2011年-世界发展银行全球_The_World_Bank_in_Nepal_2003-2008___Country_Program_Evaluation_183页_1mb

World Bank Country Assistance Evaluation in Nepal (2003-2008) Summary

Core Content

This document presents the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) assessment of the World Bank's Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) and activities in Nepal from fiscal years 2003 to 2008. It evaluates the relevance, efficacy, and overall impact of the Bank's development assistance in the context of Nepal's political and economic challenges during this period.

The World Bank Group, including the International Development Association (IDA) and the International Financial Corporation (IFC), played a significant role in Nepal's development, with IDA being the largest development partner, contributing 13% of Nepal's gross overseas development assistance (ODA) during the period. The evaluation highlights both achievements and shortcomings in the Bank's program across key strategic areas: broad-based growth, social development, social inclusion, and good governance.

Main Strategic Pillars and Outcomes

1. Broad-Based Growth

• Core Goals: Public expenditure management, private sector development, and pro-poor agricultural development.
• Key Findings:
  • The Medium-Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) was established and functioned successfully until FY06 but was later abandoned.
  • The state-owned enterprise (SOE) sector was not effectively restructured, and budget drain remained significant.
  • Private sector development was hampered by civil war and political instability, leading to limited recovery.
  • The financial sector saw partial restructuring but progress halted after 2006.
  • Infrastructure development had some success, but most outcome objectives were not met.
• Overall Rating: Moderately Unsatisfactory

2. Social Development

• Core Goals: Improving education, health, and rural water and sanitation services.
• Key Findings:
  • IDA supported the Education for All (EFA) program, leading to increased access to basic education, including for marginalized groups, though quality improvements were limited.
  • A sector-wide approach (SWAp) in health led to satisfactory progress in improving healthcare services and reducing access disparities.
  • Rural water and sanitation access improved, but sanitation lagged behind.
• Overall Rating: Moderately Satisfactory

3. Social Inclusion

• Core Goals: Mainstreaming social inclusion in projects and increasing access to public services for disadvantaged groups.
• Key Findings:
  • The Poverty Alleviation Fund (PAF) was effective in channeling funds to socially excluded groups, but it mainly supported private goods (e.g., goats) rather than public services.
  • There was limited institutional impact and insufficient evidence of poverty reduction.
  • The Civil Service Act Amendment in 2007 addressed inclusion issues but lacked safeguards against political interference and pay-for-performance.
• Overall Rating: Moderately Unsatisfactory

4. Good Governance

• Core Goals: Decentralization, civil service autonomy, and transparency in public finance.
• Key Findings:
  • IDA's objective to support decentralization was relevant, but the planned operations did not materialize due to the suspension of local governments.
  • Civil service autonomy remained limited, and a bill was drafted but never enacted.
  • The Procurement Act was passed, but had little impact on improving public financial management. In fact, quality regressed after 2005.
  • The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) was suspended for most of the period, limiting oversight of government finances.
• Overall Rating: Unsatisfactory

Key Recommendations

• Introduce greater realism into the Bank's country assistance strategy and program design, especially in the context of political instability.
• Maintain flexibility in the face of changing circumstances and ensure regular consultation with national stakeholders and development partners.
• Make agriculture and rural development the central focus of IDA's assistance program.
• Incorporate a mechanism to systematically track the impact of the Poverty Alleviation Fund (PAF) on poverty and social inclusion.
• Adjust the design of the PAF to optimize benefits for the poor and socially excluded.
• Continue using sector-wide approaches (SWAps) as an alternative to policy-based lending when prerequisites for budget support are not met.
• Strengthen public finance management through policy reforms and institutional improvements.

IFC Activities

• The IFC made a limited contribution to Nepal's development during the review period, with only two hydropower projects in its portfolio.
• A gradual re-engagement began in 2006, resulting in:
  • Two Global Trade Finance Program (GTFP) investments.
  • An investment in a domestic airline in 2008.
  • A pipeline of financial sector projects.
  • A constructive dialogue with the government on improving the business climate.
• The IFC's performance was moderately satisfactory, with some positive outcomes but challenges in additionality and impact.

Country Context

• Nepal is a landlocked, resource-poor country with difficult terrain and a high dependence on remittances, which now account for over 15% of GDP.
• It is the poorest country in South Asia, with a GNI per capita of $340 (Atlas method, 2007).
• The country faced political instability, internal conflict, and democracy suppression during the evaluation period, significantly affecting development efforts.
• Despite these challenges, social well-being improved, with a decline in income poverty from 45% in 1996 to 31% in 2004 and improvements in social indicators.

Conclusion

The Bank's program in Nepal during 2003-2008 had mixed results. While some progress was made in social development and education, the overall impact on broad-based growth and good governance was limited or unsatisfactory. The evaluation concludes that the Bank's strategy needed to be more realistic and flexible to address Nepal's complex political and economic environment. The recommendations emphasize the importance of targeted interventions, systematic impact tracking, and institutional reforms to improve future development outcomes.