***From its very inception and. throughout its five-year history FAP has generated a great deal of controversy and criticism both locally as well as internationally. The debate has some-times been quite heated.

THE Flood Action Plan (FAP) has Just comp leted its first phase consisting of a large number of studies and some pilot projects over the past five years at a total cost of approximately US 150 mil lion dollars As such it is by far the biggest planning ex ercise in the natural resource sector in the country's history. The final report was presented to the Cabinet re cently and is to be discussed at an Internationa) conference to be held in Dhaka on 8 and 9 November 1995. The report as It now stands envis ages another planning phase over the next five years to develop a National Water Plan and further Investments to the tune of approximately Tk 4.500 crore in the water sector over the next decade

From its very Inception and throughout its five year history FAP has generated a great deal of controversy and criticism both locally as well as internationally. The debate has sometimes been quite heated. An interesting feature of this debate is that the critics and proponents when talking about FAP often do not mean the same thing This is because FAP has undergone a number of changes over the years and hence It Is not always clear which phase or aspect of FAP is being discussed.

In order to clarify the situation and help foster a more

Informed debate it would be useful to define these differ ent aspects and phases of FAP so that both critics as well as proponents alike can be clear about which precise aspect or phase of FAP they are referring to when they use the word 'FAP''

French FAP Immediately after the devastating floods of 1988 the French government fielded a team of engineers who came up with a plan to embank the major rivers of the country at an estimated cost of USS 10 billion This Image of embanking all the major rivers of the country and figure of USS 10 billion became a very powerful one and has been very much the Image against which most of the early anti-FAP activities and advocacy had been ad dressed However, this French Plan was never a very serious prospect and was very soon superseded by the London Conference in December 1989 where the FAP proper was launched by the government and donors with the World Bank acting as Coordinator.

World Bank FAP: The FAP that emerged from the London Conference consisted

of a series of twenty six com ponents (later to proliferate into more) mostly consisting of studies and some pilot projects to be carried out over a period of five years at a total cost of US8 150 million This then became the Image of FAP for the period betw een 1990 and 1994. namely a multiplicity of studies with some pilot construction projects funded by different donors coordinated by the World Bank Although some people, specially amongst the critics, both at home and abroad, were still conjuring up the previous Image of the French FAP It became clear over time that was no longer correct. This phase of FAP was associated with the World Bank (although they were not the only donor in volved) as they were playing a very close coordinating role and were perceived as being the main proponent (together with FPCO of FAP. Hence the World Bank (as well as some of the bilateral donors) became the focus of the critics, particularly at the international level.

FAP 20 : During this phase FAP consisted mainly of stud ies but also of some pilot construction projects. The

most important of these was the Compartmentalization Pilot Project (CPP) or FAP 20 In Tangall funded by the gov ernments of the Netherlands and Germany This became the target of demonstrations by local people in Tangail and even led to clashes between anil and pro FAP groups there Although this project was only one component of FAP nevertheless it gained great prominence as It was one of the few physical mani festations on the ground of FAP Thus the image of construction of embankments under the FAP as a whole even though it was one component only

FPCO’s FAP The culmination of the studies was the FAP (Draft) Final Report produced by the Flood Plan Coordination Organization (FPCO) In October 1994 which listed 65 different projects around the country at a total estimated cost of USS 2 5 billion over the next decade This became the subject of much criticism from many quarters including the donors and as a result was modified quite drastically in early 1995 Nevertheless this version of FAP probably reflects most accurately the

wishes of FPCO and the Water Ministry on FAP

Water Management Strategy In April 1995 a new revised document called Bangladesh Water and Flood Management Strategy" was released which was a drastic change from the October 1994 document This focused on a further five year period from 1996 to 2000 to develop a National Water Plan which would Incorporate environmental considerations and people s participation as important criteria for water sector planning This would be followed by an investment phase estimated at TK 4.500 crore The authorship of this Report was not clear, nor was its ownership until It was revised and adopted by the Cabinet in September 1995

Conclusion

The current document has still not resolved the issue of what is FAP"’ For example when the Vice President of the World bank. Mr Joseph Woods recentlv visited Dhaka and met with the Prime Minister Begum Khaleda Zia he was reported in the press as having assured the Bank's support for the future phase

of FAP This was assumed by the press (and presumably GOB) to mean that the World Bank would be making a substantial contribution to the Tk 4.500 crore investment plan, whereas the World Bank s view would probably be that they would support the planning phase only Thus the different images of FAP continue to confuse the discussions around FAP not only amongst critics and proponents but also between government and donors.

As will be apparent from the above description there are at least five different Images which are conjured up by different groups of people when referring to the word "FAP" Therefore, it would probably be helpful in the future to make explicit which particular aspect or phase of FAP one Is referring to when using the word.

My personal feeling is that from 1996 onwards (once the FAP Conference Is over) It is probably best to bury the word FAP' (except for historical description) and go on to use the words "National Water Plan which should hopefully gain a less controversial and more cooperative image In the coming years

The writer is Executive Director Bangladesh Centre for Advanced Studies, a nongovernment. nonprofit policy and research institute