In January 2009, continuous and sometimes intense rains caused some of the worst flooding in Fiji’s history. Flash floods affected many areas but were particularly damaging in the northwestern section of the main island of Viti Levu. Overall, about 150,000 people— one-sixth of the country’s population—were affected directly or indirectly through disruptions to communications and access to food and clean water. Roads, schools, medical facilities, and water supply and sanitation infrastructure were extensively damaged. Crops were lost, commercial enterprises badly hit, and tourism disrupted. While food rations were needed, particularly in rural areas, extensive damage to roads restricted the movement of people and goods.
The Asian Development Bank (ADB) approved a loan of $17.56 million for the Emergency Flood Recovery (Sector) Project in August 2009 to assist in the short-term rehabilitation of the damaged infrastructure, estimated by the government to cost $41 million. The project was to focus on rehabilitating road infrastructure, water supply systems, and agricultural drainage schemes. It was provided notwithstanding that, following the military coup in 2006, ADB did not have a country partnership strategy for Fiji and its engagement had been limited to continuing to implement unfinished projects in the transport and water sectors. While helping to restore access to infrastructure for people in the rural areas and allow economic activities and social services to resume, the design and construction of physical works will also be incorporating measures to mitigate the impacts of future floods and climate change.
Project attainment of its output targets was mixed. It was able to assist emergency civil works, including the clearing of landslides and debris, reinstatement of washed-out approaches to bridges and wet crossings, and temporary road pavement repairs. The $2.72 million spent on these works surpassed the appraisal estimate of $0.84 million but was done through retroactive financing. The $0.63 million provided for retroactive financing of repairs to agricultural drainage schemes completed in 2010 was less than the $1.16 million cost estimate. Stabilization works on landslide−prone road areas were way below the target coverage. Rehabilitation of secondary road networks was as targeted; while that of water supply systems exceeded targets.
Shortfalls in project accomplishments were due to a host of factors, including poor capacity of implementing agencies, inadequate initial designs, implementation delays, and cost overruns. It did not help that while the project management unit in the Ministry of Works, Transport, and Public Utilities (MWTPU) had limited technical capacity, project provisions for design and implementation support consultants were largely unutilized.
Delays in design, which took more than the 12-week normal period for an emergency loan, and delays in implementation, which caused a 2-time extension of project closing from February 2012 to July 2015 changed the intended emergency response nature of the project. By the time rehabilitation started, most subprojects were no longer responding to an emergency.
ADB’s Pacific Department rated the project less than successful. The Ministry of National Planning was the executing agency. Together with the MWTPU, key agencies in the transport, road, and water and sewerage sectors served as implementing agencies.
