4.1 Introduction
The logical framework approach (LFA) was first adopted by U.S. AID in the early 1970s. The framework provides a set of designing tools that, when used creatively, can be used for planning, designing, implementing and evaluating projects (the entire project cycle). The purpose of LFA is to undertake participatory, objectives-oriented planning that spans the life of project or policy work to build stakeholder's team commitment and capacity, through a series of workshops. The technique requires stakeholders to come together in a series of workshops to set priorities and plan for implementation and monitoring.
This achieved by structuring the main elements of project in a matrix (the logical framework) which summarizes the project, highlighting logical linkages between intended inputs, planned activities and expected results and records the underlying assumption. See Figure 4.1, for the content of framework matrix and how to read the LFA.
4.3 Application of Logical Framework for Sarawak River Basin Planning
The following is an exercise of an application of Logical Framework Approach for Sarawak River Basin planning and management.
Sarawak River Basin is being used for the following purposes:
Some hydraulics Infrastructures have been developed and proposed for that purposes, i.e.:
Figure 4.3.1 Hydraulics Infrastructures in Sarawak River Basin
Step 1: Problem Analysis
Identify the issues and problems then and select the focal problem. In this exercised the problem in water supply is chosen as the focal point for the next 25 years development in Sarawak River Basin. Then, establish the Problem Tree, as follows:
Step 2: Stakeholders Analysis
Stakeholders or institutional analysis is to identify who is addressing this problem and who is going to be affected the most. The stakeholders are categorized, and their linkages are defined.
In this case the stakeholders are consists of the State Government of Sarawak (which representing by Sarawak Water Resources Council), domestic, commercial and industrial operators, and community/public in general.
Categorization and their linkage is as follows (see Figure 4.3.3):
Step 3: Objectives Analysis
The objective analysis is done by reformulating the statements in the Problem Tree as positive statements to become the Objective Tree. The objective tree is as follows (see Figure )
Step 4: Alternative Analysis
There are five obvious alternatives have been identified:
Then, a set of criteria base on the cost, chance of success, cost and benefit ratio, time horizon, and social risk, has been used to choose the best combination. In this case, the best alternative is the cluster of alternative 1, 2, 3, and 5 that has been chosen as the strategy for future action.
Step 5: Identify main project elements
The main project elements for Input, Activities, output, immediate objectives, and development objectives can be seen in the LFA Matrix
Step 6: Identify external factors
External factors are the important factors for the success of the project, but lies outside the scope or not influenced by the project. These external factors will be included in the matrix and put as the assumptions in the forth column at the appropriate project element.
Step 7: Identify indicators and means of verifications
The objective Indicators describe the project elements into operationally measurable terms. They should be measurable in a consistent way at an acceptable cost. On the other hands, the source of verification are documents, reports and other sources providing information that make it possible to gauge actual progress.
Step 8: Filling up the logical framework matrix
All the analytical results concerning the project elements, objective indicators, mean of verification, and the assumption are put in the Logical Framework Matrix as shown in the following Table 4.3.
Remarks
LFA workshops should be conducted, so that the stakeholders can reach a common understanding of the problem to be addressed, how and under what constraints. The use of LFA and systematic monitoring ensures continuity of approach, especially when its results are used by various organizations
The logical framework approach (LFA) was first adopted by U.S. AID in the early 1970s. The framework provides a set of designing tools that, when used creatively, can be used for planning, designing, implementing and evaluating projects (the entire project cycle). The purpose of LFA is to undertake participatory, objectives-oriented planning that spans the life of project or policy work to build stakeholder's team commitment and capacity, through a series of workshops. The technique requires stakeholders to come together in a series of workshops to set priorities and plan for implementation and monitoring.
This achieved by structuring the main elements of project in a matrix (the logical framework) which summarizes the project, highlighting logical linkages between intended inputs, planned activities and expected results and records the underlying assumption. See Figure 4.1, for the content of framework matrix and how to read the LFA.
4.2 Steps in Logical Framework Development
The steps in developing a logical framework are a follows:
The steps in developing a logical framework are a follows:
- Problem Analysis
- Stakeholders Analysis
- Objectives Analysis
- Alternative Analysis
- Identify main project elements
- Identify external factors
- Identify indicators and means of verifications
- Filling up the logical framework matrix
4.3 Application of Logical Framework for Sarawak River Basin Planning
The following is an exercise of an application of Logical Framework Approach for Sarawak River Basin planning and management.
Sarawak River Basin is being used for the following purposes:
- Urban and rural water supply;
- Sink for sewerage and wastewater;
- Agriculture and aquaculture;
- Industries (the important one is electronics);
- Recreation;
- Biodiversity;
- Flood control for some developed areas, which are highly affected by floods; and
- Other purposes.
Some hydraulics Infrastructures have been developed and proposed for that purposes, i.e.:
- Sungai Sarawak Regulation Scheme ( Bako Causeway, Pending Causeway, Barrage)
- Landing Facilities (Wharves and Jetties)
- Water Intakes ( Batu Kitang, Siniawan, Bau)
- Construction of Weir across the Sg. Sarawak Kiri
- Proposed Bengoh Dam
Figure 4.3.1 Hydraulics Infrastructures in Sarawak River Basin
Step 1: Problem Analysis
Identify the issues and problems then and select the focal problem. In this exercised the problem in water supply is chosen as the focal point for the next 25 years development in Sarawak River Basin. Then, establish the Problem Tree, as follows:
Step 2: Stakeholders Analysis
Stakeholders or institutional analysis is to identify who is addressing this problem and who is going to be affected the most. The stakeholders are categorized, and their linkages are defined.
In this case the stakeholders are consists of the State Government of Sarawak (which representing by Sarawak Water Resources Council), domestic, commercial and industrial operators, and community/public in general.
Categorization and their linkage is as follows (see Figure 4.3.3):
Step 3: Objectives Analysis
The objective analysis is done by reformulating the statements in the Problem Tree as positive statements to become the Objective Tree. The objective tree is as follows (see Figure )
Step 4: Alternative Analysis
There are five obvious alternatives have been identified:
- Weir Kiri, for protection against salinity intrusion and increase safe yield beyond 2010 ( Estimated 484MLD);
- Dam Bengoh, for long term need of Kuching water supply to increase safe yield beyond 2030 demand (Estimated 1965 MLD);
- Sewage and Wastewater Treatment, toward safe and clean raw water supply and prevention of direct effluent to the river;
- Weir Kanan, for increasing safe yield to 2020 demand; and
- Capacity Building in Water Resource Sector, to cope with the policy and institutional development, and with the non-construction activities.
- Alternatives 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5;
- Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 5; and
- Alternatives 1, 3, 4, and 5.
Then, a set of criteria base on the cost, chance of success, cost and benefit ratio, time horizon, and social risk, has been used to choose the best combination. In this case, the best alternative is the cluster of alternative 1, 2, 3, and 5 that has been chosen as the strategy for future action.
Step 5: Identify main project elements
The main project elements for Input, Activities, output, immediate objectives, and development objectives can be seen in the LFA Matrix
Step 6: Identify external factors
External factors are the important factors for the success of the project, but lies outside the scope or not influenced by the project. These external factors will be included in the matrix and put as the assumptions in the forth column at the appropriate project element.
Step 7: Identify indicators and means of verifications
The objective Indicators describe the project elements into operationally measurable terms. They should be measurable in a consistent way at an acceptable cost. On the other hands, the source of verification are documents, reports and other sources providing information that make it possible to gauge actual progress.
Step 8: Filling up the logical framework matrix
All the analytical results concerning the project elements, objective indicators, mean of verification, and the assumption are put in the Logical Framework Matrix as shown in the following Table 4.3.
Remarks
LFA workshops should be conducted, so that the stakeholders can reach a common understanding of the problem to be addressed, how and under what constraints. The use of LFA and systematic monitoring ensures continuity of approach, especially when its results are used by various organizations
Comments