• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Evaluation Findings on World Bank Group Assistance to Low-Income Fragile and Conflict-Affected Stat

Evaluation Findings on World Bank Group Assistance to Low-Income Fragile and Conflict-Affected Stat



About 370 million people live in low-income fragile and conflict-affected states (FCS). They have higher poverty rates, lower growth rates, and weaker human development indicators than other ...

About 370 million people live in low-income fragile and conflict-affected states (FCS). They have higher poverty rates, lower growth rates, and weaker human development indicators than other low-income countries. This presentation outlines main findings from the evaluation of World Bank Group assistance to FCS.



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



1 Embed 1

http://unjobs.org 1


Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Evaluation Findings on World Bank Group Assistance to Low-Income Fragile and Conflict-Affected Stat Evaluation Findings on World Bank Group Assistance to Low-Income Fragile and Conflict-Affected Stat Presentation Transcript

    • World Bank Assistance to Low-Income Fragile and Conflict-Affected States Anis Dani, Lead Evaluator, IEGCC International Launch Seminar Nairobi, December 2, 2013
    • Outline   Evaluation Approach   Portfolio outcomes   Country level outcomes   Internal drivers of quality   Three dimensions of results   Gender in FCS   Concluding remarks
    • Evaluation Approach   Scope:   Assessment of the relevance and effective of World Bank Group country strategies and assistance programs to FCS   Focus is on low-income Fragile and Conflict-Affected States   This is an evaluation of WBG performance, not of the performance of partner countries   Methodology:   Comparative analysis of 33 IDA-only FCS with 31 non-FCS – portfolio and country results, budget, staffing, and aid flows   Comparison across time – FY07-12 compared with FY01-12   6 case study countries (Cameroon; Congo, DR; Nepal, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Republic of Yemen)   3 Country Program Evaluations (Afghanistan, Liberia, Timor-Leste)   Other countries with fragile and conflict-affected situations will be the subject of a separate evaluation
    • Portfolio outcomes in IDA FCS have improved Scope of work   The World Bank Group has a long history of engagement in FCS – exemplified in the name IBRD   Historically, portfolio performance in FCS lagged significantly behind other countries   Since 2007, results in IDA FCS indicate a turnaround   FCS IDA countries perform better than non-FCS IDA, and are almost at par with Bankwide average Outcomes by number of projects
    • However, results in the private sector have been weaker Late start and weak results in FCS   IFC investments in IDA FCS lag behind that in non-fragile countries.   One third of the FPD projects evaluated in FCS were MS+, compared to two-thirds in non-fragile IDA countries.   IFC’s Advisory Services in FCS perform at par with projects in countries that are not fragile.   MIGA’s portfolio growth recent, with few guarantees evaluated to draw meaningful conclusions. SIPs struggle financially & operationally. IFC commitments grew faster in non-FCS
    • Project outcomes not matched by outcomes at country level   The Bank is most responsive to fragile and conflict-affected states (FCS) in the immediate aftermath of conflict   FCS classification is inaccurate   Country assistance strategies are not well adapted to FCS   Prolonged use of ISNs, which are not evaluated, is problematic   Recent CASs reflect greater attention to fragility/conflict drivers but effects on operations not yet evident   Sustained budget support in FCS is positively correlated with policy and institutional results
    • Share of ODA to FCS from donors The share of overall official development assistance (ODA) flows in IDA-only countries has changed in favor of FCS However, the share of IDA flows to FCS remains below 30% of total IDA commitments
    • Positive effects of internal drivers on results need to be sustained   FCS classification based on CPIA ratings is no longer consistent with fragility and conflict risks in many FCS. Classification leads to errors of omission and too rapid graduation from FCS list   Fragility analysis for CAS needs to be taken into account in design of operational programs   Internal drivers of quality since 2007 need to be sustained:   increased staff and project budgets   huge increase in TA financed by Trust Funds   Incentives at IFC and MIGA need more attention   Despite increased field presence, IFC HR incentives not fully aligned with Bank incentives, and performance incentives are not aligned with strategy for FCS   MIGA faces similar challenges due to smaller size and complexity of underwriting projects in FCS.
    • Results assessed along three strategic dimensions Building capacity of the state Building capacity of citizens Supporting inclusive growth and jobs
    • Building state capacity   Relatively good progress on public financial management where sustained support has been most effective   Recent attention to public expenditure reviews of security sector draws on Bank’s comparative advantage   Efficiency of revenue mobilization also improved in FCS   Civil service reform has been more challenging; of necessity, reliance on PIUs and externally-funded consultants leads to sustainability issues   On decentralization, more effort and results in AFR than in other regions where lack of consensus within government and among donors affects progress
    • Building capacity of citizens   WB investments in FCS widely acknowledged as increasing access to education and health services   Most FCS are likely to achieve at least one of the MDG targets, although FCS lag behind non-fragile IDA states   State capacity strengthened by outsourcing to private and non-profit service providers, especially in health   Results monitoring is mixed, with more focus on outputs than outcomes   Increased attention to voice, accountability and third party monitoring, which can be an
    • CDD and citizen capacity   CDD growth in IDA FCS to build local institutions and provide public goods and services   Especially useful in countries with diverse populations, where governments previously lacked outreach to all communities and ethnicities due to weak infrastructure and public services (e.g., Afghanistan)   Where large-scale programs exist, CDD has enhanced reach of the state and enhanced its legitimacy   But CDD programs in FCS have not evolved over time and in many countries have not yet developed plans for sustainability
    • Inclusive Growth and Jobs   Support for inclusive growth and jobs has been slow and faces continued challenges in IDA FCS   Investment climate support necessary but not sufficient. Other PSD constraints—power, transport, land not adequately addressed   WBG support for agriculture not commensurate with its effects on food security and employment in FCS   Support for natural resources focused on regulatory reform with less attention to local economic development and fragility risks   WBG synergies in telecom, power sector, and microfinance have played transformational role, but only found in a few countries   WBG lacks a strategic and effective framework for job creation in FCS: short-term jobs and skills development programs lack synergies with education and the private sector
    • Gender in FCS   In several FCS, women and girls have been deliberately targeted to humiliate, intimidate, punish, and forcibly displace members of a community or ethnic group   Demobilization, disarmament, and reintegration (DDR) programs were not gender-sensitive and focused primarily on ex-combatants; few programs for victims of violence   Ffew good examples in FCS (AFG, Nepal) of linkages from analytical work to strategy, to project interventions.   Overall, despite recognition of gender disparities in some CASs, very few programs addressed these constraints beyond health, education and CDD projects.   No evidence of measures to address gender-based violence or the constraints identified by IFC Women, Business, and the Law database   Lack of targeted programs for economic empowerment of women in FCS affected by gender-based violence, despite increase in female-headed households
    • Concluding Remarks
    • Operationalizing the 2011 WDR   Progress made but this effort needs to be sustained and, in some areas, intensified   CASs in FCS more fragility focused but operations need to adapt accordingly   Community of Practice and knowledge management   Partnerships with UN have improved at corporate level; results more mixed at country level   Security—support for DDR and PERs in security sector   Justice—J4P not well integrated in CAS or operations; and lack of clarity of niche and comparative advantage   Jobs—need a framework and WBG synergies   Risks and results—need more realistic risk assessment and monitoring, and contingency planning.
    • Recommendations   The Bank Group should develop a more suitable and accurate mechanism to define FCS status   CASs should be tailored better to FCS, with clear articulation and monitoring of risks and contingencies for rapid adjustment if those risks materialize   Provide increased support to reform-oriented FCS for capacity building through predictable, programmatic budget support, complemented by TA and Ils   Develop and implement a plan to ensure the institutional sustainability of CDD programs   programs need to be more responsive to the conflict context and help address effects of violence against women and the legal constraints on economic empowerment   develop a more realistic medium- to long-term framework for inclusive growth and jobs in FCS and ensure synergies across WBG   IFC and MIGA should adapt their business models, risk tolerances, product mix, sources of funds, staff incentives, procedures, and processes to be more responsive to the special needs of FCS
    • https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/evaluations/ fcs URL for the full report released on December 2, 2013