1. Perspectives on Development: Results of a Ranking Exercise in Eastern Africa John McPeak, Syracuse University PARIMA project of the GL-CRSP

2. Study Area

3. Introduction Questions motivating the study –What has been the development experience to date? –What kinds of interventions are most highly desired by people living in these communities for the future? –To what extent are these desires shared by individuals within these communities?

4. Study Area

5. SiteMarket Access Ethnic Majority Relative Ag. Potential Annual Rainfall Kenya Dirib GumboMediumBoranHigh650 KargiLowRendilleLow200 LogologoMediumAriaalMed.-Low250 N’gamboHighIl ChamusHigh650 North HorrLowGabraLow150 Sugata MarmarHighSamburuMedium500 Ethiopia Dida HaraMediumBoranMedium500 DilloLowBoranLow400 Finchawa Qorati High Medium Guji Boran High Medium 650 450 WachilleMediumBoranMedium500

6. Development survey Survey of 249 people in six communities in Kenya, 147 people in five communities in Ethiopia; 396 people. Open ended work to develop survey form. Run in late 2001 in Kenya, 2002 in Ethiopia. Kenya interviewed multiple individuals per household, Ethiopia only household head. Had been working with them since 2000. Text to make clear motivation.

7. Percent having personal experience with project of type:

8. Who did the projects? Recall N’gambo, Finchawa, Sugata Marmar high market access; Kargi, North Horr, Dillo low market access.

9. How are these past interventions ranked by most helpful to least? Significant difference between community and personal for: Livestock Health, Education (C>P); Alternative Income Generation, Food Aid (P>C); Others NS difference.

10. Is low rank because no experience or low evaluation of experienced project? Rank by those with experience

11. Any that caused harm? Ethiopia –12% noted something that harmed the community and 8% identified personal harm (fertilizer burned plants, wrong medicine in health centers, restocked animals brought diseases, a few others) Kenya –23% identified something that harmed the community and 8% identified personal harm (borehole water poisoned and killed animals, the spread of mesquite plants, loss of grazing land to natural resource management projects or wildlife, a few others).

12. What about ranking future interventions - overall Education in only one with statistically significant difference, C>P

13. There is a lot of variation: by site

14. And within sites: North Horr respondents

15. Overall variation As a general rule, things ranked more highly have less variance about them as measured by the CV.

16. Summary of regression findings (p-values)Site dummiesHH characteristicsIndividual characteristics Human health.000 ***.051 *.119 Water.000 ***.119.674 Education.000 ***.234.463 Livestock health.000 ***.680.510 Livestock marketing.000 ***.161.337 Conflict resolution.000 ***.093 *.187 Restocking.000 ***.760.466 Food aid.000 ***.388.523 Cultivation.000 ***.184.274 Alternative income.000 ***.091 *.277 Savings /credit.000 ***.187.241 Transport imp..000 ***.166.598 NRM.002 ***.122.831 Institutional dev.000 ***.005 ***.573 Other services.000 ***.074 *.304 Wildlife management.000 ***.169.094 *

17. Conclusions: is the message getting through currently?

18. Conclusions World Bank ALRMP in Kenya: phase 2 38.9 million USD will be spent on natural resources and disaster management 24.2 million USD will be spent on community driven development 14.8 million USD will be spent on support to local development (working with other development agencies already active).

19. PriorityDevelopment Rankings Government of : funding allocation ALRMP : funding allocation 1Human HealthPublic Infrastructure (roads, electricity, solar, telephone): 57% Education: 53% 2WaterWater: 8%Restocking: 16% 3Livestock HealthHuman Health: 8%Alternative Income Generation: 11% 4EducationLivestock and Fisheries development: 8% Health and Sanitation: 9.6% 5Livestock MarketingEducation: 6%Water: 4% 6Conflict ResolutionTourism, Trade and Industry: 4% Cultivation: 4% 7Restocking Human Resource Development: 2% Housing for the poor: 1% 8CultivationMixed farming: 3%Natural Resource Management: <1% 9Food AidConflict and Disaster Management: 3% Food Aid: <1% 10Alternative income Generation Veterinary: <1%