Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor,
Tanzania
Intervention Summary
What support will the UK provide?
The Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor (SAGCOT) is at the heart of Tanzania’s economic development
strategy and is central to Tanzania’s current level of energy and agricultural production; the mainstays of its
economy. For SAGCOT to effectively generate the predicted $2.1 billion of public-private investmenti and
for this to sustain poverty eradication and food security, significant investment in water resources
management, including climate resilient infrastructure, will be required.
Under this Business Case the UK will invest £5 million in the building blocks (Phases 1&2) towards a
potential ICF funded £70 million programme (Phase 3) to deliver water security infrastructure which, as part
of the UKs broader support to SAGCOT, will underpin the goal of lasting poverty eradication, food security
and economic growth in Tanzania
Why is UK support required?
Despite Tanzania’s robust economic growth rates and its potential to be a regional food basket, levels of
poverty and food insecurity remain stubbornly high. With over 12.9 million Tanzanians below the poverty
line, and 85% of those living in rural areas, agriculture presents the best opportunity for reducing poverty
and achieving food security in Tanzania; and is a Presidential and G8 priority. The Southern Agricultural
Growth Corridor of Tanzania (SAGCOT) has received international attention as one of the mechanisms to
transform the country’s agricultural sector through $2.1 billion ii of inward investment, leading to sustained
poverty eradication and economic growth. The Rufiji river basin - the main water source in the SAGCOT
region - and generator of 80% of the country’s hydroelectricity - is likely to experience an intensification of
floods and droughts due to climate change. Water insecurity in the Rufiji and related water basins will
seriously undermine the success of SAGCOT and will have significant implications for Tanzania’s economic
and social development.iii For the SAGCOT results to be sustained and for investment to be leveraged,
climate preparedness must be built in to water sector development plans for the river basins and
infrastructure within the SAGCOT region. If not, it is likely that investment in water infrastructure will be
delayed or at worst, poor investment decisions will be made which exacerbate rather than improve
predicted challenges around water resources management.
This Business Case will invest £5 million in essential data collection, analytical work and capacity building to
the Rufiji River basin office and the Ministry of Water, which will contribute to unlocking approximately
$800millioniv of multi-donor and private sector investment in climate resilient water resource infrastructure,
essential for the delivery of the SAGCOT programme v. This building block phase will also provide the basis
for a further ICF bid of £70 million for climate resilient water infrastructure investment, which will be
submitted to the ICF board in early 2014.
The evidence is clear: achieving lasting poverty reduction, food security and economic growth in Tanzania
is dependant on a massive scale up of water security infrastructure in the Rufiji river basinvi. Before this can
happen, robust information and data as well, as strong institutional capacity to generate and utilise this
information are required. Without these it will be impossible to take informed decisions on the location and
scale of large water security infrastructure development and planned large scale irrigation investments
under SAGCOT. It is anticipated that in the absence of such information and capacity, investment in water
infrastructure could be delayed by up to 5 years.
A range of development partners are supporting the Water Sector Development Plan(WSDP), under which
water resources management is one pillar. They are also supporting specific elements of water resource
management and climate change in the SAGCOT region e.g. USAID on climate resilience of rice and
maize, and GIZ on strengthening the capacity of Water User Associations and the development of a climate
change action plan for thewater sector. However, as a leading development partner on water, climate
change and agriculture in Tanzania, the UK has a comparative advantage in delivering a water security
programme which acheives results across all sectors of SAGCOT. Furthermore, this water security
programme will provide better information to make decisions, and the resultant water infrastructure
investments should significantly contribute to climate proofing the UKs overarching £36+ million investment
in the SAGCOT, which was recently approved. There is a significant risk that, if the UK does not support the
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
building blocks set out in this business case, that the pace of intensification of agriculture in the southern
corridor will outstrip the ability of the current water infrastructure to meet the demands, and that investment
in relevant water infrastructure would be delayed, or, at worst the wrong investments would be made.
Whilst focused on agriculture, the programme will deliver other significant direct and indirect co-benefits
resulting from improved management of water resources such as access to water and sanitation, energy
security, forestry and land management, school attendance and infant mortality, and the protection and
managment of wildlife areas and national parks.
Tanzania was identified as “highly vulnerable with capacity to deliver” in the ICF thematic paper on
water resources. Supporting climate preparedness of the water sector in SAGCOT will contribute to results
in three of the ICF thematic paper priority areas:
 Agriculture investments to support smallholder farmers, and ‘food systems’.
 Address disaster risk reduction; critical infrastructure and early warning.
 Manage water resources for sustainable access (consumption and agriculture).
The Business Case satisfies the four ICF criteria for what constitutes a ‘transformational’
programme:
 Scale: This intervention will have significant regional and and potentially national level impact.
 Replicable: Focused on the Rufiji river basin, the approach could and should be replicated across
each of the 9 river basins in Tanzania to achieve full impact on the national economy.
 Innovative: Integrating climate change into water management (plans and infrastructure) at a
national scale is new to Tanzania. Whilst other donors are building agricultural resilience at a microlevel and in specific value chains, this is the first time that climate resilience will have been
integrated at scale.
 Leverage: UK support through this programme is expected to leverage significant bilateral and
multilateral investment in water sector infrastructure development.
What are the expected results?
Improved water security and climate resilience in the SAGCOT region will contribute to the delivery of
results under the DFID Tanzania operational plan on climate change. It will improve the ability of people to
cope with the effects for climate change by improving water availability, ensuring it is sustainable and water
climate resilient. Some of the specific results are outlined below:
Results of Phase 1: Data generation and institutional strengthening
 Quality base line hydrological, climate and end user information generated, with a particular focus
on ground water mapping.
 Institutional capacity of River Basin Office, Water User Association and District Level Authorities built
to use this data for decision making.
 Technical capacity of River Basin Office, Water User Association and District Level Authorities built
to collect and use the data and information.
Results of Phase 2:Climate proofing development
 Data and information from Phase 1 built into water sector development plans, SAGCOT investment
plans, sectoral and national development plans.
 Water allocations take account of climate variability.
 Investment in water infrastructure leveraged.
 Investment in water infrastructure based on sound hydrological and climate data and modelling.
 Investments in SAGCOT are informed by data generated by Phase 1 and are sustainable
Long term results of Phase 1-3 in contributing to the overall success of SAGCOT: Water Security
Infrastructure Development :
 Up to 2.3 million people lifted permanently out of poverty.
 $2.1 billion investment in SAGCOT leveraged.
 Approximately $800 million investment in water security infrastructure leveraged.
 4.5 million people with long-term access to water and sanitation.
 80% hydro-electricity production sustained and increased potential realised.
 Food security for Tanzania and the surround region is achieved.
2
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
Strategic Case
A. Context and need for a DFID intervention
Context and rationale:
Climate change will cause and exacerbate water insecurity in the SAGCOT region, resulting in
significant losses in GDP from: reduced crop yields, potential disincentive to investors in SAGCOT,
reduced domestic access to water and sanitation, reduced hydroelectric production, and increased
conflict over land and water resources.
These risks can be mitigated by building climate preparedness into water resource planning and
investment in infrastructure upgrading and development. Planning and infrastructure development will
only be effective if based on robust hydrological data and information, mapping of water use as well
as down-scaled climate modelling and annual climate variability measurements. This data can only
be generated if River Basin and District Level Authorities, as well as relevant government Ministries,
have the capacity to generate and use the information.
Agriculture is the mainstay of Tanzania’s economy, and is at the heart of Tanzania’s goal of achieving
independence from overseas aid by 2025. It accounts for 45% of Tanzania’s economic wealth,
employs 75% of the population and supports food security for the country and surrounding
region.vii (A top Presidential and G8 priority). 98% of rural women who are economically activity in
Tanzania are engaged in agriculture.
Against the backdrop of a predicted population increase from 45 to 105 million by 2050, and
increased energy, food and water insecurity, Tanzania’s Vision 2025 commits the country to
transitioning from developing country status by 2025. SAGCOT is a key component of achieving this
vision, and water security is a key component to the success of SAGCOT.
Launched in 2010, SAGCOT is a public-private partnership aimed at mobilising $2.1 billion of
investment over the next 20 years – game changing for the Tanzanian economy – and increasing
agicultural productivity by 680,000 tonnes of field crops, 630,000 tonnes of rice, 4.4 million tonnes of
sugar cane, and 32,000 tonnes of fruit and vegetables. SAGCOT will leverage an annual revenue
increase of $1.2 billion from agriculture, provide 420,000 more jobs, ensure food security for
Tanzania, and transform Tanzania into a breadbasket for the region, and help lift up to 2.3 million
people out of poverty. SACGOT is primarily aimed at supporting 10,000-20,000 small scale artisan
farmers by linking smallholders to larger agribusinesses. This will establish closer links to markets
and introduce farmers to modern farming techniques, including irrigation. Only 2% of the irrigation
potential in the southern agricultural growth corridor region is being realised – requiring
massive scale up of infrastructure in the region to unlock its agricultural capacity (all dataviii).
However, only limited hydrological analysis has been undertaken to confirm the availability of water
resources to deliver SAGCOT objectives without adversely impacting other water users in the
regionix.The Water Sector Development Plan (the main donor harmonisation mechanism for
integrated water planning in Tanzania), the SAGCOT Green Growth Strategy, SAGCOT investment
framework, and the Strategic Regional Environmental and Social Assessment have begun to map out
this information. However UK support is required to build the capacity of relevant institutions to
effectively build climate preparedness into multi-sectoral plans. Experience elsewhere has shown that
retrofitting water resources management to safeguard the industry is both costly and time consuming.
For example, the failure to analyse and invest in water resources management during the
development of horticultural industry around Kenya’s Lake Naivasha generated risks to long term
growth of this key export earner. It is essential to learn from this, and to avoid such a costly mistake in
SAGCOT.
3
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
The success of SAGCOT is largely dependant on the sustainability of water resources in the
Rufiji river basin, encompassing more than 73% (or 621,800 hectares) of Tanzania’s irrigable land.
Alongside agricultural productivity, the Rufiji supplies domestic water to 4.5 million people and
generates 80% of the country’s hydro-energy (50% of Tanzania’s electricity supply) and 48.7% of
the total national hydro-thermal power capacity (953.75 MW). It contains 100 forest reserves, three
of Tanzania’s most important national parks, and a designated RAMSAR site x.
Tanzania’s energy security is currently dependent on water security in the Rufiji. An additional
(above current capacity) 2,876 MW of hydropower capacity can be developed in the Rufiji basin at
Stiegler’s Gorge (2,400 MW), Ruhudji (358 MW), and Mpanga (118 MW)xi. One of the key risks for
the energy (electricity) sector in Tanzania is the effect of climate change on hydro-electric generation,
from a combination of changes in precipitation, run-off and river flow, surface water evaporation,
various impacts from changes in variability (reduced run-off due to droughts and increased run-off
due to floods), and from secondary effects such as impacts of siltation deposits and sedimentation.
Energy-related impacts on the economy due to droughts are already evident in Tanzania,xii and have
been well documented. Analysis (World Bank, 2010) indicates that the economic cost of power
shortages, including running backup generators and losses from foregone production, is over 4% of
GDP annually for Tanzania.
Access to water and meeting the MDGs are dependent on water security in the Rufiji.
Population growth alone in Tanzania will result in a decline in renewable water availability from
2300m3/per capita/year in 2002 to around 1500m3/capita/year in 2025xiii. Population growth rates in
the Rufiji range from 1.4-3.6% with an average density of 25.6 person/km2 and average domestic
water supply coverage of 46%. Rates of population growth and agricultural intensification are higher
than infrastructure and social service expansion rates, making it difficult for Tanzania to meet its
national development targets, which the MUKUKUTA (national growth and poverty reduction strategy)
sets at 65%-90% coverage for rural and urban water supply). Water-related diseases account for
about 25% of all infant deaths in the basin. Climate change will exacerbate this. Any progress
towards achieving the MDGs – specifically MDG 1 and 7 in the Rufiji river basin will require significant
investment in water infrastructure (all dataxiv).
Reducing conflict and increasing regional stability depend on water security in the Rufiji
basin. Competing demands on the Rufiji are resulting in water disputes and overuse. Conflicts are
frequently recorded, and are increasing due to increased stress, use and climate change. Several
conflicts have been reported between pastoralists and commercial farmers/irrigators in the Usangu
Plains. Inter-sectoral conflicts also occur between upstream irrigators in the Usangu, and downstream
domestic users. Further conflicts result from wildlife water use in the Great Ruaha National Park and
hydropower generation at Mtera and Kidatu. The situation is exacerbated by uncoordinated water
resources development, and by inadequate monitoring and enforcement of water related laws and
regulations. Climate change will be an additional stress on the availability of water resources. First
documented in 2001, conflicts already exist between commercial and small scale farmers / villages
due to encroachment of water rightsxv.
Building climate preparedness is fundamental to achieving water security in the Rufiji river
basinxvi. Tanzania, and in particular the Rufiji basin, is highly vulnerable and underprepared to cope
with the impacts of climate changexvii. Historical data and climate modelling indicate a seasonal shift
in precipitation with weaker early season rains and stronger later season rains leading to
intensification of flooding and drought. The frequency of droughts in the Rufiji is increasing.
Temperature increases of around 1.5°C -2°C are predicted across most of Tanzaniaxviii. Climate
induced water insecurity is a significant risk for both the agriculture and energy sectors in Tanzania,
the mainstays of the economy and the SAGCOT region. Climate induced yield losses of between 1020% are expected by 2030, accounting for a 0.6-1% decline in GDP. Reduction of hydro-electric
power (HEP) potential resulting from droughts and flooding is expected to cause losses of 0.7-1.7%
of GDP by 2030xix. In 2011, the IMF downgraded predicted annual growth in GDP from 7.2% to 6%
mainly as a result of the impact of weather in energy production. The impacts are evident. Severe
4
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
droughts in 2005 caused agricultural sector growth to slow to only 5.2% compared to 5.8% growth in
2004. The Central Bank of Tanzania estimated that in 2007 the economy grew by 1.1% slower than
expected due to drought induced electricity shortagesxx .
Predicted impacts of Climate Change
in Tanzania:
 Temp Rise: 1.5°C -2°C
 Increased variability and intensity
of precipitation rates
 Increased frequency of natural
disaster
 10-30% reduction in crop yield
Direct Economic Costs of Climate
Change in Tanzania:
 Total GDP: 1.5-2%(2030)
 Energy: 0.7-1.7%direct,
 Water: 0.1% (2030)
 Agriculture 0.6-1% (2030)
 Health: 0.1% (2030)
Under current climate scenarios for the Rufiji river basin both drought and flooding are expected to
intensify xxiThese conditions, coupled with the increase in demand for water (population, productivity,
energy) create both a necessity and an opportunity to develop a “no-regrets model for agricultureled development”xxii, which builds preparedness and resilience to climate change. Given the
dependence of agriculture on water, the highest impact intervention is to build climate preparedness
into water resources management. Doing so is a no-regrets, win-win option that has the potential to
help secure private sector investment in SAGCOT, deliver economic, social and environmental
outcomes, and reduce the likelihood of conflict over water resources.
The Water Sector Development Plan
The Water Sector Development Plan (WSDP) has been developed to operationalise Tanzania’s
Water Sector Development Strategy (2006-2015). The WSDP is the main donor coordination
mechanism on water for Tanzania, and represents a $210 million investment in Tanzania. The WSDP
is a five year programme, consisting of four subsectors; 1) water resources management, and 2)
institutional support and capacity building, 3) rural water supply and sanitation, 4) and urban water
supply and sanitation. The programme recognises the criticality of climate change for water security,
but a lack of technical capacity and resources is currently inhibiting action to take account of the
climate change.
The 2012 Interim Report of the WSDP identified a number of critical “building blocks” that need to be
put in place before water security in the Rufiji river basin and related water sources can be achieved.
This business case aims to address these gaps. Specific context and recommendations from the
WDSP Interim Report are highlighted below:
Gaps in Data and Analysis:
Climate monitoring: The Rufiji Basin climate exhibits marked variations at seasonal, annual, interannual, and decadal time scales. The historical records are shown to contain strong evidence of
climate warming for all Rufiji sub-basins, as well as seasonally changing precipitation patterns.
Climate warming presents challenging hydrologic consequences, as it is expected to increase
evapotranspirationxxiii, reduce watershed runoff, reduce groundwater recharge, and increase irrigation
(and other) water demands. Especially vulnerable is the Great Ruaha, which experiences the highest
warming rate, receives the lowest average precipitation, and supports the most intensive water uses
of all Rufiji catchments. There is thus an urgent need to (i) assess the risks associated with climate
variability and change and (ii) develop strategies and plans to reduce the present and future
vulnerability of the basin water users. Towards this goal, it is important that the climate monitoring
network be upgraded to enable the acquisition of high quality data and information upon which to
base dependable assessments and basin development plans.
5
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
Surface Water Hydrology: The hydrologic assessments demonstrate that water use in Great Ruaha
has reached unsustainably high levels impacting the flow regime and all downstream water uses. The
need to implement interventions to restore the river flows and to avoid the escalation of upstreamdownstream conflicts is compelling. However, a key prerequisite for developing such plans and
interventions is good and quantitative knowledge of the basin surface water hydrology. This
knowledge can only be built upon thorough data and information on the underlying (i) hydrologic
processes and (ii) actual water use throughout the Rufiji Basin, both of these areas require significant
investments.
Groundwater Resources: Groundwater is an important component of the hydrological system in the
Rufiji Basin. However, important functions related to assessing and managing groundwater resources
(e.g. groundwater monitoring, assessment, licensing, and information management) need to be
scaled up. The Rufiji groundwater resources are variable with well yields varying depending on the
nature of weathering and fracturing of the hard rocks, and the grain size of the various sediments.
Well yields in the basin vary from as low as 0.18 m3/h to as high as 42.4 m3/h. For groundwater
development purposes, especially for domestic water supply, these yields are reasonably high, and
this indicates that the basin groundwater potential is medium to high. Further investigations are
needed to ascertain whether groundwater yields are sufficient for supporting irrigation especially in
areas such as Kilembero and Usangu plains, and for other water uses, and to assess the potential for
both groundwater and surface water use.
Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) for the Rufiji River Basin: The draft
Strategic Regional Environmental and Social Assessment (SRESA) of SAGCOT (GoT,2012)
highlights the need to undertake an environmental and social assessment for the river basins in the
SAGCOT region, and prioritising Rufiji as the one that needs to be urgently carried out. The draft
SRESA has also highlighted the need to build capability in the river basins, in particular Rufiji, to carry
out environmental flow assessment to underpin decision-making on water allocations.xxiv
Institutional Gaps and Issues:
Institutional Issues: The existing water sector management framework is robust and provides a
solid foundation for sustainable water resources management and development in the Rufiji Basin.
Although the river basin authority has made good progress in terms of establishing the appropriate
water resources management institutions at different levels, several of the institutions (catchment,
sub-catchment, committees/councils, water user associations) called for in the law are yet to be
established in most parts of the basin. The few that have been established are already facing a
number of challenges ranging from inadequate technical and financial capacity to conflicting roles and
responsibilities. Establishing catchment and sub-catchment institutions is still a challenge due to
inadequate legal provisions in the current Act. For example, the establishment, mandates, roles and
responsibilities of catchment and sub-catchment councils are not specified in the Water Resource
Management Act (WRMA) (2009). These two institutions are delineated in the Water Resources
Management Regulations (2010) but with no clear mandates.
Coordination Issues: Although the National Water Policy (2002) promotes integrated water
resources management, and advocates a multi-sectoral implementation approach, the existing crosssectoral coordination mechanisms are weak and inadequate. The current basin water resources
management and local government institutional frameworks are considered separate and parallel to
each other, with inadequate provisions for integration or synergy. Coordination between the two
frameworks is usually limited to cross representation on specific administrative and management
committees at different levels. This is negatively impacting on the implementation of water resources
management activities.
Technical Capacity Gaps: Water resources management subsector lacks staff with appropriate
expertise, experience and quantity across the country, both at a national and subnational level. The
Rufiji river basin is no exception. Staff shortages for water resources management is a result of many
factors, including limited funding allocation to the subsector over many years. This has impacted on
6
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
the ability of river basin to adequately manage and develop the subsector. The Rufiji river basin office
has a number of staff with reasonable experience and capacity, however the office lacks experts in
some specialist areas such as hydro-geology, water resources engineering and economics. While
some of the field posts have been filled, the majority of staff have limited post graduate education and
practical experience. Training courses are required to up-skill government hydrologists in
groundwater resource assessment, test pumping analysis, and groundwater monitoring. The
government has approved recruitment of staff to fill some of the critical posts starting from FY
2013/14. It is envisaged that this programme will address the critical issues of technical capacity
through hiring of short-term technical experts, who will mentor and coach the staff throughout the
programme period.
Alignment with the DFID Tanzania Operational Plan
The DFID Tanzania operational plan for the next four years (2011-2015) outlines DFID’s engagement
on climate change, building on the evidence developed under the Strategic Climate Programme
review (SPR) and a proposed division of labour with other development partners. The climate
screening of the DFID portfolio that was undertaken as part of the review, highlighted the need to
address water resources both to underpin investments in SAGCOT but also the delivery of rural water
supply. The goal of the proposed programme will build climate resilience in water resource
management in the SAGCOT region, which will ensure “people are better able to cope with the
effects of climate change”, the main climate change result under the DFID operational plan. The
programme will also contribute to ensuring the sustainability of DFID operational plan results on rural
water and sanitation by increasing water availability and also wealth creation, by ensuring
sustainability and climate resilience of the investments made under SAGCOT.
7
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
B. Impact and Outcome that we expect to achieve
Overall Impact:
 Water security improved in the SAGCOT region, through data collection and
evidence based decision making on water resource management.
Outcome:
 Effective water resources management, planning and development in the Rufiji River
Basin, resulting in a significant scale up of commitments to invest in climate resilient
water security infrastructure in the SAGCOT area by 2015 / 2016.
Key reviews of SAGCOT including regional environmental and social assessment, and the
water sector reviewxxv identify the need to build water security and preparedness for climate
change through:
 Improved hydrological systems and institutional capacity (Phase 1)
 Effective water use planning and management (Phase 2)
 Significant scale up of water infrastructure and storage (Phase 3)
To meet these gaps, the proposed programme consists of three phases with deliverables
over two time scales (2013- to July 2015 for phase1&2, and then phase 3 will begin in
2014/15, this last phase is not covered by this business case.)
This business case focuses on Phase 1 and 2 as outlined below:
Phase 1: Building Blocks – Data generation and institutional strengthening: Data and
information generation, analysis, knowledge management and technical assistance and
capacity building of the Rufiji River Basin Office (RBO) and District Authorities
Impact Statement: Improved information/data generation and increased institutional
capacity
Phase 1 will deliver impacts in 5 components:
 Climate monitoring and assessment of risks
 Surface water monitoring (data collection and analysis)
 Ground water data monitoring (data collection and analysis)
 Strategic environmental and social assessment of Rufiji basin
 Institutional strengthening of Rufiji basin management
Climate monitoring and risk assessment:
 Upgrade the climate monitoring network in the Rufiji and associated water sources
 Develop high quality data and information to inform dependable assessments and
basin development plans. Specific data monitoring and management outcomes
include:
- Existing rainfall and climate monitoring stations rehabilitated.
- Climate monitoring network expanded to cover un-gauged portions of the basin.
- Down-scaled climate modeling undertaken for the Rufiji basin and related water
sources.
- Climate monitoring systems installed to capture, analyse and use information.
Surface water monitoring:
 Existing stream-flow gauging network rehabilitated and expanded to deliver
information necessary to support dependable water balance investigations for all
major headwater watersheds, and downstream river reaches, lakes, wetlands, and
reservoirs.
 Significant water withdrawals and returns monitored to assess the level of
consumptive water use, the utilization efficiency, and the impacts on the basin
8
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
hydrology.
 Best practice hydrological mapping and data management systems in place such as
the “Mike” basin data system.
Ground water exploration and monitoring:
 Data and information is compiled, quality assured and stored in a groundwater
database so that it can be easily accessed to generate thematic maps as well as
groundwater assessment reports.
 High yielding boreholes are test-pumped properly, with the specific aim of gaining
more hydrogeological information.

reasonable coverage of monitoring wells.
 Deeper boreholes are drilled to monitor response of the deeper and probably more
productive aquifers for heavy abstraction.
Institutional strengthening:
 River basin office (RBO) and district authorities institutions strengthened.
 Sub-catchment committees and water user associations (WUA) established and
strengthened.
 Technical capacity of RBO, Tanzanian Metrological Authority (TMA,) district and
other agency staff built to compile, quality control, archive, analyze, and share
climate, hydrological and water data through computerized means and tools (such as
the Rufiji DSS).
 Coordination between relevant authorities significantly strengthened.
Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) for Rufiji river basin,
downscaling the work under the SRESA for SAGCOT, specifically building on the data
analysis and monitoring highlighted above and environmental flow assessment to inform
and underpin decision-making on water allocations in the basin.
Phase 2: Climate proofing development: integrating climate preparedness into water
resource management plans, SAGCOT Investment Framework, sectoral and national
development strategies. Allocation of water permits according to new data and information.
Mapping out priority infrastructure investment needs to feed into £70 million ICF project
preparation by 2014.
Impact Statement: Water security improved, through robust evidence based decision
making and planning.
 Climate preparedness integrated into Integrated Water Resource Management
(IWRM) Plan for Rufiji.
 Water security built into national and sectoral development plans.
 Investment Frameworks for the SAGCOT region take account of water security.
 SAGCOT investment decisions being taken on the basis of information and data
provided in Phase 1.
 Robust evidence and mapping of type, scale and location of water security
infrastructure development to inform Phase 3 of this programme.
Phase 3 (not included in this Business Case): £70 million ICF investment in infrastructure
development and upgrading of water resources. Phase 1&2 of this business case will
provide the analytical basis and evidence for a £70 million ICF investment in the upgrading
and development of water security infrastructure in SAGCOT. Phase 3 is not the subject of
this business case as the information on which to build a robust ICF concept note / business
case does not yet exist. A logical and phased approach is therefore recommended; with
Phase 1 & 2 providing the foundation to ensure a future bid is fully evidenced based and will
offer
maximum
value
for
money.
9
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor,
Tanzania
Theory of Change
The theory of change below summarises the link between inputs, outputs, outcome and impact.
Investment in Rufiji Hydro
Climatic Monitoring System
Outputs
Functional Rufiji HydroClimatic Information and
Decision Support System
Outcome
s
Impacts
Improved Water Resources
Monitoring and Assessment
SAGCOT Investments
Informed by Reliable HydroClimatic Data
Technical Assistance and
Institutional Capacity
Building
Increased Institutional
Capacity and Technical
Skills
Improved Regulation of Water
Use and Water Allocation
Stakeholder consultations
and establishment of water
governance institutions
Effective Stakeholder
Forums and Water
Governance Institutions
Phase 3:
Development and
Upgrading of Climate
Resilience Water Resource
Security Infrastructures
Improved Public Awareness
and Information
Dissemination
Improved
Water Security
Economic growth and poverty eradication is sustainable
under climate vulnerability in Rufiji River Basin
Inputs
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor,
Tanzania
Key Assumptions
Investment level assumptions
 SAGCOT programme will be informed and enriched by improved data, evidence and
planning around climate resilience in the water sector.
 Increased evidence and planning on climate resilient water security will increase
investor confidence and improve the likelihood of SAGCOT achieving investment its
targets.
 Increased evidence, data and planning leverages commitments to climate resilient
water security infrastructure.
Impact level assumptions:
 Increase in investment results in increased demand for water in the SAGCOT.
 Population growth rates increase at 1.5-3.6% per annum
 New hydro potential is realised in the Rufiji basin.
 Climate change will impact water security in the region.
Capacity level assumptions:
 Water basin office and district level authorities use climate and hydrological data
effectively to improve the management of water resources.
 Water permits are allocated on the basis of sound scientific data and analysis. That
the Government of Tanzania maintains political drive on water resources
management and climate change.
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth Corridor,
Tanzania
Appraisal Case
A. What are the feasible options that address the need set out in the Strategic case?
The options will be set out in two stages, firstly whether or not DFID should provide support to water
resources management in Tanzania and the Rufiji Basin in particular considered against the
counterfactual of providing no support in this area. Then in a second stage there will be an
assessment of the most appropriate options for delivery of support.
At a strategic level there are two options for investment:
Option A: Do nothing further to support water resources management in Tanzania – the counter
factual
Option B: Support the Rufiji River Basin Organisation, through technical and institutional support to
ensure water security and sustainability of investments under SAGCOT.
The context section of the business case sets out quite clearly the significant need and rationale for
support to water resources under SAGCOT to ensure climate resilience, and also to the Rufiji River
Basin in particular due to its significance for both the region and Tanzania’s Economy as a whole.
The evidence for this support (Option B) is strong and comes from a number of sources both under
SAGCOTxxvi, Water Sectorxxvii and on Climate Changexxviii. If support was not provided (Option 1) by
DFID, the Water Sector Development Plan would continue to deliver Integrated Water Resource
Management, but would be limited in building climate preparedness into these plans, and also it is
unlikely to be funded in the short term. Water resources component under WSDP is currently
underfunded, it receives only 7.5% of the overall funding to the water sector, which is not a true
reflection of the scale of need and is relatively by comparison to other countries. This under
investment could risk the long-term impact of DFID’s current investment in rural water supply and
also agriculture, in particular SAGCOT.
The Integrated Water Resource Management Plan for the Rufiji Basin is the first in Tanzania. If we
fail to build climate change responsiveness at this stage, we will a) limit the opportunities to learn
lessons for other 8 river basin plans and b) reduce the replicability and scale of impact. It is also
unlikely that other development partners working on SAGCOT will step in and address this gap in
support to water resources management.
.
The counter factual (Option A) would also reduce the UK’s leverage and political reputation as one of
the lead development partners on climate change in Tanzania.
Appraisal of Delivery Options:
On an operational level there are a number of options for support to the Rufiji River Basin and to
water resources. Three operational options are set-out for comparison, they differ in terms of the
mechanism for channelling funds, the implementing agency, management and monitoring, but the
same level of funding is envisaged over the same time period. £5 million is considered the minimum
necessary to deliver Phases 1 and 2 of the programme, and to unlock the potential for £70 million
ICF investment in the outer years.
Option 1: Support to Rufiji river basin and other basins for climate change integration through
component one of the Water Sector Development Programme (WSDP)
Evidence Rating: Strong
The Government of Tanzania with support from World Bank and other development partners is
strengthening water resources management through the nine basin offices in the country. Integrated
Water Resources Management (IWRM) plans for all basins are being developed. An interim IWRM
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
plan for Rufiji basin has been produced and is awaiting finalisation (as of October 2012). The current
draft plan and the terms of reference for other basins’ IWRM plans do not sufficiently reflect the
effects of climate variability on future investment or include the necessary analytical and capacity
building, to enable basin offices to undertake this. Under this option funds and technical assistance
would be channelled through the Water Sector Development Programme component one (Water
Resources Management subsector), initially for activities related to Rufiji basin office and later
covering other basin offices.
Delivering through the WSDP will entail working with World Bank, GIZ and Government of Tanzania
(Ministry of Water: Directorate of Water Resources). The World Bank is currently the lead donor for
the water sector development programme, including support to water resources management. GIZ is
in the design phase of a capacity building programme on climate change for the Water Resources
Management (WRM) directorate. Support under Option 1 should complement these initiatives.
The advantage of this approach is that DFID would have an opportunity to influence the integration of
climate change adaptation across all river basins. Although the intervention would start initially with
one river basin the objective is to scale up to other basins and also feed into the water sector climate
change action plan. This approach is in line with government and other development thinking as it
aims to incrementally improve the capacity of government on climate change adaptation without
compromising implementation capacity. It would enable DFID to coordinate interventions with other
donors and enable cross learning with other sectors notably agriculture, the environment and energy.
It would have the potential to leverage additional investment for water security infrastructure
development in SAGCOT and other river basins.
The water sector basket is an established and credible financing mechanism for implementing the
WSDP. DFID is already providing support to rural water supply through the basket and due diligence
has been carried out at a national and local level, including a forensic audit of the water sector.
Monitoring systems are already in place, though there might be potential to strengthen these with
respect to delivery by the river basin offices.
Option 2: Support directly to the Rufiji Basin Office to support climate change integration and
build their technical and institutional capabilities.
Evidence Rating: Medium
DFID would channel funds directly to the Rufiji Basin Office (RBO) for implementation of project
activities. DFID would establish a separate arrangement outside of the existing WSDP management
arrangement for the transfer and management of funds. This could entail either the transfer of funds
to the basin office directly, or through the Ministry of Water. A bilateral Memorandum of
Understanding (MoU) would be signed between DFID and the Government of Tanzania for the
implementation of the project activities. Under this option the Ministry of Water would provide overall
guidance and oversight, but DFID would establish separate monitoring and reporting arrangements
with the RBO.
This option would build capacity of the Rufiji Basin and help deliver results in a priority growth
corridor. While this approach would ensure DFID Tanzania has greater control over programme
implementation, it would be difficult to influence change in policy and practice across the sub-sector
without ownership and support from the national level government. This would potentially limit the
replicability and scale up of the DFID support. In addition, there will be limited alignment with other
development partners and with current DFID support to the rural water supply programme, which is
implemented through WSDP basket fund.
Option 3: Provide earmarked funding to the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) Freshwater
programme to extend support to Rufiji River Basin building on lessons from Ruaha River
Basin.
Evidence Rating: Medium
DFID could provide direct support to World Wildlife Fund (WWF) Tanzania through an accountable
13
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
grant, complementing the support provided centrally through the DFID Partnership Programme
Arrangement (PPA) for Tanzania, as part of the WWF Freshwater programme. The current
programme focuses on institutional strengthening with some technical support on monitoring
sustainable flows and ensuring equitable payments for watershed services. The current programme
focuses on Ruaha in the SAGCOT region and potentially will have valuable lessons on the payment
for eco-systems services and advocating for good water/river basin governance.
On the technical side, there would be some concern about the ability of WWF to build the capacity of
the RBO, for example on data and analysis, and to what extent this would have buy in from
government and be used and integrated in the IWRM plans for Rufiji and other basins. From a due
diligence perspective there would be some concerns about the ability of the WWF Tanzania
programme to manage substantial programme funds under Phase 1-3 of this initiative, and to scale
up their support significantly in a new geographic area/river basin. WWF plays an active role in the
water sector working group, and they are in a good position to share lessons and their experience in
supporting water governance. The work that WWF is doing in Ruaha will definitely complement and
provide important lessons for support to WRM going forward. Equally it would be good to build on the
lessons from the work that has been supported by other NGOs in building climate resilience in other
river basins, such as Pangani by IUCN/CARE consortium. However in comparison to 1 and 2, it is not
felt that this is a viable option for delivery at this stage.
Comparison of Delivery Options
Some of the risk and opportunities in relation to the different delivery options have been outlined
above. Option 1 is the preferred option. The WSDP is the main mechanism for coordinating
development partner activity on water resources management, and is relatively advanced in the
development of integrated water resources management in the Rufiji Basin. It provides a financial
mechanism, which offers value for money, quick disbursement of funds and early delivery of results.
It already has an established monitoring mechanism, which, as compared to Option 2, will not set up
parallel reporting and financial management structures. It also has greater government leadership
and buy-in, as compared to Option 3, where that would need to be established. Government
leadership and buy-in both at a national and basin level will be critical for delivery of the technical and
institutional components of the programme.
Therefore the detailed economic appraisal is based on option B at the strategic level, and option1
which is the preferred option for delivery. Support to the Rufiji River Basin Organisation, through
technical and institutional support to ensure water security and sustainability of investments under
SAGCOT. This will be delivered through the water sector basket financing mechanism, under
component one of the Water Sector Development Programme (WSDP).
B. Assessing the strength of the evidence base for each feasible option
In the table below:
 the quality of evidence for each option is rated as either Strong, Medium or Limited
 the likely impact (positive and negative) on climate change and environment for each
feasible option is categorised as A, high potential risk / opportunity; B, medium / manageable
potential risk / opportunity; C, low / no risk / opportunity; or D, core contribution to a
multilateral organisation.
Option
1
Evidence Rating
Strong
Climate change and
environment risks and
impacts, Category (A, B, C,
D)
C – low risk as climate and
environment intervention
Climate change and
environment opportunities,
Category (A, B, C, D)
A- high potential for delivery,
scale up and replication of
approach to building climate
resilience in RBO and IWRM
14
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
2
Medium
C - low risk as climate and
environment intervention
3
Medium
C - low risk as climate and
environment intervention
B – some opportunity for
scaling up and replicability
Limited as working with only
one RBO
B – some opportunity but
government buy in maybe be
limited and therefore will limit
opportunity for scale up
Evidence Rating: At a strategic level, the evidence base is medium. The evidence base to support
interventions on water resource management is medium/strong, however on climate change it is
more limited. This is due to the uncertainty and lack of baseline data and information on climate
change. Also this is a new area of work for DFID, development partners and government. However
the identified intervention (option B) both from a technical and institutional perspective is considered
a “no regretsxxix” option. It will also improve the evidence base, through improved data and analysis at
the basin level, and improved systems for managing the risks associated with climate change and
their impact on water resources.
The evidence base for the programme delivery options set out above is strong- medium, we already
have experience, both DFID and other development partners, of successful delivery through the
basket for both water supply and water resources management. There is more limited experience of
providing support directly to the river basin organisation (option 2). Finally WWF have an established
Freshwater programme, which provides some limited evidence on this as a potential delivery option.
Climate and Environment: At a strategic level Option A, “do nothing” is rated as high risk, as there
are considerable climate impacts that need to be addressed, and this will fail to take any of these into
account, through current engagement in the water basket on rural water supply and work outside the
sector on climate change. All options for delivery (1-3) of strategic option B are climate change
interventions building improved resilience of water resources management and therefore are
expected to have a high to medium impact on climate change and environment in Tanzania. It is
expected that Option 1 will present the most significant impact in terms of scale up and replicability
and therefore is rated low risk (C) and high opportunity (A) to address climate and environment.
C. Economic Cost Benefit Analysis
This section evaluates the costs and benefits at a strategic level, i.e. the proposed DFID
intervention in water resources in the Rufji River Basin against the “do nothing” counterfactual (option
A versus B).
The intervention is building on the work being done in phase one of WSDP implementation for Rufiji
basin and will implement the initial findings from the IWRM plan and will undertake and implement
the Strategic Environment and Social Assesmsent for Rufiji basin. Experience generated from work
in Rufiji basin will feed into the on-going work on other remaining 8 river basin plans, as part of phase
two support of WSDP, which is due to start in July 2014.
The Tanzanian Water Resource Strategy highlights the central role water plays in the performance of
key sectors of the economy, and the impact of under investment or inappropriate forms of investment
in irrigation on food and energy security. The DFID funded Economics of Climate Change (2011)
supports this analysis, that climate change could result in a significant loss in GDP from reduced crop
yields, reduced domestic access to water and sanitation, interruptions to hydroelectric power and
disincentives to investment. Resulting in Tanzania not acheiving its aspiration to reach middle income
status in the medium term. The study also highlights the critical role that water plays in underpinning
the economy, agriculture, industrial production, and energy. The future impacts of climate change on
water depend on the nature of managed supply and demand, related to a wide range of factors
15
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
including socio-economic development and operational management as well as cliamte outcomes.
There are opportunities to reverse or limit this decline with appropriately designed investments
especially in water storage and irrigation which remain largely untapped (currently 2% of the region`s
irrigation potential has been developed).
Launched in 2010, SAGCOT is a public-private partnership aimed at mobilising $2.1 billion of long
term investment (over 20 years) creating 420,000 jobs. The bulk of this will be provided by the private
sector. About £800 million will come from government, donors and the International Financial
Institutions. Success critically depends on the sustainability of water resources in the Rufiji river
basin, which will be addressed through WSDP with support under the present project. The central
role Rufiji will play in supporting both hydro-electric power generation, eco-systems and agriculture is
further empahsized in the SAGCOT Strategic Regional Environmental and Social Assessment
(SRESA).
The full economic benefits of the project are difficult to quanitify, since it will impact on a range of long
term investments pervading the regional and national economy. We have taken a partial approach to
quantification based on two key parameters. The first relates to the value of new jobs created. The
second relates to potential time delays on new investment if the project were not go ahead. In the
counterfactual (do-nothing) situation components of the project are potentially attractive to the private
sector in view of modest costs involved and high potential returns. Private sector activity in the
region is currently limited and even more so in the area of water reosurces maangement, however
take up over a timeframe of a minimum of 2-5 years is possible, but unlikely, if the present project did
not go ahead.
The table below shows the Net Present Value (NPV) of expected public -private investments in
SAGCOT based on expected job creation valued at Tanzania`s current per capita income ($558 pa) £82.5 million in the base case situation. A gradual build up of investment and jobs over 20 years is
assumed (NPV estimated over 35 yrs at discount rate of 11%). This assessment is conservative
since in valuing jobs no allowance is taken of any long term rise in Tanzanian real incomes;
employment is assumed to be only partially sustained (maximum 15 years, and wider benefits to the
Tanzanian economy such as reduced power outages are neglected. Incremental costs arising from
delays to start up of the investment programme (ie in the counterfactual situation and attributable to
the project) are shown in the shaded areas.
The analysis shows that the benefits of the project (£9-50 million) exceed costs (£5 million) if time
delays of 2-5 years are averted. Longer time delays increase benefits proportionally. If increased
employment from new investments is sustained, the benefits of the project exceed costs even if a
short time delay of under one year is averted. The conclusion that project benefits exceed costs is
therefore robust under a range of different circumstances.
NPV of SAGCOT
public–private Project benefits = impact on
invesment programme (£m) *
NPV of time delay averted
(£m)
1 year
2 yrs
5yrs
Employment
82.5
9.1
19.0
50.4
sustained **
Employment
29.5
3.2
6.8
11.2
partially
sustained***
Notes:
*NPV over 35 yrs at discoount rate of 11%.
**Increcrease in employment sustained for 35 years.
***Incarse in emplyed suated for 15 years
16
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
Qualitative benefits and costs
There are likely to be many benefits resulting from improved water security though not all can be
quantified. Some of the benefits includes:
 Improved water security in the Rufiji river basin as a result of enhanced climate resilience
would have great benefits to the poor farmers. 80% of the 4.5 million people in the Rufiji basin
depend on agriculture for their livelihood and income, and contribute a significant portion of
the country’s food. The average farm size for majority of the small holder famers is 2
hectares, and this depends on rainfall and traditional irrigation for their farming (Rufiji IWRM
2012). Changing weather patterns has reduced water availability and farmers’ productivity.
Improved water security resulting from improved water resource use and management will
contribute to increased productivity of small holder farmers, and motivate production of varied
crops such as maize, rice and beans and vegetables which will improve income as well as
nutrition status of the people through dietary diversity. Iringa Region for example is one of the
food basket regions of the country, yet it has high stunting levels nationally for the under-fives
estimated at 50% (DHS 2010).

Other direct and indirect benefits to the poor people in the area and nationally would be
derived through increased tourism business. The Rufiji basin serves one of the large national
parks in Tanzania – the Ruaha national park. In recent years, long periods of drought in the
great Ruaha river have significantly disrupted animal lives in the Ruaha National Park, and is
likely to further threaten the ecological system of the national park, if measures are not
undertaken. Improvement of the water security would help to restore the ecological system of
the Great Ruaha which will sustain animal lives and attract increased tourism business in the
Ruaha national parks.

The government plans, through SAGCOT, to improve agricultural potential by attracting
commercial farming investors in the region. Commercial farming is likely to benefit small scale
farm holders, through out-grower schemes, as is the case with existing commercial farms in
sugar farming in the Kilombero valley. However, even without changes in agricultural
productivity, improved water security would improve livelihoods of poor people, as a result of
reduced conflict and competition over water use. Violent conflicts between farmers and
pastoralists and between upstream irrigators and downstream water users are on the
increase as the dry period intensifies effects on their lives and livelihoods.

Agriculture remains a key sector for Tanzania growth and a main source of employment for
women. 65% of women work on the agriculture sector but have limited access to land, credit
and inputs. Estimates indicate that women own about 19% of registered land in Tanzania and
their plots are on average half the size of their male counterparts (0.3ha as compared to
0.6ha)xxx . Immediate increase on their land size is limited and cannot be addressed through
this programme although other programmes are addressing women’s access to land.
However, sufficient water availability and introduction of modern farming techniques, through
SAGCOT, will benefit women farmers as a result of improved productivity of the existing land
Costs
It is anticipated that improved water security in the Rufiji region increases confidence of
potential investors and improves agriculture productivity as a result of increased commercial
farming in the region. However, increased commercial farming in the region is likely to crowd
out the small scale farmers with negative impact on poor people livelihoods and income
sources. Also commercial farmers are likely to produce crops for export and not targeting food
crops hence reduce food supply in the region and nationally with negative effect to the poor
people.
D. What measures can be used to assess Value for Money for the intervention?
The DFID advisers (water and climate change) and the growth team programme manager will
provide oversight on the use of the funds for water resources management through the WSDP,
17
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
working closely with government and other development partners. Thereby improving the value for
money (vfm) on all aspects of the programme.
The following metrics will be applied as part of the oversight of the programme:
Economy and Effectiveness
 Key cost drivers will be monitored, equipment and installation; cost per person receiving
training.
 The degree to which investment incorporates recommendations and avoids high cost
retrofitting.
 Cost per bankable investment project reflecting recommendations linked to project outputs.
Effectiveness
 Quantification of net benefits as outlined in the appraisal and iterative calculations of NPV at
key points during the project.
The main cost drivers will be:
 Costs of hardware, minimised by ensuring competitive, procurement and benchmarking costs.
 Staffing and consultancy costs, minimised by good management, good procurement of
consultancy services and benchmarking of costs. In some cases the use of direct
procurement by DFID, where a time and vfm argument can be made.
E. Summary Value for Money Statement for the preferred option
Based on the evidence presented in the appraisal, the second strategic option (Option B) will provide
great benefit to the development of SAGCOT region, contribute to creation of employment, beneficial
to the country economy as a result of reduced power outage, fill a critical gap in the Rufuji IWRM and
contribute to reaching Tanzania MDGs for water supply. It has a Net Present Value of £9-50million
indicating there is a strong economic argument for proceeding with the programme.
Delivery of this investment through the WSDP water basket will provide the best value for money as
compared to the other options ( 2 and 3) both directly as it will build and use existing financial
management and monitoring systems and indirectly as it provides the greatest opportunity for scale
up and replication. The commercial and financial case will discuss in more detail the direct vfm and
due diligence aspects of using WSDP as the delivery mechanism.
18
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
Commercial Case
Direct procurement
A. Clearly state the procurement/commercial requirements for intervention
DFID is taking a results based approach to supporting the Government of Tanzania’s Water Sector
Development Programme, in order to improve delivery of water security in the SAGCOT region. The
first two phases of this programme (as set out in the Strategic Case) will be delivered through
earmarked support to Element 1 (Water Resources Management) of the Water Sector Development
Programme. The water sector programme is supported by multiple donors through a joint basket
managed by the Ministry of Water.
Interventions in the first two phases are composed of the following activities:

Investments in hydrological measurement, Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment
(SESA) and mapping climate change modelling: these will indirectly procured using GoT
regulations as GoT is managing the basket

Technical assistance and capacity building to relevant institutions: Direct procurement with
goods and services procured using DFID’s procurement system and mechanisms such as the
PEAKS resource centre

Institutional strengthening of Rufiji RBO, including stakeholder’s consultations and
establishment of Water User Committees: Indirect procurement using basket and applying
GoT regulations and procurement procedures
B. Use of Competition to drive commercial advantage for DFID
Technical assistance and capacity building to relevant institutions: Direct procurement
Funds will be used to procure TA to enhance capacity of Basin Water office and local Government
authorities in areas of water rights allocation, data analysis, downscaled climate change modelling, and
procurement of demand-driven services. Procurement of these services will be done through
competitive tendering process according to DFID procurement guidelines as outlined in section E
below. Where appropriate the use of DFID Resource Centres such as PEAKS will be used to provide
specialised services.
In order to get best value for money for these services, Terms of References (ToR) will be written to set
out clearly expectations of suppliers in regard to DFID standard terms and conditions of contract and
application of DFID policies and standards (e.g. travel and subsistence). All contracts issued under this
project will be paid upon successful completion of the objectives. Approvals from relevant project
managers will be sought before payment is made.
The following measures will be taken forward to ensure delivery of better value for money during
procurement:
 Consultancy work will be put to competitive tender to bring down costs;
 Where possible DFID Tanzania will exploit opportunities to collaborate with other development
partners, in order to reduce costs and attain better vfm. For sharing such services, either DFID’s
procurement system or the partner’s procurement system will be used after agreeing that the
partner’s system complies with DFID systems;
 Where using DFID staff, stretching Terms of Reference will be set and aligned with post holder
objectives to make sure that targets are reached.
C. Market place response to the opportunity
Technical Assistance and capacity building – Direct Procurement
Local experience indicates that there are reasonable firms in the region with relevant expertise and
experience to undertake some of the service required e.g. to carry out hydrological assessments and
19
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
provide capacity building in this area. However, this project will also require some specialised
expertise and experience which might not be available in the region. In such cases international tenders
will be conducted.
Overall, it is reasonable to expect that there will be adequate responses to invitations to submit
proposals. DFID is one of the leading Development Partners in Tanzania and a number of firms would
like to work with such an organisation.
D. What are the key cost elements that affect overall price? How is value added and how will we
measure and improve this?
Technical Assistance and capacity building – Direct Procurement
DFID will ensure that consultancy costs are reasonable and where possible will attempt to re-negotiate
fee rates with the winning bidder so as to bring down costs with a focus on maximising value-formoney.
Key cost drivers
Services (consultants)
How is value added
How to measure & improve
Clear Terms of Reference
Check that outputs meet the
agreed objectives
Using the appropriate number
of working days
Consultant to justify the number
of working days
Competitive bidding
Ensure DFID systems, which
drive competitive advantage,
are followed
Goods associated with
DFID T is driving down the cost of these items by getting
hydrological mapping and
competitive quotations and having clear specifications for items to
capacity building
be purchased.
E. Intended Procurement process to support contract award
We will follow DFID Blue Book Guidance to ensure that all contracts awarded by this project will be in
line with DFID procurement guidelines.
Contracts up to and including £25,000 may be issued without competition. However, contracts over
£25,000 but under the EU threshold £113,057 will be subjected to competition with suppliers invited to
submit proposals either directly for limited tendering or through advertisement for open competition. In
commissioning a contract within this range it is possible not to compete but this must have the approval
of the Head of Office and the reasons for such a direction must be clearly stated. Contracts above
£113,057 will be procured through Procurement Group (PrG) using EU procurement guidelines.
F. Management of contract and supplier performance through the life of the intervention
Technical assistance contracts will be managed by DFID Tanzania’s Growth Team. Satisfactory
performance (and eligibility for payment) will be assessed by lead adviser for this project and
programme manager in Growth Team. Contract and supplier performance management will be
undertaken using existing established mechanisms in DFID including support from DFID Tanzania’s
Local Procurement Officer for local direct contracts and support from HQ’s PrG where necessary
Indirect procurement
A. Why is the proposed funding mechanism/form of arrangement the right one for this
intervention, with this development partner?
The following activities of this project will be indirectly procured through GoT using GoT and WB
procurement regulations as agreed in the MOU governing WSDP implementation. Funds will be
channelled through the GoT system as detailed in the financial case.
20
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania


Investments in hydrological measurement, mapping climate change modelling and undertaking
the Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment (SESA) of Rufiji
Institutional strengthening of Rufiji RBO, including stakeholder’s consultations and
establishment of Water User Committees.
This funding mechanism is the right way to deliver DFID’s contribution for the following reasons:
1. It provides an opportunity to improve institutional arrangements and management
systems for the whole water sector.
Donor engagement through the Water Sector Development Programme (WSDP) has proved an
effective way of ensuing stronger management capacity, closer compliance with Government of
Tanzania budgeting and better implementation of public financial management rules and regulations.
Following a restructuring of the water sector programme in 2011, stronger emphasis has been paid to
improve financial management and procurement capacity of the Ministry of Water and implementing
agencies, including river basin offices.
Since April 2012, a Management Information System (MIS) has been completed and is loaded with
accurately verified financial and contractual data. CAG has re-audited the system and approved it as a
reliable and adequate system for financial management of the progamme. Completion of the MIS has
improved transparency and reliability of financial reporting. The October 2012 Joint Government Donor
Supervision Mission upgraded the programme financial management rating status from “Moderately
Satisfactory” to “Satisfactory”. The mission has also reviewed procurement system of the Ministry and
of the implementing agencies, including basin offices and found that progress has been made on
outstanding issues, related to procurement but there are still significant delays with procurement
process. The review mission maintained a moderately satisfactory rating assessment for procurement.
2. It reduces the burden of administration for DFID and the Government of Tanzania.
Supporting the Ministry of Water outside the WSDP and through the basket would mean having to
draw up a separate funding arrangement and processes for management, monitoring and evaluation,
which creates needless additional administration when other donors contributing to the basket share
DFID’s aims and objectives The MoU governing the basket is a thorough and detailed document that
has been recently revised to make sure that review and audit recommendations are implemented, as
detailed in point 1 above.
3. The bilateral Memorandum of Understanding governing DFID’s funding to the
Government of Tanzania is a robust document which makes sure mandatory
requirements for oversight of the funding are followed.
DFID specifies that all grant arrangements with Partner Governments must be governed by a Partner
Government MoU – in this case a Non Budget Support Financial Aid Partner Government MoU. This
makes sure that appropriate auditing, transparency and reporting requirements are followed, and
provides for an exit strategy if DFID considers that changes occur that impact the development value
of the programme. The MoU also makes sure that the Partner Government adheres to basic
Partnership commitments (see section 5C).
4. The current Memorandum of Understanding governing basket funding provides for both
flexibility and rigorous oversight of the water sector.
Under the WSDP MoU it is possible for donors to either fund the basket overall or to focus their
funding on particular results. This is a good arrangement for DFID as it allows us to specify which
results we want to prioritise for our funding but it also means DFID can engage with the sector at a
strategic level, beyond an individual agency agreement. Overall, providing this funding through the
basket provides good value for money for DFID. It means that DFID can achieve specific aims and
objectives on water and sanitation whilst ensuring close and improved oversight for the entire sector.
B. Value for money through procurement
GoT’s Procurement System
21
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
Legislation and Policies
Public procurement in Tanzania is governed by the new Public Procurement Act - PPA 2011. This has
the following improvements over its predecessor, the 2004 PPA:





Establishment of a Procurement Policy Division in the Ministry of Finance. This Division will,
amongst other activities i) develop a national procurement policy and monitor its
implementation ii) review procurement policies, regulations, circulars and other related
directives iii) advise the central government, local authorities and statutory body on issues
related to procurement policies iv) and develop and manage the procurement cadre.
The Public Procurement Regulatory Agency (PPRA) has been given more powers to execute
its regulatory functions. These powers include cancellation of procurement proceedings where
a serious breach of the law is established; powers to intervene where an accounting officer
decides to reject tenders and where any mis-procurement is reported to it.
The Act also provides sections which make the Public Procurement Appeals Authority (PPAA)
independent from the Ministry of Finance, hence enabling it to discharge its functions more
efficiently and effectively.
The functions of Procurement Management Units (PMU) have been enhanced in particular,
with regard to preparation and submission of Annual Procurement Plan (APP) and quarterly
reports on the implementation of APP.
It will also make it mandatory for entities to procure from the Government Procurement
Services Agency (GPSA) using procedures to be prescribed in the Regulations
To ensure vfm, the law also continues to provide for competitive tendering procedures as the preferred
method of procurement and defines clearly the circumstances under which single source procurement
or direct purchasing may be permitted.
Procurement Compliance
Whilst there continues to be on-going concerns about the integrity of the procurement process,
compliance to procurement legislation has improved significantly in recent years from 39% in 2006/7
to 75% in 2010/11. It will continue to be monitored through an indicator in the Budget Support
Performance Assessment Framework.
Under this project, the Ministry of Water is responsible for overseeing procurement planning and
implementation for this programme. For Water resources management subsector, Basins Water
offices are responsible for procurement of goods, works and services. In the case of this project, Rufiji
Basin office is responsible. Procurement will be guided by the annual procurement plan, prepared at
Basin level and consolidated by the Ministry of Water. The Water Sector Steering Committee which
meets twice a year and is composed of DPs representatives, Permanent Secretaries of the Ministry of
Water, Finance, Education and Health and Representative from Civil Society Organisations approves
the Procurement Plan. The supervision mission team in October 2012 reviewed the Water sector
Procurement plan for 2012/13 and found it be in line with budget and work plan.
All procurement will be conducted in accordance with the Government of Tanzania’s Public
Procurement Act and regulations, which promotes value for money through free and fair competition.
The only exception to this is International Competitive Bidding for goods, works and international or
high value consultancy contracts, which will use the World Bank’s procurement guidelines.
To ensure vfm, WSDP also includes the following measures:
 DPs will review Terms of References for consistency with the approved annual work plan
and budget and the annual procurement plan. They will also ensure that expenses funded
by DPs are eligible.
 Independent technical audits are undertaken annually which also includes value for money
audit of works, goods and services.
22
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
Financial Case
A. What are the costs, how are they profiled and how will you ensure accurate forecasting?
Costs and Profiling:
Total cost for this programme will be £5 million over a 2.5 year period from March 2013 to June 2015.
The programme extends into DFID FY 2015-16 to align with the government’s financial year, it is
expected that activities will still be underway until June 2015. We also expect phase 3 to be underway in
2015. The following table summarises how the costs of the programme will be profiled based on the
DFID financial years.
DFID Support to Tanzania Water Resources Programme – Rufiji
Summary Budget 2012-2015
FY 12-13
Technical
Assistance* - DFID
direct procurement
Data analysis and
Collection incl.
equipment
SESA for Rufiji RBO
Institutional
Strengthening –
technical support
and capacity
building
Programme Total
FY13-14
FY14-15
FY15-16
250,000
250,000
0
500,000
500,000
(Usangu
and
Kilembero)
160,000
340,000
1,900,000
800,000
0
3,200,000
0
550,000
0
250,000
0
0
160,000
1,140,000
1,000,000
Disbursed
in Feb
2013
2,700,000
1,300,000
0
5,000,000
* The technical assistance, will include support for M&E and workplan development to be undertaken in
the first 6 months of implementation. This will include review of the logframe, ensure it is realistic and has
an appropriate baseline against which outcomes and ouputs can be measured.

The budget and profile outlined above will be reviewed and adjusted, and a work plan
developed in the first 3-6months to feed into the GoT budget cycle for 2013/14.
Forecasting:
 Forecasting to 2% accuracy in line with DFID’s corporate commitments will be achieved by
agreeing a disbursement time-frame (set out above) with the GoT and the WSDP at the start of
this programme. The profile above will be revised following the June 2013 budget approval and
agreement on the work plan for the Rufiji Basin office.
 As described in detail in section E below, the Ministry of Water has made substantial reforms to
improve financial management of the programme including, forecasting. DFID’s Climate Change
and Water Advisers will work closely with the Government and other donors to ensure
achievements made are sustained and work plans and procurement plans are agreed and
followed.
B. How will it be funded: capital/programme/admin?
The concept note for this business case was approved by the July 2012 ICF Board. The full amount will
23
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
be drawn from the ICF and will be programme funding.
C. How will funds be paid out?

For activity 1: Technical assistance and capacity building, funds will be paid by DFID Tanzania
to the consultant (s) following satisfactory completion of assignment.

For activity 2/3 and 4 funds will be transferred into the WSDP Basket Fund Holding Account in
the Bank of Tanzania on a semi-annual basis in accordance with the 2001 Treasury Circular or
subsequent amendment that sets out procedures for Channelling Project Funds. From the
treasury, funds will be transferred to basin office based on approved annual budget, work plan
and procurement plan.
D. What is the assessment of financial risk and fraud?
DFID Tanzania undertook a Fiduciary Risk Assessment (FRA) of the Government of Tanzania in 2011
and found substantial fiduciary risk, and substantial risk of corruption. Particular weaknesses with
relevance to the social service sectors were the lack of policy based budgeting, the lack of budget
credibility and the failure to execute the budget predictably. The detailed measures DFID is taking to
deal with these issues at the centre of government, including its support to the Public Financial
Management reform programme, are explained in the business case for budget support in Tanzania.
This section focuses on specific measures for the water sector.
Sector support to the Ministry of Water

The 2011 joint supervision mission found no issues of fraud and corruption during the mission or
during the external audit review. However, they did find issues with the quality of the financial
management of the programme. Overall they assessed the quality of financial management as
moderately unsatisfactory and the financial management risk as substantial, due to the
complexity of the project, which involves a large number of different implementing agencies
including 132 Local Government Authorities (LGAs), 9 basin water offices, 25 regional urban
utilities and about 109 small towns. A further in depth Independent Financial Management
Review was conducted by the WB between August and October 2011 and the results were
shared with all the donors in the water sector. No additional issues were found beyond those
already identified.

Since September 2011, MoW has made significant efforts to improve financial management
system of the sector in line with recommendations made from the various reviews. A financial
management specialist was hired to assist the sector, a new Management Information System
has been established and loaded with verified data from all implementing agencies and training
of all accountants and internal auditors on the use of system. These measures have contributed
to improved quality and accuracy of financial reports. All interim financial reports are now
generated through the system. The supervision mission team in October, found that financial
management arrangement for the programme as acceptable and all external audit queries have
been closed. The mission has upgraded financial management rating to Satisfactory and
expects the programme to maintain satisfactory financial management arrangements both at the
ministry and implementing agencies.
E. How will expenditure be monitored, reported, and accounted for?
Funding to the Ministry of Water

The Memorandum of Understanding between donors and the Government of Tanzania in
relation to the water sector details how expenditure will be accounted for.

Semi-annual deposits will be made into the WSDP Basket Fund Holding Account in the Bank of
Tanzania. The initial deposit will be based on a forecast of projected expenditures for the first
24
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
two quarters of Project implementation as set forth in the approved Annual Work Plan, Budget
and Procurement Plan.

The second and each subsequent deposit will be based on a forecast of projected expenditures
for the two ensuing quarters of each subsequent year of Programme implementation as set in
the approved Annual work Plan, Budget, Procurement Plan and an Interim Unaudited Financial
Report (IFR) covering the preceding reporting period.

Funds to Basin offices which are responsible for the implementation of water resources
management component will be transferred to basin office on quarterly basis based on approved
annual budget, workplan and procurement plan.

MoW will produce a consolidated quarterly IFR of all implementing agencies including of Basin
offices through the MIS. These will be submitted to the Thematic Working Group four and
Development partners who review the overall status of uses funds and accountability. No
implementing agency will receive subsequent funding without submitting financial as well as
progress report of the previous quarter.

DFID will work closely with other development partners and follow the procedures set in the
current WSDP MOU for monitoring expenditure. As a member of the Technical Working Group 4
(TWG 4) on Capacity development, fiduciary and monitoring, DFID will receive reports of the
financial expenditures and audited accounts as required under WSDP.

Internal audits: Each implementing agency is required to conduct an internal audit of the WSDP
and a consolidated internal audit report will be submitted to the TWG 4, Steering Committee and
Development Partners semi-annually. The TWG 4 and SC will review the internal auditor’s
consolidated semi-annual reports during their meetings and advise the government on corrective
actions to be taken to mitigate risks or to address anomalies.

External audits: The National Auditor General as mandated by the National Audit Act of 2008
will undertake external audits of the WSDP or an audit firm sub-contracted by the National Audit
Office (NAO) for such purposes in accordance with the provisions of the said Act. The external
audit opinion and report will be made available to the SC, TWG 4 and DPs by the Government
within six months after the end of each fiscal year of WSDP implementation. The MoW will report
at each SC and TWG 4 meetings progress on implementation of action to correct any anomalies
discovered during the audit process or to address audit queries.

Technical audits: The WSDP MoU provides for annual technical audits to be undertaken by an
independent firm based on the terms of reference that are agreed by the Water Sector Working
Group and the Development Partners. The Government will submit the technical audit report to
the Steering Committee, the Water Sector Working Group and Development Partners no later
than six months after the fiscal year to which the report relates.
25
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
Management Case
What are the Management Arrangements for implementing the intervention?
 DFID Tanzania’s Growth team will be responsible for oversight of the project in collaboration with
the Water sector adviser in Basic Service Team.

DFID’s contribution to the Water Resources Management component of WSDP will be a join
funding arrangement between the other DPs and GoT. It will be governed by an agreed WSDP
MoU and detailed project Implementation Manual. DFID will also have its own bilateral agreement
with the GoT.
The organisational structure for implementation and oversight is as follows:

Ministry of Water (MoW): The MoW is responsible, through its Programme Management Unit, for
the overall coordination of the WSDP, and providing technical and administrative support to all
implementing agencies including Basin Offices. Its core responsibilities include ensuring good
quality financial and progress reporting, producing consolidated annual Work Plans, budgets and
procurement plans in coordination) and monitoring the implementation of Annual Work Plans by
Implementing Agencies.

Implementing Agencies: The main implementing agencies are: Local Government Authorities
(LGAs); Urban Water and Sewerage Authorities; Small town authorities; Basin Water Offices;
Executive Agencies; PMORALG; MOHSW; MoW.

Steering Committee (SC): The SC is a high level decision making committee which ensures
coordination between the Sector Lead Ministries (MoW, PMO-RALG, MoHSW and MoF) and the
Development Partners involved in the management, implementation and financing of the WSDP.
It meets at least twice a year. Any revision of the strategic focus of the WSDP needs to be
approved by the SC. While the SC is in charge of the entire WSDP, it will pay particular attention
to those activities and projects which are financed through Government of Tanzania and Water
Basket funds. Key activities include monitoring progress, checking compliance to agreed
processes for good financial management and reviewing the annual work plan, budget and
procurement plan. The Sector Lead Ministries are responsible for ensuring that agreed actions
and recommendations will be undertaken.

Water Sector Working Group (WSWG): The WSWG is the consultative group for sector
dialogue between MOW, other relevant Government Ministries and Institutions, Development
Partners, Civil Society Organizations and other sector stakeholders. It meets at least twice a year
and is a forum for sharing information and consultation. The Group is also responsible for
reviewing the overall WSDP implementation progress (especially work plans, budgets and
procurement plans) and recommending required actions. It will discuss proposals forwarded by
the Technical Working Groups and either make recommendations to the SC for approval or to the
TWGs for implementation.

-
Technical Working Groups (TWGs) There are four Technical Working Groups.
Technical Working Group 1 works on water resources management and development
Technical Working Group 2 works on rural water supply and sanitation
Technical Working Group 3 works on urban water supply and sewerage
Technical Working Group 4 works on capacity development, fiduciary issues and monitoring

The TWGs constitute the basis of the sector dialogue framework under the water sector SWAP,
and will meet at least once every two months. All TWGs are chaired by the Directors from the
respective directorate with an exception of the TWG 4 which is chaired by the Deputy Permanent
26
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
Secretary. They have the mandate to address all issues in relation to the successful
implementation of the Water Sector Development Programme. Any matter which requires the
approval of the senior management of involved Ministries will be forwarded by the TWGs to the
WSWG and / or the SC. In addition, TWG 4 has an important role in reviewing all work plans,
budgets and procurement plans before they go to the WSWG / SC, monitoring fiduciary and
compliance issues and recommending remedial actions, and checking progress on agreed actions
following the annual Joint Water Sector Review and Joint Supervision Missions (see section 5D
on monitoring below). TWG 4 also reviews quarterly Interim Financial Reports and six monthly
cash flow forecasts.

Water Resources Management TWG: Water Resources Management Technical Working Group
(Chaired by the Director of Water Resources and the Director of Water Laboratories as deputy).
For the TWG composition to be efficient it will need to include the nine Basin Water Officers as
normal members along with development partners and civil society organisations as well as
technical representation from Prime Minister’s Office-Regional Administration and Local
Government (PMO-RALG). The technical representatives from will need to be well acquainted
with environmental and safeguard issues.
DFID Tanzania Responsibilities
 Within DFID the overall management responsibility for the intervention will lie with the Sustainable
Growth Team. The Climate Change Adviser will provide technical and management oversight
with support from the Water/Social Policy Adviser in the MDG Team (currently overseeing support
to rural water supply). They will work very closely with the Ministry of Water senior managers of
the water resource directorate, Rufiji Basin Office, World Bank, GIZ and USAID. Additional
technical inputs will likely be required from a range of other DFID advisers such as the results and
vfm adviser.

The Sustainable Growth Team Deputy Programme Manager will act as the project officer
following up on operational, administrative and financial issues. The deputy programme manager
will also administer component 2 of this project – Technical assistance and capacity building using
Blue Book guidance.

DFID will be responsible for monitoring programme implementation through participation in the bimonthly water resources management technical working group meetings, quarterly water sector
working group meeting and bi-annual water sector supervision mission which involves field visits.
In addition to the existing result framework, adjustment will be made especially to the respective
basin office to reflect the additional results requirements. Under this arrangement DFID will have
the opportunity to coordinate technical and financial support to the subsector with other donors
under the leadership of the World Bank who are also the key supporter of water resources
management
B. What are the risks and how these will be managed?
Fiduciary risk is the primary concern. The selected option proposes using government systems to
disburse climate finance – a new approach for DFID Tanzania. Fiduciary risk is a potential concern and is
assessed as ‘moderate’. A combination of strong monitoring and evaluation framework and DFID
Tanzania’s Anticorruption Strategy, will be used to minimise this risk and maximise delivery of results,
with effective safeguards and accountability measures in place.
Rating
Medium
Medium
Risk
Information generated is not sufficiently
robust on which to build water allocation
decisions
Speed of strategy approval by the
Mitigating Measure
Strong technical expertise contracted to
support generation of information
Capacity of government will be built along-
27
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
Weak
Weak
Government undermines effectiveness
and impact on investment
Capacity of River Basin and Regional
Authorities weakens over time
Donors pull out of basket fund
mechanism
side that of other agencies
WSDP invests in long-term capacity building
and implements recruitment plan to fill
technical positions in RBOs and Directorate
of Water Resources.
In the event that donors pull out of the
basket fund, DFID would be able to work
directly – with other interested donors –
through the River Basin Authorities and the
Ministry of Water. Whilst it would not be our
preferred option of operationalizing the
programme, sufficient safeguards could be
put in place to ensure its viability if the
basket fund were to collapse.
C. What conditions apply (for financial aid only)?
Not Applicable
D. How will progress and results be monitored, measured and evaluated?
Monitored:
During the Inception phase (March to July 2013), technical assistance will be provided to Rufiji RBO and
MoW to review and update the logical frame to ensure the baseline for M&E is in place and appropriate
milestones are realistic and agreed as part of a work plan for coming year.
There is a comprehensive system in place for monitoring all components of the WSDP, including the
Water Resources Management which will be supported under this project. The baseline for the
programme has been established through this process. Since DFID is supporting Rufiji basin through the
WSDP mechanism, it will use these established mechanisms for monitoring and reporting. No additional
reporting mechanisms will be required.
Bi-annual reviews will be undertaken jointly with Ministry of Water, Rufiji Basin Office and other
development partners to monitor progress on achieving performance targets and milestones set out in the
log-frame. Technical working meetings will be held on a quarterly basis through the Water Resources
Management Technical Working Group. The technical working group will be reviewing progress of
implementation against performance targets and implementation actions agreed.
.
Semi-annual Progress reports:
The Ministry of Water will prepare detailed progress reports on each of the four components of WSDP
incl. water resources management (component 1) and a consolidated report for the whole programme
twice a year. These reports will give information on progress against key performance targets and
implementation activities as described in the annual work plans, along with details for each Implementing
Agency. They will be reviewed by the Technical Working Groups, the Working Group and the Steering
Committee.
Annual Progress Reports
The Ministry of Water will prepare a consolidated annual progress report (the State of the Water Sector
Report), which will have information on results, financial management and programme implementation
bottlenecks. This report will be shared with Development Partners and other stakeholders.
Annual Joint Water Sector Review
28
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
Every September or October the water sector will be appraised in a joint review, involving the
Government, Development Partners and stakeholders from the private sector and civil society. It will
assess progress against the annual work plan and budget, and review priorities going forward.
Evaluated: DFID Tanzania is committed to improving evidence and accountability through evaluation.
We have developed an Evaluation Strategy and the programme has been assessed to see if it should
prioritised for evaluation based on the criteria set out in the strategy.
Project: Water Security in the SAGCOT – Support to Rufiji RBO
Criteria
Score

Value - £5million
0 – low value project £5m

Strategic Importance

Strength of evidence base

Pilot

Evaluability
1-medium, is an important area of work and will
underpin the sustainability and delivery of results in
the operational plan, however will is unlikely to
deliver on OP results, part from on climate change.
2- evidence gaps esp. climate change and also water
resources management limited evidence base and
attribution often is difficult to ascribe.
0-This is one of the only DFID countries with WRM
project and also substantial cope for replication and
scale up but not a pilot in traditional sense
1-medium, is a new area of work and maybe difficult
to evaluate, definitely more difficult than water supply
4- low, therefore no specific funds set aside for
evaluation in budget. However there should be an
evaluation to contribute to scaling up and replication
by the other 8 RBOs both in Tanzania, and
regionally. Potential to link to DFIDSA and CED work
on WRM,,so potential for joint evaluation work across
DFID.
Overall Score and Priority
It will be vital for any evaluation to be undertaken and owned by Government and therefore GoT should
lead with substantial involvement from DFID.
Logframe
Quest No of logframe for this intervention: draft attached
i
SAGCOT Investment Blue Print
SAGCOT Investment Blue Print
iii
Investment in SAGCOT will potentially lift to 2.3 million people out of poverty iii, create 420,000 new jobsiii, provide regional
food security iii, ensure safe drinking water for 4.5 million people and maintain 80% of the country’s hydroelectric power (HEP)
generation. SAGCOT Investment Blue Print
iv
WSDP Framework Component 2/3
v
SAGCOT Investment Blue Print
vi
IWRM Rufiji RBO,2012
vii
SAGCOT Investment Blue Print
viii
SAGCOT Investment Blue Print
ix
Green Growth Strategy – SAGCOT 2011
x
WSDP - Rufiji Basin 2012
xi
WSDP Interim Report 2012
xii
NAPA, 2007
ii
29
Business Case: Achieving Water Security in the Southern Agricultural Growth
Corridor, Tanzania
This compares with a figure of 1700m 3/capita/year commonly used to indicate ‘water stress’ and 1000m 3/capita/year
indicated physical scarcity. The Rufiji Basin is already experiencing water stress.
xiv
WSDP - Rufiji Basin 2012.
xv
10.04.2001: Mbarali Rice Farms Limited – encroachment on village water rights
xvi
SAGCOT Investment Framework and WSDP Interim Report – January 2012
xvii
The Economics of Climate Change – Tanzania (DFID 2010)
xviii
The Economics of Climate Change – Tanzania (DFID 2010)
xix
WSDP Interim Report – January 2012
xx
Economics of Climate Change – Tanzania (DFID 2010)
xxi
Economics of Climate Change – Water 2011.
xxii “no regrets” agricultural development is taken from the Economics of Climate Change, 2011
xxiii Evapotranspiration (ET) is the sum of evaporation and plant transpiration from the Earth's land surface to atmosphere.
Evapotranspiration is a significant water loss from drainage basins. Types of vegetation and land use significantly affect
evapotranspiration, and therefore the amount of water leaving a drainage basin.
xxiv
SAGCOT Strategic Regional Environmental and Social Assesment, GoT Dec 2012
xxv
WSDP Interim Report, SAGCOT Framework Annex VII – Water, Economics of Climate Change in Tanzania – Water and the
Strategic Environmental Assessment Interim Report
xxvi
SAGCOT Blue print and SRESA both provided substantial evidence on the need to support WRM in the SAGCOt region to
ensure sustainability of investments
xxvii
WSDP and Rufiji IWRM plan set out the need for support to the RBO both on the technical and institutional side.
xxviii
Economics of Climate Change work for Tanzania highlights the significance of WRM for the Tanzanian economy and more
specifically the case study on Rufiji sets out some of the needs.
xxix
Economics of climate change, 2011 and DFID climate screening,2012 – both documents identify potential “no regrets” and
win/win options.
xxx
Gender and Economic Growth in Tanzania (2010)
xiii
30