Amibara Irrigation Project II - Feasibility Study Summary

-—
/
STUDY OF THE FEASIBILITY OF REALLOCATING THE PLANNED 2,000 HA AMIBARA IRRIGATION PROJECT II SETTLEMENT SCHEME INTO J WO SEGMENTS IN MELKA SADI .'ND AMIBARA ZONESAi-,a
PROVISIONAL
MILITARY       GOVERNMENT OF
SOCIALIST ETHIOPIA
AWASH VALLEY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY AMIBARA IRRIGATION PRO.TECT II
STUDY OF THE FEASIBILITY OF REALLOCATING    THE    PLANNED    2,000    HA. AMIBARA IRRIGATION PROJECT II
SETTLEMENT SCHEME INTO SEGMENTS   IN   MELKA   SADI
ZONES
J WO
ND AMIBARA
Revised         and    final1sed            November       1979
AWASH VALLEY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
P. O. BOX 591
ADDIS ABABA
ETHIOPIA
TECHNICAL SUPPORT SERVICES TEAM HALCROW—ULG LIMITED
P. 0. BOX 2306
ADDIS ABABA
ETHIOPIASection
1
1.1
1.2
2.
INTRODUCTION
Background
The Terms of Reference
HISTORICAL and EXISTING SIT.1TION
2.1             History
2.2 Organisation
2.3
2.4
2.5
3.
Location
Selection of Settlers
Future Plans
SCOPE OF THE REPORT AND FA 2TORS CONSIDERED
1
1
1
3
3
4
4
5
V
3.1            Finance
3.2             Settlement Policy
3.3             Social Aspects
3.4             Livestock Aspects
4. COST AND MANAGEMENT IM-' ! ICATIONS
4.1             On-farm Development
4.2             Farm Machinery
4.3             Equipment and Vehicles
4.4             Buildings and Housing
4.5             Health and Education
4.6             State Parra/Settlement Authority
Budgetary  onsideratr; ns
n
9
9
11
11
18
20
20
20
24
24
27
27
4.7
Introduction of Neu S * clement Model
29
4.8
Land Suitability
30
4.9
Production Costs
31
5. SETTLEMENT LOCATION ALTERNATIVES
5.1            Retaining Existing Plan
5.2           Alternative 1
5.3                        Alternative 2
5.4                        Alternative 3
5.5                        Alternative 4
5.6                        Alternative 5
5.7            Comments on Alternative 6
5.8
Alternatives Ranlcing Table
34
35
36
38
39 39 4o 44 46Section
6.            RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTION f'EQUTRED 6,1        Recommendations
6.2        Action Required
6.3        Other considerations Appendix I               -   Letter requesting study
49
49
49
50
II
-   Ministry of State Farm | roposal for Alternative 6
Maps -            1        - Existing Situation
2        — Health facilities
3        — Educational facilitiee
4-8    - Alternatives 1-5
9        - Irrigation Suitability ClassificationMcRow’ulq lid
Agriculture — Engin&nrlnt] - Rural Development
Registered Office: Burderop Park,
TnlfpMrw: Swindon 107931 812479
Swindon, Wiltshire SN4 OQD, England
Obtoi Propufiion fiwm. WUtt. T«’*x 4434-1 iA/B HALWILG1
December 5»             1979
HU TSST CN1
Dr. Zewdio Abate
Executive Director
Amibara Irrigation Project II
Addie Ababa
Dear Dr. Zewdiei
Settlement FoaalbiLlty Study
Please find attached 10  copies of the above study, which has been revised and amended in the light of* comments received.
Thia document prepared by the Halorow-ULG Technical
Support Services consultants ia presented to provide
the basic information nacessary for your committee to
decide the most appropriate relocation, if any, for tho
settlement acheme.
✓ .
The recommendation, made are baaed only upon the
information presented, but there may be other factors
of which the committee may be aware which could hlso
have an over-riding influence.
Should        you        require        any        further        explanation        of        tho report, ploaae do not hedtate to call on me.
Yours sincerely,
J, R. Dorrell Senior Agriculturalist TSST
JRD/ka
Encl3.
?■■
^orofAgru^tunlSmuce,: D.R WIU^m n
.
OitKta ’fEngmetringServitt G.C.Awrt' 2ooT
SCHEME NTO  JW?, 
. 8880 SE™^
\-r-r -run -FOMENTS - TN 5TXKA 5Api_AN2_AMIBARA
r
~ 
'
ZONES
■ -—A-— —      •
.PJTOODUCTTCI
!. 1 r-nckgroimd
This report haa been preparer Ln response to a request by the Executive Director of jIP in his letter
T 27„ 18/7245/71 dated 28 Jun - 1979 to the Senior
t
Agriculturalist of the Halcrow-ULG Technical Support Services Team (TSST). The original instruction was Issued by the General Manager of VADA in his letter
/1-13/1O/71 dated 18/7/19.
The objective of the proposal to split the settlement areas between Melka Sadi and Amibara is to provide
a more equitable distribution of settlement land between tlio difforent Afar clans ♦•'ho are traditionally resident in the project area and further to satisfy the social attachment of the different clans to their traditional dwelling areas. At the 2.rune time no increase fen expenditure should be incorred and the present allocated rosourcos to settlement .for buildings, workshop and machinery should net be = Lgnif leant ly changed.
1  °                   Ternu of Referon.ee
The letter from the AIP Executive Director with a list
•f guiding factors attached referred to in. Section I above, comprises the only Terms of Reference received. The TSST has interpreted the requirements to include the examination of various alternatives both in size, number and location of the settlement
consideration.
areas under2
It does this after discussions with AlP tnd VADA management who indicated that;
-    the settlement blocks should not be widely dispersed;
-    it would be deslrablo to allocate land which is included in the earlier stages of development;
-    the two settlement areas need not necessarily
be the same size.
The list of factors given as a guide for the study refers to services many of which are outside the parameters ef the AIP II as detailed in the World Bank appraisal and the financing agreements. Those that are included are most of para (c) Farm Services and Para (e) Health Services, However, all the factors are relevant and sheuld be taken into account by the Government’s regional planners, the Settlement Authority, Ministries and local government organifiertlons concerned. (Letter T27 • 1«/7245/71 is attached as Appendix I to this report*)
This report deals with the proposal from a technical viewpoint and the effect, if any, that various alternatives for change may have on the allocation and the amount of existing project only funds required. It does not enter into discussion
of the sscio-politlcal implications af settlement change in which aspects the Consultants are instructed not to concern themselves. However socio-political criteria will be important factors
in the decision making and should be considered separately by the Settlement Authority and AVDA who have the expertise and experience of the area and the people.3
2. HISTORICAL AND EXISTING SITUATION
2. 1 History
The settlement programme in tho Middle Awash was started in. 1967 as a compensation scheme for displaced Afars as a result of land development
for private concessionaires, The first area to
be developed in May 1967 totalled 67 ha. and gradually the area was increased with the selection
of settlers from eight clans in the Melka Sadi and Amibara areas.
In the absence of any farm settlement policy the
Initial project plan recommended the allocation
of 2.5 hectares per family.
Tn addition to the settlement plan for arable
farming a livestock development/pastoralist settle ment scheme was proposed to be established on the Alledeghi Plains.
Subsequently 17 ha. of irrigated pasture (alfalfa/ Rhodes Grass) for a dairy scheme and 60 ha. of irrigated pasture for beef and sheep rearing and fattening were established on the AVDA Settlement
farm.
In addition a Minimum Mechanisation Afar Settlement Experiment Project (now discontinued) was set up
in November 1975. It had the general objective of
"deriving workable farming systems which would enable the Afar nomads of the Middle Awash to become self-reliant farmers and self-sustaining for food
and animal resources on an irrigated settlement scheme with a minimum of paternalistic infrastructure”
(see UNDP/FAO Project ETH/74/0O5; Some Social Aspects of Settloment Programmes in Ethiopia J. Colairs^. January 1977).u-
2.2       Organisation
The former AVDA Settlement Farm, which has now been taken over by the Settlement Authority of the Relief
and Rehabilitation Commission, at present carries
•ut a celleotive farming operation on behalf of 441 Afar heads of families. The profits, if any, are distributed, after the sale of the cotton and deduction of production costs, on the basis of 2.5 hectares per family. Any advances/loans and family labour provided during the season are taken into account in the final share out. Duo to administrative difficulties no paymonts have been made to "settlers" for the last two years.
The irrigation blocks are not allocated to groups
of families nor to individuals and -consequently there
is:
no recording of production from settler plots; no identification by individuals or groups of
"settlers" with their own piece of land; and little labour supplied by the Afars except occasional casual labour for veoding nr picking.
2,3       Location (See Map 1)
The area at present being farmed for potential settlement is situated on the western side of the northern (Amibara) end of the project area* It is bounded on the northern side by Algeta Farm, a unit
1/ This was reported in the FAO Calaris report 1977 Para 1.2
referred to above at Page 3 
2.1 para 4 above and is
recently  substantiated in discussion with settlement farm staff.  However no  formal records are kept of Afar labour input.5
o f the Amibara St'ate Faip of the Middle Awash
Development Corporation (MADC)| «n the south by
the Mp1ka Varer Research Station; en the east by
the area at present planned for settlement area
extension and further state farm development (Amibara
State Farm l); on the west by the northern section
of the western dyke.
Ai full development the eettlement scheme area, will
be cut off from direct access to the Afar’s tradition
al                  ng grounds on the Alledeghi Plains although
a        livestock        corridor        is        planned,        and        will        be        adjacent on three sides to stato farms and research land.
The       settlement       area       will       also       be       bisected       by       the main Amibara road and the primary canal.
2.4       Selection of ^Settlors”
The presently oxisting 441 settler family units have
been selected from the eight major family clans who
traditionally live in the Melka Sadi and Amibara
Area.
At         the         time         of         selection         the         following         criteria were included
the settlers should come from the nominated clans; the settler should be willing to settle, be
healthy and between the ages of 20 and 40 years; the settler has not been involved in any illegal
activities.
if possible, he should be literate.6
2.5 
Future Plans
The Project plan indicates that in addition to the
area already allocated to -settlers", then estimated
at 1,200 hectares, an additional and adjacent 800 ha
would be developed to provide settlement for a
further 320 families.
The original plan is in essence unchanged although
the detailed figures of numbers of settlers and the
breakdown of the areas still to be developed cannot
be finalised until construction and on—farm field
layouts have been completed. The total area planned
for settlement remains at 2,000 hectares giving
holdings for 800 settlers at the present allocation
of 2.5 ha. per family with a cropping pattern of
80% cotton, 15% maize, 5% haricot beans.
It is reported that the Awash Valley Settlement
Agency (AVSA) has presented a Settlement proposal
to the Government which is under review and awaiting
ratification.
The essential points of their proposal are that:-
- the settlement scheme will have irrigated pasture; the area will b  divided into units of 720 hectares
e
to accomodate 480 families i.e. 1.5 ha. per
family;
each unti will have 151 labourers, 7 tractors and
the necessary farm implements;
each settler will be allocated 0.5 ha. for
irrigated pasture, 0.5 ha. for food crops and 0.5 ha. for cotton.7
_ the potential settler shall t>o:
( n)         a person willing to settle;
(b) between the ages of 15 an(1 ^5 years,
(o)        a person who has no adequnto source of Income;
(d) a person of good health.
The AVSA states that "under the prevailing conditions
in the Awash Valley a minimum allocation of 0.5 hn. por settler from the family holding for irrigated pasture
has been acknowledged, as a favourable condition and indlspensnblo componont of nomadic settlement to set
free the labour productivity and to achieve th©
mobilisation of the nomadic settlors on the farm site
which preconditions to oonfine thoir milking livestock
nt least to irrigated paeturo. In addition, another
0.5 ha. per settler has been acknowledged too for
subsistence food crop production. The cash crop
component, from the family holding per settler, that
would enable the settlers to pay back the loans, to
deposit their families annual consumption requirements
and to acquire the financial accumulation nocessary to establish economically self sufficient communities,
is under deliberation and research."
The final part of this statement indicates that the
AVSA has not catagorlcally decided the size of the
holding that should be devoted to cash crops.
In so doing it must be born in mind that apart from
the families cash requirements as outlined above, from
Year 1 the settler will be required to pay Birr 95.0O/ha Operation and Maintenance charges to AVDA aad from Year 4 an additional Birr 200/ha. as a contribution to IDA
loan repayments.a
This
in
<• —-"In* 
h’
twi
crops »1 livestock produce, he kill bo required to
pay Birr 442.50 out of the not earnings from 0.5 ha.
of cotton#
In 1976/77 settlers received an average of Birr 3,048.00
per family after deduction of loan., production costs
income tax and land tax from a holJLng size averaging
nearly 2.5 ha. No payments have bnen made for the last
two years.
Further, to the Consultants' know edge, no decision has
been made either to accopt or reject the recommendations
for settlement holding size and changes in settler’s
cropping pattern made in Section 4»2.2. of tho Draft
Farm Development Plan circulated in August 1978. The
basis of this recommendation bn Lng that 2.5 ha. of irrigated
annual crops was too much for one family to manage;
secondly that the cropping pattern proposed took no account
of the need to provide grazing for some stock near the
homestead; and thirdly that the proposals did not conform
to Rural Lands Proclamation No. 31 of 1975 which is still
in force. Viz.
Chapter 2
Para 4.5 No person except sick, old or single
woman may hire labour to cultivate
his holding,
4.6         The Minister shall determine by
regulation the size of land sufficient
for the farming family.
5,24 Nomadic peoples shall have possesion rights over customary grazing lands.9
3.1 Finance
The financial implications of change are covered in general terms but no detailed financial or economic analysis is possible without the addition of on economist to the TSST. However, as the TOR restrict the report to considering changes which do not Involve additional financial cost, the sensitivity of the
project economics to changes proposed within this parameter is likely to be Insignificant unless chcn_.es
In the cropping pattern are introduced•
The TOR state the 11 the pion is to establish these settlement units within the total package of allocated resources/commitments for the 2,000 hectare settlement schemo as per buildings, workshops, machinery, etc, stated In the Projects Financing Agreements. ”
Detailed breakdown of costs heads as between, project headquarters and settlement is not possible because
the financing agreements and World Bank appraisal follow the original concept that the settlement schemo and project headquarters would both fall under AVDA. No separate allocation of funds as between the two organisations now involved i.e. Settlement Authority
and AVDA/AIP for equipment and vehicles, buildings and housing, Including workshops, is given in the EEC financing agreement (Ref. Annex 2 page 5, Annex 2, table 2, table 3, tables 3.3 and 3.4). It will be
nocessary for decisions to be taken and agreed with the two organisations and the two funding agencies involved i.e. ADF and EDF before a breakdown canHowever, the farm machinery allocation is separately estimated and by analysing the contribution of the funding agencies some broad separation of buildings and housing and on-fnrm development costs is possible.
The analysis of expenditure allocation is further complicated by the mixed use in reports and financing agreements of Birr, U.S. dollars and European Unite of Account (EUA); EUA • s being an ever fluctuating currency. Recent trends in oxchange rates have been increasing the value of the EDF grant to tho project when valued in the available Birr after conversion.
Table 1 below gives the approximate breakdown of expenditure allocation as far as is possible from the information availablei
TABLE 1 Settlement
Government
Contribution
f 000 Birr
1.    On-farm Development — BOO ha. (oxoluding past expenditure
of 443 EVA)
2.    Building and Housing
3.    Equipment and Vehicles
4.    Farm Machinex*y
S ta^o Farms
1.    On-farm Development - 6700
2.     Building and Housing
3.    Equipment and Vehicles
4.    Farm Machinery
1/ 1,535.0 EUA per hectare
2/ 1,535.^ EUA per hectare
194
Foreign
Exchange
’OOO EUA ’OOOU.SS (EDF) (ADF)
1,228 /
557
1
Allocation decisions pending
180
ha.
1,02Q72 3 4^
Allocation decisions pending
1,950
1,697
- including 56.24% contingencies.
- including 56.24% contingencies.11
3,2 <?A^1nnient Policy
and is only now planning t<- appoint a team
to study the Amibara Settl'.ient question,
In principle, the Settlement Authority normally has a range management settler - nt model for nomadic people and a small holding, model for sedentary rural peasants and the resettlement of urban unemployed. Soil conservation and for:3try also figure srrongly
in the policy objectives.
An irrigation settlement unit comprises 5^0 families on 750 hectares of ara’ile land plus house plots of 1,000 square metros per family, Tho Settlement Authority aims to hare over each settlement unit to a settler/farmer association following a period of three years of orientation and training.
In the absence of firm guidelines the Consul tRnfs have therefore recognised these general principles in considering the opportunity for change from the
existing plan.
Proclamation No.78 of 1976
— Settlement Authority
3.33,3.1 Health Facilities
The Ministry of Health has a programme of development requiring the establishment of 100 health clind.cs
and 10 health centres per year throughout Ethiopia.
A clinic should serve a population of approximately 10,000 people and a health centre serves 50,000 people.
There is a health centre situated in Melka Rarer village staffed by:
*   a health officer (in future to be a qualified doctor);
" 2 health assistants;
- 1 nurse;
•    1 sanatarlan13
The (UM.U7 Health
pier, clinic of approximately 90 eq. netree Is
’ ’t*nd“rd
Birr 20,
,000 when constructed by the Rural Project
Agency (RPA).
This comprises a verandah waiting
area, a registration room, an small laboratory, a treatment room
examination room, a
, a 3 tore and WC,
with running water and sewerage laid on to the building However, the RPA is over committed and the health centre/clinic building programme is being supported by outside contractors, whose rates may be as much
as double that of RPA quoted above.
A health clinic Is staffed by two health assistants
In addition to the health centre at Malka Warer village, the project area at present is served by clinics established at MAESCO (Malka Sadi), Amlbara state farm H.Q. and the Settlement farm H.Q. at Sholoku.
Other clinics, some of temporary construction, are being established by the three engineering contractors at their base camps and these could become an integral part of the project area health service when the contractors leave provided they can be staffed and
funded.
The complement -f existing clinic, plus those already in construction or allowed for in the estimates should be sufficient for the project area population. The project fund allocation for a clinic of Birr 30,000 Plus contingencies would not be affected by changes in the location of settlements and state farms.
(See Map 2).14 -
However, the Melka Water Health Centre at present
serves an area stretching from Awash bridge to
Lake Hartale and with the expanding project area
population the areas outside the project area will
need additional health facilities. It is likely
that there will shortly be a need for a medium sized
hospital to be located either at Melka Warer or
at the proposed Regional Township.
There is no provision for the building of clinics
at the new state farm headquarters in Contract Uc
and these will therefore have to be included in the
Ministry of State Farms Middle Awash Development
Corporation (MADC) budget for 1980/81.
There is, however, provision for a clinic to be
built at the project H.Q. under Contract 4a. In the
opinion of the Consultant’s, this is unnecessary as
there is a Ministry Health Centre only 1.5 km. away
at Melka Warer village: the funds would be better
spent in expanding this facility.
3• 3■ 2            Educational Facilities
The project area is reasonably well served with
elementary school educational facilities.
The Ministry of Education's target standards for
elementary schools in rural areas are as follows:
Ma
Maximum wlaking distance approximately 5 km;
- Age bracket 7-12 years;
200       pupil,       in       four       classes       or       up       to       400       pupils using a shift system;
One       teacher       per       class       per       shift teachers would be i  charge);
(one of the
n15
There     are     no
for a junior
Secondary  (l7
ment depends
fixed standards or target distribution Secondary (13-1* 
°r
.18         years)         schools         and to       a       large       extent       upon
their
establish,
local
demand
and population density#
Existing facilities in the project area comprises
—    a full elementary school at Melka Warer i,e.
Grades 1-6;
—    an elementary school at Melka Sadi with Grad.es
1—4 at present, which will be expanded up to Grade 6 in 19^0;
—  an elementary school at Amibara with Grades 1—*4.
To date there appears to be a low demand and attendance level by Afar children at ^he schools
listed above.
The distribution of schools covers the majority of the project area (see Map 3) and existing facilities with an introduction of shift systems and more teachers should cope with the increase in demand over the next three years. Thereafter, &B atate farm staff and labourers bring ia their families and demand increases from Afars with the establishment of settlement villages, additional schools will be
required.
However, the redistribution of settler
^’X
tO  haVO
d           ’
educational facilities.
areas is
on the require,
*   Klonal township bo developed
re
ideal elta for the establishment
Xn time, should
would be An
of secondary schools.16
(a) A potable water supply be required regardless
villages (or state farm
for human consumption would of tie location of the settler
sat ?ll±te villages)9
The Consultants are informer, that from past experience there should be no difficulty in finding good quality water with boreholes at dep* ’S of less than 1OO me .re.-, in any of the alternative 1 nations for settlement proposed later in this repo?.*;.
(b) Livestock watering points r; >uld also be establi shed
f
near the settlement villaf u. This water may also be supplied from the same ureholee*
In addition some catchmer reservoirs could be dug
along the drainage line r. preserve some of the rur
The approximate cost of
f3ide the Eastern dyke to
j for watering the livestock
'orehole, pump and watering
trough       is       Birr
80 000 
t
ai
for catchment reservoir
excavation tho rate is J
Housing
(a) Staff he using for Sett*
provided for under Cor;
: *ly to be Birr 8«0O
per
ent Agency  personnel
ct 4B. Decisions as
is
to
housing numbers and tyj 3 to be allocated be tween Settlement staff and 1 1 'A Project Control staff have yet to be made.
Should changes in set 5 ement location which mean that the Ni ilstry of State
be adapted
Farms -take _
A-- • •            —  - -
over certain of the tj jets (including housing) at
Amlbara Settlement fu -n than it would
to suppose that they Lil provide a similar compliment of houses (or funds * Lth which to build them) to the Settlement Agency.
seem reasonable17
Taken one stage further thia could also be applied
in same degree to office accommodation and workshops (See section 4.4).
(b) Settler housing is not provided for in project
funds and its provision or assistance with
its provision is a matter for Settlement Agency policy. No permanent housing is provided for the "settlers" on the existing scheme and the majority of the Afar population still live in their traditional movable shelters.
There is however evidence to suggest that
the Afar people may be encouraged more easily to adapt a sedentary way of life if a good permanent house on the settlement is part of the incentive. However surveys have also shown that as soon as they have spare cash the purchase of livestock is very high on their list of
priorities.
.3.5          Community Amenities Consideration of these aspects
including burial
grounds, churche s,
mosques^ markets and consumer
cooperatives are all matters which should be taken into consideration if the settlement areas are to be relocated. The Consultants therefore suggest that these aspects together with sociological factors should be reported upon by other experts with the specialist knowledge required and that their report should be attached as an annex to this feasibility study.18
farmerfl.
On the other hand the evidence of reports available suggests that:—
(a)        the Afar people will continue to regard th.© ownership of grazing herds a desirable if not essential part of their way of life for many
years to come;
(b)       milk continues to be the staple diet of preference. The evidence of the Minimum Mechanisation Scheme (MMS) suggests that even 0.8 ha. of irrigated pasture per finally may be Insufficient to provide sufficient milk production to feed the family
and the young stock which will be kept near the homestead* There was continuous pressure from trainee settlers on o 
— 
e19
^though there was
commitment by trainee
farmer, on the MMP to the devel.pment of their holdings, they relied almost entirely on their
near relatives for labour. The sharing of this labour force between livestock herding and farming, which seems inevitable, is made more difficult
when the two activities are carried out in isolation of each other.
The Consultants favour the latter view and regard the proximity of traditional grazing areas to the settlement scheme site as being a major advantage which lends itself
to the development of a model for Afar Settlement. The activities associated with cash and food crop cultivation, irrigated pnature far stock nt the homestead and extensive grazing on the adjacent plains, could mor© easily be inegrated in this type of development model.
It is further suggested that consideration be given to developing a part of the proposed 1,500 ha. of irrigated pasture at the northern end of the project as a cooperative farm ultimately managed by the Afars, for the intensive production of forage for some "zero grazing" /, but largely for preservation for distribution during the dry season.
120
U. COST AND MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS
The likely Implications of change in location and composition of the settlement programme can be discussed under a number of project component headings.
4.1 On-farm Development
4.1.1 Costs - The total EDF allocation to the project as
a whole for On-farm Development as extracted from Annex 2, Table 3.1 of the EEC financing agreement is shown in Table 2 below:
TABLE 2
Land clearing (2,200 ha in Ami bar a
'OOP EUA
3,300 ha JLn Malka Sadi)             1 ,037 Land levelling (4,200 ha in Amibara
3,300 ha in Melka Sadi)         4,049
Canals,          drains,          structures          and          access tracks (No separata area allocation)
Contingencies (056^)
Total costs
2,310
11,515
The area  to  receive on-farm development works is 800  ha.  of settlement and 6,700  ha  of state farm land giving an average budgetted estimated cost
of 1,535 EUA per hectare.
The        contracts        for        on-farm awarded as shown in Table
(See Table 1 ) development have now been
3,21 -
TABLE 1
Cont.
N?.           Location
Estimated
Total area
Hectares
Total Cost
Birr
Cost/ha Cost/haJ^
Birr               EUA
2,910
18,184,953
6,249
2,196
2E
Melka Sadi
1,684
2F
Amibara
Totals
3,710
6,620
17,779,238
4,792
35,964,191
The contracted cost is therefore somewhat higher
than the original estimate as shown in Table 2.
No difference in clearing, levelling, irrigation
or road layout is envisaged as between the area
allocated to settlement or state farms, The above
contracts will therefore remain unaffected if some
of the Melka Sadi area is allocated to settlement
and a different or lesser area is given over to
settlement in the Amibara section*
The provisional breakdown of the estimated costs
of on-farm development as between Settlement and
State    Farms    as    shown    in    Section    3    Table    1    (page    •    •    •    «    ) would need to be amended with, changes in hectarage.
4.1.2, Management - The organisation of the ex-f R-t-ing
"settlement" collective farm differs very little
from the state farms. Changes from this system are planned for future, settlement and the existing scheme will be modified to make it conform to Settlement
Authority policy.
The requirements for housing, >taff and labour are therefore different for the two forms of development, but the total requirements should be similar whatever the location. Some changes would be necessary in building programmes, staff training and recruitment
1/ Using current
exchange rate of 2.846 EUA « 1 Birrshould the timing of the Introduction of settlement
or state farming deviate from the existing plan.
Some infrastructural and moving costs will be incurred if location changes are made and these are discussed
in para U.U below. However, the engineering programme must follow a fixed programme and the schedule for irrigation works and on-farm development works cannot be changed significantly•
Farm Machinery
The total estimated cost of farm machinery for the new settlement area (previously estimated at 800 ha.) and the state farms (estimated at 6,700 ha.) is
2,130,000 EUA including a contingency element. The breakdown Is as follows
TABLE k
Basic Coot
'000 EUA Contingency
Total
®59.MG
Settlement Machinery
111
66
177
State Farm Machinery
1,225
728
1,953
Totale
1,336
794
2,130
In arriving at the above estimates for farm machinery
the assumption was made that the proposed settler helping of 2.5 hectares would be planted, weeded
and cleared after harvest by hand labour. The
Consultants do not endorse this assumption and recommend that settlers are able to hire planters, rolling tine cultivators and slashers from their farmers’ associa
tion to supplement the hand labour supplied by their family in order to ensure timeliness of operatton.Further, because of the lac< of a finalised and
published policy as to the holding sire which will
be granted per family and the management model on
which the settlement scheme will be based the
Consultants have prepared their revised list of farm machinery  and specifications on the basis of optimum mechanisation.
There is no differentiatior therefore in the farm machinery tender documents wing prepared as between state farms and settlement When the Settlement Authority has formulated 1 ;s settlement management policy amendments can be m ide as necessary.
The existing "settlement*  farm is fully mechanised.
All the machinery and eooipment have been transferred to the Relief and Rehabilitation Commission (RRC) of which the Settlement Au<hciity and Awash Valley Settlement Agency (AVSA) are now a part. This means that if the settlement scheme is relocated, in part
or completely, the existing farm machinery and the additional machinery purchased for the new area would be moved to the new settlement site. It could then
be divided up according to the number of farm associa tions which are formed,
Assuming that the existing machinery is properly main tained and that AVSA have an orderly replacement policy this machinery should cope quite adequately with the cultivation work on the nearly cleared virgin land without additional cost.
1r- 24
4.3        Equipment and Vehicles
The allocation of equipment and vehicles to the
different project components would not change unless the total area  allocation of farming  land to  settle ment and state farms were changed.
The financing agreements do not differentiate between the Project Headquarters and Settlement for these items and allocation of funds as between these two new separated organisations is yet to be agreed.
4.4       Buildings and Housing
The buildings and housing for state farms are to bo funded from the African Development Fund (ADF) (US$ 1 697,000 which at July 1979 rates is equivalent
f
to 1,235,978 EUA).
The        settlement        buildings        and        housing        are        funded        by EDF (577,000 EUA) and the Ethiopian Government
(Birr 194,000) out of a total sum for Project H.Q. and Settlement of 1,218,000 EUA.
The breakdown and allocation of contracts is given in Table 5 below:
TABLE 5 - Buildings A Housing Costs 'OOP Birr
IDA EDF ADF ETH
Govt
Status
Projeot        H.Q.
1,709.3* -
Project
Control Centre
Substantially
completed
Administrative Buildings
(incl.workchop &. clinic) 801** -
Houses for Project H.Q.
and Settlement H.Q. staff- 1,347**
State Farms H.Q. (x2)
incl, workshop, cotton
stores, offices & houses) -
♦Actual Contract Price
3,513** -
4A
194** 4b
4C
Contracts
due to
be awarded
1st Nov.
1979
♦♦ As quoted Annex 8 Table 1 - World Bank Appraisal25
On the other hand, should some of the 'J
either in the Melka Sadi section or the Amibara section of the project be exchanged between settlement end state fams this could affect the location of the
new state farm headquarters Contract 4C and some of the
under Contract UB.
to  be constructed under
houses to be built
The resulting amendments to this contracts would possibly cause some minor delays for re-negotiations with the selected contractor but the increase in
cost, if any, is likely to be insignificant.
Mechanical workshops are provided for in contracts 4A (at Project H.Q.) and 4C (at the stato farms). Workshop facilities would be required to service and repair settlement farm machinery if a new area is developed in Melka Sadi away from the existing settlement farm, where a new workshop is under construction. This problem could be solved by
building a very simple service bay at the farmer’s association H.Q. and by having the major servicing and repairs of this new settlement’s farm machinery carried out by either the Project’s Central Workshop
ono of the state farm workshops with charges being made as appropriate.
It would be uneconomic for each entity to have
totally Independent workshop facilities and whenever possible economies of scale should be taken advantage of particularly there major investment in large and sophisticated workshop facilities have been made.
The existing settlement farm has a well developed headquarters infrastructure including offices, a large new workshop under construction, stores, staff houses and labour quarters.Should ±t be decided to totally relocate the
settlement for the sUte f«™ to take over this
complex it ±a assumed that the AVSA would transfer
al l or most of its movable amta to the new settlement
Site, The project will be providing the stnte farms
with some offices, workshops stores and housing
certain of these could be handed over by the state
farms to AVSA in exchange for the Amibara Settlement Farm complex.
The now buildings and housing being constructed
from the project funds for state farm headquarters would not be na complete na the Amibara Settlement Farm complex.
Therefore as the state frirras would be beneflttlng considerably it would be necessary for them to compensate the AVSA to a considerable degroe to maJce any exchange of property equitable*
This compensation should be so set that It would allow the AVSA to supplement their rww settlement sub-centre In the Amibara section and if it is considered noceasary to establish a second sub-contro on the Malka Sadi settlement unit* The size and
facilities necessary  t each
a
these centres would
depend upon the hectare^ they will servo. Consideration can also  e ^
b       Yen to efltabll shisig a settlement 3Ub- *ntro at the EEE contractors cawp
c
and establish!^ the buildings at present scheduled for tbo Amlbiu-, St„t« Farm H.q. „„ tB Mollca Sadl 5ldo
. 
as a settlement aub-centre*27
The ..... r*™ -wed
«»lr MADC heed-
at Anbu.h Into . far™ headquarter, could
obviated        by        th.        .equitation        ot        th.        AVSA        lam        thu. releasing budgottod fund, to compensate and ...1st
AVS/l With their new centres.
4,5           Health and Education
These aspects have been considered in some de-tn.il in Section 3.4.1 and 3.4.2 above. In suipmnxy, the implications to project cost and -nenngement of changes in settlement location are unlikely to bo significant for health or educational aspects provided that the relocated settlement is within reasonable
waJLking distnneo i.o* 5 - 6 
other facilities as shown on Maps 2 and 3*
It would also seem reasonable where necessary for the Ministry of Health, the Settlement Authority, or
th* farmers1 associations to contribute towards the cost of establishing and running their own additional health clinics as is presently practised on other
settlement schemes,
Melka Warcr or Miy
6  State Fam/Settlement Authority Budgetary Congiderotions
Allocation of Funds
Th* Consultants are informed that, as recommended, the Ministry of State Forms have budgettod for the development of 2,000 hectares of new land in the ATP II area for the 1 8O/8l cotton flowing  o
9
3   a3olll
l.o. February 198O - Jruinnury 1981 . The Settlement Authority, which has recently token over the AVDA Settlement Farm, has no provision in its 1979/80 budget for ths establishment of any new settlement
in AIP 11 as to date the new
scheduled for development until the 1981/82 cotton
season.
been28
The budgetary  and planning  implioa^iona  of changes in area  allocation afl between the two  organisation will depend upon which areas, if any, are select
for change of use and the dates at which these new
areas will be ready for farming.
1*.6.2 Timing of Decisions for Change
Should changes be recommended for implementation during this coming year (19®°) difficulties could
be encountered In the reallocation of Govorrunent funds, the marshalling of resources by the AVSA
nnri the dis * up liar. of the Minis try of State Farm plans for 198O which are already well advanced.
The Consultants would recommend, therefore, that whatever re-allocation of land area, if any, is
approved that these decision* do not bocomo effective until the 1^8l/B2 cotton growing season. This implies that if  it is nccossary to transfer land from state
farms to settlement or vice versa as n result of Government decisions on this settlement Issue, the disruption would be reduced considerably if the
1980 fanning programmo is allowed to continue without change. This would allow n realistic period for planning the changes in the budgetary, logistical, staffing and training programmes which are nonrrrv*y to ensure success.
It would al™ allow sufficient time for procedures to be followed, discussions to be hold and agreement
1
r^chod vi+h Rn ri,.rtiu. boforo irrovtlI lhiu
,
 cbangea
are made to the development programme.
However if the AVSA feels confident that it is abie to quickly expand its farming activities from its
.rt.tlng b.,. *  Amibara, then .
tS9 -
1= po„lbl«. This would bo for It to 
proposed settlement block in Mulko Sodl in 1980
the
l,e. either solution ±3 rather than
627 ha or 1049 hn. depending on chosen (See Section 5)
a  single unit
a settlement scheme. Tf an slternBU'O
1. chosen which involves the trnn-rer/owehanBo of Inn between AVSA and ototo forms on the Amibarn side this could be effected during 198I.
The new model settlement scheme proper could then
be introduced by AVSA in an orderly and well planned manner In th.lr own time, inoluding an Afar settler training programme, the format for which has not boon finalised.
In nny event, decisions in principal muat be made without delay in order that any changes required either in location or composition of project capital works | such os buildings or roads F can be made before the construction of contracts
in November this year (1979)*
4B and 4C start
7 Introduction of New DSettlement Model
It Is the Consultants’ opinion that to date the difficulties that will be encountered In Imposing
a new settlement model l.e. smaller holdings, full labour input by Afar settlers, training of Mars in irrigation and cultivation techniques and introduction of a permanent state farming barrier between tho proposed settlor villages on the existing site and
tho Alledoghl, have been much underestimated.
While it ia appreciated that legislation can be
passed
and
enforced, 
this
approach
to 
promote
the
local
co-operation
would        be necosanry
Buccees 1» thia aohome.
unlikely to achieve30
One Of the advantages of
locations of settlement blocks Is that under the
right conditions it may bo easier to introduce an
entirely new concept rather than to partially change
an established situation. It la therefore possible
that the Afar people may accept a new settlement
model and mode of operation more easily if i* ls
located in new areas, which may appear to offer advantages over and above the acceptance of changes
in the existing areas.
Land Suitability
The project area 'WM subjected to soil survey by ITALCONSULT in 1971 and classified for irrigation suitability as Plass 1 arable, Class 2 arable and
Class 6 non-arable land,*
Suitability of the Land was measured in terms of
a theoretical anticipated range of net income per
beot-ar?’, The estdjnci’ted potantiaJL production cripacity and costs of production were taken into nennunt to
base the land classification on the oconomics of diversified crop production,
There have been changes in the economics of crop production since 1971 and under the present plan ovor                of the new land to receive irrigation will be planted to one crop (cotton) rather than to divrsi- fled cropping as originally planned. For the purposes of this report the land classification Is taken p
being indicative rather than definitive.
in the31
Tho irrigation suitability map produced by TTAIXONSULT is reproduced in this report as Map 9»
Certain of the alternatives for settlement location changes considered in the following section would Involve changes in the distribution of Class 1 and ■- land. However, this 1» not considered to be a significant factor due to the accepted differences
in the production potential of the two types of farming i.e. State farm and settler. The project economic analysis assumes that state farms have a higher yield potential than settlement farms.
4*9 Production Costs
Possible variations JLn prcxtuc-tlon costs nd between land to be cropped for the first -tljna and the older lands already In production on the settlement farm can be brought about by a number of* factors:
^-9*1 Levelling
Tho land lov^ler tm the existing AVSA farm are below the standards necessary for the introduction of the furrow and siphon method of irrigation proposed and a considerable amount of land levalling work needs
to be dono»
On the new lands the contractors will level tho land to a high standard as part of the on-farm development works, but subsidence will take place over the first few years re levelling work will be necessary.32
Xn summary both old and new
Innda will «squ±re levelling
work      and      the      dlffe^nce      in      cost      of      those
opemtionfl between
the two land classes should vary by
*5*2 primary Cultivations
It is the practice on the AVSA farm to plough some 5^
sf the land twice, prior to planting to ensure total burial
af trash and assist in reducing the very high weed
population.
Because rf the clearing, scarifying and levelling operations carried out by (ho contractors the new lands should only require ploughing once. However progress may be shower because of the number of uncleared roots and windrav material that could be a nuisance during the ploughing
operations,
On balance therefore tho difference in total time i.o.
more
than
5f*.
ooot, spent <n primary -rnjJLtivutions on the two differ&nt
land classes is unlikely to affoot the total production
cost of growing the crop by sere than 2—3,4 up or down.
4.9.3 Fertiliser
Tho total useage of fertiliser (Urea 46$) on the AVSA farm in 197® was 600 quintals, but this increased in
1979 to newer 1000 quintals* However  the evidence of
f
research results from Melka Harer over twelve years is that there is no significant economic response to the
use of fertiliser on these soils. There is no evidence
to suggest that if plant population weeding and Irrigation regimes are maintained to high standards trtiat fertiliser is no cess ary even on the older fields.
Tn tho cotton exhaustion trials conducted annually since 1968 to date (1979} and continuously on the same area of land at Melka Water Research Station, Resultsbetween the yields from the four treatments.
(Refer       IAR       Melka       Water       Annual       Reports       since       1968       and Reports on "Exhaustion Trials which are •n-golng).
At present the Consultants consider that the potential
irrigation techniques. Its effect on ylold has yet to
be proven.
It is In question, therefore, as to whether the cost of
fertilising the older lands should in reality he regarded
as a genuine necea^Ary additional production cost as opposed to the new nrwis where it 1b accepted that fertiliser >
Is unnecessary.
4 Other Production Cost Factors
The other major cost production factors should not he different whether old or new lands are being cultivated. Seed coats, post planting cultivations, hand weeding and spraying oasts should all be similar. Th© total picking cost will vary with yield but the rate paid par kg. for picking will be the same.
It is possible that the accumulated production costs on
Jk.1____ . 4 a.
«<•*.SETTLEMENT LOCATION ALTERNATIVES
In addition to  the possibility  of retaining  the existing proposals for the settlement Land allocation,  five other layouts were considered.
In formulating these alternatives the main criteria were
that they should require no major changes in engineering
design, plans or contracts already under way and in
particular that irrigation find drainage channels, dykes
and roads should not require alteration*
More than five alternatives were couriered but all except
those selected were rejected either,
a) on the grounds of being likely to cause unaccepta
ble delay because of changes being required in
the stage boundaries as planned, which would cause contracts to bo redrafted or the Introduction of variations; or
b) because the total areas resulting from relocation of settlement blocks were either so much below or above 2 000 hectares that the resulting
f
differences in rate of development and crop production build up would cause significant changes in the project’s cash flow and economic
analysis•
The selected alternatives aro best illustrated In map
form and are g-L-rcn w Map® 4 — 8 in fold nut form at the buck of the report, The areas shown are the consulting engineers latest available estimates of the net irrigable
area in the block shown and the most likely year in which farming could commence.35
5<1 Retaining Existing Plan
The existing situation has been described earlier in this report (see Section 2) and many of the advantages and disadvantages of making no change are self-evident.
In summary the advantages are:
-   any change is liable to cause delay;
-   the existing plans aro well understood, IT not entirely accepted, by all partios concernod;
-   the whole of the area is on land designated Class 1 for irrigation suitability (ITALCONSULT 1971);
-   any plans for the settlement scheme already formulated can continuo unchecked (although there is little
evidence of much planning by the Settlement
Authority to date);
-   a trading centre, village with social services and farming headquarters are well established, although there is no planned settlement and the village is populated largely by permanently employed farm labour and not by Afars;
- there is ready access to the river for the animals
kept near the houses.
Tho disadvantages are:
-   th® present location of the scheme gives no land to the Melka Sadi Afars in their traditional area;
-   the general location of tho scheme is poor, in that
it is bordered cm tlurce tri de a by government farms, has no access to the traditional grazing areas on
the Alledeghi Plains and the area is divided by the primary canal;f
be given alternative opportunity to talce part in
the proposed 1 T 500 ha. irrigated pasture scheme t the north of the project area.
5*2 Alternative 1 (see Map 4)
The proposal would bo to transfer the location of the additional new settlement area adjoining the existing farm in Amibera (see Map 1) to the area in Mm kn Sadi bounded by the primary canal/oastem dyko and the link road. The new area 1, close to the ProJect K<Q
snd givas &c„aa to water, gracing an the Alledaghi roads and social slices and trading facilities in’
36
the allocation of land per family is too large, the
pjote arc not Identified with individuals or groups
and Afar participation In the fanning activities
is miiiljrwl. To change all this on the existing
scheme is possible but w±Ll be difficult and will
take several years with a poor chance of success;
 if the above changes are implemented on the existing settlement area crop production will drop markedly on what is now a high yielding farm and much of the permanent labour force will have to be moved to one cf the new state farms;
- approximately 500 Afar families c^t of the astlmated total of 1,300 families traditionally living in the
project area will not receive a settlement plot
(proeent nllocniion 1a ROO families having 2.5 hectares each on 2 OOO hectares), although somo of those may
Warer ville
se and is close to thc a±±o
proposed new regional township.37
Alternative 1  therefore, provides a simple solution
t
to the problem of providing the Melka Sadi Afar clans
with some settlement in the Melka Sadi area. This is
its main advantage over the existing plan, however,
it has the disadvantage that it disperses the settle
ment into two blocks and does nothing to counteract
some of the major disadvantages of the existing plan which have been listed above.
Technically the proposal is feasible and would make
little or no difference to project cash flow or
eoenomlcs as the timing of development and the area Involved is almost the same as the area selected in Amibara. However the AVSA may consider that it is necessary to establish a settlement farm sub-centre
at the Melka Sadi location and investment costs for these facilities would bo incurred. (See Table 8)
Contracts UA and 4B include office facilities and
housing for Settlement Authority staff at the Project Headquarters and Control centre.
In view of the extensive facilities which the AVSA
have at Amibara it would seem unnecessarily extravagant for settlement offices and houses to be built at the project H.Q. as well. Amibara should continue to
serve as the Settlement H.Q. and savings made from ratting out ttw settlement aCrices nnd houaee from Contracts 4a a 4b could possibly be used to contribute to the cost of a Melka Sadi settlement sub-centre.For this alternative the proposal is to transfer approximately 350 ha. on the eastern side of the primary canal from the existing developed "Settlement" farm to the state fains, adding it to the area known
as Amibara State Farm I. This would reduce the existing Amibara settlement area from approximately 1,360 ha. to 1,010 ha. The total would then be made up by allocating the block of 1,0^9 ta. on the Melka Sadi side of the project which adjoins MAESCO.
Again this achieves the objective if granting the Melka Sadi Afars land on the Melka Sadi end of the project area, gives access to grazing and is due to be completely developed at an early date (1980/81), It would also be comparatively simple to implement from the management point of view.  but it does not
t
solve many of the existing plans problems*
Consideration must also be given
to the facts that:
-   both areas would be bounded on three Bides by state farms;
-   although adjacent to a service road, the Melka Sadi area is somewhat Isolated from other existing services, although the NEC camp could in time serve Aa  a settlement farm sub—centre.
the total area for settlement is increased from 2,000 ha. to 2,059 ha. which would have a slightly depressing the whole project because of the lower cotton yields on the settlements. Xt could als0 mean an adjustment upwards in the state farm
...» 
800 Mrr/h-) lf .
charge is not increased and the level of the 1 repayments Is to be maintained.39
The AVSA headquarters should remain at tho Amibar•* Settlement farm for thia alternative also, obviating
the need for offices and houses at Project H.Q.
However some temporary facilities, possibly at MAESCO, would be needed for a settlement sub-centre until the NEC eamp became free for occupation by AVSA.
5,4 Alternative 3 (See Map 6)
Alternative 3 introduces the concept of moving a large portion of the settlement or*. of the existing Amibora
"settlement" farm area Into newly propared land on
the eastern side of the prir.iary canal.
On th© Ami bare. side it incorporates 350 ha* o the already developed land, v-dch is now being cropped f with the addition of that area which was planned for extending the existing **dottlcment" farm. On the Malka Sadi side it bring: In the Marne area as that proposed for the Alt«?rna;l vn 2 above.
Although this proposal has some merit In that it
gives an opportunity for a fresh start on most of
the settlement scheme t the Amibara area would become tMtirely surrounded by state farms. The Melka Sadi aroa would suffer from the same disadvantages bs outlined for Alternative 2 „ and an entirely newly palnned settlement udnrlnistnative contro would be needed on the Amibera side»- UO -
This has advantages over all the previous choices
In that it gives the Amlbara settlement area direct access, albeit on a narrow front, to the Alledoghi plains for grazing. If stock watering points can also be established and supplied >y water from the primary canal, the need for lives toe < corridors to the river through state farm land could possibly bo reduced or dispensed with, provided that the Afar herdsmen can be persuaded to use the watering points.
However, in order to maintain a total area of 2,000 hectares for settlement, the same area in Malka Sadi would have to be used as suggested for Alternatives 2 and 3. This area’s inherent disadvantages and the
fact that the two areas are widely dispersed and
in porta remote from existing services and trading centres are the major drawback to the adoption of this settlement pattern, Similarly to Alternative 3 an entirely newly planned centre would be required on the Amlbara side.
5*6 Alternative 5 (See Map 8)
This last alternative again proposes that the settle ment scheme is located in total on new land previously allocated for state farms and that the existing settlement farm is taken over by MADC . The area suggested on the Malka Sadi side is the same block
as that
put
forward in Alternative 1. The Amibnra
area would stretch from the bridge on the link road along the eastern dykA in a north-easterly direction for approxi^toly 9 km, its are* i_R approximately
1.37U         hatI             aimomt         the         SM.e
farm.
as
the         existing         settlement- ^1
Th is alternative has severa' major advantages;
. Similar to the existing plan, it keeps the settlement
area contiguous but also locates a portion of the
scheme to the Melka Sadi sice of the project.
It provides the Afar settlers with an arable area
over a 13 kilometre front with direct accoss to
traditional grazing areas. This would give the
Settlement Authority the opportunity to develop
a settlement model incorporating both arable holdings
and range management to gi/e an acceptable family
Income level.
-   It   is   estimated   that   on   the   basis   of   *   2#   per   annum increase    in    the    number    of    Afar    families    since    197^, 1,300 families are now present in the area,
Re-allocation of holdings at 1.5 ha. per family would
provide settlement holdings for all- Tills re-organisa
tion would be easier in an entirely new area.
- Roads, health and educational facilities and
commercial centres at Melka  Vnror and the proposed new regional township would bo  centrally  placed to provide services to the settlers.
• The state farms would only have one border with the settlement holdings and the need for settlers to
drive their livestock through the state farms areas would be much reduced, particularly if boreholos
or canal fed watering points could be established adjacent to the grazing areas along the eastern dyke,
- The high production being achieved on the existing "settlement" farm would not be depressed by the introduction of true settlement agriculture This
n
now and economic rate of return.
in  " Slleht
project cashThe settlers although having to accept a lower percentage of Class 1 land would be compensated by the fact that it would all be properly levelled, have
a brand new reticulation system and a layout conducive to forming family group url^e of approximately one gasha (40 hectares) each,
. The Settlement Scheme headquarter offices could be located centrally at the Regional Township, the Project H.Q.  or as favoured by the Consultants at
f
the EEE contractors camp thus making savings on Contracts 4A/4B.
- The project Central Workshops will be situated close enough for carrying out major repairs to settlement fanner association tractors although routine servicing would be carried out by settlement workshops.
- The location of the settlement would contribute
subs tantlally to making the proposed now regional township an Important administrative and trading cento.
— It would give the Amlbara state farms a solid
contiguous block of land fed entirely by the primary canal f with the settlement area fed independently
by its own secondary canal.
Whlln thin alternative has an impressive list of
lt alHQ has importiint disadvantages although
nona are insuperable. The disadvantage-s are-
It requires a radical change of plan with regard
t hG areas to be uaQd for atafco
3Esttleme„t.43
it would probably be necessary for the state farms
to initiate the farming operations at least on the Amibara block (1,374 ha.) in 1980. Then, when the Settlement Authority is ready they would have to exchange with MADC the existing "settlement” farm for the new Amibara area. This also means that any buildings erected under Contract 4C used to farm the eastern area e.g. workshops and offices, houses etc. would have to be handed over to the Settlement Awthority in exchange for the facilities at Sholoku Settlement Farm and additional compensation would have to be made to AVSA to enable them to build
up new facilities in the two area6 comparable
in value to those they would be losing at Sholoku.
■ It would require the relocation of the state farm headquarters presently planned to be situated on
the eastern dyke for "Amibara State Farm I” to the Amibara settlement farm site or to expand the MADC H»Q. at Ambash.
- Those Afar families already resident close to the ’’Settlement Farm” would have to be moved. (However, there is no fixed pattern to their settlement and
few If any have permanent housing)
The labour force necossary to farm the area prior to Settlement Authority take over would either have to be given temporary housing at the sites for the proposed snttler villages, transported daily from
the existing state farms (Algeta, Ambash or permanently housed at the site for
> Sublale),
u satellite
tillage to the north of
the area on "Amibara State
Farm I", Vnforbunatoly, (indicated as the middle Just to the north of the
the contractor’s camp site
settlement vili    site
ago
link road) win not bevacated by
until late
44
Ethiopian Earthmoving Engineering ° 1982, otherwise this could have been
r
1
-
However, a temporary farm H Q. located next to this
t
9n
camp might be the interim solution required.
Comment  _Q  Alteraative.6
The Ministry of State Farms lave proposed a further alternative for settlement relocation to supplement those put forward by the Consultants in the first draft of this feasibility s :udy.
The document as presented by the Ministry of State farms is reproduced in full as Appendix IX'.*
In essence it proposes the development of a single
block of land for settlement at the northern end of
the project area bounded on the western side by a necoTidary canal and on the eastern side by the Eastern Dyke. It would also be adjacent in the north to the proposed area for th® scheme for 1 50O ha. of irrigated
T
pasture.
The proposal has an impressive list of advantages
fxs given in the state farms document but is seriously deficient on several points,
(a)          The area as shown on the alternative 6
map for development in 1982 has been revised and is now calculated at 1226 ha. Thia
that the total area east of the secondary canal as shown will only be approximately 1680 ha. which is too little for the scheme unless the Afars are propared to accept this smaller area because they are getting the 1500 ha, of irz-lgated pasture as well.Alternatively the area could be increased by adding to it the area west of the secondary canal which is due for development in 1982, This area is estimated to be 4U2 ha. which would then give a total settlement area of approximately 2120 ha i.e. rattier more than is required and divided by the secondary canal.
(b)         It does not satisfy the fundamental objectives of relocating the settlement as described in Section 1.1 of this report.
(c)          The majority of the area will not bo developed until 1982 which would not satisfy the Afar communities demand for early action.
For these reasons the Consultants do not support this proposal and because of the unanawerod questions with re eard to area this alternative cannot be included in the ranking table as shown below.
However, the Ministry of State Farms proposal does- 46 -
5,8 Alternative Ranking Table
To reinforce the analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the various alternatives a simple ranking chart has been d-iwn up. Each factor is scored out of 10 or 5 de sending on the weighting given. The highest tote I score gives tho favoured option. The results of "his analysis should be regarded only as a numei*ically quantified guide
to decision making and not as a definitive statement. The factors chosen and ;he scores given, although based upon the objectiv experience of the Consultants, arc never!neless arbitary and ope-, io amendment., , B6riCU>S of Alternative.
t j«ll 7
Max  Pts  Ex  Lating
Poasi^lo
Plan         1
Irrigation suitability                                    5
1
' of l®»d
, variation fro"  existing
2 ‘ hectorage (2,000 ha.)
Coramunications
3.
it.
(roads etc)
Location in relation to
5
10
Alternatives
2  3  4  5
4  4  3  2
0       12                  5
6548
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
traditional grazing
areas (klledeghi
Plains)
Existing/possible
water points
Other Govt, farms
Trading facilities
(e)  Health services
(f)
(«)
Educational facilities
Proposed regional to
town
5« Likely effect on project
cash flow and economics
\5 pta « no effect)
6* Administrative simpllcityi
()
a
()
organisation change
10
5
10
5
5
5
5
10
10
b             introduction
of    new
settlement      model      to
Mars                                            10
for early
implementation
Totals                                 100
5 6 7 10
3333
4338
2004
3223
3223
0004
4556
7564
6789
5 _1_ _J_ 4
52 46 48 73
C O a          .
8(b)      8(C^°r®      8076          considered      for      each      aLtemntivo      in      Tables      8(n) ac ore  above1^^’ and shoulri be wei«h^ed attainst the ra-Jzlng
sTables 8(a), ®( )
b   and ^( ) below illustrate where possible
c
how the various cost components arc broken down between settlement and state farms and tho dditional investment, if any, necessary when each of the alternative proposals are put forward.TABLE 8(a)
f
On Ehitti Development Costa (Rounded oL -l
Mnlka Sadi ©6.040/ha
Amibara   @4.301/ha.
Alternative Settlement
Existing
• OOO Birr
State Farm                     Total
Settlement
2,550
-
-
2,550
4,301
5,909
State Farm                Total
Plan
1
2
3
4
3
-
3,787
6,336
6,336
6,336
3,787
18,185
14,398
11,849
1 1 ,849
11,849
14,398
18,185
18,185
18,185
18,185
18,185
18,185
15,229
17,779
17,779
15,229
13,478
11,870
17,779
Grand
Total
35,964
17,779        35,964
17,779        35,964
17,779        35,964
17,779        35,964
17,779        35,964
Sourco of funds Contracts 2E (Melka
Sadi) and 2F (Amibura)No tea for Table fifbJ
Building Costs
I, Set.tlomnnj Sub Centre Complex A
New      Self      contained      centre      in      new      location      not adjacent to existing tnfrasturucture  comprising!
Estimated Cost
'OOO Bin
(
u) Workshop equipped for routluu servicing
b)      J roomed office Hock
30J
245
c)
Equipment store (10m x 5m) with generator house
d)
Generator (60 kva)
e)
Borehole +■ pump and water distribution. network
f)
Ono Type B house (2)
g)
One Typs D House (4)
h)
Open fronted machinery shed (25m x 10tn)
I)
800m  hard standing
2
14
60
100
127
195
20
1 1
J)
Access road to nearest service road (500m)
k) Bar-bod wire security fence. (400m)
13.5
for Bervlcos
1140
285
Total '000 Birr ....................................................................
II, Settlement Sub Centre Complex H
New centra established close to existing infrastructure for sharing water (electricity i
access road facilities. 
rby 50% and kJ roducod by 25%
♦
1O% for Services
Total •OOO Birr
XII. Set
tlement Centro Complex C
This would be a take-over of one of the contractors camps
which comprise accommodation, offices, workshops and
services. Office equipment and workshop equipment woul
d
be transferred from existing centre or additionally
purchasod as necessary.
Total estimated cost ’OOO Birr
1222
IV
Sottloment Centre Complex D
Thia       would       be       a       take-over       of       a       state       farm       H.Q.       complex       an constructed on Contract Uc
Total estimated cost ’OOO Birr
V           UO x double roomed barracks block ’OOO Birr
VI         Cotton store (as per state Farm H.Q.) U2m x 2*4 x 3.5m
250
i«o« 3,528m^ storage volume.
’OOO BirrTADLf
BnildlM investment required for Sottinmen* AltorgpUy^
Possible Source
of Funds
Comments
’OOO Birr
Existing          Plan (E.P.)
at Sholoko
Standard
Total
Coa t
'000 Birr
4^2
Estimated. Maximum
Incremental
lnvest
Description Additional cotton
ment Required
Store 1
AVSA
Settler
Barraks
housing
(80 rooms 500
AVSA
AVSA
x 3m)
Alternative          1 (A. 1 )
Total
Additional C-ntton Store    1    in    Klelka
Sadi
Barraks for Melku Sadi
221.
442
a
Estimated as needed to
storo cotton from
tional 593 h -
Settlement•
Pending decisions
selfhelp or contract
construction.
Not included in project
funds but necessary for
additional permanent
labour.
Need for storo cotton
addl-
Amlbara
for
NIL
AVSA
AX
of
m additional 627 ha,
Me lk a Sadi settlement
(80 rooms CF3m x 3m)                   500
Settler housing in Melka
Sadi situated at alto TB1
for satellite village/.
Sub centre complex B situated separately on Project H.Q. approach and on Bite next to central work shop. Settlement sub- contre staff housing
as for 4b,
(to be
AVSA As
AVSA As
for EP
feu EP
identified)
.r
Ref. Note IX items a)
n ) i *)» j)pk) could
possibly bo funded byl e
i h ) * 
.  •  / Deduct items
___________________ r
oovere
 ,
1
939
1881
Contracts 4A
and AVSA
4n
Total
Variation to  Contract\4A,  by  Aa Workshop equipment would & 4B '
bo supplied from equipn^ent
& vehicles tondor, Stal'K
housing is included with
Project H.Q, staff in
Contract 4B.
2Z*Standard PoJ?iJblg^» J4£££
u
*~Tptal — o Funds
Cost "
*000 Birr
442                      avsa
Comments
description
Alternative 2 Additional Cotton
E s tima t Q_d_.y. xly.xuti1
T ncroment                    Tnvest- ’"iTic-nt Begun 3_d
1OOO Biri
fl, 2)
Store 1 in Melka
Sadi
Additional 1  size
2 additional cotton store needed for store cotton from 1,049 ha.
250
Cotton     Store     2     in
Melka Sadi
250
AVSA
Sub*-ccntre     Complox 
C
in Melka Sadi
1000
TBI
NEC camp to be purchased
from Contract
as scon as available
*
savings
Barracks   (   1   20   rooms
@3m x 3m) in Melka
Sadi
750
AVSA/TBI
As for EP and from NEC
Contractors camp
250
Settlor housing In
TBI
Melka      Sadi      near      site
of NEC camp
2442
AVSA
Au for EPSjtnnd_a rjj
'Total
Cq st
•OOO Birr
1*1*2
Con hr unts
Description
jWditional Cotton
Storo 1 Molka Sadi
Ea tint.--                       Mp.xltnum Increniontal J? nv^.*
m ont" Re q VjLV ( \
•OOO Birr
and
Alternative 4 Additional
/ Uemr.tive_______3
TaTjT
f          size
(A.1.F"
Cutton       Storo       2       in
Melka Sadi                                               250 Additional Cotton
Store 3 and -J- size
4 in Ambaah                                            692 burracks          (120          rooms)
in Melka Sadi                                           750 Barracks          (120          rooms)
in Amibara 750
Ppssi b1e So i irce
of Funds
AVSA
MADC
MADC
MADC/TRT
MADC
!;compensate AVSA in
As for EP
MADC would be Roquired to
full to replace tlio facilities at
) Sholoko which they i would transfer to { MADC.
Sub      centre      Complox      A
at
Amibara
1425                      MADC
250
692
750
500
11*25
Sub      centro      Complex      C
at Melka Sadi 1000
TBI
ContrQct
Savings
As for A2
AVSA H.Q. offices and houses at project centre. (3 offiooB, 3 type B
duplex houses) a
626 
4 A  4b
t
Not
separate
from
Project
Settlor housing at
Melka Sadi and Amibara TBI
H.Q*
AVSA
As for EPStandard pos$iblo Source
TTn otfrsial1 
Cost
>00 Birr
roaui l' .jwiu.* ~
■“
of Funds
Description
' ’ ’0
Alternative 5 Additional Cotton
Comments
Estimated Maximum
Incramental invest
ment Required
i000 Birr
(a.J)
Store     1     in     Melka
Sadi 442
Settler housing ia
Melka Sadi situated at site for satellite
village.
Sub centre complex D (Amlbaru) (include©
2 cotton store)
Settlement H.Q*  at
Complex C
TBI
>935
AVSA Ah for Al
AVSA As for EP
Uc
TBI
from Contract
Savings
Part of eiohango
with MADC to Sholoko
1O00
Sub     centre     Complex     B
(Melka Sadi)                                        854
Barracks      at      Melka      Sadi
(80m x 3m x 3m)                                  500
Barracks at Complex D
(Amibara)                                           1000
(160 rooms 3mx 3m)
4981
Nt_B< i - The number of barracks recornmendod are
settlement schemes neod a labour force
Ab for EP
854
Deduc t
245)
127)
195)2a7
AVSA
MADC
As for EP
Part        of        compensation
Payment for Sholoko 1000 1000
1287
based upon the AVSA*
of 150 per 700 ha.
Statement that’/
Incremental investment is
location and does not labour barracks which
increased
funds and
hoctaruge
funds
would
5
assumod to mean investment necessary because include items such as an additional cotton store would be needed in any event for AVSA to farm the These items have never been included in project
need to be provided from AVSA budget.
of
and
Alternative 6
---------
The costs of implementing Alternative 6 are not provided in detail becauso the layout/distribution of facilities is not given in the proposal as presented. Further the actual hectarage needs to be finalised to enable estimates to be made of cotton store and housing/barracks costs.
However, It can be assumed that the facilities required would bo similar
*’? *
o
e d ®*allad for Alternatives 3 and k, although a saving of say ] o%
° COnO,nlC8 °f BCal° due to
concentrationfable 9 Notes<
a) Additional storage will be needed by AVSA to store the cotton production from the extra 593 ha. Provision should have been made for this store in the original estimates, but for no knoun reason it was omitted.
b) Infrastructural investment for Settlement Sub Center for Nelka Sadi situated adjacent to Project Beadquarters not covered by Project funds comprising:-
Itcjn
Workshop
Cost 'OOP Birr
303
2
800 m hard standing
Aceass to read
Security fence
Equipment store
11 6.5
38.5
14
BaTracks (80 rooms)
for services
500
87
c) Infrastructural investment for SettJentcnt Sui> Center for M«Jfca
Sadi         situated         adjacent         to         Project         Headquarters         which         could         possibly be funded from Project Contracts 4A or IB. Comprising;-
Item
J room office block *
toilts
Cost *000 Birr
245
2 Typo B bouse
I Tup? d bouse
lox for services
21?
295
57d) The area in Melks Sadi for Alternative 2 is larg^i than tor Alternative 1 and the requirement for cotton storage and labour accomodation Mould be approximately half as much again as for Alternative 1 i.e.:-
Item
Barracks (120 rooms)
Additional 1/2 size
Cotton Store
Cost 'COO Birr
750
759
l'OUO
q) The infrastructure fc ‘ the Settlement Svb Canter at Helka Sadj
would he provided by the !JEC Contractor Caop. It is conservative y estimated that the Project can acquire this camp at a cost of
■1 million Birr for less) and that these funds can be provided
from Prof oct contract savings.
f) Contracts 4.4 and 43 already include provision of office
accommodation for the Settlement Headquarters (4A) and provision
of an unspecified number of houses for Settlement Staff (4d}~
The basis of uhe estimated cost figure given .< three offices ind
three type B duplex houses.
3) Alternatives 3 and 4 require total relocation of chu Settlcver’t
Scheme into nor areas requiring new Sott-er.cnt Su~> Cent<-~ u’wrn tr.o only existing infrastructure is the USC Contractors C4c\?.              ■ ? following new buildings would have to be provided and should _-i
paid for by MADC in exchange for the conptMansive facilities chat thcu would inherit at fhcJ.-A-j. rhe nw im'ra.ntrucr.ro reguizad would comprise:-Location
Malka Sadi Amibara Malka Sadi Amibara
3 Item
1/2 size cotton store 1 1/2 cotton store Barracks (120 rooms) Barracks (120 roons)
H                              Workshop
•f
II
Offices and toilets
Store and Generator house
H                              Generator (60 k v a)
Cost *OCC dir.
250
692
750
750
303
245
14
6G
n
M
M
l»
M
Borehole/pump/water services 1 Type B house
1 Type D house
Machinery shed Hard standing (800 r.)
jot
2
W                            Access road (500 rtj W                            Security fence
Plus 25*  for services and contingencies
127
195
20
11
13.5
51.5
3 t 542
896
The  additional  infrastructure  required  for  Alternative  5  whicv should be covered by project fundiny is as follovs?-
Locaton
n-jm
Cost 9 MO nirr
Ami bars AJoibara Nelka Sadi
Settle .:ent Sub Center
1,9JS
fSta-c Farm H.Q. 4C)
Sc*clement Headquarters
1,CJO
(PEE Contractor CrxpJ
r jrt of Settlement Sub Center
(necr Project
fl.O.)
(sec Koto (c)
624
• •/34
i; The additional infrastructure for Alternative 5 which could not _
provided from project fuhds should be paid for by State Fa™? is part compensation for the take over of the Shalako compl jx This infrastructure would comprise:-
Function
Melka Sadi
(near Project
H.O.J
Item
Part of Settlement
Sub Center (see Hate b)
Cost f_PflO 3irr
960
plus barracks (BO rooms)
500
l,4f9
Ami bar a
Barracks for Settlement
Sub Center (attached to
State Farm H.0. complex
4C).
160 rooms
Sub Center Clinic
1,000
50
Tt would appear that there would be little saving on existing contracts
by relocating the Settlement Scheme in the area designated for Alternative 6. State Farms would still require the sane number of
now headquarters. This is because of the long distances involved
from shalako and Amibara to the Eastern zx/ke side of the Project
in #imi2>ara and the continuing need for a State fatvi HeadquArtur complex in NeiJta Sadi.
The entire coat of establishing a new Settlement Headquarter excluding one cotton atore (see Note a) would therefore have to be rot by compensation funds from the State Farms. A broad estimate of the requirement with costs is as fallows
---/55 -
Item
Barracks (240 room)
Cotton Stores
Central Workshop
Settlement H.Q. Offices
3 Type B houses
2 Type D houses
Clinic
New Access Roads (3 km.)
Bore Hole, pump and tank
Hachinory Shed
2
Hard standing area 1600 m
Security fence
General store fi generator bouse Plus 25% for services and contingencies
Cost '000 Dirr 1,500
884 300 300 380
390
50
81
100
20
22
75
20
4,122 1,031r A s h E 9
SETTiEHENT fttM&CATION COST _ OOHEANTSONS
f. putting Settler Housing costs which are not Known)
Al tarnative
Estimated Additional    Cost    to    be
fund ad by Government
Estimated
Additional Costs which
Estimated
Additional Costs which
may posslbily be funded should have been
from project contracts
included  in original
project estimates
Estimated Costs to be met by compensation from Ministry of State Farms
’000 Birr          Note
r 000 fiirr
Note
'000 Birr
443
442
442
442
442
442
Note
•000 Birr
Existing Situation
Altornatlvc 1
(GJ + (f)
1,000
1,626
3,559
(9)
(1)
(J)
4,473
2,510
5,153
The compensation figure shorn in
this column for buXldirwa rt
compensation for take over of such items as fuel pumps, oonor^nr. L dn services only. rt docs not Shalako and would need to be provided at new Settlement Centers. * ^hich may be fixed equipment at
•
• • ■»/7■n^ers to Other Questions:
1. Reference page 45. Question of reducing block of 442 ha
alkeated to sute r.„ * m u ,in , lm
area {Alternative 6)
It is technically possible to do this but would have the following
disadvantages
a) It would not be possible to measure the water usage cn the tw
separate parts of the 442 ha. black without installing additional
measuring devices and redesigning some structures.
b) It would cause water nanagement difficulties to have a snail
120 ha. block supplied by the samo canal as the reminder of the
block but formed by a different organization.
cj Although it nay be possible to realign the secondary canal supply
ing this area to rc-»hape the block to the required size this wc :ld
require a new survey and re-designof canal, drains and structures.
All the above would have financial implications i»e. increase the
which can only be assessed by the Consulting Engineers, however,
these increased costs are likely to be significant.
• Development changes in relation to location of land and erpenuituro
On  ^ter distribution infrastructure and clearing and levelling costs.
Wo refer to Annex 13 of the world Bank Appraisal of the UrncsH Amihora Irrigation Project.
rho Z.VO4 Cash Plow, table shows that the project .’as tcoed upon ar equal “land s Hater Charge” of not less than 8irr 300 per ha. (in 1077 constant terms) for all land except the Settlement Earn and TAR research. This charge was to be made regardless of whether it was old developed ’and e.g. WSCO and AVW Settlement, or tf.o newly developed area.fl
The   Settlement   land   whether   old   or   new   was   to   be   charged   at   net   less than Birr 200 per ha. (in 1977 constant terms).
The level of charges for development and water shall be set by A'.TA
"taking into account the relationship of the investment recovery
rate to settlers and State Farm production incentives and cepacia f -
pay" (see page 26 para. 8.01(g) of Horld Bank Appraisal).
Further discussion of the recovery of costs is given in paras 6.00
and 6.10 page 23 of the above document.
The level of charges and the possibility of relating then to water
usage and land development costs will be the subject of a study
conductod by the new Agricultural Team Leader in early 1930.
If it is decided to have differential charges for different arc.is c-
land depending on the development costs of the area then so.*’® agrearen would have to be reached with the State Farms to contribute to th?
settlers all or part of the higher charges that would be aide for
newly cleared and developed areas.
Alternatively  Government  would  need  to  subsidise  the  settlers  ror  th'* development charges over and above their estimated ibilitp to pay.
It should also be remembered that on top of these so called ter.d
and water charges" on Operation and Maintenance charge of <3u 1 .a. t fi irr 95.00 per ha. is proposed. This will also bo reviewed £n
early 19M.INUNDATIONS AND ACTION. -REQUIRED
1 Recommendations
Analysis of the data collected and th? alternatives presented in this report leads the Consultants to strongly recommend the adoption of Alternative 5 as outlined in the previous section and illustrated on
Map 8.
If Government considers that it is essential to grant land to the Afar people on the Mellca Sadi side of the project and it considers that Alternative 5 would
be too difficult to implement then Alternative 1
would be the seoond choice.
However, even if in the final analysis it is not considered essential that Melka Sadi land is included, in the opinion of the Consultants t.ie allocation of land for settlement as Indicated in Alternative 5 -*-s likely to give a much greator chance to the Settlement
6,2
Authority of successfully implementing a true settlement scheme with the Afar people than the existing plan.
Although erganisation and management will be difficu_- initially, the plan as illustrated could also have
far reaching and long term benefits to the Middle Awash Development Corporation and the project as a whole.
Required
6      2      1 r»
1
• •   Policy decision is required from Govemniorx^ as soon as possible:
(a) whether it accepts in principle the Consultant’a recommendationj;50
(b)     whether it prefers to adopt another, or
(c)     whether the existing plan should remain
unchanged.
6.2*2 If change is recommended the funding agencies
should be consulted immediately.
6.2*3 If the decision is to adopt cither (a) or (b)
above, then discussions should take place immediately between AIP management, the Ministry of State Farms
and the Settlement Authority to agTee on any
variations that may be necessary either in location composition, or distribution of those buildings
Included in Contracts hA, 2iB and 4C.
o jl
•   • At the same time a team should be appointed by
the Ministry of State Farms ar.d the Settlement
Authority to work with AIP, the TSST and the
Consulting Engineers to formulate anti agree implementation programme far the d eve In pm an t
°f the new land and the consequent transfer of
farms and exchange of sssets between the MA DC and the Settlement Authority. It is assumed that all
n ©w farm machinery purchased with project funds would remain with that organisation to whom it was first
Allocated.
Other Cons idem tions
The Consultants rocommend th a be given to the po^®ibilitd.es fc
_ 
active consideration
the Construction of livestock watering  points along the eastern dyke to  reduce the need for stock to  be taken through the irrigated farm land to the river,
'i51
the greftter utilisation project drainage water
and the collection and spreading of the escarpment runoff water at the northern and of the project within the limitations of land levels.
the development of the 1,500 ha. proposed for irrigated pasture should include the provision
of a fodder reserve for feeding to Afar livestock during the dry season and not for the area to be developed solely as Irrigated grazing. A fodder production cooperative is likely to extend the
benefits to more people and fodder would be available to all Inhabitants of the valley and not just to
those settled in the northern part of the area.f-MU+mt* KHW Dirt
trir*
flXVfl KM JtC^ ?*<W -AT PA TC]N
THE PROVISIONAL MlUTARY GOVERNMENT OR SOCIALIST ETHIOPIA AWASH VALLEY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AMIBARA IRRIGATION PROJECT
aa/i Ann______
Hr. J. R. Dorrell
Senior Agriculturalist
Raicrw-CTZ TSST
taibsxi Irrigation Project
Addis Ababi
Dear Hr* Darrelli
a jurnn
ILMIBARA IKRISATrCn P.^OTCT -'-r Feasibility fftndg on I» Oso
Hectare Oiiits Jettleaant icbcw at
a)    atdbara Araa
b)    Melia Satti Ar w
You mg recall ay earlier discussion rith jw acoetlma
l«*t February at poor Swindon Of fin an tba proposal to break tka 2,000 hectare settleneot rr*r— in tec are thocw.d hectare Knits. To this effort, VAOA’s General Mkneger has Instructed AC in bin lettox of Sene 11, 1971, (June IS, 1979) Ref. FoJiTI /l-U/10/71
to outline strategies to achieve this goal. Ths erpaneota of this proposal thought such an allocrtlen of the settlc-wrt schece to be
•guitahle and acceptable to both Aeibara and MaUa Sell Mart.
While AtP eouid aiaoerelv mdoxoo the reanxfatlcn, bat would soeh a careful analysis ano eval oat Lao on such aspects la
r-oaiologicti, eanagment and inft astrtrtnrel xegulremntJ and torts of the Mh^ff, i „ Attaching • llK of factoro as a guide for
S<xur study, i feel thia nee proj a»“l *ooJl1 rs™iro the erpert inputs of the Settl^nt Anther It i including those af the Afar representatives. Following the j alloy guidelines free the Authority 1* a east.
Subeeguantlu, goer would- • suhnitted pcvno*u shall be dlscuoced, aaendad -or modified friar to whaixsioo to the funding Agencies for their conrldaratlonr and action. I would vary such opproolata your jjswdlate start c > this amlgnooBt. Mtxu» note
.../I
ZEWE ABATE (Drl
tur atws »■«<«
A«is.<. tniU'lw i‘r,iK’I
2
tho plan In to establish these sattleacnt trnlta vithla the
total vackacfo of allocated resonrces/cv^nltnents tot the
2 000 hectare - sotilesvnt schen as per fcjlZdlngr, vorksbcfs, Chinan, etc. stated Ln the Project's financing /greeeeats,
nxarAln »wr?tr^ _
2EV/DIE ABATE (Dr)
Executive DlncW
Amibiu Irrlptlm Pn|«t
■ent
Fnpr<^!3 Council
t•I
I
•f •
' «•
1
4
‘
<
H      *•»
’.X
•>
Ml
rf • ' r
28th June 1979 ■_
-.
t
I
WTWARA IRP-IGATIOW PROJgCT__n
> tctly type of services to be provided at THE SETTLERS' VILLAGE CENTERS
OR AT.THE RECIOHAI TOWN
»1
♦
a) Municipal Services:
-    Burial Places
t
»
>
t
»
*r
»
r
‘f
uy1 ’
.*-/■ ’•
r?'*.
•Y’Vm
»\ V'
F-L, • I
I’-
'7*.
-    Water
-    Light (Electric)
-    Road
-    Village Administration
-    Post Office
b) Rural Industry
-    Slaughter House
-    Cotton Gin
C)    Farm Services:                                                     »
Central Garage
Petrol Station
<
•fc
■
•m
'-
T
•  Tractor Stations
•   Sorting Sheds
•   Supply Stores
-   Warehouse
a*
. I,
• 1/
r • •. •!
”L 1
< i
-   Milk Collection Centre     (Milk Tanker Service)    L
./ *
U • - • -i - ?-
I. i
»
i -i
.X
•’* *.
r
d)    education a Culture:
Elementary School
Secondary School
Amphitheatre
Mother and Child Care Station
■»
.*-■ »
f*; _K
. ;.x'
•r« •
•i|
M. *r
■»
*.1
tri'
• •*
M •• ’. -
*• .•
\
•{ .. U, v-
Nursery and Kindergarten Canteen for Children
*  Youth Club and Sports Grounds
•   Library
Y’
•-
•
•t
-   Reading Clubs and Sports Grounds
-   Mosque, Church
. -T
•• s
*•
<■
’ -v
Hoc 1th Services?
~ t
1
Central Clinic (distance and moans
of transportation?
■•
»
Consumer Services:
Trade (snail shops)
Artisan Workshops# Ip*-—— •
(3lacksalth, Plumber, Tinsmith, Carpenter,
“ .flactrician# Tailor
*'— 
SShhoeoemmake  akerr,, H Hai airrddrreescser ot
. 1 •
1
-   Personal Services
-   Cooperative Store
-    Banks
d/a^       '       ■       7l)t£       (V2ATS
F* /
invCutlY. Lirctot
• » - -»a »nt"
IV
1-
st"
«Appendix n
Proposal for Reallocation of the Planned 2,000 Ha. Settlement Area as a
single plot ■ Proposal Six
The Ministry of State Farms Development, having reviewed the five proposals presented for reallocation
of the 2000 Hectares of the settlement area, would present a sixth alternative, as agreed by the parti
cipants of the meeting held on October 5, 1979> at the AIP Executive Director’s Office. Unlike the alternatives
suggested by the AIP consultants, our proposal deviates in that, the total 2000 Hectares would be in one single unit in the Amibara area.
v °uld come
’982, vith
the next
e  stage of development is such that 450 Hectares X t ° °Peration in 1981 and 1525 Hectares in
a  total hecterage of 1975 Ha. Even though posed area does not come into operation within
K a ’on» the reallocation of the areas could
j sted to the stage of development.
ex               vlews of the high cost of the development and
leuid     re^U:rn»     the     creation     of     two     undivided     plots     of °uid be the better alternative.
following pages we try to summerize the and disadvantages of the sixth proposal.Advantages
h It keeps the settlement area in nne unit! that simplifies administration and minimizes invest ment .
2* Adjacent to the proposed irrigated pasture,
3* An open area for grazing and future expansion of the irrigated pasture,
An open front te tb^ rest of the pla±nt
5* A continous stretch for the stat® farms
(
. better
management control.
A better class of land as compared to the
ether alternatives,
7. The existing settlement farm could accommodate foore families as per the existing per capita
of 2.5 Ha. (In any case 2.5 Ha. per family for irrigated farm is too high and would be dlfflou to manage)
The possibility of organizing and establishment °f proper settlement farm.
It does not provide different plots for the Amibara and Mellca Sadi a forts « .
2.       Delay in the* additional Hoctarage of 600 3.       The lack of a do tailed transfer programme
this could be worked out between the two the acceptance of the proposal.
f  but partiesMAP 1
AMIBARA IRRIGATION
development
5CAIE
AL6EU
AMIBARA VILLAGE N AND SETTLEMENT FARM
HEAD -------q---u---a--r---t--e--r---s
MELKA WARER— RESEARCH STATION
PROJECT
ROAD
MAESCO
DF7ELOPEO
AREA
EXISTING SETTLER
COLLECTIVE FARM
APPROX 1360 ha-
PROPOSED ADDITIONAL
SETTLEMENT AREA
APPROX 640 ha-
EXISTING STATE FARM OFFCES
HOUSING WORKSHOPS
PROPOSED STATE FARM OFFICES
HOUSING WORKSHOPS
EXISTING SATELLITE VILLAGES
PROPOSED
PROPOSED REGIONAL TCWNSHIP
CONTRACTORS CAMPMAP 2
AMIBARA IRRIGATION—PROJECT—H HEALTH FACILITIES
SCALE
AMBASH
ALGE TA
MW RS
PROJECT /
LINK ROAD
MA ESCO
, DEVELOPED
AREA
f. »• V]- EXISTING
DEVELOPMENT
- HEALTH CLINIC
- existing farm clinic
— contractors clinic
—    PROPOSED PROJECT HO CLINIC
—  PROPOSED FARM HO WITH CLINIC
BUILT BY MAOCMAP 3
AMIBARA
IRRIGATION
FnUCATIONAL
PROJECT
facilities
SKM
/ A MBAS H
I*
•
*/
**
\ . • 
j AVSA
\**
_ **~li
C mvJrs I
91
PRQJECI
HQ—
ROAD
REGIONAL TOWNSHIP
FOR
MAESCO
AREA
MELKA SADI
WALKING DISTANCE FROM EXISTING
ELEMENTARY
6KM
5 KM
EXISTING DEVE LOPMENTMAP 4
amibara irrigation projectji
SETTLEMENT RELOCATIONjz_ALTERJMAT1VE_.I
HS1ING DEVELOPMENT
L._d
SUBLALE
,iTC      FOR      MAIN      SETTLEMENT      Q 1LLAGE
SITE FOR OFFICES/WORKSHOP/
AMSASH
5TAFF HOUSING
SCALE
/“=T
5KM
AVSA HQ AND
AMIBARA VILLAGE
MWRS
EXISTING SETTLEMENT AREA
APPROX 1350 ba
JAR MING 15 ONGOING
[m El KA SADI SETTLEMENT
' SUB CENTRE
f                LINK ROAD
® >__________________
I ADDITIONAL NEW SETTLEMENT ~AREA
~ APPROX 627 ha
|REAQr FOR FARMING IN 1980/JI
MAESCO \
DEVELOPED \\
AREA .
ALTERNATIVE I
TOTAL AREA = 1987 ha
ALTERATIONS FROM ST DRAFT
■300*1’ jap 5
AMIBARA IRRIGATION PROJECT II
SETTLEMENT RELOCATION- ALTERNATIVE 2
KEY
existing development ZlIL TOR MAIN SETTLEMENT
village
S'UBLALE \
AM 8 ASH
AUG ETA
scale
5KM
EXISTING SETTLEMENT AREA
WEST OF ROAD
APPROX 1010 ha
| FARMING IS ONGOING
MWRS
PROJECT /
H- G-
► LINK ROAD
Z Z<
.■■ MAESCO
'
■DtlEFVVEFLLnOPPFED Z
AREA          V
; A/®
NEW ADDITIONAL SETTLEMENT AREA APPROX 1043 ha
READY FOR FARMING IN 1W0/ SI
ALTER NATIVE T
TOTAL APE A - ?0Wh5MAP &
AMtBARA IRRIGATION _ PROJECT , II settlement relocation ALTERNATIVE 3
SUSCALE
F
j'lNG DEVELOPMENT
5 FOR MAIN SE TLLMENI
AMBASH
t
lAGE
SCALE
5KM
ALGETA
MWR5
EASTERN BLOCK OF ONGOING
SETTLEMENT
APPROX 350 ha
+
EXISTING PLAN EXTENSION AREA
APPROX* £40 hQ
FOR FARMING 1981
TOTAL 990 hv
PROJECT
H-Q —
R^AD
MAESCO
□EVE LDPEh
i AREA
(
ADDITIONAL NEW SETTLEMENT AREA
APPROX 10W ha
REACT FOR FARMING IN WQfJl
ALTERNATIVE 3
TOTAL AREA = 1039
R,
LMAP “
&MIBARA IRRIGATION PROJECT II
SETTLEMENT, RELOCATION ALTERNATIVE^
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT
SITES FOR MAIN SETTLEMENT ($)
VILLAGE
AMBASH
ALGETA
MWfJS
PROJECT
PLANNED SETTLEMENT EXTENSION ARI
APPROX-+ 6A0he
NEW SETTLEMENT AREA
ESTIMATED 360 he
TOTAL 1000 be
READY FOR FARMING 19S1
ROAD
MAESCO DEVELOPED';
AREA
, NEW SETTLEMENT AREA
APPROX TOW ha
READY FOR FARMING, IN 1080/81
MERHMWE A
1Q1AL AREA. ha-AMIBARA IRRIGATION PROJECT II SETTLEMENT RELOCATION ALTERNATIVE 5
■1
I
KEY
(yiSllNG DEVELOPMENT
SITES FOR MAIN SETTLEMENT VILLAGES
SUBL^LEj
SCALE
5 KM
ambash
ALGETA
li I
jj
1/
If
■7 <7 //
AVSA
MWRS
NEW SETTLEMENT AREA
APPROX*        13 74 ha
READY FOR FARMING INT980 ,
PROJECT
H O------------*4
LINK ROAD
NEW SETTLEMENT AREA
APPROX 6? 7 ha
READY FOR FARMING IN 1980/81
MAESCQ
DEVELOPED
AREA
ALTBRWATWE5
TOTAL AREA 1001 haMAP$
AM I BARA, IRRIGATION PROJECT • II IRRIGATION SUITABILITY
LINK RO AO
HALCONSUg W71 IRRlfiApilHY CLASSIFICATION
CLASS 1
CLASS        3
CLASSAUTHOR
TITLE
CALL NO.
EDjTtON ----------------- -------- VOLUME ------------------------ —--------- CA«. NO.--------- ----------------------------

< <

Summery

Document Overview

This feasibility study examines the reallocation of a planned 2,000 hectare irrigation settlement scheme in Ethiopia's Awash Valley between Melka Sadi and Amibara zones. The study was commissioned by the Awash Valley Development Agency (AVDA) and conducted by Halcrow-ULG Limited in 1979.

Key Objectives

Evaluate options for dividing the settlement scheme into two segments
Ensure equitable land distribution between Afar clans
Maintain existing budget and resource allocations
Consider social, economic, and technical factors

Main Alternatives Considered

Alternative	Description	Area (ha)	Key Features
Existing Plan	Single block in Amibara	2,000	Contiguous area but disadvantages for Melka Sadi Afars
Alternative 1	Split between Amibara and Melka Sadi	1,987	Simple solution but maintains some existing problems
Alternative 2	Reduced Amibara area + Melka Sadi addition	2,059	Provides land to Melka Sadi Afars but increases total area
Alternative 5	New contiguous area along eastern dyke	2,001	Provides grazing access and better settlement model
Alternative 6	Single northern block (Ministry proposal)	1,975	Simplifies administration but delays implementation

Primary Recommendation

The consultants strongly recommend Alternative 5, which:

Creates a contiguous settlement area along a 13km front
Provides direct access to traditional grazing areas
Allows development of integrated arable/pastoral model
Facilitates better administration and services
Maintains the planned 2,000 hectare total

Key Considerations

Social Factors

Afar attachment to traditional dwelling areas
Need for health and educational facilities
Importance of livestock in Afar culture

Economic Factors

Projected production costs and yields
Land and water charges for settlers
Infrastructure development costs

Technical Factors

Land suitability classifications
Irrigation system requirements
Farm machinery needs

Implementation Requirements

Immediate government policy decision
Consultation with funding agencies
Coordination between AVDA, Ministry of State Farms, and Settlement Authority
Formation of implementation team
Development of livestock watering points