62 116.95 167.13 576.79 23 :29.63 114.42 97.63 361.59 135.16 122.62 122.62 116.65 167.13 24 :29.63 114.42 97.63 361.59 136.16 122.62 '22.62 116.95 25:29.63 114.42 97.63 361.59 136.16 122.62 12262: Total : 1,843 1,843 12.43 1,843 1,843 1,943 1,815 1,700 1,603 1,241 1.106 93 : 16 : 97.S3 361.Sa 135.16 IZ.62 1Z.62 116 : 1 :114429763 6158 3516122621226Z11.8516.13-SB Econonic COST OF lUCnE FMR OIL PMA REPLIIU UE1T 1E7E - £190 0 illine1 at 1NS Constant Prics) v:m :1902 1903 1S1 im5 196 196? 19s 8 1969 1SM 1991 19S2 1V93 199I1 19S1991 199 1998 19"9 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2061: : :- : S : 0.O5 0.05 0.06 0.23 : : 0.0? 0.06 0.09 0.32 I: :0.02 0.0? 0.06 0.21 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.0? 0.11 0.3: : : 0.02 0.0 0.0? 0.21 0.09 0.05 e'.os 0.00 0.11 0.11 49 : 0.02 0.09 0.0? 0.27 0.1U 0.89 0.09 0.05 0.12 0.43 10 : O.Ut 0.0 0. " 0.25 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.13 0.15 11 : 0.02 O.nq 0.0? 0.26 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.13 0.41 12 : 0.02 0.09 0.0? 0.20 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.13 0.41" 13 : 0.02 0.09 0.0? 0.26 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.13 0.11 : i: 0.02 0.00 0.0? 0.26 6.09 0.09 0.089 0.000.12 0.41 IS : 0.02 0.0 0.0? 0.21 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.12 0.41 : U : 0.02 0.06 0.06 0.25 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.11 0.40 : 1? : 0.02 0.07 0.06 0.25 0.09 o.0 0.0 0.00 0.11 0.39 : is 8 0.02 0.0? 0.06 0.21 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.0? 0.11 0.3: is 2 0.02 0.07 0.66 0.21 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.0? 0.11 0.3: :20: 0.02 0.0? 0.06 0.22 0.00 0.0? 0.0? 0.0? 0.10 0.35 : 21 : 0.02 0.0? 0.06 e.22 0.00 0.0? 0.0? 0.0? 0.10 0.35 : : 22 : 0.01 0.06 0.a5 0.21 0.00 o.w 0.07 0.07 0.09 0.35: : 23 : 0.01 0.06 0.65 0.20 0.0? 0.61 0.o6 0.61 0.0: : 22 : 0.01 0.03 0.02 o.06 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02: : 2S : 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.02: :iotNm:0.:2 0.89 0.11 0.41 O.S? 0.74 o.64 1.12 1.21 1.30 1.33 l." 1.31 1.33 1.3 1.2? 1.21 1.13 1.11 1.04 O0. 0.79 0.3 0.54 0.112 : : t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~65 YIELD OF OIL PLN UNODER MRINTEWINCE PROGRI-U FOR OIL PRLU REPLFANTmE ETWEEN 1979 - 1995 ('000 TON) Re9 : 1982 1993 1984 1985 1986 19W7 1909 1999 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 : : :*S~- - - - 3 5 :0.24 0.23 0.33 1. tS 6 : 0.73 0.70 1.00 3.46 7 : 0.28 1.14 0.98 3.61 1.35 1.22 1.22 1.16 1.67 5.76 a : 0.34 1.37 1.17 4.34 1.62 1.47 1.47 1.40 2.00 6.92 9 : 0.40 1.60 !.37 5.06 1.09 1.71 1.71 1.63 2.34 9.07 10 : 0.46 1.83 1.56 5.78 2.16 1.96 1.% 1.87 2.67 9.?3 I1 I 0.51 2.06 1.76 6.51 2.i2 2.20 2.21 2.10 3.01 12 : 0.51 2.06 1.76 6.51 2.43 2.21 2.21 2.10 13 : O.X1 2.06 1.75 6.51 2.43 2.21 2.21 14 0.48 1.94 1.16 6.14 2.29 2.09 : " 15 : 0.48 1.94 1.66 6.14 2.29 : 16 : 0.46 1.83 1.56 5.79 : 17 : 0.46 1.83 1.56 : 16 : 0.43 1.72 : 19 : 0.43 : 2D: 21 22 23 24 25 : : : Totl : 0.28 1.48 2.75 6.84 9.64 12.99 15.72 19.46 23.31 26.05 28.07 29.51 30.41 : *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ R-58 O S / / ,/ // YIELD Of OIL P3l. INER fIITOflE I PROWM FOR OIL PI REPLfTED ETMEN 1979 - 1985 BY R ('000 TO") Rge : 19 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 . ~~~ _ _ __ 5: : : 18 :14 2.08 1.99 2.4 9.91 15 : 2.01 2.08 1.98 2.84 9.91 16 : 2.16 1.96 1.96 1.97 2.67 9.23 17 : 5.78 2.16 1.96 1.96 1.86 2.67 9.23 : 18 : 1.46 5.42 2.03 1.84 1.84 1.75 2.51 8,6s 19 : 1.71 1.46 5.42 2.03 1.84 1.84 1.75 2.51 9.65 20 : 0.40 1.60 1.37 5.06 1.89 1.72 1.72 1.63 2.34 9.07 21 : 0.40 1.60 1.36 5.06 1.89 1.72 1.71 1.63 2.34 8.07 22 : 0.34 1.37 1.17 4.34 1.62 1.47 1.47 1.40 2.00 6.92 : 23 : 0.34 1.37 1.17 4.34 1.62 1.47 i.4? 1.40 2.00 : 24 0.31 1.26 1.W0 3.98 1.40 1.35 1.35 1.28 : 25 0.31 1.26 1.07 3.98 1.48 1.35 1.35 Total : 31.16 30.45 29.88 28.48 27.82 26.18 5.22 22.64 21.02 16.11 14.17 11.5 : R-59 c x - 100 - Appendix 46 ECONOMIC BENEFIT FOR PALM OIL (1989 CONSTANT PRICES) I YEAR ITOTAL YIELD I ECONOMIC ITOTAL BENEFIT I I I (TON) IPRICE (1989) I ( o$'000) I 1982 1 286 1 147.00 1 42.04 1 B 1983 1 1,488 1 173.00 1 257.42 1 1 1984 1 2,750 1 279.00 1 767.25 1 3 1985 1 6,847 1 173.00 1 1,184.53 1 B 1986 1 9,649 1 98.00 1 945.60 1 1987 1 13,017 1 138.00 1 1,796.35 1 1988 1 15,743 1 140.00 1 2,204.02 1 - 1989 1 19,488 1 124.00 1 2,416.51 1 1990 1 23,343 1 43.00 1 1,003.75 1 I 1991 1 26,583 1 50.00 1 1,329.15 1 - 1992 1 28,073 I 81.00 1 2,273.91 1 B 1993 1 29,533 1 123.00 1 3,632.56 1 : 1994 1 30,423 1 119.00 1 3,620.34 1 ! 1995 1 31,192 1 159.00 1 4,959.53 1 1996 B 30,477 1 159.00 1 4,845.84 1 1 1997 1 29,897 1 159.00 1 4,753.62 1 1 1998 1 28,490 1 159.00 1 4,529.91 1 B 1999 1 27,841 1 159.00 1 4,426.72 1 1 2000 1 26,188 1 128.00 1 3,352.06 1 B 2001 1 25,215 1 128.00 1 3,227.52 I I 2002 B 22,656 1 128.00 1 2,899.97 1 1 2003 1 21,034 1 128.00 1 2,692.35 1 I 2004 1 16,124 1 128.00 1 2,063.87 1 B 2005 1 14,180 1 128.00 1 1,815.04 1 1 2006 1 11,561 1 128.00 1 1,479.81 1 ---------…I--------- B-- …I-------------B ……------------ B TOTAL B 492,078 1 B 62,519.68 1 B…B------------------------------------------------ A-60 - 101 - Appendix 47 ECONOMIC RATE OF RETURN FOR PALM OIL MAINTENANCE PROGRAM (1989 CONSTANT PRICES) -------------------------------- ICAPITAL I PRODUCTION I TOTAL I INET INCREMENTALI i YEAR I COST I COST I COST I BENEFIT I BENEFIT I I (M$m) I (MSa) I (MSm) I (Mom) I (M$m) I … …___ _I--------…I------------… I--------…I…-------- I--------------- I 1982 1 0.12 1 0.02 1 0.14 1 0.04 1 -0.10 I - 1983 1 0.09 1 0.09 1 0.18 1 0.25 1 0.07 1 I 1984 1 0.05 I 0.16 1 0.21 1 0.76 1 0.55 1 i 1985 1 1.05 1 0.41 1 1.46 1 1.18 1 -0.28 1 - 1986 1 0.96 1 0.57 1 1.53 1 0.94 1 -0.59 1 i 1987 ! 0.47 1 0.74 1 1.21 1 1.79 1 0.58 1 i 1988 1 1.45 1 0.P4 1 2.29 1 2.2 1 -0.09 1 1 1989 1 0.03 1 1.12 1 1.15 1 2.41 1 1.26 1 1 1990 1 1 1.24 1 1.24 1 1.00 1 -0.24 1 I 1991 1 1 1.30 1 1.30 1 1.33 1 0.03 1 1992 1 1.33 1 1.33 1 2.27 1 0.94 1 1993 1 1 1.33 1 1.33 1 3.63 1 2.30 1 I 1994 1 I 1.34 1 1.34 1 3.62 1 2.28 1 1 1995 1 1 1.33 1 1.33 1 4.96 1 3.63 1 1 1996 1 1 1.30 1 1.30 1 4.84 1 3.54 1 1 1997 1 1 1.27 1 1.27 1 4.75 1 3.48 1 1 1998 1 1 1.21 1 1.21 1 4.53 1 3.32 1 I 1999 1 1 1.18 1 1.18 1 4.42 1 3.24 1 1 2000 1 1 1.11 I 1.11 1 3.35 1 2.24 1 1 2001 1 1 1.04 1 1.04 1 3.22 1 2.18 1 1 2002 1 1 0.87 1 0.87 1 2.89 1 2.02 1 1 2003 1 1 0.79 1 0.79 1 2.69 1 1.90 1 1 2004 1 1 0.63 1 0.63 1 2.06 1 1.43 1 1 2005 1 1 0.54 1 0.54 1 1.81 1 1.27 1 1 2006 1 1 0.46 1 0.46 1 1.47 1 1.01 I ------------------------------------------------------------------ Net Present Value Discounted at 50% = M$0.331 million Economic Rate of Return = > 50% A-61 LOAN 2147 - M : NALCCA IROP IRRIGRTION IMPROVEIENT PROGR FItNECIRL CAPITflL COST (CURRENT PRICES) : : :192 1993 1984 1915 1986 1987 19 1999 Total : : Irrigation Improvment: - - - 0.26 0.51 0.31 - - 1.09 : N : Corultancy Sevice - - - - - - - - °. ° : Equipment & Vehicles : 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.23 : Rd.inistrative Cost : 0.05 0.06 0.09 0.10 0.14 0.16 0.11 0.11 0.84: : Smallscale Civil Mark : 0.01 0.02 0.009 0.12 0.18 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.66 Total 0.07 0.14 0.19 0.53 0.99 0.60 0. 20 0.20 2.01: A-62 LORN 2147-M: ILCCA IflDP IRRIGRTION IMPRPJEeIT PROGRA6 DERIVRTION OF FINNCIRL CFPITFL COST (CONSTR4T PRICE 1999) (Ms) : 1982 1983 1984 1985 1996 1987 198 1989 Total : :Irrigation Improvmen : - - - 0.28 0.55 0.33 - - 1.16 : :Cri' SSvic. - - - - - - - - O.00: :Equipent & Vehicles 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.08 0.07 0.04 0.01 0.01 C.24: :dinistrati_ Cost : .05 0.09 0.09 0.11 0.15 0.17 0.12 0.11 0.89: : Samliml. Civil Marm : 0.01 0.03 0.09 0.13 0.19 0.10 0.08 0.08 0.71 : *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Total : 0.07 0.16 0.19 0.57 0.96 0.64 0.21 0.20 3.00 : R 63 A-ES~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ LOAN 2147-R : hALACCR IROP IRRIGRTION IIRURENT PROG6 ECONOMIC CFPITfR COST (CONSTRNT PRICE 1989) (Ms) *~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~_ _ _ _ ___ __ ___ _ _ 1982 1983 1984 1915 1986 1987 1980 1999 Total : ~ ---_ - ------------- - _--_ : lrriotion Improveent: - - - 0.24 0.46 0.27 - - 0.97: o : Conaltancy Service - - - - - - - - 0.0 : : Equipment & Vehicles : 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.23 : : Administrative Cost : 0.04 0.07 0.06 0.09 0.12 0.14 0.09 0.09 0.71 : : Smallseale Civil Mark 0.01 0.02 0.0. 0.11 0.16 0.0. 0.0? 0.07 0.60 : Total 0.06 0.13 0.17 0.49 0.80 0.53 0.17 0.16 2.51 R-64 FM rnooucnm UUILIHW IllSRllOII IIW30EIWf ROOMmi : :uNmENE : 6avME : .En TED OVA : IWME : rERwcn : TOT.L PUOUMIN : . Mxucnw. : Ia ER : aM : wVIL (TAM : -: YIELD : PUUIIH TII : 31_T PSECT : P000:tiCH : A0 : cO : C:iS6 : creSS r: crOS) : cr : : am2 : : 2:: : 0.2 : : Im 0 : " : 2m: 3.1 : 1*,019: 1,079 (lom: Is" : 3 : 3.a : 1.0rs: 1.07: 5,w: ": : 1 : 307: 3.4: 255: 296: 3.4: 2.050: 27050: 1.044: 1.m: : 9Sr : n : 3.2 : 315 : 312 : 3.3 : 1.270 : 1.271: 0 : 1z:0 : , : Iam : * " : 3.4 : 32S : 323 : 3.5 : 1.298 : 1.2t : IS7: 1a1i: 0 :imsn : Xs : 3.6 : i0 : 40 : 3.6 : 1.570 : I.S70 : 119: 1.451: IVAs : 22 : 3.6 : 407 : 03 : 3.6 : 1.530 : 1.530 : ?s: 1.l0: I : sa : : : 40?: 403: 3.6: 1.401: 1.451: 1:,40: Ism 417 413: 3.6: 1.48?: 1.i4m: : qmv: :199 : : : *17: 413 3.5 i.44s 1.44 11: : : ss9 : : : 41?: 413:. 3.5: 1.441: 1.4 : :1,f 1VA5 : : : 17 : 413: 3.5 1.41: 1.441: : 1.4 1S: :iss : : : 41: 413 3.4: 1.404 10: : l.4" Is"? : : : 17 413: 3.4: I,404: 1.404 : 1.40: is". : : : 41?: 413: 3.4 1.4o4: 1.404: : 1.404: : Isst :1* I? 4133 3.S: 1.17 : 1.4.?: : 1.43?: : 2 : : : *17: 413: 3.6: 1.is7: 1,48?: : 104mw: : 201 : : : 47: 413 : 3.6: 1.40?: 1.4mw: : 1.40?: :ag : : : 41? 413 : 3.5 : .tS1: 1.41: :: : 2003 : : : 417 413 : 3.5: 1.ns: 1.441: : 1.44S: : 200 : : 417: 413 : 3.5: atSs : 1.-1M: 1 :200 : : : 1t?: 413 : 3.6: 1.4: 1.48?: :1,4 A-es COST OF PRODUCTION OF PRDI PER HECTARE PER SERSON (1909 PRICES) : : Financial Economic a. Rgricultural Inputs :--- ------- -----:-:-: Fertilizer - 112.00 Seed 32.20 29.99 Chemical 132.84 120.80 b. Labour Land Preparation 275.20 225.73 : Transplanting ) Maintenance ) 350.63 287.52 ° Hervesting ) c. Other Charges :-------------:: Padi Bonus - 610.50 Land Tax 7.20 7.13 Depreciation 17.30 17.13 Others 116.00 115.63 Total 932.25 1,526.40 Source : NIROP's Farm Survey, 1909 Note : Fertilizer was given free of charge and padi bonus was at $16.50 to every 100 kg of padi sold and production is 3.7 mt/ha Conversion factor : Agricultural inputs : 0.91 Labour : 0.92 Tax . 0.99 Others : 0.99 A-66 ECONOMIC COST OF OPERRTION RNO MRINTENRNCE (MS million, 1989 Constant Price) ------------------------------------------ YEAR Additional Rrea Incremental Brought Into Production Maintenance Cost 1983 1984 - 1985 - 1986 41 0.001 1987 273 0.008 O 1999 299 0.009 1999 315 0.010 1990 326 0.010 1991 407 0.012 1992 407 0.012 1993 407 0.012 1994 407 0.012 1995 407 0.012 1996 407 0.012 1997 407 0.012 1998 407 0.012 1999 407 0.012 2000 407 0.012 2001 407 0.012 : 2002 407 0.012 2003 407 0.012 2004 407 0.012 2005 407 0.012 2006 407 0.012 a~~~~~~~~~~ Maintenance was estimated at financial price of $37.48/ha per year. Conversion factor = 0.94 R-67 INCREIENT9L PROOUCTION COST YER : Incr-eental : Rdditional Rr . : Incremntal Padi : Production Cost : Total Incremental : : Production : Brought Into : Bonuses Paid Out : For Incr.e.rntal : Production Cost : : : (ton) : Production (HN) : (M*e) : Rra ("*a) -: (9*$) :-: -~- :-: _:-- :- :1982: - : - - : - : - :1983: - : - - - - :1985 1996 : 1,006 : 41 : 0.16 : 0.037 : 0.197 : 1987 : 1,030 : m : 0.17 : 0.249: 0.419 : : 199E : 1,131 : 299 : 0.18 0.273: 0.453 : : 19B9 : 1,451 : 315 : 0.23: 0.28e: 0.518 : : 1990 : 1,451 : 326 : 0.23: 0.298B 0.528: 1991 : 1,451 : 407 : 0.23: 0.372 : 0.602 : X : 1992 : 1,487: 407 : 0.24: 0.372 : 0.612: 1993 : 1,446 : 407 : 0.23 : 0.372 : 0.602 1994 : 1,446 407 : 0.23 : 0.372 : 0.602 1995 : 1,446 : 407 : 0.23: 0.372 : 0.602 : 1996 : 1,404 : 407 : 0.23 : 0.372 : 0.602 1997 : 1,404 : 407 : 0.23 : 0.372 : 0.602 : 1996 : 1,404 : 407 : 0.23 0.372 : 0.602 1999 : 1,487: 407 : 0.24: 0.372 : 0.612: 2000 : 1,487: 407 : 0.24: 0.372 : 0.612: * 2001 : 1,487: 407 : 0.24: 0.372 : 0.612: 2002 : 1,446 : 407 : 0.23 : 0.372 : 0.602 203 1,446 407 : 0.23: 0.372 : 0.602: 2004 0,446 47 : G.23 : 0.372 : 0.602 2005 1,47 407 : 0.24: 0.372 : 0.612: 2006 1,487 407 : 0.24: 0.372 : 0.612 R-69 TOTRL INCRE"ENTAL BENEFIT IRRIGATION INPROVE?ENT PROGRAN (1989 CONSTRNT PRICES) ______________________________ YEAR : Incremental : Economic : Total Yield : Price Benefit (ton) : (1989) : (N* million) :1902: - :-:-: :1983: - :-:-: : 1904 : - : - : - : 1985 : - : - - 1996 : 1,006 : 400.00 : 0.40 : 1997 : 1,030 : 393.00 : 0.39 : 1988 : 1,131 : 504.00 : 0.57 : 19: 9 : 1,451 : 482.00 : 0.69 : 1990 : 1,451 : 401.00 : 0.5 : 1 1991 : 1,451 : 401.00 : 0.58: 1992 1,487 401.00 : 0.59 : : 1993 : 1,446 : 401.00 : 0.5 : 1994 : 1,446 : 401.00 : 0.58 : 1995 : 1,446 : 500.00 : 0.72 : 1996 : 1,404 : 500.00 : 0.70 : 1997 1,404 : 500.00 : 0.70 : 1998 : 1,404 : 500.00 : 0.70 : 1999 : 1,497 : 500.00 : 0.74 : 2000 1,487 : 428.00 : 0.63 2001 1,487 : 428.00 : 0.63 2002 1,446 : 428.00 : 0.62 2003 1,446 : 429.00 : 0.62 2004 1,446 : 428.00 : 0.62 2005 : 1,487 : 428.00 : 0.64 2006 1,487 : 428.00 : 0.64 R-69 rOeUmIC QfTE OF ETt4 (1989 I6NSITM PRICE) IR1IRTIw IWPREIENT FOGH (EXCLLSIVE OF PFDI B SES) (P million) : S 'M : Capital: Incrinmsntal Inaremtl : Total Total : Ntt :c:st : Cost of : Cost of :Cost : Ef it Incremwntel : :: Xintwe :Production : : : lwit : 1E : 0.06: - : - 0.060 : (0.060): : 1983 : 0.13: - : - 0.130 : : 0.130): : 1984: 0.1?: - : - : 0.170 : (0.170): : 1995 : 0.49 0.49: -: (0.490): : 1986 : 0.80: 0.001 : 0.037 : O.SM : 0.40: (0.439): : 197 : 0.53: 0.001: 0.249: 0.797?: 0.39 : (0.397): : 1998 : 0.17: 0.009 0.273 : 0.452 : 0.57 0.119:: : 1989 0. is: 0.010 0.299 : 0.458 : 0.69: 0.232 : : 1990 : - : 0.010: 0.298: o.aos: 0.5s: 0.2729: : 1991 : - : 0.012: 0.372 0.384 : 0.58: 0.196 : : 1992 : -0.012 :0. 372 : 0.384 0.59 0.206 : : 193 : - : 0.012: 0.372: 0.384: o.se: 0.206: : 1993: - : 0.012: 0.372: 0.384 : .58: 0.11% : : 199 : - : 0.012: 0.372: 0.394 : 0.58: 0.196 : : 1995 : - : 0.012: 0.372: 0.384 : 0.72: 0.36 : : 199 : - 0.012: 0.372: 0.394 : 0.70: 0.316 : : 1997 : - 0.012 : 0.372: 0.34 : 0.70: 0.316 : 1998 : - 0.012 : 0.372 0.34 : 0.70: 0.316 : : 1999 : - 0.012 : 0.372: 0.384 : 0.74 :0.2 : : 2WI : - 0.012 : 0.372: 0.384 : 0.63: 0.246: : 200 - : 0.012 : 0.372: 0.384 : 0.63: 0.246 : 2002 : - 0.02 : 0.372 : 0.394 : 0.62 0.236 : 2002 : - : 0.012 : 0.372: 0.384 : 0.62: 0.236: 2004 : - 0.012 : 0.372: 0.384 : 0.62:029 : 2006 : - : 0.012 : 0.372: 0.384 : 0.64: 0.256 . 2006 : - : 0.012 : 0.372: 0.384 : 0.64 0.256 Net Present Value at 1CD discount factor = *.129 million Economic rte of retrn 12X R-70o ECDNO"IC MTE OF ET1Nt (19W9 C6TRN PRICE) IGRIRTION IIPROE1ENT PFRfGi (INClUSlIE OF PRD 110101SS) (N* million) : E: Capital : Incrintal : In1emnta Irncr.mntal : Total : Total : Nut cost : Cost of : Cost of Padi Bonses : Cost. : llfit ': rm:tal : : .(M) Nint () Praduction (M) ( n1o) : (1) : (n) : f it (NSa) : 1902 : 0.06: - : - : 0.060:): : 1913 : oaa: 0.130 (0.130): : 19 o 0.1 - - 0.170 : (0.170): : 1905 : 0.49 - 04- 0 (.°-0) : 1996 : !o.: 0.001 : 0.037 0.160 : 0.9s : 0.40 : (0.599): : 1 : 9.s :3 0.00 : 0.249 0.170 0.957 : 0.39 : (0.567): :199 0.17 0.90 0.273 0.190 0.632: 0.57 (0.062): : 1999 : 0.16: 0.010: 0.Z8; 0.230 0.6m6 : 0.69: 0.02 : 1990 : - 0.010: 0.299: 0.230 0.538 : O.u: 0.042 : : t9SI : - : 0.012: 0.372 : 0.230 : 0.614 : 0.:5 (0.034): 7 : 1992 : 0.012: 0.372 : 0.240: 0.624 : 0.99: (0.034): :199: - : 0.012 0.372 : 0.230: 0.614 : 0.59: (0.034): : 1994 : - : 0.012: 0.372 : 0.230: 0.614 : .5n: (0.034): : 1996 : - 0.012 : 0.372: 0.230: 0.614: 0.70: 0.106: : 1996 : - 0.012: 0.372: 0.230: 0.614 : 0.70 0.:96 : : 1997 : 030.0122 . : 0.230 0.614 : 0.70: 0.096 : : 0.012 :0.3 : 0.230 : 0.614 : 0.70 :0.096 : :1l9S9 : - : 0.012: 0.372: 0.240 0.624 : 0.74: 0.116 ' :a2 : - : 0.012: 0.372: 0.240: 0.624 : 0.63 :O.6 : : 20I : - : 0.012: 0.372: 0.240: 0.624 : 0.6'S 0.006 : : 202 0.012 : 0.372: 0.230: 0.614: 0.62: 0.006: :20 : - : 0.012 0.372: 0.230 : 0.614 : 0.62 : 0.006 : : 2004 : 0.012: 0.372: 0.230 : 0.614 : 0.62 : 0.096 : : 2D0 - 0.012: 0.372: 0.240 : 0.624 : 0.64 : 0.016 : : 2006 0:2 - : 0.02: 0.372: 0.240 : 0.624 : 0.64 : 0.016 : H, t Pisat Value at IX discasgt factor= (*1.597) Ecommic rate oF ratLrn Nil A-TI OE6IrIRIWOIF Of EC_WNIC FRIWE MCICE Of PM 1cSNur 19S" MIICES * : :Convrsion: 1993 i9s4 19 1sm 1911 1i6s Ism 15 1sm am : : Factor : FO Prico* 1a1g_o& SUSj.t : 373.00 150.00 253.00 201.00 216.00 302.00 230.00 23.900 3011.00 2.00 : : 1. FM Price. Sb.,q. Me,n t : 897.00 917.00 72.0 6412.00 613.00 621.00 73.00 60.00 013.t00 1I.10: : 2. Iirad differentiol less 12) : (89.00 (0S.00) (72.00) (64.00) (61.00) (62.00) (.00) (65.00) 001.00) C6l.00: : 3. Ocan freight * imri : : 115.0 00.00 05.00 35.00 85.00 85.00 05.00 S5.00 05.00 MOD : do to Port : : : :1. CIF Price. K-as Lumqr : 630.00 07.60 737.00 663.00 Y13.00 621.00 739.00 165.00 *17.00 7.0: S. Part howdhings.trsport : 0.79: 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00: : a storm" to -sele. : : : t : Itxl- L_r : : : I S. awl&.ol prie. K. Lumr : : 913.00 O77.00 767.00 693.00 667.00 3lS.00 OZ0.00 695.00 0I7.00 m.oo: : T. Trr_pt frove Projoct : 0.79 : fI1.00 Cl1.00) (11.00 (11.00) (11.60) (11.00 (12.00) (11.00 (11.00 (11.00): area sillis to K. r :L:p: :. Eu-nil p-ice, preject re, : : 902.00 966.00 751.00 662.00 656.00 343.00 603.00 6e1.00 336.00 ?ZS.00 :3. Pilling cost not coered : 0.?9 : (50.00) (50.00) (50.00) (50.00) (50.00) (50.00) (30.00) (3.00) (3000) 0.60): : b value of bg products 10. Price in-vll. prject aor : : 8S2.00 016.00 701.00 632.00 606.00 793.00 759.00 631.00 7E6.00 176.00: 11. Psdi equivalent t65# mill : 554.00 530.00 09.00 411.00 334.00 515.00 493.00 412.00 511.00 43.00 : r.turn 12. nmk.ting, f.ng t- to mill : 0.69 (11.00) (11.00) (11.00) (31.00) (1.00) (11.00) (11.00) (11.COD (11.00) (11.00): 13. Econonic price of pedi at : : 543.00 519.00 4.00 400.00 33.00 504.00 412.00 401.00 S0.00 142.00 : or* : :t: : -- - -t: 8-72 r xA 00 LOAN 2147-t HRLRCCR IflQP ORAINAE I1ROVEMNT PROGRAM FINANCIAL CRPITRL COST (CLUREMT PRICES) (Ms) 1992 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1980 1989 Total Drainage Imprsoveent : - - - 0.09 0.09 0.13 - 0.03 0.32 Land Rcquisition - - 0.14 - - - - - 0.14' Equipeent & Vehicles : 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.23 A:dministrative Cost : 0.05 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.14 0.16 0.11 0.11 0.64 S.allscale Civil Mork : 0.01 0.02 0.08 0.12 0.18 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.66 Total : 0.07 0.14 0.32 0.35 0.46 0.42 0.20 0.23 2.19 : : LORN 2147-MR: NRLRR IROP ORRINRGE IMPR TNT PR0G DERIWRTION OF FINANCIRL CFPITRL COST (1989 CONSTRNT PRICES, Ms.) * ---------------------- - -------------------------.------- 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1989 1989 Total Drainage lmprove.ent : - - .o9 0.09 0.14 - 0.03 0.35 : Ld Pcquisition: - - 0.15 - - - - - 0.15: Equipment Vehicles : 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.05 0.07 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.24 :dministrative Cost : 0.05 0.09 0.09 0.11 0.15 0.17 0.12 0.11 0.09 : Salscale Civil Mork : 0.01 0.03 0.09 0.13 0.19 0.10 0.08 0.08 0.?71 -- -- -- - -- -- - - - …… - - - - - - - -… Total 0.07 0.16 0.34 0.39 0.50 0.45 0.21 0.23 2.34 : : A-74 LOA" 2147-?V: flRLAJ IROP DRRINF1GE IUPRcPEtNEN PR0OGRR ECWO1IIC CRPITTAL COST (1989 COISTFOT PRICES. 1$.) 1982 1983 1984 1995 1966 1987 1968 1989 Total: :-rani. Improvemnt : - - - 0.07 0.07 0.11 - 0.02 0.2?: Land Rcquisition - - 0.12 - - - - - 0.12 * . Equipmnt & Vehicles : 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.23 Pdministrative Cost : 0.04 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.12 0.14 0.09 0.08 0.71 Seallsc1o. Civil Mark 0.01 0.02 0.09 0.11 0.16 0.0O 0.07 0.07 0.60 :~~~~~~~ ~ - ----- -- ------ Total 0.06 0.13 0.29 0.32 0.41 0. ? 0.17 0.18 1.93 R-75 CROP PllCTION 0UILD-P INTEHSIFICRT OF HO-fonflDoml um TlF ARER ORRINRGE IuPROeENT PRO0GW :k: L fited Rrea (Ha) : Bm.itted Rrea (Ha) Prodacton : : (Ukbenfited Rrea) (at) : Year --- : - Rubber Oil Palo Fruits Total Rubber Oil Palo Fruits Total : RQbr Oil Palo Fruits : 192: 217 162 162 541 109 324 219: : 193 : 217 162 162 541 174 972 656: : 1994 : 217 162 162 541 : 21? 1,620 6S6: : 195: 217 162 162 541 : : 239 1,944 875: : 196 : 137 02 102 341 : 90 60 60 200 : 179.1 1,428 551 : : 1937 : 63 63 211: 132 99 99 330 : 119 1,134 340 : : 19 : 85 63 63 211 : 132 99 99 330 : 129 1,134 340 : 0 : 199 : 217 162 162 541 : : 1990 : : 217 162 162 541 : : 1991 : : 217 162 162 541 : : 1992 : : 217 162 162 541 : : 1993 : 217 162 162 541 : 1994 : 210 162 162 541 : : 1996 : : 21? 162 162 541 : :19 : : 217 162 162 541 : : 1997 : : 21? 162 162 541 : : 1998 : : 217 162 162 541 : 1999 : 217 162 162 541 : :I200 : : 217 162 162 541 : : 2001 : 217 162 162 541 : : 2002 : 217 162 162 541 : : 2003: 217 162 162 541: : 0 : 2004 : 217 162 162 541 : : ZC06 : : 217 162 162 541 : : D C : 2006* ': 217 162 162 U5I1: : ~ 1 :------- -- --- - -76 A-?6 ± CROP PROUJCTION OUILD-UP INTEJ6IFICRTION OF NON-FLOODED RGRICULTURE RRER RRINR6E IWPROVET FROGRAN Production Total Production Total Pro&nction Incrmental (Bowwitsd Rra) (at) with Project : Iithout Project Production dAsr Oil Pale Fruits : Rubber Oil Palo Fruits : utben Oil Palo Fruits R Quhbr Oil Palo Fruits Totel : : : ~~~~~~~~109 324 219 : (109) (324) (219) (652): : : ~~~~~~~~174 972 656 : (174) <972) (656) S,O) 217 1,620 656 : (217) (1,620) (656) (2,493): : : 239 1,944 875 (239) (1,944) (975) (3,058): 104 840 324 : 282 2,268 an : 178 1,428 551 2 104 840 324 1,268 : 105 1,584 534 : 304 2,718 874 : 119 1,134 340: 105 1,584 534 2,303 : 198 1,782 733 : 326 2,916 1.073 : 129 1,134 340: 199 1,792 733 2.713 : 304 2.916 1,199 : 304 2.916 1.199 : 304 2.916 1.199 4,419 : 260 2,916 1,199 : 260 2,916 1,199 : 260 2,916 1.199 4,375 : 326 2,754 1,426 : 326 2.754 1.426 : 326 2,754 1.426 4.506 : 292 2,754 1.426 : 282 2.754 1.426 : 292 2.754 1,426 4,462 239 2,992 1.426 : 239 2.592 1,426 : 239 2,592 1.426 4,257 217 2,592 1.426 : 217 2,592 1,426 : 217 2.592 1,426 4,235 198 2,430 1.523 : 195 2.430 1.523 195 2,430 1,523 4,148 2 174 2,430 1,523: 174 2.430 1,523: 174 2,430 1,523 4,127 217 2,268 1,523 : 217 2.268 1,523: 217 2,268 1,523 4,00: 195 2,269 1,523 : 195 2,269 1,523 : 195 2,268 1,523 3,986 174 1,944 1,523 : 174 1,944 1.523 1 374 1,944 1,523 3,641 2 152 1.944 1,5 W : 152 1.944 1,523 2 152 1,944 1,523 3.619 2 152 1,792 1,523 : 352 1,782 1,523: 152 1,782 1,523 3,45? : Id 130 1,792 1,53 : 130 1,792 1,523 130 1,782 1,523 3,435 : t 217 1,620 1,523 : 217 1,620 1,523: 217 1,620 1,523 3,360 : m 174 1,620 1,523 : 174 1.620 1,523 174 1,62 I.sa 3,317 : w & 137 1,6ZO 1,523 : 130 1,620 1.523 : 130 1,620 1,523 3,31 : o 130 1,620 1,523 : 130 1,620 1,523 2 130 1,620 1,523 3,273 : " ---?? COST OF PRODUCTION OF FRUITS PER HECTRRE PER YEAR (1989 PRICES) Financial Economic Rgricultural Inputs Fertilizer 140.00 : 127.40 Chemical : 151.00 137.41 Labour : 135.67 111.25 Other Charges : :-------------: Oepreciation 8.47 : 9.47 Tax : 22.00 : 22.00 *~~~~~~ 5 Total 457.14 : 406.53 : : Source : "IROP, Fare Survey, 1999. Conversion factor : Labour : 0.82 Tax : 0.99 Inputs : 0.91 A-78 ECONO"IC COST OF OPERRTION AND NRINTENANCE ORRINAGE IhPRLVE"ENT PROGRRh (N$ million, 19S9 Constant Price) -----__----------------------------------- YEAR Rdditional Area Incremental : : Not Affected By Floods : "aintonance Cost : 1982 :__ : 1983 :-:-: 1 985 :-:-: 198s6 :200 :0.014: : 1987 :330 :0.177 : 191eo8 330 :0.177: : 1989 :541 :0.039: : 1990 :541 :0.039: : 1991 :541 :0.039: : 1992 S41 0.039 : 1993 :541 :0.039: : 1994 :S541 : 0.039 : :* 1995 541 0.039 : 1996 :541 :0.039: :* 1997 41 0.039 : 1998 :541 :0.039: : 1999 41 0.039: :* 2000 41 0.039 :* 2001 41 0.039 2002 541 0.039 1200 541 0.039 2004 541 0.039 2005 : S41 0.039 2006 541 0.039 ,___________------------- ----------------------------- hainton *ac wa stited at financil price of $26.50/ha per year for drainage schse-s and *60.83/ha per yoar for other sS- Cae Civil projoets. Conversion f4ctor 0 0.34 R-79 1WI~ENTAL PROUMCTlllN COST llf OINFIGE IMPRAIeEN PRO06WM : YRA : Incremental : Additional Rrea : Production Cost : Total Incremental : : Proiction : BrouK* Into : For Incresental : Production Cost (ton) : Production (Ha : 9r.a (MS million) : ( illion) :1982: - : - : _ _ :1903: - : - : - : 1994 : - - - : - : 1995 : - - - - : 1996 : 5,950: 200 : 0.10 : 0.10 : 1997 : 7,443: 330 : 0.19 : 0.19 : 1968 : 8,820: 330 : 0.21 : 0.21 I- : 11,086 : 541 0.37 0.37 1990 : 11,016 : 541 : 0.39 : 0.39 : 1991 : 11,219 : 541 0.40 0.40 1992 : 11,21X : 541 0.37 : 0.37 1993 : 10,87 : 541 0.37 : 0.37 1994 : 10,70 : 541 : 0.37 : 0.37 1995 : 11,030 : 541 0.36 0.36 : 1996 : 11,309 : 541 0.36 0.36 : 1997 : 10,256 : 541 0.37 : 0.37: : 1999 : 9,a01 : 541 : 0.37 : 0.37 : 1999 : 9,106 : 541 0.36 : 0.36 : 2000 : 9,053 : 541 0.33 0.33 : 2001 : 9,652 : 541 : 0.33 : 0.33 : 2002 : 8,652 : 541 0.29 0.29 : 2003 : 9,251 : 541 : 0.28 : 0.28 : 2004 : 0,251 : 541 : 0.27 : 0.2? : 2005 : 8,251 : 541 : 0.21 0.21 : 2006 : 8,251 : 541 : 0.21 : 0.21 R-80 TOTRL INCREKD4TRL BENEFIT OQfIl IPRE PRGTFOM (1999 CON5TRNT PRICE) : Ircro-ntal Yield (Ton) : Economic Price/ton (1989): Total Bunf it (Mm) :Year -- -: : bber Oil Palo Fruits Total : Rubber Oil Palo Fruits : Rubber Oil Pals Fruits Total : - : - -:-- : :I : 1982 : (109) (324) (219) (652): 1,840 147 292 : (.20) (0.05) (0.06) (0.31): : 1983 : (174) (972) (656) (1,902): 2,143 173 254 : (0.37) (0.16) (0.16) (0.69): : 1984 : (217) (1,620) (656) (2,493): 1,854 279 242 : (0.40) (0.45) (0.16) (1.01): : 19B5 : (239) (1,944) (875) (3,056): 1,596 173 236 : (0.38) (0.34) (0.21) (0.93): : 1996 : 104 840 324 1,268 : 1,746 99 301 : 0.18 0.09 0.09 0.35 : : 1997 : 105 1.54 534 2,303 : 2,135 13Q 264 : 0.39 0.22 0.14 0.75 : : 1999 : 193 1,782 733 2,713 : 2.446 140 292 : 0.48 0.25 0.21 0.94 : : 1999 304 2,916 1,199 4,419 : 2.000 124 445: 0.61 0.36 0.53 1.50 : : 1990 : 260 2,916 1,199 4,375 : 1,998 43 445 : 0.49 0.12 0.53 1.14 : : 1991 : 326 2,754 1,426 4,506 : 1,898 50 445: 0.62 0.14 0.63 1.39: : 1992 : 282 2,754 1.426 4,462 : 1,99B el 445 : 0.53 0.22 0.63 1.39 : : 1993 : 239 2,592 1,426 4.257 : 1,899 123 445 0.45 0.32 0.63 1.40: : 1994 : 217 2,592 1,426 4,235 : 1,099 119 445 : 0.41 0.30 0.63 1.34 : : 1995 : 195 2,430 1,523 4.146 : 2,905 159 445 : 0.57 0.39 0.67 1.62 : : 1996 : 174 2,430 1,523 4.127 : 2,905 159 .445 : 0.51 0.38 0.67 1.56 : : 1997 : 217 2,266 1,523 4,008 : 2,905 159 445: 0.63 0.36 0.67 1.66: : 1998 : 195 2,266 1,523 3,986 : 2,905 159 445 : 0.5? 0.36 0.67 1.60 : : 1999 174 1,944 1,523 3,641 : 2,905 159 445 : 0.50 0.31 0.67 1.48 : : 20 152 1,944 1,523 3,619 : 1,967 129 445 0.29 0.24 0.67 1.20 : : 2001 152 1,782 1,523 3,457 : 1,96? 129 445 : 0.29 0.23 0.67 1.19 : : 2002 130 1,782 1.523 3,435 : 1,967 129 445 : 0.26 0.23 0.67 1.16 : : 2009 217 1,620 1,523 3,360 : 1,967 128 445 : 0.42 0.20 0.67 1.29 : : 2904 2 174 1,620 1,523 3,317 : 1.967 128 445 2 0.34 0.20 0.67 1.21 : : 2006 130 1,620 1,523 3.273 : 1.967 128 445 0.25 0.20 0.67 2.12 : 2006 : 130 1,620 1,523 3,273 : 1,967 128 445 2 0.25 0.20. 0.67 1.12 : : 1 A-Si ECONOMIC RATE OF RETURN INTENSIFICRTION OF NON-FLOOWED RGRICULTURE RARE ORRINPGE ItPROJSE?NT PROGRR (EXCLUSIJE OF PFI)I BONU5ES) M$ million) :_ S YEAR Capital Incremental Incremental Total Total Net Cost Cost of Cost of Cost Beefit Irncrmental Ilintenamce Production Benefit i 1982 0.06 - - 0.060: (0.31)? (0.370): 1983 0.13 : - 0.130 : (0.69): (0.820): 1964 0.29 : - 0.290 (1.01): (1. 300) 1996 : 0.32 : - 0.320 : (0. 93): (1.250): 1986 : 0.41 : 0.014 0.10 0.524 : 0.35 : (0.174): 1997 : 0.37 : 0.177 0.19 : 0.737 : 0.75 : 0.013 : 1999 : 0.17 0.177 : 0.21 : 0.557 : 0.94 : 0.393 : 1999 : 0.19 : 0.039 : 0.37 : 0.589 : 1.50 : 0.911 : 1990 - 0.039: 0.39: 0.429: 1.14 : 0.711: :1991: - 0.039 : 0.40 : 0.439 : 1.39 : 0.951 1992 - 0.039: 0.37 : 0.409 : 1.39 : 0.971: : 1993 - : 0.039 0.37: 0.409 : 1.40 : 0.991: 1994 - 0.039 0.37 : 0.409 : 1.34 : 0.931 : : 1995 : 0.039 0.36 : 0.399: 1.62 : 1.221: :1996 : - :.O3s 0.36 : 0.399 : 1.56 1.161: 1997 0.039 : 0.37 : 0.409 : 1.66 : .1.251: : 1999 : - : 0.039 : 0.37 : 0.409 : 1.60 : 1.191 1999 : .39 : 0.369: 0.399: 1.40 9 1.091 : 2Mao : - 0.039 : 0.33 : 0.369 : 1.20 : 0.931 2001 - 0.039 : 0.33 : 0.369 : 1.19 : 0.821 : 2002: - 0.039 : 0.29: 0.329: 1.16 0.931 2003 - 0.039: 0.289 0.319: 1.29: 0.971: 2004 - 0.039 : 0.27 : 0.309 : 1.21 : 0.901: 20065 0.039 : 0.21: 0.249 : 1.12 : 0.871 2006 - : 0.039 : 0.21 0.249 : 1.12 : 0.971 Net Present Value discounted at 12X = $O0.543 million Economic rate of rwturn = 24% Z Ft-82~ ~ ~~~~~~ ECONOMIC FRRMGRTE PRICE OF VARIOUS SELECTED LOCRL FRUITS ("*/ton at 1989 Constant Prices) : : Year Far-gate, Farsgate, Faregat., Current Prices 1/ 1989 Constant Prices Economic Prices 1982 342 400 292: 1993 311 348 254: 1984 306 331 242 1995 299 323 236 1986 385 412 301 1987 341 361 264 1909 : 398 400 292 1989 609 609 445 1990 445 1995 : : : 445: 2000 445 Source 1/ FAHR, Melaka. Conversion factor = 0.73 R-83 LORN 2147-IR : IR'LRCCA IRDIP RIVER IMPROVEMENT PROGRAN FINflNCIRL CRPITRL COST (CtSUREN1 PRICES) (M$m) 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 Total : ~~~~~~- - - -- -- ----- - -!------------------ - ----------------------- - -----_-__-_-___-_______ : River Improvement : 0.06 0.22 0.01 0.30 0.18 0.01 - - 0.78 : Land Rcquisition 0.05 0.33 0.16 0.05 0.01 - - - 0.60 : : Consultancy S-evice - 0.04 0.05 0.12 - - - - 0.21 : Equipment & Vehicles 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.23 : : Administrative Cost : 0.05 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.14 0.16 0.11 0.11 0.84 : : Smallscale Civil Work : 0.01 0.02 0.08 0.12 0.18 0.09 0.08 0.08 0.66 : Total 0.18 0.73 0.40 0.74 0.57 0.30 0.20 0.20 3.32 --- - ………………-------- ------ … - R-84 LOW4 2147-1R : ARLRCCR IROP RIVER IIIPROVEPtT PROGRAN OERIVRTION OF FINRNCIRL CPPITAL COST (CONSTRHT PRICE 1989, H$s) - : 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1980 1989 Total :River Improv_ent : 0.07 0.25 0.01 0.32 0.19 0.01 - - 0.8S: :Lan Icqu.sitiaon : 0.06 0.36 0.17 0.05 0.01 - - - 0.65: :Consultany Srvice - 0.04 0.05 0.13 - - - - 0.22: :Equipmwnt L Vehicles 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.05 0.07 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.24 : :Pdministrative Cost 0.05 0.09 0.09 0.11 0.15 0.17 0.12 0.11 0.9e: :Sallscal- Civil Mark : 0.01 0.03 0.09 0.13 0.19 0.10 0.08 0.08 0.71 : Total : 0.20 0.81 0.42 0.79 0.61 0.32 0.21 0.20 3.56: *~~ Se -- - - - --- - - ---- --- ---- --- ---- --- - A--- - - -- - - -- - - - LORN 2147-RA HALCCOC IROP RIVER IMPROVEMENT PROGRO ECONOMIC CAPITRL COST (CONSTRNT PRICE 1989, M*.) :~~~~~~~~~~ ---- ------ 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1908 1999 Total : River Improvement : 0.06 0.21 0.01 0.27 0.16 0.01 - - 0.72 : Laid Rcquisition : 0.05 0.29 0.14 0.04 0.01 - - - 0.53 : Cansultanct Service - 0.03 0.04 0.10 - - - - 0.17 : : Equip; nt & Vehicles : 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.23 : : Rdministrative Cost : 0.04 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.12 0.14 0.09 0.08 0.71 : : Ssallscale Civil Mark : 0.01 0.02 0.08 0.11 0.16 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.60 : Total : 0.17 0.66 0.36 0.66 0.51 0.27 0.17 0.16 2.96 : : R-86 RIVER IMPROVEMENT PROGRRI INCREASE IN NON-FLOODEO RGRICULTURE flRER RND CROP PROOUCTION : : aUfited frea (Ha) Bwwfited rea (Ha) Year R: ubbq- Oil Padi Cash Total : Rubbr Oil Padi Cash Total Palo Crops Pal Crops : : --_ ___----:---…: 1982 : 697 1,035 a 60 I,800: 1983 : 697 1,035 a 60 1,800 1984 : 697 900 8 1,605: 135 60 195: 1985 : 697 900 8 1,605: 135 60 195I: 1986 : 90 135 225: 607 900 a 60 1,575 : 1987 697 1,035 8 60 1,9m0: 1988: 697 1,035 8 60 1,900 : 1989: 697 1,035 8 60 1,800: 1990: 697 1,035 a 60 1,800: 1991 697 1,035 8 60 1,600 : 1992 697 1,035 0 60 I,90 : 1993 : 697 1,035 8 60 I,0 : 1994 : 697 1,035 8 60 1,800 : 1995 : : 697 1,035 8 60 1,800 1996%: 697 1,035 8 60 1,800Q0 1997 a 697 1,035 a 60 1,800 1998 : 697 1,035 8 60 1,800 1999 : 697 1,035 8 60 1,00 : :o2000 : 697 1,035 8 60 I,m : 2001 697 1,035 a 60 l'aw : : 2002: 697 1,035 a 60 1,800 : > a 2003 697 1,035 a 60 I,80 : 2004 ' 697 1,035 0 60 1,800 : : 2005 : 697 1,035 8 60 1,800 : : 2006 : 697 1,035 8 60 1,800 : ° X -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - --- - -- -- -- - - - _______--- A-87 RIVER IMPROVEMENT PROGRRM INCRERSE IN NON-FLOOED QGRICULTLRE AREA FM CROP PROOLCT I ON _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____ _ _ _ … --___- - -- - -- - :____________ Total Productici (ton) Incremental ~~~~~ ~-~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~- ~~~ ~ - -- : Production : IJ~~~ith Project :Wlithout Project:: :Rubr Oi l Padi Cas Total :Rubber OilI Padi Cash Total :Rub ber OilI Padi Cash Tbotal: : ~~Palo Crops :Palo Crops :Palo Crqmps: ------------------ - - - -- -- -- ----- - -- -- - 348 2,070 19 1oo 2,617 : (348) (2,070) (19) (190) (2,617): 557 6,210 23 100 6,970 : (557) (6,210) (23) (180) (6,970): 270 lo9 450 : 697 9,000 25 9,722 : (697) (0,730) (25) 180 (9,272): 0o IS90 990 : 766 10,900 24 11,590 : (766) (9,990) (24) 190 (10,600): 303.5 9,000 27 240 9,571 : 117 1.890 2.007: 197 7,110 27 240 7,564: 557.6 12,420 26.4 144 13.149 : 558 12,420 26 144 13.149 : : 697.0 14,490 28 144 15.359 : 697 14,490 28 144 15,359 : 766.7 16.560 29 414 17,770 : 767 16,560 29 414 17,770: : 906.1 10.630 29 414 19,979 : : 06 10.630 29 414 19,97 :9 975.9 18,630 29 414 20,049 : : 976 10,630 29 414 20,049: 1.045.5 18,630 29 414 20.119 : : 1,046 38,630 29 414 20.119 : : 975.8 17595 28 414 39,013 : 976 17.595 29 414 19,013 : 836.4 17.595 28 414 18,873 : 936 17,595 20 414 10,973 : 1,0,45.5 16,560 28 414 18,048 : : 1,046 16,560 28 414 19,040 : 906.1 16,560 27 414 17,907 : 906 16,560 27 414 17,907: 766.7 15,525 27 414 16,733 : 767 15,525 27. 414 16,733: 697.0 15,525 27 414 16,663 : : 697 15.525 27 414 16,663: 627.3 14,490 29 414 15,560 : 627 14,490 29 414 15,560 557.6 14,490 29 414 15,491 : : 558 14,490 29 414 15,491 : 697.0 12,420 29 414 13,560: : 697 12,420 29 414 13,560: 627.3 12.420 28 414 13,489 : 627 12,420 28 414 13,489: 557.6 11,395 28 414 12,385 : : 559 11,385 28 414 12.395 : 407.9 11,385 28 414 12,315 : : 498 11,385 28 414 12,315 : 497.9 10,359 29 414 11,281 : : 488 10,350 29 414 11,281 : 418.2 10,350 29 414 11.211 : : 418 10,350 29 414 11,211 :*oila -. - - * i COST OF PRODUCTION OF CRSH CROPS PER HECTARE PER YERR (1989 PRICES) ________________________________ : : Financial Economic Rgricultural Inputs Seed 130.69 : 118.92 Fertalizer 237.81 216.40 : Cheeical : 153.91 : 140.05 : Labour Land Preparation 67.86 : 55.64 Harvesting L Handling 349.98 286.98 :'Other Charges Depreciation 19.36 : 19.36 Land Tax : 20.00 19.80 Others 131.6 130.28 Total 1111.21 : 987.43 -------------------------- - --------- : : Source : HIROP, Farm Survey, 1969. 2 Conversion factor : Inputs : 0.91 Labour : 0.82 x Tax : 0.99 - Others : 0.99 w R-e9 ECONOMIC COST OF OPERRTION RNO MRINTENRNCE OF RIVER IMPROVEMENT PROGRRH (M$ million, 1989 Constant Price) : : YERR NoAdditional Rrea : Incremental : A Not Rffected By Flood : Maintenance Cost * * S~~~~~~~~~~~~~ : 1982 :-:-: : 1983 1984 210 0.018 1995 210 0.018 1996 1,429 0.133 1987 904 0.083 1988 1,800 0.166 1989 1,800O 0.166 1990 1,800 0.166 1991 : 1,800 0.166 1992 : 1,800 0.166 : 1993 1,600 : 0.166 : 1994 1,800 0.166 : 1995 1,800 0.166 1996 1,800 : 0.166 : 1997 : 1,800 : 0.166 1998 : 1,800 0.166 1999 1,800 0.166 2000 : 1,800 0.166 2001 1,800 0.166 2002 1,800 0.166 2003 1,800 0.166 2004. 1,600 0.166 2005 1,800 0.166 2006 : 1,800 0.166 "aintenance was estimated at financial price of $49.33/ha per year for river and $60.83/ha per year for other seallscale civil projects. Conversion factor = 0.84 R-90 INCREMENTAL PROOLICTION COST INTENSIFICRTION OF NON-FLOODED RGRICULTUR A2RER RIVER IMPROVEMENT PROGRAN YERR : Incremental: Additional Rrea : Production Cost : Total Incrmental : : Production : Not Affected 9s : For Incremental : Production Cost : (ton) : Flood (Ha) : Pr*a (11 million) : (11f million) :- -- : * : :S:-- 1982 : (2,444): - - : 1983 : (6,832): - : - : - 1984 : (5,774): 210 : 0.16 0.16 1985 : (6,943): 210 : 0.16 0.16 1996 : 25,85 : 1,429 : 1.21 : 1.21 : 1987 : 36,123 : 904 0.84 0.84 i9e8 : 47,275 : 1,800 1.49 1.49 : 1989 : 48,075 1,800 : 1.49 1.49 1990 : 48,092 I,6o0 : 1.48 1.48 1991 : 45,507: 1,900 : 1.43 : 1.43 1992 : 45,507 : 1,800 : 1.43 1.43 1993 : 43,198 1:,80 : 1.43 : 1.43 1994 : 43,030 : 1,800 1.41 : 1.41 1995 : 40,469 : 1,800 1.39 : 1.39 1996 : 39,459 : I,80 1.32 : 1.32 1997 : 36,813 : 1,600 : 1.28 : 1.28 1998 : 36,645 : 1,80o : 1.13 1.13 1999 : 32,028 : 1,800 1.09 1.09 : 2000 : 31,859 : 1,800 1.07 : 1.07 : 2001 : 29,392 : 1,900 : 0.73 : 0.73 : 2002 : 29,382 : 1,600 : 0.73 : 0.73 * : 2003 : 26,905 : 1,600 : 0.73 : 0.73 : 2004 : 26,905 : 1,8Q0 : 0.73 0.73 : : 2005 : 26,905 : 1,800 : 0.73 : 0.73 : 2006 : 26,905 : 1,00 : 0.73 : 0.73 : x 8-91 TOTlL INCREMENTL BENEFIT RJIYER IlPO_ ENT P_lR (S199 CONsTRNT PRICE) : Iecrmtal Yield (Ton) Economic Price/ton (1909) 2 Total Bowfit Me) Rubber Oil Palo Padi Cash Crop: Rubber Oil Palo Padi Cash Crops: Rber Oil Pals Padi Cash Crqn T31 1992 (346) (2,070) (19.0) (180): 1,840 147 543 632 : (0.64) (0.30) (0.01) (0.15) (3.10) 1983 : (557) (6,210) (23.0) (160): 2.143 173 543 056 : (1.19) (1.07) (0.01) (0.15) (2.42). 1984 (697) (9,730) (25.0) 190 : 1,854 279 519 713 : (1.29) (2.43) (0.03) 0.12 (3.61) 1965 : (766) (9.990) (24.0)i 160 : 1,596 173 448 696 : (1.22) (1.72) (0.01) 0.10 (2.65). 3996 : 166 7.110 27.0 240 : 1,746 96 400 646 : 0.32 0.69 0.01 0.16 1.16 198? : 556 12,420 26.0 144 : 2,135 130 383 667 : 1.19 1.71 0.01 0.09 3.00 3989 : 697 34,490 28.0 144 : 2,446 140 504 632 : 3.70 2.02 0.01 0.09 3.62 199 : 767 16,560 28.6 414 : 2,000 124 402 430 : 1.53 2.05 0.01 0.19 3.77 19s : 906 16,630 28.6 414 : 1,698 43 401 438 : 1.71 0.60 0.01 0.16 2.70 1I9 976 16,630 26.6 414 : 1,698 so 401 438 : 1.6s 0.93 0.01 0.16 2.9? 1992 : 1.045 10,630 28.6 414 : 3,696 el 401 438 : 1.96 1.51 0.01 0.19 3.66 19a 97m 17,595 2e.0 414 : 1,693 123 401 438 : 1.65 2.16 0.01 0.18 4.20 1994 : 836 17,595 28.0 414 : 1,696 119 401 438 : 1.s5 2.09 0.01 0.18 3.e6 199 2 1,046 16,560 28.0 414 : 2,905 159 500 436 : 3.03 2.63 0.01 0.16 5.85 1996 2 906 16,560 27.0 414 : 2,905 159 SW0 438 : 2.63 2.63 0.01 0.18 5.45 199? 2 767 15,525 27.0 414 : 2,905 159 500 438 : 2.23 2.46 0.01 0.18 4.60 199 : 697 15,525 27.0 414 : 2,905 159 s5o 438 : 2.02 2.46 0.01 .0.19 4.6? 1999 2 627 14,490 28.6 414 : 2,905 159 500 436 : 1.82 2.30 0.01 0.la 4.31 2OW9 S 556 14,490 28.6 414 : 1,967 128 428 438 : 1.09 3.6s 0.01 0.16 3.13 2001 : 697 12,420 28.6 414 : 1,967 128 42a 436 : 1.37 1.59 0.01 0.36 3.14 202 2 627 12.420 28.0 414 : 1,967 128 428 438 : 1.23 1.56 0.03 0.36 3.00 2003 s sse 11,365 28.0 414 : 1,967 129 428 439 : 1.09 1.45 0.01 0.36 2.73 2004 469 11,365 29.0 414 : 1,967 128 428 436 : 0.95 1.45 0.01 0.38 2.s9 20o5 469 10,356 28.6 414 : 1,967 128 42a 436 : 0.95 1.32 0.01 0.16 2.46 2006 : 418 10,350 28.9 414 : 1,967 128 428 438 : 0.92 1.32 0.01 0.18 2.33 _ _____ t~~~~~~~~ ECONOMIC RATE OF RETURN INTENSIFICRTION OF NON-FLOODED RGRICULTURE RRER RIVER IMPROVEMENT PFROGRUI (M$ million) * ~~~_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ - _ _ _ _ ____ : : YEFR : Capital Incremental : Incremental : Total : Total : Net Cost : Cost of : Cost of : Cost : BOneFit : Incrmental : : Maintenance : Production ::: Benfit * *----------~~~~------------- ---- ------ -- -- - -- - : 19 : 0.170 : 0.170 (1.10): (1.270): : 193 : 0.660 :0.66 (2.42): (3.080): : 1984 : 0.360 : 0.019 : 0.16 : 0.538 : (3.61): (4.148): : 195 : 0.660 : 0.018 : 0.16 : o.939 : (2.93): (3.668): : 1996 : 0.510 : 0.133 : 1.21 : 1.953 : 1.19 : (0.673): : 1987 : 0.270: 0.093: 0.94: 1.193: 3.00: 1.907: : 19 : 0.170 : 0.166 : 1.49 : 1.926 : 3.92 : 1.994 : 1999 : 0.160: 0.166 1.49: 1.916 3.77: 1.954: : 1990 : : 0.166: 1.48 1.646: 2.70: 1.054: : 1991 : : 0.166: 1.43: 1.596: 2.97: 1.374 : : 1992 : 0.166 : 1.43: 1.5%: 3.68 : 2.084 : 1993 : : 0.166: 1.43: 1.596 4.20: 2.604: : 1994: 0.166 : 1.41 : 1.576 : 3.96 : 2.284 :19f : : 0.166 : 1.39 : 1.556 : 5.B5 : 4.294 : : 1996 : 0.166*: 1.32 : 1.496 5.45 : 3.964 : : 1997 : 0.166 : 1.28: 1.446: 4.89: 3.434 : : 1998 : 0.166 : 1.13: 1.296: 4.67: 3.374 : : 1999 : 0.166 : 1.09 : 1.256 : 4.31 : 3.054 : : 2000 : : 0.166 : 1.07: 1.236: 3.13: 1.94 : : 2DD : 0.166 : 0.73 : 0.9% : 3.14: 2.244 : 202 : 0.166 : 0.73 : 0.996 : 3.00 : 2.104 : : 2003 : : 0.166 : 0.73 : 0.996 : 2.77 : 1.97? : 2004 : 0.166 : 0.73 : 0.9% : 2.59 : 1.694: : 2005 : 0.166 : 0.73 : 0.9% : 2.46 : 1.564: : 2006 : : 0.166 : 0.73 : 0.9% : 2.33 : 1.434: Net Present Value discounted at 12X = m*0.128 illion Economic rate of return = A-93 DAIRY DEVELOPMENT FII4WNCIRL CAPITFIL COST (CLIRRENT PRICES) (M1$) * --- ----- ---- ----- ---- ----- ----- -- - ----- ---- -- -------__- -------__- 1992 1983 1984 1995 1986 1987 1980 1989 : Total Rdministrative Cost 0.14 0.25 0.26 0.32 0.42 0.48 0.34 0.32 2.53 Farm Develop"mnt - 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.07 0.03 - - : 0.17: w Buildings - - 0.11 0.47 0.31 0.03 0.02 0.06 : 1.00 LwMd Acquisition 0.11 0.23 - - - - - 0.34: Equipment & Vehicles 0.03 0.12 0.03 0.15 0.19 0.13 0.03 0.01 : 0.68 : Smalwlscae Infrastructure : 0.03 0.09 0.26 0.36 0.61 0.31 0.25 0.24 2.17 : Total : 0.20 0.59 0.93 1.34 1.59 0.98 0.64 0.63 : 6.99 R ~ --- --… - 9--…-… -- -- - PR-94 ID DAIRY DEVELOPMENT FINRNCIRL CFPITRL COST (CONSTRNT 1989 PRICES) (M$m) --------------____------------------------_ _ : 1982 1983 1964 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 : Tokal : - -------------- ---- - ------------------------------ :Rdministrative Cost : 0.16 0.28 0.28 0.34 0.44 0.50 0.35 0.32 2.67 :Farm Oevelopment - 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.07 0.03 - - 0.17 : :Buildings - 0.12 0.50 0.33 0.03 0.02 0.06 : 1.06 : W :Land Rcquisition - 0.12 0.24 - - - - - 0.36 : @ :Equipment & Vehicles : 0.03 0.13 0.03 0.16 0.19 0.13 0.03 0.01 : 0.71 : :Smallscale Infrastructure : 0.03 0.10 0.30 0.30 0.65 0.32 0.25 0.24 : 2.27 : * ----- ------- ---- S --- - S-- - - --- --- - - Tokal : 0.22 0.64 0.99 1.42 1.68 1.01 0.65 0.63 : 7.24 * ---- ----- ----- ----- - - -- --- - - - ------ -- -- --- --- …-…- - -- -------- R-95 DRIRY DEYEL0P1ENT ECOMONIC CFPITRL C06T (CUNSTRNT PRICES 1989) (11.) :Conversion: 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1989 1989 : Total Factor Administrative Cost 0.e2 : 0.130 0.230 0.230 0.270 0.360 0.410 0.200 0.260 : 2.170 : Fare Develop.ent 0.91 : - 0.009 0.018 0.36C 0.060 0.270 - - : 0.717 : w Buildings 0.64 : - - 0.100 0.420 0.270 0.020 0.016 0.050 : 0.876 : Land Rcquisition 0.65 : - 0.078 0.156 - - - - - : 0.234 : Equipsent X Yehicles 0.94 : 0.020 0.120 0.020 0.150 0.170 0.120 0.020 0.009 : 0.629 : Seallscla Infrastructure: 0.84 : O.20 0.080 0.250 0.320 -0.540 0.260 0.210 0.200: 1.98O: Total 0.170 0.517 0.774 1.520 1.400 1.090 0.526 0.519 : 6.506 R-96 I~~~~~~~~~ DAIRY CRTTLE POPULATION BUILD-UP : VYar N o.. of Dairy : lNo. of Dair.j : Ne. ef Oa-ir f are :3 Cattl* Population I nliIkr. : ~ ~ - - -- - - - - -- - -- - - -- - - - - :-- - - - - - - 1962 317 : 1.910 : 076 1963 S 317 1.987 , 914 1904 : 317 2.5S0 i 1,173 1905 3 435 2,930 1,340 1966 : 470 3,350 : 1,545 : 1967 : 470 : 3,652 : 1,772 g196 3SS 2 3.474 : 1.59 1969 313 S 2,469 i 1,144 ; 1990 2 313 3.772 2,. 1,679 1991 : 313 : 3.478 i 1,600 1992 : 313 : 2.950 1,357 1993 : 313 : 2.960 : 1.362 1994 : 313 : 3,148 1 1.448 1995 : 313 : 3.358 : I.S4S 1996 2 313 :3.S76 1.646 1997 2 313 3,004 : 1.750 1996 313 : 4.046 1 1.062 1999 2 313 : 4.296 2 1.976 2000 3 313 i 4,571 . 2.103 2001 2 313 i 4.865 2,236 2002 : 313 5,107 2 2.306 6 2003 S 313 5,524 S 2.541 2004 313 2 S.674 2,702 X 2005 2 313 2 6.254 : 2.87 2006 : 313 6,674 i 3.070 A-97 DR1aY ODEVLOPIETr DAIRY CATrLE PRODUCTION BUILD-UP S ~~------------------ - ----__________ t I total nilIk Production (1) : e. of :----------_---------------------------3 Calves and Culld S : Yeor S Sold to nnc S Sod to local S Coms Sold C2) : S 2 S retail outlet I I :----------S------------------2 ----------------------------------------- 1902 1,096,000 2 20.073 - S 2 1903 8 1.975.000 30.076 S 33 3 ' 1904 S 2.620,000 3 40.020 3 420 1905 t 3.019.000 4:S974 t 492 3 19 2 3.402.000 2 S2,721 564 3 1907 3.970.000 : 6O4S6 S 64? I 1900 e 300000 S 54.517 50a 3 : 1909 2 *3204.000 : 40.792 410 2 1990 3 3.006.000 45.777 S 634 3 1991 ; 3,010.000 45.037 S S84 3 1992 3 3.040.000 46.307 S 496 3 1993 3 3.05.60 * 46,460 S 497 L a : 1994 3 3.242,400 2 49,376 3 529 : I S 1995 S 3.460.000 S 52.702 * 566 3 1996 3 3,605,920 S 56.130 S o0l 2 19 S 3.921,120 ; 59.712 t 630 3 1990 4.169.760 63.490 : 600 t !; 1999 4,425,120 S 67.30? 722 3 2000 : 4,710,720 3 71,736 t 760 3 2001 S S,013,120 ; 76,342 S 017 2002 2 5.345,760 : 01,40? : 071 S S 2003 3 5691,040 : 86,670 S 946 3 2004 ; 6,051360 92,152 3 906 j 2005 3 6.444,400 : 98.139 3 1,05 2 2006 6 6,77,920 ; 104.340 S 1,121 S -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - - ---- ------- -----------------------_ CI) It is assumed thet the amount of milk sold to ncc is constituted about 90.5Z of milk produced and another 1.S2 more sold to local retail outleto at an average p-ice It$l.OO'litor. C2) It is ostimated that 702 of dairj farmers sold their c-lves and cwlled come ev*ry y-ar. Total *elling repr*sant some 24Z of their totatl cattle population. (Sourc- : nIABP Farm Survey. 1909). A-So LORN 2147 - MR : IRLRCCR IROP COST OF PRODUCTION ODIRY OEVELOPMENT (MS at 1989 Prices) ----- _---------- ------- - -----_----- Year Financial/Farm Economic Financial Per Farc Total 1902 2,844 : 2,684 : 850,928 : 1993 3,455 : 3,259 : 1,033,103 : 1984 3,734 : 3,526 : 1,117,742 1905 3,619 : 3,417 : 1,486,395 : 19:6 : 3,812 : 3,601: 1,692,470 1907 4,002 : 3,053 : 1,810,910 : 199ie 4,357 : 4,114 : 1,460,470 : 1989 4,742 : 4,490 : 1,402,240 : I 1990 4,992 : 4,716 : 1,476,109 1991 5,241 : 4,952 : 1,549,976 1992 5,657 : 5,344 : l,672,6t2 1993 5,990 5,659 : 1,771,267 1994 6,406 : 6,052 : 1,694,276 19'95 6,822 : 6,445 : 2,017285 1996 7,238 : 6,830 : 2,140,294 : 1997 7,654 : 7,231 : 2,275,823 : 1: 90 8,153 : 7,703 : 2,411,039 : : 999 0,736 : 8,253 : 2,503,189 : 2000 9,316 : 0,803 : 2,755,339 : 2001 9,017 : 9,275 : 2,903,075 2002 10,483 : 9,903 : 3,099,639 : 2003 11,232 : 10,611 : 3,321,243 : > 2004 11,997 : 11,240 : 3,510,120 : 2005 12,729 : 12,025 : 3,763,825 : m 2006 13,561 : 12,812 : 4,010,156 : & f-99 w ECONOMIC COST OF OPERATION RND MRINTENRNCE DRIRY DEVELOPMENT (M*m at 1989 Constant Prices) ------------------------------------------ Year Incresental … : HMaintenance Cost 1982 1993 1984 : 1995 :.02 1985 0.021 1986 0.021 1987 0.021 1989 0.020 : 1989 0.019 : o 1990 0.019 : 1991 0.019 : 1992 0.019 : 1993 0.019 : : 1994 : 0.019 : 1995 0.018 : 1996 0.019 : 1997 : 0.018 : 1999 0.018 : 1999 0.01 : 2000 0.012 : 2001 0.012 : 2002 ' 0.012 : 2003 0.012 : 2005 0.012 : 2005 0.012 : : 2006 :0.012 :I :------------------------------*---------- o R-100 O OAIRr OEVELdPnENr : -2- I VS lueo of Frsh : Value of Celuoe Tetal *sn.tit S V: er I niak (nI> c1) I and culled Cons Sold S cnon) s :cnsn> c2a s --------- ----:- -- - ---- -- - - - - - - - - ---- - :S----- - -- - - -- - - 1962 : 0.62?: 2 S 0.62?:t : S S S S 1963 ; 0.626 2 0.320 1 1.154 2 1964 : 1.31? 2 0.422 1 1.739 I a196 S 1.507 S 0.466 S 1.993 I 1966 S 1.719 S O.SS6 2 2.275 S 196? S 1.9S4 S 0.630 2 2.592 i g19o : 2.040 : 0.575 2 2.61S : * : : S 969 . 1.760 2 0.412 S 2.192 2 . 1990 i 1.562 2 0.626 2 2.206 I 2 1991 1.564 S 0.576 I 2.160 2 1992 i 1.609 2 0.490 S 2.099 : 1993 i 1.615 2 0.491 . 2.106 i 1994 1.713 2 0.522 2 2.235 2 : 1995 : 1.825 0.559 : 2.384 2 : 1996 : 1.951 2 0.593 : 2.544 2 1997 : 2.071 0 O.b29 2 2.700 : 1996 2 2.199 : 0.671 S 2.870 2 * : : . 1999 2.340 2 0.713 : 3.053 2 * : : : S 2000 . 2.486 0.756 2 3.244 2 2001 . 2.641 2 0.806 S 3.447 2002 2 2.622 2 0.859 S 3.661 2 * * S 2003 : 3.009 2 0.934 : 3.943 2 2004 3.194 0 0.973 2 4.167 2 2005 3.406 1 1.037 ; 4.443 t 2006 2 3.626 1.106 4 4.734 Cl) Fotal w-lo- of fresh milk sold to MCC at 4c@nomic tors gote prico shoun in Appendis 67 and to local r*tail outl-t at an average price of ns 1.00 per liter. (2) Overag- economic pric- per usit of anir-l sold - ns 967.00 (Source ; niAoP Farm Surve4. 1989) ECONOMIC RRTE OF RETIWN ORIRY OEOELOPMENT (1989 Constant Prices) (n* million) * _______________________ : : Year : Capital : Incremental Cost : Incremental Cost : Total : Total : Not Increental : : Cost : of Naintenanc. : of Production : Cost : Benefit : Eenefit : :-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~SS55------ - --S :- : 1982 : 0.170 : : 0.850 : 1.020 : 0.827 : (0.l93): : 1983 : 0.517 : 1.033 : 1.550 : 1.154 : (0.396): : 1984 : 0.774 : 1.117 : 1.891 : 1.739 : (0.152): : 1985 .520 : 0.021 2 1.486 : 3.027 : 1.993 2 (1.034): : 1986 : 1.400 : 0.021 : 1.692 : 3.113 : 2.275 : (0.838): : 1987 1.080 : 0.021 : 1.810 : 2.911 : 2.592 : (C.319): : 1988 : 0.526 : 0.020: 1.460: 2.006 2.615: 0.609: 1989 0.519 : 0.019 : 1.402 : 1.940: 2.192 : 0.252 : :1990 0.019 : 1.476 : 1.495 : 2.208 : 0.713 : : 1991 : 0.0Q9 : 1.549 : 1.5682 2.160 : 0.592 : : 1992 : : 0.019 : 1.672 : 1.691 2.099 : 0.408 : 1993 0.019 : 1.771 : 1.790 2.106 : 0.316 : * 1994 : 0.019 : .994 : 1.913: 2.235 : 0.322 : 1 995 : 0.018 : 2.017 : 2.035 : 2.384 : 0.349 : 1996 0.018 : 2.140 : 2.158 : 2.544 : 0.386 : : 1997 0.018o : 2.275 2.293: 2.700: 0.407: 1998 0.018 : 2.411 : 2.429 : 2.870 : 0.441 : 1999 0.018 : 2.583 2.601 : 3.053 : 0.452 : 2000 : 0.012 : 2.755: 2.767: 3.244: 0.477: 2001 : : 0.012 : 2.903 2.915 : 3.447 : 0.5322 2002 : : 0.012 : 3.099 : 3.111 : 3.681 : 0.570 : : 2003 : : 0.012 : 3.321: 3.333: 3.943: 0.610 : : 2004 ::0.012- : 3.510 : 3.530 : 4.167 : 0.637 : 2005 : 0.012 : 3.763 : 3.775 : 4.443 0.668 : 2006 : 0.012 : 4.010 : 4.022 : .4.734 0.712 : Net Present Value Oiscounted at IX = 1.011 Economic rate of return = 2.3Z A-102 ECONOIIC FARRGRTE PRICE OF MILK (C$/1,000 LITER RT 1989 Consant Prices) : : Year : Current Price I : Far-gate. : Economic Farngate : 1989 Prices : Price 1982 : 400: 468: 421: 1983 : 400: 446: 403 : 1984 : 500: 540 486 : w 1985 : 500: 540: 486 : 1906 : 500: 535 482 : : 1987 : 500: 530: 477 : 1908 : 600 : 618 : 556 : 1989 : 600: 600: 540 : 1990 : 600 : 570 : 513 : 1) Source : Department of Veterinary Services, Melaka. Conversion factor = 0.90 R-103 LOAN 2147 - WIR: NItACCR IROP FISH POND DEELOPMENT FINRNCIRL CfPITRL COST (CWRENIT PRICE) (,) 1992 1983 1984 1995 1986 198? 198 1989 : Total _____ - ---------- ----- :--- ---- Rdministrative Cost : 0.14 0.25 0.26 0.32 0.41 0.48 0.34 0.32 : 2.52 : Equjipment L Vehicles : 0.03 0.12 0.03 0.15 0.13 0.13 0.03 0.01 : 0.69 Ponds Construction 0.32 0.34 0.11 - 0.04 - - - 0.91 S Ilscale Civil 1wks : 0.03 0.09 0.29 0.36 0.61 0.31 0.25 0.24 : 2.17 Total 0.52 0.9 0.68 0.83 1.24 0.92 0.62 0.5? : 6.19 fl-104 LOAN 2147 - NA MFLRCCR IROP FISH PONO OEVELOPIENT OERIVRTION OF FINFRCIRL CFPITRPL COST (Ma) 1982 1903 1984 1985 1966 1987 1988 1989 : Total : U : Administrative Cost : 0.16 0.28 0.28 0.35 0.44 0.50 0.35 0.32 : 2.68 : Equipment & Vehicles 0.04 0.13 0.03 0.16 0.19 0.14 0.03 0.01 : 0.73 : Ponds Construction : 0.37 0.38 0.12 - 0.04 - - - : 0.91: Sallscale. Civil Works : 0.04 0.10 0.30 0.39 0.65 0.33 0.26 0.24 : 2.31 Total 0.61 0.09 0.73 0.90 1.32 0.97 0.64 0.57 : 6.63 A-105 LOfi 2147 - hR : HRLRCCR IROP F ISH POND 0EUL0OPENT ECONOI1IC CRWIIRL CcOT (1919 CONSTRNT PRICES, M*.) :Conversion: 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 : Total Factor : _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - -- -- -- -__ _ --------- Rdministrativ. Cost 0.82 : 0.13 0.23 0.23 0.28 0.36 0.41 0.28 0.26 : 2.18 : Equipaent b Vehicles : 0.94 : 0.03 0.12 0.03 0.15 0.17 0.13 0.03 0.01 : 0.67 Ponds Construction 0.84 : 0.31 0.32 0.10 - 0.03 - - - : 0.76 ; Sallscale Civil harks : 0.84 : 0.03 0.08 0.25 0.32 0.54 0.2e 0.22 0.20 1.92 Total : : 0.50 0.75 0.61 0.75 1.10 o.e2 0.53 0.47 : 5.53 …-…------ -…- ----- --------- - ----- - ------- ---------- fl-106 * S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~f A-lOB~~~~~~~~~ Io LOAN 2147 - na : MALRCCR IROP FISHERIES COMPONENT PROGRESS OF FISH POND CONSTRUCTION (HR) Year : 1982 1983 1984 1985 Total : : -- -- -- - ------- ---------------- ---------- Hectare : 24.48 27.36 8.64 - 60.48 : : A-i107 S~~~~~~~~~~~~8 I -e * --(-e 4--- 0E6 uEc'I 096 166 10o ES8 96L 069 :efi/p!S1fi e6eJe 9? zc ZZ IZ7 tlZ dZ SZ z lelojL Co : Z' 9 Z *E661: < : z 61 9 t1 S OZ aB EB61 :ST 9 El S El S i z : Z3861 6661 8661 , L861 9661 St 61 *861 E861 M01I (3dUI33M) NOI3113iSN03 10 dUJ3A AB ONOd 9NIonlOdd 0131A lN3NOdWO3 S3Ii3HSII dOJI UI3UIJNW: UW - Lf1Z NtlOl LOAN 2147 - MR : RALRCCR IRflP FISHERIES COMPONENT OERIVRTION OF ECONOMIC FARlIGRTE PRICE OF FISH (MS/KG) ……~~~~~- - - - -----… -…-- -- - Year : 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 198? 1988 1989 1990 1995 2000 Financial Price: 3.49 3.65 3.79 3.79 S.83 3.87 4.79 4.08 (Current) Firnacial Price 4.08 4.09 4.09 4.09 4.09 4.10 4.93 4.08 (Constant 1989) :Econoeic Price 3.91 3.93 3.93 3.93 3.93 3.94 4.73 3.91 3.91 3.91 3.91 - --- -----------… --------…--…-- - -----…------------- Source Financial Price - IIIROP's Fare Survee, 1989 Conversion factor = 0.96 A- 109 LOAN 2147 - M : MRALRCCR IROP ECONONIC BENEFIT FRESH WATER FISH POND CONSTRUCTION (11, 1989 Prices) Year : Yield Producing : Yield per : Total Yield : Economic : Total Benefit Pond (Ha) : Ha (kg) : (kg) : Price per kg : (c'0OW) 1982 : 7 : 680 : 4,760 : 3.91 : 16.612 1963 : 25: 796 19,900: 3.93: 78.207: 1984 : 27 : 853 : 23,031 : 3.93 : 90.512 1985 : 24 : 701 : 16,824 : 3.93 : 66.118 1986 : 21 : 768 : 16,548 : 3.93 : 65.034 1987 : 22: 960: 21,120: 3.94: 83.213: 1988 : 26 : 1,030 : 26,780 : 4.73 : 126.669 : - 1989 : 26: 930: 24,180: 3.91: 94.544: 1990 : 26 : 930 : 24,180 3.91 : 94.544 1991 : 26: 930: 24,180: 3.91: 94.544: 1992 : 26: 930: 24,180: 3.91: 94.544 1993 : 26: 930: 24,180: 3.91: 94.544: 1994 : 26 : 930 : 24,180 : 3.91 : 94.544 1995 : 26: 930: 24,180: 3.91: 94.544: 1996 : 26: 930: 24,180: 3.91: 94.544: 1997 : 26: 930: 24,180: 3.91: 94.544: 1998 : 26: 930: 24,180: 3.91: 94.544: 1999 : 26 : 930 : 24,180 : 3.91: 94.544: : 2000 : 26 : 930 : 24,180 : 3.91: 94.544: : 2001 : 26 : 930 : 24,180 : 3.91: 94.544: : 2002 : 26 : 930 : 24,180 : 3.91 : 94.544 : 2003 : 26: 930 : 24,180 : 3.91: 94.544: : 2004 : 26: 930 : 24,160 : 3.91: 94.544: : 2005 : 26: 930 : 24,180 : 3.91: 94.544: : 2006 : 26 : 930 : 24,180 : 3.91 94.544 , Note: 1 1982 - 1989, MIROP records 1990 onward, estimates * R-1 10 LORN 2147 - MR : MRLRCCR IROP INCREMENTRL COST OF PRODUCTION FISHERIES COMPONENT Year : Yield Producing Pond : Cost of Production : Incremental Cost : (Ha) : per ha (1989 Prices) : of Production (1$) : (M$'000) 1982 : 7 : 743 : 5.201 : 1983 : 25 : 743 : 18.575 : 1984 : 27 : 743 : 20.061 : : 1985 : 24 743 : 17.832 : 1986 21 : 743 : 15.603 : 1987 : 22 743 : 16.346 : 1988 26 743 : 19.318 : 1989 26 : 743 : 19.310 : 1990 : 26 : 743 : 19.318 : : 1991 : 26 : 743 ' 19.318 : 1992 : 26 743 : 19.318 : 1993 26: 743: 19.318 : 1994 : 26 : 743 19.318 : : 1995 : 26 743 19.318 : 1996 : 26 : 743 : 19.318 : : 1997 : 26 : 743 : 19.318 ' 1998 : 26 : 743 : 19.318 : 1999 : 26 : 743 : 19.318 : 2000 : 26 : 743 : 19.318 : 2001 : 26 : 743 : 19.318 : 2002 : 26 : 743 : 19.318 : 2003 : 26 : 743 : 19.318 : 2004 : 26 : 743 19.318 : 2005 : 26 : 743 : 19.318 : : 2006 : 26 : 743 : 19.318 : A-1ill COST OF PRODUCTION PER HECTRPE FISH POND DEVELOPMENT (M$ , 1989 Prices) material Cost : : : Financial Price : : : Fish Fry 300-00 Feeding Material 236.00 Labour 285.00 Total 821.00 : : : 9- Economic Price Fish Fry : 285.00 Feeding Material 224.00 Labour : 234.00 Total 743-00 : : Source : Kajian Impek Rancangan Subsidi Menternak Ikan, Prime Minister Department, 1981 Conversion factor Fish fry and feeding material = 0.95 Labour = 0.02 R-112 cosr OF HAINrEHWlCE OF FRESHSIARER FISH POND Fl SHERI ES COMMEN :Constructaon: Yield Producing Ponds (Ha) * :-------------------------- - - --------- - - - - - - - 198? 1998 1989 1590 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1999 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 : 982 : 17 5 13 5 13 6 IS 7 17 5 13 5 13 6 15 7 17 S 13: : 1983 a 20 5 11 S 19 7 8 20 5 1a 5 19 7 a 20 5 14 5: : 1901 2 6 2 4 2 4 2 6 2 4 2 1 2 6 2 1 2 i: : Total 7 25 27 24 21 22 27 26 1? 13 12 31 12 36 1S 29 29 26 21 22: Cost if : aintenance 3.5 12.5 13.5 12.0 10.5 11.0 13.5 13.0 8.5 21.5 6.0 15.5 6.0 18.0 7.5 11.5 11.5 13.0 10.5 11.0 ens(ft000 Cost of Op.rational and Haintnance is estimated at SSW0/ha. ever 5 years 8-113 ECONOMIC RRTE OF RETURN FISH POND DEVELOPMENT (t*'O00O, RT 1989 Constant Prices) - -…-----------------…- Year: Capital : Incremental Cost : Incremental Cost : Total Total : Net Incremental Cost : of Maintenance : of Production : CoAt Benefit : 8enefit -----:- ---- -- --- - ----: : : :-:-: 1982 : 500.000: : 5.201 : 505.201 : 18.612 : (486.59): 1983 : 750.000 : 1 8e.575 : 768.575 78.207 : (690.368): 1984 : 610.000 : 20.061 : 630.061 : 90.512 : (539.549): 1985 750.000 : 17.832 : 767.832 : 66.118 : (701.714): : 1986 : 1,100.000 : 15.603 : 1,115.603 : 65.034 : (1,050.569): 1987 : 820.000 : 3.500 : 16.346 : 039.846 : 83.213 : (756.633): 1988 : 530.000 : 12.500 : 19.318: 561.818 126.669 : (435.149): : 1989 : 470.000 : 13.500 : 19.318 : 502.818 : 94.544 : (408.274): 1990 : 12.500 : 19.318 31.818 94.544 : 62.726 : 1991 : : 10.500 : 19.318: 29.818 94.544 : 64.726 : 1992 : 11.000 : 19.318: 30.318: 94.544 : 64.226 : 1993 : : 13.500 : 19.318 : 32.818 : 94.544 : 61.726 : 1994: : 13.000 : 19.318: 32.318: 94.544 : 62.226 : 1995 8.500 : 19.318: 27.818 :94.544 : 66.726 : : 1996 : : 21.500 : 19.318 : 40.818 : 94.544 : 53.726 : 1997: : 6.000 : 19.318: 25.318 : 94.544 : 69.226 : : 1998 : : 15.500 : 19.318 : 34.818 : 94.544 : 59.726 : : 1999 : 6.000: 19.318: 25.318: 94.544 : 69.226: : 2000 : 18.000 : 19.318: 37.318 : 94.544 : 57.226 : : 2001 : : 7.500 : 19.318 : 26.818 : 94.544 : 67.726 : 2002 : 14.500 : 19.318 : 33.819 : 94.544 : 60.726 : : 2003: : 14.500 : 19.318 : 33.818 : 94.544 : 60.726 : : 2004 : : 13.000 : 19.318 : 32.319 : 94.544 : 62.226 : : 2005 : : 10.500 : 19.318 : 29.818 : 94.544 : 64.726 : : 2006 : : 11.000 : 19.318 : 30.318 : 94.544 : 64.226 : . _ _ _ _ _ _ -________- ________ ____: - ------- Net Present Value discounted at IX = M($3,943) Economic rate of return = IXX R-114 LORN 2147 - hR : MRLCCR IRDP CR6H CROP DIVERSIFICRTION PROGRfIM FINRNCIRL CAPITRL COST (CURRENT PRICES) (Nl*o) 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 : Total: * - - - - - - - - - - - - - I~~~~~- - - - - - - - Incremental : 0.14 0.25 0.27 0.32 0.42 0.48 0.34 0.32 : 2.54 Rdministrative Cost :Cash Crops Diversification: - 0.08 0.12 0.42 0.06 0.05 0.08 0.06: 0.87 Oevelopaent :Equipment and 0.03 0.12 0.03 0.15 0.18 0.13 0.04 0.01 : 0.69 : Nachinery :Seallscale Civil Works O.C3 0.10 0.29 0.36 0.61 0.31 0.26 0.24 2.20 -- - - - ---- … ----- - … -… : * : : Total 0.20 0.55 0.71 1.25 1.27 0.97 0.72 0.63: 6.30 :-- ----------------------------- -------- -- ----------------- ------ ----------------- R-1'15 LORN 2147 - MR : MfILRCCR IAROP CRSH CROP OIVERSIFICRTION PROGRRM DERIVRTION OF FINRNCIAL CAPITRL COST (CONSTANT PRICE 1989, M$m) 1902 1983 1984 1985 1986 p98? 1988 1989 : Total : - - -…-…-…-…----- -- -- ----.--------------------- - Ln :Incremes.tal 0.16 0.20 0.29 0.34 0.44 0.50 0.35 0.32 : 2.68 : Rdminist-ative Cost Cash Crops Diversification : - 0.09 0.13 0.45 0.06 0.05 0.08 0.06 0.92 Developme:it : Equipment and : 0.03 0.13 0.03 0.16 0.19 0.14 0.04 0.01 : 0.73 : Machinery : Smallscale Civil Works : 0.03 0.11 0.31 0.38 0.65 0.32 0.26 0.24 : 2.30 : : : : Total 0.22 0.61 0.76 1.33 1.34 1.01 0.73 0.63 : 6.63 R-116 0…-…-…~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ LORN 2147 - MR : ?RLLHIR IRiP CRSH CROP DIUERSIFICRTION PROGRRM ECONOMIC CAWITRL COST (CONSTANT PRICE 1909, M$e) : : Conversion: 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 : Total : factor : :Incremental 0.82 0.13 0.23 0.24 0.27 0.36 0.41 0.28 0.26 2.18 : Rdmanzstrative Cost :Cash Crops Diversification : 0.91 : - 0.08 0.12 0.40 0.05 0.04 0.07 0.05 : 0.81 : Oev lope.nt : :Equipment and 0.94 : 0.02 0.12 0.02 0.15 0.17 0.13 0.03 0.01 : 0.65 : Machinery A :Smallscale Civil Works 0.84 : 0.02 0.09 0.26 0.32 0.55 0.27 0.22 0.20 : 1.93 : Total : 0.17 0.52 0.64 1.14 1.13 0.85 0.60 0.52 : 5.57 …--…-------------------- ------------------- - - 7-- --- - * S~~~~~~~~~~~~~- 1 LORN 2147 - HR : mRLRpCR IRoP CASH CROPS DIVERSIFICRTIOM PROGRRM CROP PRODUTION BOUILO-LP ----- - - -----~~~- --- New Rrea (Ha) : Rrea Sustained : Total Benefited : Production : Incremental Year :From Previous Year (Ha): Rrea (Ha) : per Ha (Ton) : Production (ton) :1983 :7B.00: : 7B: 3.0 : 234: :1984 :99.25 : 47.00 :146 .3.0 : 438: :1985 :239.17 : 87.00: 326 :3.0 : 978: 198s6 :40.42 : 196.08 236 :4.0 : 9944: :1987 :75.64 : 141.90 : 1e 2.4 : S23: : 9B8 37.77 : 130.52 168 2.4 : 403 : :1989 :66.87 : 100.92 :16e 6.9 : 1,159 : _ :1990 :: 161B : 6.9 : 1,1l59 : Ln :1991 :::160 : 0.:0.l9 1992 16 6.9 : 119 :1993 :::168: 6.9 : 1.159: :1994 :::168: 6.9 : 1.159: :1995 16 6.9: 1 159 :1996 :::16e 6.9 : 1,159 :1997 :::16e: 6.9 : 1,159: : 99 16 6.9 : 1,1I9 : 1992 168: 6.9: 1,159 : 2000 78. : : 7: 6.9: 1159: : 2001 47:0: 16B: 6.9 : , :159 : 2002 : 32168: 6.9 : 1,159: : 2003 : : : 168 : 6.9 : ,159: :1 6 : :2: 168: 6.9: 1,159: : 2005 : : 168: 6.9: 1,159: :190 : :2 168: 6.9: 1,159: > 1994 : 168: 6.9: 1.159t 1995 : * 168: 6.9: 1.159:~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1996R-1{ 16:69:119 1997 : 168: 6.9: 1.159:~~~~~~~~~ 1998 : * 168: 6.9: 1,159:~~~~~~~~ ECONOhIC COST OF OPERATION AND MRINTENRNCE (1$., 1989 Constant Price) ------------------------------------------ : : Year Rdditional Benefited Incremental Rrea Maintenance Cost 1982 S 1983 : 78 0.004 1984 146 0.007 1965 : 326 0.017 1986 236 0.012 1987 218 0.011 1988 : 16e8 0.008 1989 168 O O.O 1990 : 168 0.00u 1991 : 168 0.008 1992 :166B 0.008 % 1993 168 0.008 1994 168 0.008 1996 16e n.00O 1997 168 0.008 1997 I 168 0.008 1998 160 0.008 :1999 : 168 0 o.00B 2000 168 0.008 2001 168 0.008 2002 168 0.008 2003 168 0.006 2004 : 1619 0.008 2005 166 0.008 2006 : 168 0.008 Maintenance was estimated at financial price of $60.83/ha per year Conversion factor = 0.84 A-i 19 INCREMENTAL PRODUCTION COST CFISH CROPS DIVERSIFICATION PROGRiM (1$, 1989 CONSTRNT PRICES) : : Incremental : Total Benefited : Production Cost : Total Incremental Year : Production (ton) : Area (Ha) : for Benefited Rrea : Production Cost : …- - - - - - - - - -~ ~~~--- - - - - - - ---- - -…- -- - --- - -- - 1982 : 1983 : 234 : 78: 77,019: 77,019 : 1984 : 438 : 146 : 144,165: 144,165: 1985 : 978 : 326 321,902 : 321,902 : 1986 : 944 : 236 : 233,033 : 233,033 : 1987 : 523 : 218: 215,259: 215,259: 1988 : 403 : 168 165,888: 165,68e : 1989 : 1,159 : 168: 165,888: 165,88 : 1990 : 1,159 : 168: 165,888: 165,889: o 1991 : 1,159 : 168 : 165,888 165,88 : 1992 : 1,159 : 168: 165,888; 165,088: 1993 : 1,159 : 168 : 165,888 : 165,88 : 1994 : 1,159 : 168 : 165,888 : 165,988 : 1995 * 1,159 : 168 165,888 : 165,088 : 1996 : 1,159 : 168 : 165,88 : 165,698 : 1997 : 1,159 : 168 : 165,888 : 165,698 : 1998 : 1,159 : 166 : 165,888 : 165,808 : 1999 : 1,159 : 168 : 165,688 : 165,898 : : 2000 : 1,159 : 168 : 165.888 : 165,688 9 : 2001 : 1,159 : 168 : 165,688 : 165,888 : : 2002 : 1,159 : 168 : 165,888 : 165,886 : : 2003 : 1,159 : 168 : 165,888 : 165,888 : : 2004 : 1,159 : 168 : 165,888 : 165,888 : : 2005 1,159 : 168 : 165,888 : 165,888 : : 2006 : 1,159 : 168 : 165,S8 : 165,688 : :~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ : n Total cost of production is $987.43/ha/year (see Appendix 73) R-120 TOTAL INCRENENTRL BENEFIT CRSH CROPS DIVERSIFICRTION (1969 CONSTRNT PRICES) __________________________ : : Year Yield (Ton) Economic Price/Ton : Total Benefit (1989) (1N$m) 1982 1983 : 234 : 856 : 0.200 1984 : 436 : 713 : 0.310 : 1985 : 978 : 696 : 0.680 1986 944 : 648 : 0.612 0: 198.7 523 667 0.350 : 19s8 403 632 : 0.255 : 1989 1,159 438 0.508 1990 : 1,159 438 : 0.508 : 1991 : 1,159 438 0.508 : 1992 : 1,159 438 0.508 1993 : 1,159 438 0.508 1994 : 1,159 438 0.508 1995 : 1,159 438 : 0.508 1996 : 1,159 438 0.508 1997 1,159 438 0.508 1998 1,159 438 0.50s 1999 : 1,159 438 : 0.508 2000 1,159 438 0.50s 2001 : 1,159 438 : 0.508 2002 : 1,159 438 0.508 : 2003 : 1,159 438 : 0.508 2004 1,15Z1 438 0.508 : 2005 : 1,159 438 : 0.508 :~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ : 2006 : 1.159 438 * 0.508 R 0 La A-121 ECONOMIC RATE OF RETURN CRSH CROPS DIVERSIFICRTION (M$m, 1989 Constant Prices) : : Year : Capital : Incremental Cost : Incremental Cost: Total : Total : Net Incremental: : Cost : of Maintenane : of Production : Cost : Benfit : Benefit S …p - - - --S- -- - -- -- - - - -- -- - -- - 1982 : 0.170 : : 0.170 : (0.170): 1983 : 0.520 : 0.004 : 0.077 : 0.601 : 0.200 : (0.401): 1984 : 0.640 : 0.007 : 0.144 : 0.791 : 0.310 : (0.481): 1985 : 1.140 : 0.017 0.321 : 1.478 : 0.680 : (0.798): 1986 : 1.130 : 0.012: 0.233: J.375 : 0.612: (0.763): 1987 : 0.850 : 0.011 : 0.215 : 1.076 : 0.350 : (0.726): : 1988 : 0.600 : 0.008 : 0.165 : 0.773 0.255 : (0.518): 1989 : 0.520 : 0.008 : 0.165 : 0,693 : 0.508 (0.185): : 1990 : 0.008: 0.165 : 0.173 0.508: 0.335: 1991 : 0.009: 0.165 : 0.173 0.508: 0.335 : 1992 : 0.008: 0.165 : 0.173: o0s50: 0.335 : 1993 : 0.008: 0.165 : 0.173 0.508: 0.335 : 1994 0.008: 0.165 : 0.173 :o.so: 0.335 : 1995 : 0.008: 0.165 : 0.173 0.508: 0.335 : 196 : : 0.008: 0.165: 0.173: o.50: 0.335: : 1997 : : 0.008 : 0.165 : 0.173 : 0.508 : 0.335 : : 1998 : : 0.008: 0.165: 0.173: 0.508 0.335: 1999 : : 0.008: 0.165: 0.173: 0.50: 0.335: : 00oo : : 0.008: 0.165 : 0.173: 0.508 : 0.335 : 2001 : 0.008: 0.165 : 0.173: 0.508 : 0.335 : 2002 : 0.008: 0.165 : 0.173: o.so : 0.335 : 2003 : : o.oo0: 0.165: 0.173: 0.508: 0.335: 2004 : : 0.00: 0.165i: 0.173: 0.508: 0.335: : 2005 : : 0.008: 0.165 : 0.173 : 0.50s : 0.335 : 2006 : : 0.008: 0.165 : 0.173: 0.508: 0.335 : : _… - - _ ----------… Net Present Value discounted at IZ = 0.953 Economic rate of return = 3X 1CR = 0.73 R-122 ECONOMiC FAR"GRTE PRICE OF VARIOUS CRSH CROPS ("*/Ton at 1989 Constant Prices) ________________________________ Yepar : Faregate 1/, : Farmgate, : Far-agate, : Current Price : 1989 Constant Price : Economic Price 1:382 : 760 S?4 832 1'383 : 849 951 856 1'384 : 734 793 713 1985 : 716 773 696 1986 : 673 720 648 : 1987 : 699 741 667 1986 : 662 703 632 1989 : 487 487 438 : 1990 : 438 1995 : 438 2000 : : 438 Notes : Prices are for various selected cash crops. Source 1/ FAMR, Malacca Conversion factor = 0.90 A-123 'I DERIVATION OF OTHER PROJECT ECONOMIC CAPITAL COST al (N S mdilion) 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 Total Cost 0.100 0.800 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.100 0-- 1989 Priebs 0.117 0.896 1.080 1.080 1.070 0.106 - - Economic Cost 0.103 0.788 0.950 0.950 0.942 0.093 - - 1.200 Conversion Factor = 0.88 N.D. Veitch, 1986 a/ Includes some costs of buildings and land acquisition amounting to about MK4 million over 1982-89 that were not apportioned to individual conporments. Cost of M11.2 million from 1990 onward is for incremental acsninistrative cost (apportioned to individual co po*nts before 1v90). A-124 s0 OD : 0 LORA 2147 - NA : lELAKR INDP ECON"IC RRTE OF REtUR FOR OVERRLL PROJECT V:Wr : 1962 1993 1981 15 1986 199? 1999 1989 1990 1991 199 1993 lNot Incr nm tl: Den fit Fror : 1. Rubber - individual : -1.300 -2.720 -2. 00 -2.760 -3.520 -3.790 -5.420 -5.350 -4.210 -2.050 -1.890 -0.730 : 2. Rubber - mini estate : -0.400 -0.210 -0.300 -0.170 -0.250 -0.170 -0.050 0.090 0.260 0.360 0.410 0.440 : 3. Rubbgr - maintance : -2.B90 -3.290 -3.680 -3.150 -2.070 -0.270 3;310 4.680 5.970 7.190 7.910 9.-lW : . Oil palst replanting : 0.000 0.000 0.000 -0.270 -1.080 -1.820 -1.330 -1.540 -0.280 -0.500 -0.010 1.250 : S. Oil palm neintenanc : -0.100 0.070 0.550 -0.200 -0.590 0.590 -0.090 1.260 -0.240 0.030 0.910 2.300 : 6. Irrigati-A lrprovwsnt : -0.060 -0.130 -0.170 -0.190 -0.590 -0.560 -0.060 0.002 0.0o2 -0.031 -0.034 -0.034 2 : T. Orainag Iyprov mnnt : -0.370 -0.820 -1.300 -1.250 -0.171 0.013 0.363 0.911 0.?11 0.951 0.971 0.9391 : 8. Ri ver I .rov"ent : -1.270 -3.060 -1.110 -3.668 -0.673 1.80? 1.994 1.951 1.05o 1.374 2.004 2.604 2 9. Dairy Oev.lopment : -0.210 -0.697 -0.64 -1.S21 -1.201 - -0.911 -0.216 -0.178 0.331 0.281 0.411 0.311 : 10. Fisheries Development : -0.486 -0.690 -0.539 -0.701 - 1.00 -0.756 -0.135 -0.109 0.063 0.061 0.064 0.061 : 11. Cash Crops : -0.170 -0.401 -0.191 -0.7s9 -0.763 -0.726 -0.519 -0.185 0.335 0.335 0.335 0.335 rotael Nt Incrental : -7.256 -11.996 -13.702 -15.058 -11.961 -6.063 -2.432 1.236 4.036 7.201 11.231 16.019 : ~ e t S: Other Capital Cost g 0.103 0.788 0.950 0.950 0.942 0.093 - 1.200 1.200 1.200 1.200 Total Nt Ier_ntal :7.359 -12.786 14.652 -16.008 -12.903 -6.156 -2.432 1.236 2.836 6.001 10.031 14.919: Benfit I __ ……_55_____=-5-=5==-==-===_-5=-=== =5==5 ==_=__== __===__ _________=___________ __ - Economic rate of return = 14% A- 1 0 £4 R-L2 r LOAN 2147 - hA . IELRKA IROP ECO4osUC RRrE Of REA Ftt OR OuVE.RLL PRoJcr :*W Y : 1995 1996 19S7 1999 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2001 2005 2006 : u:. :ag.t NoIt Incemental: e0nefit Fron: : A. Ruhbbr - individual : 0.560 7.550 12.410 16.590 18.890 20.820 12.930 13.1ISO 12.670 12.100 10.300 10.660 10.420 : : 2. Rubber - nini estate : O.sS0 1.200 1.250 1.220 1.210 1.250 o.730 0.690 0.630 O.S70 0.660 0.610 0.590 : : 3. Rubber - naintnance : 9.840 15.530 14.100 13.250 12.690 11.090 5.790 5.250 4.110 3.540 2.900 1.310 0.000 : : . Oil pal replanting : 1.050 1.060 4.820 5.390 5.660 5.770 1.140 4.030 3.880 3.770 3.610 3.510 3.310 : : S. Oil pola naintenance : 2.280 3.630 3.540 3.480 3.320 3.210 2.240 2.180 2.020 1.900 1. 1.2I0 OI.OU : : 6. Irrigotion lIprovenent : -0.034 0.106 0.086 0.086 0.086 0.116 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 o.ooi 0.016 0.016 : : i. Orainege l.proveamnt : 0.931 1.221 1.161 1.251 1.191 1.001 0.831 0.821 0.831 0.971 0.901 0.871 0.671 : : B. River Itprove,wnt : 2.204 .294 3.961 3.434 3.374 3.051 1.894 2.244 2.104 1.831 1.691 1.564 1.434 : : 9. Oairy Owelopwnt : 0.211 0.372 0.362 0.412 0.472 0.422 0.538 0.488 0.598 0.568 0.668 0.628 0.678 : : 10. Fislmies Dove opnent : 0.062 0.066 0.053 0.069 0.059 0.069 0.057 0.067 0060 0.060 0.062 0.064 0.064 : : 11. Cash Crops : 0.335 0.335 0.335 0.335 0.335 0.335 0.335 0.335 0.335 0.335 0.335 0.335 0.335 : * ~ ~ ~ ~ - -------… - --------… Total Not Incrntal : 17.869 38.364 42.091 45.S1? 47.2?7 47.217 29.491 29.301 27.274 2S.654 22.566 20.9e0 U9.?28: Benefit a Other Capital Cost : : 1.200 1.200 1.200 1.200 1.200 1.200 1.200 1.200 1.200 1.200 1.200 1.200 1.200 * _________ --------- … ---~~~~~~~~~- ----- … ------- ---- -…------------------ …- rotel Not Increental : 16.669 37.164 40.861 44.317 46.00? 46.047 29.291 22.101 26.074 24.454 21.366 19.699 17.528 :Benfit s : Economic rate of return = 14% s-a OQ TOTAL INCREWRTL YIELD OF RUBBER (TON) Year Individual : Mini-Estate : Maintenance : Total ------ -------… --------…-:- 192 : 0.0: o: o: : 1983 : 0.0 : 0: : O: 1984 : 0.0 : 0 158 : 158 : 1995 : 0.0 : : 697 : 697 : 1986 : 0.0: O: 1,426: 1,426: 1987 : 0.0 : a: 2,246 : 2,246 : 1989 : 0.0: 60: 3,354: 3,414: 1989 : 0.0 : 159 4,710 : 4,869 : 1990 : 390.0 : 264 : 5,639 : 6,293 : : 1991 : 1,130.0 : 322: 6,270 : 7,722 : : 1992 : 1,950.0 : 355: 6,616 : 9,921 : : 1993 : 2,730.0 : 373 : 6,872 : 9,975 : : 1994 : 3,820.0 : 420 : 7,071 : 11,311 : : 1995 : 5,040.0 : 496: 6,921 : 12,457: : 1996 : 6,640.0 : 512 : 6,431 : 13,583 : : 1997 : 9,120.0 : 500 : 6,116 : 14,736 : 1998 9,930.0 : 496 : 5,893 : 15,309 : : 1999 : 9,600.0 : 520 5,244 : 15,364 : : 2000 : 10,140.0 : 503 : 4,891 : 15,534 : : 2001 : 10,240.0 : 485 : 4,374 : 15,099 : : 2012 : 9,930.0 : 458 : 3,414 : 13,902 : : 2003 : 9,590.0 : 427 : 2,73E : 12,752 : : 204 : 8,570.0 : 445 : 2,181 : 11,1% : 2005 : 9,640.0: 429: 1,035: 10,103: 2005 : 8,390.0 : 397 : 0 : 9,787 : … …~~- ------ - …--- - - -----… : : R- 127 - 168 - Appendix 111 EXORT_DTk- U&TLM& 1BEER (w.e.f 18 Ani! 1985) The duty is calculated in sen/kg. to the nearest 1/8 of a sen according to the rates as shown below On the first 210 sen per kg - nil on the next 40 sen per kg - 10 % On the next 50 sen per kg - 20 % On the balance - 30 % Source : Statistics Department A-128 EXP9JRT DUTY NRTURflL RUEBER BY YEFRQ (1 sen/kg) (1999 Constant Prices) Year 1982 1983 1984 1995 IC" 399? 19988 1989 1990 1995 2000 - - -- ---- - - - -- ---- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - - - - --------------- -- - FOB Prices ff sen/kg : 205.0 245.0 226.0 387.0 205.0 238.0 335.0 296.0 291.0 445.0 357.0 Ist 210 a sIn/kg : - - - - : : . o% :Next 40 son/kg - 3.5 1.6 - - 2.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0: :NeKxtoS0n/k: - - - - - - 10.0 9.2 9.2 10.0 10.0: :On the balance - - - - - - 10.5 - - 43.5 17.1 Total : 0.0 3.5 1.6 0.0 1D.0 2.8 24.5 13.2 12.2 57.5 31.1 …-_--- - -- - -----------…- …-- ------ ------.,- ------------------------------… - -------------------------- -- A-129 LORN 2147 - MR : HELRKR IROP EXPECTED COST RECOVERY EXCLUSIVE PROJ BONUS (M$ million) : Incremental : Zakat : Cost Recoverable : Incremental : Collectable Year : Yield of Padi : Receivable : froam Padi : Yield of Rubber : Replanting (ton) . (ton) : (Constant 1989) : (ton) : Cess :,83 :*: (M*million) :1982 : 0 . ° :1983 : 0 0.00: :1984 : -: - ::158 0.02: 1965 : - : - : : 697: 0.07: 1966 : 1,073 : 107.3 : 0.050 : 1,426 : 0.14 1387 1,097 : 109.7 : 0.051 : 2,246 : 0.22 1988 : 1,188 : 118.8 : 0.060 : 3,414 : 0.34 : 1989 1,518 : 151.8 : 0.070 : 4,869: 0.48: 1990 : 1,525 : 152.5 : 0.071 : 6,293 : 0.63 1991 : 1,511 : 151.1 : 0.070 : 7,721 0.77: 0 1992 : 1,547 : 154.7 : 0.072 : 8,921 : 0.89 : 1993 : 1,506 : 150.6 : 0.070 : 9,975 : 0.99 1994 : 1,506 : 150.6 : 0.070 : 11,311 : 1.13 1995 : 1,506 : 150.6 : 0.070 : 12,458: 1.25: 1996 : 1,464 : £46.4 : 0.068 : 13,583: 1.36: : 1997 : 1,464 : 146.4 : 0.068 : 14,736: 1.47: : 1998 : 1,464 : 146.4 : 0.068 : 15,310: 1.53: : 1999 1,547 : 154.7 : 0.072 : 15,365 : 1.54 : 2000 : 1,547 : 154.7 : 0.072 : 15,534 : 1.55 : 2001 1,547 : 154.7 : 0.072 : 15,099 : 1.51 : : 2002 : 1,506 : 150.6 : 0.070 : 13,802: 1.38 : : 2003 : 1,506 : 150.6 : 0.070 : 12,752 : 1.27 : : 2004 : 1,506 : 150.6 : 0.070 : 11,197 : 1.12 : : 2005 : 1,547 : 154.7 : 0.072 : 10,103 : 1.01 : : 2006 : 1,547 : 154.7 : 0.072 : 8,788 : 0.98 : Replanting cess = 10 sen/kg (M$100/ton) . Research cess = 4 sen/kg (M$40/ton) a Financial price of padi = $467.5/ton, excluding padi bonus c x R-130 LOAN 2147 - MR: NELRKA IROP EXPECTED COST RECOVERY EXCLUSIVE PFRDI 1ONUS (MS million) : : : Collectable Export Total Cost Total Cost : Comulative Year : Research : Duty : Recovery Recovery Cost Cess : : from Rubber : Recovery : : : ( IIion):aillion) :(I$million): ($illion) :Cmillioe) (Nmillion) : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ----- - - ------- : 1982 : 0.00: 0.00 o.o : 0.00 0.00 1983 0.00 : 0.00: 0.00 : 0.00 : 0.00: : 194 : 0.006: 0.003: 0.03 : 0.03 0.03: : 1985 : 0.03 : 0.00: 0.10 : O.10 : 0.13 : 1986 : 0.05: 0.00 ( 0.19 : 0.24 : 0.37: : 1987 : 0.09: 0.06: 0.37: 0.42: 0.79: 1989 : 0.14 : 0.B4 : 1.32 : 1.38 : 2.17 : 1989 : 0.19 : 0.64: 1.31 : 1.38 : 3.55: 1990 0.25 : 0.77: 1.65 : 1.72 : 5.27: 1991 : 0.31 : 0.94: 2.02 : 2.09 : 7.36 : 1992 : 0.36 : 1.09 : 2.34 : 2.41 : 9.77 : 1993 : 0.40 : 1.22 : 2.61 : 2.68 : 12.45 : 1994 0.45 : 1.382 2.96: 3.03 : 15.48 1995 : 0.49 : 7.16: 8.90: 8.97 : 24.45 1996 0.54 : 7.81 : 9.71 : 9.78 : 34.23 : 1997 : 0.59 : 8.4/ 10.53 : 10.60 : 44.82 1998 : 0.61 : 8.80: 10.94 : 11.01 : 55.83: 1999 : 0.61 : 8.83: 10.98 : 11.05 : 66.88 2000 : 0.62 : 4.83 : 7.00 : 7.07 : 73.95 2001 : 0.60 : 4.69 : 6.80 : 6.87 : 80.82: 2002 : 0.55 4.29 : 6,22 : 6.29 : 87.11 2003 : 0.51 : 3.96 : 5.74 : 5.81 : 92.92 : : 2004 : 0.45 : 3.48 : 5.05 : 5.12 : 98.04X : 2005 2 0.40: 3.14 : 4.55 : 4.62 : 102.66 : D : 2006 0.35 2.73 : 3.96 : 4.03 : 106.69 ' & ….------------------- -- 1-----------1-.0 A- 131 LORN 2147 - MR : HELRKR IFIOP EXPECTED COST RECOVERY INCLUDING PROI BONUS (M$ million) : : : Incremental : Zakat : Oost Recoverable : Incremental :Collectable : : &ar : Yield of Padi : Receivable : from Padi : Yield of Rubber :Replanting : (ton) : (ton) : (Constant 1989) (ton) Cess : (N$iion) ~~~- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - ---------… -…- - - -- :~ 1982 : - : -00 1983 : - _ 0: 0.0 :1984 : - 158: 0.02: 1985 697 : C.07 1986 : 1,073: 107.3: 0.07: 1,426 : 0.14: 1987 1,097: 109.7: 0.07: 2,246 : 0.22: 1988 1,188: 118.8 0.08 3,414 : 0.34: 1989 1,518: 151.8 : 0.09: 4,869 : 0.48: 1990 : 1,525: 152.5: 0.09: 6,293: 0.63: 1991 : 1,511 151.1: 0.09: 7,721 : 0.77 1992 : 1,547 : 154.7 : 0.10 : 8,921 : 0.89 1993 : 1,506 : 150.6 : 0.09 9,975 : 0.99 1994 : 1,506: 150.6: 0.09 11,311: 1.13 1995 : 1,506: 150.6: 0.09: 12,458 : 1.25: 1996 : 1,464 : 146.4 : 0.09: 13,583 : 1.36: 1997 : 1,464: 146.4 0.09: 14,736: 1.47: 1998 : 1,464 : 146.4-: 0.09 15,310 : 1.53 1999 1,547 : 154.7 : 0.10 : 15,365 : 1.54 : : 2000 1,547 : 154.7: 0.10 : 15,534 : 1.55: : 2001 : 1,547 : 154.7 : 0.10 : 15,099 : 1.51 : : 2002 : 1,506 : 150.6 : 0.09 : 13,802 : 1.38: : 2003 : 1,506 : 150.6 : 0.09 : 12,752 : 1.27: 2004 1,506: 150.6: 0.09: 11,197: 1.12: 20059 1,547 : 154.7 : 0.10 : 10,103 : 1.01 : 2006 :1,547 : 154.7 : O.10 : 8.7Bw : 0.813 ' o 200______ - 1 5_________4 _________________________________________7_____ 1 Financial price of padi = M632.5/ton, including padi bonus R-132 LORN 2147 - lIR : EL9I0 IROP EXPECTED COST RECOVERY INCLUDIN6 PRDI BONIS (N$ million) S ___________________________~~~________ _ _ : Collectable : Export : Total Cost : Total Cost : Commulative Year : Reserch : Duty : Recovery : Recovery : Cost : : CCss : from Rubber : Recovery :: (million) :Wmmillion): (Cmillion) :Mowillion) C$iliion) 1902 : 0.00 : 0.00 : 0.00 : , 0.00: 0.00 : 1983 : 0.00 : 0.00 : 0.00 : 0.00 o.00 : 1984 : 0.006: 0.003 : 0.03: 0.03 0.03 : 1985 : 0.03: 0.00 : 0.10: 0.10: 0.13 : 39 0.5: o.oo : 0.19: 0.26: 0.39 : 1987 : 0.09 : 0.06 : 0.37 : 0.44: 0.83 : 1985 : 0.14 : 0.84 : 1.32 : 1.40 : 2.23 : 1989 : 0.19 : 0.64 : 1.31 : 1.40 : 3.63 : 1990 : 0.25 : 0.77 : 1.65 : 1.74 : 5.37 : 1991 : 0.31 : 0.94 : 2.02 : 2.11 : 7.48 : 1992 0.36: 1.09: 2.34: 2.44: 9.92: 1993 : 0.40 : 1.22 : 2.61 : 2.70 : 12.62 : 1994 : 0.45: 1.38 2.96: 3.05: 15.67: 1995 : 0.49 : 7.16: .90 : B. : 24.66 : :1996 :0.54 : 7.81 :9.71 : c, aO : 34.46 : 199 : 0.59 : 0.47: 10.53 : a.62 : 45.09 : 1998 : 0.61 : 8.80: 10.94 : 11.03 : 56.11 : : 1999 0.61 : 8.83 : 10.98 : 11.08 : 67.19 : : oo : 0.62 : 4.83 : 7.00 : 7.10 : 74.29 : : 2001 : 0.60 : 4.69 : 6.90 : 6.90 : 91.19 : : 2002 : 0.55 ' 4.29 : 6.22 : 6.31 : 87.50 : : 2003 : 0.51 3.96: 5.74 : 5.83 : 93.33 : : 2004 0.45: 3.48: 5.05 : 5.14 : 99.47 : : 2005 : 0.40: 3.14: 4.b5 : 4.65 : 103.12 : : 2006 : 0.35 2.73: 3.96 : 4.06 : 107.189 R-133 PAenxments To Loan Agre-ment (Malacca Integrated Agricultural Development Project) Loan 2147 - A Schedule I : Iithdraual of thq Proceeds of the Loan (US$) Original : P t, : P_mxeent, : lment, Category : gremnt, Ju r - 25,19814 : July 17, 1986 : January 19, 1989 October 7, 1982: * _________ S~ -- -- -- -- -- - - - - -- - - --- -- - - - -- - - - -- - - - :() Civil MiCIs 6,000,000: 5,500,000 : 3,490,000 : 3,500.000 - - - ----- -- - - ----- -- -- - - - - - - -- - - -- - : (2) Rubber and Oil Palm 13,000,000 15,500,000 : 11,450,000 : 12,400,631 : planting and replanting s maintenance and * construction aterials - For far ers centres : : - - : : (3) Equipment, vehicles 1,700,000 1,100, 0W 1,410,000 790,000 and materials -- - - -- - -- --- --- -- (4) Liv stockc 2- 1-2 ,000 o : - - - --------- ^- ~~~~~~~~ -:- -----------……------- - - -- (5) Consultants Services 1,200,000 I,WO0,000 970,000 7 0,o000 and overseas training - (6) Fee 375,369 375,36S 375,369 375,369 (7) Unallocated 1,024,631 1,924,631 54,631 - … ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~… ~~~~~~~~~OQ TOTFIL 25,400,000 25,400,000 17,750,000 17,756,000 Cancelled - - 7,650,000 7,660,000 : __________- ----- ----- -- - - - -L : Original Total 25,400,000 25,400,000 25,400,000 : 25,406,000 R-134 Schedule 2 t Description of Project : -------------.---:------------- PFot Original %_eement be ,ent ARend.ent t : : . l*d , -9 25.is " JulgS V. 19mM6 J is. 1 : : - : a S.wilholde i) RplOnting with iovd 1) Som as per original i) Replanting mith iprwoved i) Sam as psr 1s"1 : tbbr clod_l materials of about pe.m.nt clonel materials of about annI nt Oevlepmt 1.011 ha of old, loe 1,400 ha of old, lam :gielding rubber ii) Sae as pr original giolding rubber ii) Sae as per 111 i ll) intunence tareu. topping ii) Iabnence theugh t apping :mtwaitV of about 5.300 he iii) Caclled meturitg of about 3,000 he iii) Cancelled of rihber replanted in of nbber replanted in 1976 - 1161 iv) Cancelled 1971 - 1961S iv) Cancelled iii) Rissiste in plaUting of ) Construction of 40 iii) Cancelled vi San as per 1 : nm nhber totalling abot romp rubber processing __ :hmt :32 he centres, a3 s.ohouses iv) Canceled and central storage vi) Planting and meintAnce: iv) Dvlopment of U he of facilities v) Construction of 35 goup of *bt 3,20C be of oil: a new Mrs" r_bbr proessiAng centres paln and othwr tree a I. : Ca!b theet_ Uen t of v) Constructon of 72 gup vi) Plnting nd mintenance of cocoa) planted frem 12 s rubber presing centres, about 2.200 he of oil palm to Ae 30. 16 :3 sohous .wd central pl anted from 1912 - 1911 : storage fclitiUs vii, Sow as per 1 vii) Ileintenence of abt 150 nt he of oil pain planted before I1S2 : * Infrastructwe i) Construction of a new i) lsmwroeent to four 0) l.qwovnent to 3 e.dsting iI Sam as per 16 DeOel e_t irrigetien -dm for omisting irrigetion irrigation schems seving a_un.ment : oA " h- of' pdi d sdw srving about about 14I1 h of paddy d r4a, improvemnts to five 1,9 he oexisting irrrigetion sdcms ii) Improvement of 3 drinage ii) Sae as per 1916 serving about 1.650 ha areas serving about 1,535 amenduent he of agricultural Iand ii) I-provement of nine ii) Sow as per original and 9 river channls : . Wdrd_nae w nd riw ye_nt srving _t 4.260 he : d_chanls serving about of airicultural are" : 2,500 he of pei iii) Construction of fr and iii) Sae as per lIs iii) Construction of fo and iii) S_. as per origivcl roads tottelling _ nwh,ent acces roads tettelling ageement about 65 km : at 1.0 km R-135 -. t t o O X Sch5dule 2 : ODscription of Project FPot Ibiginal Agreenmnt Anenb,ent Ran_nt fi_nt October 7, 1952 Ju 25. II Julg 1r, 1916 JnuIwj D. 1 C g Crop a) Establishod of a padi seed ) Some as per onginal i) S5e as per original a) Sam as per riginal owese1_et mutiplication progam agreemnt areement agreement Programs at) Planting of about 3N0 h per ii) Sw_ as per aoginal ii) Planting of about 3.000 he ii) Sawex per 1116 an oef various cash crops agr_.nt of various crops andnnm t as&) Railitation of sal- iii Sae as per original iii) Canlellod iii) Cancelled holdw orchards c1 od- * pgeetaf lArd frauts lots totallng: about I h * i) l.Ilpnemiation of pilot iv) San as per ornginal iv) Cancelled iv) Cancelled schems covering ?;A0 ha of y grent fragmntod idl- agricultural lInds for perennial crops ----------- --- - --- --------------- - -----…-------------------------- o s .a ry and a) Dxtbrribution of 2.50D i) Cancolled i) Cancelled i) Cancelled f: r I._, crosabred dairy iefaers to opmenlt 1,000 nf l SW istang Progrys daarj farmes it) Establishw,AM of about 250 &) San es per original a&) Sane as parr c iginal ii) Sow as parr origieal he of o- froo fodder grass greement agreement areement production at&) Construttion and quiappng iti5l Sow as per .a janal iti) Construction nd equipping iii) Sow as par lS: of * milk collection centr- a5re-mt of a milk collection contre enmen- nt hanling up to 1.350 litres and 3 wb-entres of "ilk per d:g av) Construction and stociang iv) San as per original iv) Construction nd stocking iv) San as per 111 of about 260 ha of fresh ageement of about 75 ha of fresh- anduent water fish ponds mater fish ponds *OQ 10 E a Consultanc a) Conultant Services for a San as per original Saew as par original San as per raginal 1 0 Services a) SIhertkehl studies agremnt areemnt agreement w * - Orerseas * rraiing b) Preparing detailed design O d construction . s:urvdsion of the . w Project morks a&) Overseas staff training -------…-……-- ------------ -- - ------- :p.c fod Project uTe 30. I9wo Jim 30. 1908 J. 30. 1988 Ju 30, 1 I..q.leton Date FORMAT I REPORT OF VISIT TO PROJECT To The Director of MiFRP Oate : Name Of Officer: Timq : ---- ------ -- - - -------------- ---------…- …-…-…- …----- : : Area :Phase : Subject Contact Observation/Comment R Action Proposed : : : S SStag : :- - : : ::-:- - - : : : : aC . . . . Sa s o . . s . s : s : : : n h : : : ; : and:productions :i n : :::t: constructed by SI SP : : : : : : : _ : ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ : * S S S S S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ : : : : : : : * : : : : : : * : : : : : : : : : : : : :S : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :S : : : : : a Sturato o en shul bean i Stt s of Prjc - p of 2Snrsrcue-Tenesfr3 Fclte odtoso h crps prjc stus driagS iriain f rSras nsfcii sadisue *Xu3Fn prble hut an S n sttu ofth an prdcin Sxs n inratrctr *~~~cnsrce bS SlP o * S S S S S S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 * S S S~~~~~~~~~~R-3 FORIfiT 2 tIIIOP' £ ItEUflTRUCTURE PROJECT PQOPOSflL Distriet: : (1) : (2) : (3) : (4) :(5) : (6) : (7) : (e) : Cg) H o. : Locmtiwi : Typ. of :No#L.ngth: Rrea to be :B.neficiaariesf: Date of :Esti.at.d: Asearks: : ~~~:Infr-structur : :Eknefitted (ha): (Has) flpplication:Cost Cs):: : : : : : : : : : :~~~~~~~~~~S~ :~ : :…… :- : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 5: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : . : : : : : : : 5 : : : : : : : : : S : : : : : : : : : : a * 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :0 : : : : : : : : :- : : : : : : : : : : : : :, 0 : : : : : . : : : : : : : : 0 : :5 : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : ': : : : : : : : * . : : : : : * N * 1 S 1 5 * S S S S S 4 6 5 5~n l - 179 - FORMAT 3 1.Io I%[ .. . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . I X I I I I t 4 a I 0.LI I I o ( l I I a ,1*- o u I I A | I *% I 0G}| I i_ I g 1 I I !9j I ' 1 I '-I Ol II ! - I . .- ~II - I MI ~....... ........j.... - 181 - COK4ENTS FROM THE MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE ANNEX 1 JABATAfPEtNGAIRiN DSNLtTRLNA MALAAANE (Department of Irrigation and Drainage. Malaysia) Page 1 of 2 KEMENTERIAN PERTANIAN, (Mini.try of Agriculture), JALAN SULTAN SALAHUDDIN, Telefon: 03-2982011 50626 KUALA LUMPUR, Telegram. DiRRiIG MALAYSIA Fax: 2914282 Ruj. Tuan: (Your Ref.) Ruj. Kami: (Our Ref.) (44 )dlm.PPS.722 Tarikh: (Date) 20 April 1992 Mr. Graham Donaldson, Chief Agriculture And Human Development Division, Operations Evaluation Department, The World Bank, 1818 H Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20433, U.S.A. Dear Mr. Donaldson, Re: MALAYSIA: Malacca Agricultural Development ProJect (Loan 2147-MA) Draft Project Completion Report Thank you for your letter dated February 28, 1992 and draft project completion report. Enclosed herewith Appendix A which contains the comments on the draft proJect completion report as requested. With best regards. Yours Sincerely, 1< (IR. JOSEPH YEOH HOH HOH) for Director General, Department of Irrigation and Drainage, Malaysia/s CCC/KCN/nas/17492 (1932-I9Q2I Bersama Memakmurkan Negara -Jayakan Perkhidmatan Sempurna ANNEX 1 - 182 - Page 2 of 2 COMMENTS ON DRAFT PROJECT COMPLETION REPORT ON MALACCA AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (1) Page V para 2 line 10 The report points out that the potential returns from the irrigation improvement component are questionable. However, it should be noted that the ERR for irrigation improvement component was 12% which is quite reasonable for this project. (2) Page 1 The correct date should be May 18, 1982 in para 1.3 line 4 and October 7, 1982 in para 1.6 line 2. (3) Page 4 Para 1.17 line 4 The sentence "This normal attitude of certain departmental priorities ahead" is repeated and should be deleted. (4) Page 10 para 2.25 (a) Line 5 The new irrigation scheme in Brisu and two irrigation improvement schemes in Jasin II and Bacang were cancelled from the project partly because it was found not economically viable and also due to implementation of the National Agriculture Policy in 1984 when Malacca was not considered as a granary area. (b) Line 12 It should be noted that the rehabilitation of schemes started slowly was not solely due to the design capacity in DID headquarters. This is in accordance to para 4.4, section IV, page 25. (5) Spelling Mistakes There are a number of spelling mistakes in the report. The important ones are as follow: (a) Page 24 para 3.45 line 5 Merlicau should spell as Merlimau. (b) Page 27 para 4.12 line 3 Merlima should spell as Merlimau. - 183 - COMMENTS FROM THE EGONOMIC PLANNING UNIT (Retyped Version for Clarity) BY FAX ANNEX 2 UNIT PBRANCANG RIONOMI Economic Planning Unit JABATAN PERDANA MENTERI Prime Minister's Department Telefoa2 2300133/2933333 JALAN DATA'ONN Cable: ECONOMICS 50502 KUALA LUMPUR Telext EPUPM MA 30098 MALAYSIA Fax: 2914268 Ruj. Tuan: Your Reft Ruj. Kami: (11 dlm. UPZ SULIT Our Ref: 15/1/17 Jilid XV Tarikh: Date: 20 april, 1992 Mr. Graham Donaldson, Chief, Agriculture and Human Development Division, Operation Evaluation Department, The World Bank, 1818 H Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. 20433, U.S.A. Dear Mr. Donaldson, Malaysia: Malacca Integrated Agricultural Development Project (Loan 2147 - MA) Draft Completion Report (PCR) We would like to thank you for letter of February 28, 1992 enclosing the draft PCR of the Malacca IADP. We are pleased to hear from you that project implementation was generally free from problems. This in itself was partially due to lessons learned from the implementation of previous projects as well as to the dedication and uninterrupted tenure of the Project Director. We note in particular that the project has contributed substantially to the beneficiaries' productivity/incomes and that the number of beneficiaries has even exceeded that of the appraisal target. 2. Of particular interest to us, however, are the findings and lessons learned from the implementation of the project. As you may well be aware, the Malaysian Government irTends to place emphasis on the implementation of integrated area development projects as one of the strategies of in situ development, now that land for new planting is getting increasingly scarco. We will strive to overcome problems which prevent the smooth implementation of future projects and we certainly agree with you also that the continuity and appropriate skill mix of Bank staff during supervision will greatly enhance implementation capability as well as maintain enthusiasm. 3. Thank you again for the favourable comments in the PCR and we look forward towards receiving the final report. Yours Sincerely, (Signed) (KASSIM BIN SARBANI) Agriculture Section for Director General, ; 23AK ,'"' ' ') 5 230'NI \ 3OB2NG / 1- ,/ >, ( ( t \ 2-30 N- eL3G,'ks x i { t , \ / >s NE GERI BIL 102-OO'E~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- * ~< :XESO -E -- :h DITRC BODAIE V\ ,.-/ A C,, <'.>X-, ..t \S, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~AI. N , .. MALAS ufz r , 2''5'N PENINSULA MAASIA S = ^ d AN C ) ?lntJOHOR MELAKA AGRICULTURAL R/ S1'N- DEVELOPM ENT PROJECTS MIL 5GATION IM COVEMNT SCHEMES ROAC3S \ - 63V~~~MNAE2 IMPROVEMENT SCH*ECTS | I?LLSOADSMEI L /|\ EXTENSION TRAINING CEtITER== rr30NA15 5 ? / J P AEMW2S' DEVIELOFMENI SU3,CENTE A MILK COLLECTION SU3CENTERS * GROUP PROCESSING CENTERS DI ER U REID 2 p! IRI 3a SD L:RFILDORESMK K.a UES.SBU, inf.emtfrN A. =t