Cover Image
close this bookContribution of People's Participation: Evidence from 121 Rural Water Supply Projects (World Bank, 1995)
close this folderAppendixes
View the documentAppendix 1A - Participation with other direct inputs into water project effectiveness
View the documentAppendix 1B - Participation with eighteen direct and indirect inputs (model 3) into project outcomes
View the documentAppendix 2. Projects rated high in overall effectiveness
View the documentAppendix 3 - Summary of differences between blueprint and learning process approaches
View the documentAppendix 4. Centre for social research: Indicators for sociological monitoring system—Karonga Lakeshore integrated rural groundwater supply project

Appendix 1A - Participation with other direct inputs into water project effectiveness

Dependent variable

Adjusted R²

Participation

Adequacy of facilities

Difficulty in holding staff

Availability of parts

Clarity of objectives

Overall effectiveness

0.85

0.28

0.14

-0.05

0.57

0.22



(5.3)

(1 8)

(-1.1)

(9.6)

(2.9)

Percentage of water system

0.69

0.30

0.10

0.17

0.71

-0.02

in good condition


(3.1)

(0.7)

(-2.0)

(6.6)

(-0.17)

Economic value of benefits

0.67

0.27

0.23

-0.11

0.38

-0.8



(4.1)

(2.5)

(-2 0)

(5.3)

(0.12)

Percentage of target

0.22

0.17

-0.05

-0.12

0.13

0.07

population reached


(1 9)

(-0.4)

(-1.6)

(1 4)

(0.5)

Environmental effects

0.11

0.23

0.01

0.03

0.11

-0.11



(2.8)

(0.07)

(0.4)

(-0 9)

(-0 9)

Equality of access

0.14

0.26

-0.13

-0.05

0.08

0.22



(2 3)

(-0.77)

(-0.5)

(0.5)

(1.44)

Community empowerment

0.74

0.59d

0.24a

-0.04

0.33d

-0.14



(8.2)

(2 3)

(-0.7)

(4.1)

(-1.4)

Water-system task capacity building

0.68

0.70d

0.16

-0.02

0.22a

-0.19



(8.3)

(1 3)

(-0.3)

(2.4)

(-1.7)

Extent local organizations

0.72

1.01d

-0.02

-0.03

0.10

-0.03

strengthened


(10.0)

(-0.16)

(-0.4)

(1.0)

(-0.3)

Net effect on leaders

0.18

0.26b

0.04

0.03

-0.02

-0.03



(2 9)

(0.3)

(0.4)

(-0.2)

(-0.2)

Note: Significance levels are indicated thus: a = significant at 0.05; b = significant at 0.01; c = significant at 0,001; d = significant at 0.0001. Figures in parentheses are t-statistics.

Appendix 1B - Participation with eighteen direct and indirect inputs (model 3) into project outcomes

Outcomea

Adjusted R²

Participation

Availability of parts

Objectives specified

Appropriate technology

Overall project effectiveness

0.86

0.24

0.44


0.19



(3.8)

(5.6)


(2.3)

Objective value of benefits

0.72

0.26

0.26

-0.30




(3.6)

(2.8)

(-2.6)


Percentage of water

0.65

0.29

0.69



system in good condition


(2 4)

(4.4)



Environmental effects

0.13

0.23

0.11





(2.3)

(0.9)



Percentage of target

0.26

0.25

0.07



population reached


(2.4)

(0.5)



Equality of access

0.40

0.17

-0.14





(1.5)

(-1.0)



a. Except for participation and availability of parts, values are reported if statistic is significantly beyond the 0.05 level.

Note: For overall project effectiveness, the t-statistics were significant at the following levels: participation = significant 0.0004; availability of parts = significant 0.0001; appropriate technology = significant 0.02; quality of management = significant 0.10.

Agency understanding

Management

Skills of staff

Geological/environmental context

Political context

Social context


0.22






(1.64)






0.3






(1.9)













-0.35

0.31





(-2.10)

(1.19)












-0.29






(-2.4)









0.38


0.4


0 61

0 54

(1 9)


(2.4)


(2 6)

(2 7)

Appendix 2. Projects rated high in overall effectiveness


Projects rated high in overall effectiveness


Projects rated high in overall effectiveness (continued)


Projects rated high in overall effectiveness (continued)


Projects rated high in overall effectiveness (continued)


Projects rated high in overall effectiveness (continued)


Projects rated high in overall effectiveness (continued)


Projects rated high in overall effectiveness (continued)


Projects rated high in overall effectiveness (continued)


Projects rated high in overall effectiveness (continued)


Projects rated high in overall effectiveness (continued)


Projects rated high in overall effectiveness (continued)


Projects rated high in overall effectiveness (continued)

Appendix 3 - Summary of differences between blueprint and learning process approaches


Summary of differences between blueprint and learning process approaches

Appendix 4. Centre for social research: Indicators for sociological monitoring system—Karonga Lakeshore integrated rural groundwater supply project


Centre for social research: Indicators for sociological monitoring system—Karonga Lakeshore integrated rural groundwater supply project