|
|
|
|
Bank Support to the Transport Sector
|
|
|
|
| Evaluation Highlights | - Transport lending commitments have fluctuated considerably during the review period. Roads dominate the portfolio.
- India and China account for 42 percent of all transport commitments.
- Average project size has increased over the past 10 years.
- Project outcome ratings have steadily improved over the past decade.
- Transport sector-wide approaches and program-based approaches will need to be evaluated more systematically when initial projects have been completed.
- Greater donor cooperation looks promising despite coordination issues.
- Nonlending assistance and knowledge dissemination have been given insufficient attention.
|
Figure 3.1: Trends in IBRD/IDA Commitments for Transport, Fiscal 1995-2005 |  | | Source: World Bank data. |
Figure 3.2: Trends in Average Project Size, Transport Sector Projects versus All Other Projects, Fiscal 1995-2005 |  | | Source: World Bank data. |
|
Table 3.1: IBRD/IDA Commitments for Transport ($ billion): Share of Top 5 and top 10 Countries, Fiscal 1995-2000 and Fiscal 2001-06 | | Country | Commitments
for fiscal 1995-2000 | Share of
total (%) | China | 4.2 | 24 | Brazil | 1.7 | 10 | India | 1.3 | 7 | Russian Fed. | 1.2 | 7 | Argentina | 1.1 | 6 | Indonesia | 0.6 | 3 | Mexico | 0.6 | 3 | Bangladesh | 0.5 | 3 | Vietnam | 0.4 | 2 | Poland | 0.4 | 2 | Total
(all other countries) | 5.9 | 33 | Total | 17.9 | 100 |
| | Country | Commitments
for fiscal 2001-2006 | Share of
total (%) | | India | 4.2 | 25 | China | 2.3 | 14 | Brazil | 1.1 | 7 | Indonesia | 0.6 | 5 | Argentina | 0.5 | 3 | Vietnam | 0.5 | 3 | Mexico | 0.4 | 3 | Colombia | 0.4 | 2 | Congo, Dem. Rep. | 0.3 | 2 | Egypt, Arab. Rep. | 0.3 | 2 | Total
(all other countries) | 6.2 | 34 | Total | 16.8 | 100 |
| Share of top 5 countries------------------ 54
Share of top 10 countries----------------- 67 | 54
66 | Source: World Bank data |
Table 3.2: IEG Ratings of Overall Project Outcome, Institutional Development, and Sustainability by Exit Year, Fiscal 1992-2006 (Transport Sector Board projects versus all other Sector Boards | | IEG Rating | Board | Fiscal
1992-94 | Fiscal
1995-97 | Fiscal
1998-00 | Fiscal
2001-03 | Fiscal
2004-06 | Outcome:
Moderately satisfactory
or better (%) | Transport | All projects Excluding large borrowersa | 69 71 | 78 70 | 84 82 | 86 74 | 89 88 | | All other | 64 | 67 | 68 | 72 | 79 | Institutional Development:
Substantial or better (%) | Transport | All projects Excluding large borrowersa | 25 27 | 37 33 | 63 57 | 68 66 | 57 50 | | | All other | 30 | 32 | 37 | 45 | 57 | Sustainabilityb
Likely or better (%) | Transport | All projects Excluding large borrowersa | 46 47 | 55 43 | 70 66 | 74 71 | 78 71 | | All other | 44 | 47 | 54 | 64 | 71 | Source: WOrld Bank data. See also figures in Appendix A.
a. Argentina, Brazil, China and India.
b. Resilience to risks of future net benefit flows. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
RSS