Document of

The World Bank

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Report No. 4724-PE

STAFF APPRAISAL REPORT

PERU

CHANCHAMAYO-SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

March 6, 1984

Projects DepartmentLatin America and the Caribbean Regional Office

{ This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance oftheir official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

US$1 Peruvian Soles S/. 2,070S/. 1,000 = US$0.48

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

1 hectare (ha) 10,000 m2 = 2.47 acres1 kilogram (kg) = 2.2 pounds1 metric ton (m ton) = 1,000 kg = 0.98 long ton

ABBREVIATIONS

BAP Agrarian Bank of PeruCAS Agricultural Service CooperativeCENFOR Forestry Center of INFORCIPA Center for Agricultural Research and ExtensionDF Forestry DistrictDGFF General Directorate of Forestry and FaunaDGRAAR General Directorate of Agrarian Reform and Rural SettlementDPF Forestry PoliceED Executive DirectorateENACO National Enterprise for CocaENCI National Enterprise for Marketing InputsINAF National Institute for Expansion of Agricultural DevelopmentINADE National Institute for DevelopmentINDA National Institute for Agroindustrial DevelopmentINFOR National Forestry InstituteINIPA National Institute for Agricultural Research and ExtensionMA Ministry of AgricultureMTC Ministry of Transport and CommunicationsOGCR General Office of Rural CadasterPD Project DirectoratePEPP Pichis-Palcazu Special ProjectUNA National Agrarian UniversityUNCP National University of Central Peru

FISCAL YEAR

January 1 to December 31

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

PERU

STAFF APPRIASAL REPORT

CHANCHAMAYO-SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Table of Contents

Page No.

I. THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR

Land Resources .................. . . 1

Population and Production.... 2

Government Policies ........................ . .. 2Regional Development of the Selva . . .................... 2

Previous Bank Participation ..... i . ..................... 3

II. THE PROJECT AREA

Location and Access .......... .. *... 4Regional Context ..................... . . ...... 4

Resource Base .............................. 4Settlement and Land Tenure. . . 6Present Agricultural Situation .. ....................... 7

Infrasl:ructure. . . 9Agricultural Services . . ........................ 10

Institutional Aspects .. . . ......................... 11

III. THE PROJECT

A. Introduction . ...................... 13B. Project Description ....................... 13C. Detailed Features .14

Credit ..................................... 14Marketing ... .......... 15Extension ............................... 15Research .15

Forestry .16Roads .17Land Titling .18Native Communities ................ 19Project Directorate .19

D. Project Costs ............... 19E. Project Financing .20F. Procurement .............. 21G. Disbursement .23

This report is based on the findings of an Appraisal Mission which visited

Peru during May/June 1983. The mission comprised Messrs. D. Myren,R. LeBreton, W. Beattie, G. Russell and W. Matthey (Bank) and Messrs.S. Romanoff and M. Dourojeanni (consultants).

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance oftheir official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

Table of Contents (continued)

Page No.

IV. ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

Executive Directorate (ED) ............................. 24Project Directorate (PD) ............................... 24Credit ............ ..................................... 25Extension and Research ................................. 26Forestry .......... ..................................... 26Roads and Civil Works .................................. 27Land Titling ........................................... 27Native Communities ..................................... 27Agreements with Implementing Agencies .... .............. 27Accounts and Auditing .................................. 28Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting ................... 28

V. AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION, YIELDS' MARKETING AND PRICES

Production and Yields .................................. 29Marketing ......... ..................................... 30Prices ............ ..................................... 31

VI. BENEFITS AND JUSTIFICATION

Benefits .......... ..................................... 32Economic Rate of Return ................................ 32Project Risk ........................................... 34Environmental Impact ................................... 34

VII. SUMMARY OF AGREEMENTS TO BE REACHED AND RECOMMENDATIONS

ANNEXES

Annex 1 - Key Indicators for Monitoring and EvaluationAnnex 2 - Selected Documents and Data Available in Project File

SUPPORTING TABLES

1 Credit: Nominal and Effective Rates of BAP2 Credit: Detailed Cost3 Agricultural Extension: Detailed Cost4 Research: Detailed Cost5 Forestry: Detailed Cost6 Roads: Detailed Cost

Table of Contents (continued)

7 Roads: Improvement and Construction Standards8 Land Titling: Detailed Cost9 Native Communities: Detailed Cost10 Project Unit: Detailed Cost11 Marketing: Detailed Cost12 Project Component Costs by Time13 Summary Project Account by Component14 Summary Project Account by Time15 Disbursement Schedule16 Financial Prices (Annual)17 Coffee Farm Model - Production and Inputs18 Coffee Farm Model - Financial Budget19 Citrus Farm Model - Production and Inputs20 Citrus Farm Model - Financial Budget21 Avocado Farm Model - Production and Inputs22 Avocado Farm Model - Financial Budget23 Pineapple Farm Model - Production and Inputs24 Pineapple Farm Model - Financial Budget25 Total Farm Budgets26 Economic Analysis27 Feeder Roads: Economic Analysis of First Year Program28 Economic Analysis of La Florida Cooperative and Yurinaki Bridge29 Summary Economic Analysis: Feeder Road Component

CHART 1 - Project Organization

MAP IBRD 17482

PERU

STAFF APPRAISAL REPORT

CHANCHAMAYO-SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

I. THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR

Land Resources

1.01 Peru has a limited natural resource base for agriculture. Of thecountry's 128.5 million ha, it is estimated that about 40% has noagricultural potential, 40% is suited only for forestry, 15% is best suitedfor pastures, and about 5% is suiitable for intensive agriculture. About 3million ha are presently in agricultural use, including about 1.2 million haunder irrigation and 1.8 million ha rainfed. Of the remainder, about 22million ha are under natural grass and the rest is either suitable forforestry or unsuitable for cultivation because it is too dry, too poorlydrained, or too steep for any form of food or fiber production. There arethree well-defined topographic and climatic zones in Peru - the Costa, theSierra and the Selva.

1.02 The Costa, which constitutes the Coastal zone in the west of thecountry, consists mainly of flat desert plains, sand dunes and the dryheavily eroded Andean foothills. It is a narrow 3,000-km-long belt, coveringabout 13.1 million ha (10.2% of the total land area), where about 46% of thecountry's population lives. Coastal agriculture is limited to the rivervalleys where irrigation is possible; these valleys produce over 40% of thecountry's gross value of crop production, including sugar, rice, cotton,maize, potatoes, citrus, olives and grapes. The region enjoys relativelyclose proximity to the urban markets, a good transportation network, andother infrastructure and is relatively prosperous.

1.03 The Sierra, which constitutes the Andean highland zone, coversover 33.4 million ha (26% of the total land area) and accounts for about 44%of the population. It consists of steep mountains reaching over 5,000 m andhigh valleys located between the mountain ranges. Some 2.3 million ha in theSierra are cropped and about 17.3 million ha are used for grazing, mostlyunder marginal conditions because of steep slopes and high altitudes. Severetopography, erratic rainfall and extreme changes in temperature make farmingdifficult and limited to a short season, leading to low agriculturalproductivity.

1.04 The Selva, which constitutes the tropical forest zone east of theAndes mountains, covers about 82 million ha (63.8% of the total land area)and accounts for 10% of the total population. It comprises two subzones:the eastern slopes of the Andes at medium altitude - the Ceja de Selva; andthe Amazon jungle - the Selva Baja (Lower Selva). Although most soils in theLower Selva are classified as marginal and suitable primarily for grazing andforestry, soils in the Ceja de Selva are generally of better quality. Withthe construction of the Trans-Andean Highway System and oil exploration, the

-2-

Selva has been gaining in economic importance over the last two decades, andthe related migration of farmers from the Sierra to the Ceja de Selva inparticular has provided considerable impetus to agricultural development.

Population and Production

1.05 The percentage of rural population in Peru declined from 53% to 33%between 1961 and 1981. Registered unemployment in the rural sector is almostnil, but underemployment (as measured by income below the minimum wage rate)is about 61% compared to about 48% in the urban sector. Agriculturalproductivity is low, which explains the disproportionately low 12%contribution of the agriculture sector to the country's GDP.

1.06 As a result of population increases, the massive migration of therural population into the cities, and the slow development of agriculturalproduction during the last decade, Peru's agricultural balance of trade hasbecome significantly negative. At the beginning of the 1970s, the tradesurplus was typically in the order of about US$100 million, but by 1981 therewas a trade deficit of about US$230 million.

Government Policies

1.07 The most significant change in policy under the present civilianGovernment compared to military Government policy during the 1970s is in thegreater emphasis on private versus public initiative and on incentives versuscontrol measures. A new Agricultural Promotion Law (Ley de Promocion yDesarrollo Agrario) was enacted in November 1980 to tackle some of theconstraints to agricultural development. It provides special fiscalincentives to agriculture and agro-industries and opens the way forcommercial banks and other financial institutions, in addition to theAgrarian Bank of Peru (BAP), to extend credit to the agricultural sector byeliminating prohibitions on the mortgaging of land. The law also endedagrarian reform actions such as transfer of private farms intoproduction cooperatives, and freed domestic and foreign marketing of farmproducts by allowing private marketing channels to develop. Furthermore, thepresent Government decontrolled prices of most commodities, which until 1980were highly regulated, and eliminated direct subsidies on most food productsand inputs.

Regional Development of the Selva

1.08 With respect to regional development, the most significantinitiative of the new Constitutional Government has been its support fororderly development of Peru's vast land area beyond the Andes. Over the pastfive years, 10 projects have been designed and initiated, or scheduled forinitiation in early 1984. These Special Projects are located for the mostpart in the piedmont area of the Selva and cover a total area of 7.7 millionha considered to have great potential for near-term impact on food productionand balance of payments. Within this area, 1.6 million ha have been assignedpriority for crop, livestock and forestry production, and investments wouldbenefit about 125,000 families.

-3-

1.09 The total cost of these projects is estimated at US$522.5 million,including Government funding and the support of international organizations,such as IDB, IJSAID, the Governments of Spain, Canada, Belgium and Switzerlandthe Federal Republic of Germany's KfW, and the World Bank (Loan 2219-PE -Alto Mayo and the proposed Chanchamayo-Satipo project).

1.10 These projects, initially administered under the Presidency of theCouncil of Ministers and now under the Cabinet-level National Institute forDevelopment (INADE), have four main objectives: (a) increased production andproductivity through expanding the agricultural frontier and rational use ofthe natural resources of the Amazon region; (b) planned colonization andchanneling of spontaneous migration through planned highway construction; (c)increased regional employment and income; and (d) conservation of naturalresources and maintenance of the Amazon eco-system.

1.11 To achieve these objectives, the projects typically containseveral of the following components: (a) road construction and maintenance;(b) farm credit, (c) research, extension and training; (d) agricultural andForestry development; (e) evaluation and management of natural resources; (f)energy; (g) land titling; (h) social infrastructure; (i) technical andadministrative coordination; and (j) monitoring and eval-uation of theproject.

Previous Bank Participation in the Agricultural Sector

1.12 The Bank has made 15 agricultural loans to Peru, totalling US$379million. Five of them, in the 1954-73 period and totalling USS55 million,were for agricultural credit (Loans 105-PE, 162-PE, 257-PE, 415-PE, and933-PE) and were channelled through BAP and its predecessors. In general,BAP's performance in executing these operations was good. The PerformanceAudit Report (Sec M81-465 of June 2, 1981) for the fifth project (Loan 933-PEof 1973) concluded that the project's rate of return exceeded that estimatedin the appraisal report (30% vs 26%), but it noted that the Bank did not usethe loan as an effective instrument in discussions on interest rate levelswith the Government. This was done, however, during preparation andappraisal of the Sixth Agricultural Credit Project (US$130 million) in 1983.

1.13 Two loans (Loans 67-PE of 1952 and 98-PE of 1954), totalling US$3million, were for farm machinery imports and another two (Loans 114-FE of1955 and 418-PE of 1965), totalling US$24.4 million, financed irrigationworks and land settlement in the San Lorenzo area within the Chira-Piurabasin on the coast. The Performance Audit Report (Sec M78-43 of January 18,1978) for the San Lorenzo project financed by Loan 418-PE concluded that theproject achieved its basic goals of increasing agricultural production andthe incomes of rural poor, but the need for better maintenance of works, astrong project unit, and agricultural support programs for irrigationprojects was noted. These findings were taken into account in the design ofthe two most recent Bank-financed irrigation rehabilitation operations: theFirst Irrigation Rehabilitation Project and the Lower Piura project (Loans1403-PE of 1977 and 1771-PE of 1979 for US$25 million and US$56 million,respectively). In 1980, the Bank approved its first rural development loanin Peru, a US$15 million operation for the Puno zone in the Sierra (Loan

-4-

1812-PE) which is now progressing satisfactorily after a slow start.Finally, the Bank provided a US$40.6 million loan to support there-establishment of the agricultural research and extension system and asecond rural development loan of US$30 million for the Alto Mayo area of theCeja de Selva (Loans 2150-PE and 2219-PE), which became effective in 1983 andare now operational.

II. THE PROJECT AREA

Location and Access

2.01 The project area is located in the provinces of Chanchamayo-Satipoin the Department of Junin on the lower slopes of the Andes in the CentralSelva (map IBRD 17482). It extends from about 300 km to 400 km east of Lima,and lies between 100 and 110 latitude south. It comprises the zones ofinfluence of the main road system (carretera Marginal de la Selva) SanRamon-La Merced-Satipo and is connected by a highway from San Ramon in theproject area through Tarma and La Oroya in the highlands to Lima on thecoast. The Tarma-San Ramon portion of this highway, as well as the main roadthrough the project area from San Ramon to Satipo, will be improved and pavedunder the Eighth Highway Project (Loan 2091-PE) which became effective inearly 1983.

Regional Context

2.02 Although Peru's undeveloped land is located mainly in the LowSelva, the most practical opportunities for near-term impact on foodproduction and balance of payments are through intensification ofagricultural production in areas which are already accessible and occupied.

2.03 After about 50 years of spontaneous colonization, theChanchamayo-Satipo area has reached a critical point in its development.Much of the forest wealth has been harvested, soils have been depletedthrough slash and burn agriculture, and systematic maintenance of fertilityis not yet common practice. Only a few farmers have achieved high levels oftechnology and yields and managed to fully develop their farms. The combinedspontaneous migration and natural population growth presently totalmore than 7% per year and careful attention is needed to develop a pattern ofsustainable agriculture if a social and ecological crisis is to be avoided.

Resource Base

2.04 Topography. The project area, approximately 730,000 ha, coversmuch of the watershed of the Perene river and its tributaries. In altitude,the project area ranges from about 500 meters above sea level to over 3,000meters in the highest mountain areas. It consists basically of two parts:(a) the main project area of about 400,000 ha of largely settled land on thelower slopes and valleys along the Perene and its tributaries; and (b) about330,000 ha of higher slopes on the north, east, and south with fewinhabitants which the Government has proposed to set aside in three reservesfor forest protection and production. (Map IBRD 17482).

-5-

2.05 Soils, The soils of the project area consist broadly of fourtypes: (a) recent alluvials of small extent, in narrow discontinuous stripsalong the main rivers, flat and fertile, but subject to flooding; (b) oldalluvials on river terraces at higher levels, of lower fertility, moderatelyfine texture and usually free-draining; (c) residual soils on hillsides,usually clays or silts, some moderately acid (pH 5.0-7.0); and (d) humicgleys in small isolated depressed areas of poor drainage, sometimes highlyacid.

2.06 Climate. The climate is tropical and the annual rainfall in themain agricultural area ranges from about 1,100 mm at Pto. Ocopa in the driestzone (located in the northeastern boundary of the project area) to about1,800 to 2,300 mm in the area around San Ramon. However, certain areas ofsteep slopes, where forest protection will be of higher priority, receivefrom 3,000 mm to over 5,000 mm of rainfall annually. The lowest rainfallperiod is between June and August, but still high enough to allow thedevelopment of permanent crops, without irrigation. Mean annual temperatureranges from 220 C to 260 C. Thus, conditions are favorable for plant growththroughout the year, limited only by low insolation during the rainy season.

2.07 Water Resources and Drainage. The area is well watered, withnumerous streams and rivers rising in the Andes and draining toward theAmazon basin. The hydro-electric potential is high, but up to now littleexploited. There are no navigable rivers within the project area, but Pto.Ocopa on the perimeter has access to the navigable rivers, Ene and Tambo.Drainage presents no general problem owing to topography and to thefree-draining character of most of the soils.

2.08 Land Use and Forestry. Approximately 14,000 ha are in annual cropseach year, 45,000 ha in permanent crops, 11,000 ha in pasture, and 96,000 hain fallow for the slash and burn system of crop production; the remaining564,000 ha are classified as forest area, most of it on land either too steepor too poor for agricultural use. The forests are of the tropical moisthardwood type. Average yield per hectare of commercial species is about 40m3 roundwood. There has been considerable temporary cultivation ofexcessively steep slopes and land is sometimes cleared simply to establishownership rights. Given the limited areas of flat lands and a populationgrowth rate estimated at 7% per annum, these steep slopes are underincreasing pressure. It is urgent to enforce existing laws to avoid burningand cropping the areas least appropriate for cultivation and most susceptibleto erosion. Further details of the forestry resource can be found in theForestry Component Working Paper and in the forest inventory carried out byUNA Forestry Faculty, in the project files (Annex 2).

-6-

Settlement and Land Tenure

2.09 Population. The project area has been colonized by immigrants fromother parts of Peru, mainly the High Andes (Sierra). Total population in thearea is estimated at about 160,000 of which about 77% is rural. Althoughprecise income data are not available, it is estimated that at least 65% ofrural population is below the poverty income level of US$300 per capita.There are about 20,000 farmers in the area, of whom some 2,000 are nativesdistributed in about 90 native communities. Most of them are partiallyintegrated in the market economy of the regi6n, though with very lowcommercial production per family. The native population belongs mainly tothe Ashaninca, also known as Campa, ethnolinguistic group, with a few smallcommunities of Amuesha.

2.10 Tenure and Land Titling. About 46% of the native communities andonly about 5% of the other farmers in the project area have titles to theirland. In addition a large number of farmers have a variety of claimsincluding: pre-agrarian reform titles, agrarian reform "contracts", forestconcessions, certificates of possession, and unofficial claims and bills ofsale. However, the number of titles (including old titles and agrarianreform "contracts") that are valid is estimated by the project staff to beonly about 1,000 (with an additional 2,000 cancelled or in the process ofbeing cancelled). Disputes over land are common among colonists and betweennative communities and colonists.

2.11 According to an MA survey, 67% of farm production units are between10 and 50 ha, 28% of holdings are smaller than 10 ha, and 5% are units largerthan 50 ha. Land holdings per family for native communities are similar tothose for colonists. Within the project area, the holdings of 49 communitieswith titles or with plans for titles (including forest land) average 897 ha.It is estimated that the median community has 14 ha per family, that 24% ofcommunities have less than 10 ha per family, and that 12% of the communitieshave 50 or more ha per family.

2.12 Individual and native community titles to agricultural land aregranted under the provisions of Decree Law 22175 (Law of Native Communitiesand Agricultural Development of Low Selva and Piedmont Regions, 1978).Land titles of individuals may be sold; on the other hand, the title isinvalidated if the parcel is abandoned for two years, ceded to a third party,sold without notifying the General Directorate of Agrarian Reform and RuralSettlement (DGRAAR), or left unworked for 12 months after title is granted.Land titled to native communities is inalienable and may not be mortgaged.The title is communal and, while informal parceling to individuals occurs,land may be divided into individually titled lots only if two-thirds of themembers of the community request it.

2.13 Under a special agreement with the Ministry of Agriculture(MA), covering the forestry, cadastral and agrarian reform work of theGeneral Directorate of Forestry and Fauna (DGFF), and the General Office ofRural Cadaster (OGCR), and DGRAAR agrarian region, respectively,these institutions have delegated to the Pichis-Palcazu Special Project(PEPP) until 1989 the responsibility for coordinating the field work and

-7-

various functions previous to the granting of titles which is then done bythe Lima office of MA. This was initiated in the project area in 1983 andhas had good results. The Ministry of Justice (General Office of PublicRegisters) is responsible for maintaining the official registry of landtitles but has not had an office in the project area; consequently changes inposession are frequently not recorded. The project will help to rectify this(para 4.08).

2.14 Native Communities. The size of the native communities variesfrom a half dozen families to 50 or more. In the western part of the projectarea, where there has been in-migration of colonists for several decades, thecommunities lost part of their land prior to passage of Law 22175 (para2.12), and are now more involved than before in cash crop production. Manyspeak primarily Spanish and in some cases have accepted colonists into theircommunities. Further west and at the periphery of the area, the communitieshave larger holdings; more forest land; more traditional hunting, fishing andgathering; less cash production; less use of Spanish; and less integrationwith the colonists. This project facilitates application of Law 22175.

2.15 Most: native communities have a community center, including thehouses of part of the population, which is generally located near the closestroad. Internal roads are largely those constructed for timber extraction anda common use of the funds which communities earn from selling their timber isconstruction of an improved school or community center. The Amazonic Centerfor Anthropology and Practical Applications, a church-related group, fundsthe work of specialists (agronomist, sociologist, social worker) to assistnative communiLties. Most of the groups do not have access to credit ortechnical assistance for crop production. A detailed study of the nativecommunities in the project area is included in the project file (Annex 2).

Present Agricultural Situation

2.16 For reasons of topography, about 74% of the project area (para2.08) is forest, mostly on steep slopes and already logged over. The26% of the project area that comprises soils of lesser slope and betterquality, produces important volumes of coffee and fresh fruits, particularlycitrus, papaya and avocado, and subsistence crops, mainly maize, beans, riceand yuca.

2.17 Coffee. Coffee is the single most important crop, with about35,000 ha under Arabica varieties. The area once produced about 20 to 22,000tons of coffee annually, or about 30% of the country's total production ofcoffee in the mid-1970s. Since 1979, however, the region has been badlyaffected by leaf rust and production has declined drastically, reaching alevel of only about 12,000 tons in 1982. The negative effect of leaf rust onthe region's coffee output has been further aggravated by failure to replaceover-age trees with high yielding varieties, low use of inputs, and lack offinancial and technical assistance.

-8-

2.18 Citrus. Citrus, mainly Valencia oranges, but also mandarins,lemons and limes, is the second most important crop covering 5,700 ha ofwhich 4,600 ha are in production. Annual production is estimated at about40,000 tons, which represents about 60% of total sales of citrus in the Limamarket. In general, citrus, which is grown under rainfed conditions in theregion, is well cared for and shows little evidence of pests, diseases ornutritional deficiencies. Despite the good market potential for citrus fromChanchamayo and Satipo, the expansion of citrus planting has beenconstrained by problems of obtaining medium-to-long-term credit, by theuncertainties resulting from lack of titles over farm land in the area, andby the low quality of feeder roads.

2.19 Papaya. Up until 1980 there were over 2,000 ha under papaya in theregion, producing about 41,000 tons of fresh fruit for the Lima market. Theplantings, however, have been affected by a virus, causing significantlosses, and the combined effect of this virus plus nutritional deficienciesof the plantings led to a sharp decline in yields and area under papayabetween 1980-82. As a result, production fell to about 6,000 tons over thesame period. The introduction of virus-resistant varieties and improvementof cultural practices, however, could bring papaya production back to itsearlier levels.

2.20 Avocado. Avocado orchards total over 2,000 ha, largelyconcentrated in Chanchamayo. Except for a problem of root rot present insome plantings, the trees appear healthy and the regional production (about9,000 tons) represents nearly 50% of the total Lima market consumption ofavocados. Chanchamayo avocados are of good quality and production in theregion could be increased, provided varieties resistant to root rot areintroduced and long-term credit is made available to farmers, together withthe solution to their land titling problems. Present plantings are locatedalong the rivers and main roads but an expansion of the production area wouldrequire an improvement of connecting feeder roads.

2.21 Pineapple. The region is also a major supplier of pineapple to theLima market (over 90%). Plantings covering about 1,300 ha are in Chanchamayoand produce about 15,000 tons per annum. The local varieties are not wellsuited for processing, with the result that only about 2,000 to 3,000 tonsare processed each year by INDALSA, the local factory. A change in varietyto the more suitable Smooth Cayenne would increase the demand of pineapplefor processing. Thus, there is a potential demand for both fresh fruit andfruit for processing, but farmers in Chanchamayo are not likely to introduceany changes in their cultural practices and varieties or expand the areaunder pineapple unless adequate technical and financial assistance isprovided.

2.22 Bananas. The third most extensively grown crop (4,500 ha) aftercoffee and citrus is bananas (including plantains), with the bulk ofproduction being sold in the Lima market (about 70%) without much regard toquality and prices. The remainder is used on the farm, either for directconsumption or as feed for small animals, or sold in the local market.Bananas are usually grown together with other crops and receive littlespecial attention. This practice, plus some pests and diseases (nematodesand insects), has led to rather low yields of 4 to 6 tons/ha. Totalproduction in the region fluctuates around 27,000 tons per year.

-9-

2,23 Subsistence Crops. There are about 4,000 ha under maize, with aproduction of about 7,000 tons per annum, and some 3,000 ha of yuca, with anannual production of approximately 21,000 tons, as well as smaller areas ofrice and beans. Yields are low largel'y because of inadequate fertilizationand cultural practices.

2.24 Livestock. The modest livestock production in the region isdirected mainly to the local market or used for on-farm consumption. Thecattle population is estimated at 13-15,000 head, mostly criollo orzebu-criollo crosses. Cattle are raised on natural pastures, with littleherd management. Many farmers keep a few chickens and hogs but there ispractically no commercial production at present. This may be expected todevelop over time through use of plaintain, banana and yuca as carbohydratesources.

2.25 Yields and Production. Although the area is already settled andmuch of the land with productive potential is occupied, only a few farmershave achieved high levels of technology and yields. Producers in the areaare responsive to commercial demand, as indicated by the range of cropsalready produced, but are presently constrained by lack of financialresources, particularly long-term credit, and lack of technical assistance.Consequently, further development of the region is feasible, provided the

credit constraint is removed and better technological support is made

available.

2.26 Farm Labor, Although the average farm in the region is small and

basically a family enterprise, most of those producing coffee and fruit for

sale have short periods of peak labor demand, principally at harvest time.

This is hand-Led through an established tradition of seasonal migration from

the highlands which also helps to ameliorate the under-employment problem in

the highlands. Eventually some of these workers adapt to the conditions of

the Selva and decide to remain and obtain land or permanent employment in theregion.

Infrastructure

2.27 Roads. Responsibility for planning, design, construction and

mainitenance of all roads in the country resides in Peru's Ministry of

Transport and Communications (MTC). However, it is a weak institution with

serious capability constraints. Although now being strengthened under the

Eighth Highway Project (Loan 2091-PE), it focuses primarily on expanding and

improving the main road network; as a result, minor provincial roads receive

only sporadic emergency maintenance from MTC. Thus, by default, minor road

improvement and/or maintenance work has passed to local authorities.

2,28 The outlet for the whole of the project area is the road from San

Ramon through the Sierra to Lima via Tarma and La Oroya. The distance from

San Ramon to ima is about 300 km and, except for the first 39 km, the road

is asphalted. Traffic is, however, occasionally interrupted by landslides in

the Sierra. Internal communications are based on a main road system

emanating from San Ramon through La Merced then forking with a southern

branch running through Pichanaki to Satipo and Mazamari while the other

-10-

branch continues eastward to Villa Rica (Map IBRD 17482). The primary roadnetwork in the area consists of gravel roads, which would be paved as far asSatipo and Villa Rica under the Eighth Highway Project. Feeding into themain roads are about 1,200 km of access roads and tracks, constructedoriginally as logging roads. Some have been somewhat improved by communaleffort, but, in general, they are narrow, unsurfaced, poorly constructed andfrequently impassable during the rains. The poor access adversely affectsdelivery of services, use of modern inputs, and marketing of products.

2.29 Health Services. Only La Merced and Satipo have general hospitals;San Ramon, Pichanaki and Mazamari have health centers and mDst rural familiesuse these health services only in cases of emergency. The most serioushealth problem throughout the area is the lack of potable water which, alongwith the lack of latrines, contributes greatly to the spread of parasites anddisease.

Agricultural Services

2.30 Input Supply. Over 60% of the fertilizer consumed in Peru ismanufactured within the country by three state enterprises and two privatelyowned enterprises. Domestic production represents about 80% of the nitrogenused, 40% of the phosphorus and 24% of the potassium fertilizer. TheNational Enterprise for Marketing Inputs (ENCI) controls the import andcommercial distribution of fertilizers, with 380 registered fertilizer salesoutlets, of which 58% are private and the rest are cooperatives that handle anumber of commodities, including fertilizer. Only 8% of the sales outletsare in the Selva.

2.31 Plant protection materials are readily available in theagricultural areas from private business sources. Large-scale farmers tendto be aware of the virtues of particular disease and insect control products,but many farmers in the Sierra and the Ceja de Selva are completely dependenton the advice of salesmen. An informed extension service could greatlyassist in ensuring efficient and cost-effective use of plant protection.

2.32 Marketing. Food crops, mainly maize and yuca, are sold locally orconsumed on the farm; ENCI purchases maize at a guaranteed price. Coffee isgenerally marketed through marketing companies; 10 Agricultural ServiceCooperatives (CAS) handle 80% of the coffee produced in the project area, andthe remainder is marketed by intermediaries. The CAS either export thecoffee directly or through ENCI. Peru is a member of the InternationalCoffee Organization, which fixes the export quota; administration of thequota in Peru is done by the Junta Nacional del Cafe. The export quota for1982/83 was 40,740 tons, accounting for about 71% of the year's production.

2.33 Fresh fruit passes through a complex system of intermediariesbefore reaching the consumer. Producers sell to itinerant traders at thefarmgate if they have poor access to local commercial centers, or they sellto local privately owned collection centers which arrange transport to andsale in Lima, or they entrust their produce to a transporter who sells on acommission basis in Lima. Except for bananas, which are sold in a separate

-11-

central market, all of the fruit passes through the wholesale market in Lima;the largest price mark-ups occur between this point and the consumer. At nopoint in the system is there any Government intervention; however, pricesfluctuate considerably. A small proportion of the fresh fruit production isalso sold to INDALSA, a private fruit processing plant located between LaMerced and San Ramon which processes about 4,000 tons per annum into fruitjuices and concentrates, largely citrus, and some jams and canned fruit.

2.34 Only in the area of fresh fruits can the present marketing systembe significantly improved, mainly by better sorting , grading and packagingwhich would reduce losses considerably and enable farmers to obtain betterprices. The Government has recently introduced some measures to improve themarketing of rural produce nationwide, including establishment of PROCOMPRA,a semi-autonomous unit with funding from a bilateral agreement with Spain andresponsible to the Vice-Minister of Agriculture.

Institutional Aspects

2.35 The Pichis-Palcazu Special Project (PEPP). PEPP, which would bethe implementing agency for the proposed project, was established by theGovernment in 1980 for the purpose of planning and implementing thedevelopment of a specific area in the Low Selva: the watersheds of thePichis, Palcazu and Pachitea rivers. PEPP is currently in charge of theimplementation of the IDB-financed rural development project in the PichisValley, the USAID-financed rural development project in the Palcazu Valley,the KfW project in Oxapampa, and the Chanchamayo-Satipo project fcr whichthis loan is proposed. Although these projects have all been initiatedduring the past three years, PEPP has rapidly established a good reputationfor its strong competent administration and the practical accomplishments ofits field staff. PEPP and the other Special Projects have broadmulti-sectoral powers and can enter into contracts and agreements with publicand private entities. Because of its administrative location, previously inthe Presidency of the Council of Ministers and now in the new NationalDevelopment Institute, PEPP is able to deal effectively with the variousGovernment agencies involved in project design and implementation in theCentral Selva, Among these entities are MTC, mentioned above, and variousdirectorates and institutes of MA as constituted under the new organic lawfor the agricultural sector issued on January 18, 1981.

2.36 Ministry of Agriculture. Under the new structure, since 1981 MAGhas retained responsibility for policy planning, administrative, regulatory,and control functions in the agricultural sector. However, directresponsibility for technical and support functions and activities were placedin four semi-autonomous institutions and two public enterprises. The fourinstitutes are: the National Institute for Agricultural Research andExtension (INIPA), the National Institute for Expansion of AgriculturalDevelopment (INAF), the National Forestry Institute (INFOR), and the NationalInstitute for Agroindustrial Development (INDA). The two public enterprisesare ENCI and the National Enterprise for Coca (ENACO).

-12-

2.37 The MA regional organization in the project area includes AgrarianZone VIII, San Ramon, which covers the Oxapampa and Chanchamayo regions, andZone XII, Huancayo, which covers the Satipo area. The zone officials aremainly concerned with enforcement of agricultural and forest legislation,veterinary immunization campaigns, land titling and cadastral survey, andcompilation of statistics. In forestry, district personnel with normativeguidance of DGFF and administrative control of the agrarian region, areresponsible for law enforcement and for approving extraction contracts, INFORprovides technical support, and the Forestry Police, an arm of the CivilGuard, supervises extraction and transport of timber, all within seriousstaff and funding constraints. In agriculture, INIPA has recently begun toprovide research and extension services in the area, but activities are stilllimited by shortage of funds. Additional qualified staff, facilities andsupport services are needed.

2.38 The Agrarian Bank of Peru (BAP). BAP is a Government-ownedinstitution with 19 branch offices, 65 agencies and 25 inspectoratesnationwide. It provides about 93% of the total institutional credit to theagricultural sector and recently received a US$130 million loan from the Bankto support a four-year lending program. BAP's policy currently provideslending autonomy for agencies to approve up to SI. 30 million (US$15,000) forindividual subloans and S/. 200 million (US$100,000) for subloans tocooperatives and for branches to approve up to S/. 120 million (US$60,000)for individual subloans and SI. 1,000 million (US$500,000) for cooperatives.Where the subloans are for new borrowers, the lending autonomy is reduced by50%. In addition, all subloans in excess of S/. 14 million (US$7,000)require crops or other assets as security, and copies of documentation aresent to the head office for supervision. BAP's current rates for the Selvaare shown in Table 1. Crop loans and long-term loans for tree crop farms,equipment and livestock establishment receive some subsidy. These rates arerequired to be reviewed and adjusted, if necessary, at bi-annual intervals toreflect changes in market rates.

2.39 BAP's audited financial statement to December 1982 showed BAP to befinancially sound, with total assets of S/. 441,000 million (US$294million). In addition, under the Sixth Agricultural Credit Project (Loan2302-PE), the Government guaranteed to maintain the value of BAP's equity inreal terms. The Sixth Project also provides technical assistance for theupgrading of BAP's staff and the development of an information system.

2.40 BAP's operation in the Chanchamayo-Satipo project area is currentlycentered at the La Merced branch, with two outlying agencies and two moreplanned to become operational. Apart from loans for coffee marketing,denominated in US dollars at interest rates varying from 18% to 21%, in whichthe private banks participate, BAP is the sole provider of institutionalagricultural credit in the area. In 1982 BAP loaned SI. 24,400 million(US$16 million) in the area, maintaining its 1979 level of lending in realterms. Of this, 77% (vs 95% in 1979) represented subloans for coffee, ofwhich 59% (1979, 81%) was for marketing loans. The reduced percentage ofsubloans for coffee reflect the recent diversification of agriculturaldevelopment in the area, mainly fruit crops. Because BAP's allocation ofresources for the area is directed mainly to coffee marketing (59% formarketing at La Merced compared to 7.5% nationally) and is largely torepetitive and larger borrowers, the small scale producers in the areaperceive BAP to be negative toward new borrowers, restrictive in loan size

-13-

and selective in loan processing. Consequently, without the promotion,technical assistance and the general support of the project, very littleincrease could be expected in the use of institutional credit by theseproducers.

2.41 BAP's staff in the La Merced zone of operation includes 20professionals who processed 3,433 subloans in 1982, or an average of S/.1,219 million (US$813,000) per professional annually. The staff in the areais expected to increase proportionately with the two new offices planned andthe anticipated increase in subloans.

III. THE PROJECT

A. Introduction

3.01 In support of its agricultural development strategy, the Governmentof Peru has requested Bank assistance to finance a rural development projectin the provinces of Chanchamayo and Satipo in the Department of Junin. Theproject was prepared by the Executive Directorate of the Pichis-PalcazuSpecial Project assisted by FAO/IBRD CP. Bank participation in the projectwould continue the Bank's strategy of supporting development of Peru's Cejade Selva.

B. Brief Description

3.02 The project would aim at increasing agricultural and forestryproduction in an area of about 730,000 ha. Most of the 20,000 ruralfamilies in the area, including about 2,000 native families, would benefitunder the project. The components listed below were selected to maximizeproductive impact while minimizing tensions between colonists and nativecommunities during the development process. To accomplish its objective, theproject would:

(a) provide credit to about 5,500 farmers;(b) reinforce extension services in the project area;(c) support research to develop and field test improved

agricultural technology;(d) modify forest exploitation to permit regeneration and

sustainable production;(e) improve about 427 km of access roads and establish a viable

system for maintenance;(f) improved marketing of fresh fruit;(g) support a program to provide legal titles for about 15,000

individual farmers and 85 native communities; and(h) assist native communities by introducing measures to improve

their security of tenure, level of skills and potable watersupply; and

(i) strengthen the executing agency.

-14-

3.03 The thrust of the agricultural development program is to increaseproductivity by obtaining broad adoption of improved technology that hasalready been proven in the region and to reinforce technical support servicesto be able to anticipate and respond to new problems that can be expected tooccur in the course of development. The project would provide agriculturalextension and credit to about 5,500 farmers, including 500 to 600 members ofnative communities, to assist them to gradually rehabilitate about 14,000 haof coffee and 3,800 ha of perennial fruit (citrus, avocado, papaya) andsemi-perennials (pineapple, banana) and to expand the plantings of tree cropsother than coffee by 4,200 ha. Technology packages have been defined foreach crop, based on the experience of progressive farmers and agronomists inthe project area. In all cases these packages include increasedfertilization and in most cases better control of insects and diseases withwhich immediate yield response can be obtained. Major components are asfollows: (1) for coffee rehabilitation, introduction of improved lines,systematic control of leaf rust by spraying, removal of excess shade, andimproved pruning practices; (2) for papaya, liming and testing of newvarieties to locate virus tolerance; (3) for avocado, field testing ofadditional commercial varieties and establishment of new plantings only ondeep light soils to avoid problems with root rot; (4) for pineapple,introduction of the best clone of Smooth Cayenne because of its marketpotential, and pre-planting control of soil insects and nematodes; and (5)for citrus, introduction of higher yielding varieties and involvement of allproducers in fruit fly control.

3.04 The project would be implemented over six years and would beadministered by PEPP's Executive Directorate in La Merced (with a liaisonoffice in Lima) and its Chanchamayo-Satipo Project Directorate also locatedat La Merced in the project area. Most of the project activities would bemanaged through implementation agreements with relevant governmental andprivate agencies, strengthened for purposes of the project.

C. Detailed Features

Credit

3.05 Medium- and long-term credit would be provided (Table 2) for landclearing, procurement of small equipment (fumigators, depulpers) and tools,on-farm development and purchase of draft animals and would be based on farminvestment plans elaborated with the assistance of extension personnel (para4.04). Incremental short-term credit would be provided for about 3,000 ha ofsubsistence crops annually and to help producers meet the operating expensesof caring for existing tree crops during the initial years of the new treecrop establishment. Items to be financed would include seeds and seedlingsfor replacement, fertilizers, chemicals, machinery rental, labor costs, andmarketing and transport of farm products. Medium-and long-term resourcerequirements are estimated at about US$17.8 million and short-termrequirements at about US$2.8 million over the project period. In view ofBAP's increased resources, including funds from the Bank's recently approvedagricultural credit loan for US$130 million to BAP (Loan 2302-PE), BAP wouldprovide the credit for the project from its ownconsolidated resources (para4.04).

-15-

Marketing

3.06 Two rural marketing centers for grading and packing fruit would beopened in the project area--one to be constructed in La Merced and one atSat-po (Table 11). The production would be destined primarily for the Limamarket. Each center would have a capacity of about 14,000 tons per year ofcitrus, pineapple, papaya, bananas, avocado and other products. TheExecutive Directorate would arrange for construction of the centers eitherthrough PROCOMPRA or directly. The centers would be owned and managed by thelocal producer associations when completed. Assistance for the associationsin marketing would be financed under the project. The project includes thecosts of construction of the two new marketing centers in the project area aswell as incremental operating costs and a four person implementation groupwhose role will be defined by agreement between PEPP and the producersassociation. This group would work the first year at each center with theproducers to get the fruit packaging plants in operation and effectivelymarket the produce.

Extension

3.07 The project would finance reinforcement of existing extensionservices of INIPA in the project area (Table 3) including:

(a) rehabilitation of the zone office at San Ramon and an agencyat Pichanaki (2,200 m2); construction of zone offices atSatipo and agency offices at Pampa Silva and San MartinPangoa (2,200 m2); and construction of simple dwellings forextension workers in 26 villages (1,248 m2);

(b) the purchase of 27 pickups and 52 motorcycles; four 4-wheeldrive vehicles; and office and field equipment for thefacilities shown above;

(c) incremental salaries (20 professionals, 27 non-professionaltechnical staff, eight clerical and 17 support staff) andoperating costs of the program; and

(d) the costs of farmers' short courses, in-service stafftraining and external training.

Research

3.08 Research to design and test improved agricultural technology wouldbe carried out in a coordinated program by UNA and INIPA with UNA taking mainresponsibility for on-station research and INIPA carrying out on-farm trials(para 4.05). The project would strengthen the research capacity of UNA atSatipo (Santa Teresa) and at San Ramon (La Genova). The on-station researchunder the proposed project would focus on variety trials to test new materialand studies of disease and pest control. Station nurseries would alsoproduce the initial stock of improved plants for distribution to privatenurseries and farmers. Financing (Table 4) would be provided for:

-16-

(a) construction of laboratories, classrooms, library and housing(1,580 m2) at La Genova;

(b) purchase of technical, scientific, office and farm equipmentfor both stations, including also a fruit grader, two pumps,two greenhouses and a limestone crusher;

(c) purchase of six pickup trucks; and(d) incremental salaries and travel costs for a project

coordinator, two soil scientists, three crop specialists, anagro-economist, eight assistants, two clerks and 10 laborers.

Forestry

3.09 The project would have three principal forestry goals: (a) theprotection and improvement of logged-over forest in preparation for a secondcutting cycle; (b) the protection and/or replanting of abandoned agriculturalland; and (c) the controlled development of the remaining block of virginforest for timber production. To reach these goals, the project would:

(a) expand INFOR's ongoing forestry research and reforestationprogram by hiring eight foresters, 10 forest technicians andsupport staff and supplying vehicles and infrastructure,including field offices in Pichanaki and Satipo, newnurseries at San Ramon and Satipo and expansion of theexisting nursery at Pichanaki. The reforestation programwould produce native and exotic seedlings in sufficientquantity to reforest approximately 4,000 ha;

(b) enable DGFF and the Forestry Police (DPF) to initiate theprotection of approximately 200,000 ha of forest areas andfinance the preparation of a forest cadaster (files and mapsof existing forest properties and concessions). To achievethis, seven foresters and 12 forest technicians would behired and 18 additional forest guards will be provided byDPF, a new district office at Satipo and six forestry policeposts would be built and supporting equipment and vehicleswould be purchased. The DGFF, through its forestry districtsat San Ramon and Satipo, would prepare studies of the forestreserve areas bordering the project area (see map) todetermine areas of production forest and areas of protectionforest. Issuance of new exploration concessions would befrozen until the DGFF completes these studies. Assurances onthis point were obtained at negotiations (para 7.01). Theproduction areas would then be opened to concessions and thecompanies winning those concessions would prepare thenecessary management/utilization plans with DGFFsupervision. The DGFF would prepare management plans for theprotected areas. These latter plans would consist largely ofpatrol schedules and plans for research on fauna and flora;

(c) establish a forestry extension service within INFOR with fourforesters and four technicians;

(d) finance a series of forestry courses and seminars forforesters, project personnel, forestry police, and skilledlaborers; and

(e) finance part of a study to determine methods of involvingnative communities in income generating forestry activities.Additional funding for this study would come from theproject's native community budget.

-17-

Detailed investments are given in Table 5 and detailed background on theforestry component is on file in a working paper (Annex 2).

Roads

3.10 The project would provide funds for the improvement of about 427 kmof access roads in areas of high agricultural activity and populationdensity; a bridge across the Rio Perene to connect the virtually isolatedeastern bank area to the main highway, so as to provide year round access;and technical assistance, tools and equipment to develop and support a systemof access road maintenance by local communities. The objectives are (i) toimprove and maintain farmers' access to markets which is very important in anarea with a large marketable production of perishable crops, and (ii) todevelop and expand local institutional capacity to organize, manage andexecute labor based road maintenance practices which could continue tofunction with a minimum of assistance from departmental or nationalgovernment agencies. To accomplish these goals, the project would finance(Table 6):

(a) construction of a bridge (90 m) across the Rio Perene atYurinaki;

(b) consultant services for detailed engineering, preparation ofcontract documents, supervision of construction of the aboveand training in road maintenance;

(c) purchase of road maintenance tools, and equipment;(d) construction of two workshops; and(e) operating and repair costs of maintenance equipment during

the implementation period.

3.11 Road improvement standards are shown in Table 7 and road locationsappear on the map. Since the roads in the project area traverse both theflat to rolling topography of the valley bottom lands and the sharply risingsteep mountainsides leading to and through higher altitude agricultural area,there is considerable variation in road characteristics. In the flatterterrain road closure is due to inadequate drainage and weak soils which wouldbe improved by raising the road beds, ditching and applying river gravelsurfacing. On the narrow mountainous roads the improvements would consist ofproviding adequate drainage systems, passing bays as well as better tractionand surface resistance through road surface improvement with the bestavailable roadside materials. Transporting river gravels up hill would ingeneral be prohibitively costly. Preliminary engineering of all road workshas been completed as well as detailed engineering for roads to beconstructed during year 1.

3.12 The road maintenance program would seek to expand and supportcommunity responsibility which is already in evidence in some parts of theproject area. Local government districts would be required to enter intoagreement with the project directorate to have the communities execute thenecessary routine maintenance work, as a pre-condition to having any roads tothe communities improved. In return the project would: (i) furnish aninitial supply of tools; (ii) provide training in labor based maintenance

-18-

practices; (iii) assist the local government in organizing and managingmaintenance; and (iv) provide some mechanized support, particularly intransporting suitable materials for use by community maintenance labor.Assurances were obtained during negotiations that a program of action forroad maintenance, including budget requirements, would be forwarded to theBank for review and comment not later than July 31, 1985 and updated annuallythereafter. Maintenance support units managed by engineering staff who wouldbe contracted by the project directorate, would be established to provide thenecessary training, technical assistance and support to the communities. Thestaff of the units would be assisted by specialized consultants in organizingthe necessary training and would provide at least three years of supervisionof community efforts. The units would assist the project directorate inequipment procurement and workshop construction, and would operate the smallequipment pools and the mechanical workshops which would eventually betransferred to an appropriate local government authority. Duringnegotiations assurances were obtained that a program for the transfer wouldbe presented to the Bank for comments not later than March 31, 1988 and madeeffective not later than March 31, 1989 and that adequate budgets would beprovided for continued operation and repair of the maintenance equipmentpools (para 7.01).

3.13 Training would be assisted by specialized consultants who wouldfirst teach project staff how to become effective trainers. A model laborcrew financed by the project would be trained to test proposed procedures,crew productivity, work organization and management. The crews would be usedto provide demonstrations to district officials and to give training todistrict foremen and crew organizers, who would be nominated by the districtauthorities. This training would be provided by project staff who wouldprovide the subsequent supervision and evaluation of district efforts aswell as on-the-job assistance in programming and managing maintenance works.The proposed training programs would be a part of the annual plan of action(para. 3.12).

Land Titling

3.14 The project would finance incremental operating expenses for theentities working jointly under PEPP coordination on an expanded titlingprogram (para 2.13). Its objective is to provide legal titles for farmers inthe project area who do not have them -- about 15,000 individual farmers and48 native communities -- and for 37 native communities at the periphery inthe zone of influence of the project (20 in the Ene-Tambo area and 17 in theGran Pajonal). In addition land registry would be established in the projectarea. Expenses covered under the project would include (Table 8):

(a) salaries and travel costs of incremental staff;(b) purchase of vehicles and a boat;(c) purchase of office and field equipment; and(d) operating and maintenance costs for equipment purchased.

-19--

Native Communities

3.15 Various components of the project would include act-ions tosafeguard the land and the rights of native communities and toincrease their participation in the regional economy and enable them tobenefit from the project. These would include: (a) continued priorityfor native communities in land titling; (b) inclusion within the extensionservice of trained bilingual (Spanish and Campa) extension officers to give

technical assistance and promote the use of credit among native communities;and (c) involvement as trainees and later as staff for implementing parts ofthe forestry component. In addition, the project would support a specialnative communities component including (Table 9):

(a) an appropriate technology program covering nutritionalimprovement, handicraft production and small scaleindustries;

(b) completion of about A00 potable water systems for nativecommunities and neighboring small-scale farmers;

(c) assistance to native communities for self-help constructionof community buildings, particularly schools and healthposts; and

(d) training related to the above activities.

Project Directorate

3.16 The Project Directorate (PD) would receive financial support(Table 10 ) for:

(a) office construction (300 m2 total) and rehabilitation (600i

2 ), housing and dormitories (700 m2 total).(b) purchase of 18 pickups, office supplies and equipment;(c) contracting additional staff (39 professionals and

technicians, 13 clerical and 22 support staff); and(d) operating and maintenance costs for vehicles, equipment and

facilities.

D. Project Costs

3.17 Total project costs, including contingencies, US$7.6 million ofindirect taxes and the front end fee, are estimated at about US$67.5 million;of this total US$21.5 million would represent foreign exchange costs.Physical contingencies are estimated at 15% for civil works and 5% formachinery and equipment. Base costs are in October 1983 values. AlthoughPeru continues to experience high domestic rates of inflation, it uses asystem of regular adjustment in its exchange rates relative to hardcurrencies which approximately covers the differential between domestic andinternational inflation. Therefore, price contingencies in the project costsare calculated on US dollar base values and estimated at the following rates:1984, 7.5%; 1985, 7.0%; and 1986-89, 6.0% yearly. Detailed project coststatements are presented in Tables 12, 13, and 14 and summarized below.

-20-

PERUCHANCHANAYO - SATIPO RURAM. DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

PROJECT COST SUMNARY

(S/. Nillioii) (US$ Million) ; of------------------------ ------------------- Foseion ; of Total

L.oel Foreiuc, Totil Locil Forei ., Total E>chanre Base Cos

A. CREDIT 21,873,2 110719,9 33i593,1 10Q6 5.7 16.2 34.9 30.9B. AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION 7Y186,1 1,556,6 9,742.8 3,5 0,8 4,2 17!8 8.0C, RESEARCH 2,479.7 1902,17 3,982.4 1.2 0.7 1.9 37t7 3.7D, FORESTRY 6,358.9 1,290.6 7?649.5 3.1 0.6 3.7 16.9 7.0E. ROADS t9,891.9 14,196-9 34!088.8 9.6 6.9 16,5 41.6 31.4F. LAND TITLING 6S600.6 724.? 7,325.3 3,2 0.4 3.5 9.9 6.7G. NWrIVE COMMUNIT[ES 1,338,5 569.1 1907.6 0.6 0.3 0.9 29.8 1.8H. PROJECT UNIT 50427.6 710.1 6i137.7 246 0.3 3.0 11.6 5.6I. MARKETTNG 3f349.8 1,950.3 5,30)00 1,6 0.9 2,6 46.8 4.9

Total BASELINE COSTS 74f506.2 34!220,9 108,727;1 36.0 16.5 52,5 31.5 100.0Physical Contingencies 4,075.7 2,87?98 6f955,4 2.0 1,4 3.4 41.4 6,4Price Contingencies 16,759.2 7,076.9 23,836.1 8.1 3.4 1135 29,7 2119

Total PROJECT COSTS 95f341,0 44F177.6 139,518.6 46.1 21,3 67,4 31.7 128.3

Fron,t End Fee - 232.9 232.D9 0.1 0.1 100,0 0.2

Total FINANCING REQUIRED 95y341,( 44i410.5 139i751,5 46,1 21.5 67,5 31.8 12858

E. Project Financing

3.18 The proposed Bank loan of US$40 million would meet 59 percent oftotal financing requirements (66 percent of total costs net of all taxes),including US$15.6 million in foreign costs, the front end fee and US$24.3million in local costs. The Government would be the borrower and would carrythe foreign exchange risk. The loan would be for a term of 17 years,including four years of grace, at the standard variable interest rate. Theremaining project costs, including contingencies, would be provided byGovernment, BAP and beneficiaries as shown in the following table.

-21-

Financing Plan

(US$ million)

ProposedProducers World Bank

Government BAP Assoc. Farmers Loan TotalCredit

Long-term 15.0 2.8 - 17.8Short-term 2.4 0.4 - 2.8Subtotal 17.4 3.2 - 20.6

Marketing .4 1.4 - 1.3 3.1Extension .5 - 4.7 5.2Research .2 - 2.2 2.4Forestry .5 - 4.1 4.6Roads 3.1 - 19.3 22.4Land Titling .4 - 3.9 4.3Native Communities .1 - 1.0 1.1Project Directorate .3 - 3.4 3.7Front End Fee - .1 .1

Total 5.5 17.4 1.4 3.2 40.0 67.5

F. Procurement

3.19 Procurement arrangements are summarized in the Table below:

(US$ millions)

Procurement Method TotalProject Element ICB LCB Other N.A. Cost

Civil Works - 15.0 7.3 - 22.3- (13.5) (6.6) - (20.1)

Vehicles and Equipment - 9.1 13.9 23.0- (8.6) - (8.6)

Salaries and Operating Costs - 19.7 19.7_ (8.9) (8.9)

Consultant Services, Training, - 2.4 2.4Studies _ _(2.4) (2.4)

TOTAL 24.1 7.3 36.0 67.4(22.1) (6.6) (11.3) (40.0)

Note: Figures in parentheses are the respective amounts financed by the BankLoan.

-22-

Civil Works

3.20 Contracts for improving access roads, totalling about US$12.0million over four years, would be procured using local competitive biddingprocedures (LCB). Because of the small scale of operations which would berequired, particularly on the narrow mountainous road sections, Schedule ofRates contracting procedures would be used when appropriate as an alternativeto unit price bidding. In some flatter areas, both types of contractingwould be tried to permit a comparison of the prices obtained. Since theproject area is large while work volumes on individual roads are small and,in addition, since overall project implementation would not be favored bygrouping road improvements in each geographical area into larger annualcontracting packages, the resulting individual contractor would tend to besmall. In addition, the suitability of smaller equipment and labor intensiveprocedures for the type of work required, would probably make the work moreattractive to smaller contractors than to Peru's traditional, larger road-contractors or to international firms already working in Peru. Both would beeligible to bid on combinations of several contracts, if interested, however,the contracts would not be advertised internationally.

3.21 Construction of the bridge across the Perene river at Yurinaki isestimated to cost about US$0.8 million equivalent, and would be contractedusing LCB procedures, satisfactory to the Bank. Peru has experiencedcontractors capable of handling such works. The balance of civil workscontracts for offices, housing, and research facilities are not of a scalewhich would interest foreign contractors; therefore, LCB procedures,satisfactory to the Bank, would be used. Any combined packages of works inexcess of US$500,000 would be subject to the Bank's prior review ofprocurement documentation. PEPP would organize bidding and would supervisethe construction of the works.

Goods and Services

3.22 Workshop machinery, tools and maintenance equipment, as well asvehicles and motorcycles would be procured by locally advertised competitivebidding which is appropriate for the small volume of goods involved. Majorsuppliers of equipment have established agencies in Lima and all would berequired to have, or to establish, equipment repair and spare parts supplyservices in or near the project area. Furniture and supplies, andscientific and technical equipment would be grouped; orders under US$50,000would be placed after prudent shopping procedures in accordance with localregulations acceptable to the Bank, and packages over US$50,000 would besubject to LCB. The total value of scientific and technical equipment, aswell as furniture and supplies procured through direct negotiations, is notexpected to exceed US$350,000. Expatriate assistance and consultants wouldbe selected on the basis of qualifications and experience and in accordancewith Bank guidelines. Scholarships extending for one academic year or moreand external travel associated with technical training financed under theloan would require prior approval of the Bank. Assurances were obtained atnegotiations that the provisions of this and the preceding paragraphs onprocurement would be followed.

-23-

G. Disbursement

3.23 Proceeds of the Bank loan would be disbursed as follows:

Category Item Amount(US$ million)

I Civil Works: 18.090% of total expenditures

II Vehicles and Equipment: 8.0100% of foreign expenditures90% of local expenditures

III Incremental Salaries and Operating Costs 8.080% until aggregate disbursements

reach equivalent of $4,800,00045% thereafter until aggregate reaches

the equivalent of $2,700,00010% thereafter until aggregate reachesequivalent of $500,000

IV Consultant Services, Training and Studies: 2.2100% of total expenditures

V Initial Deposit in Special Account 1.0

VI Front-end Fee .1

VII Unallocated 2.7

Total 40.0

3.24 The project would be implemented over six years and disbursementsunder the Bank loan would extend over six and one-half years (Table 15).Taking into account historical disbursement profiles for agricultural andrural development projects in the region, which have averaged eight years,the proposed period is justified because of: (a) PEPP's experience incoordinating similar projects in the region; (b) present status of designpreparation for access roads and the bridge at Yurinaki as well as theinitiation of land titling activities; and (c) strong Government commitmentreflected in the project's special status under the new cabinet-levelNational Development Institute.

3.25 For all civil works carried out by local contractors, and forincremental salaries and operating costs, disbursements would be made on thebasis of certified statements of expenditures. The supporting documentationwould be retained by the respective implementing agencies and be availablefor inspection by Bank supervision missions, the Project Directorate and theauditor. Disbursements against other expenditures would be made upon

-24-

submission of the normal documentation. Assurances were obtained atnegotiations on these points. Retroactive financing of up to US$350,000(less than one percent of the loan amount) would be provided for costsincurred after January 1, 1984 for start-up including essential equipment andinitiation of office construction and hiring of key project and extensionstaff.

3.26 In order to ensure timely payments of project costs, a working fundwould be established in the Banco de la Nacion by the Government to coverestimated expenditures for two months. Simultaneously, in order to alsoaccelerate disbursement, the Borrower would establish a Special Account in USdollars at Banco de la Nacion into which the Bank would make an initialdeposit estimated to cover the Bank's share of three months of expenditures(US$1.0 million). The borrower would claim reimbursement of the Bank's shareof expenditures from the Special Account upon presentation of withdrawalapplications, which, in turn, would be forwarded to the Bank fully documentedfor replenishment of the Special Account. The Bank would require a monthlystatement of the Special Account which would reflect transactions during theprevious month. Similar facilities are included in the Bank's Eighth HighwayProject (Loan 2091-PE) and the Alto Mayo Project (Loan 2219-PE).

IV. ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

Executive Directorate (ED)

4.01 The Chanchamayo-Satipo project organization has already been set upunder the Executive Directorate of the Pichis-Palcazu Special Project (PEPP),originally in the Office of the President of the Council of Ministers, andpresently under INADE. Chart I outlines the project organization. PEPPwould have authority over this project as well as over three others in theCentral Selva region (para 2.35), but would delegate day-to-day operation tothe Chanchamayo-Satipo Project Director located in the project area at LaMerced. The PEPP Executive Director's function with respect toChanchamayo-Satipo would therefore be to:

(a) ensure that planning, programming, and implementation conformto the provisions of the Loan Agreement with the Bank;

(b) ensure that all resources necessary to carry out the projectare available in a timely manner;

(c) approve plans and programs of the Project Directorate (PD),and approve and sign contracts required for projectexecution.

To ensure effective coordination of the project with the participatingagencies, an assurance was obtained at negotiations that the ED wouldcontinue to maintain a liaison office in Lima.

Project Directorate (PD)

4.02 The Project Director Chanchamayo-Satipo, who is already in place,would be responsible for the efficient implementation of the project, onbehalf of the ED to whom he would report directly. The Project Directorate(PD) would head five sub-directorates: farm production services (FPS), landtitling (LT), roads and buildings (RB), administrative services (AS), and

-25-

planning and evaluation (PE), (Chart 1). He would also be responsible forcoordinating aspects related to the native communities. Specificresponsibilities of the five sub-directorates are sumarized below:

(a) FPS would implement: (i) the farm development and creditprogram, including extension and research, with theparticipation of BAP, INIPA and UNA; and (ii) the forestrydevelopment and protection program to be executed by DGFF,INFOR and the Forest Police. It would also be responsiblefor the training and native communities component and wouldprepare progress reports on all of the above;

(b) LT would implement the land titling program, with theparticipation of DGFF, DGRAAR and OGCR under agreement withMAG (para 2.13);

(c) RB would coordinate and control all civil works and relatedcontracts for consulting services. Consultants would beengaged for detailed engineering, supervision of construction

and technical assistance in training. Staff contracteddirectly by RB would manage the road maintenance units andconduct related technical assistance and training (para 3.12,3.13) and would assist RB in procuring equipment.Consultants would assist RB in preparation of biddingdocuments, in evaluation of bids for civil works and in thepreparation of progress reports on works for which it isresponsible;

(d) AS would be responsible for budgeting, accounting, personnel,supplies and support services; and

(e) PE would produce and annually up-date an Integrated RuralDevelopment Plan for Chanchamayo-Satipo, plan and executesystematic monitoring of the program, evaluate projectimpact, make appropriate recommendations, and modify plansand programs based on data gathered.

4.03 Although difficulties may occur in attracting qualified personnelto work in the field, the transportation and housing to be financed under theproject should generally provide sufficient incentives. The key staffpositions in the Project Directorate have already been filled by personnel onshort-term contract. Assurances would be obtained at negotiations that, inthe event Government removes the Executive Director or the Project Director,their replacements would have qualifications satisfactory to the Bank.

Credit

4.04 Under a credit agreement between BAP and the ED (para 4.10), BAPwould assume responsibility for channeling adequate development andproduction credit through its local agency at La Merced in the project area.The agreement would include a schedule of annual lending targets andprovision for annual review of the targets. Under this agreement, a creditsub-committee, with representatives of BAP, the Center for AgriculturalResearch and Extension (CIPA), the PD and beneficiary farmers, would meet atquarterly intervals to analyze the supply, demand and delivery aspects ofcredit and production inputs. Terms and conditions of lending would be in

-26-

accordance with BAP's established norms, as agreed by the Bank for the SixthAgricultural Credit Project. Farmers would be aided by the project's creditpromotors in preparing long-term investment plans and in calculating seasonalcredit needs, which would be appraised by BAP. Loan approval, supervisionand recovery would also be the responsibility of BAP, assisted, if necessary,on technical aspects by INIPA personnel. BAP personnel would receiveproject-financed training formulated jointly by BAP and the ED.

Extension and Research

4.05 INIPA and UNA would collaborate closely with the PD in implementingthe extension and research components of the project. Their respective rolesare being defined in a tripartite agreement with INADE (para 4.10). INIPAwould establish a separate regional office (CIPA XIX) for the Central Selva,which would be staffed largely under the project and would haveresponsibility for the extension program. It would also have principalresponsibility, in collaboration with UNA, for carrying out training, whichwould be a key part of the strategy to integrate research and extension.This training would satisfy specific project needs not covered by the INIPAloan (2150-PE) and would be planned by PEPP and CIPA XIX with assistance ofexpertise available under the INIPA loan. UNA would implement the design andtesting of improved agricultural technology, utilizing its existing stationsin the project area at Satipo (Santa Teresa) and San Ramon (La Genova). AtSanta Teresa, the expanded program would utilize some of the improvementsbeing made under the recently effective Bank loan (2208-PE) for the PeruHigher Agricultural Education Project. INIPA would have main responsibilityfor off-station trials and demonstration plots, in collaboration with thefarmers and the UNA research staff.

Forestry

4.06 The three institutions responsible for executing the forestrycomponent are: INFOR, DGFF and the Forestry Police. The Forestry Faculty ofUNA with the collaboration of INFOR/CENFOR will plan, organize and executeall forestry courses and seminars. Course/seminar outlines will includeobjectives, costs, course content, and number and type of participants.INFOR, through its CENFOR office in San Ramon, would execute the research,extension and reforestation activities and would participate in training.DGFF would be responsible for protection and production control activitiesrelated to forest concessions and shipment of forest products within andthrough the project area. DGFF would also participate in the elaboration ofmanagement plans for the estimated 60,000 ha of virgin forest concessions inorder to better supervise harvesting and subsequent management. Each yearthe executing agencies would prepare detailed annual working plans specifyingactivities, personnel involved and detailed budgets for staff, equipment andmaterials. Salaries and other incremental costs for project activities wouldbe transferred directly from PEPP to each executing agency. Each agencywould be required to keep separate accounts of project-related expenses andperiodically provide these to PEPP. Salaries would be standard salaries paidby the agencies to their permanent staff. The agreements signed by INADE and

-27-

the executing agencies would specify that the incremental staff hired for

project-financed activities would be incorporated as permanent staff by theend of the sixth year. The purchase of vehicles and equipment and the

construction of infrastructure would be carried out directly under PEPPsupervision for the respective agencies.

Roads and Civil Works

4.07 Road improvement works, the bridge, office and housing constructionwould be subject to competitive bidding. The responsibility for invitingbids for the construction of offices and housing and awarding contracts wouldrest with the Project Directorate assisted by consultants financed under theloan. In the case of feeder road improvement and bridge construction, thebids would be invited by PEPP assisted as needed by the Ministry of Transportand Communications (MTC). The supervision of works would be carried out byconsultants to the PD Sub-directorate for Roads and Buildings.

Land Titling

4.08 Titling was initiated in the area during 1983 with funds providedunder the Eighth Highway Loan and would be accelerated in 1984 when theproposed loan becomes available. The existing convenio between PEPP and theMinistry of Agriculture, provides for a coordinated approach to the wholetitling process for native communities and individual holdings. The LTSub-directorate (para 4.02 b) has two units to carry out this work: (1) theCadastre Unit which has responsibility for photo interpretation, listing offarmers with land rights, mapping of parcel boundaries and sketching parcelplans; and (2) the Titling Unit with responsibility for registering andsurveying native communities, revocation of titles and agrarian reformcontracts which are no longer legal, land classification and issuance oftitles. These units are supported by administrative and legal staff.The final step, for both native communities and individuals, is registrationof titles with the Ministry of Justice for which funding would be provided tohelp establish a land registry office in La Merced with a branch office inSatipo. PEPP would negotiate an agreement for establishment of this officewith the Ministry of Justice.

Native Communities

4.09 Implementation of the measures to assist the native communitieswould be the responsibility of each of the entities participating in theproject. Coordination of these support activities would be the directresponsibility of the Sub-director for FPS who would also manage directly thenative communities component described in paragraph 3.14 and Table 9.

Agreements with Implementing Agencies

4.10 Although the PEPP Executive Directorate and its Project DirectorateChanchamayo-Satipo are fully responsible for all aspects of projectimplementation, overall coordination of the project would be facilitated byagreements which INADE would enter into with other institutions, some ofwhich are legally autonomous. For these, specific agreements satisfactory tothe Bank would be made with regard to:

-28-

(a) Farm Development Cred't: an agreement with BAP on provisionof credit (para 3.05 and 4.04);

(b) Agricultural Research and Extension: a tripartite agreementwith INIPA and UNA (para 4.05);

(c) Forestry: an agreement with INFOR (para 3.09).

Execution of the above agreements would be conditions of effectiveness forthe loan (para 7.02).

Accounts and Auditing

4.11 The PD has its own budgeting and accounting facilities subject toPEPP's own internal audit. The PD would maintain separate records toreflect, in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, itsoperations and financial conditions, reflecting the individual components ofthe project and incorporating the credit component to be executed by BAP.BAP also has adequate accounting and auditing arrangements. At negotiations,assurances would be obtained that: (a) the annual project accounts,including the working fund and special accounts, would be audited byindependent auditors acceptable to the Bank, whose reports would be of suchscope and in such detail as to include in their comments: (i) the accuracyof statements of expenditures submitted to the Bank for reimbursement; and(ii) such other information as the Bank may reasonably request; and (b)copies of PD's audited accounts and auditors' reports (including the longform report or a management letter with comments on aspects of internalcontrol) would be submitted to the Bank within six months of the end of eachfinancial year. A copy of the annual audited accounts of BAP showingseparately the credit component of the project would also be submitted to theBank.

Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting

4.12 A small monitoring and evaluation unit within the PESub-directorate would plan and coordinate with the executing agencies(particularly INIPA, UNA, INFOR and BAP) the systematic collection of data onproject progress and impact. This unit would consist of professionals inagriculture, statistics, economics and sociology/anthropology, who wouldcollect and analyze information that would provide a basis for decision andprompt action by executing units as well as a basis for annual planning andbudgeting. If necessary, random sample surveys would be conducted to obtaindata on crop yields, production and farm income. Indicators (Annex 1)established prior to project initiation would be adjusted during subsequentannual planning exercises.

4.13 The evaluation activities would focus on in-depth measurement ofimpact on production, natural environment, personal income and generalwelfare of the individual families and native communities that the projectintends to assist. The major evaluation work would include: a mid-termreview of program execution and impact to be carried out during year 3 and acompletion study and analysis to be carried out in year 6. The unit may alsocarry out or contract special ad hoc studies on problems that arise during

-29-

implementation. To assess the effects of project action in the nativecommunities, an information file would be established for each communityshowiLg social and physical characteristics, project activities, and effectson the community. Assurances were obtained at negotiations that an M&E unitsatisfactory to the Bank would be established not later than six months aftersigning of the Loan Agreement (para 7.01).

4.14 Annual progress reports would be submitted to the Bank no laterthan 90 days after the end of each year. These reports would present projectperformance and disbursements by component and explain any significantdeviations from objectives. The mid-term review and the completion report

would be prepared and sent to the Bank within six months after the end of thethird and sixth years, respectively. Assurances that the above reportingprocedures would be followed were obtained at negotiations (para 7.01).

V. AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION, YIELDS, MARKETING AND PRICES

Production and Yields

5.01 Incremental production under the project would result, on the one

hand, from rehabilitated and expanded perennial and annual crop plantingsfinanced through project-provided credit and, on the other, from an increasein average yields of perennial and annual crops due to the extensionpackage. The increase in yield, expected to be achieved through theintensified extension and research efforts, will come from better pruning,fertilization and disease and insect control in coffee, improved graftingdisease and insect control in coffee, improved grafting techniques anddisease control in citrus and avocado, better fertilization and cultivationpractices for papaya and banana, and improved planting material andmanagement for pineapple. Better management, fertilization and plantingmaterial is also expected to raise yield levels in maize and yuca. The yieldlevels expected to be achieved and the incremental production are as follows:

Incremental Production at Full Development

Area (ha) Yields at FD Years to Annual Incre. Prod.w/o with w/o with full Volume

Crops Proj Proj Proj Proj Devt (mt) S/.m US$mmt/ha mt/ha

Coffee 14,000 14,000 0.4 0.7 9 4,200 7,938 5.3Citrus 1,200 3,000 10.0 14.0 16 30,000 2,820 1.9

Avocados 240 800 4.0 6.0 12 3,840 422 0.3Pineapples 400 1,000 12.0 16.0 12 11,200 885 0.6Papayas 720 1,800 4.0 6,0 10 7,920 1,782 1.2Bananas 3,900 3,900 6.0 8.0 10 19,500 2,340 1.6Maize 2,750 5,500 1.7 2.0 7 6,325 1,423 0.9Yuca 800 1,600 7.0 9.0 8 8,800 792 0.5

Total 18,402 12.3

-30-

5.02 Incremental production estimates assume that the present situationreflects the future without-project case and that there would be no change intotal production over the project development period if project investmentswere not made. The justification for this position is that although the areaunder crop is likely to expand somewhat even if project investments are notmade, the following serious constraints would tend to reduce production perhectare: (a) the inability to market products effectively due to poor feederroads, hence post-harvest losses; (b) lack of technical assistance fordisease control and sound soil conservation and fertilization programs,likely causing average yields per hectare to decline over time, as is alreadythe case for coffee; and (c) lack of long-term credit for sufficientinvestments in on-farm development, thereby further slowing theintensification process. In the case of coffee, at full development (year 9)incremental production would reach about 4,200 tons (parchment coffee) or 35%more than the current (1982) level of production (12,160 tons) in the area.This increase in production, however, would only compensate the fall inproduction that has taken place in the area since 1978 as a result of leafrust (first noticed in the area in 1979).

5.03 As shown below, the incremental incomes of project beneficiariesare considered sufficient to provide an incentive to participate in theon-farm development works and other project programs. Results are based onfinancial prices shown in Table 16 and farm models shown in Tables 17 to 25,which are considered representative, bearing in mind that the actualinvestment mix may vary.

Full Development Farm Family Income

IncomeFarm Type Without Project With Project

… ------------- (US$)…

Coffee 2,364 4,925Citrus 1,277 4,110Avocado 534 1,718Pineapple 936 2,774

5.04 Preliminary estimates would indicate that increased output of sawntimber would be about 180,000 m3 per year, valued at S/. 3,150 million(US$2.1 million) per annum at current prices.

Marketing

5.05 Coffee production is largely exported. Peru has an export quotawithin the framework of the International Coffee Agreement. The Peruvianquota for 1982/83 was 40,740 tons, which was a reduction of 2,900 tons withregard to 1981. The reduction has been partly the result of the country'sinability to satisfy the ICO Council that it would be in a position to meeta greater export quota due to the declining trend shown by its production

-31-

after 1978. The additional export coffee which would be generated annuallyby the project at full development (year 9) represents no more than 8% ofPeru's 1982-83 quota. Since Peru's export quota can be expected to increaseby about 1.3% per annum in line with expected growth in world demand, thisproduction should not create surplus coffee for Peru. Government has noother plans to expand coffee production.

5.06 The increased fruit production would be absorbed primarily by theLima market. Projections of that market's demand for fresh fruits from theproject area are summarized below:

Annual Project Total Lima Market:Increment at Production Demand for Fresh Fruit from

full in Project Area the Project AreaFruit Development with Increment Low High

Projection 1/ Projection 2/

(tons)

Bananas 19,500 46,500 52,600 63,100Citrus 30,000 79,240 102,000 122,000Pineapples 11,200 26,800 25,100 25,100Avocados 3,840 12,740 13,900 16,700Papayas 7,920 13,920 40,600 40,600

1/ Assuming that the project area's share of the Lima market would remainthe same.

2/ Assuming that the low projection volumes would increase by 20%, with theexception of pineapples and papaya which already have a high share of theLima market.

Source: FAO/CP IBRD Report No. 28/83 CP PER 14, April 23, 1983.

Only pineapples would show a small surplus over the projected size of thefresh market in Lima, but existing unsatisfied demand for pineapple forprocessing by the local plant, which is at present about 2,500 tons, wouldabsorb that surplus.

Prices

5.07 Financial prices used in projections are based on current farmgate

prices. In the case of coffee, farmgate prices are fixed by coffeecooperatives according to the export price, less marketing expenses andtransport costs between the production area and the port of Callao. Thecoffee price used for economic analysis is the World Bank forecast priceexpressed in constant 1983 values, less processing, shipping and handlingcharges to convert it to a farmgate basis. For all other crops, farmgateprices are determined entirely by market forces and current farmgate prices,which are assumed to remain constant in real terms, have been used(Table 16).

-32-

VI. BENEFITS AND JUSTIFICATION

Benefits

6.01 The project's main direct benefit would be the expandedagricultural production in the area. Of the estimated total increase inproduction value of US$12.3 million annually at full development (in constant1983 dollars), 46% would be from fruits, 43% from coffee and 11% from foodcrops. These benefits would accrue to farmers expected to obtain credit andfollow extension advise successfully, estimated at just over one quarter ofthe total farmer population.

6.02 Additional indirect benefits, however, would be considerable.First, road improvement would not just benefit the direct projectbeneficiaries but the entire area population; in addition, the increase inlogging and sawmilling activities in. the private sector resulting from betteraccess, is estimated to provide additional employment to 450 people. Second,project-sponsored forestry protection and replanting of degraded lands wouldimprove soil and water conservation and be beneficial in environmentalterms. Third, the accelerated land titling would reduce tensions amongsettlers and between settlers and native communities, and would provideincreased cultivation incentives as well as a firm legal basis for investmentcredit. Fourth, the native communities component, which would includeelements of all the above plus certain social services, would specificallybenefit the least developed part of the population and increase theirparticipation in the economy. Finally, agricultural development wouldcontribute to a better utilization of the labor force, as it would generatean estimated 3,300 man-years of on-farm employment for family labor whichotherwise would remain idle or move to the cities in search of off-farmemployment opportunities.

Economic Rate of Return

6.03 The economic rate of return has been estimated at about 18.6%(Table 26) and is based only on quantifiable benefits from crop and forestproduction. Additional secondary benefits were not included. The followingassumptions were used in the analysis: (a) the progressive development ofthe various crops followed projections in the respective farm models andinvestment plans; (b) prices for coffee were calculated as indicated in para5.07, both family and unskilled labor was costed at the full market price;other production costs were priced according to local market conditions onthe grounds that this best reflects opportunity costs, given the marketstructure and current Government pricing policies; (c) the period of analysiswas 20 years; (d) the exchange rate used was S/.2,070 = US$1.0 which isconsidered to reflect reasonably well the present value of the Sol; and(e) calculation of the economic rate of return includes costs of all civilworks, buildings and related infrastructure required for projectimplementation. Also included are costs of research, extension, marketing,land titling and the production-related elements of the forestrycomponent, consultant services, training, machinery and equipment for civilworks, the maintenance program for roads and physical contingencies.

-33-

6.04 Project costs were lagged by one year to simulate the effect ofdelays in project implementation. This reduces the rate of return to 14.6percent. A sensitivity analysis to test the impact of various changes incosts and benefits is shown in Table 26.

6.05 In addition to the overall assessment of project benefits, ananalysis was made of the economic feasibility of each feeder road (or groupof interdependent feeder roads) included in the project. This analysis, withthe exception of the feeder roads in La Florida Cooperative area which wereanalyzed separately as a system to take into account the impact ofconstruction of the Yurinaki bridge, (para 6.06) was made utilizingsimplified Method III of the Bank's Rural Roads Screening and SimplifiedEconomic Appraisal Procedures (April 1983). For each road's area ofinfluence, agricultural value added with and without the project was comparedto total project costs associated with that area: road investment andmaintenance costs, on-farm agricultural investment, and the imputed value ofother project costs (marketing, extension, research, land titling, trainingand project unit). A total of about 660 km of roads were evaluated of which427 were found to be economically justified. Table 27 gives details of theeconomic analysis of the roads to be included in the first year program, andTable 29 sumrmarizes the economic rate of return for each road. The economicrates of return vary from 11% to greater than 18%. These rates of returnshould be considered only indicative as the methods used to distributebenefits along the project roads were very approximate. However, theestimates are considered to be conservative because benefits tonon-agricultural traffic were not quantified.

6.06 A separate analysis was made of the roads in the La FloridaCooperative area because these are associated with the construction of thebridge over the Yurinaki River. First, the construction and operating costsof the bridge and various alternatives (improved ferry service; constructionof a new road link to an existing bridge) were compared. This analysisconcluded that the bri'dge alternative was the most cost-effective solution toproviding access to this area. An economic analysis of the total investmentsplanned for the La Florida Cooperative area as a.whole was then made.Quantified benefits included those derived from additional agricultural valueadded with the project. In addition, benefits from reduced vehicle operatingcosts for the transport of agricultural produce from farms which would havethe same production with and without the project and for forestry trucks werequantified. Vehicle operating cost savings were mainly derived from distancesavings, as trucks avoided a long alternative route to the market, and fromsavings derived from improved road surface conditions with the project.Vehicle operating cost benefits for normal and generated light vehicle andbus traffic were also quantified. The investments in the La FloridaCooperative area are estimated to have an economic rate of return of 14%(Table 28).

-34-

Project Risk

6.07 The risk that technical conditions for agricultural developmentwould not be met, is considered low. The Chanchamayo-Satipo area is alreadysettled, agroclimatic conditions are adequate for the proposed agriculturaldevelopment, and its population is enterprising, as shown by the relativelyhigh levels of technology achieved by some farmers despite total lack ofsupport services, and the extension technology proposed is largely proven.Frequent risks with projects of this nature are institutional and financial,as delayed implementation may result from the project authoritiesdifficulties to coordinate and supervise the work of the variousimplementation agencies, as well as from difficulties to assign sufficientcounterpart funds to the project. However, PEPP has implementationexperience with similar activities in other areas (para 2.35) and thepresent Government has an often expressed priority commitment to thedevelopment of the Ceja de Selva area, and has expressed this in practice byconsistently allocating adequate budget funds to such activities. Otherproblems which have been considered in the design of the project are: (a)continued adverse effect on the environment from frontier development, and(b) friction between the settler population and native communities caused byland conflicts. Accordingly, the project includes components to minimizethese risks as well as enough flexibility for the Project Directorate toaccommodate needed changes during implementation.

Environmental Impact

6.08 Rational land use would be encouraged through the basic strategyproposed for on-farm development; emphasis would be on increasingproductivity of existing cultivated areas, rather than on expanding suchareas through further deforestation. The proposed logging plan for virginforest is based on selective felling with relatively little disturbance ofthe forest and virtually no heavy equipment is used. Recovery of the forestis rapid so that this operation is not considered to be environmentallydestructive. The project would also strengthen the forestry district and theforest police, enabling them to enforce prevailing legislation on timberextraction and reforestation. An effective agricultural extension servicewould inform farmers on the rational use of fertilizers, plant protectionchemicals and herbicides, stressing safety in application and handling. Thiswould minimize contamination of natural water resources. Construction ofdomestic water supply systems and wells under the native communitiescomponent would improve sanitary conditions and thereby help to preventuncontrolled spread of disease. Detailed discussions of environmental impactand native communities are presented in separate working papers in theproject file (Annex 2).

VII SUMMARY OF AGREEMENTS TO BE REACHED AND RECOMMENDATION

7.01 During negotiations, assurances were obtained that:

(a) Government would freeze the issuance of new forestexploration concessions in the proposed forest reserve areas

-35-

adjacent to the main project area (see map) until studiesclassifying these forest reserves into areas of productionand protection are completed (para 3.09);

(b) a program of action for road maintenance, including budgetrequirements, would be furnished to the Bank for comment notlater than July 31, 1985 and updated annually thereafter, anda program for transfer of the maintenance units toappropriate local authorities would be presented to the Bankfor comments not later than March 31, 1988 and made effectiveno later than March 31, 1989 (para 3.12);

(c) provisions for procurement in paragraphs 3.19 through 3.22would be followed;

(d) disbursement would be as specified in paragraphs 3.23 throughthrough 3.26

(e) the Executive Directorate would continue to maintain aliaison office in Lima (para 4.01);

(f) any replacements for the Executive Director or the ProjectDirector would have qualifications satisfactory to the Bank(para 4.03);

(g) auditing would be carried out as specified in paragraph 4.11;(h) a monitoring and evaluation unit satisfactory to the Bank

would be established within six months after signing of theLoan Agreement (para 4.13); and

(i) annual progress reports would be sent to the Bank no laterthan 90 days after the end of each year and the mid-termreview and completion report would be sent to the Bank withinsix months after the end of the third and sixth years,respectively (para 4.14).

7.02 The conditions of loan effectiveness would be that INADE hasentered into agreements satisfactory to the Bank (para 4.10) with regard to:

(a) BAP on provision of credit;(b) INIPA and UNA for extension and research;(c) INFOR for forestry.

7.03 With the above assurances and conditions the project would be

suitable for a loan of US$40.0 million for a term of 17 years, including fouryears of grace, at the standard variable interest rate.

February 23, 1984

-36- ANNEX 1

PERU

CHANCHAMAYO-SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Key Indicators for Monitoring and Evaluation

Indicators forObjectives Key Semi-Annual Indicators Ongoing Evaluations

Credit

Increase long-term credit No. of loan applications Unit cost data

Improve loan processing No. & amount of loans Demand for credit

Data on types of borrowers Repayment record

Extension

Improve outreach & Farm level field staff Changes in area andeffectiveness productivity by crops

Introduce new technology No. & location of offices No. of farmers adoptingnew methods by size

Increase production No. demonstration plots category

No. of farmers assisted Participation of nativedirectly through groups communities& individually

Cost per farmer assisted

Research

Select better varieties No. and type of experiments Quality of researchand develop better initiated and concludedcultural practices Relevance of experiments

No. of field days & to small farmersDevelop improved soil attendancemanagement for a Proven utility at the farmsustainable agriculture Training courses level of research findings

No. of staff contracted

Forestry

Reforest 4,000 ha No. of seedlings produced by Unit cost datanursery and species

Number and kind ofSurvival rate participants

Hectares planted by lo-cation and species

-37-

Indicators forObjectives Key Semi-Annual Indicators Ongoing Evaluations

Establish forest reserve Hectares protection forests Trends in land clearingzones & protect 200,000 ha established and timber removal as

program progressesHectares forest reservezones established

Number of patrols/visitsrealized in forest areasannually

Logging concessions grantedand operating

Area with forest managementplans

Expand ongoing INFOR/GTZ No. and description of Evaluation of researchforestry research experiments and number results and new species

effectively carried out introduced for planting,per hectare yields ofwood, etc

Create a forestry con- Number of extension activitiesservation mentality realized: meetings withamong the project area native communities, coope-population ratives, farmers groups,

urban centers; field tripswith local authorities;films and slide shows pro-duced and shown

Training Number of events and parti-cipants: forestry policecourse; environmental con-servation seminars; selvi-culture and nursery manage-ment; forestry extensioncourse; M.S. fellowship

Land Titling

Provide security of tenure No. titles & ha in process Effects of titling on long-by titling: term improvements on15,000 small farmers No. of titles & ha completed small farms and native160 native communities communities

Native Communities

Provide special assistance No.of staff in field Impact on health andin applied technology & employmentpotable water No. of wells completed

No. of families participating

-38-

Indicators forObjectives Key Semi-Annual Indicators Ongoing Evaluation

Access Roads

Provide all weather access Km of road with: Quality of access (by Km)to main farming areas by engineering designs ready,improving existing roads improvement initiated Farmers benefitted

construction completedConstruction cost/km Quality of maintenanceKm routine maintenance: Km all weather accessin last month providedin last six months

No. of districts withtrained foreman

Km of improved road in good, Maintenance cost/kmfair or deterioratingcondition

Equipment availability, Man days/km by districtutilization labor

Output and Income

Increase production and Area by crop Trends in productivityimprove family income Yield by crop Trends in family income

Net family income for individual farmersand native communities

-39-

Annex 2

PERU

CHANCHAMAYO-SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Selected Documents and Data Available in Project File

1. Evaluacion e inventario forestal de los recursos forestales de LaMerced-Satipo. Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina,Departamento de Manejo Forestal. Lima, 1982.

2. FAO/IBRD CP Preparation Report No. 28/83 CP PER 14, dated April 22,1983.

3. Working Paper: Aspectos Ambientales del Proyecto de DesarrolloRural Chanchamayo-Satipo. Marc Dourojeanni, June, 1983(Consultant).

4. Working Paper: Forestry Component of the Chanchamayo-Satipo RuralDevelopment Project. W. D. Beattie, August, 1983. LAC ForestrySpecialist.

5. Working Paper: Land Titling Component of the Chanchamayo-SatipoRural Development Project, S. Romanoff, July 1983 (Consultant).

6. Working Paper: Native Communities Chanchamayo-Satipo RuralDevelopment Project, S. Romanoff, July, 1983 (Consultant).

-40- Table 1

PERU

CHANCHAMAYO-SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Credit - Selva Area - Nominal and Effective Rates - BAP

Interest Rates (%)Purpose Nominal Effective

Short Term (Maximum 24 months)

Crop Loans - Less than SI. 20 million 46.5 46.5

Crop Loans - More than S/. 20 million 56.0 56.0

Other Purposes 62.0 73.4 1/

Marketing 56.0 65.1 1/

Long Term

Livestock and Pasture, Irrig. Equip. 50.5 50.5

Tractors, Implements, Irrigation andLand Improvement, Perm. Crops 57.0 57.0

Other Purposes 63.0 63.0

1/ Interest collected each quarter in advance.

-41-

rTable 2

PERUCHANCHAATYO - SATIP0 RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Credit - Detailed Cost

(PU NO)

Parameters

Quantit; Base Costs Phw.----------------------------------- Unit ------------------------------------------------------- Cant, For, Gross Suaaard

Uhnit 1984 1985 1984 1987 1988 1989 Total Cost 1984 1985 1984 1987 1988 1989 Total Rate Exch. Tax Rate Account

I. INEFSTMfENT COSTS

A. LON6-TERN CREDIT

LONG-TERN -61,2 29735.9 3'773.4 49105.0 1,957.6 613.0 13,946.2 0.05 0.4 0.16 EQ

Sub-Total LONG-TERN CREDIT 761,2 29735,9 3,773.4 4,105,0 1,957.6 613.0 13,946,2B VEHICLES AND EQUIPifNT

SHLL 41D CAR 2 2 1 2 2 1 10 10 20.0 20.0 10.0 20.0 20.0 10.0 100.0 0,05 0.6 0.4 VEH

SuknTotal JFHCICES AN EQUIPMENT 20.0 20.0 10.0 20.0 20.0 10.0 100.0

Total INVESTKENT COSTS 781,2 2,755.9 3,783.4 4,125.0 1,977.6 623,0 14,046,2

IT. RECURRENT COSTS.__ _ _ ____

A. SHRT-TERM CREDIT

SHORT-TERN CREDIT 61.5 198,3 300,7 465,7 385,6 514.4 1t26,2 0 0 0 OPO

Sqb-Tot;1 SHORT-TFRN CREDIT 61.5 198.3 300.7 465.7 385.6 514.4 1,926.2B. STAFF

TECHNICAL ASSISTANT MAN YFAR 2 4 5 5 5 5 26 6.4 12,8 25.6 32.0 32.0 32,0 32.0 166.4 0 0 0 SAL

Sub-Total STAFF 12.8 25.6 32.0 32.0 32.0 32,0 166,4Cr OPERATING COSTS

VEHICLE OPERATING COSTS VEHICLE 2 4 5 5 5 5 26 3 6.0 12.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15,0 78,0 0 0.3 0.5 OPVTRAINING - - - - - - - 4,0 4.0 1.3 1,3 1.3 - 12.0 0 0 0 TR6

Sub-Total OPERATING COSTS 10.0 16.0 16.3 16.3 16.3 15.0 90.0

Total RECURRENT COSTS 84.3 239.9 349,1 514.0 433.9 561,4 2P182.6===== :===== =:==== ======= ======= ======= ==:====.

Total BASELINE COSTS 865.5 299 5.8 4P132.5 4i639,0 2.411,6 1,184.4 16,228,8

October 27f 1983 14134

-42- ~~~~~~~~Table 3

PERUlCOMC80YO - SATIPS RURAL DIEVELOPNOT PROJECT

Ao;ricultural Extension - Detailed Cost

1WS M00)

Paraaaters

Goantits R~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~ats Costs Pta, ----- --------------- ------ Uit-------------------------- Cont. For. Gross Snmars

Unlit 1904 198 1984 1987 1988 1989 Total Cost 1984 198 1986 1987 1988 1999 Total Rate Exeh. Tax Rawe Accoort

T1IH"FTNINT CISTSS

ABRLILOTGSS

SOTIFO! SAN MARTIN AND P40.A SILVA 02 1,100 1,100 - - - -2,200 0.2 220.0 220.0 - - - - 440.0 0.15 0.35 0 CAFXT: WORKER HOUSES 12 92 3.34 236 576 - - -1,24B 5.2 47,2 47~2 115~2 - - - 249.6 0.15 0,35 5 COSAN 90800. AND PICH0A4I /0 M2 1,100 1,t0S 0 - 2,200 004 440 44.0 - Belo 8. 0.15 0235 0 Cl

,ub-T,.;,41 ATILDINGS 331,2 321,2 115.2 - - 777,6S. VEHICLES /t

FIlE-UF 8 4 I 9 4 1 27 12~4 99.2 49,6 12.4 J1116 49.6 12,4 324.8 9,05 0.6 0.4 VD2SNALL.4 4O CA A… … … … ……- - 4 10 400-- - - - - 40,0 0,85 0.a 0.4 VD0AOTDRCUC:LES 7 12 7 7 12 52 1.6/ 11.7 11.7 20.0 11.7 11.7 20.0 96,? 0.05 0,6 0.4 YEN

S.0-Total VEHICLES /c 150.9 61.3 3224 i23.2 61.3 32,4 461.5C FURNITURE AN0 EGUIPHE.N.T

FURNITURE AND OFFICE E9IPIFEAT 10.0 10.5 - - 21.3 0.05 0,8 0,16 EQTFFti$F E4UIT1NE0T-20 3.8 - - - - 6.8 0,05 0.8 0.16 Ea.ALIPIS-VISUAL EGIPIFENT…9.32…9.2 0,05 0.8 0,16 £8TflQ1 ANT IOPLEAHNTS 30O 3,0 0.7 0.7 - - 7.3 0.05 8,8 0,16 El

L.A-Total FURNITURE AND E20IIFMNET 26.2 37,3 5.7 0.7 - - 44.8

otool INUUfSTNT0T COSTS 500.3 409.7 148.2 122.9 61.3 32.4 1,282,9

TI, RECURRENT COSTS

ASTAFF

JETE DE ZIONA KAN TEAR 2 2 2 2 2 2 120i,33 16.7 16.7 16.7 16.7 16,7 16,7 100.0 0 0 0 SMLSUPERVISOR MAN 1969 4 4 4 4 4 4 24 6,93 27,7 27:7 27~7 27,7 27,7 27,7 166.4 I 0 0 SM.SUBJECT MATTER SPECIALIST MAN TEAR 10 15 10 10 10 10 60 6.93 69.3 69.3 69.2 69.2 69.2 69.3 436.8 0 0O 0 SAL02T005050 AORKER 09N YEAR 7 14 26 26 26 26 125 4,87 341 68.1 126.5 126.2 124.2 126.5 600.2 0 0 0 SALSECRETARIES 00 YEAR 4 A 8 0 0 0 N4 2.8 11.2 22.4 22.4 22,4 22.4 72,4 123.2 0 8 0 SN.CREDIT PROMPTERS MAN TEAR 4 4 4 4 4 - 20 5,53 22.1 72:1 7221 22.1 22,1 - 110.7 8 0 0 SMLDRIVERS ONAYEAR 6 12 12 12 12 12 6623,47 20.8 41.6 41.6 41.6 41,6 43.6 278.8 0 0 0 SMLNATIVE C040LNI

TIES ASSISTANT MM6 TEAR 4 6 6 6 6 6 34 2.07 9,3 12.4 12.4 12.4 12.4 12,4 70.3 0 0 0 SM.

WATCHMEN 444 YEAR8 5 5 5 5 5 30 2.07 10.3 10.2 10.2 10.2 10.2 10,3 62.0 0 0 0 SM.

Suji-T.,TsI STAFF 220.5 298.7 349.1 349.1 349.1 327.8 1,88.70.18NI6104

LOCAL TRAININ6 PARTICIPANT 50 50 10 50 50 SO 300 0.27 13.3 12.3 13.3 13,2 13,3 13.3 88.0 0 0 4 TEENATIONAL TEAINING /d PARTICIPANT 4 4 4 4 4 4 24 0,47 1.9 1;9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 11.2 0 6 8 TESYISITIMS INSTRUCTORS Ie PARTICIPMI5 3 3 2 2 3 3 1 00.47 1t4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1,4 1.4 8.4 0 0 0 TRENATIVE CDSNETTY T041I1IN0 /f PARTUCIPANT 5 5 5 - - - 12 0,47 2.3 2.3 2.3 - - - 7.0 0 0 8 088FARMERS TRAINING 30087 COURSES Ig PARTICIPANT 250 254 250 150 - - 98 0.01 1.7 1.? 1.7 1.0 - - 6.8 0 H A TR$

S.Al-Totol T8900140 20.6 20.6 20.6 17.4 16.4 16.6 112.6C, SPERATINOE COSTS

PICR-UP VEHICLE VEARA 8 12 13 24 14 14 75 3,223 29.9 44.0 48.5 52.3 52.3 52.3 288.0 0 0.3 0.5 WV0MOTORCYCLE VEHICLE TEAR 10 20 22 26 26 26 131 0.53 5.3 10.7 12.3 13.9 13.9 13.9 69.9 0 8.3 0.5 WV8SMALL 4 AD VEHICLE TEAR 4 4 4 4 4 - 20 3 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 - 60.0 0 0.3 0.5 am9801)0100 MAINTENA0CE IhA- - 12.2 26.4 26.4 24.4 26.4 118.8 8 0.15 0 005OFFICE EOPE0OITORES 1 7.9 24.0 1.3 29.3 29,3 29.3 131.3 0 0.15 I IOPTRATTAi ESPEASES 24.3 33. 44.9 44.9 44.9 44,9 227.2 I 0 0 an0DIEMNHSTRATION KATERIALS !i 2.6 5.2 9.1 9.1 8.1 9,1 44.3 4 0.15 0 WC8

Ott-Total OPERATING COSTS 92.1 142.9 154.6 307.9 187,9 175.9 941.4

ToWLI RECURRFOT COSTS 323.2 454.3 5243 554,7 553.7 519.5 2r939.7

ToTL BASELINE COSTS 041.5 844.0 472.4 678.4 615,0 551,9 4t223.4

Ia IN VILLAGES' 48 02 EAIA' REHABILITATION 301Y/t IOCLODES REPLACEMENT AFTER 2 Y8S14 T70 000TH COURSES/e 15 DAY VISITS F808 INIPA STAFF/I FOR EXT1ENSION 6880080/A OKE NWEE COllE10 52 OF CONSTRUICTION COOT/i SEERS, FERTILIZERS, PFSTICIDES. ETC

OcTober 27, 1993 W742

I C

K-

vl ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ LC |oooooo oW ooC°°°°°° olO u,moooootu |

IB oI _ . IC _ CoCoCom o C0 o _ oI owl o 1 il C O I C CO CO CO C Cx I Coo >X 11011l ICr

1111 IIII0lIIlII; 'I'l Nob7 CCC o0000 C IC 110t11!

* CI !0

!' ''i ''! 0! - CC!> ,-o , , ei i^!! j

~~~ | _ '~~~~~~I I I 'I I I - 1 I II *

o I ~~~~1111 o1 mI oI r 0 z lII 001 11r0 1 U lI B rr0 oO IC I O I Ca CCC 00r0 01 C C II

i u~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ iC c-l! ,r rj r|r_g rr' 0 0 OUe ^ lC;. |ng>. r lg?~

_ fI l _;S_r sI,SbIII I I Ii I |a

° ~~~~~ClC j rI 7C I I 10 11CI CI 010 C CC0001I CI

Q c ti ro !i | + 8| | |- .1 -- I11 . II - 1 . 1' 1h1 11 1i

3i!! ~ ~~~~~~ ~ 'I ' '1-11111lI III i

*~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~ I I , Ie j11

- OCCOO00oCC ^ C

COs C loll

Z1000001 C jC 01111e1111i051

(II~ C s_ Is

~~~~iv ! '4 EXtG - Vj-j

0~~~~ IlIlIll I 101 C 1 1 1111 I1.1 1Sv m2 !,

v01 ¢yV-8>=2 S ,lV v..-i. I

lOl I . I) 11110 1111 I B IC v 111! o 1 !Ii~~~~~~ lol I ! I 1 1001I I 011 C 111

-44- ~~~~~~~~~~~Table 5

0048848Y1 - 1A11P8 4940. OM ~1648 4840(0

Forestry - Detailed Co-t

Dm CF't~ ~ ~ Cot Fr,Crsslaa,

1460~ 1984 1985 1986 19197 19M 1989 Iotal Unit Cost 198 t85 1986 197 1988 198 Total 8aR. ot. Ia.,.T Rate ooo'-t

rtEL, 16'00E 14'I 'a 2902 I I 2 68 - 680 68.0 - - '3620 10 150,35 0

1863 0816888148 CEN'48 18117 '6 2422NI 1I 30 30.0 - 30.0 2~11 0.35 C 06D282922' OFCE8119FF c JN1T - 1 - - - 1 68 - 68.3 - - -8 t0 7.15 0:31 C CRPOLICE 521 1812 dLII 2 2 2 - - - 6 30 60,0 00.0 60.3 - 180.03,15 0.35 C WNURSERIES ;OFFICEC 4 UIT - 1 1 - - - 2 4 - 4.0 4,0 - - 0. .1I.315 2 CRNt5ER309 82168E7 '1 41 - 1 2 - 2 - 2,0 4.0 - - - 6.0 CII5 0,35 C Cm

92.. . I4!l 298 90.2 232.0 116.0 - - - 428,0

60323849TE88 UN11 -- - -Io - . 6.0 0.31 3.6 0l1 ElFuILl O-7C03 I*11 - I 1I 2 3 - 3.0 320 - - - 6.0 0.32 30, 2~16 El315T9ICT 6F1ICE3 'U812T I - - - - 1 3 - 3.0 - 3 - 1. 1.03 0.8 0.16 CgFOL ICE P00.T6 '142T 2 2 - -1 2.3 2.0 2.0 - 6, 0.02 Cl8 0.16 03495882E9 rOFFICE' 24' RI`- - - 1.0 1,2 - 2.0 2,35 2.8 0.16 EO

81400.8281 '~~~~~'068' o 1422UNI - 1 2 - 3 - 3,3 603 - - 0. 2.21 C.8 C.IV CO

Eao?ot IP012884 2,0 68.0 12.C - 2.0

FI`Co-uF '3 112T 3 - 6 12.4 37,2 32.2- - - - - - 2100 2,T 0.4 ViiiM0'D00IC19LF I4TT IC CC. Co IC - 40 1.6? 16.' 16,7 16. 016.7 - 66.27 3.05 0.6 0,4 ViiHSRNL 4 WVC68 1440T 6 8 - - - - 16 10 solo 80.0 - - -- 160.0 0.31 25.6 2.4 liii9180291600~ '. '.91 - 1T - -I- 66.62 - 66.? - - -- 66.3 0.02 0.2 0.4 .0'

62-.. VE860102 133.B9 231. 16.7 10.7 - - 16377

0j4685Mt O U0 4P0968'EPO6ATIO4 09 5 0 …… I 0.28 4.0 -- 4,0 0.02 C 2 002RVNT8616 K82 1'0ICC…3 40 0.21 62.0 2 .01.C-.410CC C 2 000

Si-1-T,q1 NEW 1033140. 9 0A 66,2 62.0-.8.013

T%!Ž1 IN4"E5Tl64T 0501 231.6 482.2 164.7 I. 0.

11. R4002440,P4T02979

8. 54438850.5

F816131681005E .18898.0E8F16' 'I 825 9 92.9 62.9 82.9 82,9 92.9 497.2 0 0 SA0831919002 1681061 18FF, 931 93.3 6133 93,3 63.3 93.1 219.6 0 0 SAL8

880-1,.0' gm4 ARIES 116 1 136.1 126.3 126.0 176.1 176.1 1,056.8

831STRI E2'E48l4SCOJSE 'UNIT1 1 I 2 3' 27,0 33.0 - - - - 74.0 0 .0 2 280

FORESTRY 033 'FLutE ft. 1412 1 I 1 I 1 1 6 8 8.0 0.0 8.3 8.3 8,0 8.0 48.0 3 I 0 T81EKOMEW6 N191/C08842914 80 14 E InA UN411 1 I 1 I 1 1 6 12 12.0 12.0 12,0 12,0 12.0 12 2.0 311 0 0 24151151C'4.1CR8814.389910 44A4A08042' 'MI11 1 1 I - 3 6.62 6.? - 6.? - 6,? - 20,0 0 0 0 24241SCE18110 SHU1R 'MKS 141T 1 1 1 1 0 1 6 IS 13.3 11.1 11.1 101, 10,0 10.0 60,0 I 0 0 T80ART1.05COM M193:10-00C4#34C 8208Y 488!02 8- - - - - 2 16. … … … … … …- 16.0 I 0 0 181888!- 8D3ESTY9RESERCH04 11 - -- -- - 23.7 07,1 37.1 33,1 32.0 172,0 0 3 I TR048T388459944444F169 98984014 rP '12 - -- -- 19.2 32.5 32.5132.2 32.2 149.3 I 0. 0 780

.RAI291414 T290181291 481118409 STIIF'k85.2 109 9 106.3 99,6 106.3 99.0 611 3C, 1WIr 041NT088( MD0 OP8RAT1ON

01E848TERS 21 4 34 8.4 8. 89.4 8 4 33.4 35.115 2 380191,8 1681003 2,0 2.0 2.4 8.8 6.8 9.8 25.8 t olls 2 080

DISTR1C' OF81098 - 1.0 5.1 5.1 1,1 2.1 21.3 0 0.15 I 140POLICE89828 2,0 2.2 101. 15,0 15,1 15.1 62.0 0 0.11 0 180

8.0--,10". 16012 01ItF41W4840! 449 E169T''.* 6,8 10.4 28,9 33.3 33.3 33.3 117.2

810-189t 38810L0 YF0R 3 6 6 6 6 6 33 3.33 11.2 22,4 22.4 32.4 22.4 22.4 1233.2 0 0.3 O'5 086MATI1CYCLOS VEHIC1.E0604R 13 20 80 40 40 80 180 0.13 1.3 10.7 16.0 21.3 21.3 21.3 96.0 0 3,3 0.5 60080.t. CAR YE41010Y5A0 8 16 16 16 16 14 88 I Ila2 16,0 06.0 16.8 16,0 16,2 88.1 2 0.3 0.1 166P44r03T2086918FA - - - -60108 I4-2.1 320 22.0 21,0 21,0 25.0 1137.1 2 0.3 0.1 O60

b,k-Total VEW1rlLES OPERATIN 800 R141N448C 33.1 74.1 29.4 84,1 84.3 84.? 444.78. 88F80RE8183184

8181U88R TIO 88183048 118181840211 7R.3884018 - 88O 1,330 0,260 2.206 2,640 8.,808 1.85 - 46.9 70.4 93,9 117.3 140.8 969,3 I 2.11 0 0o8

SobLoA,T, 4800048T1818O - 46.9 70,4 93.9 017,3 140.8 469,2

Total 8800888129818 368.3 417.5 461.1 491.6 121.7 538.1 2,239.7

tsto 84811338 0.198. 621.T5083 521,1 53.3,9.1

/b 041 W0i,200 R2 A8 E8IIIN M041 FOR PW5878/F 400 4,3 '1 IE.lO 91010438 I 842198 4088188/2 280 88 4.81 84M 844,841148 P1044381 042N1 814 .48,8889 494.E1 11 138 U 44491O8T8.20 03181091I. 51 42,S.4N PAM 40 841140 /n O WM 0 FOR 20 WM0/F 1840 8884804 R , 8129440I, 041180 lo OK188 018FO 40 PEPP 1148Fft 088680 408 PI21ED1,41088800F3 2THERS /I WE WE89 44.1E8881 Y98, 20 PARTICIPANTS6h 6 FOR 14104 I E EC0818 MO1( 204114T 82 'SM FD18 FACLITY,/i 30 804 14F88,11 FOR0410,188FOR0POLICE8POT, By WA

&okerb, 2?. 193 14233

-45-

PERU Table 6CHIANCHAMAYO - SATIPM RUiA PEVELOPENIT PROJECT

load - Detailed Cost

(US$ 000)

F araseters

UIJ3ia,titL Dase CDeS PHe.

-------------------------------- Unit ----------- _____________________ Cont Forl Groi; Suonar;Uint 19t4 7985 1984 1987 1988 1989 T%t01 Coat 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 Total Rate E>ch. Tax R2te Accornt

t IFIESTFNT COSTS

A. CIVIL WORK!

FEEDER ROADS - 2,990,1 2,990.1 2,990 2,990 1 - 1l,960,2 0,15 0.35 0.f5 ClYURINIA IRttGE -252 548r0 - - - - 8000 0.15 0,75 0:15 CW

Sti-modal CML WORKS 252.0 3,538:a 2,990:1 2!990:1 2i990:1 - 12,760.28. CONSULTANT SERVICES 333,3 333 333.3 - - - 1,0000 0. 0 0.2 0 SEP

C; MAIXTENANCE WORKSHOP AND EQUIPMENT 333:3 333,3 333,3 333,3 333,3 333.3 2,000.0 0.05 0.9 0:16 ED

P. TRAINING 50.0 50.0 - - - - 100.0 0,05 0.9 0 SER

Te;.al WESONFNIT COSTS 968:7 49254.7 3,656.7 3,323.4 3,323.4 333.3 15,860.3

t1: RECLURRENT COSTS_______________

A. NAINTCNACE - 40,0 80.0 120.0 184.0 184,0 608,0 0 0.3 0 OPO

TeaLl RECURREINT COSTS - 40,0 80.0 120.0 184,0 184.0 608.0

Totl! SASEI-IHE COSTS 968:7 4,294:7 3,736.7 3,443.4 3,507.4 517.3 16,468.3C===== ====== ===== :===:== ======= ====== ========

Ort-er 27, 1 M8 14'34

-46- Table 7

PERU

CHANCHAMAYO-SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Roads - ImDrovement Standards 1/

Natural Ground Cross-slope0 to 20% 20% to 50% > 50%

Alignment Criteria

(a) Horizontal curves:

Desirable radius 30m >15m > iomMinimum radius 2/ 12m Existing widened to extent

practical

(b) Verticle:

Desirable max. grade 3/ 6% 10% 12%Absolute max. grade 4/ 10% Existing grade with surface

improvedFlooded areas 5/ -

Road Width

Roadbed - Desirable 5.5m 4.5 3.5m 6/- Minimum 4.5m 3.5m 6/ Existing

Surfacing-gravel (full depth) 4.0m-4.5m 3.0m-4.Om 3.OmDitch 0.5m 0.5m 0.5m

Removal of Shade Trees As required to permit road surface to dry

Cross Slope (min) 8/ 4% 4% drain to ditch 4% drain toditch

Stream Crossings 7/ Pipe Culverts or Paved Fords or Small Bridges

River Crossing 1-lane bridge (H-20-S44 loading)

1/ Standards apply to both intermittent and continuous improvements.2/ Widen roadway platform at sharp curves, to form passing bays where sight

distance is obstructed.3/ Limit grade improvements to localized flattening of sharp "dips" and

flatten grades in direction followed by loaded trucks.4/ Improve surface on steep grades.5/ Grade should be 0.5 meter higher than normal water level or 0.3m higher

than maximum water level, whichever controls.6/ Passing bays (max. width 6.0m) would be provided where road width is less

than 4.5m.7/ Small bridges (L <10m) only where depth of water makes paved fords impossible.8/ Cross-slope would be increased to 7%-8% on steep slopes.

-47- Table 8

PERUCHANCHAMAOY - SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Land Titling - Detailed Cost

(058t 000)

Pera,etera

lenLte Base Couts Ph9,----------------------------------- Unit ------------------------------------------------- Cont. For, Gross Sulmmari

'S.t l994 19S5 1906 298:1 1989 198 Totel Cost 1984 198' 1986 1987 I98P 1989 Total Rat4 Exch, Tax Rate 4ccouwt

INVESTMENT COSTS

d. EQUIPMENT

OFFICE EQJUIPMENT -40 - - - - - 40.8 0.05 0,5 0.16 EQ; ADORATORY EVUIP8NMT 29 - - - - - 2,9 0,05 0.8 016 LEENGINEERING EgUIPMENT 383 - - - - - 3la,3 °005 0.8 0.16 EGPHOTOIRAPHOI EQUIPMFNT 13 0 - - - - - 13.0 0.05 0.8 0116 EQELECTRIC MAP TABLE 1000 - - - - - 100,0 0.05 0.8 0.16 EQ

SuL-Tetcl FQUTAENiT 195:0 - - - - - 195.GB. VEHICLES

BFAT UNIT I - - - - - 1 3 0 - - - - - 3.0 0.05 0.6 0,4 ViEHSMALL TRUCK LUNT 7 - - 7 - - 14 l46 102>2 - - 102,2 - - 204.4 0.05 0,6 0.4 VEHi

S:b- T.tJl VFHTr ES 105.2 - - 102>2 - - 207.4C. LOCAL CONSULTANT SOCIAL SCIENTIST MAN - MONTH 9 3 - _ _ 12 2 18,0 6.0 - - - - 24.0 0.05 0 0 SER

e1 INL)FETMFNT CR3TS 318.2 6>0 - 102,2 - - 426.4

RECIJRFNRT COSTS

A: SALARIES AND ALLOWANCES

JEFATURA -Q>4 19,4 19.4 19,4 19>4 19>4 116,4 0 0 0 SALARI4INISTRATTON 18>6 18.6 1tS6 18t6 18t6 18,6 101.6 0 0 0 SAL

LEGAL 4?,9 47,9 47>9 47.9 47.9 47.9 287.6 0 0 0 SALll!L!NG 12.5 l2.5 12-5 t2:5 12,5 12.5 75.2 0 0 0 SALNATIVE COMMUNITIES 1132 13,2 13>2 13,2 13,2 03.2 79.2 0 0 0 SAL

REVERSION AND ADJUDICATION, 56,9 56.9 '6.9 56.9 56.9 56,? 341.2 0 0 0 SALCLASSYFICATION -…8106 - - 81.6 - - 163.2 0 0 0 SALCADASTRAL - 16.9 16.9 16.9 16.9 16.9 16.9 101,6 0 0 0 SALPHTO-IP8NT -7.2 37;2 37.2 37.2 37,2 37,2 223.2 0 0 0 SALBOUNDARIES 74,7 74,7 74,7 74.7 ?4.7 74.7 448.4 0 0 0 SALCAPRrO6RAPHY 18>7 18>7 18.7 18.7 08.7 18>7 102.4 0 0 0 SALREGISTRY OFFICE 22'.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 134.8 0 0 0 SALFXTFRNAL LEGOL SERVICES 20-8 20 8 20.8 20.8 20.8 20.8 124.8 0 0 0 SAL

St'L-To!(l SALARIES AND AL.ONANCES 441.0 35994 359>4 441.0 359.4 359.4 203t9.6P. OFFICE EXPENDITURE 25.9 25.9 25.9 75.9 25.9 25.9 155.6 0 0.15 0 OPo

C> VEHTICLE OPN COSTS 32:5 32:5 32 5 32,5 32,5 32.5 195.2 0 0.3 0.5 OPVb. TRAVEL EXPENSES 73.7 73.7 73.7 i3.7 73.7 73.7 442.0 0 0 0 OPO

al RECUJRRENT COSTS 573.1 4V1.5 491.' 573.1 491.5 491.5 3F112.5:=== ===== ====== z===== ========= =====G

tel PASELINE COSTS 891.3 497 5 491.5 675>3 491.5 49125 3,538.9_=o=== ====== ===== ====== === ====== ====1=

tcLer 27v 1983 14.40

-48-Table 9

PERUCHANCHAMAYO - SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTNative Communities - Detailed Cost

(1US$ 001

Parameters

Ouaruot.t Base Costs Phs.------------------------------- Unit -------------------------------------…- Cant, For. Gross Sunfamerv

Unit 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 19S9 Total Cost 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 Total Rate Exch, Tax Rate Account

1 IH !FCtNFN'l COSTS

A. VEHICLFS I EQUIPMENT

PICK-UP ' I - - - - - 124 12.4 - - - - - 12,4 0.05 0,6 0.4 'EHMOTQRCYf:LF lb - - - - 5 1.67 8.3 - - - - - 8.3 O.O'i 06 0.4 HEVTOOLS SET 3 - 3 3153 4.6 - - - - - 4.6 0z05 O. 0.16 ESWFLL DIG3'ER UJIT 3 - 3 30 90,0 - - - - - 90.0 0.05 0G8 0;16 EC

Sub Total VEHICLES I EQUIPMENT 115,3 - - - - - 115.3

Total INVESTMENT COSTS 115t3 - - - - - 115:3

11, RECURRENT cosrs

A. POTABLE WATER PROGRAMME

STAFF /c 25,:3 48.3 2873 28.3 22,8 - 153.3 0 0 0 SALMATERlLt.S WELL i0 60 60 60 60 - 300 0,6 36-0 36,0 36.0 36.0 36.0 - 180.0 0 0.15 0 OP0TRAWL - - - - - 3,0 30 3.0 3.0 - - 12.0 Q 0:15 0 OPOVEHICLE MAINTENANCE VEHICLE YEAR 3 3 3 3 3 - 15 0.53 1,6 1.6 1.6 1,6 1.6 - 8.0 0 0,3 0.5 OPVSCHGLARSHIPS COURSE-YEAR 3 3 3 3 - 12 1.2 3.6 3.6 3.6 3,6 - - 14.4 0 0 0 TCR

SaAy-Tutol POTABLE WATER PROGRAMME 69.7 922 792.5 72.2 60.4 - 367.7B, LOW COST TECHNOLOGIES

FOREIGN CONSULTANIS MAN-MONTH 6 6 2 - 14 10 60.0 60,0 20.0 - - - 140.0 0 0.9 0 SALSPECIALIST MAN-YEAR I I 1 5 1.33 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 - 6.7 0 0 0 SALPROMOTERS MAN-YEAR 3 3 3 3 3 15 1.33 4.0 4.0 4.0 4,0 4.0 - 20.0 0 0 0 SALMATERIALS - - - - - - 9.3 9,3 9.3 9.3 9.3 - 46.7 0 0.15 0 OPOTRAIVEL 3.4 3,6 3.6 3.6 3,6 - 18.0 0 0.15 0 OPOVEHICLE MAINTENANCE 5.3 5t3 5.3 5.3 5.3 - 26.7 0 0.3 0.5 OPO3SCHOLARSHIPS COURSE-YEAR 3 3 3 3 - - 12 1.2 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 - - 14.4 0 0 0 TR0

S,ib-Totuil LOW COST TECHNDl.OGES 87,2 87.2 47.2 27.2 ?3.6 - 272.4C. TRAINING COURSES

STAFF /d 18,6 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 - *6.7 0 0 0 SALMATERIALS 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9 6.9 - 34.3 0 0.15 0 OPOTRAVEL 9,0 9.0 9.0 9.0 9,0 - 45.0 0 0.15 0 OPOSCHGLARSHIPS COURSE-YEAR 5 5 5 5 ' - 25 1,2 6.0 6,0 6.0 6.0 6.0 - 30.0 0 0 0 TRG

S.A--Totel TRAINING COIURSES 40.5 31.4 31.4 31.4 31.4 - 166.1

Total RECUMRRFNT COSTS 197.4 211.1 151.1 131.1 115.4 - 806.2

Total BASE!NHE COSTS 312.7 211.1 151.1 131,1 115.4 - 921.5

!a LOW-COST TECHNOLOGIES./b THREE FOR POTABLE WATER PROORAMMEv TWO FOR LOW COST TECHNOLOGIES,Ic TWO MN-YEARS ItAILUNTER e USt20000 FOUR MAN-YEARS ADMINISTRATOR-MECHANIC e S/,M8.3 /2 MAN-YEARS e S/.MI.9/d FIVE YM-YEARS TRAINEE S!.MS EAFIV?E MAN-YEARS SECRETARY S/,M 5.; ONE MAN-YEAR WRITER B S!,M8,3i

ONf. MN-YEAR CAHPA ASSISTANT 7 S/.MS,3

October 27, 19113 14142

-49- Table 10

PERUCHACHAMIAYD - SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Project Unit - Detailed Cost

;U15$ 0001

Parsketers

Qusrfits Base CDsts Phs,------------------------------------- Unit ------------------------------------------------- Cont, For, Gross Suemare

'Jifit 1984 t915 1986 1987 1988 1989 Totel Cost 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 Total Rate Exci, Tan Rate Account

1 INUEMES1NT rtiST5

A VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT

PICN-UP Fa 3 6 3 6 - 18 12.4 37.2 74.4 - i7.2 74.4 - 223.2 0.05 0,6 0.4 VEHOFFICE FURNITURE AND EQUIPMENT - - - - - - 265 6,b - - - - 33.1 0.05 0,8 0.16 EQ.OFFICE EOUIPMENT -2. 2.3 - - - - 5.7 0.05 0,8 0.16 E0

Sub-Tujtal VEHICIES AND EGJIPMTENT 66.5 83:3 - 37:2 74.4 - 261.5P, BUILDINGS

STAFF QUARTERS M2 - 700 - -00 0.2 - 140.0 - - - - 140.0 0t15 0.35 0 CWOFFICES-NEW 92 300 - 300 0.2 60.0 - - - - - 60.0 0,15 0,35 0 ClWOFFICES-REHAPILITATION 92 600 - 600 O0l 60.0 - - - - - 60.0 0,15 0,35 0 CW

Sub-Total BUILDINGS 120.0 140,0 - - - - 260,0

TItAl INYFSTMENT COSTS 186,S 223:3 - 37.2 74.4 - 521.5

II, RECURRENr COSTS

A. STAFF

DIRECTORATE 21.8 21.8 21.8 21.8 21.8 71.8 130,8 0 0 0 SALADHINISTRATION 46.7 93.0 93.0 93,1 93.1 93,1 512,3 0 0 0 SALINTERNAL AUDIT 10.4 10,4 10,4 10,4 10,4 10,4 62,4 0 0 0 SALLEGAL DEPT 11:8 11,8 11.8 11.8 11.8 11.8 70.8 0 0 0 SALSTATISTTCS 3.3 6.4 6,4 6.4 6.4 6,4 35,3 0 0 0 SALROADS I BUILDINGS 39.1 39,1 B6,5 86.5 86.5 86,5 424.4 0 0 0 SALCrOMJNICATION 6.9 13.9 13.9 13.9 t3.9 13,9 76.3 0 0 0 SALPLANNING 14.7 27,1 27,1 27,1 27.1 27,1 150,3 0 0 0 SALPROMOTION 14.0 27,7 77.7 27,7 27,7 27.7 152.7 0 0 0 SALiNINITORIN6 AND klVALUATION 22.0 44,3 44.3 44.3 44,3 44,3 243.3 0 0 0 SAL

Sub-Tutoil STAFF 190.7 295,7 343.1 343.1 343,1 343,1 1.858.7B. OPERATING COSTS

OFFICE EXPENDITURE 1,7 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 13.7 0 0.15 0 OPOTRAWEL EXPENSES 24,0 31.3 31,3 31.3 31,3 31,3 180.7 0 0 0 OPOVEHICLE OPERATING COSTS VEHICLE 3 9 9 9 9 9 48 3.73 11.2 33.6 33.6 33.6 33.6 33.6 179.2 0 0.3 0.5 GPVRTS 2 BLDG.S OP COSTS - - - - - - - 6,5 23.3 45,4 45.4 45,4 45,4 211.3 0 0,15 0 QPO

Sub-Total OPERATING COSTS 43.4 90.6 112,7 112.7 112.7 112.7 584,9

Total RECIIRRENT COSFS 234,1 386.3 455.8 455.8 455.8 455.8 2P443.6

Tatat BASE.INE COSTS 4204 7 609.6 455t8 493.0 530.2 455.8 2,965,1

:a INCLUDES REPLACEMENT AFTER 3 YRS,

Novbebi 3, 1983 0410t

-50- Table 11

PERUCHNCHAMAYO - SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Marketing - Detailed Cost

(US$ 000)

Paraeters

'uantitv Base Costs Pht.--------------------------------- Unit ---------------------------------------------- Cont. Eos Gross Submat

Unit 1984 195 1986 1987 1988 1989 ToLal Cost 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 Total Rate Exch. Tax Rate keccount

I. INVESTHENT COSTS

A. RURAL MARKETING CENTRES

LA MERCED - 574,0 - - - - - 574,0 0.15 0.7 0 C1SATIPO - - 574.0 - - - - 574.0 0.15 0,7 0 CU

Sub-Totil RURAL MARKETINi6 CENTRES 574.0 574.0 - - - - 1,148.0

Total INVESTOENT cOSTS 574-0 574,0 - - - - 1.148.0

11I RECURRENT COSTS

Ah INCREMENTAL OPN COSTS

SALARIES - - 226.5 228.8 6.3 10.2 16.9 488.7 0 0 0 SM.OPERATION 2 MNTCE - - 57.1 57,4 - - - 114.5 0 0.15 0 OPOTRANSPORT - - 34.5 36.3 1.8 5.1 13.7 91.5 0 0.15 0 OPOPACKING MATERIALS…- - 243.6 255.5 38.5 70.6 109,5 717.7 0 0.15 0 WC

Sub-Total INCREMENTAL CPN COSTS - 561.7 578.1 46.6 85.9 140.1 1,412.4

Totsl RECURRENT COSTS - 561.7 578,1 46.6 P5.9 140.1 1)412.4

Total BASELINE COSlS 574.0 19135,7 578.1 46,6 85,9 140.1 2560.4O===== ======= ====== ==== 4=== ====== ==_===

October 27, 1983 14:,43

-51-

Table 12

PERUPHANCHAMAY0 - SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Prviect Copfon.enet b,. Time(US$ 000 '000'

Ba5e Costs

1984 1?85 1986 1987 1988 1989 Total

A. CREDIT 0.9 3.0 4,1 4,6 2,4 1.2 16.2B. AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION 0.8 0.9 0,7 0,7 0,6 0.6 4.2C. RESFARCH 0,4 0.8 0.2 0!2 0,2 01 1.9D. FORESTRY 0.6 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 3.7E. fRiOADS 1 .0 4,3 3)7 3,4 3,5 0.5 16.5F, LAND TITLING 0,9 0,5 0.5 017 0.5 0,5 3,53. NATIVE COMMUNITIES 0.3 0,2 0.2 0.1 0.1 - 0.9H. PROJECT UNIT 04 0,6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0;5 3.0I. MARKETING 06 t.1' 046 0.0 0,1 0.1 2.6

fotal BASELINE COSTS 5,8 12.4 11,0 1.0.8 85 4.0 52,5Pht.sical Contingencies 0.3 1.0 0t7 07 0.6 0.0 3.4Price Contingencies 0.2 1.5 2,2 2.9 3,0 1.7 11.5

Totl PROJEI'T COSTS 6.4 14.9 13.9 14.4 12.0 5.8 67.4

Texes 0.6 1+6 1,6 1.9 1.5 0.4 7,6Foreign Exchange 2.6 5.4 4,2 415 3,5 1.1 21.3

Noveober 3? 1983 14:13

-52- Table 13

PERU

CHANCHAMAYO - SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

SusmirY Account bv Project Component(USS 000)

F'hysica1

CortirgenciesAGRICULTURAL LAND NATIVE PROJECT -------------

CRFDIT FXTENSION RFSEARCH FORESTRY ROADS TITIING COMMUlNTTIES UNIT MARKETING TotIl Z A4sount

1 INVESTMENT COST S

A. CIVIL WORKS - 777.6 556,9 428.6 !s76012 - - 260.0 1!148.0 15s930.8 15.O 2,389,6R: EOUIPMENT 13Y946!2 44.? 3t 85 32:0 2000n0 197;0 ?4,6 38.3 - l6b699.4 5.0 835:0C. VEHrCLES 100.0 461.5 74,4 i67.7 - 207.4 20.7 223,2 - 1s455,0 ',0 72.70: SERVTIESC - - 4k8 128 0 li!00.0 24:0 - - 1s256,8 5.0 62;8

Total INVESTMENT COSTS 14s,46,2 1!283.9 9834,6 955,7 17,S60,3 426.4 115.3 521.5 1t148,0 35Y341.9 9!5 3s360,2

II. RECIURENT COSTS

A. INCREMENTAL STAFF 166,4 1!885,7 549,3 1,056.8 - 2',31?,6 376.7 1!858.7 488,7 8F702,1j 0,0 0.0'i TRAINING 12S0 112:6 - 67193 - _ 8.8 - - 794.7 0.0 0,0C, VEHICLE OPERATING COSTS 780 409?,9 63.5 444,7 - 195.2 34,7 179,2 - 1s405.2 0,0 0.0D, OTHER OPERATING COSTS 1i926.2 531.6 326.5 626.8 608.0 ¶97.6 336.0 405.7 923:7 6,292!1 0:0 c,0

Total RECURRENT COSTS 2y182.6 20939,7 939.3 2y739.7 608.0 3Y112.7 806.2 2Y443.6 's412,4 17,104:1 0 0.0Totsil SASFLINE COSTS 16s22''8: 4s223.6 1!933 9 37695:5 16i468:3 3i53089 921.5 2s965;i 2,560,4 52s.526,1 6.4 3Y360,12

Physical Contingencies 702.3 142.0 104,9 90Q6 "s069,G 21.3 5.8 52.1 172'2 33602 0.0 0.0Price Contiriserscies 3i7'-6 0 8/2:3 326,3 773,9 3s901:2 719,: 13S54 663.1 367,2 lif515i2 5.6 642,2

Total PROJECT COSTS 20f687:2 >237:9 2s355:1 4S559,9 22!438, 4i280:0 1062:7 3,680.3 3,099.8 67!401.4 5.9 4s002-4

Taxes 2y943,7 489.9 139,3 45'2,1 3sO80,2 253,0 46.1 230.6 - 7Y634.9 7:1 543,3Foreiqnf, Ez&iianiese 7s'2tS:1 932:3-i 875.4 764 7 !'256:,' 406:3 305.4 424.7 1,160,3 21s342-2 7.7 1s645.4

Novetiber 3, 1983 1471'

-53-Table 14

PERUCHNCHAIAYO - SATIPO RURAL OEVELOP ENT PROJECT

SumarN Acount bv TimeCUSS 000!

Pase Costs +Price Cont,

Pase Costs Forei§n E.chanse on Ease Total Incl,--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Costs-t Cont.1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 Total , Amount (USl) .US$)

!, INVESTKENT COrTS

A. CIVIL WORKS 1429.8 5,2?9,7 1,241.3 Y.990,1 2P990,1 - 15p930,8 3Fr5 6Y297.6 18,933.2 21Y773,1D. FOLUIPOENT 1t'83-' 3,29924 4,t4M, 4,439,0 2,29t0 946.3 16J6994 46,5 70768.8 20,178.7 21Y187,7C. VEHIC%ES 492,7 38.6 59:1 324.1 168,1 42,4 1,455.0 60.0 873.0 1f681.9 1,766.0D, SERVICES 468.9 452,9 334.9 - - - 1,256,8 23,1 290,0 1I3R7.3 19456.7

Total INVE3TIENT CoSTS 3F974.7 9?400.A 70775.6 7'53:' 5,449.1 98.8 3M5341.9 43.1 15,229,3 42YI81l1 46Y183,4

11. RECURRENT COSTS

A, INCREMENTAL STAFF 1,244,2 14590.8 1,645,3 1,484,4 1,401.2 1,336.2 8?702,1 28 240.0 10,625,0 10P625,0P: TRAIANNG 127/: 147?7 141,4 13127 130,2 116.2 7947 O?;0 0 0 966:9 966.9C, VEHICLE OPERATING COSTS 148.4 ?37.8 251.5 262,1 262.1 243.2 1S405,2 30.0 421.5 1-'37.8 19737,8D. OTHER OPERATING COSTS 345,2 973,5 1,222,2 1.7I8.0 12217.9 1f345.3 6F282.1 10.2 643,2 7,888.3 7,888,3

Total PFCIJRRENT COSTS 1,865.3 2,949.8 3,260 1 3-O-J63 .4,011:4 3!040:9 17!184.1 7,6 1!302.8 21f218.0 21,218,0Total BASELINE COSTS 5-840,. 12.350,4 li?036,0 10,809,5 8P4c0.5 4,029. 52,526,1 :,415 16,532,1 63Y399,1 67f401.4

thY-ic:,sl Curtirp2r,inkes 3417? Q?s,6 712 9 686.7 57k' 49.4 3,360,. 41.4 1,391.2 - -

Pr2ce ContinAencies 231.8 1,503.4 'F170I ?i941,2 iM91.3 1,67S,8 11515.2 ?9.7 3!418,8 - -

Tota1 PROJECT COSTS 6,413,5 14,851.8 11,919,6 34p437,4 12,023.3 5,755,9 679401,4 31,7 21,3422!. 639399,1 67.401,4

Taxes M12.7 1,600.3 1,613.5 1,914, 1,467,4 421.1 7,634,. 0;i '.0 - 7f634.9Forei4i- Fxrchalte 2!,582.6 5,176,6 4,207.6 4f544.6 ,5'21.? 19108.9 21i342_2 0.0 0,0 - 21,342 2

Novembei, 3,983 1412

-54- Table 15

PERU

CHANCHAMAYO-SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Disbursement Schedule

Quarterly CumulativeFiscal Year Amount Total

…------ (US$ Million)---------1985

September 30, 1984 0.5 0.5December 31, 1984 0.5 1.0March 31, 1985 1.0 2.0June 30, 1985 1.0 3.0

1986

September 30, 1985 1.0 4.0December 31, 1985 1.0 5.0March 31, 1986 1.5 6.5June 30, 1986 1.5 8.0

1987

September 30, 1986 1.5 9.5December 31, 1986 1.5 11.0March 31, 1987 2.0 13.0June 30, 1987 2.0 15.0

1988

September 30, 1987 2.0 17.0December 31, 1987 2.0 19.0March 31, 1988 2.0 21.0June 30, 1988 2.0 23.0

1989

September 30, 1988 2.0 25.0December 31, 1988 2.0 27.0March 31, 1989 2.0 29.0June 30, 1989 2.0 31.0

1990

September 30, 1989 2.0 33.0December 31, 1989 2.0 35.0March 31, 1990 2.5 37.5June 30, 1990 2.5 40.0

February, 1984

Table 16

PERU

CHANCHAvA.YO-SATIPO PURAL DEVELOPTENIT PROJECT

Financial Prices (Annual)

CALENDAR YEAR

Unit 0 1 2 to & 7 to 20

OUTPUT

COFFEE KOS 1,890 1,785 1,710 2!025BANANA KGS 120 120 120 120

YUCA KGS 90 90 90 90MIZE KGS 225 22 225 225CITRUS KGS 94 94 94 94PAPAYA KGS 225 225 225 225AVOCADO KOS 110 110 110 110PINEAPPLE KGS 79 79 79 79

INPUTS

SACKS SACKS 400 400 400 400MAIZE SEED KGS 375 375 375 375YUCA CUTTINSS TH. CUTTiNGS 950 950 950 950BANANA SUCKERS ,LANT -0 30 30 30PINEAPPLE SUCKERS TH. SUCKERS 1,000 1F000 1,000 1,000PAPAYA SEED KGS ?§400 9,400 9,400 9.400CMFFEE SEEDLINGS R'ANT 20 200 200 200PLANTS PLANTS 1,000 10O00 *,000 1,000PINE. PLANTS TH. PLANTS 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000BOXES BOX '181 281 281 281FERTILIZER KGS 220 220 22-)0 220CHEMICALS KGS 5.000 5,000 5,000 5,000LLIE GS .. '8.1 29.1 18.1

LABOR

LABOR NANDAYS 21000 2,000 2,000 2,000

Aus'st 15s 1:`33

-56-Table 17

PERUCHMNCHAhAYO-SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Coffee Farm Model - Production and Inputs

CALENDAR YEAR

Incremental

Unit t 2 3 4 5 6 7 to 20

CROPPING INTENSITY Percert - 5.00 7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50

CROPPING PATTERN

Existing Te&hnologvCOFFEE HA -4.00 -4.00 -4.00 -4.00 -4.00 -4.00 -4.00MAIZE HA -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50BANAA OLD fLANTING HA -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50 -0.50BANANA NEW PLANTING HA - - - - - - -

Sub-Total Exi,tis Tech olasi Area -5.00 -5.00 -5.00 -5.00 -5.00 -5.00 -5,00

New Techn;cOgvCOFFEE HA 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00MAIZE HA 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00BANANA OLD PLANTING HA 0.50 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00BANANA NEW PLANTING HA - 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0,50

Sub-Total New Technoloss Area 5.00 6.00 6.50 6.50 6.50 6.50 6.50

Total CROPPING AREA - 1.00 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50

MAIN PRODUCTIONCOFFEE KuS 200.00 400.00 600.00 900.00 1o000.00 1,200.00 1.200.00MAIZE KOS 50.00 1,000.00 1,100.00 1,150.00 1,150.00 1,150.00 1,150.00BANANA KGS 250.00 500.00 7,000.00 7,750.00 8,250.00 8,750.00 9,O00.00

SALESCOFFEE KGS 200.00 400.00 600.00 800.00 1,000.00 1,200.00 1,200.00;AI7E KGS 50.00 1,000.00 1.100.00 1,150.00 1.150.00 1.150.00 17150.00BANANA KGS 250.00 500.00 7,000,00 7.750.00 8,250.00 8,750.00 9,000.00

INVESTMENTINPUTS

Eauipsert UNIT 1,056,000.00 435,000.00 950OO0.00 - - - -Land PreFaration HA 2.00 2.00 - - - - -Coffee Seedlings PLANT 3,500.00 3,900.00 S00.00 400.00 - - -Fertilizer KIGB 400.00 900.00 800.00 400.00 - - -

LABO

Labor MANDAYS 94.00 126.00 48.00 16.00 - - -

OPERATINGINPUTS

FERTILIZER KtGS 475.00 500.00 575.00 550.00 550.00 550.00 550.00CHEMICALS KGS 17.50 18.00 20,00 0.00 20.00 20000 20.00M4IZE SEED KGS - 17.50 17.50 17,50 17.50 17.50 17,50SAEC?S BACKS 1.00 b.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00BANANA PLANT 315.00 390.00 465.00 190.00 190.00 190.00 190.00

LABOR

LABOR MANDAYS 77.50 122.50 157.50 162.50 162.50 162.50 162.50

Se…tember 8,…103…

PERU Table 16

C5ffe F.aTa Dle4430 - Finaoaial Thxget

0 2 0 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 00 13 23 14 IS 16 17 16

0260FEE 3,402.00 3,570300 3.262,33 4,104.00 4,446,00 4,780.00 4,78B000 5,670.00 5,670,00 S,670,00 2,,670.00 5,670.00 5,670.00 5,670.00 5,670.DO 5.670.00 5,670.00 5,670.00 5.6y',o5:'007E 405.00 42750A 450,00 406.)00 450,00 450.00 450.00 420.00 450.30 430.00 450.00 450.00 450.00 450,00 450.00 450 00 450.37 450.70 4s1o 45C .86868 3M,0 430,00 0.200.00 7.290,00 1.050,00 1,410.00 0,440.00 1,440.00 1,440,00 1,440.00 1,440,00 1,440.00 0.440300 0.440,00 1,440.00 0,440.00 0,440.07 1.440,00 1, 4427 1.44.2

Su,b-T7,tK -AI0 PRODUCTION 4,097,10 4.407,50 5,402,00 5,044.00 6,244,00 6,640.00 6,670.00 7,560O 7,560,On 7,560,37 7,566.00 7,560.04 7,560~00 7,560,00 70560.00 7.560,00 7,560.00 7,560,00 7,24...~5,5

00200 VAoIl' OF 4*110U7706 4,107,70 4,407.50 5,413,00 2,044,70 6,246,00 6,648,00 6,6'6.00 7,560.00 7,560,00 7,560.00 7,560.00 7,560.00 7,560.00 7,560,00 7.560000 0,560 00 7,540.30 7,560.00 7,0: .'>47

.407 "613E01 2IFT-DUC•500 4,17,07C 4.417050 5.402,00 0,044.00 4,746,00 4640.00 4,670.00 7,540.00 7.560.00 7.064,00 7,50.000 7,5040.0 7,560.00 7,54.,00 7,060.00 7,060.00 7,543,70 7,560.40 7.51< 5o' 7

%'caj 0401760 4.007.00 4,417.57 3.412,00 0.64.4,00 6,246.00 6,6.40.00 0,671.70 7,560.00 7.560,00 '.560.00 7.560,00 7,060.00 7,560.00 7,560,37 7.560,00 7.560,00 7.360,00 7,560.27 'So51.7 '.24

E- ~ 1.056,00 935.2 2055.00 P

QW,) St#,dli,o, 100. N 7000 06 0.00 - - - - - - -

0o67n0,e40,,ls ~~~~~00.00O '00.00 0760.0 000 - - - - - - - -18.1,144', 06.32 070.07- - 07600 -- -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- - -- -- -- -- ---0,00- - -- ------ - ---- - -- -- - -- - - --- --- ---- -- -- - -- -- - -- -- - - --- - -- -

INPUTS' ,077 2.024 00 2,77,027 771.00 04.0 68,- - - - - -

LOWR180., 148.00 125200 06.00 32.02

0,k-24~~47 0480010742 2,20220~ 2020.06- -- 027.00 200.00- - ---- - ---- - ---- - ---- - ---- ----- ---- - ----- - -------- ----- --------- -------- - ----00T00 NV3H4 ,210 02'000,270 240

FERTI12Z0R 004,30 000,25 023.70 221.00 '20,00 J222.00 131.00 121.0 02,0.7 J22030 120.00 121.00 020,00 120,00 221.00 120.00 020.00 1216.0 01.00 07215000610010 007,0 0050 01~O 20.0 0 20.00 020.00 220.00 120,00 120.00 020.00 030.00 020.00 020.00 020.00 120.00 120.00 03.7200.00 020.00 120 .27 120 .0 12Q46070 0003 6,57 20.02 10012 00.02 10.12 00.02 73,12 00.02 15.02 i3.02 00.03 00.02 01,07 10.02 10.02 00.07 10.02 10.12:3l.12 13.0504000 7,00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4 77 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.30 4.00 4.00 4.00 4,00 4.00 4.00 4.00 40 7.77)o80806 10,.75 03.75 05.00 6.75 6.75 6.75 6.73 6.73 a,7 6.75 6.75 6.75 6,75 6.75 6.75 6,75 6.70 6.75 ' 7 6 50

0,0-7e0 T612 203.001 25.4.1 275,87 244.07 244.07 344.07 264,07 244.87 264.67 264,67 344,87 264.67 74.64,7 364.87 364.87 264.07 264,87 264.67 2464.0' 264,8•

L400R 764,0 2.00 8 88DC W. 00 804.00 804.0 00 44,00 484.00 6854.00 004.00 804.00 804.00 4894.00 004,00 894,3 004.00 094.00 004.00 804.00 804,27 814,77

066-Total 600042040 906.00 10.37,02 1,064,0 0,050.07 0,050.07 7,050.67 1,0580.7 7,050.07 0,150.07 1,050,87 1,036.07 1,058.87 1,100,07 0,030.07 0,050,67 1,150.07 0.0 ,07 5,20.07 o.o

5 40' 0.150,0

Suh-T'tlaPOD0C2T0010 2302 3.200,10 3,400,13 3,100,87 1.056488 1.05687 1,050.67 1,150.07 0.058.87 0,158.87 0,058.87 0,150.87 0,026.67 0.638,87 0,058.07 0,050.07 0,050,670,5087,15 0.07 0,150,07 1 .155068

Tot,l O070F800 0,200.00 7,400.03 2,000.87 0,358.88 0,050,87 7,000.07 0,150.67 0,050.07 0,050,87 0,056.67 1,158.87 0,036.07 0,150.8701,050.87 2,158.07 0,750.B7 0,150.8701,158.87 ,1 50,07 1,250.087

CA8004.( 01.04 F02 FI01ANCI0G 048.90 0,007,37 3,27.0.13 4,485.10 5,087.27 5,488,10 5,509,70 6,4000.03 6,401.03 6,601.12 6,401.13 6,400.12 6.400.12 6,401.12 6,400.02 6,400.03 6,400.02 6,401.12 6,4 01.12 6.401 02

FAR 0AM017 BENEFITS 0000R0 F0I840341 988,89 0,007.07 3,220.00 4,485.13 5,3087.12 5,489.10 5,528.10 6,400131 0.400,02 6,401.03 6.401,12 6,400.07 6,400,02 6,401.12 6,401.12 6,601.12 6,400.03 0,400.12 6,4201 12 6,401.12

000fL08(8TS ON LOW 508R4 LM 1,769.60 0,856.40 020.60 060.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

300108R408E73S OM 01M 770EN1088 706.980 69.70 070.70 027.00 027.0 027.00 027,10 927,00 92.2.03 927.00 027.00 927.03 027.00 827.00 027.00 027.00 027.10 927,07 9-27.10 927,12T88V1008804F 8000PRE 0000 090,D l22 207.42 232.07 2330.77 700.77 201.77 200.77 2301.77 231.7 0.77 23 0,77 2 01.77 2 00.77 2 50,77 300.77 300.77 300,77 23 0.77 301.77 2 03 - ?1.77L.ESS7088800 T08OM7000000 207.47 703.097 270.7' 201.77 200.77 230.77 230.73 200.77 200.77 2300.77 231,77 231.77 201.77 2300,77 230.77 230.77 330.73 230.77 205.70 -

048-ToIi 0708000 0000I6400 2.508.27 2,707.55, 0,754.70 1,087.00 027.00 027.10 027.10 027.00 027.00 937.00 927.00 837.00 937,00 037.00 037.10 027.10 827.00 937.10 27.23 1,o1B.07

LON8 TERM080R0INCIPAL - 478.82 526.65 605.65 696.40 300,97 020.01 0,050.28 -55.51 -63.84 -73,42 -84.43 -07.09 -0111.66 -028.40 -147.67 -11 6.2 -005,:27L0 T.0008 080007 - -T 794.86 747.00 668.00 577.00 472,72 353.37 714.40 52.50 43.84 73.42 84.43 07.09 100.66 028.4 047.67 60.2 17.2807 7E80 080400086.L 706J80 880.73 003.00 827.10 027.10 027.10 927.00 977.10 027.10 027.00 027.10 937,00 027.10 027.10 027.10 027.13 027.10 927.12 927,1008100 T088 I87ERES7 1100.50 030.45 139.78 039.06 027.06 139.06 1790.6 1390.6 100.56 029.06 1390206 039.00 1390.5 100.06 130.06 139.06 000.06 130.06 13.0,0

Su6-Ttol OjI N 0004074E600 -006.42 1,040.03 2,240.17 2,027.03 23.30,83 2,389,83 2,330,83, 2,230,83 2,330.85 1,046.16 1,066.06 1,064.06 1,0664164 0",161066.14006,0 0,03.016 [044.14 1,046616 0.06.6.10

NET 008M0I40 2.558,29 1.796.13 754.55 -0,250.27 -0,412.75 -1,402.75 -1.412.75 -1,412.75 -1,402.72. -1,402.75 -100.06 -000.06 -0390.6 -038.00 -108.06 -039.04 -120.06 -039.06 -j39.06 92,71

CAN4 01.80 AFTER 00I844I08 0537,17 2,8006.30 ,074.60 3.226006 3.674,28 4,076.08 4,100.18 4,08,38 4,088.56 4,988.38 6,262.00 6,362.00 6.263,06 6,263.04 6,262.06 6,362.06 6,262.00 6,262.06 6,262.04 6,400.03

0F88 FAM010 KNFI4000T 0 MM 0FI4A0088 3,537.17 2,403.50 0,074.67 3,224.86 3.674,30 4,076.28 4,106.28 4,060,00 4.988,3B 4,080.38 6,263.00 6.362,00 6.263,06 6,262.36 4,262.00 6,262.00 6,262.00 6,262.06 6,32,206 6,493,33

Octote, 26, 0083 10254

-58-Table 19

PERU-CMANCHAMAYO-SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Citrus Farm Model - Production and Inputs

CALENDAR YEAR

Withwt Wjith Project

Unit I io 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 to 20

CROPPING INTENSITY Percent 17,Z3 30.00 40.00 40,00 40,00 40.00 40.00 40,00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00

CROPPING PATTERNExistina Technologs

CITRUS ILD PLANTING HA 1.00 - - - - - - - - - - - -CITRIJS N£N PLANTING HA - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _MAIZE HA 0,50 - - - - - - - - - - - -PAPAhA OLD PLANTINC. HA 0,60 - - - - - - - - - - - -PAPAYA NEW PLANTING HA - - - - - - - - - - - -

YUCA HA 0,150 - - - - - - - - - - - -

Sub-Total Existina Technologo Area 2.60 - - - - - - - - - - - -

New fechnolultoCITRUS OLD PLANTING HA - 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00CITRUS NEW PLANTING HA - 1,00 1,10 1,50 1.50 1,50 150 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1,50NAIZE HA - 0.50 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00PAPAYA OLD PLANTING HA - 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0,60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60PAPAYA NEC PLANTING HA - 0.0 0 0. 90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0,O0 0,9 0,90 0.90YU(A HA - 0,50 l,00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Sub-Total Net4 Technolo0, Area - 4,50 6.00 6,00 1,00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6,00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00

Total CROPPING AREA 2.60 4.50 6.00 6,00 6,00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00

MAIN PRODDUCfIONCITRUS KGS 10,000.00 10,000.00 11,000.00 11,000.00 12,000.00 22,000.00 29,000.00 30,500.00 31,500.00 32,000.00 33,000.00 34,500.00 35P000.001AIZE 1KGS 050.00 900.00 1.050,00 1,950.00 2,000.00 2,000,00 2,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 2,000,00PAPAYA KGS 2,400,00 2,400.00 6300.00 6P600.00 7,350.00 8,100.00 8,550.00 9,000.00 9,000.00 9,000.00 9,000.00 9,00000 9,00.00YOJCA KGS 3,500,00 3,75000 7,750.00 8,210,00 N,750,00 9,000.00 9,000.00 9,000.00 9,000.00 9,000,00 9,000.00 9,000,00 9,000.00

SALESCITRUS KGS 10,000,00 10,000.00 11,000.00 11,000.00 12,000.00 22r000.00 29,000.00 30,500.00 31,500.00 32,000.00 33,000.00 34,500,00 35,000.00MAIZE K0S 850,00 900.00 1,050.00 1,950.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 2.000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00PAPAYA KGS 2,400.00 2,400.00 6,300.00 6,600,00 7,350.00 8,100.00 0,550.00 9,000.00 9,000,00 9,000.00 9.000.00 9,000.00 9,000,00YIJCA KSS 3,500,00 3,750,00 7,750.00 8,250.00 0,750.00 9,000.00 9,000.00 9,00,.00 9,000.00 9,000.00 9,000.00 9,000.00 9,000,00

INVESTMENTINPUTS

Eouiptent UNIT - 1,876,000.00 295,000.00 95,00000 95,000.00 - - - - - -Lsnd Pepparatirn HA - 2,00 - - - - -Plants PLANTS - 250.00 165.00 60.00 20.0 - -uertilizer KGS - 100.00 300,00 400.00 400.00 225.00 75.00Cheticals KGS - 1.00 3.00 4,50 5.00 3.00 1.00

LABORLabor lANDAYS - 41.00 115.00 115.00 67.00 22.00 -

OPERAFINGINWUTS

SACKS SACKS 24.00 35.00 40.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 85.00 85.00 85,00 85.00 85.00 85.00 05.00fERTILIZER KGS 130.00 472.50 650.00 650,00 750.00 800.00 800,00 . 00.00 80000 8 00.00. 800.00 000.00CHENICALS KGS 1,00 12.00 13,.0 13.50 16,50 18.00 18,00 18.00 18.00 18.00 18.00 18.0 18.00NAIZE SEED 60S 17.50 17.50 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00PAPAYA SEED K6S 0,06 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75LIOE KGS - 600.00 600.00 600.00 600.00 600.00 600.00 600.00 600,00 600.00 600.00 600.00 600.00BOXES BOX 60.00 150.00 180.00 225.00 225.00 225.00 225.00 225.00 225.00 225.00 225.00 225.00 225.00YUCA CUTTINGS TH. CUTTINGS 4.00 5.00 10.00 10.00 10,00 10.00 10,00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00

ILAO0RLABOR NANDAYS 134.50 237.50 331.50 331.50 352.50 365.00 366.00 370.00 372.00 374.00 377.00 378.00 378.00

Se,tember 8O 1983

-59- T~~~~~~~~~~~~~lable 20

9E96

Citrus Farm Otdel - Fink=anca Bhxlget

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

614 ,0 2Ut13

'ITRUS ~~~~~~~946,00 1,034,00 10,34.00 1,128.00 2,0680,0 2,726.00 2.961,00 3,102.00 3,241.09 M, 3,2900 ,9.00 3,290.00 3,290,00 3,290,00 3,290.00 3,290.00 1.290,00 3,290.00 3,291.90 3,20.0099170 405.00 427.50 450,00 450.00 450.00 454.00 400.00 450.00 4500.00 450.00 450.00 450.00 450.00 450,00 450000 450.00 400.00 450.00 450.03 459.00PAPAYA 540,00 1,417,50 1,485,00 1,653.75 1,922.50 1,9233.73 2,023,00 2,035.00 2,025.00 2,025.00 2,025.00 2,021.00 2,025.00 2,02.00 2,025.00 2,025.00 2.025.00 2,025.00 2,025.90 2.-025.00YUCA 317.50 697.50 742,50 797.50 819.00 810,00 810.00 910.00 910.00 810.00 810.00 810.00 910.00 910,00 410.00 810.00 810.00 810,06 819300 610300

MAIN7o.. P916 9Ur2T11N 2,772.50 3,376.50 2,711,50 4,019.2 50,130.00 5,909,75 6t246.00 4,382.00 6,538.00 6.575,09 6,570.00 6,575200 6,575.00 6,575.00 6,575.00 6,575,00 6,575.00 6,75n.00 61,70.0 6.512.00

9900 VALLE Of PRODUCTION 2,222,50 3,576,50 3,711.00 4,019.25 0,10050,% 2.,"90 6,246,00 6,187.00 6,028.00 0,575,00 6,075,00 6,575.00 6,575.00 6,575,00 6,535.00 6,575,00 6,575.00 6,575,00 6,5'5.l 601,200

NET VALUE0 OFPR8001TI01N 2,222,50 3,576,50 3,71J120 4,019.25 5,150.00 5,909.75 6,246.00 6,392,00 6,528.00 6,075.00 6,070.00 6,575.006,S.D 6,57500 O 6,575,0066,575.006 ,575,00 6 ,57 5.00 6,575,00 6,5'5.T ,W551

Total 1NFL069 2,222.50 3,576,50 3,711.52 4,019,25 9,1500,2 5,909.75 6,246,00 6,382,00 6,028.00 6,575,00 6,575.00 6,575.00 6,575.00 6,275,00 6,575.00 6,17500 6,575,00 6,575,00 6,57¶.00 6,57500

010H)1ENT

Oo.aipoonr ~~~~1,876,00 295,00 95.00 95.00 - -

en-1 P--a~t-o 190.00 - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -

22.0 63,0 60.00 2.0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

P,.Lbaza, ~~~~~ ~~22 00 66,00 98,00 44.00 49.50 16,5 S- - - - -

chsa-s 5.20 15.20 22.50 25,00 12,00 5.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

OU-TolaIN1PUTS 2,033.50 941,20 265.00 328.00 64.30 21,50 - - - - - - - - - - - - -

100)0Labor 02.00 230.00 230,00 134.00 44,00 - - - - - - - - - - - -

3009-03t. 1000079090 2,412.00 771,00 495.50 362.00 100,00 21,00 - - - - - - - - - - - -

INPUETSSACKS 14,00 16.00 16.00 24.00 32.00 34,00 34.00 34,00 34.00 0400 3.0 54.00 34.00 34.00 34.00 1 4.00 24.00 3 4.00 34.00 34 .00PP920LI7P9 193,92 14320O 143 20 165.00 176.00 176,00 176.00 176.00 176,00 176,00 176,00 176.0 176.00 026,00 176.00 176.00 176.00 176,00 176.00 176.070091C410 42.00 67.50 67.50 92.50 90.00 90,00 90.00 90,00 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 90,00 90.00 9.0 90.00 90.00 90. I00 90.0044170 00E2 6.56 13,12 13131 13.12 13.12 13.02 0312 11.12 19.12 13.12 13.12 13.12 11.12 11,12 13.13 13.12 13.02 12.12 13,12 13.02PAPAYA SEED 7.00 7,105 705.05 7.05 7.05 7, 055M 7.00 7.05 0.0 2 05 7.05 7.0 5 7.05 7,05 7.05 7.0 5 7.05 3, 05 0 .05 29

T9E 16.86 16.86 16.86 16.86 16.86 16.86 16.86 16.86 lb.& 1686 16.8 6 16.86 16,86 16.86 16,86 16.86 16.86 16.9 6 16.86 10.86169BOXES 16.86 50.50 50.50 62.22 63.22 63.22 63.22 63,22 63.22 63.22 63.32 61.25 61.25 63,22 63.22 63,22 63.22 63.22 63.25 63.22YIrCA CUTTING0 4,75 01 9.50 9 .00 9.5 2 9.50 9.50 9 .001 9.50 M 9,00 9,00 9.00 9.50 9.50 9.50 9.50 9.50 9.00 9.50 9.00

9,6-T,,~1a 19011T9 202,03 loO.ts 320.61 381.26 402.76 404.76 409.76 409.70 409.76 409.76 409.76 409.76 409,76 409,76 4097,76 418,76 409,76 449.76 409.76 409.76LABDR

LAM1 449.80 645,00 663.00 705.00 730,00 732.00 740.00 744,00 748.00 754.00 756.00 756,00 756.00 756.00 756.00 756.00 756.00 756.00 756.00 756-00

Sob-Total DP0R901N0 661.83 968,61 986.61 1.086,26 1,137.76 1,141.76 1,149.76 1,153,76 1,157.76 1,163.76 1,165.26 1,160.76 1.165,76 1,165.76 1,165.76 1.165,76 1,165,76 1,165,26 1,163.76 1,165.76

Sob-Total 990000T109 COST 3,076.93 1,739,62 1,482.1 1,448.26 1,246.76 0,163.26 1,149.76 1,155.76 1,117.76 1,163.76 1,165.76 1,165.76 1.165,76 1,145,76 1,163.76 1,160.76 1,163.7011276 1,165.76 1,163.76

Total Y-JTFL180 3,376,83 1,739.62 1,402.11 1,448.26 1,246.26 1,163.26 1.149,76 1,153,76 1,157.76 1,163,76 1,163.76 1,163.76 1.165.76 1,165.76 1,165,76 1,165.76 1,165.76 1,162.76 1,165.76 1,163.76

CASH PFL6 90F0RE F14W00NG -854.33 1,996,98 2,229.39 2,570.99 1,904.24 4,746.49 5,096.24 5,233,34 5,370.34 0,411.24 5,409.24 5,409.24 5,409,24 5,409,24 5,409.24 5,489.24 5,409.34 5,449,24 5,409.24 5,409.24

FM18 FAM110 004EP1TS 8EFDRE F14WIG -854.33 1,836.88 2,229.38 2,570.99 3,904.24 4,346.49 3,096,24 0,233,24 5,370.24 5,411.24 5,409.34 0,409.24 5.409,24 5.40924 5,409,24 5,409.24 5,409.24 5,409.24 5 409.24 5,489.24

SOURCES OF F394446D181URSM(4TS ON LOW4 TE18 LOAN 1,932.00 616,80 396.40 289.60 86.80 17.20 - - - - - - - -- - - - -

00991*99f40 0 194390 0089 LOUB 529.47 774,89 799.29 869.91 910.21 913.41 919.41 923.01 936,21 931.01 933.61 9325.61 932.61 932,61 T32,61 932.61 933.61 925.61 933.61 932.61T9440ER FROM 90V130 PER10D 133.37 093.72 197.25 217.25 227.55 228.15 229.95 230.75 231.50 232.75 2325.15 225.15 23315 .15 233.15 3 33.15 22 3,15 233.15 225 .15 22515 23.151008 TRANSFER9 T0 9003 PERI0D 192.75 197.32 317.25 227.55 258.35 229.95 230.75 231.02 232.75 2313.15 225.15 233.05 2333.15 333.05 233.15 233.15 233,15 225,15 225.15 -

86,Tota S1(RCES OP F14440 2,400,11 1,188,09 1,165,76 1,148.31 096.21 92901 919.31 922.21 92501 930.61 933.61 933.61 932.61 932.61 933.61 932.61 925.61 925.61 932.61 1,163.76

109B 0ERM PR1IN1IPAL - - - - 927.39 163.94 415.95 478.34 550.09 632.61 727,50 026.62 -40.60 -46.69 -53.70 -61.75 -71.81 -1.6l -3.9 -1109.00LOW E 00 INTERSET - - - - 674,93 618.73 586,77 024,32 452.62 370,11 275.22 166.09 40.66 44,69 53,70 61.75 71.81 91.66 93.91 O 10.0SHORT TE9 PR1401PAL - 29.47 774,89 789.29 869.01 910.21 913.41 919.81 923,01 926.31 931.80 932.61 925.61 932.61 925.61 933.61 933.61 932.61 932.61 932.689(T T999 040T9003 - 79.42 116.25 118.29 130.35 136.03 132.01 127.97 138,45 138.93 119.63 039.99 139.09 i3399 139.99 139.99 139.99 839.99 139.99 139.19

Sub-Total 104 REPAYMENTS - 606,89 891.13 907.69 2,002.09 2,049.46 2,053.14 2,060.50 2,064.18 2,867,86 2,073.38 2,075.22 1,072.50 1,073,50 1,072.50 1,072500 1,072.50 1,872,54 ]672.s0 1,4725.00

MET FIV(I44 2,400.11 779.21 274,64 240.62 -1,005.87 -1,120.45 -1,134.13 -1,138.29 -1,139.17 -1,137.25 -1.140.77 -1,142.61 -129.99 -139.09 -109.99 -139.09 -139.89 -139.99 1829.9 92.26

CASH FLOW AFTER F1I4W01G 1,549.78 26416.09 2,504.02 2,811.61 2,899.37 3,626.04 3,962.11 4,094,95 4,231107 4,275.99 4,268.47 4,266.63 5,269.35 5,269.35 5,269.35 5,269.25 5,269.25 5.229,25 5J269.25 5,582.50

PA FAMILY 80591S 9FTE9 FI14N46IN4 1,545.78 2.616.09 2,564.02 2,811.61 2,898.37 3,626.04 3,963.11 4,094.95 4,231.07 4,273.99 4,368.47 4,266.63 5,269.35 5,269.23 5,269.25 5,269.3251,269.25 5,369,25 5!269105 5,593.500

October 36' 1983 11104

. -60-

Table 21PERU

CHANCHANAYO-SATIPO PFlRAL DEVELOPffENT PROJECT

Avocado Farm Model - Production and Inputs

:ALENIIAR YEAS

Without With Prc...ert

Ulit 1 to2 1 ^ 3 4 5 6 l 9 t: 20

CROPFING3 INTENSITY Perc-'nt 10.67 2i33 26:67 60 6 26.S 26.6) 26: 2:07 ^.

CROPPING PATTERNExisiing Technologo

AVOCADO OLD PLANTING HA 0,60 - - - - - - -AVOCADO NEWJ PLANTING HA -HAlZE hA 0.50 - - - - - -BANANA NEW PLANTING HA - - - - - - -BANANA 0l[D PLANTTNG HA 5 '!0

Sub-Tditl EXIEtiMg Te hn0leV Ai:!s: 1.0 --- - - - -

Nep Technol1utAVOCADO OLD PLANTING HA - ,.,AO0 %0 O .o 0 0.60 0.60 0.60 0,60 0.SO 0.60AV)OCADO NE4 PLANTING HA - t 40 1.40 1 4C 1 40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.4C 1.40MAIZE HA - 0.50 1.0i 1.00 1.9c 1i00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1,00BANANA NEY Pr.ANTING HA - 0,50 0. 0 O.iO 0.s50C 0 5C 9.350 0.50 0.50 0.50BANANA OLD PLANTING HA - 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0,50 Q50 Q.50 0.50 0.50

Sub-Total New Technclog1 Area 3,50 4,00 4.00 4.00 4,00 4.00 4.0C 4m:'0 4.00

Total CROPPING AREA 1.60 3.50 4.0 4.00 4.00 40,40 4,00 4.00 4.00 4.01

MAIN PROIIUCT.WNAVOCADO KGS 2.400,00 2.400,00 2-700,00 3.000.00 8,9OO,00 ?Y200 00 9.900,00 10-600,00 11,300,00C 1.9000,00MAIZE KrS 850,00 90qo1r 3 .850.0 *'950, O0 2003.OO 0w,01^O. 2-00 00 24000,,0 2.000,00 2OOO ?Q0BANANA KGS 3.000,00 3,250,00 6F500.0Q 7.00000 7?500,00 7.750,00 5S000.00 9S000,00 ,000,00 9.q-000.00

INESTHMENTINPUTS

E,uirment SOLES - Ji3'6.000,00 290,000.00 90!0000if 90.000,00La.id Frersratior: HA - 2.60 - - -

Plants PLANTS - 35000 56.00 56.00 -

Fertilizer KriS - 260-00^ 520 Q 37 10.O 390,00Chemicals KGS - 2.60 5,20 5.iO 5.20

LABO RFLkibor MANDAYS - 106.00 125.00 122.00 114,00 - - -

OPFRATINGINPUTS

SACKS SAChS 16,00 23.00 28,00 56.00 70.00 70,00 70.00 70,00 000 Q 0.00FERTILIZER KIiS - 135,)0 197.50 325.00 325.00 325.00 325.00 3250,0 325.00 325.00CHEMICALS KGS - 2.70 4. 20 700 7.00 700 7 00 .00 7 .00 7 .00

MAIZE SEED KGS 17,50 17.50 35.00 35,00 35.00 35,00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35. 5BANANA PLANT 35,00 385.00 425.00 150.00 150.00 150.00 150,00 150.00 150.00 150.00

LABORLAPOR MANDAYS 62,70 137.60 170.10 1?99.20 200.20 'i21,60 237.00 237.00 2 00 237,00

Setptember 139 1983

'-61- Table 22

PERUIOMCAMMYD-S6TIPD RURAL. DEVELDPMENT PROJECT

Avocado Farm model -Financial Budget(J4A SOLES MO0)

CALENDAR YEAR

WI t6et With ProAct

1 2 to19 20 1 2 3 4 5 A 7 8 9 00 11 12, 13 to1I 20

HAIN PRODUCTIONAOCGADO 264.0 2AO 264,0 U 6O 264.UU 297,00 331.1 90.00 99(0 ,012,00 o,0U9,0U 1,166.00 1,243.00 i,379,0U 1,320-0U 1.320.00 1,320.00 1,320.UO 1.320,0040000 191,25 091.22) 190.22 405.01 427.50 450.00 450.00 450.00 450UO0 450.00 450,00 450,00 450.OU 450.00 450,00 450.00 450.U0804A0A 360.00 360.0U 360,00 3900.00 700,0 RADIO 000.00 930,00 960,00 060.00 960,00 960,00 406000 06,0.0 960.00 OUU.00 960,00

Sub-Total "IA PRODUCTION 815.25 005.2 015,25 1,0590.0 1.504,50 1,620.0 2,329.00 2,392.00 2.,A99,00 2.57U,OU 2,653.00 2.730.00 2,730.UO 2,731100 2,730.00 2,730.00 2.730,00

DROS VALUJE OF0 PRODUICTI0N 815,25 815,2!; 015,25 1,059,00 1,504.50 1,20200 2.329,UO 2,392.UO 2,499,01 2,576,00 2,653,00 2,73U,00 23073,OU 2.730,00 2.730,00 2,730.00 2,730,00

METt)ALIJF OF PRODUCTION 815.25 IlOu 2.5 8102.22 1!U59.OU 1,514.50 1,620.0U 2,329,00 2,392.00, 2.499,00 2.576.00 2.053 00 2.730,00 2,730,00 2,730,00 2,730 00 2,730.00 2-730,00

ToA,l I*LOAS 805.72, 002.75 812,25 1,059.00 1.504,50 1,620.02 2,320.00 2*392,00 2,409.00 2,276.00 2,653,00 2,730.00 2,730.00 2,73,0.1 2.730.00 2,730.00 2,730.00

OOTFLOWS

INPUTSEauapsert - -1,876,30 290,00 90.00 90100 - - - - - -- - -

Piarts - - - ~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~350.00 56.00 S~OUl - - - - - - - - - - -

09. [l,zer - 7.20 314.40 85.80 15,801 chniels - - 13:02 26.00 26.00 26.00 - - - - - -- - -

SUb-T,ctail INPUTS 4R6-2.200 4004 257,80 201.00 --BO 10P0R

Labor - - 212,00 250,00 244,00 220.00 - - - - - -- - -

Sub-TqLe' ONUESTMUAT - - - >74270O 736,40 501.00 429.92 - - - - --- - -

DPF1ROTI4$

SOLoS 6.40 0,40 6.40 9.20 11.23 22-40 21.00 20.00 20,00 21.00 208.07 20.00 28.00 20.00 20,00 20.00 20.01F0P'DLOZE

0- - - 29,70 43.42 ~7,50 71,50 71.50 ~l.50 70,50 71.5 p,0 71,50 70,50 71,50 71,50 71.50

fLHFMTLA1_ 1 3',20 21.00 32,00 320 5:00 35,100 32100 35,00 35,00 35 00 35 00 351.00 35,00 35.009000 00 6.50 6.56 ,6 6 56 13.2 13.02 0.2 0,7 11 32 1.2 13.12 1311 31 1,7 1.1 30

970744 ~~~~~~~~~1 05 1 OS 1 75 11~55 12.'!; 4 50 4 50 4.50 4.50 4.30 4.50 4,50 4,50 4.50 4.50 4,50 4.50

ZbT2IUp!T0 4:401 140:~ 04 0: '021 101.52 146.52 152.13 152,13 152,13 1,52.13 152.10 152 13 152.13 152.03 152.103 152.00 :52.12I

LABRP 025.AC, 125,40 12540 Ž'5,20 340,20 398.40 412I40 443,20 474,00 474.00 474,00 4?6,00 474 00 9474U0 474.00 476,00 474,00

;-so-Tst2i OPER4TINO 139 40 13?,41 139,41 345,71 441,72 544,93 56022I `95,33 020.13 626.10 626,13 620.13 626,13 026.13 626.10 r26.13 626.10

-~b-T.htalI 'P002TI0A C001 139,41 139,41 139,41 3,007,91 0.0,70,12 .016,72 994,32 505.33 626-13 726.13 626.13 62u.13 620.13 626.13 626,13 62to.13 626.13

T:tol 170:20 039.41, 139.41 139 41 3.00.791 1181 .,4,2 994,33 5q5,33 620,13 626.13 620.13 026.13 o26 13 A26 13 426.13 026,13 020.13

10%l _~ ?EFOP0 ~l0C~ 75,04 A75,04 6O5,04 -2,028,91 326,37 573'3.2 1 0.34.07 1,796,67 1,872,87 1,9A9,R7 2,026,87 7.103,07 2,103,U7 ?,103,07 2?100.07 2,103,07 2,173,67

FAPM ea~ 003E10100000 PEFR i740CIN0 675984 075,84 675,84 -2,020,90 326,37 973,29 1,374:67 1-790,67 1,072,87 1,41 2,026.07 2.103,87 2.103,87 2,103,67 2103,07 2.0,7 ,103,0?

11S?VR64EN1'0 99 LONG TERM ~_0AA - - - 7.40/00 662,76 450.62 306.82 - - - - - - -- ''6RUR'ME,'TS C'a tIOPT TEP9 LOAN 111.53 0111,53 I1l S3 276.57 353.30 435,04 41.162 476.26 200,90 50,0 50900,0,90 00,1 50~ 0,0 50S 50

7p144qF0 FIrM P1077760 ;FQ11f 37,69 280 2',90 69,14 00.34 100.90 112.96 119,07 125,22 125.22 125.221 125.2-2 125,22 127,22 125.22 122.22 125.22E-0 TPAM00E9 13 'E'

7iT 0 27,88 2'.R - 08,34 106.98 112,96 019 07 025.22 125.22 125.22 125M2 025.22 125,22 125.22 125.22 125,2'

0u STO4 000410 F 00 O14NCE 111.53 111.53 139,41 2'175,35 495:50 003.64 832.28 470.10 500,90 500,q0 500,90 500.90 500,90 500,90 500,90 500,40 o2.

_O40 TE'a 'P1INCI%. - - - - - - - 403,31 4o3,01 533.38 613,39 705,39 811.20 932,802 1,072,81 0,00 0,00:2.41 TF;' TY',00 R- -T - - 830.43 709,93 700.30 02U.35 528,34 422.53 300.85 160,92 -0,00 -0.00StAT TEROO PI1C11%L - 11153 100.53 - 76,57 353,38 435,94 451,6 476,26 500.00 566.00 500,90 500,96 500,90 500,90 500,90 5210.q03400T ~16a TFRk0T - 1113 it115 - 27.66 35.34 43,59 45,00 47.63 50.09 50,09 50.09 50,09 50:09 50.09 50,09 50.09

luD~-T)tl LJtO 0004990075 -1122.68 1,22.68 - 304,2, 308.72 479,53 1730.52 1.757,62 1,784.73 1,784.73 1,784,73 1,704,73 1,784.73 1,784,73 550,99 550,99

400 11441141'9 Ill 23 -01,12 10,73 2-725,35 691,27 494,92 357,72 -1,260.42 -1,256.72 -1,7.83.83 -1,203.63 -1,283.03 -1,283.83 -1,283.83 21,283,80 -50,09 75.13

1ASM -L1 AFTEP FINANLINO 787,37 664.68 692,57 096.44 1,017.65 1,068,20 1,687,.42 536,26 616,15 666.05 743.05 820.05 820,05 8200O5 820.05 3,0517,7 3.029,01

RARA 0R00LY ?REPEITS AFTER, FINAOOCINO 787,37 664.68 692.57 696.44 1.017,65 1,01.8.20 1,087.42 536.26 616,15 666.05 743.05 020,05 020,05 920.05 620,05 2,053,76 ,790

2' t4e: 20, 0~99 10 '02

-62- Table 23

PEPECHA?yAIHAM -SAT71PC URAL DEVELIPPE)4T PPO!ECT

Pineapple Farm Model - Production and Inputs

rPLENDAtR YEF

Yithouvt YJth P!Cjfct

Unit I *a 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 G l@1W ======= ===z_ ==== z== ====== =_== -=r === ==== ==: ==: = ...sss zss==s = ... s= ... xz=ss _ _sw

CROPPIW6 INTENSITY Ptrcent 13,33 13.33 23.33 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30,00 30.0t 3.3

CROPPTNF PATTERNExisting T.c1ntolot4

PIIEAPPLE OLD PLANTING NA 1.00 - - - - - - - - - -PINEAPPLE NEY PLANTING HA - - - - - - - - - - -MAIZE HA 0,50 - - - - - - - - - -

'((P;A NA 1IC - - - - - - - - - _

Suk loal Existing Techo1wio Pie2 2AiC--00 - - - -

1 - T.chno1ogt.PINEAPPLE OLD PLANTINS HA - 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0 1.5 I APINEAPPI.E NEW PLANTING HA - - 0,50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1,50 1.50 1.50 1. 1.oMAIZE HA - 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.0 1.0 1.5 SAYUCA HA - 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,00 1I00 1,00 1.0 to

Sub-Total New Tchnm2oft Areia - 2.00 3.50 4.50 4.50 4.'0 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.3 4.3

Total CROPPING AREA 2,00 2,00 3.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4-50 4.50 4.50 4.3 4.3

MAIN PRODINTIONPINEAPPLE KOSS 12t000,00 12,670,00 13.330.00 209000,00 33,005.00 34465.00 36,330.00 37V3.00 3SN5.0 3R93.US 414mhHP!ZE KGS 850,00 900.00 1,850.00 1t950-.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 ',000,00 2.000.0) 2,e.00 200.0 2.0JYUCA KOS 3,500.00 3p750.00 7f,50,00 P,250.00 8,750.00 9,000.00 90W.00 9o.00000 9oe 000 *,oot 9*,eSJ

IN IEST*:NTIN~IPTS

Eauipment SOLES - 976,000,00 295M000.00 95t000,00 95.000,00Land Pr"?arat.ar HA - 1,00 15 - - -11SOPlants TH, PLANTS - 40.00 60.00 - - -

Fertilizer KNS - 200.00 300.00 - - - - - - - -chet. tas KitS - 3. DC 45 - - - -

LABORLabtor MADAYS - 29.00 44.00 - - - - - - - -

OPERATTNGINPUTS

SAC$S SACKS 64.00 10500 140.00 220.00 260.00 .'6000 2AO.00 260.00 26.40 3.0 USFERTILIZER K5s5 - 137.50 225.00 325.00 325.00 325.00 325.00 325.00 325M.0 MM. lAOCHEMICALS K(iS - 3.MD 5 00 7,00 7.00 7,00 7.00 7.00 7;0 7,0 7.3PINEAPPLE SUCKERS TH, SUCKERS 10100 10.00 15.00 25.00 2!.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.0 2L.0M4zI7E SEED KtiS 17?50 17,50 35.00 3S500 35,m0 35.00 35,00 35.00 35.00 I5.06 3YIUCA CUTTINGS TH. CUTTiNGS 4,00 5.00 10.00 10,00 10.009 10.00 10.00 10.0 o 10. 10 19.00

LPAOR MAtDAYS 127,50 138.50 235.50 309,50 315,50 315.50 315.50 315.50 315.50 315.3 -tSJV

Stttrem I t! !9S ?3 1It

-63- Tb22

CNSWD"T-SATIPO RIMSL NVEL~908 PR8CT

Pineapple Farm Model - Financial Budget

(IN WAS '0001

EMLFn TEAR

Without With, PnJnrt

1 2 to19 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 00 10 12 13 to09t20

MAIN PROBTIONPINEAPPLE 948,00 948,00 948.00 1.090,93 1,052,07 1,580.00 2,607.39 2,738.53 2.870,07 2,949,46 3,028,46 3,107,07 3.160.00 3P160.00 3,160 ON 3,140.00 3,160.80MAIZE 191,23 191,21 191,25 405.00 427.50 450.00 450.00 450.00 450.00 450,00 450.00 450.00 450.00 450.00 450.00 450.00 450.00100* 315.00 315S0 315.00 337,50 697,50 742.50 787.50 810.00 810.00 810.00 810,00 810,00 810.00 8 1000 810.00 810.00 611,00

Sub-Total MAIN PRDLOTZON 1.454,25 1,454.25 1,454.25 1,743.42 2,l78.07 2.772,50 3,04.89 3;998.53 4.130.07 4,209.46 4,288.46 4.367,07 4.420,00 4,420.00 4,420.00 4,420.00 4,428.20

GROSS VALUE OF PROENrT!ON 1,454,25 1,454,25 1,454.25 1,743.43 2,178.07 2,772.50 3,844.89 3,910.53 4.130,87 4.209.46 4,200.46 4,367.07 4,420,00 4,426.00 4,428.00 4,420.00 4,420.00

NET VALUE OF MROOITIDN 1,4%4.,25 1,454.25 1,454.25 1,742.43 2,178.0? 2,772.50 2,844.89 3,990.52 4,130.07 4,209.46 4,28M,46 4,367,07 4,420,00 4.420,00 4,420,00 4,420.00 4,420.80

Total 1I01005 1,454.25 1,454.25 1.454,25 1,742.43 2,178.07 2,772.50 2,844.89 3,99.52 4, 130, 07 4.29, 46 4.23M.46 4,367,07 4,420,00 4.420.00 4,428.00 4,420.00 4,420.00

OUTFLOWS

MRDOETION COST

Eauipmot - -76.00 295.00 95.00 95,00O- - - -

Land Preouratiom ? 0.00 125,00 - -- - - - - - -

Plants - - -160.007240.00 - - - - - - - - - - -

Fortiliz4r - - - 44.00 66.00 - - - - - - - - - - -

Chonocalo ~ ~ -------- ------------ -- ---- - -15.0-2,50- - - --- --- - - - - - - -

Sub-Total 1I01TS i ,285. 00 758.50 95.00 95.00 - - - - - - - - - -

LABORLabor - 580100 8.00 - - - - - - - - - - - -

Sub-Tital INVEZSTMN8T - - -1,343.00 844.50 95.00 95.0 - - - -

OPERATINGINPUTS

SACKS 25.60 25.60 25,60 42.00 36.00 88.00 184.00 184.00 184.00 104.00 184,00 104,00 104.00 184.00 104.00 184.00 104.00FERTILIZER - - - 30.25 49.50 71.50 71.50 71.50 71.50 71,50 71,50 71.50 71.50 71.50 71.50 71.50 11.50CHEMICALS - - - 15.00 25.00 3S.00 35. 00 35. 00 25.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35,00 35.00 35.00 35.08 35.00P1INEAPPLE SUICKERS 10.00 10.00 10,00 10.00 15.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.80 25.00MAIZE SEED 6,56 6.56 6,56 6.36 13.12 13,12 13.12 12.12 12,12 13.12 13.12 13.12 12.12 13.12 13.12 12.12 131.2Y1JCA CUTTINGS 3,80 3.00 3.00 4.75 9.50 .9.50 9.50 9.50 9.50 9,50 9,50 9,50 9,50 7.50 9.50 9.50 9.50

3.6.-Total INPUTS 45.96 45,94 45,96 100.54 160.12 242.12 258.12 258.12 258.12 250.12 258.12 250.12 258.12 258.12 258.12 258.12 258.12LADRR

LAOR 255,0 255,00 255.00 277.00 472.00 619.00 631.00 631.00 631.00 631.00 621,00 631.00 631,00 631.00 631.00 631.00 631.00

Sub-Totul OPFROTINO 300,96 300,96 200.96 385.54 639.13 061.12 889,12 889.12 889.12 889.12 889.12 889,12 8189.12 309.12 88912 889.12 889.12

Sob,-Tol.l PROTDIJTION COST 300.96 300.96 300.94 1,720.36 1,405.63 956.13 904.12 889.12 889.12 889.12 889.02 889.12 889,12 889.12 889. 12 889.12 8M9.12

Total OUTFLOWS 300.96 300.96 300.96 1,728.56 1,485.62 956.13 984.12 09. 12 889. 12 88.12 889. 12 88.12 88912 889.02 189.12 88912 089.12

CASH FLOW BEFORE FINANCING 1,153.29 1,152,29 1,153.29 14.87 692.44 1,816,37 2,86077 3,109.41 3,240.95 3.320,34 3,299.34 3,477,94 3,230,87 3,50.87 3,520.87 3,530.87 3,530.87

FARM FAMINLY BENEFITS BEFORE FINANCING 1,153.29 1,152,29 1,153,29 14.87 693.44 1,016.37 2,860.77 3,109.41 3,240.95 3,320.24 3.399,34 3,477.94 3,530.87 3, 530.87 3,530.87 3,530.87 3,530.87

FINANCING

SOURCES OF FINANEDISDOSNETS ON LOW TERMNLDMN - - -1,200.79 761.85 05.50 85.50 - - - - - - - - - -

D1S00RSNENTS O900SOT TERN LOAN 240.77 240,77 240,77 208.45 511.30 688.90 711.30 711.30 711.30 711.30 711.30 711.36 711.30 711.30 711.30 711.30 711.30TRANSER FF00 PREVICOUS PERIOD 60.19 60.19 60,19 77.11 127.82 172.25 177.82 177.82 177.82 177.82 177.82 177.82 077.82 177.82 177.82 17.7.82 177.82LESS TRANSFER TO NEXT PERIOD 60.19 60.19 - 127.82 172.25 177.82 177.82 177.82 177.82 177.82 177.82 177,82 177,82 177.82 177.82 177.82 -

Sub-Total S0110ES OP FINANCE 240.77 240.77 300.96 1,466.44 1,228.75 768.00 796.00 701.30 711.30 711.30 711.30 711,20 711,30 711.30 710.30 711.30 889.12

LIMO TERN PRINCIPAL - - - - - - - 228.71 253.82 291.89 335.67 386.02 443,93 500.52 587.09 0.00 0.00LONG TERN INTEREST- - - - - - - 454,45 421.34 383.27 339.49 289,13 231,23 164.64 88.06 -0.00 -0.00SMOT TERN PRINCIPAL -240.77 240.77 -300.45 531.320 688.90 713.30 711.30 711.30 711,30 713.30 711,30 733.38 711.30 711.30 711.30SHORT TERN INTEREST - 24.08 24,00 - 0.84 51,12 60.89 71.12 71.03 71.13 71.13 71.03 71,13 71.13 71.13 71.13 71,13

Sob-Total LOAN REPAYMENTS - 244,82 264,85 - 339.29 562.43 757.79 1,457.59 1,457.59 1,457,59 1,457,59 1,457,59 0,457,59 1,457,59 1,457.59 M82,43 7M243

NET FINANCING 240,77 -24.00 36.12 1,466.44 889.45 206.37 39.01 -746.29 -746.29 -746.29 -746,29 -746.29 -746.29 -746.29 -746.29 -71.13 106.69

COON 11.06 AFTER F2OAINCZ 1,394,06 1,127,21 1,189.40 1,402.30 1,583.90 2,022.74 2,899.78 2,363.12 2,494.66 2,574.05 2,653.05 2,731.66 2,784.59 2,784.59 2,784.39 3,459.74 3,637.57

FARM FAMILY BENEFITS AFTER FINANCING 1,394.06 1.129,21 1,189.40 1,401.30 1,581.90 2,022.74 1,899.78 2,363.12 2,494,66 2t574,05 2.653.05 2,731,66 2.784,59 2,784.59 2,784.59 3,459.74 3,637.57

Octo,ber 26. 1983 11l19

-64- Table 25

P-U

CEhNCIaAcl-SATIP ttLDVOP83TPROJECT

W8. wujlia)

rMLO TM8

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :7 11 -- 14t~2

209701. ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~132.30000 624.750,00 1.436,400.00 2.633.400.00 3,030,40000 5,027,400,0 0,144,700.00 6.079,7S0,0 0,005,300.00 0.0.34400505,000.OC E.o,5 ol.00 0,5050.1 0.52.7I'l2, 2,122.312.50 1,930,500.30 1,738,687.50 1,423,125.00 1,423,1225.00 1,423.125.00 1,423,120.00 1,423,125.00 1.420.125.50 1.42321205.0 1, 423.125,A 1.423,25.00 1, 423.12 5.71 1,42372-7.0

6~~~~~~~i6 ~~~~~~~~~11,700.00 72,900.00 461,700,00 1,433,200.00 2,463,600,00 3.480.300.00 3.725,700,00 3.990,400.00 3,9U,300.30 4.020.000.70 4.1Q.22O.22 4.220.00,94,00 .20.000.l1 6,720.70v.1C21901S 01,280.00 43,123.00 90,240.00 270.720,30 721,920.00 1,339,240.00 2,036.040,31 2,425.200.20 261.?10.90.0 2,73-,421.00 2.a23.080.00 2.020.400.12 2.8022.00.11900919 - 200,340.00 629,300.00 794,750.30 I.210,950.00 1.368.80.00 1.339,300.00 1,672,63.0,0 1,745,350.40 1.782.000.20 1,702.000.0 1,702.2Q0.00 1.782,000.00 I, 7B2,lO:~. 31 YLTo 3,600.00 72,000.00 262.800,00 4752300.00 694,8000.00 741,800.00 781,200,00 792,000.00 792,000.00 792.100,11t 292,100,0.0 792. 2100 792,301.20 792.11C,22040191 - 1,0320.00 6,6M00.0 40,480.00 227,600.30 216,480.00 311,640.00 336.160,00 366,960.30 394.680,00 413,101.20 422,430.10 422.400.00 422.410022F18000PLE 2,117.20 20,304.40 44,240,00 161,172.00 339,197.30 566,714.40 724,698.62 768,937,00 806.842.80 837D.4000 862,664,20 878,446.40 804,030.2000 84.8217

00b-70041 4A24 P83301TIC8 2,272,029.70 2,82,60440 4,424.847,50 7,048,570.80 10,380,392.20 13,5333,63.40 23,968,303.60 18,9?99032,00 20,052, 177.82 22,371.162.40 20,533,240.20 22,626,253.41 22. .49.325.00 21 ,0,715.~2,

00000691E OF P92DL1C1IO. 2,272,029.70 2,82,604.40 4,424,847,50 7,341,370.00 10.380.392,20 23,353,639.40 15.968,303.60 18,999,232.30 20.053,177.80 2.0371.165.00 22,533,340,20 20,626.123,40 20,649.325.00 70,649,72'74C

NET7 .41LLIE 900001T106 2,272.029.70 2,821.604.40 4,424,847.00 7,0048717.0 13,383,392.20 13,513,639.40 596,06118,999,232,00 23,353,777.81 20,371.165.l11,50,4,020CC;. 20,649.35.5 20.649.3122~3

Octal 1169150 2,272.029.70 2,878.604.4 4.424,647.00 7,040,570.40 10,383,391232 13,353,638.4 15,960,303.60 18,993.432,00 20.57.77822.01.s55 27.363.149.21 2C,tls,553.45 2l,049,32S,11 21.s47132,.V

Eo.i-t 720,800.00 2,512,450.00 3,311,600.00 3.984,500.00 1.993,700.00 707,550.00 56,400.00-- -

,ar, Pron,tioc 696,960.00 776,880.00 92,880.20 92.50.00 - -- ----lot?.. 8n611,8 245.3000,00 I, 004,000.00 1.610,000.00 1.730,0D0.00 1,071.000.00 252,000.00 84,000.00-- --F.,til-o, 53.023,00 207,680.30 405.064.00 601,040.30 389,388.00 390,832.00 238,106.30 0.60,00 7.8030---Plants 44,080.00 154,040.00 207,360.00 228,84.0.0 101,640.00 35,300.00 7,200.00 -- Elao-al 7 120.00 15,200300 15,623,00 27.140,00 33,660.00 29.340.00 29,323.30 7.200,00 7.00.0,0-- --Plants 64.000,00 96,000.00 - - - -- ----

Sit-Total 100510 1,319.308.00 4.770,250.00 3,842,724.00 6,664,400.00 3,691.080,00 1,4235362.00 323,056.00 30,960.00 7,740.30 ---

L.bcr 107.320.00 413,060,00 700,720.50 879,040.30 704,760.00 337,920.00 1223,040.00 25,840.01 ---

lit-Total 186807808 1,926,329.00 3,183,610.00 6,343,444.00 7, 563,440.00 4,396,140,00 1.773.202.30 430,096.00 46.800.20 7,740.00 - -0PE36T288

FERTILIZER 48.01S.30 231,836.00 404,046,50 563.874.50 624,222.00 644,627.00 653,620.30 057,580.00 657,580.00 637,300.00 057,100.20 657.380,00 057,B080.0 607.380.0028091191 56.203,00 149,4350.0 791,473.00 417,493.00 449,400.00 469,200.00 477,3000.00 4800.00,00 480,0040, 480,380.00 400,000.20 480.000,60 400,000.00 40,0500.204A030 ED8 - 3,604,37 14,437,50 23,265.62 36,393,72 00,893.72 36.093.75 36.093.75 36,093.72 36.093.75 36,039.72 U00~3, 75 36,093.75 36,090,7586(0 1.436,00 7,334.00 18,188.00 34,156.00 50,512.00 64.288.00 73.060.00 76,960.00 77,680.00 77.6800,0 77,600.00 77.640000 77,6800.0 77.600,22flW 7.780,30 33, 474.30 253n.3850 34.920 .30 27,830.00 29,992.30 22,230.00 21.030,00 21,330.30 21.3300,00 21,300.00 21.,000 71,300.00 11,030.02

914104 SEED 778.33 3.110,2B 3,448.24 7,783.20 7,763.20 7,7830 71m.20 7,783.20 7,7M3, 20 7 ,783.0 0 7.783,23 7,78 3.20 7. 783,2 .7320 7,703.23LIME 2,003.20 8,392.00 14,162.40 20.232200 30,232.30 30,222.00 23, 202.00 00,230.00 20.232,00 20.232,00 20,232.01 20,232,00 200.22200 20,202.00

KXS ~ ~~~~~~~- 4,346.40 16,183.60 29,842.20 46,5322,60 51,050.80 33,638.00 5536.03,0 33,638.00 30,638.00 00,o380O 530,63 8.04 35,63.0.0 5536.08009840*3UTT15S 132.00 1,368.00 4,004.0 ,403 ,100 9,120.00 9.120,00 9,10.0 9,120.3 1000 9 ,912.00 : 1000 9,120.00 910.06

PI08040900 HERS -I0.0 2,0.0 3000.00 4,800.00 6,000.00 0,000.00 6000,00 ,000.00 ON000DO 0000.00 600 0,00 0.0 6000

hab-Total I000S 96,390.02 461,19.22 784,337.74 1.163.408.32 1,376,437.33 1,338,422. 72 1,360,476.95 1,370,736,90 1,370.456.92 1.371,456,95 1,371,456.92 1,371,436.93 1.371,4S6.92 1.371,436.95

LAW8 268.322,00 638,008.00 1,082,672.00 1,348,62.00 1.801,258.00 1,920,810.00 1,962,372.30 1,982,844.00 1,992,060.00 1,98,5040.0 2,003,020.00 2.00.243.00 _2,011,3020.00 3.011.740.00

hab-Total FUATOM 364,712.02 1.099.327.33 1,B47,209.74 2.712,070.32 3,077,695,05 3,259.232.75 3.322,048.95 3,333580.9 3,363,516.95 0,369,996.95 3,373,276.95 0,379,396.95 0,382,476.90 3,003,196,93

Slt-T.otl 950940000 cosy 2.290.240.02 6.283,137.35 8,410,633,74 10,275.510.52 7,473,833.00 5.032,314.75 3.772.944.95 3.400.380.95 3,371,256.92 3.369,996.95 3,375,276.93 3,379,396.93 3,382,476.93 3,083,196.99

Total UT9FLON 2,291.040.02 6,282V,00.2 8,413,633,76 10,272,310.33 7.472.833.03 5,332,314.72 3.772.944.95 3.400.3D0.95 3,372,236.95 3,369.996.95 0,072.276.95 3.379.4 6.93 3,382,476.92 3,083,196,95

-CSf FL08OW nf F0WX08 -19.210.32 -3.84.3532.98 -3,98M,806,26 -3,226,939.72 2.906,337.15 8,521.124.65 12.193,038.65 13,393,631.03 16.681,.92.0 17,001,1680.5 17.138.T72.72 17,246,406.45 17,366.848.05 17,266,1223,03

WOOl d16,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~410.OD -2,386,024..37 -3.034.228,30 -2, 43190.63 1.378,543.75 3,941.356.23 8,334,506.23 13,677,036.23 11,196,866.23 11,228.306.23 11,228,306.25 11,228,306.23 1l.2,38623:112 11.220800.:251000 106.224,48 -609391.08 -633,248,24 -508.4t1.9 884,026.20 1.727.724.30 2,673.852.80 3,601.381.00 4,096,261,80 4.325.731,80 9,43B,891,8 4.502.33,0I0 4.16.291.90 4.323571900#A8 22.832,00 -254.872.50 -333,250,00 -357.395.30 67,695.00 049,133.00 409,167.00 482,071.00 313,773.00 543,495,00 561,973.00 371,213.00 371,210.00 07 1,213.00PIOPPE _ftOD -3'0. -284,244.10 6,932.00 74,278.30 376,292.20 602,789.40 776,833.60 835,143.30 873,077.80 903,635.00 928.899,20 944,683,40 951,035.00 981,335.00

90-Total FMFS L 913188ITS005 PlU FI0E -19,210.32 -3.4U54,32.95 -3,M98314.24 -3.226,939.72 2.9066.57.13 8,521.124.63 12.195,338.68 13,308.631.35 16,681,950.83 17,001,168.05 17,13B,072.23 17,246.456.45 17,266.848.05 17,266.128,00

DetOur 34. 1083 00010~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-- - ----- --- -------- - --

-65- Table 26

PERU

CHANCHAMAYO-SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Economic Analysis

(SI, million)

uw3 .dtu:a 'rt"L Atctt l Fers6ty YrketIng ra SetCogCI oatS _ stS 1!fita g_to_e_t_its _o ISf Its e5entlcs

1 9212.40 31M1,16 12374,26 3135.40 o000 776.11 3911.51 -8462.742 17766.90 86'i.72 2'6437.62 3903.47 931.50 837,94 5672.91 -20764.71

3 14595.40 11606.70 26202.10 6106.29 931.50 884,30 7922.09 -1880,004 12439,30 14140.34 26619:64 9727,03 931 SO 958,27 11616.80 -15002.855 12654.90 10132.? 22968.79 14324,94 931,50 1033,34 16229,78 -6679.i016 6435.40 6F94.8$ 13380,26. 18704,02 931.50 1137.1 2 20772.64 7392.387 5224.54 522S0.66 7471,24 220362,5 31.50 1230,96 24198.71 16727.488 .443.198 46F2.52 7136,50 26219.62 ?31.50 1278343 28428,55 212F2.05

° 841,80 4652.34 54'i4,14 2?673 3? 931,50 136t.23 I99L 6.12 24 4711.FS

10 1287.54 4650.b 6 5938,14 28112.20 931,50 1444.03 30427.73 4549.5?11 1491:78 46,S7,9 6149.47 28336,02 93t1.0 1444.03 307I1.55 245L1.812 841.30 A663.M3 5505.63 28463.38 931,50 1444.03 : 389.41 '253 '3,7813 1287,.54 4667,r.2 5955.36 28496.06 93115z0 1444.03 30871.597 24916;2314 2441,22 4667.82 7109.04 28496a06 931.5O 1444.03 30871.59 23762 5515 1807890 4667f.2 4475,62 284W6,06 931,50 1444.03 30871.59 24395.A716 1287.54 4667?.82 5955,36 2496.06 2096,22 1444,03 32036.31 i 260o8917 1477.?8 4667.62 6 14. 4 80 28496.06 2678,3:8 1444.03 32618.6? 26472.?7Is 841,80 4667.82 5509.62 28496.06 3259.56 1444.03 33199,65 27690.0319 1287,54 46670.82 5955 36 28496,06 3841I92 1444.03 33782.01 27826:6520 1477.98 4667.82 6145.80 28496.06 4428.42 1444.03 34368.51 28222.71

INTERNAL RATES OF RETURN OF NFT STREAMS

Bene-fitS - UP lOZ UP 20% DOWN 1ox POWN 20% LAC, 1 YEAR LAG 2 YEARS LAC 3 YE£8.

Costs*l8,563 21 292 24,006 15,784 12:?15 14 529 11,674 9.t20

LP 1OZ 16.040 18.563 21,045 13.445 10.737 12570 10(017 7.'52

tf 2% 13"884 16,2t52 18,563 11.428 8.839 10.844 8,534 6.624

DM#W 1 21.594 124609 27I642 18.563 15,471 16.794 13.554 11,064POi 20% 21,364 28i7?0 32.291 21,971 18.563 19.475 15.72S 12.936

L 1 Y£AR - - - 18.247 14,119 11.I7cLA,G 2 YEARS - - - 17.854 13. 16

.A6 3 YEiARS - - - - 17.Z33

-66-

Table 27

PERU

CHANCHAMAYO-SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Feeder Roads: Economic Analysis of First Year Program

Toterani-Quirimi Francia/ Union La Florida

Sur Sta. Rosa California Cooperative Huahuari(6) (7/7a) (20) (24/26/27) (30)

Number of Kilometers 5.1 9.2 23.4 68.2 25.3

1. INVESTMENT

1. Road Improvement Cost (US$'000)Financial (Base) a! 118 96 482 2,560 804Economic b/ 123 95 506 2,604 823

A. Present Value of Economic Cost c/ 123 95 492 2,251 823B. Maintenance Cost: Present Value

(US$'000) 10 18 47 136 51C. Agricultural Investment: Present

Value (US$'000) 163 546 1,143 1,187 317D. Total Cost (Present Value) (A+B+C) 296 659 1,682 3,574 1,191E. Total Adjusted Cost (Present Value)

(US$'000) d/ 384 856 2,184 4,642 1,546

II. Agricultural Value Added (AVA) (US$'000)

Coffee 5 67 275 490 141citrub 4 199 99 147 22Pineapple 107 - 93 - -Avocado - - 44 - 2Banana 1 29 47 126 202Papaya 15 - - 123 33

Total 132 295 558 885 402

III. Ratio of Investment/AVA 2.9 2.9 3.9 5.2 3.8

IV. Estimated Economic Rate of Return('X) e/ >18 > 18 16 14 f/ 16

a! Excluding Physical Contingencies.b/ Including Physical Contingencies, engineering and supervision; exclusive of taxes.c/ Discounted at 12Z.d/ Investment cost increased by a factor of 1.3 to reflect other project costs (marketing; research; land titling;

project unit).e/ Utilizing simplified appraisal technique number III.f/ Analysis includes Yurinaki Bridge. (See Table 28)

Improvement of roads in this area would take place over years 1 and 2.

SOURCE: Report of FAO/World Bank Cooperative Programme, April 1983; mission estimates.

September 13, 1983

-67-

PERU Table 28

CHANCHAMAYO - SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Economic Analysis of La Florida Cooperative Area Roads and Yurin.aki Bridge

(US$ '000)

Costs BenefitsForestry

Vehicle VehicleFeeder Yurinaki Agricultural Agricultural Operating b/ Operating

Year Roads Bridge Investment Value Added- Cost Savings- Cost Savings

1 747 304 543 117 - -

2 1857 536 287 297 - -3 27 - 109 291 73 1044 27 - 48 368 76 1045 27 24 19 436 78 1046 27 24 181 507 80 1047 27 24 - 681 83 1048 27 24 - 681 84 1049 27 24 - 681 85 10410 27 24 - 681 86 10411 27 24 - 681 87 10412 27 24 - 681 88 10413 27 24 - 681 90 10414 27 24 - 681 92 10415 27 24 - 681 93 10416 27 24 - 681 94 10417 27 24 - 681 96 10418 27 24 - 681 98 10419 27 24 - 681 100 10420 27 24 - 681 102 10421 27 24 - 681 105 10422 27 24 - 681 105 104

Economic Rate of Return: 14Y.

a/ Only 77% of total value added included as a `henef it, as the present value of feeder roads,Yurinaki Bridge, on-farm agricultural investment and on-farm operating costs represent77% of total project costs. Remaining 23% of agricultural value added benefits assumedto be atributed to other project costs (marketing, research, land titling, project unit).

b/ For trucks includes only vehicle operating cost benefits derived from normal trafficgenerated on farms where production would be the same with or without the project.Includes benefits from normal and generated light vehicle and bus traffic.

Source: Mission estimates and Consultores CIPSSA

October 1983.

-68-TABLE 29

PERU

CHANCHAMAYO - SATIPO RURAL fEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Summary Economic Analysis: Feeder Road Component

EconomicRoad Number of Base Rate of

Road Name Number Kilometers Cost Return(km) (US$ '000) (M)

La Esperanza/Tirol 3 & 4 10.5 144.1 13Quirimi Sur 6 5.1 118.0 >18Francia/Santa Rosa 7/7a 9.2 95.5 >18Quirimi Centro-Villa Dorado 9 25.8 504.2 14Rio Blanco 10 9.2 155.7 14Rio Dolores 13 7.0 98.8 11Rio Seco 14 2.5 40.0 >18Pampa Whally-La Esperanza 15 9.1 134.2 >18Cerro Gavilan 17 4.9 113.8 17Villa AmorethlAlto Kimarinil

Pampa del Oso 18118a/b 22.8 530.7 17Toterami-Union California/Los

Angeles 20/20a 23.4 481.8 16San Chirio/Union Bajo Paloma 22/22a 16.1 350.0 17YapazlMetraro/Sancachari 23a/23b 23.7 805.4 12La Florida CooperativalYurinaki

Bridge 24/26127 68.2 3,360.7 14Huahuari 30 25.3 803.8 16Samanaro-Kanariaki 31 10.1 292.5 >18Rio Chari-San Jacinto de Shaurcato 33 7.9 147.5 >18Nazca-Llayla/Corvirialli Buenos Aires 46 22.8 552.4 16Paurioli 47 5.7 234.2 >18Caprirustari 48 5.1 226.0 15Teoria 51 5.4 99.7 >18San Jose de Sanamoro 52 2.8 210.9 >18Celendin 53 3.9 95.0 >18Naylamp 54 7.4 148.6 15Vilcabamba 56 9.0 192.7 16Pampa Tigre-Kubantia 58 18.7 665.3 13Alto Pumpuriani 25 11.2 259.3 13ivionterrico 8 10.0 115.0 11Alto Kivinaki- Pichanaki 28 43.9 1,279.2 12

TOTAL 426.7 12,255.0

Source: Mission estimates

February, 1984

PERU

Chanchamayo-Satipo Rural Development Project

Project Organization

Executive Director|

Pichis-Palcazu|

Project DirectorChanchamayo-Satipo Internal

._________ ___________ Audit

Sub-Director . Sub-DirectorAdministrative Services Planning & Evaluation

I i m ~~ccounts & L| Supply lPersonnel Budget Support Services

b-Director Sub-Director Sub-DirectorRoads & Buildings Farm Production Services Land Titling

,BB) 174BB2bEPIEMBER 043

P ER UCHANCHAMAYO -SATIPO RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

4 ~~~~~~~~~SELVA CENTRAL

Are,,.o~ B-os, t A,p,or erod A, f o 6

P,op,-d F-d-e Pe-d F.,,,,osPoes R--eso A-3o

00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ *

0 0~~~~0

6 PA Z I L~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ D