Final report : evaluation of ICAITI, fuelwood and alternative energy sources project, and regional industrial energy efficiency project

Evaluation covers the period through 8/87; the methodology included extensive interviews with project participants and beneficiaries. (1) PEEIR. ICAITI has implemented the project with a high degree of competence and thereby earned positive marks from the industrial community. Quantitative targets have been largely met except in regard to follow-up activities. PEEIR's major flaw has been its focus on numerical targets (e.g., number of energy audits conducted, seminars held) rather than on energy saving. Nonetheless, the project has been very cost-effective, in terms of both energy audits and seminars and training; the latter recovered a greater portion of their cost than did the audits. Overall, PEEIR has been responsible for at least $2 million in energy cost savings each year (vs. a total life of project cost of about $3 million). The project was less successful in promoting energy pricing and financing reforms. The Permanent Secretariat of the General Treaty of the Integration of Central America (SIECA) prepared numerous policy reports, but these have not been seriously considered. PEEIR should be continued, with some modifications. (2) FWAE. At less than programmed cost, the project has met or exceeded its original and revised output targets and has been relatively successful in introducing new technologies, some of which have immediate potential for self-sustainability. Among these are: lumber and brick kilns; batch bread ovens; ceramic stoves; and others. Some 13,000 households have benefited from the technologies, 4,000 businesses were established or assisted, and 200,000 cubic meters of fuelwood have been conserved. However, FWAE's lack of market orientation. along with some design and management inadequacies, are keeping it from reaching full potential. Appropriate follow-ups, especially with the private sector, should be considered. ICAITI's overall competence and its ability to implement major donor-financed projects are critical skills for the region. However, the Institute has done little forward planning, operating rather in a reactive mode, especially in reaction to ROCAP's initiatives. As funding for these two A.I.D. projects accounts for more than half the ICAITI's budget during the past years, ROCAP must share some of the blame for this stagnation and should assist ICAITI in making a transition to a more active role. Most importantly, ICAITI must become more market oriented (an effort which will require outside help) and it must undergo certain administrative and organizational reforms.