|
Study Logistics and Stats
|
|
|
|
Methodology
This study is the first Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) evaluation of the entire transport sector. In the past only subsectors such as urban transport, railways, and ports have been reviewed. The evaluation uses the IEG-World Bank objectivesbased evaluation methodology in which performance is evaluated by measuring the Bank’s progress toward its transport objectives. There are four such objectives: (i) encourage competitive markets and help to balance the roles of the public and private sectors; (ii) help clients achieve sustainable management of the sector; (iii) support transport investments to contribute to poverty reduction; and (iv) respond to changes in the environment to meet new challenges such as globalization.
The review covers the period from July 1995 to June 2006, during which time there were 642 projects with transport components in the portfolio. Of these, 335 have closed and 284 have been evaluated by IEG; 307 projects are still active. The extensive, customized database covering all transport modes provides the foundation for the analysis of project performance, their results, and the lessons learned from that experience. Bank transport projects are considered first in terms of projects formally allocated to the Transport Sector Board and second for completeness of all projects containing a transport component, irrespective of which Sector Board is responsible. This covers project components under the urban, rural, private sector development, public sector governance, social development, environment, poverty-reduction, and other boards. However, interpreting the results of these projects requires caution, as most ratings in these cases refer to the main project and not necessarily to the transport component.
The portfolio analysis is complemented by a review of the academic and professional literature on transport issues in developing countries as well as by nonlending assistance in the form of World Bank economic and sector work (ESW) and strategy documents. With regard to public and private financing of transport infrastructure and services, it was necessary to first undertake a background review of evolving global experience since 1995, against which the Bank’s endeavors could be benchmarked.
To gain insights into operational issues and performance, particular attention was given to IEG transport Project Performance Assessment Reports (PPARs). Field visits for these evaluations were undertaken during the study period; 20 completed between 2003 and 2005 were specifically selected with this study in mind. These reports provide a spread of results across the main modes and the six Bank Regions.1 In addition, three transport country case studies were selected for more detailed analysis: Brazil, India, and Tanzania; information from two completed impact studies in Brazil and Morocco, a special multidonor evaluation in Ghana, and an African multidonor assistance program known as the Sub-Saharan Africa Transport Policy Program (SSATP) are included as well. Other case studies are included as boxes to illustrate particular examples of successful interventions. The map in figure A.1 shows the location of cases and information on all the above reports, see annex B (download pdf).
An area of particular interest to the Bank is the effectiveness of road funds, an instrument used to redress the long-term underfunding of road maintenance. Over the past 10–15 years many Bank projects or sector reviews (especially in Africa) have supported the restructuring of road management and road maintenance finance, including creating independent road boards, establishing road agencies, and setting up road funds. Because of the importance of this issue, a background paper on this topic was commissioned as an input to the study.
The methodology also includes the results from structured interviews of one-third of Bank transport network staff. These were used to understand staff views on the performance of the transport portfolio, as well as issues arising from their experience and ideas about how to improve Bank efficiency, and to try to understand the pressures under which they work. Both open-ended and specific questions were put to the 36 randomly selected staff members, covering task team leaders and specialists in the transport network encompassing all Regions, including the Bank headquarters in Washington, DC, and country offices.
The views of a selection of key stakeholders were obtained using local consultants, one in each of the case study countries, to understand the perceptions of government officials, users, providers of transport services, and interested parties such as consultants and academics about the Bank’s assistance and influence in the transport sector in each of the countries concerned. Finally, a panel of transport sector experts was convened to advise the study team and to review key evaluative documents and the final study report.Â
IEG Transport Review: Inputs to the Evaluation |  | Note: AAA = analytical and advisory assistance; ESW = economic and sector work; IFC = International Finance Corporation; MIGA = Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency; PPAR = Project Performance Assessment Report. |
|
|
|
RSS