Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No: ICR00006429 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT IDA 54560 and IBRD 90430 ON AN IDA CREDIT IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 32.40 MILLION (US$50.00 MILLION EQUIVALENT) AND AN ADDITIONAL FINANCING IBRD LOAN IN THE AMOUNT OF EUR 18.20 MILLION (US$20.43 MILLION EQUIVALENT) TO GEORGIA FOR THE IRRIGATION AND LAND MARKET DEVELOPMENT PROJECT March 25, 2024 Water Global Practice Europe and Central Asia Region This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective January 24, 2024) Currency Unit = Euros (EUR) EUR 0.92 = US$1 US$1.09 = EUR 1 Special Drawing Currency Unit = Rights (SDR) SDR 0.75 = US$1 US$1.33 = SDR 1 FISCAL YEAR January 1 - December 31 Regional Vice President: Antonella Bassani Country Director: Rolande Simone Pryce Regional Director: Sameh Naguib Wahba Tadros Practice Manager: Winston Yu Task Team Leader(s): Nadege Orlova, Rufiz Vakhid Chirag-Zade, Pierrick Fraval ICR Main Contributor: Sven Schlumpberger, Cecilia Belita ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AF Additional Financing CBA Cost-Benefit Analysis CPF Country Partnership Framework EFA Economic and Financial Analysis EIRR Economic Internal Rate of Return EMP Environmental Management Plan ENPV Economic Net Present Value EPP Emergency Preparedness Plan ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework FIG Farmer Initiative Group FIRR Financial Internal Rate of Return FM Financial Management FNPV Financial Net Present Value GA Georgia Amelioration GDP Gross Domestic Product GILMDP Georgia Irrigation and Land Market Development Project GoG Government of Georgia GRAIL Georgia Resilient Agriculture Irrigation and Land GRM Grievance Redress Mechanism I&D Irrigation and Drainage ICR Implementation Completion and Results Report ICT Information and Communication Technology IDCDP Irrigation and Drainage Community Development Project IFR Interim Financial Report IPRS Immovable Property Registration System IRI Intermediate Results Indicator ISR Implementation Status and Results Report IT Information Technology KS Kvemo Samgori Land Agency National Agency of Sustainable Land Management and Land Use Monitoring M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MEPA Ministry of Environmental Protection and Agriculture MOA Ministry of Agriculture MOF Ministry of Finance MTR Midterm Review NAPR National Agency of Public Registry NPV Net Present Value NSLRR Nationwide Systematic Land Registration Reform O&M Operations and Maintenance PAD Project Appraisal Document PDO Project Development Objective PFMA Probable Failure Mode Analysis PIT Personal Income Tax PIU Project Implementation Unit RAP Resettlement Action Plan RDA Rural Development Agency SLR Systematic Land Registration SLRD Systematic Land Registration Division STEP Systematic Tracking of Exchanges in Procurement TK Tbisi Kumisi TOC Theory of Change UASCG United Amelioration Systems Company of Georgia WUO Water User Organization ZR Zeda Ru TABLE OF CONTENTS DATA SHEET ........................................................................................................................... I I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES ....................................................... 1 A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL .........................................................................................................1 B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................3 II. OUTCOME ...................................................................................................................... 6 A. RELEVANCE OF PDOs ..............................................................................................................6 B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY) ........................................................................................8 C. EFFICIENCY ........................................................................................................................... 14 D. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING .................................................................... 16 E. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS ......................................................................................... 16 III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME ................................ 18 A. KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION ................................................................................... 18 B. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................. 19 IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME .. 20 A. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) ............................................................ 20 B. ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE ..................................................... 21 C. BANK PERFORMANCE ........................................................................................................... 23 D. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME ....................................................................................... 24 V. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................. 25 ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS ........................................................... 26 ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION ......................... 38 ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT ........................................................................... 41 ANNEX 4. EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... 43 ANNEX 5. BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS ... 50 ANNEX 6: SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS .................................................................................. 51 ANNEX 7. THEORY OF CHANGE DETAILS ............................................................................... 52 ANNEX 8. DESCRIPTION OF REVISIONS TO PDO INDICATORS ................................................ 53 ANNEX 9. CHANGES IN THE INTERMEDIATE RESULTS INDICATORS........................................ 54 ANNEX 10. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDO AND INTERMEDIATE RESULTS INDICATORS .................... 57 ANNEX 11. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE BORROWER ICR .................................................. 60 ANNEX 12. PROJECT PHOTOS ............................................................................................... 71 ANNEX 13. ENDNOTES ......................................................................................................... 76 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) – DATA SHEET BASIC INFORMATION Product Information Project ID Project Name P133828 Irrigation and Land Market Development Project Country Financing Instrument Georgia Investment Project Financing Original EA Category Revised EA Category Partial Assessment (B) Partial Assessment (B) Organizations Borrower Implementing Agency Ministry of Environmental Protection and Agriculture, Public Debt Management Department, Ministry of Ministry of Justice, National Agency of Public Registry Finance of Georgia (NAPR) Project Development Objective (PDO) Original PDO The Project Development Objective is to (i) improve delivery of irrigation and drainage services in selected areas and (ii) developimproved policies and procedures as a basis for a national program of land registration. Revised PDO The Project Development Objectives are to: (a) improve delivery of the irrigation and drainage services in selected areas; and (b) develop improved policies, procedures, and systems as a basis for a national land management program. Page i The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) FINANCING Original Amount (US$) Revised Amount (US$) Actual Disbursed (US$) World Bank Financing 50,000,000 50,000,000 45,024,094 IDA-54560 20,400,000 20,400,000 19,662,414 IBRD-90430 Total 70,400,000 70,400,000 64,686,508 Non-World Bank Financing 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 Total Project Cost 70,400,000 70,400,000 64,686,508 KEY DATES Approval Effectiveness MTR Review Original Closing Actual Closing 23-May-2014 13-Mar-2015 03-Aug-2017 31-Jul-2019 30-Sep-2023 RESTRUCTURING AND/OR ADDITIONAL FINANCING Date(s) Amount Disbursed (US$M) Key Revisions 07-Jun-2018 17.96 Change in Results Framework Change in Loan Closing Date(s) Change in Implementation Schedule Other Change(s) 20-Feb-2020 25.35 Additional Financing Change in Results Framework Change in Components and Cost Change in Loan Closing Date(s) 21-Sep-2022 50.51 Change in Results Framework Change in Loan Closing Date(s) Change in Institutional Arrangements Change in Implementation Schedule KEY RATINGS Outcome Bank Performance M&E Quality Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Modest Page ii The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) RATINGS OF PROJECT PERFORMANCE IN ISRs Actual No. Date ISR Archived DO Rating IP Rating Disbursements (US$M) 01 27-Oct-2014 Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 0 02 17-Apr-2015 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 0 03 29-Sep-2015 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 1.50 04 25-Mar-2016 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 2.46 05 14-Sep-2016 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 5.48 06 10-Apr-2017 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 9.93 Moderately 07 29-Nov-2017 Moderately Satisfactory 13.46 Unsatisfactory 08 25-Jun-2018 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 19.27 09 01-Jan-2019 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 21.49 10 28-Jun-2019 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 23.31 11 27-Dec-2019 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 24.22 12 29-Jun-2020 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 25.52 13 29-Dec-2020 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 31.21 14 29-Jun-2021 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 38.61 15 31-Jan-2022 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 43.78 16 29-Apr-2022 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 46.24 17 03-Nov-2022 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 52.76 18 08-May-2023 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 56.39 19 28-Sep-2023 Moderately Satisfactory Satisfactory 61.37 Page iii The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) SECTORS AND THEMES Sectors Major Sector/Sector (%) Agriculture, Fishing and Forestry 100 Irrigation and Drainage 84 Public Administration - Agriculture, Fishing & Forestry 16 Themes Major Theme/ Theme (Level 2)/ Theme (Level 3) (%) Urban and Rural Development 100 Rural Development 100 Rural Infrastructure and service delivery 95 Land Administration and Management 5 Environment and Natural Resource Management 2 Climate change 2 Adaptation 2 ADM STAFF Role At Approval At ICR Regional Vice President: Laura Tuck Antonella Bassani Country Director: Henry G. R. Kerali Rolande Simone Pryce Director: Laszlo Lovei Sameh Naguib Wahba Tadros Practice Manager: Dina Umali-Deininger Winston Yu Rufiz Vakhid Chirag-Zade, Task Team Leader(s): Peter Goodman Pierrick Fraval, Nadege Orlova ICR Contributing Author: Sven Schlumpberger Page iv The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL Context Country Context 1. Since 2004, Georgia has implemented noteworthy structural reforms and liberalization resulting in average annual growth of nearly 6 percent between 2004 and 2013, starting after the 2003 Revolution of Roses. The decade before 2014 was characterized by strong economic growth, but high rates of unemployment and inequality persisted. Annual gross domestic product (GDP) growth averaged 5.5 percent in the 10 years leading up to 2014, while unemployment remained high at about 15 percent.i The growth stemmed mainly from capital inflows before the 2008 global economic crises and the conflict with the Russian Federation, and from a fiscal stimulus package to support recovery after, including a large public investment package and increased social transfers. Furthermore, productivity gains were concentrated mainly in non-tradables. There was no strong revival of labor-intensive manufacturing or productive transformation of agriculture or agri-business. The majority of the workforce, over 50 percent, was employed in agriculture (mostly self-employed), which contributed only 8.2 percent of GDP and was characterized by family-based subsistence farming with a relatively small agri-business sector. Low productivity levels in agriculture contributed significantly to high rural poverty. Recognizing that the rural population benefited least from economic reforms, the newly elected Government of Georgia (GoG) at the time placed a high priority on agricultural development, including irrigation and drainage improvement. Sector Context 2. The share of agriculture to GDP (and total output in real terms) significantly declined, from 25 percent (approximately US$1.57 billion annually in 2015 US$) in 1999 to about 8 percent (approximately US$1.07 billion annually in 2015 US$) in 2012, as a result of both agriculture not being a public policy priority and a wider structural adjustment of the economy in which other sectors were growing faster than the agriculture sector. However, it rose to 8.2 percent (approximately US$1.14 billion annually in 2015 US$) in the first six months of 2013 due to the GoG’s renewed focus on agriculture. Georgia is strategically well located with access to the Black Sea ports and near Russian, European, and Middle Eastern markets. Historically, Georgia has a reputation of good-quality food and unique wines. However, at the time of the project appraisal, Georgia had lost its position in many markets (notably Russia), and there was untapped potential for the country to regain its position in domestic and export markets. 3. Over the previous 25 years, the irrigated area in Georgia declined from 386,000 ha in 1988 to 105,600 ha in 2004. The Georgian Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) reported that only 25,000 ha were irrigated in 2014. The Rural Investment Climate Assessment (World Bank P122191, 2012)ii, based on a survey of 3,000 rural households, found that 49 percent of households considered the lack of irrigation or drainage as a severe or major constraint to rural investment. 4. Between 2001 and 2009, the World Bank-funded Irrigation and Drainage Community Development Project (IDCDP) (US$43.7 million) invested in rehabilitation of both off-farm and on-farm infrastructure and building capacity for management of on-farm irrigation and drainage systems. At the same time, while the IDCDP supported improved infrastructure serving 20,000 ha, institutional arrangements for irrigation and drainage services did not develop successfully within a policy environment that envisaged a limited role for the GoG in irrigation service provision. 5. At project appraisal, the National Agency of Public Registry (NAPR) was responsible for land registration and was highly efficient by international standards. The land privatization process and evolving standards for registration, however, resulted in a situation whereby the majority of land ownership rights were not registered in NAPR. The MOA estimated that only between 15 and 20 percent of agricultural land plots were registered. The main cause for the low registration level was the adoption of a set of rules for property registration in 2006, which most land ownership rights did not meet. The main challenge was, therefore, to redefine the policies and procedures for land registration to allow most existing Page 1 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) land ownership rights to be registered (regularization). Also, the quality of some land title documents was poor and re- mapping may need to be considered although this is a far less acute problem. Rationale for World Bank Involvement 6. In this context, the GoG conceived and sought the World Bank’s support for the Georgia Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (GILMDP). The project was to address the foregoing issues in the agricultural sector, particularly as they pertain to irrigation and land registration reforms. Through investments in irrigation infrastructure and services, the project contributed to the Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) FY2014–FY2017.iii Specifically, the project contributed to the CPS’s Area of Focus 2: Enabling job creation by the private sector through improving competitiveness and its Objective 8: Provision of infrastructure and services to facilitate growth. The project contributed to these via investments in irrigation infrastructure and services that were expected to bring improvement to agriculture, which was expected to facilitate growth and increase farmers’ income. Coupled with successful systematic land registration (SLR), this will pave the way for small-holder farmers and farm owners to access markets and be more competitive. Similarly, the project addressed two priorities outlined in the Government’s Socioeconomic Development Strategy ‘Georgia 2020’, which was approved by the GoG on June 6, 2014, setting the goals to be achieved by the country by 2020: (a) increasing competitiveness of farmers and agricultural enterprises, which specifically referred to the importance of land market development, and (b) improving agricultural infrastructure, which focused on the importance of irrigation improvement. The project contributed to these by rehabilitating the irrigation systems in the project areas, as the improved irrigation and drainage systems were expected to contribute to increased agricultural productivity and allow for diversification into higher-value crops. Further, improved land registration policies and procedures were supposed to contribute to strengthening security of land tenure in the project areas, which would give households greater access to capital and stimulate investment in agriculture. Furthermore, the project was to help contribute to poverty reduction by raising the productivity of farm households and improving security of land tenure for farmers through land registration. 7. Regarding donor coordination, it was expected that the World Bank would take a lead in developing institutional arrangements for irrigation management and rehabilitating related infrastructure, while the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) would support the public agricultural extension services and agribusiness development and improvement of agricultural statistics, and the European Union would focus on supporting cooperative development, food safety improvement, and agricultural policy formulation capacity in the MOA. Similarly, the Rural Development Agency (RDA) has been providing farm- and firm-level support, where farmers/project beneficiaries have also benefitted from its support programs including its ‘Plant the Future Program’, which aims to use the uncultivated lands in the country effectively, increase the possibility of replacing imported products, create new/additional jobs in rural areas, and improve the socioeconomic conditions of the population. 8. Furthermore, the GILMDP additional financing (AF) loan, approved in 2020, also contributed to the Focus Area 1 ‘Enhanced Inclusive Growth and Competitiveness’ of the Georgia Country Partnership Framework (CPF) for FY2019– FY2022,iv mainly on Objective 1.1 ‘Support agricultural modernization and access to markets’ in Georgia. The project again contributed to this objective through investments in the rehabilitation of agriculture assets. The AF activities were also to contribute to the Strategy for Agricultural Development in Georgia 2015–2020 that was to develop agricultural land market and introduce modern approaches in land use. Theory of Change (Results Chain) 9. The project aimed to achieve two outcomes: (a) improved delivery of irrigation and drainage services in selected areas and (b) improved policies and procedures developed as a basis for a national program of land registration. According to the project design, the project was to improve delivery of irrigation and drainage (I&D) services through I&D rehabilitation and modernization of selected schemes, strengthening of I&D institutions at the national level, and support for the development of institutional arrangements for on-farm irrigation service delivery. Similarly, the project planned to improve policies and procedures as a basis for a national program of land registration through development of guidelines for land registration, implementation of pilot registration in selected areas, and design and implementation of a system Page 2 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) for monitoring land registration and evaluating its impact. Both outcomes support the long-term outcome of increased agricultural productivity, increased property values, and diversification into higher-value crops. Annex 7 provides further details and illustration of the project’s Theory of Change (TOC). Project Development Objectives (PDOs) 10. The original PDO, as stated in the original Financing Agreement, is to (a) improve the delivery of the irrigation and drainage services in selected areas; and (b) develop improved policies and procedures as a basis for a national program of land registration. Key Expected Outcomes and Outcome Indicators 11. The original PDO consisted of the following two outcomes: • Outcome 1: Improved delivery of irrigation and drainage services in selected areas, measured using two PDO-level indicators: o Absolute volume of irrigation water supplied to project rehabilitated schemes (million m3 to first project schemes) o Area provided with irrigation and drainage servicesv - improved (ha) (Corporate Results Indicator). • Outcome 2: Improved policies and procedures developed as a basis for a national program of land registration, measured using one PDO-level indicator: o Recommended policies and procedures for national program of land registration submitted to government. Components 12. At appraisal, the project had three components, as summarized in the following paragraphs. 13. Component 1: Irrigation and Drainage Improvement (Appraisal: US$45.65 million; Actual, including AF: US$48.60 million). This component financed the rehabilitation and modernization of existing I&D schemes under the project, which consist of primary, secondary (off-farm), and tertiary (on-farm) canals; other major structures such as headworks and dams; and other minor structures in the project areas, including design, construction, and construction supervision. It further financed activities on (a) preparation of the National I&D Strategy; (b) preparation of a National Rehabilitation and Modernization Plan; (c) institutional strengthening of the United Amelioration Systems Company of Georgia (UASCG) in management and operations and maintenance (O&M); (d) upgrading of UASCG machinery and equipment for maintenance; (e) preparation of O&M and financing plans for project-selected schemes; (f) preparation of annual UASCG operational plans for 2015/16; and (g) development of institutional arrangements for on-farm irrigation service delivery, including exploring institutional options for on-farm irrigation system ownership and management, such as water user organization (WUO) development. 14. Component 2: Land Market Development (Appraisal: US$2.25 million; Actual, including AF: US$12.37 million). This component financed the pilot phase of land registration to redefine and test the policies and procedures for registration of agricultural landvi that would allow most existing land ownership rights to be registered. 15. Component 3: Project Management (Appraisal: US$2.10 million; Actual, including AF: US$3.71 million). This component financed the project management, including coordination and technical supervision of the implementation, financial management (FM), procurement, monitoring, and evaluation, related to Component 1 and similar project management activities related to Component 2. B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION 16. A number of changes were introduced during the 9-year implementation period of the GILDMP. The project was restructured thrice.vii A summary of key changes and restructurings is presented in table 1. Page 3 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Table 1. Overview of Restructurings Restructuring Overview First This restructuring was necessary, as it became apparent during the midterm review (MTR) that the PDO Restructuring indicators will not be achieved by the original closing date of July 31, 2019. Aside from revising the PDO (June 7, indicators, which are explained further in paragraph 18 below, the restructuring extended the project closing 2018) date for 24 months from July 31, 2019, to July 31, 2021, to allow completion of all activities envisaged under the Component 1, as the project had suffered delays with the preparation and implementation of the main canal rehabilitation works (batch 1). The restructuring also formalized revised conditions upon which the World Bank would issue ‘no objection’ to construction contracts for rehabilitation of local (on-farm) level irrigation systems.viii Second The AF IBRD Loan in the amount of EUR 18.2 million (equivalent of US$20.43 million) was approved by the Board Restructuring on February 20, 2020, and declared effective on May 21, 2020. The rationale for the AF was to allow the project and to achieve its irrigation-related outcomes under the PDO by filling a funding gap and giving more time to restore AF (February the secondary and tertiary networks at Kvemo Samgori (KS) and Zeda Ru (ZR) irrigation schemes and also use the 20, 2020) opportunity to scale up and expand the already achieved and successful targets under the PDO indicators related to Component 2. The AF-associated project restructuring included the modification of the PDO (see paragraph 17) and scope and cost of components and revision of the Results Framework, as explained further in paragraphs 18-23 below. The parent IDA credit closing date was also extended for 18 months from July 31, 2021, to September 30, 2022, to align with the AF loan closing date and enable successful implementation of the AF- supported activities and achievement of the PDO. Third This restructuring involved the (a) extension of the IBRD loan and IDA credit closing dates for 12 months from Restructuring September 30, 2022, to September 30, 2023, and (b) revision of the Results Framework as described in paragraph (September 18 below. The main rationale for this restructuring was to allow additional time for the completion of works 21, 2022) related to the irrigation investments under Component 1. The scope of rehabilitation works was adjusted due to further financing gaps, as described in paragraph 19. The restructuring also resulted in scaling up the land registration activities under Component 2, modifying some existing indicators and targets and introducing new indicators. Revised PDOs and Outcome Targets 17. The PDO was revised through the February 2020 project restructuring and AF, to read as “to: (a) improve the delivery of the irrigation and drainage services in selected areas; and (b) develop improved policies, procedures, and systems as a basis for a national land management program.” While the original (parent project’s) PDO remained relevant, this revision enabled a broader PDO scope to capture the expanded range of the project activities (going beyond land registration) to be supported by the AF funds under Component 2. By referring to “land management” instead of “land registration,” the revised PDO formulation enabled capturing the strengthening of the new land management agency created under the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Agriculture (MEPA). In addition to the development of improved policies and procedures to form a basis for a national land management program, the revised PDO also included the development of improved systems to encompass an upgrade of the NAPR information technology (IT) system. Revised PDO Indicators 18. The PDO indicators were significantly revised in all three restructurings. These changes consisted of modification in definition of indicators, deletion and addition of new indicators, and revision in targets. Changes are summarized in table 2 and described in more detail in annex 8. Page 4 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Table 2. Evolution of PDO indicators Original Project First Restructuring (June AF (February 2020) Third Restructuring (February 2022) Appraisal Document 2018) (PAD) Indicators Absolute volume of No change No change to main indicator Dropped and replaced with two new irrigation water supplied indicators, as the volume of water is to Project Rehabilitated Sub-indicator added which influenced by external factors beyond Schemes (million m3) reads as ‘Volume of irrigation the project’s control, such as drought or water effectively supplied to decreased demand in rainy seasons. the WUOs in bulk within the New: Irrigated area per unit of water Project Rehabilitated Schemes supplied for Kwemo Samgori (KS) (million m3)’ irrigation scheme (m2/m3) New: Irrigated area per unit of water supplied for Zeda Ru (ZR) irrigation scheme (m2/m3) Area provided with Formulation adjusted to Formulation adjusted to read Revised definition to include all areas irrigation and drainage read as ‘Area provided as ‘Area provided with regardless of existence of contract. services – improved (ha) with new/improved irrigation and drainage irrigation or drainage services (ha)’ End target increased from 12,000 to services (ha)’ End target reduced from 17,400 ha due to updated definition of 20,000 to 12,000 ha to reflect the indicator. End target decreased the final irrigation from 26,000 ha to 20,000 infrastructure design and Sub-indicator adjusted and split into two ha. change in definition to include indicators which read ‘Area provided only those areas with with irrigation and drainage services - Sub-indicator added contracts. Improved (ha)’ and ‘Area provided with which reads as ‘Area irrigation and drainage services - New provided with new Sub-indicator added which (ha)’ irrigation and drainage reads ‘Area provided with services (ha)’ irrigation and drainage New: Area supplied with optimal services - Improved (ha)’ irrigation delivery conditions (ha) Recommended policies No change Formulation revised due No change and procedures for expanded scope of national program of land Component 2 under the AF. registration submitted to The revised indicator: government ‘Preparation and implementation of policies, procedures for Systematic Land Registration (SLR) and NAPR IT system upgrade’. Revised Components 19. Component 1. As part of the AF processing and associated project restructuring in February 2020, the scope of activities and budget was revised to (a) reallocate funds and finance the cost overrun to restore the secondary and tertiary canals. The new funds would be used to complete full restoration for the KS and ZR irrigation schemes, while the respective networks at Tbisi Kumisi (TK) would only be partially restored; (b) strengthen the new National Agency of Sustainable Land Management and Land Use Monitoring (Land Agency) created under MEPA and support the creation of a spatial land use and land management system, preparation of land use legislation, economic valuation of land markets, and monitoring of land use through remote sensing; and (c) conduct a feasibility assessment of a proposed East Georgia program for irrigation reservoir rehabilitation and construction to support Georgia’s 2017 irrigation strategy. In the September 2022 Page 5 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) restructuring, two areas of the KS scheme facing insufficient irrigation water supply and stage two works at the TK scheme facing lack of funds were removed from the activities, reducing the scope for irrigation infrastructure rehabilitation by 5,750 ha. Some funds were reallocated to upgrade stage two works at the ZR irrigation scheme. Furthermore, the ambition related to WUO establishment was decreased to align with reality, no longer requiring full establishment of WUOs but only farmer initiative groups (FIGs) and WUO support units at the initial stage. 20. Component 2. The February 2020 AF and accompanying restructuring drastically increased the scope of this component and scaled up SLR in irrigated pilot areas and upgraded the IT infrastructure to strengthen NAPR’s capacity in processing and storing additional data from systematic registration. The technical oversight of SLR activities was delegated to the Systematic Land Registration Division (SLRD) within NAPR. In the third restructuring of September 2022, support for the nation-wide systematic land registration program was added to the scope of work. 21. Component 3. As part of the AF processing in February 2020, the implementing agency for Component 1 was changed to MEPA, where previously it was the MOA through the MOA Project Planning and Monitoring Division (PPMD), and for Component 2 it was changed to NAPR under supervision of the Ministry of Justice (MOJ), where previously it was the MOJ through NAPR. 22. The changes in component costs are presented in table A3.2. The approved amount at appraisal and AF compared to the actual cost by component is also further detailed in annex 3. Other Changes 23. In addition to the changes described above, several intermediate results indicators (IRIs) were also either dropped, added, adjusted, or redefined throughout the project life to better capture project impacts and achievements and facilitate project monitoring and final evaluation, with the target values revised accordingly (see annex 9 for details). Rationale for Changes and Their Implication on the Original Theory of Change 24. The above-described changes did not affect the core elements of the TOC. While some of them, including the AF and restructurings, were the result of the World Bank’s response to changes or delays in project implementation and the COVID-19 impact, revisions regarding the land-related part of the PDO provided an opportunity to scale up and expand the project impact beyond the initially envisaged land registration program and contribute to improved land management, with the PDO updated accordingly to become more ambitious. The AF enabled not only covering of the financing gap but also support of some additional activities, such as strengthening of the Land Agency, feasibility assessment of reservoir rehabilitation, and NAPR IT system upgrade, which were added during the AF. While this addition of activities resulted in minor enhancements to the details of the TOC, the general logic remained the same. II. OUTCOME A. RELEVANCE OF PDOs Assessment of Relevance of PDOs and Rating 25. At project closure, the PDO remained fully relevant and aligned with the CPF for FY2019–2022,ix which was updated by the Performance and Learning Reviewx extending it through FY2023. The first focus area in the FY2019– FY2022 CPF pertains to enhancing inclusive growth and competitiveness. Specifically, Objective 1.1 relates to agriculture modernization and access to markets. This is relevant to the GILMDP objectives on improving I&D services via rehabilitation of irrigation networks, to facilitate diversification into crops with better yields, increase productivity, and increase income and market access. The third focus area in the FY2019–FY2022 CPF pertains to building resilience. Specifically, Objective 3.3 relates to enhancing management of natural resources and climate risks. This is relevant to the GILMDP objectives to improve I&D services, as rehabilitation of irrigation canals supports enhanced management of water resources. Further, irrigation will improve farmers’ resilience to climate risks by reducing the impact of droughts. GILMDP support for improved land management is also aligned with the CPF Objectives 1.1 and 3.3, as secure land titles will Page 6 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) improve market access and generally provide better incentives for farmers to manage the land sustainably, rather than extracting the maximum yield no matter the cost to land quality. Lastly, secure land titles could also encourage farmers to shift to crops that would improve carbon capture (that is, shifting to crops that require multiple years of investment rather than annual crops). 26. The PDO also continues to be fully aligned with the priorities set out in the Concept Note for the new CPF for FY2024–FY2028,xi which was reviewed on December 14, 2023. High-level outcome 1 relates to increased productivity and creation of good quality jobs, which is relevant to the GILMDP objectives regarding improving I&D services via rehabilitation of irrigation networks, thereby increasing agricultural productivity. High-level outcome 3 relates to strengthening resilience and accelerating the green transition, which is relevant to both the GILMDP objectives regarding improvement of I&D services and sustainable land management, by encouraging enhanced management of water resources, improving farmers’ resilience to climate risks, and encouraging more sustainable land management. 27. Furthermore, the GILMDP remains highly relevant to the key GoG’s strategic documents in the irrigation, agriculture, and land sectors. The project is highly relevant to the ambitious Georgian Irrigation Strategy 2017–2025, which aims to increase irrigated areas, transform the Georgia Amelioration (GA) into a professional and financially sustainable irrigation service provider, introduce a new irrigation tariff system, and transform local-level management entities into customers. The strategy’s objectives are to (a) improve the reliability of the water supply through rehabilitation of infrastructure, (b) ensure financial sustainability of service providers by reducing their dependency on direct government subsidies, (c) ensure efficient allocation of water across alternative uses, and (d) increase the competitiveness of Georgia’s agricultural sector by providing reliable I&D services at reasonable prices. These objectives are relevant to the GILMDP objectives to improve I&D services via rehabilitation of irrigation networks, thereby facilitating diversification into higher-value crops. Further, the strategy is based on guiding principles, two of which are sustainable irrigated agriculture systems and a shift to higher-value crops. These principles are relevant to the GILMDP objectives on land management, as increases in land tenure security will support sustainability and shifts to higher-value crops. In addition, the GILMDP is highly relevant to the Agriculture and Rural Development Strategy for Georgia 2021–2027. The strategy aims to “diversify and develop economic opportunities in rural areas and improve social conditions and quality of life.” Its strategic goals are (a) development of competitive agricultural and nonagricultural rural sectors; (b) sustainable use of natural resources, ecosystem conservation, and climate change adaptation; and (c) development of efficient systems in food/feed safety and veterinary and plant protections. These goals are relevant to the GILMDP objectives to improve (a) I&D services, as these contribute to improved agricultural sector competitiveness, use of water resources, and climate change adaptation and (b) land management by encouraging sustainable use of land through secure land titles and tenure. The GILMDP is also fully aligned with the GoG’s vision on land sector development in the 2021–2024 ‘Toward Building a European State Program’, which considers completing land reform a top priority for Georgia. Two state policy goals were outlined in the State Budget for 2021: (a) land market development and (b) support for land registration and improving NAPR services, both of which are essentially identical to the GILMDP objectives around land management. 28. The high GILMDP relevance is also confirmed by a follow-up operation, the Georgia Resilient Agriculture Irrigation and Land (GRAIL, P175629) Project, which is currently under implementation and builds on the achievements, foundation laid, and lessons learned from the GILMDP and continues and expands much of the work that was started by the GILMDP. Specifically, the GRAIL Project aims to improve the coverage and quality of I&D services and agricultural production in selected irrigation command areas and further strengthen capacities for irrigation management and land management. 29. Based on the above, the relevance of the PDO is rated High. The GILMDP was highly relevant at appraisal and continued to be fully in line with subsequent CPFs and the GoG priorities. Furthermore, the follow-up lending operation, GRAIL Project, builds on the GILMDP experience and underlines the relevance of the agricultural and land management agendas. Page 7 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY) Assessment of Achievement of Each Objective/Outcome 30. The PDO has two elements. (a) To improve the delivery of the irrigation and drainage services in selected areas (b) To develop improved policies, procedures, and systems as a basis for a national land management program. 31. To achieve these objectives, the project implemented irrigation canal rehabilitation in three selected irrigation schemes, completed land management activities in substantial areas throughout Georgia, and implemented institutional and policy reforms and institutional strengthening for both of these sectors. The following paragraphs provide an assessment of each of these two objectives/outcomes to support achievement of the PDO. While the discussion here largely focuses on achievement of the PDO at project closure, it is important to note that some of the changes (such as decrease of some target values) made throughout the life of the project require a split rating, which is explained further in the section on overall outcome rating. 32. Outcome 1: Improved delivery of irrigation and drainage services in selected areas. The activities and outputs required to achieve this outcome revolve around both I&D infrastructure investments and institutional capacity building. To achieve this outcome, the project focused on activities in both areas: 33. I&D system rehabilitation and modernization clearly improved irrigation in the project-supported areas. I&D are part of the same sector and go hand in hand, depending on the needs (for example, irrigated lands might require adequate drainage to remain capable of producing crops), and are treated as a single entity in formulation of the corporate results indicator applied for the project. At the same time, the GILMDP activities were focused on irrigation systems and did not intervene nor intend to intervene in upgrading drainage systems, as it was not needed for the project-supported areas. In total, 271 km of canals (main/primary, secondary, and tertiary) were rehabilitated as part of the project, improving delivery of irrigation water for farmers in an area of 17,400 ha, which represents 100 percent achievement of the revised target value in place at project closure, though it is lower than the originally set target of 26,000 ha (see annex 10 for full breakdown of achievement under each set of targets). The works included the rehabilitation of the headworks and main canals in the ZR, KS, and TK irrigation schemes and rehabilitation of secondary and tertiary canals in the ZR and part of the KS schemes (see table 3). Note that rehabilitation of the main canal only, as was done in TK, has still led to increased access to water and an increased area of irrigated land (as prior infrastructure is still in place). In TK, this is evidenced by a decrease in water loss of 30–40 percent in the main canal and an increase of 73 percent (from 492.68 m2 to 850.00 m2) in irrigated land between 2016 and 2019. Nonetheless, while areas dominantly served by only a rehabilitated main canal do have improved irrigation services, they do not have optimal irrigation conditions, which can be secured with additional rehabilitation of the secondary and tertiary canals, among other measures. The 2022 restructuring introduced a sub-indicator to measure the area supplied with optimal irrigation conditions. At project closure, 8,692 ha of area with optimal conditions were reported, almost fully (99 percent) achieving the set target of 8,750 ha. There is also clear evidence that the rehabilitation of the canals has led to more active use of irrigation. In the three main irrigation schemes addressed by the project, the area of irrigated land based on contracts signed by farmers with the GA increased from 3,749 ha in 2016 to 8,387 ha at project closure. This 124 percent increase in area under contracts with the GA certainly shows that irrigation has become more accessible to and more actively used by farmers. Table 3. Works Completed in Each Irrigation Scheme Irrigation Scheme Work Completed Zeda Ru Rehabilitation of head works and main canal Rehabilitation of secondary and tertiary canals in entire scheme Kvemo Samgori Rehabilitation of head works and main canal Rehabilitation of secondary and tertiary canals for 6,450 ha of 9,200 ha (excludes the 2,750 ha in Giorgitsminda [1,500 ha] and Tora Hill [1,250 ha]) Tbisi Kumisi Rehabilitation of head works and main canal Page 8 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) 34. The Results Framework at project closure also included two outcome indicators on ‘irrigated area per unit water supplied’, which replaced the original indicator on absolute volume of irrigated water supply to the project rehabilitated schemes to improve the project attribution of the delivered resultsxii and measure efficiency of water use separately for the KS and ZR schemes. The final achieved values for this indicator were 1.91 m2/m3 for KS, which represents 126 percent achievement compared to the baseline of 0.57 m2/m3 and target of 1.63 m2/m3, and 0.68 m2/m3 for ZR, representing a regression from the baseline of 0.79 m2/m3. This regression in ZR can be attributed to two factors: (a) data that do not provide a complete picture, as significant construction was still ongoing during the 2023 irrigation season and realistic data are only expected in 2024 and (b) the fact that ZR provides all available water to the farmers, with unused water returned to the river basin. In contrast, in KS, works were completed sooner, and the irrigation scheme is structured differently, leading to data that give a more complete picture. Nonetheless, the rehabilitation works allowed for 10,679 landowners, of which 2,127 were female, to benefit from new and improved I&D services provided under the project, exceeding the target of 7,000 landowners (including 1,000 females). Several dam safety activities for the Sioni and Algeti dams, which are the dams at the headworks of the KS and TK schemes, respectively, and a preliminary feasibility assessment for a proposed East Georgia program for irrigation reservoir rehabilitation and construction were also completed as part of the project. Both additional sets of activities are of vital importance to ensuring the integrity of reservoirs for irrigation schemes. 35. Strengthening of I&D institutions was vital to achieving results for this outcome. The project took a multi- pronged approach to strengthening I&D institutions, including (a) preparation of the national I&D strategy and National Rehabilitation and Modernization Plan, defining the GoG’s long-term vision for the I&D sector and its approach to increasing resilience to climate change, and prioritizing the investments necessary over the next 5–10 years to facilitate nationwide government and donor funded investments and (b) institutional strengthening of the GA though capacity building to strengthen management and operations and provision of machinery and equipment for maintenance activities. This strengthening included improvement of maintenance guidelines and plans and improvement of water delivery management and technology and billing technology. Furthermore, the GA benefitted from staff training, study tours, vehicle purchases, and purchases of office equipment. Strengthening the GA was vitally important, as this institution is the central agency responsible for building and proper maintenance and operation of irrigation schemes around the country. Lastly, the project also worked to strengthen local irrigation institutions, specifically through the establishment of WUOs. 36. Significant progress was made in fostering local irrigation institutions. The project aimed to develop institutional arrangements for on-farm irrigation service delivery. One significant milestone was the adoption of a legal framework for the establishment of WUOs, which allowed for structural changes of the institutional framework to allow for stronger local institutions. This included the establishment of WUO support units at the central level (within the GA) and initiation of extensive consultations with farmers, including the creation of FIGs—a precursor to the formation of fully functional WUOs. While the project initially aimed to establish WUOs to manage on-farm service delivery within the project timeframe, this proved difficult due to slower-than-anticipated progress in securing farmers’ commitment to forming WUOs. This delay was in part due to the COVID-19 pandemic and also due to historical resistance to collective measures. Nonetheless, the GoG’s commitment to creating local organizations for on-farm irrigation service delivery was clear throughout the project and changes were made during implementation to adjust measures to be realistically feasible. Ultimately, the project was able to establish three WUO support units within the GA (one central and two regional) and eight FIGs that serve as precursors to full WUOs. The endline survey shows that there is still significant resistance to local irrigation organizations, with only 10–20 percent of farmers in all groups surveyed stating that they would probably or definitely join a user-led/-owned organization. Nonetheless, as mentioned in paragraph 37, the project contracted an external service provider to engage in in-depth on-farm training for farmers in KS to raise awareness about the benefits of WUO membership. This led to a significant shift in willingness to join a WUO. This success can be used as an example when expanding to more communities and schemes. Ultimately, the important groundwork laid in this project will be followed by further development of local irrigation institutions and establishment of full WUOs in the GRAIL Project. Page 9 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) 37. The project also funded some educational outreach to farmers in the KS area to improve outcomes of the project and facilitate understanding and cooperation by farmers. Specifically, this outreach contributed to achievement of this outcome by educating farmers on irrigation scheme operation and by soliciting their inputs and informing them on design decisions, thereby fostering more local support and ownership. The interviews conducted by the Implementation Completion and Results and Report (ICR) team during site visits to KS impressively illustrated the importance and success of such efforts. The farmers in KS had a good understanding of the O&M of the new scheme (and its pressurized pipe systems) and expressed interest in cooperating with each other and forming a WUO. They further had a better understanding of the implications and limitations of the rehabilitated scheme. In contrast, the meeting with farmers in ZR, who did not benefit from outreach efforts due to financial constraints in the project, illustrated much less interest in cooperation and access to irrigation water was much more contentious, though most farmers still voiced satisfaction with the rehabilitation efforts. 38. Ultimately, available data clearly demonstrate that the completed activities under the GILDMP have improved the delivery of I&D services in the selected areas. The project’s endline surveyxiii indicated that access to irrigation increased and that farmers were reaping the benefits of improved irrigation. Table 4 shows a brief overview of the gains experienced by the project benefiting landowners (farmers already reaping full irrigation benefits by 2022) compared to a control group (farmers located outside the project area). For example, the percentage of households in the project benefiting farmers group irrigating their land increased from 33 percent to 70 percent, with the percentage of households whose needs in terms of frequency of irrigation and volume of water were met fully increasing from 14 percent to 65 percent. Furthermore, the fraction of these beneficiaries who rated their access to irrigation water as good or very good increased from 20 percent in 2016 to 98 percent in 2022. In addition, the fraction of the project beneficiaries who thought that the quality of irrigation water is high increased from 5 percent in 2016 to 49 percent in 2022 and those who thought irrigation water is provided in a timely manner increased from 4 percent in 2016 to 56 percent in 2022. Overall, these gains were not seen at all or not at the same magnitude in the control group. There has also been a small increase observed in the adoption of advanced irrigation technologies. While there is a clear difference between the project benefitting group and control group, it should be noted that farmers throughout the country also benefitted from RDA agricultural support programs. Support from these programs likely helped farmers in the project benefitting group make good use of the rehabilitated irrigation schemes to achieve the impressive improvements discussed earlier. Lastly, land registration (as discussed further in paragraphs 41–47) likely also gave farmers the needed security of tenure to make the necessary investments to achieve the impressive results discussed earlier. Table 4. Overview of Gains Experienced by Benefitting Beneficiaries Compared to the Control Group Project Benefitting Group Control Group 2016 2019 2022 2016 2019 2022 Share of land owned that was irrigated (%) 33 53 70 6 11 10 Volume of water and frequency of irrigation met farmer’s 14 37 65 4 6 4 needs fully (%) Access to irrigation water is good or very good (%) 20 39 98 6 7 12 Quality of irrigation water is high (%) 5 15 49 1 1 20 Irrigation water is provided exactly as needed in a timely 4 15 56 1 1 17 manner (%) 39. In addition, the surveys showed that the use of irrigation water increases land productivity by 67 percent on average and positively affects the total generated agricultural income. In the project area, the positive effect of irrigation on productivity is greater than 50 percent for most crops. For example, in marginal farms where the primary crops tend to be corn, potatoes, and tomatoes, the yield for irrigated crops is 169 percent, 104 percent, and 68 percent higher, respectively, than for crops that are not irrigated. In addition, for large farms, better irrigation and water availability also led to improvements for most main crops. For example, productivity for irrigated grapes and apples is 13 percent and 25 percent higher, respectively, than for crops that are not irrigated. Furthermore, In the project area, for large farmers, the Page 10 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) average annual income is approximately GEL 22,400 without irrigation and over GEL 73,400 with irrigation (227 percent increase). The effect on small- and medium-size farmers is similar, with agricultural income increasing by about 290 percent with irrigation. Lastly, both the focus group discussions conducted as part of the survey and site visits by the World Bank ICR team showed that overall satisfaction with the rehabilitated system is obvious in ZR and KS, despite some remaining issues that the Government is continuing to address, such as some concerns about sediment load in the irrigation system. Overall, these positive developments are a clear testament to the impact of the project on farmers, especially because these developments are absent or vastly reduced in the control group. Furthermore, the positive developments achieved under this project have effectively paved the way for the GRAIL Project by opening the Government’s eyes to the importance of working on the whole irrigation system and making the Government inclined to borrow to further expand these positive results, illustrating that the Government clearly considers this project a success to build upon. 40. Overall, the achievement of Outcome 1 is rated Substantial at project closure. For the assessment of the overall project outcome, as target values under one of PDO indicators related to this objective were decreased, this ICR will apply a split evaluation (see paragraph 57), with the achievement of Outcome 1 for the respective set of PDO indicators and their targets before the last restructuring assessed as Modest. While the targets regarding rehabilitated area were without doubt more ambitious at the beginning and throughout the project before the last restructuring, and the ambition on WUO establishment was higher, the evidence throughout this section still illustrates significant development outcome. Data regarding achievement against the indicators under the various sets of objectives can be found in annex 10. 41. Outcome 2: Improved policies, procedures, and systems as a basis for a national land management program. The project addressed preexisting constraints for scaling up access to secure land rights in Georgia by supporting the legal and operational reforms and capacity building needed to roll out the Nationwide Systematic Land Registration Reform (NSLRR). Specifically, before the project, land management was not well organized, and the land registration process was largely paper based. Data were generally incomplete and not trustworthy, and registration and cadaster systems were kept separate leading to further inconsistencies. The project was successful in completing the activities toward addressing these bottlenecks and achieving the outcome of improving policies, procedures, and systems as a basis for a national land management program. At the end of the project, the procedures have been redefined to be more efficient. NAPR now has full control of the SLR process, which is also fully digitalized. Additionally, the registration and cadaster systems are now linked, significant in-house capacity was built for NAPR, and NAPR is now a model that is aspired to by other countries. In addition, it is important to point out that this outcome morphed from focusing on land registration in 12 pilot areas to focusing on rolling out the NSLRR and wider land management reforms, vastly increasing the scope and ambition of what is to be achieved, which was acknowledged in the revision of the PDO at AF. More details are provided in the following paragraphs. 42. Policy, legal, and procedural development played a key role in improving land management. The project- supported adoption of the new legal framework for land, its successful piloting, and further enhancement created positive momentum for the NSLRR design and implementation. The GILMDP successfully updated the policies and procedures needed for land registration in the pilot areas envisioned at appraisal. Specifically, the project supported development of the strategy for land registration and improvement of cadastral data in the pilot areas, the communication strategy and action plan for the land registration pilot project, the guidelines for the SLR pilot, and a robust legal framework.xiv The lessons learned during pilot registration were used to further refine these documents and laws and establish the legislative framework for the national program of land registration.xv Most importantly, the registration procedures were simplified and NAPR was given sole responsibility for all steps in the SLR process, which significantly accelerated the entire process, including appeals. It is also worth noting that NAPR showed significant agility, experimenting with various modalities of implementation for land surveysxvi (with regard to in-house or outsourcing) and adjusting the approach to land surveys on an ongoing basis based on lessons learned. This strong capacity to learn and adjust the approach to land surveys was a major factor in successfully completing NAPR’s land registration activities under the project. Also, NAPR developed a Land Page 11 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Registration Monitoring System that allows NAPR to monitor the impact of land registration, effectiveness of policies and procedures, and progress of implementation, which was used throughout the project for monitoring (see annex 4 for further discussion). 43. Institutional strengthening activities also formed an important part of achieving Outcome 2 in terms of improving NAPR’s systems as a basis for a national land management program. In particular, the project financed an upgrade of NAPR’s IT and information and communication technology (ICT) infrastructure that enabled the project to boost NAPR’s capacity in processing and storing data from SLR, improve its IT capabilities for other services, and streamline the registration process. Key outputs of the development of IT system designxvii and the ICT upgrade and software developmentxviii that proved crucial in achieving this outcome were the development of the Immovable Property Registration System (IPRS), the Electronic Minutes (E-Minutes) application, and smart contracts. The digitalization of the SLR process and subsequent introduction of the E-Minutes application by NAPR resulted in a 50 percent decrease in the time for data processing compared to before the introduction of this application. Data processing in real time facilitated communication with residents, who could see the cadastral drawings in the field and make necessary adjustments in real time online. This resulted in a 70 percent decrease in applications for remeasurements during the public display process, compared to before the introduction of real-time processing, which previously had taken place offline and was paper based. This digital transformation of the SLR process also accelerated and improved consistency and quality of business processes and data and resulted in a dramatic reduction in time needed for data collection and processing and a 70 percent decrease in cost compared to before this transformation. These significant savings in time and cost were not anticipated (at least not to this extent) during project design and are not reflected in the Results Framework; however, they do further illustrate how vastly successful the activities regarding land market development were. The IT system design was fully completed, and the ICT upgrade and software development was nearly complete at project closure, with 7 of 10 sub- activities completed and the remaining 3 nearing completion (and in the process of completion by the borrower). The development of these systems was led by a new in-house IT department at NAPR that was built under the project, thereby building in-house expertise for long-term sustainability and completing the work at a lower cost. On top of that, the project also invested in strengthening NAPR’s in-house approach for surveying activities, which proved to be the most effective approach and made NAPR independent from external surveying companies and enabling it to conduct the necessary surveying by itself. While NAPR had virtually no surveying capacity of its own at the beginning of the project, at project closure it had 720 surveyors on staff with all necessary equipment to execute their jobs well and efficiently. Together with 300 registrars, they form the backbone of the NSLRR and NAPR’s capacity to massively scale up land registration. 44. The project far exceeded expectations on land registration. To redefine and test the policies and procedures for registration of agricultural land, the project financed an SLR pilot in 12 selected areas representing various geographic and land tenure situations. The outcomes of this pilot informed the design of the NSLRR. The pilot was based on the new Law on Systematic and Sporadic Registrationxix adopted by the Parliament on June 3, 2016, which resolved several overarching challenges to land registration in Georgia. The pilot also successfully validated the NAPR implementation strategy of SLR and provided insights for its scale-up through the NSLRR. After successful completion of the pilot, the project expanded land survey and registration to all irrigated areas included in Component 1 (as envisioned in the AF). The target values of the PDO indicators and IRIs associated with survey and registration in the pilot and irrigated areas were nearly fully achieved or overachieved. Specifically, 174,174 land parcels had their use or ownership rights recorded in the pilot and irrigated areas, compared to a baseline of just 50,600 and representing 97 percent achievement of the set target of 178,000 parcels. Furthermore, 83,984 people, including 40,600 women, had their use or ownership right recorded as a result of the project, drastically exceeding the target of 68,000 people and 30,600 women with recorded rights. Lastly, 191,377 ha of land had use or ownership rights registered as part of the project, representing 106 percent achievement over the target of 180,000 ha. In addition to registration in these limited areas, following the 2022 restructuring, the project expanded its ambitions on land management and supported NAPR in co-financing the national rollout of SLR in selected areas, with 460,109 land parcels surveyed, exceeding the target of 270,000 by 70 percent. With the capacity built Page 12 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) with project support and the surveying team in place, NAPR continues surveying activities after the project closure and plans for the national rollout to the entire country (excluding a few major cities) to be completed by June 2024. 45. Additional activities further supported the goal of improved land management. The project also provided support to NAPR to strengthen the national addressing system. This support consisted of enhancing the NAPR addressing registry, effectively improving the address database, and financing a study to review Georgia’s addressing system and provide recommendations for upgrading it. After successful completion of these first steps, the project also supported NAPR in allocation of addresses to villages (78 percent of villages did not have proper or any address before the project). Project support resulted in all villages in Georgia being allocated standardized addresses and NAPR created 45,692 streets for 2,485 villages and assigned 354,927 individual addresses throughout rural Georgia. Furthermore, the project supported the capacity of the Land Agency under MEPA (formally under Component 1, but supports Outcome 2) created in 2020 through both soft and hard measures, such as provision of some equipment, a consultancy to pilot the development and establishment of an integrated database on land resources in two pilot municipalities, support for a land balance report, training for staff on the integration of data, formation of software technical specifications necessary for data integration and data management, definition of the methods of entering data into geographic information systems (GIS), and development of guidelines. These measures improved land use monitoring and knowledge and asset management of agricultural land resources. Lastly, the project also supported the forest management agency with office equipment, as the agency played a key role in processing land registration cases in which there was private land overlapping with state- owned forest land. 46. Beyond the PDO and IRIs related to Objective 2 and corresponding activities, the field visits by the ICR team and interviews with NAPR staff and beneficiaries in TK and ZR confirmed the positive impact of SLR on beneficiaries. Specifically, farmers indicated that by completing land registration and clarifying title documents and cadastral descriptions, land ownership became more secure and conflicts with neighbors reduced. Furthermore, farmers felt more comfortable investing in their land, especially since properly registered land generally leads to better loan conditions when using the land as collateral. Investments in land include investment in more modern irrigation technology, such as drip irrigation, which reduces water use and improves farm productivity, illustrating that the success of the land component is key for the long-term outcomes under the irrigation component to be realized. In addition, farmers noted that they could apply for and receive some agricultural subsidies that require registered land and could also insure their crops. Lastly, landowners generally felt that their land value increased due to registration (though this could not be proven, as discussed in the efficiency section). Beyond what was specifically mentioned by farmers in interviews, proper land registration and a good land management system tend to stimulate the market by encouraging land transactions and consolidations and encouraging the use of longer-term and higher-value crops. The use of longer-term crops, such as trees, also have a positive impact on the climate by capturing more carbon (about three times that of annual crops). In addition to encouraging the use of longer-term and higher-value crops, more secure land tenure also encourages farmers to engage in more sustainable land use and management since they have the assurance that they will be able to use the land for many years to come and therefore have an interest in the long-term viability of the land for farming. Lastly, proper land registration will also encourage land transactions (as further discussed in annex 4), making it simpler for farmers, for example, to buy some irrigated land or collaborate to consolidate lands to further improve agricultural efficiency. Overall, for many farmers, this registration improved the economic foundation for their operations. 47. Overall, this outcome is rated High at project closure, given that the project effectively exceeded its targets. Given that these targets were higher than at any previous point in the project, the rating is also High for any prior sets of targets. Data regarding achievement against the indicators under the various sets of objectives can be found in annex 10. Justification of Overall Efficacy Rating 48. Considering the above, the overall efficacy of the project is rated Substantial at closing. The project substantially achieved its revised objectives and targets, and there is strong and clear evidence that the results recorded can be attributed to project interventions, despite shortcomings in the Results Framework for Outcome 1. A rating of Substantial Page 13 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) for efficacy is also justified for the prior sets of objectives, given the respective ratings for Outcomes 1 and 2 described earlier. Data regarding achievement against the indicators under the various sets of project objectives and associated with project-supported activities can be found in annex 10. Table 6 also provides an overview of the split evaluation. C. EFFICIENCY Assessment of Efficiency and Rating Summary of Financial and Economic Results 49. At appraisal, in 2014, the ex-ante economic analysis focused on investment in I&D infrastructure, which expected to generate benefits for farmers in the form of incremental annual gross margin of US$690 per farm household arising from improved I&D, and the analysis was anticipated to consider benefits arising from the irrigation activities only. In 2020, as the AF enabled the project to get a stronger land market development component (which theoretically should allow tracking of land prices moving forward), the methodology for economic analysis was adjusted consequently to account for additional costs and additional incremental benefits arising from increasing prices for registered irrigated land. Overall, the financial net present value (FNPV) of the AF project was estimated at US$17.2 million and the financial internal rate of return (FIRR) was estimated at 15.3 percent, with the economic net present value (ENPV) and economic internal rate of return (EIRR) being estimated as US$15.8 million and 14.9 percent, respectively. The ex post economic analysis at the ICR stage adopted a combined approach to assess and analyze the results of both components. 50. The project’s economic impact at the ICR stage was evaluated using a 20-year period (starting at project implementation) and a 10 percent discount rate for calculation of net present value (NPV), as used in calculations at appraisal. 51. At completion, the project achieved benefits mainly through (a) an increase in crop yield for almost all major crops in the project areas; (b) an increase in cropping area for the irrigation component; and (c) direct cost savings to beneficiaries during land registration, as NAPR provided the land registration free of charge. 52. The economic analysis shows that the overall project was economically justified with an EIRR of 14.73 percent (against an appraisal projection of 17 percent, lowered to 14.9 percent at AF) and an ENPV of US$4.56 million (against an appraisal projection of US$16.3 million, lowered to US$15.8 million at AF) for a 10 percent discount rate. The financial results at completion show an FIRR of 12.57 percent (against an appraisal projection of 19.6 percent, lowered to 15.3 percent at AF) and an FNPV of US$3.47 million for a discount rate of 10 percent (against an appraisal projection of US$27.2 million, lowered to US$17.2 million at AF). These results are summarized in table 5. Table 5. Comparison of Estimates of Economic and Financial Returns Indicators at Appraisal and Closing Indicator Expected Results at Parent Expected Results, as Adjusted at Results at Project Closing Project Appraisal AF Appraisal FNPV (US$, millions) 27.2 17.2 3.47 FIRR (%) 19.6 15.3 12.57 ENPV (US$, millions) 16.3 15.8 4.56 EIRR (%) 17.0 14.9 14.73 53. The analysis shows that the FNPV and ENPV are positive and both FIRR and EIRR exceed 10 percent, though both FNPV and ENPV are much lower than expected at the appraisal stage and at AF. This is mostly since the longer time frame for project implementation resulted in later realization of most benefits. The smaller-than-expected irrigation area coverage at project completion also resulted in decreased benefits. Further, the project costs have risen significantly compared to appraisal. Also, the FNPV and ENPV at completion are still lower than those at the time of AF because the benefit of increased land value after land registration could not be observed/proven and calculated at the time of the ICR. 54. Yet, the financial and economic analysis results show that in terms of FIRR and EIRR the project exhibits a substantial performance even though some benefits could not be accounted for in the cost-benefit analysis (CBA). Those benefits include the following: Page 14 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) • Additional benefits from the land market development component. Due to lack of reliable data, many benefits for Component 2 could not be quantified. For example, increase in land values could not be proven at the ICR stage and was not accounted for in the CBA. However, this benefit likely has been realized at some level, as the increase in land values in general was stated by many beneficiaries during their interviews with the ICR team, although there was no quantitative evidence that the values increased as a result of improved irrigation, as values of non-irrigated land increased at the same rates as well. Also, the land registration process, in principle, is supposed to lower the likelihood of conflicts between the landowners, the number of land ownership disputes, and the number of lawsuits. Yet, this benefit cannot be accounted for, due to the unavailability of statistical data on lawsuits regarding land ownership disputes. Furthermore, registration of land in general is considered conducive to promoting land transactions (which increased by 116 percent between 2013 and 2023) and allowing farmers to both apply for agricultural subsidies and use the land as collateral for loans. Both aspects are difficult to quantify and are not included in the economic and financial analysis (EFA). • Broader socioeconomic benefits. Another additional benefit associated with the project implementation comes from temporary jobs generated by the project-financed construction activities (retrospective analysis of similar projects shows that labor costs comprise between 20 and 25 percent of total costs at minimum). After the personal income tax (PIT) (20 percent) is paid, 80 percent is paid as a salary to the employees and can be considered as an economic benefit. However, while this benefit was realized during project implementation and could be calculated, the analysis conducted for the ICR did not account for it to make the EFAs at appraisal and ICR stages more comparable. 55. Implementation efficiency was generally adequate despite some shortcomings. Broadly speaking, the core elements of the project design remained in place throughout the project, despite changes to targets and timelines. Furthermore, staffing within the Project Implementation Units (PIUs) was stable and the PIUs were dedicated to implementing this project. Despite the need for three project extensions that shifted the project completion date, these extensions helped MEPA complete the project activities that were critical to achieving the PDO, and they became necessary partly due to the flaws in the initial project design, and some delays, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, were beyond the project’s and PIU’s control. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic caused a 40 percent increase in costs of construction materials, while also causing worldwide shortages of these materials, which led to both a financial and time impact on specifically Component 1. Contracted companies were having trouble raising the necessary funds and procuring the needed materials, resulting in cancelation of some contracts. In addition, global and local economic development, coupled with significant changes in exchange rates between the SDR, EUR, and US$, led to exchange rate losses of about US$5.5 million (that is, 8 percent of project funds) for the project. Nonetheless, the project extensions actually also allowed for the scope of Component 2 to be expanded and for NAPR to receive additional support to advance SLR. In fact, implementation efficiency was very good for Component 2. The investments in the IT system upgrade at NAPR, automation of processes and services, coupled with improved procedures and processes, resulted in significant time and cost savings in the land registration process and reduction of the timeline of the NSLRR to only three years, which allowed high performance in resource utilization and high work performance efficiency. Overall, the project ended up being able to disburse nearly 100 percent of the funds at its closure. With regard to the cost overruns suffered by the project under Component 1, much of it was outside the control of the implementing team. Activities originally envisioned under this component were originally estimated to cost US$45.65 million but ended up costing about US$54.8 million while also rehabilitating a smaller area. However, the main contributors to this cost overrun were underestimation of the extent of works required for secondary and tertiary canals during appraisal, soaring materials costs during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, and significant exchange rate losses. In sum, despite the initial shortcomings that led to delays, implementation efficiency was largely adequate. 56. Overall, considering the factors above, project efficiency can be considered as Substantial. The EFA clearly illustrates the financial and economic value of the operation, and the project clearly had a positive impact beyond what can be measured by the economic analysis. The extension of the closing date not only compensated for the initial delays Page 15 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) in the project but also allowed for provision of additional support to NAPR and achievement of much higher results under Component 2 and allowed for disbursement of nearly 100 percent of project funds, including original financing and AF. D. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING 57. The overall outcome rating for the project is Moderately Satisfactory. The project objectives were highly relevant at appraisal and at closing, as confirmed by the GILMDP’s strong alignment with government programs and strategies and CPFs. The GILMDP substantially achieves the objectives in place at project closing. However, since the total area provided with new and improved irrigation services (which relates to a PDO indicator) and the ambition of Component 1 continually decreased, a split evaluation was applied for this project and the details are shown in table 6. Attribution of these improvements to the project activities is clear, and the project displayed Substantial efficiency. Table 6. Overview of Split Evaluation Original Objectives Revised Objectives Revised Objectives and Revised Objectives and and Targets, as and Targets after Targets after 2020 AF Targets after 2022 Appraised 2018 Restructuring and Restructuring Restructuring Relevance High Efficacy Substantial Substantial Substantial Substantial Outcome 1 Modest Modest Modest Substantial Outcome 2 High High High High Efficiency Substantial Overall outcome rating Moderately Moderately Moderately Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Numerical value of 4 4 4 5 outcome rating Disbursement value in each 17.96 6.26 26.34 14.13 period (US$, millions) Cumulative disbursement 17.96 24.22 50.56 64.69 (US$, millions) Disbursement in each 27.76 9.68 40.72 21.84 period (%) Weighted value of outcome 0.2776 × 4 = 1.1104 0.0968 × 4 = 0.3872 0.4072 × 4 = 1.6288 0.2184 × 5 = 1.0920 rating Weighted overall outcome (1.1104 + 0.3872 + 1.6288 + 1.0920 = 4.2184) = 4 (rounded figure) rating Moderately Satisfactory E. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS Gender 58. The project paid special attention to empowering women. In Component 1, the project aimed to increase the percentage of female water users with access to irrigation services. At appraisal, only 3.7 percent of water users with access to irrigation services were female, and the project increased this to 20 percent, exceeding the final target of 18.6 percent. Furthermore, in Component 2, the project-supported Law on Sporadic and Systematic Land Registration of 2016 stipulated that all household members able to provide official records or other proof would be registered as co-owners of the land plot, to enable women to be officially recognized as co-owners. Data from NAPR show that while the national average of female landowners and co-owners in 2020 stood at 42 percent, in the project areas, females represented 48.3 percent of owners with use or ownership rights recorded, exceeding the target of 45 percent and up from 29 percent before the reform. In addition to legislative incentives, the project deployed an awareness raising campaign to inform prospective land co-owners about their rights, communicate the importance of land ownership, and empower women to claim their land rights. For that, the campaign included relevant success stories, including access to funding and Page 16 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) agricultural grant programs for registered owners, and demonstrated the benefits of ownership through real-life examples of the women entrepreneurs who broke the stereotypes and started so-called ‘manly’ businesses such as farming and other activities. The project also promoted and contributed to an increase in the employment of women surveyors in a profession that had traditionally been largely dominated by men. The number of women surveyors employed under the project increased from 0 to now 100, out of 720 surveyors involved in the NSLRR. Institutional Strengthening 59. The project provided support to the national and subnational institutions involved in both components. Specifically, for Component 1, the project supported the preparation of a national irrigation and drainage strategy and a national rehabilitation and modernization plan. Furthermore, the project strengthened the capacity of the GA through both soft and hard measures, such as maintenance and water delivery management improvements and strategy and planning measures, and provision of new equipment and machinery. By developing the necessary regulatory framework for the establishment of WUO support units and FIGs, the project also helped strengthen local institutional arrangements for on-farm water delivery by increasing water user participation. This created conditions to reach the ultimate long-term goal of establishing WUOs, which form an integral part of the follow-up GRAIL operation. Lastly, the project supported the capacity of the Land Agency under MEPA created in 2020, as discussed in paragraph 45. Under Component 2, the project supported NAPR in the preparation of the legal framework for both pilot registration and the national systematic registration, and also helped upgrade NARP IT and ICT infrastructure to improve its capabilities to fulfill its responsibilities both inside and outside the project. Lastly, through the project, NAPR got a team of qualified and well-trained surveyors and is now able to complete the entire registration process in-house. Mobilizing Private Sector Finance 60. The improved irrigation water supply led to more investments in crop production, as shown in the endline survey via the higher rate of project beneficiaries attempting to take a loan or grant over the last three years (37 percent compared to 20 percent in the control group and 20 percent in 2019), with 20 percent of farmers planning to use this money to build a farm or purchase agricultural machinery and equipment. The improved irrigation water supply and this increased investment led to increased agricultural productivity, as discussed in paragraph 39. Improved irrigation water supply also enticed private investors to establish new farms in the rehabilitated schemes, as discussed in paragraph 62. Poverty Reduction and Shared Prosperity 61. In Georgia, the incomes of the poorest households have grown considerably slower than the national average, and a high proportion of farming households are among these poorest households. The project specifically targeted farming households in selected areas to improve productivity of farms and increase security of land tenure through land registration. As discussed in the efficacy section, the project’s efforts in irrigation were directly linked to increases in productivity and farm income and directly contributed to reducing poverty among farming households in the project areas. Furthermore, increasing land security is known to encourage moving to longer-term and higher-value crops and engaging in more sustainable land use and management, all of which will increase farm income in the long run. Other Unintended Outcomes and Impacts 62. One unintended outcome of the main irrigation canal rehabilitation was the development of farmland outside of the original command area in KS. The original command area consisted of farmland that could be supplied from the irrigation canal via gravity feeding. However, the main canal rehabilitation and the consistent supply of water encouraged investors to develop the Udabno almond plantation (2,900 ha) and other farms (about 1,000 ha) above the main canal, and these investors used their funds to finance pumps to extract irrigation water from the project-supported canal. While this led to the positive and legal development of additional farmland outside the original command area, it also vastly increased water demand and led to unintended concerns over irrigation water supply to 2,750 ha of farmland within the project command area at the tail end of the main irrigation canal. While the GA was working on a technical solution to this problem, this issue was yet to be resolved at project closure and will be resolved as part of the GRAIL Project. Page 17 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) 63. Another unintended outcome of the successful digital transformation of the SLR process was that the sporadic registration process (that is, where farmers initiate registration outside systematic efforts by NAPR) also moved to the use of the E-Minutes application. This innovative application streamlined field data collection, significantly increased the accuracy of registration data, provided surveyors real-time connection to NAPR servers, and led to the reduction of the implementation timeline of the NSLRR to only three years. For the E-Minutes application, NAPR received the ‘Most successful IT innovation which resulted in streamlining of a business process’ award during the Georgian IT Innovations Event in 2022. Moving forward, NAPR is already planning to move the entire land registration process fully online. III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME A. KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION 64. The PDO was clear and realistic, and the project’s components were clearly structured and followed a clear operational logic. Pairing irrigation and land management engagements was a key positive design decision that led to strong synergies. Furthermore, given the information available at appraisal, the project had an appropriate sequencing of tasks. Preparation of fiduciary, environmental, and social aspects was adequately executed; relevant risks were identified through the operational risk assessment framework; and the mitigation strategy was generally adequate, though the design risk related to readiness for implementation may have been underestimated (see paragraph 65). The stakeholders were also generally well-chosen and involved throughout project preparation. Lastly, the choice of having two implementing agencies was appropriate, given the project’s focus on irrigation aspects and land aspects. 65. One of the key factors negatively affecting Outcome 1 of the project was the lack of adequate designs and insufficient consideration of water quality issues for Component 1. The GA had technical designs for the rehabilitation of the canals ready before the start of the project; however, all were found to be inadequate during implementation and required additional time and efforts for improvement, which led to significant delays to the start of the irrigation contracts. Low water quality, specifically the high concentration of sediments, was also a key problem that was flagged in the final survey and in all field visits, particularly affecting those farmers using drip irrigation. While these problems could not have necessarily been foreseen in all cases (such as in ZR), it seems that at least in KS the environmental conditions should have been known during preparation. It is also important to note that these sediments do not prevent usage of the water for irrigation, but they do make use of some technologies, such as drip irrigation, more difficult. Nonetheless, the remaining technical aspects of the project, and specifically those for Component 2, were of adequate quality. In addition, while these shortcomings led to delays and challenges, the PIU and implementation team proved adept at largely realizing the envisioned outcomes. 66. While Component 2 was well-structured and then further enhanced as part of the AF, and indicators related to Component 2 were of good quality, the designed Results Framework did not adequately measure progress toward Outcome 1, and costs for Component 1 were underestimated. One of the PDO-level indicators (‘Absolute volume of irrigation water supplied to project-rehabilitated schemes’) was not a good choice, as it was dependent on external factors, such as drought, flooding, and demand by farmers, not allowing for adequate reporting of improved irrigation water delivery attributed to the project (see M&E section). The underestimated cost of irrigation works, in addition to COVID-19, spiraling inflation, and currency exchange losses, contributed to the project cost overrun, leading to the need to secure AF and still not allowing the project to cover the initially planned command area and excluding the batch 2 works for TK. 67. Requiring baseline, midterm, and endline surveys for Component 1 was a prudent choice to monitor outcomes. The choice to include in-depth surveys (with control groups) allowed the team to effectively monitor and report the associated outcomes on improved irrigation services, despite shortcomings in the Results Framework. The data obtained through these surveys provided the most convincing data that Outcome 1 objectives were substantially achieved. Page 18 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) B. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION Factors Subject to the Control of the Government and/or Implementing Entities 68. The project enjoyed continued commitment and support from the Government, and both the PIUs were responsive, committed, and proactive to advance project activities. Both the PIUs had human resources, institutional capacity, and a legal framework that were either adequate from the start or were built through the project. Furthermore, the project enjoyed strong support from the Government throughout the entire implementation period, which enabled the project to be brought to completion despite initial delays. At the same time, there were some decisions under the Government’s control that negatively affected the activities and results achieved under Component 1. The GA’s decision to allow withdrawal of water from the irrigation canal by farms outside the command area in KS led to a redesign of the project due to a risk it posed to the reliability of water supply to the Giorgitsminda (1,500 ha) and Tora Hill (1,250 ha) areas located in the command area at the tail end of the main canal. These areas were disconnected from the canal, which affected the reach of the project. Furthermore, misjudgment in the required time and efforts needed for farmer mobilization, which turned out to be a more complicated and time-consuming process, than initially planned, since it evoked negative memories from the Soviet period, did not allow the project to complete the WUO establishment process. While the GIDLMP supported creation of enabling conditions for WUOs establishment (legislation, WUO support units, and FIGs), no WUOs were established within the GUDLMP time frame, and the completion of this task will be done under the follow-on World Bank project. Factors Subject to World Bank Control 69. Good supervision and reporting were key positive factors that supported the project in largely reaching its outcomes in the end, despite shortcomings at entry. In general, supervision was effective, and reporting was generally candid with the aim of finding solutions to problems and moving the project forward. Specifically, a candid MTR in July 2017 laid the basis for the first restructuring in 2018. Furthermore, close supervision and ongoing assessments of progress and financial status led the team to initiate the 2020 AF and 2022 restructuring. Factors outside the Control of Government and/or Implementing Entities 70. A change in ZR water quality forced a redesign of the ZR scheme. Specifically, an increase in turbidity and sediment load in the Liakhvi river in 2021 during project implementation forced a change from a closed to an open irrigation system to reduce the cost of sediment cleaning and maintenance. This change caused additional time for redesign and an increase in overall project costs. This increase in sediment load originated upstream outside the GoG’s control in the Tskhinvali region/South Ossetia. 71. The COVID-19 pandemic significantly affected project implementation. For Component 1, it delayed contractor mobilization activities for civil works starting in 2020 and completion of ongoing civil works, due to border restrictions preventing the Azerbaijani contractor from entering the country. The lockdown and social distancing measures further delayed mobilization efforts to engage farmers for the WUO establishment process. For Component 2, the pandemic had more of an impact on processes than timing. Specifically, NAPR decided to roll out systemic land registration to the irrigated area using only their in-house capabilities rather than continuing to experiment with outsourcing. While this decision was partly driven by COVID-19, in the end, it turned out to be a positive and beneficial decision for the project and client, as it solidified clear expertise for SLR in-house and made NAPR independent of a tight external survey market. 72. The COVID-19 pandemic, spiraling inflation, and currency exchange rate fluctuations were among the major factors leading to budget constraints and cost overruns. These were discussed in detail in paragraph 55. All these financial factors combined led to cancellation of secondary and tertiary canal works in TK and to the restriction of education outreach activities to only KS (that is, no educational outreach at ZR). Page 19 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME A. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) M&E Design 73. The intended results chain was clear throughout the project documents. The PAD clearly explained how activities, outputs, and outcomes were connected. The original Results Framework with three PDO-level indicators and six IRIs was manageable and did not overly burden the reporting systems. However, one PDO-level indicator (‘Absolute volume of irrigation water supplied to project-rehabilitated schemes’) was found to be inadequate in measuring progress toward Outcome 1, due to its susceptibility to external factors.xx While this indicator was replaced by two new indicators (on area per unit of water supplied for KS irrigation scheme and on area per unit of water supplied for ZR irrigation scheme) during the 2022 restructuring, these new indicators were later found to be subject to external factors’ impact and did not allow to clearly measure and report achievement of the project Outcome 1. To be fair to the project, measuring improvement of irrigation water delivery is quite complex and something other projects have also grappled with. Nonetheless, while the achievement of Outcome 1 was recorded and evidenced through a combination of the data reported under the PDO indicator on areas provided with improved and new I&D services and data outside the Results Framework, such as results of baseline, midterm, and endline surveys and data related to improved land productivity and use of long-term and higher-value crops (see paragraphs 38 and 39), the Results Framework did not allow sufficient tracking and measuring of the level of achievement of this outcome. All other PDO and IRI indicators proved to be generally adequate in measuring the outputs and outcome-oriented progress and were further modified as part of project restructurings to improve formulation, methodology, and alignment with the World Bank sector core indicator (that is, related to I&D); adjust the end target values to match the reduced length of the irrigation schemes due to cost overrun; and, in case of the PDO-level indicator related to Outcome 2, make it more ambitious and align it with the modified PDO and expanded scope of the component and further strengthen the Results Framework with an additional set of IRIs to better track the associated project progress and results. As a result of the project restructurings and expansion of activities under Component 2, the final Results Framework had four PDO-level indicators (plus two sub-indicators) and 13 IRIs, as opposed to three originally set PDO-level indicators and five IRIs. Even though the Results Framework became quite larger, it was still manageable and did a more detailed and refined job of capturing the details of the implementation progress than the original Results Framework did. M&E Implementation 74. The M&E system went beyond the Results Framework indicators and was supported with baseline, midterm, and end line surveys administered by MEPA for Component 1 to determine the existing pre-intervention conditions in the targeted areas at initial phase, track change dynamics, and assess and identify the changes induced by the project on irrigation services and as a result of implemented activities and rehabilitation works. Similarly, a baseline survey was conducted in four pilot areas to mainly evaluate the importance of land registration to the local people and provide a basis for better assessment of the project outcomes for Component 2. The M&E rating was consistently kept Satisfactory or Moderately Satisfactory. MEPA occasionally experienced some difficulties with receiving data from the GA but complemented this with hands-on monitoring of results. The automation for monitoring of indicators for Component 2 brought advantages to timely reporting and accuracy of data. This automation proved to be incredibly valuable in being able to regularly report on progress and is certainly a positive aspect of M&E implementation. The PIUs provided regular accounts on the environmental and social performance of the project. Such reporting was an integral part of general project progress reports produced on a quarterly basis. The World Bank and PIU also made sure to identify and collaboratively address any M&E execution-related issues. For example, earlier in the project life, the quality of environmental and social reporting to the World Bank team suffered from insufficient inputs from the supervision engineer, and over time, and with the PIU’s persistent efforts, this was mostly eliminated. Similarly, the progress on works improved significantly during the later part of the implementation period and more generally M&E implementation Page 20 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) improved throughout the project cycle. Typical shortfalls in contractor’s performance documented in the PIU’s reports were related to the occupational health and safety at workplaces and on-site management of various waste streams. M&E Utilization 75. The M&E system was crucial to project management and informed decision-making. The M&E system facilitated monitoring progress toward the PDOs and expected outputs by MEPA, NAPR, and the World Bank team. It was also used in deciding whether restructuring was necessary at different periods of implementation. Regular progress reports, including quarterly project status reports, were prepared on time by both the PIUs based on the data collected, which proved effective at regularly communicating progress against the indicators. For example, when it became apparent that the PDO indicator on absolute water was not adequate, the World Bank team proposed a replacement. Nonetheless, this replacement could have been made earlier (and proved not adequate). Furthermore, there were some IRIs, such as the number of people benefiting from access to improved I&D services, which could be moved to the PDO level to strengthen this part of the Results Framework. Alternatively, the Results Framework could be strengthened with indicators for improved land productivity or landowner satisfaction with I&D, which could be proposed and monitored based on the analysis of associated baseline, midline, and endline surveys. Justification of Overall Rating of Quality of M&E 76. The overall rating of the quality of the M&E is Modest, mostly due to significant shortcomings throughout the project in the PDO-level indicators for Component 1. One original PDO indicator proved inadequate at monitoring progress toward Outcome 1 objectives, and the attempt to replace it with a set of two new indicators was not successful, due to the sensitivity of both original and new indicators to the same external factors. As such, while the ICR team noted the Borrower’s comment that, despite the challenges encountered in identifying appropriate indicators, M&E can be assessed higher, since the project has utilized all available resources effectively to streamline its operations, address existing challenges, and provide necessary data and analysis for informed decision-making (see annex 5), this ICR still assigns the overall rating of M&E Quality as Modest in recognizing the shortcomings on PDO indicators related to outcome 1. Nonetheless, the performance of both the PIUs, with the timely submission of reports and effective information systems that improved throughout the project cycle, was good, and all indicators related to monitoring progress toward Outcome 2 were well selected and attributable to the project, allowing for M&E of the results achieved, and the project also had a sound set of IRI indicators, especially after modification to the Results Framework as part of the AF processing. B. ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE 77. Environmental safeguards. The project used the safeguards framework and it triggered OP/BP 4.01 Environmental Assessment, OP 4.09 Pest Management, OP/BP 7.50 Projects on International Waterways, and OP/BP 4.37 Safety of Dams. The project was classified as Category B, and an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) for the project and Environmental Management Plans (EMPs) for individual irrigation schemes were developed and mitigation measures implemented. At the AF stage, the ESMF of the original project was updated to the World Bank’s satisfaction. There were small issues that came up during construction works, such as poor housekeeping and on-site management of waste, shortfalls in application of occupational health and safety rules, and deficient records of environmental monitoring produced by a supervision company. Nonetheless, the borrower took expedient action upon noting noncompliance with safeguards; kept site-specific ESMPs updated; prevented health and safety accidents; and, despite the temporary issues mentioned, maintained generally good environmental performance. For the specific OP/BPs triggered, the ratings for OP/BP 4.01, OP 4.09, and OP/BP 7.50 were predominantly Satisfactory throughout and at the end of the project, periodically changing to Moderately Satisfactory. The dams included under OP/BP 4.37 were the Sioni and Algeti dams, located at the headworks of the KS and TK schemes, respectively. The GoG made progress and developed an Emergency Preparedness Plan (EPP) for dams. While implementation of the plan can be further improved, it was already sufficient, as it appears that procedures under the EPP worked well during the 2022 emergency flooding event. The GoG also installed some dam monitoring instrumentation in 2021. Nonetheless, there were shortcomings with no specific O&M plan, but only a general guideline, in place. In addition, there is a need for installation of an early warning Page 21 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) system, collection of data, structured analysis, and interpretation thereof, and capacity building. Overall, while the dams are considered safe for now, the installed instrumentation is insufficient to ensure long-term safety. The GoG has committed to completing these requirements in the near future. The dam safety activities are also part of the follow-up GRAIL Project, and the World Bank will continue to engage with the client on this topic through this follow-on operation. The rating for OP/BP 4.37 was predominantly Moderately Satisfactory (with occasional downgrade to Moderately Unsatisfactory), which, given the definite progress on dam safety, is justified. 78. Social safeguards. During project preparation, a rapid social assessment was undertaken, which showed that households in the target areas are generally poor, community organizations are nascent, and there are a relatively high number of female-headed households. With regard to community organizations, the assessment revealed distrust and lack of local ownership of previous local water resource management arrangements, which guided the approach to WUOs. The project triggered OP/BP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement. A Resettlement Policy Framework was prepared and disclosed for Component 1, and a Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) was developed for each site. For Component 2, a ‘country systems’ approach was followed, and the Government’s Guidelines for Land Registration was evaluated for equivalence and acceptability (per OP 4.00). The main issues that came up throughout the project were around rare objections to pipes running across private land, occasional improper implementation of the RAP, and occasional insufficient site-specific evaluation, though these deficiencies were always quickly addressed upon surfacing. Aside from these issues, the project was generally in compliance and a final rating of Satisfactory for OP/BP 4.12 seems appropriate. 79. A grievance redress mechanism (GRM) for the project was duly established. For Component 2, this system was in place and functioning well, with the PIU reporting regularly. In relation to the SLR, out of 141,835 registration applications received during the project, 218 administrative complaints (that is, appeals) were submitted to NAPR, and 70 registration decisions were challenged in court, illustrating that citizens had an effective way to appeal decisions. Appeals generally revolved around issues related to exact plot boundaries, past transfers of ownership, and lack of or insufficient title documents. All administrative complaints have been resolved as of project closure, but 48 court cases are still pending, illustrating a generally functional GRM and appeals process. For Component 1, the GRM was originally focused around providing phone numbers and complaint boxes for beneficiaries to use. However, this approach did not work well in the early part of the implementation period but improved over time as the approach was transformed into a more proactive one. Actively engaging farmers, the GA, and WUO support units in meetings and other settings, as was done since 2019, yielded better results in the GRM, allowing registration of and response to some complaints, such as poor housekeeping at work sites. This adjusted approach ended up being more appropriate and practical and reasonably functional. Complaints received were all minor and were resolved. Nonetheless, some grievances were not reported through the mechanism. For example, the water quality concerns voiced in the survey and in meetings in KS were never registered through the GRM. Lessons learned regarding the GRM in this project were incorporated in the follow-on project. 80. Procurement performance by both PIUs was Satisfactory. The World Bank procurement guidelines were generally followed, though some difficulties arose in the early stages of the project. For example, MEPA risked contracting only one company to supervise all ongoing civil works. MEPA also terminated a contract with a construction company and suffered delays on another one, partially due to the contractor's poor performance and partially due to poor contract management. In another tender, an error in the bidding documents was overlooked by all parties (including the World Bank), which potentially influenced bidders’ proposals, causing significant delays. During the project, eight post-review reports were completed. While there were always some findings regarding deviations from processes and the project had some issues with contract management, there were significant improvements throughout project implementation. 81. FM was rated Satisfactory throughout the project. MEPA had experience implementing World Bank projects and FM capacity was adequate from the beginning. For NAPR, the FM capacity was not there initially; however, a financial manager was appointed within NAPR at the beginning of the project. There was also continuity of qualified FM staff in the PIUs. Throughout the project, FM was generally in compliance with World Bank policies. Responses from the client were timely, and the client was proactive at flagging potential problems up front to be able to prevent or quickly address them. Page 22 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Submission of interim financial reports and audits was generally on time and the quality of these reports was satisfactory. There were no ineligible expenditures or unresolved issues throughout the project. C. BANK PERFORMANCE Quality at Entry 82. The project was prepared by qualified World Bank staff and consultants and the overall project design was reasonable given the information available at the time. The project, as identified and appraised by the World Bank team, was and is of high strategic relevance to Georgia, as discussed in the section on relevance. Furthermore, the approach taken by the project to achieve the outcomes defined in the PDO was reasonable and the activities chosen reasonably contributed to achieving the PDO. The project strongly considered poverty, gender, and social development aspects, and it was effectively designed and appraised to achieve the intended outcomes under these aspects. Environmental, social, and fiduciary aspects were adequately addressed during project design by putting in place adequate safeguards and providing for implementation of adequate fiduciary systems to be consistent with fiduciary policies and the World Bank’s fiduciary role. In addition, policy and institutional aspects were adequately considered during preparation and the project included the necessary policy adjustments and institutional strengthening to support implementation and sustainability in the project. The choice of two implementation agencies was good and both agencies proved competent in their respective area of responsibility. Furthermore, the risk assessment was well done, and the identified risks and ratings were appropriate. Some of the identified risks such as the risk around the WUOs came to be. The World Bank team also successfully incorporated lessons learned from prior operations to improve the quality at entry and put the appropriate staff and processes in place to support project implementation. Nonetheless, there were also a few shortcomings regarding quality at entry. Specifically, the technical designs and bidding documents were not of sufficient quality, despite the assumption and belief by the preparation team that they were ready. Furthermore, water quality issues were not adequately considered during preparation. Lastly, from a financial perspective, the costs for Component 1 were underestimated during project preparation. Nonetheless, the remaining technical aspects of the project, and specifically those for Component 2, were of adequate quality. Furthermore, the EFA at appraisal was solid and gave a strong fiscal and economic justification for the project. Lastly, the Results Framework was not adequately designed to measure progress toward Outcome 1. The indicators measuring progress toward Outcome 1 did not provide the full picture. While the area to be served by the improved irrigation scheme was measured, there was no adequate measure of actual improvement of irrigation water delivery. Data collection, reporting, and evaluation, on the other hand, were well- designed and proved capable of providing a regular overview of project progress. Overall, based on the above, quality at entry is assessed as Moderately Satisfactory. Quality of Supervision 83. The World Bank team provided good implementation support throughout the project on all aspects of the project, including technical, fiduciary, and safeguards. The World Bank team responded quickly and adequately to implementation challenges that arose. The World Bank team was able to adapt the project design and Results Framework to new information and changes in external conditions. Furthermore, despite challenges with quality at entry and weak Results Framework, the World Bank team was able to adjust implementation to ensure progress. In addition, once it became clear that the original objectives for Component 1 were overly ambitions, they were adjusted to more accurately reflect what could be reasonably accomplished, though the changes were quite drastic and fluctuated between the various restructurings. The adjustments made illustrated a focus on development impact, as they ensured that as much of the outcome as possible is met, despite reductions in scope. Nonetheless, the World Bank team was unable to adequately address the weaknesses in the Results Framework and the shortcomings in the PDO indicator related to volume of irrigation water provided, as even the indicators that replaced it were inadequate. The World Bank team supported the client through three restructurings (one of which included additional financing) to make necessary adjustments and add necessary funds. The team also took advantage of these restructurings and the additional time available to scale up Component 2. Despite having three different Task Team Leaders responsible for accountability and decision-making Page 23 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) throughout the project, supervision (including missions) was regular, thorough, and, most importantly, ensured progress toward outcomes despite several serious challenges. The team was well staffed with key staff having the necessary expertise. Nonetheless, no core team staff was based in Georgia, with the closest core team staff based in Azerbaijan. Reporting was regular and thorough, and specifically the MTR provided a good assessment of the state of the project and the necessary changes to ensure success (which led to the first restructuring). The World Bank conducted regular implementation support missions and produced 19 Implementation Status and Results Reports (ISRs). Supervision of fiduciary and safeguards aspects was thorough and regular. Furthermore, the World Bank, through capacity strengthening, improved the likelihood of successful regular operation of supported activities after closing. In addition, the follow-on GRAIL Project will further support the institutions involved in the GILMDP. Overall, supervision is assessed as Satisfactory. Justification of Overall Rating of Bank Performance 84. The performance of the World Bank is rated Moderately Satisfactory based on the quality of its performance at entry and supervision. The project combined irrigation and land management to derive significant synergies between the two engagements. Both engagements showed significant development impact and the World Bank provided the flexibility to extend and adjust the project to allow completion of irrigation scheme rehabilitation and extended support to NAPR for land management and registration and to overcome the factors beyond the borrower’s and World Bank’s control. D. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME 85. The sustainability of Outcome 1 will depend on the ability of national and local institutions to maintain the irrigation canals. During the project, institutions, specifically the GA, were strengthened and WUO support units and FIGs were established. However, WUOs were envisioned as an integral part of the institutional structure to ensure local ownership and buy-in for the irrigation infrastructure and operations and ensure a good framework for collection of fees. Without this structure in place, there is a risk that the GA would struggle to adequately maintain and operate the on-farm networks and may struggle to collect fees. However, the WUO support units and FIGs established under this project are an important step toward establishing this structure. The sustained capacity of GA depends on the ability to attract and retain young technical staff. Most of the experienced technical staff will be retiring in the next decade. Since the GA is responsible for maintenance and operation of the main irrigation networks, especially off-farm, this is cause for concern regarding sustainability of the development outcome regarding improved irrigation and drainage services. 86. Future water availability will depend on impacts from climate change and increasing demand. Georgia is experiencing increasing demand from large agribusinesses with high water demands and is also experiencing an increasing threat of droughts due to climate change. Both factors make the availability of water in the project areas less than guaranteed, which would affect the sustainability of the improved irrigation and drainage services. 87. The sustainability of land registration depends on proper support and staffing of NAPR. The land registration gains made in the project are dependent on NAPR being properly resourced to continue survey activities and maintaining good records of land titles. The GoG will have to provide funding to NAPR to continue the national rollout of the NSLRR. 88. Perverse incentives not to register land may exist in Georgia, such as fear of property taxation, loss of social security benefits, and enforcement of collateral by lenders in the event of loan default. The GoG recognized these fears and created incentives to counteract them.xxi Sustainability of land registration and the system for transactions is attested by a sustained increase in the yearly number of transactions. Since the establishment of NAPR, and most notably after the land reform, there were no known significant volumes of ‘unofficial transactions’ or similar malpractices in Georgia.xxii Nonetheless, continued community engagement and awareness raising are key to sustaining the land registration system. 89. The approval and implementation of the GRAIL Project helps mitigate some of these risks. The GRAIL Project’s aim to improve the coverage and quality of I&D services and agricultural production in selected irrigation command areas and further strengthen capacities for irrigation management and land management helps mitigate the risk to the GILMDP’s development outcome. The GRAIL Project will ensure continued support to NAPR and the GA and will continue the work of establishing WUOs, helping secure the outcomes achieved under the GILMDP. Page 24 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) V. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 90. Pairing irrigation and land management engagements can lead to strong synergies. In this project, farmers in the selected areas benefitted from improved irrigation and drainage services and more secure land tenure. Together, these aspects can create an environment for farmers to invest in their farms and especially in more efficient irrigation infrastructure (such as drip irrigation), since the fear of losing their land or of not getting water is greatly reduced. Adding a stronger agricultural component, such as agricultural policy reform, could strengthen the outcomes further. 91. Designs prepared by the client before and during project preparation should be evaluated for adequacy. The project assumed that the prepared irrigation scheme designs would be adequate for immediate tendering of civil works. The feasibility studies and original final designs were completed outside the project under a contract with the MOA. However, when this assumption turned out to be incorrect, there was a significant loss in time and money to go back to the design stage. Future operations should conduct an evaluation of prepared feasibility studies and designs to ensure that all elements are adequate for tendering (including proper accounting for environmental conditions). 92. Potential impacts, both positive and negative, in areas outside the command area should be considered at the design stage. The works under this project caused farmer-led irrigation development outside the command area in KS, which increased water demand, a scenario that was not considered sufficiently at project preparation. The impact of this scenario was both positive and negative. While additional area outside the command area could be cultivated, the tail end of the command area had to be disconnected from the canal due to concerns around inadequate amounts of water. 93. Timelines for irrigation civil works should consider the fact that civil works can only take place outside the irrigation season. While the project took measures to supply farmers with irrigation water even while civil works take place (via temporary earthen canals), civil works are unpopular and difficult to conduct during the irrigation season, which spans from May to September in Georgia. To avoid unreasonable interruptions in water supply, ample time should be allocated for civil works. Furthermore, the timeline should also consider that it often takes 1–1.5 years to progress from the design to the commencement of civil works. 94. Detailed, intensive, and thorough training and consultation with farmers, particularly during the design phase, are essential for understanding and addressing local needs and demands. This approach will ensure maximum cooperation and support from farmers during the implementation phase and avoid changes to the design and delays in the implementation of civil works. Furthermore, this approach will also help with establishment of collective organizations, such as WUOs, which requires careful planning and lengthy consultations, especially in former Soviet countries where collective efforts often evoke negative emotions. Projects should start the mobilization process as early as possible, even in parallel with designs, to allow adequate time for raising awareness and educational outreach. 95. Educational outreach and technical field training are imperative when introducing new technologies. The pressurized pipe system with double hydrants for on-farm delivery used in the KS irrigation scheme is the first of its kind in Georgia. The GILMDP did not invest up front in farmer training to train water users on how to operate and maintain such a system, which was unfamiliar to farmers. Given that this transition requires technical field trainings for farmers and that the construction and supervision contractors cannot be relied on to train all water users, project funds should be earmarked for dedicated technical training providers to provide this training on O&M of modernized irrigation systems (at design, construction, and handover) to farmers and water users to ensure sustainability. 96. Building capacity within NAPR was key to success under the land component. NAPR initially looked at hiring companies from the private sector to complete surveying activities. The surveys completed by third parties were generally of poor quality and contributed to early implementation difficulties. Implementation became a success when NAPR decided to build surveying capacity in-house to be in full control of the entire land registration process. Furthermore, the overall capacity-building activities, coupled with highly engaged staff, led to the overall success of the land component. Page 25 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS A. RESULTS INDICATORS A.1 PDO Indicators Objective/Outcome: To improve delivery of irrigation and drainage services in selected areas Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Area provided with irrigation Hectare(Ha) 0.00 26,000.00 17,400.00 17,400.00 and drainage services (ha) 23-May-2014 31-Jul-2019 30-Sep-2023 30-Sep-2023 Area provided with Hectare(Ha) 0.00 26,000.00 14,500.00 14,500.00 irrigation and drainage services - Improved (ha) 23-May-2014 31-Jul-2019 30-Sep-2023 30-Sep-2023 Area provided with Hectare(Ha) 0.00 2,900.00 2,900.00 irrigation and drainage services – New (ha) Comments (achievements against targets): Fully achieved. Page 26 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Area supplied with optimal Hectare(Ha) 0.00 8,750.00 8,692.00 irrigation delivery conditions (Hectare(Ha)) 30-May-2022 30-Sep-2023 30-Sep-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Substantially achieved. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Irrigated area per unit of Text 0.57 m2/m3 1.63 m2/m3 1.91 m2/m3 water supplied for Kwemo Samgori (KS) irrigation 31-May-2022 30-Sep-2023 30-Sep-2023 scheme (m2/m3, Custom)” Comments (achievements against targets): Surpassed. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Irrigated area per unit of Text 0.79 m2/m3 .93 m2/m3 0.68 m2/m3 Page 27 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) water supplied for Zeda Ru 31-May-2022 30-Sep-2023 30-Sep-2023 (ZR) irrigation scheme (m2/m3, Custom) Comments (achievements against targets): Partially achieved. The final result is .25 m2/m3 below the target & .11 m2/m3 below the baseline. The data depicts the 2023 irrigation season when irrigation rehabilitation for Zeda Ru (ZR) was not complete, & the construction company had created alternative (temporary) earth canals to ensure water supply to farmers during the season. This resulted in water loss, & realistic data is not expected until the end of the 2024 irrigation season. This result is further impacted by the fact that ZR provides all available water to the farmers, with unused water returned to the river basin. Objective/Outcome: To develop improved policies, procedures and systems as a basis for national land management program Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Preparation and Text The corpus of Recommended Prepared and Prepared and implementation of policies, registration Policies and implemented policies implemented policies procedures for systematic regulations and Procedures for and procedures for and procedures for land registration and NAPR IT procedures in place National program systematic registration systematic registration system upgrade Submitted and upgraded NAPR IT and upgraded NAPR IT System System 23-May-2014 31-Jul-2019 30-Sep-2023 30-Sep-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Fully Achieved. Page 28 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) A.2 Intermediate Results Indicators Component: Component 1 Irrigation and Drainage Improvement Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Landowners with access to Number 0.00 7,000.00 10,679.00 new and improved irrigation services 23-May-2014 30-Sep-2023 30-Sep-2023 Land owners with access to Number 0.00 1,300.00 2,127.00 improved irrigation services – female 23-May-2016 30-Oct-2022 30-Sep-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Surpassed. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion National irrigation and Text No strategy Strategy finalized and trategy finalized and Nat. irrigation strategy drainage strategy prepared endorsed by endorsed by prepared and and endorsed government government endorsed. The National Drainage strategy (the draft version) is prepared 23-May-2014 31-Jul-2019 30-Sep-2022 30-Sep-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Page 29 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Fully achieved. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Readiness of proposed Yes/No No Yes Yes program for Reservoir Rehabilitation & 31-Oct-2019 30-Sep-2023 30-Sep-2023 Construction Comments (achievements against targets): Fully achieved. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Strengthening of the Text Tender documents for Strengthening of the Strengthening of the Strengthening of the National Agency for the announcement of National Agency for National Agency for National Agency for Sustainable Land expression of interest Sustainable Land Sustainable Land Sustainable Land Management and Land Use are prepared; tender Management and Management and Management and Monitoring was announced on Land Use Monitoring Land Use Monitoring Land Use Monitoring October 7, 2021 to identify and select an international consultant to prepare a concept paper on establishment and integration of the Page 30 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) database on land resources 30-Apr-2022 30-Sep-2022 30-Sep-2023 30-Sep-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Fully Achieved. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Water User Organization Number 0.00 3.00 3.00 Support Units established and operational 31-May-2022 30-Sep-2023 30-Sep-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Fully achieved. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Farmer Initiative Groups Number 0.00 8.00 8.00 (FIGs) formed 31-May-2022 30-Sep-2023 30-Sep-2023 Page 31 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Comments (achievements against targets): Fully achieved. Component: Component 2 Land Market Development Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Land parcels with use or Number 50,600.00 178,000.00 174,174.00 ownership rights recorded in pilot areas 30-Sep-2020 30-Sep-2023 30-Sep-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Substantially Achieved (97% net of baseline). Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Target population with use Number 0.00 68,000.00 83,984.00 or ownership rights recorded as a result of the Project 23-May-2014 30-Sep-2023 30-Sep-2023 Target population (females) Number 0.00 30,600.00 40,600.00 with land use of ownership rights recorded as a result 23-May-2014 30-Sep-2023 30-Sep-2023 of the Project Comments (achievements against targets): Page 32 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Surpassed. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Complaints received as a Percentage 99.94 99.95 99.97 result of the systematic registration process and 31-Oct-2019 30-Sep-2023 03-May-2023 resolved Comments (achievements against targets): Surpassed. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion IT System Design Completion Percentage 0.00 100.00 100.00 18-Nov-2019 30-Sep-2023 03-May-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Fully achieved. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Page 33 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Target land area with use or Hectare(Ha) 0.00 180,000.00 180,000.00 191,377.00 ownership rights recorded as a result of the Project 23-May-2014 30-Sep-2022 30-Sep-2023 30-Sep-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Surpassed. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Land parcels surveyed in Number 0.00 270,000.00 462,314.00 selected areas during nation- wide systematic land 30-May-2022 30-Sep-2023 30-Sep-2023 registration program Comments (achievements against targets): Surpassed. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion ICT Upgrade and Software Percentage 0.00 97.00 97.00 Development 31-May-2022 30-Sep-2023 30-Sep-2023 Comments (achievements against targets): Page 34 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Fully Achieved. Page 35 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) B. KEY OUTPUTS BY COMPONENT Objective/Outcome 1: Improved delivery of irrigation and drainage services in selected areas 1. Irrigated area per unit of water supplied for Kwemo Samgori (KS) irrigation scheme (m2/m3) Outcome Indicators 2. Irrigated area per unit of water supplied for Zeda Ru (ZR) irrigation scheme (m2/m3) 3. Area provided with irrigation and drainage Services – new and improved (ha) 4. Area supplied with optimal irrigation delivery conditions (ha) 1. Landowners with access to new and improved irrigation services 2. Landowners with access to improved irrigation services – female 3. National irrigation and drainage strategy prepared and endorsed 4. Readiness of proposed program for Reservoir Rehabilitation & Construction Intermediate Results Indicators 5. Strengthening of the National Agency for Sustainable Land Management and Land Use Monitoring 6. Water User Organization Support Units established and operational 7. Farmer Initiative Groups (FIGs) formed 1. 1.91 m3/m2 irrigated area per unit of water supplied for Kwemo Samgori (KS) irrigation scheme 2. 0.68 m3/m2 irrigated area per unit of water supplied for Zeda Ru (ZR) irrigation scheme 3. 17,400 ha with new or improved irrigation and drainage services 4. 8,692 ha supplied with optimal irrigation delivery conditions 5. 10,679 landowners with access to improved irrigation services (2,127 of which are Key Outputs by Component female) (linked to the achievement of the Objective/Outcome 1) 6. National irrigation strategy prepared and endorsed 7. National drainage strategy (in draft form) prepared 8. Preliminary Assessment for Reservoir Rehabilitation and Construction Program completed. 9. 3 WUO support units established and operational 10. 8 Farmer Initiative Groups (FIGs) established 11. National Agency for Sustainable Land Management and Land Use Monitoring strengthened Page 36 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Objective/Outcome 2: Development of improved policies, procedures, and systems as a basis for a national land management program 1. Preparation and implementation of policies, procedures for systematic land Outcome Indicators registration andNAPR IT system upgrade 1. Land parcels with use or ownership rights recorded in pilot areas 2. Target population with use or ownership rights recorded as a result of the Project 3. Target population (females) with land use of ownership rights recorded as a result of the Project 4. Complaints received as a result of the systematic registration process and resolved Intermediate Results Indicators 5. IT System Design Completion 6. Target land area with use or ownership rights recorded as a result of the Project 7. Land parcels surveyed in selected areas during nation-wide systematic land registration program 8. ICT Upgrade and Software Development 1. Policies and procedures for systematic registration prepared and implemented and NAPR IT System upgraded 2. 174,174 land parcels with use or ownership rights recorded in pilot areas 3. 83,984 people of target population with use or ownership rights recorded as a result of the project (of which 40,600 are female) Key Outputs by Component 4. 191,377 ha of target land area with use or ownership rights recorded as a result of (linked to the achievement of the Objective/Outcome 2) the project 5. 99.95 percent of registration applications received processed successfully without involvement of the courts for resolution of appeals 6. 460,109 land parcels surveyed in selected areas during nationwide systematic land registration program 7. ICT upgrade and software development 97 percent complete Page 37 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION A. TASK TEAM MEMBERS Name Role Preparation Peter Goodman Task Team Leader(s) Rufiz Vakhid Chirag-Zade Sr Operations Officer Joop Stoutjesdijk Lead Irrigation Engineer Malcolm D. Childress Sr Land Administration Specialist Ghada Youness Legal Counsel Sandro Nozadze Procurement Specialist(s) Galina Alagardova Financial Management Specialist Darejan Kapanadze Sr Environmental Specialist Joanna Peace De Berry Sr Social Development Specialist Joseph Paul Formoso Senior Finance Officer Usaid I. El-Hanbali Consultant Kunduz Masylkanova Program Coordinator Arman Vatyan Sr Financial Management Specialist Hiromi Yamaguchi Consultant Supervision/ICR Nadege Orlova, Rufiz Vakhid Chirag-Zade, Pierrick Task Team Leader(s) Fraval, Peter Goodman, Wilfried Hundertmark Sven Schlumpberger ICR Author Cecilia Belita Team Member & ICR Co-author Armine Aydinyan, Rahmoune Essalhi, Sepehr Fotovat Procurement Specialist(s) Ahmadi, Sandro Nozadze, Tanvir Hossain Tural Jamalov, Galina Alagardova, Arman Vatyan, Financial Management Specialist Nodar Mosashvili, Damir Leljak, Djamshid Iriskulov Page 38 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Darejan Kapanadze Environmental Specialist Militsa Khoshtaria Team Member Vusala Asadova Procurement Team David Jijelava, Joanna Peace De Berry, Michelle P. Social Specialist Rebosio Calderon, Sophia V. Georgieva, Alkadevi Morarji Patel Prachi Shrikant Tadsare Team Member Malcolm D. Childress Team Member Usaid I. El-Hanbali Team Member Joseph Paul Formoso Team Member Joop Stoutjesdijk Team Member Rebecca Emilie Anne Lacroix Safeguard Specialist - Resettlement Pierre Jacques Lorillou, Ximing Zhang, Felipe Vicente Dam Safety Specialist Lazaro, Maria Guell Pons Kazuhiro Yoshida Team Member Mariam Ghambashidze Team Member Ranu Sinha Team Member Mohammad Ilyas Butt Team Member Rahmoune Essalhi Team Member Prachi Shrikant Tadsare, Ghada Youness Legal Counsel B. STAFF TIME AND COST Staff Time and Cost Stage of Project Cycle No. of staff weeks US$ (including travel and consultant costs) Preparation FY13 15.464 144,365.10 FY14 20.431 219,328.76 FY15 22.778 250,900.48 Page 39 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) FY16 8.938 47,480.21 FY17 3.713 20,888.09 Total 71.32 682,962.64 Supervision/ICR FY15 8.978 75,143.73 FY16 14.475 162,470.76 FY17 21.997 165,881.85 FY18 25.064 259,983.94 FY19 14.357 106,120.99 FY20 22.748 130,000.15 FY21 28.045 161,134.43 FY22 29.840 185,059.38 FY23 23.287 160,704.74 FY24 19.219 123,804.88 Total 208.01 1,530,304.85 Page 40 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT Components Amount at Approval Actual at Project Closing Percentage of (US$, millions)a (US$, millions) Approval Component 1: Irrigation and 54.85 48.60 88.60 Drainage Improvement Component 2: Land Market 12.56 12.37 98.52 Developmentb Component 3: Project Management 3.02 3.71 122.99 Total 70.43 64.69 91.85 Note: a. Total amount reflected in the datasheet of this ICR is US$70.43 million (IBRD approved amount was US$20.43 million but the signed amount was US$20.40 million). b. Includes front-end fee. Page 41 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Attachment to Annex 3 Although the actual amount disbursed in US dollars was 91.85 percent of the approved amount, the amounts based on currency in SDR for IDA and EUR for IBRD were almost 100 percent of the approved amount. The large difference between the amount at approval against actual project cost in US dollars is due to this currency exchange difference of US$5.52 million (see below). As per the World Bank system, the total undisbursed amount was only about US$220,000. Overall, disbursement stands at 99.69 percent of amounts approved in credit/loan currency. Table A3.1 Data from the Borrower’s Audit Report and World Bank System Financier Amount at Approval Actual Amount Disbursed Undisbursed Amount IDA US$50.0M/SDR 32.4M US$45.02M/SDR32.4M US$.05M IBRD US$20.43M/EUR 18.2M US$19.66M/EUR18.0M US$.17M Table A3.2. Estimated and Final Allocations per Project Component (including AF Processed in February 2020) Component At Appraisal (IDA) AF (IBRD) Total Cost Cost Cost (US$, Cost (EUR, Cost (US$, (US$, millions) (SDR, millions) millions) millions) millions) 1. Irrigation and Drainage 45.65 29.67 9.20 8.19 54.85 Improvement 2. Land Market Development 2.25 1.46 10.31 9.19 12.56 3. Project Management 2.10 1.37 0.92 0.82 3.02 Total 50.00 32.50 20.43 18.20 70.43 Page 42 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) ANNEX 4. EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS Introduction 1. The objective of the EFA is to evaluate the ex post economic and financial returns of the GILMDP at project completion in September 2023. The project total costs were estimated at US$50 million equivalent at appraisal in 2014, as a loan from IDA. The project received additional financing of EUR 18.2 million from IBRD in 2020, extending the project to September 2022. The closing date was then further extended to September 2023. Altogether, the project total costs were expected to equal US$70.4 million. 2. The PDOs were to (a) Improve delivery of the irrigation and drainage services in selected areas and (b) Develop improved policies, procedures, and systems as a basis for a national land management. 3. At appraisal in 2014, the EFA calculated the NPV only focusing on the expected benefits from irrigation activities. In 2014, the project was anticipated to generate net incremental financial benefits with an FIRR of 19.6 percent and an FNPV of US$27.2 million and net incremental economic benefits with an EIRR of 17 percent and an ENPV of US$16.3 million. 4. In 2020, as the AF had a stronger land component, the methodology was adjusted to account for additional costs and additional incremental benefits arising from rising prices for irrigated land. In 2020, the project was anticipated to generate net incremental financial benefits with an FIRR of 15.3 percent and an FNPV of US$17.2 million and net incremental economic benefits with an EIRR of 14.9 percent and an ENPV of US$15.8 million. Methodology of the ICR Economic Analysis 5. The EFA at project closing may not fully replicate the approach used at the appraisal stage, although it is better to stay as close as possible to the approach used at appraisal. The ICR team tried to use the same approach as at appraisal and AF stage wherever possible. 6. At the AF stage, project benefits were identified as attributable to (a) irrigated land restoration and return of unused arable land to production, (b) land use efficiency optimization by increasing cropping intensity and crop yields, and (c) diversification into higher-value crops. Key assumptions include the following: (a) a return of about 11,300 ha of unutilized arable land to production (about 65 percent of the command areas were out of production due to the lack of irrigation water supply); (b) significant increases in crop yields by 20 to 30 percent for all crops (except grains) and by 55 percent for wheat and maize (present yields are low); and (c) an increase in cropping intensity from 100 percent to 115 percent due to double cropping. 7. At the parent project appraisal, the EFA calculated the NPV only focusing on the expected benefits from irrigation activities. As the AF has a stronger land component, the methodology was adjusted to account for incremental benefits arising from rising prices for irrigated land. 8. At project completion, the ICR identified project benefits related to improvements in irrigation infrastructure. However, due to the lack of solid data, the increase in land values (although many beneficiaries stated an increase in land values in general, there was no evidence that the values increased as a result of improved irrigation, because values of non-irrigated land increased at the same rates as well) could not be proved at this stage. 9. At the same time, significant cost savings to beneficiaries (that have not been accounted for at the appraisal stage) occurred, as NAPR provided the land registration free of charge. Although, most of Page 43 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) the beneficiaries stated that registration of similar land plots would cost them from GEL 600 to 1,100, the ICR team conservatively assumed cost savings at the minimum level, that is, GEL 600 equivalent at the time of land registration. 10. The project’s fiscal and economic impacts were decided to be evaluated using the same 20-year period (after the start of the project), and the same 10 percent discount rate was used to calculate the NPV, as was done at appraisal of the parent project and at appraisal of the AF. 11. The financial costs were adjusted to correctly assess economic costs associated with the project globally, considering the economy as a whole. To achieve this, taxes were excluded from the financial costs, as tax payments represent just transfer of funds from the point of view of the country. Also, shadow prices have been considered along with the inefficiency characteristic for a transitional economy. The following paragraphs discuss in detail the assumptions made for the economic analysis. 12. For conducting economic analysis, the financial costs were corrected as follows: • PIT, which is included in the labor cost and makes up its 20 percent, has been deducted from the labor costs reflected in the financial costs. • Value added tax (VAT) at the current rate of 18 percent has been deducted out of the O&M and capital costs used in the financial analyses. 13. Identification and application of conversion factors required for the economic analysis was carried out in the following two stages: • Total project costs were broken down into three components: foreign procurement, local procurement, and local labor force. It was calculated that 30 percent of the materials were purchased internationally and 55 percent locally. Nearly 15 percent of the material costs were attributed to labor. Also, 25 percent of construction cost was attributed to labor. • Foreign procurement was considered at world prices and a conversion factor was not used. The standard conversion factor was calculated at 0.96, as Georgia has relatively little import or export taxes and average difference between world and domestic prices is small. The shadow wage factor was calculated using the following formula: SW = W × (1 − t) × (1 − u), where SW is the shadow wage, W is the market wage, t is the income taxation, and u is the unemployment rate of the region. By plugging appropriate numbers for Georgia, the ICR team received a shadow wage factor of 0.64. 14. Then, appropriate conversion factors were applied to each group. The conversion factors applied to the mentioned cost items are given in table A4.1. Table A4.1. Capital Costs Conversion Factors Type of Work Foreign Purchases Local Procurement Materials Labor Force Share in Total Conversion Share in Conversion Share in Conversion Costs, % Factor Total Costs, Factor Total Costs, Factor % % Construction 10 1.0 65 0.96 25 0.64 works Materials 30 1.0 60 0.96 10 0.64 15. After the application of the conversion factors, the resulting capital expenditures were used for the economic analysis. Page 44 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) 16. For the costs associated with Components 2 (Land Market Development) and 3 (Project Management), the conversion factors were 0.72 (as part of the funding was used for procurement of equipment from foreign manufacturers) and 0.64, respectively. 17. The ex post benefits and costs are assessed following the appraisal methodology, considering the actual rehabilitated areas, changes in cropping patterns and yields, and project costs and revising assumptions on future yields and cropping patterns beyond project completion. Economic and financial benefits are estimated as incremental variation between the ‘with project’ (WP) scenario and the ‘without project’ (WOP) scenario over the 20-year project life. To ensure meaningful comparison with appraisal results, a discount rate of 10 percent was used in the analysis. The sensitivity analysis was also conducted to assess the robustness of the results in relation to the key variables that may be subject to some level of uncertainty over time. 18. The analysis mainly builds on the results of the baseline, midterm, and final surveys conducted in 2017, 2020, and at the end of project, in 2023, when the majority of rehabilitation works were completed. The surveys collected comprehensive information of the project area and the landowners, socioeconomic characteristics of farm households, agricultural production technology, and output and input prices in the project areas. The survey results allow assessment of the economic benefit of rehabilitation works. At the parent project appraisal, the analysis conservatively included only the benefits derived from rehabilitation works although capacity building and land ownership entitlements could also result in additional benefits. The data collected were fed into the EFA. 19. The CBA assesses the stream of benefits and costs over the project horizon in the WP and WOP scenarios. At the parent project appraisal, the WP scenario built on a baseline survey conducted in the rehabilitated areas before and the endline survey conducted after most of the rehabilitation works were completed, while the WOP scenario builds on a survey conducted in the non-rehabilitated areas during the same periods. Benefits consider the incremental incomes from agricultural activities for different types of crops (cereals, vegetables, fruits, and pasture) in the WOP and WP scenarios. The project costs consider the investment and recurring costs. In the economic analysis, the financial prices were converted into economic prices by removing taxes and subsidies from input and output prices, as explained above in detail. Irrigation and Drainage Infrastructure Rehabilitation 20. At appraisal, the project planned support to two regions with the rehabilitation of I&D infrastructure over 26,000 ha. At completion, the project managed to rehabilitate up to 17,400 ha representing 67 percent of the target value. At appraisal of the parent project, the rehabilitation costs were estimated at US$1,783 per ha, while at completion, the rehabilitation costs were US$2,916 per ha. Project Benefits 21. The project generated significant benefits, increasing irrigation farmers’ net margin. The rehabilitation works allowed for increased and reliable supply of irrigation water. The improved water supply contributed to enhanced revenues for the farmers in the project area through increase in (a) crop yield for almost all major crops and (b) increase in cropping intensity. Additionally, through the land market development component, farmers received the services associated with the land registration free of charge. 22. Change in crop yields. The survey results indicate a noticeable increase in yield for the same crops in the rehabilitated areas compared to non-rehabilitated areas. Despite the fact that the majority of rehabilitation works were completed at the time of the endline survey in 2023, in some areas the full potential of achievable yields due to the improved water supply could not be realized. However, based on Page 45 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) yield improvements achieved in the rehabilitated areas in the first seasons after the rehabilitation completion, the analysis conservatively assumes that the latest recorded yield will continue over the project lifetime with no further yield increase. 23. Improvement in cropping intensity. The endline survey highlights a change in cropping intensity in different areas and for different crops. The analysis conservatively assumes a cropping intensity of 2 for some crops. 24. Returns to agricultural landowners due to land registration cost savings. Most of the beneficiaries stated that registration of similar land plots would cost them from GEL 600 to GEL 1,100, and the ICR team conservatively assumed cost savings at the minimum level, that is, GEL 600 equivalent at the time of land registration. These benefits were calculated in US dollars at the time of occurrence, using historical exchange rates. Project Costs 25. This analysis considers different costs associated with the project. First, it accounts for all the costs, including (a) irrigation and drainage improvement (capital costs), (b) land market development (including capacity building), and (c) project management costs. All project costs were calculated in US dollars and represent actual expenses during project implementation. Results of the Cost Benefit Analysis 26. Financial returns to the farm households. The project investments generate net incremental financial benefits to farm households estimated at US$199 per ha compared to non-rehabilitated areas over a horizon of 20 years. The FIRR is estimated at 12.57 percent and the FNPV is estimated at US$3.47 million at a discount rate of 10 percent. The benefit-to-cost ratio is estimated at 1.09. The results are summarized in table A4.2. Table A4.2. Results of the CBA - Financial Results Financial Indicators ICR Values FNPV financial net incremental benefits (US$) 3,465,865 FNPV financial net incremental benefits per ha (US$) 199 FIRR (Percent) 12.57% Discounted benefit-to-cost ratio 1.09 27. The economic analysis shows that the project generates net incremental economic benefits to farm households estimated at US$262 per ha compared to non-rehabilitated areas over a horizon of 20 years. The project generates an EIRR of 14.73 percent and an ENPV of US$4.56 million at a discount rate of 10 percent. The benefit-to-cost ratio is estimated at 1.15, as shown in table A4.3. Table A4.3. Results of the CBA - Economic Results Economic Indicators ICR Values ENPV economic net incremental benefits (US$) 4,559,452 ENPV economic net incremental benefits per ha (US$) 262 EIRR (Percent) 14.73 Discounted benefit-to-cost ratio 1.15 Sensitivity Analysis of the Project Results 28. To assess the robustness of the results, a sensitivity analysis was performed on key benefits that will occur after the project completion—benefits from increase in crop yield in the project areas. The sensitivity analysis tests the impact of a 10 percent to 40 percent decrease in the cropping intensity on the EIRR starting from 2024. The results are shown in table A4.4. Page 46 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Table A4.4. Results of Sensitivity Analysis - Economic Results Assumptions for Sensitivity Analysis ICR Values EIRR for 10 percent decrease in benefits (percent) 13.56 EIRR for 20 percent decrease in benefits (percent) 12.27 EIRR for 30 percent decrease in benefits (percent) 10.82 EIRR for 40 percent decrease in benefits (percent) 9.18 29. The economic results are robust to changes in the cropping intensity. Variations in cropping intensity have only a slight impact on the EIRR. If the 10 percent EIRR level is considered the minimum acceptable threshold, the project remains economically justified even if irrigation benefits are reduced by 35.2 percent. Summary of Financial and Economic Results 30. The financial and economic analysis results show that the project exhibits substantial level of performance even though some benefits were not or could not be accounted for in the CBA at the ICR stage. Those benefits include the following: (a) Additional benefits from the land market development component. As mentioned earlier, due to the lack of solid data, increase in land values (although many beneficiaries stated an increase in land values in general, there was no evidence that the values increased as a result of improved irrigation, because values of non-irrigated land increased at the same rates as well) could not be proved at this stage and was not accounted for in the CBA at the ICR stage. However, even though reliable numbers were not available, this benefit likely has been realized at some level. Also, the land registration process in principle would lower the likelihood of conflicts between the landowners (land ownership disputes) and minimize the lawsuit cases (unfortunately, the ICR team was not able to get statistical data on lawsuits regarding land ownership disputes), though it was not possible to account for it. Furthermore, registration of land in general is considered conducive to promoting land transactions. As illustrated in figureA4.1, sale and purchase transactions have increased by 116 percent between 2013 and 2023, substantiating that the land market reforms have facilitated an increase in land transactions. Nonetheless, quantification of this benefit is difficult, and it was also not included in the EFA during appraisal and AF. Furthermore, registration of land also allows farmers to both apply for agricultural subsidies and use the land as collateral for loans. This aspect is difficult to quantify economically. Page 47 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Figure A4.1. Trends in Sale and Purchase Transactions Source: NAPR. (b) Broader socioeconomic benefits. During project implementation, an additional benefit was derived from temporary job generation. The source for temporary job creation was construction activities during project implementation (retrospective analysis of similar projects shows that labor costs comprise between 20 percent to 25 percent of total costs at minimum). After the PIT (20 percent) is paid, 80 percent is paid as a salary to the employees and can be considered as an economic benefit. While this benefit was actually realized during project implementation and could be calculated, the ICR team did not account for it to make the EFAs at appraisal and ICR stages more comparable. 31. Table A4.5 provides a summary of the financial and economic results. Table A4.5. Summary of Financial and Economic Results Economic or Financial Indicator Values Financial Results FNPV financial net incremental benefits (US$) 3,465,865 FNPV financial net incremental benefits per ha (US$/ha) 199 FIRR (Percent) 12.57 Discounted benefit-to-cost ratio 1.09 Economic Results ENPV financial net incremental benefits (US$) 4,559,452 ENPV financial net incremental benefits per ha (US$/ha) 262 EIRR (Percent) 14.73 Discounted benefit-to-cost ratio 1.15 Comparison of the Appraisal(s) and ICR Analyses 32. Similar approaches were used in conducting the EFA of the project at the appraisal, AF, and completion stages. The results show that the project performed slightly worse at completion, with an EIRR of 14.73 percent, compared to the projected 17 percent at appraisal of the parent project. The FIRR was also lower at 12.57 percent versus 19.6 percent at appraisal. Various factors explain the differences between the economic results at appraisal and completion. First, the rehabilitated area at completion was smaller than what was planned at appraisal for the parent project by about 33 percent, leading to slightly Page 48 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) lower irrigation benefits. Additionally, due to the lack of solid data, increase in land values (although many beneficiaries stated an increase in land values in general, there was no evidence that the values increased as a result of improved irrigation, because values of non-irrigated land increased at the same rates as well) could not be proved at this stage and was therefore not considered. On the other hand, the yields achieved slightly exceeded expectations at appraisal (source: endline survey). The assumptions and financial indicators used in the appraisal and the current analyses are summarized in table A4.6. Table A4.6. Summary of Results at Appraisal and at ICR Analyses Key Assumptions Appraisal for Parent Project Appraisal for AF ICR Total area for rehabilitation (ha) 25,749 15,700 17,400 Total FNPV (US$, millions) 27.2 17.2 3.47 FIRR (%) 19.6 15.3 12.57 Total ENPV (US$, millions) 16.3 15.8 4.56 EIRR (%) 17.0 14.9 14.73 Per area FNPV (US$/ha) 1,056 1,095 199 Per area ENPV (US$/ha) 634 1,006 262 33. Additionally, the project efficiency was compared to other similar projects on the cost efficiency. There were no comparable projects in Georgia during the same period, but there was one project with similar scale and scope in the Caucasus region, in Azerbaijan—US$107.68 million Water Users Association Development Support Project, financed by the World Bank (implemented during 2011–2018). As there were some similarities and also some differences, the cost per ha irrigated land (see table A4.7) was compared. Table A4.7. Comparison to Other Similar Projects in Efficiency Name of the Project Location Cost per ha of Irrigated Land at Project Completion (US$) GILMDP Georgia 3,000 Water Users Association Development Support Azerbaijan 725 Project 34. A comparison with the abovementioned project in Azerbaijan reveals that the current project has a higher cost per ha irrigated land than the Water Users Association Development Support Project in Azerbaijan. While this could suggest high costs in Georgia, this comparison should be taken with a big grain of salt, despite the similarity in project nature, since the extent of works could differ drastically. The costs in Azerbaijan are even lower than those expected for Georgia at appraisal (US$1,783). Page 49 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) ANNEX 5. BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS ANNEX 5.A. COMMENTS PROVIDED BY PIU (MEPA) "Thank you and the team very much for the report. We have thoroughly reviewed it and believe it comprehensively and objectively describes the project, its achievements, and the challenges faced. We appreciate your efforts in this regard. However, we have a concern regarding the assessment of M&E, which was rated as modest. We feel that the project has utilized all available resources effectively to streamline its operations, address existing challenges, and provide necessary data and analysis for informed decision-making. Despite the challenges encountered in identifying appropriate indicators, we believe that the M&E assessment should reflect a higher level of achievement, similar to the overall assessment of the project. If you disagree with our assessment, we would appreciate a breakdown or a more detailed explanation and rationale for the modest rating of M&E." Note: These comments were received via E-mail from the PIU, and no further comments were received from the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Agriculture. ANNEX 5.B. COMMENTS PROVIDED BY PIU (NAPR) “We wish to thank you and the team for doing such a wonderful job in capturing the hard work that project has completed over the years and for recognizing NAPR’s efforts in implementing the SLR in Georgia. “ Note: These comments were received via E-mail from the PIU, and no further comments were received from the Ministry of Justice Page 50 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) ANNEX 6: SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS 1. Project Appraisal Document (Parent Project) Report no. 862 2. Project Paper (Additional Financing) Report no. 3478 3. Financing Agreement Credit 5456-GE 4. Amendment to the Financing Agreement Credit 5456-GE 5. Loan Agreement Loan 9043-GE 6. Implementation Status and Results Reports 1–19 7. Aide Memoires 8. Restructuring Paper Report No. RES32332 (June 7, 2018) 9. Restructuring Paper Report No. RES50199 (September 21, 2022) 10. Borrower ICR Prepared by MEPA (October 2023) 11. Borrower ICR Prepared by NAPR (October 2023) 12. NAPR Project Status Report ended July 2023 13. MEPA Project Status Report Version 22 ended July 2023 14. Baseline Survey for Component 1 (January 2017) 15. Mid-term Survey for Component 1 (November 2020) 16. Final Survey for Component 1 (June 2023) 17. Georgia Country Partnership Strategy FY14–17 Report No. 85251-GE 18. Georgia Country Partnership Framework FY19–22 Report no. 121853-GE-GE 19. Georgia Performance and Learning Review of Country Partnership Framework FY19–22 20. Report No. 166148-GE 21. Georgia Country Partnership Framework FY24–28 Concept Note 22. Georgian Government’s Irrigation Strategy 2017–2025 23. Agriculture and Rural Development Strategy for Georgia 2021–2027 24. Georgia 2021–2024 “Toward Building a European State Program” 25. Project Appraisal Document for Georgia Resilient Agriculture Irrigation and Land Project (GRAIL, P175629) Page 51 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) ANNEX 7. THEORY OF CHANGE DETAILS 1. The PAD did not require a TOC. A TOC was created for this ICR using the information provided in the PAD covering higher-level objectives, the PDO, Results Framework, and description of activities under the project components. The TOC key assumptions include the following: (a) there will be sufficient water available to supply the irrigation schemes, (b) there will be sufficient demand from farmers for irrigation, (c) the GA will be able to operate the irrigation schemes and generate adequate revenue through water tariffs, (d) there is sufficient engagement and interest from farmers in on-farm irrigation institutions, and (e) NAPR is able to procure a firm or develop capacity to conduct field surveys. Figure A7.1. TOC at Project Appraisal Page 52 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) ANNEX 8. DESCRIPTION OF REVISIONS TO PDO INDICATORS 1. As part of the June 2018 restructuring, the formulation of the original PDO indicator measuring the area provided with improved irrigation and drainage services was adjusted to include the new area provided with irrigation water to align the definition of this indicator with the World Bank corporate results indicator at the time. In addition, a sub-indicator measuring the new area was added. The target value was also decreased due to cost concerns. 2. During the February 2020 restructuring associated with the AF, the original PDO indicator on the recommended policies and procedures for national program of land registration submitted to the Government was revised to reflect the expanded scope of Component 2 under the AF and track preparation and implementation of policies and procedures for systematic land registration and NAPR IT system upgrade. The other changes to the PDO indicators included the introduction of a new outcome- level sub-indicator to measure the water volume effectively supplied to WUOs within the command area, acknowledging the importance of WUOs. The end target for the PDO indicator measuring the area provided with new and improved I&D Services was decreased again along with the adjusted definition of how this indicator will be measured to reflect only the area irrigated by registered consumers to better reflect operational reality. Furthermore, the approach on data to be collected to track the sub-indicator on new I&D area was revised to measure total area of land provided with I&D services in the command area of the three rehabilitated schemes with an accompanying adjustment to the end target. 3. As part of the September 2022 restructuring, the original PDO indicator measuring the volume of irrigation water supplied to project rehabilitated schemes was replaced by two new PDO-level indicators measuring the irrigated area per unit water supplied separately for the KS and ZR schemes. At the same time, the other PDO sub-indicator, which was introduced at the February 2020 restructuring to measure the water volume supplied to WUOs, was dropped. The replacement of the indicator related to volume of irrigation water and the drop of WUOs-related indicator was processed due to concerns around attribution and the influence of external factors on these indicators and significant delays in WUO establishment. Finally, the end target for the area with improved I&D services was revised upward, as the definition of the indicator was updated to measure the area where irrigation delivery conditions have been improved or where no irrigation took place before, regardless of the existence of a contract, and including private irrigation schemes that could develop as a result of the improvements. Although the end target was increased, it remained lower compared to its original value at entry due to its revisions downward at the first two restructurings. The target values and definitions of the corresponding sub- indicators were also updated accordingly. Furthermore, a new sub-indicator to measure the area provided with irrigation services that allow optimal distribution to farmers’ plots was added to capture the degree of improvement provided. The areas with optimal irrigation conditions are those in which, among other requirements, secondary and tertiary canals have also been rehabilitated. Page 53 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) ANNEX 9. CHANGES IN THE INTERMEDIATE RESULTS INDICATORS Original PAD Restructuring AF (February 2020) Restructuring (September 2022) (June 2018) IRIs IRI: Water users provided with End target value Dropped and replaced by IRI: Landowners new/improved irrigation and reduced from with access to new and improved irrigation drainage services (CRI) 31,000 Ha to services. End target value changed from Target value: 31,000 Ha 24,000 Ha 6,400 to 7,000 owners. Sub-indicator: Water users Target value Land owners with access to improved provided with irrigation and reduced from irrigation services - female. drainage services - female 3,100 to 2,400 Ha End target value changed from 2,400 to (CRI) Target value: 3,100 Ha 1,300. IRI: National irrigation and No change No change No change drainage strategy prepared and endorsed End target text: Strategy finalized and endorsed by government New IRI: Readiness of proposed program for Reservoir Target’s text was changed to Yes or No. Rehabilitation & Construction. End target text: Reservoir Rehabilitation & Construction Program assessed and prioritized against multiple criteria and verified through stakeholder consultation New IRI: Strengthening of the National Agency for No change Sustainable Land Management and Land Use Monitoring End target text: Spatial land use and land management information updated and used for policy analysis New IRI: Farmer Initiative Groups (FIGs) formed. End target value: 3 Page 54 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Original PAD Restructuring AF (February 2020) Restructuring (September 2022) (June 2018) New IRI: Service area locally managed by WUOs Dropped Target value was 12,560 Ha. New IRI: Complaints received during the implementation Dropped of Component 1 activities and redressed satisfactorily Target value was 80%. New IRI: Total number of beneficiaries, that benefit from Dropped new/improved irrigation services End target value: 21,400 IRI: Number of land titles No change Dropped and replaced by IRI: Land parcels with use or No change registered in project pilot ownership rights recorded in pilot areas areas Targeted value changed to 178,000. Targeted value: 48,000 New IRI: Target population with use or ownership No change Rights recorded as a result of the project End target value: 68,000 New sub-indicator: Target population (females) with No change land use of ownership rights recorded as a result of the project End target value: 30,600 New IRI: Complaints received as a result of the No change systematic registration process and redressed satisfactorily End target percentage: 99.95% New IRI: IT System Design Completion Target’s unit of measure changed from Yes to End target text: Yes Percentage and end target percentage to 100% New IRI: Land parcels surveyed in selected areas during nation-wide systematic land registration program End target value: 270,000 New IRI: ICT Upgrade and Software Development. End target percentage: 100% Page 55 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Original PAD Restructuring AF (February 2020) Restructuring (September 2022) (June 2018) IRI: Direct project No change Dropped beneficiaries (CRI) End target value: 50,000 Sub-indicator: Female No change Dropped beneficiaries (CRI) End target value: 5,000 Page 56 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) ANNEX 10. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDO AND INTERMEDIATE RESULTS INDICATORS Table A10.1. Achievements of PDO and IRIs as Appraised Indicator Baseline Target as Actual Achievement Appraised Achieved of Target (%) PDO indicators Absolute volume of irrigation water 67 95 72.9 21 supplied to Project rehabilitated schemes (million m3 to first Project schemes) Area provided with irrigation and 0 26,000 17,400 67 drainage services – Improved (ha) Recommended policies and procedures The corpus of Recommended Recommended 100 for national program of land registration registration policies and policies and submitted to government regulations and procedures for procedures for procedures in national national place program program submitted submitted Table A10.2. Achievements of PDO and IRIs for Objectives after First Restructuring Indicator Baseline Revised Target Actual Achievement after First Achieved of Target (%) Restructuring PDO indicators Absolute volume of irrigation water 67 95 72.9 21 supplied to Project rehabilitated schemes (million m3 to first Project schemes) Area provided with new/improved 0 20,000 17,400 87 irrigation and drainage services (ha) Sub-indicator: Area provided with new 0 20,000 2,900 15 irrigation or drainage services (ha) Recommended policies and procedures for The corpus of Recommended Recommended 100 national program of land registration registration policies and policies and submitted to government regulations procedures for procedures for and national national procedures in program program place submitted submitted Table A10.3. Achievements of PDO and IRIs for Objectives after AF and Second Restructuring Indicator Baseline Revised Actual Achievement Target after Achieved of Target (%) AF and Second Restructuring PDO indicators Absolute volume of irrigation water supplied 67 95 72.9 21 to Project rehabilitated schemes (million m3 to first Project schemes) Sub-indicator: Volume of irrigation water 0 66 Undefined No WUOs effectively supplied to the WUOs in bulk created within the Project rehabilitated schemes (million m3) Page 57 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Indicator Baseline Revised Actual Achievement Target after Achieved of Target (%) AF and Second Restructuring Area provided with irrigation and drainage 0 12,000 8,387 70 services (ha) Sub-indicator: Area provided with irrigation 0 15,700 14,500 92 and drainage services – Improved (ha) Preparation and implementation of policies, The corpus of Prepared and Prepared 99 procedures for systematic land registration registration implemented and and NAPR IT system upgrade regulations policies and implemented and procedures policies and procedures in for systematic procedures place registration for and upgraded systematic NAPR IT registration system and 97% upgraded NAPR IT system Table A10.4. Achievements of PDO and IRIs for Objectives after Third Restructuring (same as annex 1) Indicator Baseline Revised Actual Achievement Target after Achieved of Target (%) Third Restructuring PDO indicators Irrigated area per unit of water supplied for 0.57 1.63 1.91 126 Kwemo Samgori (KS) irrigation scheme (m2/m3) Irrigated area per unit of water supplied for Zeda 0.79 0.93 0.68 0 Ru (ZR) irrigation scheme (m2/m3) Area provided with irrigation and drainage 0 17,400 17,400 100 services (ha) Sub-indicator: Area provided with irrigation and 0 14,500 14,500 100 drainage services - Improved (ha) Sub-indicator: Area provided with irrigation and 0 2,900 2,900 100 drainage services - New (ha) Area supplied with optimal irrigation delivery 0 8,750 8,692 99 conditions (ha) Page 58 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Indicator Baseline Revised Actual Achievement Target after Achieved of Target (%) Third Restructuring Preparation and implementation of policies, The corpus Prepared and Prepared 99 procedures for systematic land registration and of implemented and NAPR IT system upgrade registration policies and implemented regulations procedures policies and and for procedures procedures systematic for in place registration systematic and registration upgraded and 97% NAPR IT upgraded system NAPR IT system Page 59 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) ANNEX 11. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE BORROWER ICR ANNEX 11.A EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE BORROWER ICR (PROVIDED BY MEPA PIU) Introduction The Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (also referred as ILMDP or the Project) is financed by the World Bank. The World Bank’s Board of Executive Directors approved an IDA credit (credit number 5456-GE) in the amount of US$50 million to finance the ILMDP on May 23, 2014. The Financing Agreement was signed on November 11, 2014, and the project became effective on March 13, 2015. The Project received additional financing of 18,2 million EUR (IBRD Loan No. 9043-GE) approved on January 20, 2020, extending the project to September 2023. Altogether, the Project amounted to US$50 million (IDA) and 18,2 million EUR (IBRD) with a disbursement rate of 100% with IDA funds and 99% with IBRD funds by the loan closer data. The project consisted of three components: Component 1. - Irrigation and Drainage Improvement. Component 2. - Land Market Development Component 3. - Project Management. Component 1 was implemented by the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Agriculture through the Project Implementation Unit (PIU). Component 2 was implemented by the Ministry of Justice through the National Agency for Public Registry. The present report captures implementation modalities and observed results of Component 1 of the project. Project Context Agriculture has historically been a significant sector in Georgia's economy, contributing to employment, rural development, and export. Agriculture is a primary source of income and livelihood for rural communities in Georgia. It employs over 50 percent of the population and contributes 25 percent of exports. While Georgia has favorable agro-climatic conditions and a diverse range of agricultural products, the agricultural infrastructure, including irrigation, suffers from significant problems. In addition, Georgia experiences periods of water scarcity, especially during dry seasons. Weak agricultural infrastructure directly influences the sector's performance, quality, and quantity of produce, negatively affecting Georgia's competitiveness in the regional market. Therefore, Irrigation infrastructure rehabilitation plays a vital role both for sustainable agriculture development and as well as for sustainable water management. The project was an attempt to address the existing agricultural infrastructure problems in the sector. It was a follow-up project to The World Bank-funded Irrigation and Drainage Community Development Project (IDCDP), which made some infrastructure improvements. It served as a basis to initiate and start an Irrigation and Land Market Development Project. Page 60 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Project Development Objectives Overall, the project aimed at addressing the challenges in Georgia's agricultural sector, enhancing productivity, and promoting inclusive rural development through irrigation and drainage improvement, as well as land registration reforms. The Development Objective of Component 1 was to improve the delivery of irrigation and drainage services in selected areas. Project sub-components The project consisted of two major sub-components: (i) Irrigation and Drainage Rehabilitation and Modernization (ii) Strengthening of Irrigation and Drainage Institutions Sub-component (i).: Irrigation and Drainage Rehabilitation and Modernization This subcomponent financed the rehabilitation and modernization of existing irrigation and drainage schemes selected under the Project consisting of primary, secondary and tertiary canals and other major structures such as head-works and dams, including design, construction and construction supervision. Sub-component (ii): Strengthening of Irrigation and Drainage Institutions Subcomponent Under this subcomponent the project aimed at supporting the establishment and operation of structures, regulatory frameworks and procedures to enable effective and efficient maintenance of rehabilitated infrastructure. Main Beneficiaries In the framework of ILMDP original design, the project targeted the Kvemo Samgori Scheme in the Kakheti Region, the Tbisi-Kumisi Scheme in the Kvemo Kartli Region, and the Zeda Ru Scheme in the Shida Kartli Region. With the additional financing, the Project rehabilitated secondary and tertiary canals in the Kvemo Kartli Region, and the Zeda Ru Scheme. The project aimed to restore irrigation and drainage systems serving approximately 17,400 ha thereby affecting 21,400 beneficiaries. Implementation Modalities The rehabilitation and modernization of the irrigation schemes occurred in two stages or two batches. Within stage 1/Batch 1 main canals of Kvemo Samgori, Zeda Ru, Tbisi-Kumisi schemes were rehabilitated. Within stage 2 modernization of secondary, and tertiary networks (canals or pipelines) and hydraulic structures took place in Zeda Ru and Kvemo Samgori schemes. In total, as a result of civil works under the Irrigation and Drainage Rehabilitation and Modernization sub-component, the following has been achieved: - a 27 km-long main canal on the Zeda Ru system - a 25 km-long main canal on the Kvemo Samgori system - a 15 km-long main canal and a 24 km-long pipeline on the Tbilisi-Kumisi system - a 55 km-long secondary and tertiary canals on the Zeda Ru system - a 125 km-long secondary and tertiary canals on the Kvemo Samgori system. Page 61 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) In total 271 km of canals (main, secondary, and tertiary) have been rehabilitated. In addition to rehabilitation of main canals of the three systems, PIU rehabilitated two dams – Sioni and Algeti dams by the summer of 2018. Sioni Dam (on the Iori River) is a multipurpose system. It is used for irrigation (68400 ha irrigated in Kakheti and Kvemo Kartli regions), power generation (4 hydropower plants downstream), and partly for the water supply of Tbilisi. Algeti Dam (on the Algeti River) serves as a long- term storage reservoir used for irrigation purposes. The irrigation area amounts to 9,500 ha (Tbisi-Kumisi Irrigation Scheme and Marneuli Irrigation Scheme). In parallel to civil works, institutional strengthening measures were carried out. In particular, the Irrigation Strategy and Action Plan were elaborated followed by the development and approval of several laws and regulations related to the Law on Water User Organizations (approved in December 2019). These included the charter of water user organizations, registration forms, and the contract between the Ministry and water user organizations. Furthermore, various forms of technical assistance were provided, and capacity-building activities were carried out. These included training, study tours, the purchase of vehicles, technical devices office equipment. All these resulted in improved irrigation service delivery, better access to irrigation water, and increased agriculture productivity for 17,000 land owners in the targeted schemes. The improved conveyance in the main canal in the Kvemo Samgori scheme allowed a private investor to develop a farm outside the command area. Additionally, in line with additional financing and project activity revisions, the PIU has implemented other agricultural support measures: - Installation and operationalization of dam safety measures for the Sioni and Algeti dams. The PIU supported the improvement of monitoring systems for these dams, including the installation of reservoir water level sensors, hydrometeorological stations, and piezometers. - Furthermore, a number of remedial works were carried out to strengthen the instrumentation system, including the installation of piezometers, a meteorological station, and an automatic monitoring system. - Provision of technical support to the newly established LEPL National Agency for Sustainable Land Management and Land Use Monitoring. Specifically, the PIU assisted in piloting the development and establishment of an integrated database on land resources in two pilot municipalities: Lagodekhi and Kvareli. - As part of the first phase of reservoir feasibility assessments (comprising preliminary assessment, technical investigation, and final assessment), the PIU conducted the preliminary assessment of 24 long-listed reservoirs. Out of these, 10 dams were identified and selected for the subsequent phases of technical investigation and final assessment, which are planned to take place in the upcoming GRAIL project. Impact level changes Through the project implementation, PIU administered baseline, mid-term and end-line studies. Based on the study reports the project demonstrated positive dynamics at the end showing significant progress in improving the delivery of irrigation services, enhancing agricultural productivity, and Page 62 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) increasing access to irrigation water in the project target areas. In particular, based on reports, ILMDP has demonstrated: Improved Access to Irrigation: The project has resulted in improved access to irrigation services in the project target areas. In the full beneficiary group, 69% of farming households and 86% of large farmers were able to connect to the irrigation system in project target settlements by the end of the project in 2022. Increase in Agricultural Productivity: The availability of irrigation water has contributed to increased agricultural productivity. Access to irrigation water has had a significant positive impact on crop productivity, with increases ranging from 40% to 63% for different crops. Regardless of the farm's size, the use of irrigation water increased productivity by 50% on average, and, respectively, was reflected in total incomes generated through this activity. The average annual agricultural income generated by large farmers without irrigation was approximately USD 5,100, while the amount exceeds USD 30,500 for irrigated farms (80% difference). The positive effect of irrigation on the productivity of marginal, small and medium-size farmers was also significant, resulting in a 70% increase in overall agricultural income. Satisfaction with Irrigation Service: Overall, households in the project target areas have expressed satisfaction with the volume and quality of irrigation water provided. The majority of households reported that irrigation water was supplied in sufficient quantities and met their needs. However, the studies demonstrated that challenges remain, such as addressing water availability issues, improving infrastructure maintenance, and promoting the adoption of advanced irrigation techniques. ANNEX 11.B. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE BORROWER ICR (PROVIDED BY NAPR, PIU) A. Introduction Following the breakup of the Soviet Union, Georgia began its long journey of transformation as the modern state with the rule of law, functioning democracy and the market economy. The Government of Georgia faced a significant national problem to land registration in rural communities across Georgia, in that rural land registration of both agriculture and urban lands remained very low, ranging from 50-75% unregistered based on municipalities. For all countries, having effective land registration systems is a critical factor to facilitate effective land administration policy and to ensure the protection of private and public interests related to land ownership and investments. Effective systems of land administration and comprehensive land registration represent the basis for the productive functioning of market economies, the development of the agricultural sector, and the sustainable and effective management of land resources, which will contribute to stable economic growth. Following the string of land reforms which started in 90s, Government of Georgia a new ambitious land reform in 2016, following the enactment of the Law on Special Procedures for Systematic and Sporadic Registration of Land Titles and Improvement of Cadastral Data under the State Project. World Bank, Under Component 2, ILMDP financed the pilot phase of a land registration program designed to redefine and test the policies and procedures for registration of agricultural land that would allow the majority of Page 63 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) existing land ownership rights to be registered. Following the successful completion of the SLR in the 12 Pilot Areas, Government of Georgia officially requested the additional financing for the Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (IDA 5456-GE) with the letter N: 07-04/29319 of March 20, 2019. Georgia and IBRD signed Loan Agreement (IBRD 9043- GE) on March 30, 2020, ratified by the Parliament of Georgia on April 22, 2020 to scale up systematic land registration activities in the irrigated areas approved by the Government of Georgia. In addition to conducting the systematic land registration activities in the areas with irrigation schemes of the Component 1 of the ILMPD Project, Component 2 focused on capacity building and enhancing the IT capabilities of the NAPR, laying ground for further testing and implementing of innovative technologies. B. Project Results and Outcomes Project completed survey and registration activities in the initial pilot areas as well as additional irrigated areas. Majority of the land plots were identified and owners defined. ILMDP registered 174,174 land plots (97.85% Completion Rate), with the area of 191,377 ha (106.32% Completion Rate). Project registered the ownership rights of 83,984 (123.51% Completion Rate) owners, from which 40,600 are women (132.68% Completion Rate). IT System Design Completion indictor reached 100% and ICT Upgrade and Software Development indicator is completed by 97%. National Rollout of Systematic Land Registration overachieved its initial estimates. During the project implementation period NAPR surveyed 460,109 land plots (171.23% Completion Rate), with the total area of 138,622 ha. The over completion of the indicator is the occurred because the GoG assigned 720 surveyors to National Rollout, exceeding the intended 300 surveyors, number which was used during the design of the project restructuring. The complete list of outcome indicators and intermediary indicators for Component 2 is given below: Table 1. Project Indicator Progress. End Target Performanc Intermedia Indicator Name Baseline (Inc. Current Status (Inc. Baseline) e (%) (Inc. te Target Baseline) Baseline) 1 2 3 4 174,174 Current Pilot Result 45,012 Land parcels with use Current Irrigation Result 71,750 or ownership rights 50600 178000 Sporadic Registration using 97.85% recorded in pilot areas 6,812 (Number) SLR Methodology or Data Updated Irrigation Baseline 50,600 (Oct 31, 2020) Target population with 83,984 use or ownership Current Pilot Result 24,179 0 19000 68000 rights recorded as a 123.51% result of the Project Current Irrigation Result 59,805 Page 64 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) (Number) Target population 40,600 (females) with land Current Pilot Result 11,244 use of ownership 0 8000 30600 rights recorded as a 132.68% Current Irrigation Result 29,356 result of the Project (Number) Target land area with 191,377 use or ownership Current Pilot Result 79,964 rights recorded as a 0 180000 106.32% result of the Project Current Irrigation Result 111,413 (Hectare(Ha)) Complaints received as 99.97% a result of the Received Apps 141,835 systematic registration 99.94% 99.95% Apps Resolved 140,787 99.97% process and resolved (Percentage) Court Cases 48 Land parcels surveyed in selected areas during nation-wide 0 270000 460,109 171.23% systematic land registration program (Number) IT Component IT System Design Completion NA NA NA 100% NA (Percentage) ICT Upgrade and Software NA NA NA 97% NA Development (Percentage) C. Policies and Procedures ILMDP actively developed and tested new policies and approaches to the systematic land registration to determine the most viable option for the National Rollout. Guidelines for Systematic Land Registration During the inception stages of the ILMDP, project hired an international consultant to design and develop the guidelines for systematic land registration. The guidelines were tested during the first stage of the systematic land registration, when project was implementing the fully outsourced approach to the systematic land registration process. Page 65 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Systematic Land Registration Implementation Methodology ILMDP tested three approaches for systematic land registration during the pilot: Full outsource, In-house and Hybrid. The In-house and Hybrid approaches of the systematic registration turned out to be the most successful and viable alternatives for the systematic land registration. With the Hybrid approach, the survey fieldwork is contracted while the legal part is entirely done by the NAPR. The contractor is required to perform boundary measurements under the close guidance of the project staff who collect and analyze registration documents provided by the owners. The contractor is also required to set up an office in the pilot area, participate in public awareness and information activities, Public Display and dispute resolution. It is also obliged to correct errors and perform verification of survey results. With the in-house approach, all technical and legal fieldwork is done by NAPR, which fully eliminates the need of contractors in the systematic registration process. Legislative Amendments Based on the findings of the pilot project, ILMDP supported the development and drafting of the legislative amendments to the Law on Special Procedures for Systematic and Sporadic Registration of Land Titles and Improvement of Cadastral Data under the State Project, which changed its name to Law on Procedures for Systematic and Sporadic Registration of Land Titles and Improvement of Cadastral Data. The new amendments simplified and optimized the registration process, which were further tested during the implementation of the pilot. The sound legislative basis developed and adopted during the implementation of the Systematic Land Registration process encouraged the NAPR Leadership and the Government of Georgia to launch the National Rollout for Systematic Land Registration. Land Consolidation Feasibility Study The objective of the technical assistance from the FAO was to conduct a feasibility study to assess the feasibility of implementing land consolidation pilot projects as standalone activities as well as integrated with systematic registration of land rights. The pilots are expected to be implemented in areas where the World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (ILMDP) and/or the subsequent Georgia Resilient Agriculture Irrigation and Land Project GRAIL) is also supporting improved access to irrigation. The outcome of the project was a Feasibility Study Report, which produced important results and roadmap for the potential implementation of the land consolidation in Georgia. Strengthening National Addressing System Project financed the strengthening of the national addressing system of Georgia, by funding the study/analysis of NAPR addressing registry capabilities, including various IT appliances (databases, software etc.). Study analyzed addressing system in light of INSPIRE requirements for data specifications on addresses and/or other international standards/specifications and create a roadmap for harmonization of the Address Registration System with International/European Standards in the area of structuring of the address data. For this purposes, Project hired an international consultant to review and report on international good practices regarding the National Addressing systems including technical and legal issues (address standards, geocoding methodologies, address types, interconnection and data exchange between different registries, good technical solutions for data sharing services, modern and innovative Page 66 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) technologies used in the address management system development, business model for data accessibility, sharing and licensing). Women’s Property Rights Existing policies and procedures for registration in Georgia are already gender sensitive, ensuring that women are equally able to register land and are not discriminated against, particularly in relation to transfers relating to joint ownership and inheritance of land. Project placed emphasis on the gender- targeted awareness actions ensuring that women are fully informed about co-ownership benefits and are equally able to register land without discrimination, particularly in relation to transfers relating to joint ownership and inheritance of land. To raise awareness in the SLR area, project staff created a communication action plan, which included various activities through, Media, Internet and face to face communication. Based on the Content Strategy awareness raising campaigns were launched in Irrigated Areas, infomercials were placed in Central and Regional TV stations, on Facebook , leaflets, posters and brochures were also distributed among the citizens during the social mobilization campaigns , describing the positive aspect of the SLR process, its procedures, potential and success stories. Based on the communication strategy, project focused on empowering women owners. During the communication with the population it was emphasized that, any adult family member has a right to become a landowner. The benefits of ownership were demonstrated through real life examples of the women entrepreneurs who broke the stereotypes and started the so-called "manly" business, farming and other forms of entrepreneurship. D. Investment in Human Capital Project invested heavily in human capital development. It financed the contracting and further training of Surveyors, Registrars, GIS Specialists, In-House IT Team, Quality Control Team and Public Display Specialists. These positions all played vital role in systematic land registration process. After the SLR portion of the ILMDP was completed staff was transferred to support the National Rollout. It should be noted that following the restructuring of the project, ILMDP also co-finance the survey works of the National Rollout. One of the important achievement of the project was to implement a career ladder for its Surveyors and Registrars. While working on this new development, project staff considered the value for money principle, staff evaluation and career growth approaches. This approach was later implanted within the NAPR as a standard procedure. It should be considered one of the success stories of the project that currently NAPR employs 100 women surveyors. E. NAPR Technical Capacity Building Systematic Land Registration is a complex and logistically demanding undertaking, it’s success is also based on the quality and availability of technical equipment, which teams use to carry out the SLR activities. ILMDP procured all necessary equipment for parties involved in the SLR process: - Survey Equipment for the field teams, GPS Rovers and Tablets – 43 items; - Survey Drones – 2 items; - Personal Computers and Lap Tops for field teams and back office staff; - Office Equipment for field teams and back office staff; - Mini Buses (2 items) and SUVs (13 Items); Page 67 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) - Specialized Work Clothing for all seasons for field teams; - Personal Protection Equipment; - IT Hardware and Software: Application Performance Monitoring Software; Hyper Converged Infrastructure (Servers); Backup Solution; Web Application Firewall (WAF) and Load Balancer. F. NAPR IT Capacity Building In parallel to legislative and procedural enhancements implemented by the project, ILMDP actively engaged in modernization and digitization of the existing business processes. The scale up of the project through IBRD provided capacity building opportunities for the NAPR IT and modernized the existing business processes. Electronic Minutes Application (EMA) Through the funding and support of the ILMDP, NAPR In house IT team together with the project staff developed EMA for field data collection, which significantly increased the accuracy of registration data, provides real time connection to NAPR servers and other important functions. Software was created to facilitate access to registration services among the wider public, by simplifying the registration process, eradicating errors and optimizing the human and time resources. It optimized the GIS, registration, field and data processing procedures and refined the business process. Data processing and field measurements are conducted in parallel and processes were automated, which resulted in 35% decrease in time necessary for data processing. Data processing in real time facilitated better communication with local residents who can see the cadastral drawings on the field and make necessary adjustments in real time. This resulted in 70% decrease in applications for re-measurements during the public display process. The second phase of optimization will focus on decreasing the time needed for registration by approximately 50%, project also plans to implement artificial intelligence (AI) to identify the interested parties and the signatories of the EMA application Once completed in the field on a tablet, software generates electronic document for the land plot in real time, which incorporates the following data: • Land Plot Cadastral Map, with respective boundary lines, GPS points, building description and other cadastral information; • Data on the owners, interested persons, family members, household members. Information is directly linked to the Public Service Development Agency database and it automatically generates information if the ID information is entered in the respective fields; • Ownership Data, Area According to the respective legal documents, data on the title documents and possibility to attach the electronic copy if needed; • Data on other residents of the registration block, bordering land plots etc; • Land usage data, information on crops, buildings etc. which is generated from GIS; • Electronic Signatures and etc. The EMA was one of the most important catalysts for National Rollout, as it fully eradicated paper based transactions from the SLR business process. Drone Imagery Page 68 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) Since the delivery of the new Drones to the project in May field teams have taken orthophotos of 16 700 Ha in Shida Kartli Region and 4200 Ha in Kakheti Region. The drone images are of higher quality compared to the previous photos at NAPR’s disposal and provide detailed up to date and detailed information for the field teams. New images are used by the survey teams when completing the Electronic Minutes and by the QC teams during the QC process. Project purchased 2 DJI Phantom RTK Drones for the project activities, which provide sharp resolution and 3 centimeter accuracy. ICT Assessment and Upgrade Project conducted ICT Assessment the NAPR, by producing reports on: i) Existing Hardware and Communication Infrastructure Assessment; ii) ICT Governance and Management Assessment and iii) Information and Cyber security assessment for NAPR. It served as the basis for the upgrade of the NAPR IT Hardware and Software Appliances. As a result NAPR purchased: 1) Application Performance Monitoring (APM) Software, 2) Web Application Firewall (WAF) and Load Balancer; 3) Hyper Converged Infrastructure (HCI) and servers 4) Backup Solution. These assets will facilitate the implementation of the National Rollout. Agile Transformation Project financed the Agile Transformation trainings of the NAPR IT department, trainings were held by the selected company over the period of 5 months, starting from July 2021. Agile Transformation Project was initiated to improve the speed and flexibility of IT services. During this process company incorporated software development project management processes (Agile: Scrum & Kanban) and as a result, IT teams migrated all their projects to JIRA to improve the development process. As a result of the activities,: i) NAPR Chairman established the Advisory Board to review initiatives and projects regarding the development of the existing information technology (IT) systems and creation of new systems; ii) Jira Software is used to demonstrate the development work; iii) All of the systems were assigned product owners; iv) 70% of the IT teams use Jira for managing projects; v) 30% of the IT teams follow the scrum ceremonies; vi) Product Owners and the Business Analysts underwent trainings to facilitate the creation of the MVP. Smart Contracts & AI To increase the security of the real estate registration and transform the settlement process into a risk free and accessible undertaking for the stakeholders, NAPR completed piloting of Smart Contract concept. The system will incorporate real estate owners/sellers, property buyers and commercial banks. Each step of property transaction will be transparent and accessible to all, and the property transaction will be carried out by qualified public registry officials. Once all the prerequisites for the transactions are met, Bank after receiving the green light from NAPR will automatically transfer the funds to the Seller, while the property will be registered in the name of the Buyer. During the registration process, if the registration is rejected or terminated, purchase amount will automatically be transferred to the Buyer’s account (returned to the Buyer). If the registration is suspended, the said amount will remain (for a limited time) on bank’s account pending a final decisio n. Depending on the outcome it will be transferred to Seller or returned to the Buyer. Deposition of an amount onto an account will be carried out with a bank operator’s help and upon its payment the amount Page 69 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) (confirmation of the payment) will immediately be entered in a specific field of a registration application. Process includes verification through AI, which will check the i) Liveness of person behind the computer, by checking an authenticity of the person to confirm that the other side of the camera is a really a live person and ii) Similarity of a person to the ID, by comparing a photo of a person and a photo on an ID document with each other and determining their likeness. AI module will be integrated in the system, which will have access to the databases of the Public Service Development Agency, which is responsible for maintaining the identification documentation. Once an electronic contract is created through a smart contract application, a citizen’s identity will be verified through remote identification, and they will sign the contract electronically. The identification process will be video recorded. A registrar or a software, will decide on registration and the amount will automatically be transferred to the seller’s account. As a result, there will be a twofold verification/security procedures in place: i) video record of AI performing its check on liveness and similarity and, iii) AI check. These steps should be sufficient to ensure comfortable, secure, and reliable registration process and a service, which citizens will be content to use. G. Grievance Redress Mechanism Project maintained effective Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM), in accordance with the Georgian legislation and Project Operational Manual. Project provided different alternatives to the interested parties under the GRM, at every stage of the SLR process. Available stages included: i) Public Display; ii) Notary Mediation; iii) NAPR Administrative Proceedings (Quasi-Judicial Review) and iv) Court Proceedings. It is the testament to the effectiveness of the GRM that from 141,835 registration applications processed under the ILMDP, only 70 resulted in court proceedings, from which 48 remain pending. H. Institutional Arrangements for National Rollout On December 31, 2021 Minister of Justice of Georgia issued order N798 on Determining Geographical Areas for Systematic Registration for the Purposes of the Law of Georgia on Systematic and Sporadic Registration of Land Titles and Improvement of Cadastral Data, which effectively launched the National Rollout throughout Georgia. NRL will be completed in 2024. In follow up to the Order N798 of the Ministry of Justice of Georgia, on January 20, 2022, NAPR Chairman issued the Order 96/S on Creating the Consultation Council for the Systematic and Sporadic Registration. Council will serve as a coordination and management organ responsible for smooth operation of the National Rollout. Two members of the Consultation Council were the project staff – Project Manager and the Chief Surveyor. It should also be noted that LMDC project coordinator and several former LMDC staff were employed in managerial positions. This change was done to maintain the high standards put in place by the LMDC, that developed and implemented the legislative framework and procedures for its implementation for the current systematic land registration set up in Georgia. During ILMDP implementation, Component 2 of the Project accumulated experienced human capital, technical capabilities and know-how, to support the Government in design, planning, launch and implementation of the National Rollout for Systematic Land Registration. Page 70 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) ANNEX 12. PROJECT PHOTOS Farmer In-Field Consultation Design Consultation with Farmers Source: MEPA. Source: MEPA. Rehabilitation of Kvemo Samgori Main Canal Source: MEPA. Source: MEPA. Rehabilitation of ZR Source: MEPA. Source: MEPA. Page 71 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) One of the Forty Settling Basins Constructed Source: Cecilia Belita. Removal of Sedimentation Source: Cecilia Belita. Page 72 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) SLR Survey Team, Women Surveyors, and Equipment and Vehicles Procured Source: NAPR. Page 73 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) High-Resolution Image Taken by DJI Phantom RTK Drone, Purchased by the Project Source: NAPR. Minister of Justice Visiting the NSLRR Source: NAPR. Billboards for National Rollout of Land Registration Source: NAPR. Page 74 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) NAPR Delegation Participated in the Conference Organized by the World Bank and the European Union on June 22 and 23, 2023, in Kampala, Uganda. One of the many conferences, study tours, and visits carried out by the SLR. Source: NAPR. Delegations from the Ministry of Land, Housing, and Urban Development of Uganda (MoLHUD) and NAPR Participated in the Knowledge-Sharing and Capacity Building Event organized by the World Bank in Washington DC on June 5 and 6, 2023. Memorandum of Understanding Signed by MoLHUD and NAPR. Source: NAPR. Page 75 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) ANNEX 13. ENDNOTES i Approach Paper, Country Program Evaluation. World Bank Group Support to Georgia, Fiscal Years 2014 –23. ii Report title: Rural Investment Climate Assessment for Rural Households and Enterprises, June 27, 2012 iii Report No: 85251-GE. iv Report No. 121853-GE v It should be noted that this outcome refers to both improved irrigation and drainage (I&D) services, since I&D are part of the same sector and go hand-in-hand in improving overall farming conditions, depending on the needs (for example, irrigated lands might require adequate drainage to remain capable of producing crops). Consequently, the corresponding corporate results indicator also treats I&D services as a single entity. It is important to note that this project focused on irrigation systems and did not intervene nor intend to intervene in upgrading drainage systems, since it was not needed for the project-supported areas. vi This refers specifically to agricultural reform land, which is the agricultural land allocated to private individuals during land reform starting in 1992. vii Restructurings are reflected in the datasheet. viii The original requirement that WUOs must be legally registered and operational before the start of rehabilitation works was replaced by a set of conditions defining critical steps toward WUO registration to be taken before the start of the contracts, which aimed to ensure a distinct level of readiness to engage WUOs in the irrigation systems management at the on-farm level. ix Report No. 121853-GE. x Report No. 166148-GE. xi As to the proposed CPF FY2024–2028, Focus Area 1 of the previous CPF was adjusted to High-Level Outcome 1- Increased productivity and creation of good quality jobs while Focus Area 3 was adjusted to High-Level Outcome 3-Strengthened resilience and accelerated green transition. xii The indicator on absolute volume of water was found to be susceptible to external factors, as illustrated by the fact that this indicator reached an achieved value of 91 million m3 in 2019 and then decreased again due to prevailing drought conditions. xiii As described by the firm that did the survey, “The end-line survey utilized a mixed method design employing qualitative and quantitative research methods. It included a household (HH) survey with a sample size of 1,139 respondents and a large farm survey with a sample size of 101 respondents, 18 focus group discussions, 6 in-depth interviews with local authorities, as well as representatives of MEPA and Georgian Amelioration. The endline survey administered a comparative analysis of three different types of settlement groups. These settlements are: 1) treatment group villages that receive project support; 2) indirect beneficiaries group villages that do not receive project support, but that might benefit from project intervention; and 3) control group villages that do not get project support and that will not benefit in any way from project intervention. In addition, the survey administered a separate assessment of large farms holding at least 5 Ha of land.” From a sampling perspective, for households and family holdings the endline survey applied a semi-panel approach, meaning that 64 percent of the midterm and baseline samples were used, and the remainder was filled on a random basis. For large farms, the entire sample of the midterm survey was used. xiv This legal framework consisted of the law of Georgia ‘On Special Procedures for Systematic and Sporadic Registration of Land Parcels and Improvement of Cadastral Data under the State Project’ (which was later amended further); Order No. 153 of the Minister of Justice of Georgia ‘On Approval of the Procedures for Publishing Results of Systematic and Sporadic Registration, Cadastral Survey, Their Verification and Amendment and Selection of Mediators’ (August 1, 2016); Resolution No. 388 of the Government of Georgia “On Approval of the Procedures for Suspension and Cancellation of a Certificate Held by a Person Authorized to Conduct Cadastral Surveys/Measurements in case of the Violation the Rules of Cadastral Surveys/Measurements and their Documentation and the Requirements of the Laws of Georgia’ (August 8, 2016); Order No. 151 ‘On Approval of Changes to Order No 4 of the Minster of Justice of Georgia of January 15, 2010 ‘On the Instruction on the Public Registry’ (August 1, 2016); and Order No. 1288/b by the chairman of NAPR ‘On Approval of the Procedures for Keeping the Technical Specifications for Cadastral Survey/Measurements Works under the Pilot Project and the Registration Documents Collected under the Pilot Project’ (July 14, 2017). xv A working group established within NAPR in 2018 discussed the report on the situation in the pilot areas, the report on progress of sporadic registration and judicial practice, the interim and final reports based on recommendations by the international consultant for the Pilot Project for SLR, a draft amendment to the law of Georgia ‘On the Improvement of Cadastral Data and the Procedure for Systematic and Sporadic Registration of Rights to Plots of Land under the State Project ’, and a draft amendment to the law of Georgia ‘On Recognition of Property Rights of the Parcels of Land Possessed (Used) by Natural Persons and Legal Entities under Private Law’. These discussions resulted in a draft legislative package that further Page 76 of 77 The World Bank Irrigation and Land Market Development Project (P133828) adjusted the procedures for land registration and regularization, reduced bureaucratic hurdles, and expanded registration possibilities. xvi A land survey determines the exact location and boundaries of a parcel of land. xvii The IT system design included 10 intermediary targets: (a) Existing Hardware and Infrastructure Assessment, (b) ICT Governance and Management Assessment, (c) Informational and Cyber Security Assessment, (d) Inception Report for Enterprise Architecture and System of the New Generation Immovable Property Registration System (IPRS), (e) Enterprise Architecture (EA) of the New Generation IPRS, (f) General Stakeholder Requirements Specifications (StRS), (g) General System Requirements Specifications (SyRS), (h) General Software Requirements Specifications (SRS), (i) Strategy for Data Migration, and (j) Design of IPRS is finalized and endorsed by NAPR management. xviii ICT upgrade and software development consisted of 10 sub-activities, of which 7 have been completed in full and the remaining 3 are in the final stages of completion (>85 percent complete), leading to an overall 97 percent achievement as of project closing. These 10 sub-activities were (a) procurement and deployment of general ICT infrastructure; (b) development of E-Minutes application; (c) upgrading of the electronic management system to enterprise resource planning standards; (d) development of the SLR web portal; (e) extension of statistics and data visualization capabilities; (f) development of the new generation IPRS based on the new Enterprise Architecture, Stakeholder Requirements Specifications, System Requirement Specifications, and Software Requirements Specifications; (g) piloting of integration of artificial intelligence-based applications for citizen identification; (h) piloting of smart contracts deployment in immovable property transactions; (i) development of the new generation IPRS deployment strategy; and (j) development of technical documentation and user manual for the new generation IPRS. xix Adopted by the Parliament on June 3, 2016. xx Case in point is that the latest value reported in 2023 for this indicator was 72.9 million m 3, which, given that the baseline was 67 million m3 and the target 95 million m3, only represents an achievement of 21 percent. However, in 2019, the value of this indicator was 91 million m3, representing an achievement of 86 percent. These fluctuations in indicator values had nothing to do with regression with respect to the progress of project activities and outputs but were largely due to the prevailing drought conditions. xxi The Law on Systematic and Sporadic Registration and the tax code specifically define that first-time registration does not have any negative consequences for the social security status of the families and that if a person owned less than 5 ha land until 2004, they are exempted from property tax on agricultural land. xxii Most so called ‘unofficial transactions’ mostly happened during the 1990s and early 2000s, in the time of significant turmoil in Georgia and when there was no unified electronic register. Page 77 of 77