March 2023 FY 2023 Armenia Country Opinion Survey Report ECR Business Intelligence Team Acknowledgements The Armenia Country Opinion Survey is part of the County Opinion Survey Program series of the World Bank Group. This report was prepared by the Business Intelligence (BI) team, led by José De Buerba (Senior External Affairs Officer). Yulia Danilina, Jessica Cameron, Nan Lin, and Sofya Gubaydullina oversaw design, reporting, and analysis. Dania Mendoza, Noreen Wambui, and Irina Popova provided data support. BI acknowledges the significant contribution from the Armenia country team and independent fielding agency AM Partners Consulting Company. In particular, BI is grateful for the support from Vigen Sargsyan (Senior External Affairs Officer) who coordinated the survey related activities from Yerevan, Armenia. Contents Objectives Overall Context Overall Attitudes Toward the World Bank Group World Bank Group’s Support in Development Areas World Bank Group’s Work and Engagement on the Ground World Bank Group’s Knowledge Work and Activities Communication and Outreach Demographics of the Sample Methodology 3 Objectives This survey was designed to assist the World Bank Group (WBG) in gaining a better understanding of how stakeholders in Armenia perceive the WBG. The survey explored the following questions: 1. What opinion do key stakeholders have of the WBG when it comes to its effectiveness, relevance, alignment with Armenia’s development priorities, and other key indicators? Are opinions improving or declining? 2. What areas of development are perceived to be the most important? Have the priorities changed over the past three years? 3. How the WBG is perceived as a development partner? Are opinions improving or declining? 4. What do key stakeholder value the most and the least when it comes to the WBGs work at the country level? What are the priorities looking forward? 5. What opinion do key stakeholders have of the WBG knowledge products and their quality? Are opinions improving or declining? 6. What are the preferred communication channels and which channels are reported to be used the most? Are there differences among stakeholder groups in terms of preferred channels? 7. What key topics the WBG communicates around do stakeholders recall? Is there a relationship between message recall and views of the WBG’s work? 4 Overall Context 5 Majority of respondents think Armenia is headed in the right direction Respondents in Armenia continue to be rather Country direction 2018 ---------------- 2023 optimistic about their country’s general direction: 68% of them say Armenia is headed in the right direction. Respondents from the private sector are the least 69% 68% The right direction optimistic: only 29% of them say the country is headed in the right direction, while the majority - 47% - are not sure. Similarly, over 50% of the civil society The wrong direction respondents are not sure about the country’s 6% direction. 13% 25% Not sure 19% Q In general, would you say that Armenia is headed in ... ? (FY18 N=165; FY23 N=112) 6 Familiarity with the World Bank Group Mean Familiarity Rating Year comparison: Respondents in this year’s 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Country Survey report similar levels of familiarity with the World Bank Group as in FY18: All Respondents 7.6 Mean familiarity: FY23 = 7.6; FY18 = 7.6. Academia 8.4 Collaboration: Respondents who collaborate with the WBG and those who don’t collaborate Private Sector 7.9 report statistically similar levels of familiarity with the institution’s work : Mean familiarity: WBG collaborators = 7.7 Government Institution 7.7 Non-collaborators = 7.2 Multilateral Agency 7.6 Local Government 7.0 Civil Society and Media 7.0 How familiar are you with the work of the World Bank Group in Armenia? Q Scale: 1-10 (1: Not familiar at all – 10: Extremely familiar) 7 Trust in Institutions Mean Trust Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 The WBG, along with the IMF and Armenia’s The World Bank Group 7.7 Central Bank, are the most trusted institutions in Armenia among those studied. The International Monetary Fund 7.3 Media, Parliament and the Local Government are the least trusted institutions, according to the Armenia’s Central Bank 7.2 respondents. Delegation of the European Union 7.0 Private sector 6.9 The United Nations (UN) 6.7 The national government 6.5 Civil society 6.1 Academia/think tanks/research institutions 5.8 Local government 5.7 Parliament 5.7 Media 5.0 To what extent do you trust each of the following groups to do what is right? Q Scale: 1-10 (1: To no degree at all – 10: To a very significant degree) 8 World Bank Group’s Support in Development Areas 9 Vs FY’18 Development areas for the WBG to focus % of Respondents Education 45% +20 Education and Public sector governance are Public sector governance 33% +18 the top areas in FY23 where stakeholders would Transport 30% +25 like the WBG to focus its resources. Both increased in priority since FY18. Considering that Health 30% +25 19% also selected “Capacity in the government”, Agriculture and food security 30% +8 public sector development is in high priority in Digital Development 28% NA Armenia, particularly among stakeholders outside the government: thus, stakeholders from the Job creation / employment 24% -6 private sector were most likely to select Environment/Natural resource management 24% +17 governance as an area of the WBG’s focus (65%). Social protection & labor market programs 21% +17 Several areas – Transport, Health, Climate Water supply and irrigation 21% +15 Change, Environment / Natural resource Energy 20% + 13 management, and Social protection have increased in priority in FY23, from just under 10% Capacity in the government 19% NA in FY18. Climate Change grew most notably - from Climate change 19% +18 1% in FY18 to 19% in FY23, and across all Urban development 16% +12 stakeholder groups, except for the private sector. Private sector development 15% -5 IMPORTANT NOTE: The overall increase in percentages in the chart is partially attributable to the change in the methodology: In Trade 13% NA FY’ 18, respondents were offered to select up to three priorities, while in FY’ 23 – up to five. In addition, two big cross-cutting areas Regional integration 13% +7 – Economic Growth and Poverty Reduction (#1 and #4 in FY18) – Equality of opportunity 12% +4 were removed from the list of options in FY23. Social protection 12% +8 FY23: Which areas should the World Bank Group prioritize in its work Q in Armenia to have the most impact on development results in the Tourism development 12% NA country? (Choose no more than 5) (N=112) FY18: When thinking about how the World Bank Group can have the Disaster risk management 12% +7 most impact on development results in Armenia, in which sectors do you believe the World Bank Group should focus most of its resources Gender equity 11% +10 (financial and knowledge services) in Armenia? (Choose no more 10 Anti-corruption 8% -13 than THREE) (N=165) Effectiveness of WBG’s Support in Sectoral Areas The WBG’s work in transport and energy sectoral areas received the highest ratings of effectiveness. Ratings of the WBG’s effectiveness across most sectors were similar to those in FY18, except for anti-corruption, which was rated significantly higher this year compared to FY18. Mean Level of Effectiveness Mean Level of Effectiveness 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 7.4 6.8 Transport Social protection 7.4 7.3 7.3 6.7 Energy Education 7.5 6.8 7.2 6.7 Digital Development Health 7.1 7.1 6.7 Agriculture and food security Regional integration 7.5 6.5 7.1 6.6 Public sector governance Disaster risk management 7.3 7.1 6.9 6.6 Tourism development Anti-corruption* 5.8 Environment / Natural resource 6.9 6.6 Gender equity management 6.6 6.5 Trade 6.9 FY22 Urban development 6.2 FY18 6.5 6.8 Equality of opportunity Private sector development *significantly different 6.8 6.8 between years How EFFECTIVE do you believe the World Bank Group is in terms of the work it does in the following areas of development in Armenia? Q (If you have NO exposure to/experience in working in any of the sectors listed below, please respond “Don’t know”), 11 Scale: 1-10 (1: Not effective at all – 10: Very effective) Pollution is the main concern for respondents in relation to Climate Change Around two-thirds of the respondents are very concerned about air pollution when it comes to the potential impacts of climate change in Armenia. Just over half are very concerned about decreasing crop yields and droughts and associated food insecurity. Climate-driven migration and floods are the two potential impacts that respondents worry about the least. Not at all A little Somewhat concerned Very concerned Air pollution 63% Decreased crop yields/food insecurity 53% More frequent and severe droughts / heatwaves 50% Land and forest degradation 49% Effects on public health 47% Increase in natural disasters 46% Forest fires 42% Unsafe drinking water 41% Extinction of plant/animal species 33% Loss of jobs 32% Climate-driven migration 23% More frequent and severe floods 18% Q What is your level of concern for each of the potential impacts of climate change as it affects your country? (N=~107) 12 Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group 13 Key Performance Indicators In FY23, there was a slight, non-significant improvement across the key indicator questions. Over one-third of respondents gave the WBG high ratings (9 or 10 on a 10-point scale) on alignment with Armenia’s development priorities and on relevance, and just under 30% of respondents gave high ratings for the WBG’s effectiveness in achieving development results and for its contribution to ending extreme poverty in Armenia. Only two in ten ranked highly the institution’s ability to influence the development agenda in the country. Percentage points change from FY18 FY 22 FY 18 -10 +1 +9 Mean Mean Alignment 21% 41% 38% 7.7 7.4 -9 +5 +4 Relevance 19% 43% 38% 7.8 7.6 -17 +13 +6 Effectiveness in achieving results 25% 47% 29% 7.5 7.4* Ending extreme poverty 31% 42% 28% 7.3 NA Influence 26% 52% 21% 7.4 NA Low (1-6) Medium (7-8) High (9-10) The World Bank Group’s work is aligned with what I consider the development priorities for Armenia, Scale: 1 -10 (1: Strongly disagree – 10: Strongly agree) How effective has the World Bank Group been in achieving development results in Armenia? Scale: 1-10 (1: Not effective at all– 10: Very effective) To what extent does the World Bank Group influence the development agenda in Armenia? Scale: 1-10 (1: To no degree at all– 10: To a very significant degree) To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements about the World Bank Group’s work in Armenia?: Scale: 1 -10 (1: Strongly disagree – 10: Strongly agree) Q The World Bank Group currently plays a relevant role in development in Armenia. The World Bank Group’s work is well aligned with what I consider the development priorities for Armenia. The World Bank Group’s work helps end extreme poverty in Armenia. *A mean score of the two questions asked in FY18: Overall, please rate your impression of the World Bank Group’s effectiveness in Armenia. Scale: 1-10 (1: Not effective at all– 10: Very 14 effective); To what extent does the World Bank Group’s work help to achieve development results in Armenia? Scale: 1 -10 (1: To no degree at all– 10: To a very significant degree) Key Performance Indicators: Comparison The mean ratings for Relevance, Alignment, Effectiveness, and Influence in achieving development results in Armenia were significantly higher than those in other IBRD countries surveyed in FY22, as well as in other ECA countries surveyed in FY22 (please refer to the footnote for the country lists), except for Effectiveness and Influence, which were statistically similar in Armenia and in other ECA countries. 7.8 Relevance 7.4 7.0 7.7 Aligned with Armenia FY23 7.4 Priorities 6.8 ECA FY22* 7.5 Effectiveness in 7.4 achieving results 7.0 Other IBRD FY22** 7.4 Influence 7.3 6.7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating Q *ECA FY22 included: Bulgaria, Tajikistan, Kosovo Other IBRD FY22 included: Angola, Botswana, Eswatini, Mauritius, Thailand, Bulgaria, Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Peru, Jordan 15 Overall Ratings for Indicator Questions: Local government is most positive Mean Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Respondents from local government gave the highest mean ratings for the aggregated All Stakeholder Groups 7.7 responses to the nineteen COS indicator questions, whereas respondents from the private sector had significantly lower mean ratings (see Local Government 8.9 the chart on the right). Multilateral Agency 8.0 Collaboration: Respondents who collaborate with the WBG and respondents who don’t Government Institution 7.9 collaborate had similar mean ratings to the nineteen indicator questions: WB collaborators = 7.7; Academia 7.7 Non-collaborators = 7.6. Civil Society and Media 7.2 *Please note that the small number of respondents (n=3) from the “Office of a Parliamentarian (National Assembly)” was not included in this analysis Private Sector 7.1 Mean Ratings for the nineteen COS Indicator Questions by Stakeholder Groups on a Scale from 1 to 10. Q These selected indicators are listed at the end of this report. 16 World Bank Group’s Work and Engagement on the Ground 17 Greatest Value Financial resources continue to be the most valued % of Respondents activity of the WBG in Armenia, along with its capacity development activities and advisory Providing financial resources 51% services. Notably, WBG’s research on local and global Capacity building and training 37% development issues is mostly valued by respondents from civil society and the media (42%). Providing advisory services and analytics to support design or implementation of 33% policies Bringing together different stakeholder groups to support Armenia’s 26% development efforts Providing data and statistics 20% Producing research on local/global development issues 17% Mobilizing third-party financial resources 9% When thinking about the World Bank Group’s role in Armenia, which activity do you VALUE the most? (Choose no more than 2) Q (FY23 N=112) 18 The WBG as a Development Partner Mean Level of Agreement 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 The WBG is seen as a responsive long-term partner in Armenia; it is staff is perceived as rather 8.8 Being a long-term partner accessible. 8.8 Perceptions of the WBG’s flexibility when circumstances change significantly improved 8.1 compared to FY18 results. Access to WBG staff and experts 8.3 Notably, respondents from civil society, media, and the private sector tended to rank WBG’s responsiveness and staff accessibility significantly 7.9 Responsiveness to needs lower—although still not negatively (mean scores of 7.7 FY23 just over 7 out of 10)—compared to other stakeholder groups (mean scores of over 8 out of FY18 10). 7.5 Flexibility when circumstances change* 6.9 *significantly different between years To what extent is the World Bank Group an effective development partner Q in Armenia, in terms of each of the following?, Scale: 1-10 (1: To no degree at all – 10: To a very significant degree) 19 The WBG Should Collaborate More with … The majority of respondents suggest that the WBG should collaborate more with the national government (76%) and the local government (50%). However, other stakeholder groups expressed interest in more collaboration: thus, 79% of respondents from civil society and media said the WBG should collaborate more with civil society, 82% of respondents from the private sector – that it should collaborate more with the private sector, and 89% of respondents from the academia – that the WBG should collaborate more with the academia. The WBG received the highest mean ratings for its collaboration with the national government (mean = 8.2) and with other donors and development partners (mean = 7.5). However, it tends to receive relatively lower ratings for its collaboration with other key stakeholder groups, which hasn’t changed significantly since FY18, suggesting that there is a room for improvement (see the bar chart below on the right). % of Respondents WBG as development partner in collaboration with … The national government 76% 8.2 The national government 8.4 Local government 50% 7.5 Other donors and development partners* 7.9 Private sector 42% 6.8 Local government Academia/think tanks/research institutions 38% FY23 6.7 Academia/think tanks/research institutions Other donors and development partners 34% FY18 6.7 *significantly Private sector 6.8 different Civil society (e.g., NGOs) and media 27% between years 6.6 Civil society (e.g., NGOs) and media Parliament 16% 7.0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Which THREE of the following groups should the WBG collaborate with more in Armenia? (Choose no more than 3) (N=112) Q To what extent is the WBG an effective development partner in Armenia, in terms of collaborating with the following groups: 20 (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) WBG’s Financial Instruments Mean Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Respondents gave the highest ratings for the WBG’s insisting on accountability through its lending and 8.1 The WBG insists on accountability through its for the timeliness of its financial support. These lending* 7.8 ratings were also significantly higher when compared to other ECA countries surveyed in FY22.** The ratings for the competitiveness of the WBG The WBG provides financial support in a 8.1 financing and for WBG’s financial instruments timely manner* 6.9 meeting Armenia’s needs were somewhat lower, although not negative; the letter one was on par with other ECA countries. The conditions of the WBG’s financing are 7.6 competitive compared to markets The WBG’s financial instruments meet the 7.5 needs of Armenia 7.4 Armenia FY23 ECA 22 *denotes significant difference The following questions ask about the WBG’s financial support to Armenia. If you have NO exposure to, or Q experience with, the WBG’s financing – please respond “Don’t know” To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements about the World Bank Group in Armenia? Scale: 1-10 (1: Strongly disagree– 10: Strongly agree) **ECA FY22 included: Bulgaria, Tajikistan, Kosovo 21 World Bank Group’s Knowledge Work and Activities 22 WBG’s Knowledge Work Seven in ten respondents (71%) report using WBG’s advisory services and analytical work. Across all stakeholder groups, respondents tend to give rather high rankings for the quality of the WBG’s knowledge work in Armenia and they suggest that they will keep using WBG’s advisory services and analytics in the future. One area where the WBG could continue improving is greater tailoring of its advice and recommendations to Armenia’s context, which may increase its contribution to the development outcomes (the lowest rank – please see the chart below on the right). Use WBG’s advisory services Mean Rating and analytics 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I anticipate using the WBG's advisory services 8.8 and analytical work in the future. 12% The WBG brings global expertise to Armenia as 8.4 part of its advisory services and analytical work. 18% I am satisfied with the quality of the WBG’s 8.3 advisory services and analytical work in Armenia. The WBG’s advisory services and analytical 8.0 work are timely. 7.6 71% The WBG’s advice and recommendations are 7.8 FY23 tailored to Armenia’s context. 7.4 FY18 Contribution of the WBG's knowledge work and 7.5 activities to development results in Armenia 7.4 Yes No Not sure Q The following questions ask about the WBG’s advisory services and analytical (knowledge) work in Armenia. Have you used the WBG’s advisory services and analytics in the past? (N=112) To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements about the World Bank Group in Armenia? Scale: 1-10 (1: Strongly disagree– 10: Strongly agree) 23 How significant a contribution do you believe the World Bank Group's knowledge work and activities make to development results in Armenia? Scale: 1-10 (1: Not significant at all– 10: Very significant) Communication and Outreach 24 General Information Sources % of Respondents Respondents report using a variety of sources to Research papers / Official get information about economic and social statistics 82% development issues in Armenia, but a majority across all stakeholder groups use research papers / official statistics (82%) and social Social media 63% media (63%). Respondents from local government are more likely to rely on television (83%) for news, while Newspapers (online) 37% respondents from the academia (78%) and private sector (53%) prefer online newspapers. Television (TV) 29% Blogs 6% Other (please specify) 5% Radio 2% Q How do you get most of your information about economic and social development issues in Armenia? (Choose no more than 3) (N=112) 25 Preferred WBG Information Sources % of Respondents Respondents across stakeholder groups prefer WBG’s publications and written materials as Publications and other written materials 67% the main way of obtaining information from the WBG (67%), which aligns with their choice of the general informational sources. Event/conference/ seminar/workshop (in 63% person) However, almost equally important (63%) are in- person events / conference / seminar / workshops, which are consistently valued by Website 51% respondents in both survey years. Notably, the importance of the direct contact (#1 choice in FY18) has waned after the pandemic, Direct contact with staff 43% but is still important for 43% of respondents, and is higher than a preference for social media channels (25%). This points to the importance Social media 25% of in-person communication and knowledge sharing in Armenia. Interviews and press conferences 13% Blogs 2% Q How would you prefer to receive information about the World Bank Group and its work? 26 (Choose no more than 3) (N=112) Recent interactions with the WBG 62% of respondents recall hearing or seeing something about the WBG in the last 30 days. Most respondents (49%) report seeing that information on social media channels and via research papers / official statistics (49%). Among those who selected “Social media”, most respondents report seeing something on Facebook (94%), followed by LinkedIn (35%). % of Respondents Social media 49% 94% Research papers / Official statistics 49% Newspapers (online) 25% Other 14% 35% Television (TV) 10% 12% Facebook LinkedIn Twitter Blogs 4% Radio 3% Where do you recall seeing or hearing this information? (Check all that apply) (N=112) Q What social media platforms do you recall seeing this information on? (Check all that apply) (FY23 N=69) 27 Topic recall in the last 30 days Global economic forecasts (52%) and WBG’s % of Respondents work or research on Human capital (39%) were the top two topics respondents recalled seeing or WBG global economic forecasts 52% hearing about in relation to the WBG in the last 30 days. WBG work or research on human capital (improving health care, nutrition, education, 39% and jobs and skills) WBG work or research on climate change 23% (mitigation, adaptation) WBG work or research on food insecurity 16% WBG work or research on energy (increasing energy supply, reducing dependence of fossil 14% fuels) WBG work to improve gender equity and 14% empower women and girls Create more and better jobs 7% Q What topics were included in what you saw or heard? (Check all that apply) (N=69) 28 Message recall and perceptions of the WBG’s work Mean Level of Agreement 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Those respondents who recall seeing or hearing something about the WBG in the last 30 days also The WBG supports countries to ensure 8.6 tend to give significantly higher rankings on the transition to more diversified and cleaner sources of energy* 7.8 key areas of the WBG work (see the bar chart on the right). They also report a significantly higher perceived level of familiarity with the WBG (mean = The WBG supports countries to strengthen 8.6 their human capital through improving health 7.8), compared to those who reported not hearing or care, nutrition, education, jobs, and skills* 7.9 seeing anything about the WBG recently (mean=7.1). The WBG helps countries boost climate 8.6 resilience and mitigate the effects of climate challenge* 8.0 Those who collaborate with the WBG, were slightly more likely to recall messages about the WBG (65%) than those who don’t collaborate (52%), but this The WBG helps create more and better jobs* 8.5 difference was not significant. There were some 7.3 variations among stakeholder groups, however, also not significant. The WBG is committed to comprehensive 8.4 debt solutions that bring significant benefits to people in poor countries* 7.8 These findings suggest that respondents who are more frequently exposed to the information The WBG is improving gender equity and 8.4 about the WBG, or who actively engage with the inclusion for women and girls* WBG’s staff or with the institution’s knowledge 7.4 work (read research papers, etc.) are also more likely to hold more positive views about the *denotes significant Heard about the WBG in the WBG’s work. difference last 30 days (N=69) Havent heard about the WBG in the last 30 days (N≈33) Do you recall seeing or hearing anything about the WBG in the last 30 days? Q To what extent do you agree with the following statements: Scale: 1-10 (1: To no degree at all – 10: To a very significant degree) 29 Frequency of WBG Engagement / all respondents WBG’s publications, website, and personal interactions are the most widely used channels by the stakeholders; however, other channels are also used by over 70% of respondents. This high level of engagement is most probably due to the high proportion of respondents (74%) who report collaborating with the WBG professionally. Not at all Every few months Every few weeks Every few days Read some, or all, of a WBG research paper or publication 13% 57% 25% 5% Had an exchange with WBG staff, in person, virtually, or by 15% 47% 21% 16% phone/email/text Visited a WBG website 15% 54% 24% 7% Read or heard a story about the WBG in media 22% 51% 21% 6% Attended a WBG event/conference/seminar/workshop 25% 63% 8% 4% Read a WBG post / tweet on social media 26% 42% 23% 9% Read or heard a story about the WBG in international media 29% 46% 18% 7% Q Over the past SIX MONTHS, on average how often did you do any of the following related to the World Bank Group (WBG)? (N=~112) 30 Frequency of Engagement matters for message recall Respondents who recall hearing something about the WBG in the last 30 days tend have more frequent interactions with the institution across all channels, including, most notably, more personal interaction with the WBG staff. They are also more likely to read WBG’s social media channels, visit the website, or read a research paper, and less likely to rely on media for the news about the WBG. Do you recall seeing or hearing anything about the WBG in the last 30 days? Yes (N=69) No (N=43) Every few days/weeks Every few months Every few days/weeks Every few months Had an exchange with WBG staff, in Visited a WBG website 23% 53% 49% 43% person or virtually Read a WBG post / tweet on social Read or heard a story about the WBG 39% 42% 23% 42% media in international media Read some, or all, of a WBG research Visited a WBG website 36% 54% 23% 60% paper or publication Read some, or all, of a WBG research Read a WBG post / tweet on social 35% 55% 21% 42% paper or publication media Read or heard a story about the WBG Had an exchange with WBG staff, in 33% 48% 19% 53% in media person, or virtually Read or heard a story about the WBG Read or heard a story about the WBG 26% 49% 16% 56% in international media in media Attended a WBG Attended a WBG 14% 62% 7% 65% event/conference/seminar/workshop event/conference/seminar/workshop Q Over the past SIX MONTHS, on average how often did you do any of the following related to the World Bank Group (WBG)? (N=112) 31 Demographics of the Sample 32 Respondent Profile: Affiliation and Specialization Current Affiliation Specialization % of Respondents % of Respondents Finance and markets 15% Government Institution 39% Public sector governance, anti-corruption 13% None of the above / Other 10% Civil Society Organization 17% Generalist 9% Macroeconomics, fiscal management 7% Private Sector 15% Education 6% Social protection, labor policies, jobs 5% Multilateral Agency 13% Digital development 5% Environment / Natural resource management 5% Energy / Extractives 4% Academia 8% Agriculture and food security 4% Gender 4% Local Government 5% Urban development 4% Health 3% Office of a Parliamentarian 3% Climate change 2% Transport 1% Water, sanitation 1% Trade Q Which of the following best describes your current affiliation? (Select only 1 response) (N=112) Please identify the primary specialization of your work. (Select only 1 response) (N=112) 1% 33 Respondent Profile: Collaboration with the WBG Collaboration with the WBG Collaboration Institution The World Bank (IBRD) 80% 26% Yes The International Finance Corporation (IFC) 6% No 74% Nove of the above 13% Q Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, MIGA, ICSID) in your country? (N=112) Which of the following agencies of the World Bank Group do you primarily collaborate/work with in Armenia? (Select only 1 response) (N=112) 34 Respondent Profile: Demographics Gender Age 26-35 17% Female 49% 51% 36-45 33% Male 46-55 29% 56 and above 21% Location Yerevan 90% Region/Marz 10% What’s your gender? (N=112) Q What’s your age (N=112) 35 Which best represents your geographic location? (N=112) Methodology 36 Methodology From December 2022 to February 2023, 197 stakeholders of the WBG in Armenia were invited to provide their opinions on the WBG’s work in the country by participating in a Country Opinion Survey. Participants were drawn from the Office of Prime Minister; office of a Minister; national government institutions; local governments; multilateral agencies; private sector; civil society organizations; from the academia, research institutes, and think tanks; from the media and other organizations. A total of 112 stakeholders participated in the survey (57% response rate). Respondents completed the questionnaire via an online platform. Every country that engages in the Country Opinion Survey (COS) must include specific indicator questions; several of them are aggregated for the World Bank Group’s annual Corporate Scorecard (please refer to the Indicator questions section of this report. 37 Year comparison % of Respondents FY 2018 FY 2023 The results in this year’s Country Survey were compared to those in the Country Survey conducted High-level government offices: Office of in FY18 (response rate was 85%, N=170). the President, Office of Prime Minister, 18% 3% Office of a Minister, Office of a member of Comparing responses across Country Surveys reflect Parliament / legislative body changes in attitudes over time, but also changes in Government Institutions: employees of respondent samples and changes to the survey ministries, Project Management Unit instrument itself. To reduce the influence of the latter (PMUs)/consultants on WBG-supported 33% 39% factor, only those questions with similar response projects, independent government scales/options were analyzed. institutions, ) The distribution of the stakeholder groups in the final Local government 2% 5% samples in FY18 and FY23 country surveys are listed in the table on the right. Bilateral/multilateral agency: embassy, diplomatic, military, UN, regional 6% 13% This year’s survey saw an increased outreach to and development bank response from multilateral agencies, but a decrease in Civil Society Organizations (CSO): outreach to and response from high-level government NGOs/community-based organizations, offices. These differences in the stakeholder composition private foundations, faith-based groups, 20% 17% between the two years should be taken into professional/trade associations, and youth consideration when interpreting the results of the past- groups; Media year comparison analyses. Private Sector: private sector organizations and financial sector/private 10% 15% Breakdowns for individual questions by year can be banks found in the “Armenia COS FY23 Tables with data Academia/Research Institute/Think Tank 8% 8% breakdowns.xlsx” file published in the WBG Microdata Library, along with the survey microdata and this report. Other 3% 0% Total Number of Respondents 168 112 38 Statistical analysis To attribute respondents to different stakeholder groups, Groups n % their self-reported responses to the question “Which of the following best describes your current affiliation?” Office of a Parliamentarian (National Assembly) 3 3% were used; notably, a small number of respondents from the Office of a Parliamentarian were not included in the Government Institution: Employee of a Ministry / analysis by stakeholder group. Ministerial Department / Project Implementation Unit / Independent Government Institution (e.g., Central 44 39% Breakdowns for individual questions by stakeholder Bank, Regulatory or Oversight Agency) / Judiciary / group can be found in the “Armenia COS FY23 Tables State-Owned Enterprise with data breakdowns.xlsx” file published in the WBG Microdata Library, along with the survey microdata and Local Government Office 6 5% this report. Multilateral Agency (e.g., development Scale bucketing: 14 13% organization, development bank, UN Agency) When mentioning Low, Medium, and High in scales throughout the report: 1-6 is low, 7-8 is medium, and 9- Civil Society Organization: local and regional 10 is high. (NGO; Community Based Organization; Private 19 17% Foundation; Professional group) and Media Statistical significance: Key statistically significant findings are denoted with an Private Sector: Private Company / Financial Sector 17 15% asterisk (*) throughout the report or discussed in the Organization / Private Bank descriptions to the charts. Significance is measured at p-value < .05 Academia/Research Institute/Think Tank 9 8% Total 112 100% 39 Indicator questions A2_5. To what extent do you trust the World Bank Group to do what is right? Scale: 1-10 (1: To no degree at all – 10: To a very significant degree) A3. How effective has the World Bank Group been in achieving development results in Armenia? A4. Overall, the World Bank Group currently plays a relevant role in development in Armenia, Scale: 1-10 (1: Strongly disagree – 10: Strongly agree) A5. The World Bank Group’s work is aligned with what I consider the development priorities for Armenia, Scale: 1-10 (1: Strongly disagree – 10: Strongly agree) A6. The World Bank Group’s work helps end extreme poverty in Armenia, Scale: 1-10 (1: Strongly disagree – 10: Strongly agree) A7. To what extent does the World Bank Group influence the development agenda in Armenia? Scale: 1-10 (1: To no degree at all– 10: To a very significant degree) A8. How significant a contribution do you believe the World Bank Group's knowledge work and activities make to development results in your country?, Scale: 1-10 (1: Not significant at all – 10: Very significant) To what extent is the World Bank Group an effective development partner in Armenia, in terms of each of the following? – Scale: 1-10 (1: To no degree at all – 10: To a very significant degree) C2. Responsiveness to needs, C3. Access to WBG staff and experts, C4. Flexibility when circumstances change, C5. Being a long-term partner, To what extent is the WBG an effective development partner in Armenia, in terms of collaborating with the following groups: – Scale: 1-10 (1: To no degree at all – 10: To a very significant degree) C7_1.Collaboration with the national government C7_3.Collaboration with the private sector C7_4.Collaboration with civil society C7_5.Collaboration with other donor and development partners C8_1 To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statement? – The WBG’s financial instruments meet the needs of Armenia (i.e., investment lending, Development Policy Loan, Trust Funds/Grants). Scale: 1-10 (1: Strongly disagree – 10: Strongly agree) C8_4. To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statement? – The WBG provides financial support in a timely manner., Scale: 1-10 (1: Strongly disagree – 10: Strongly agree) C10_1.To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements about the World Bank Group in Armenia? I am satisfied with the quality of the WBG’s advisory services and analytical work in Armenia. Scale: 1-10 (1: Strongly disagree – 10: Strongly agree) C10_4.To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements about the World Bank Group in Armenia? The WBG’s advice and recommendations are tailored to Armenia’s context. Scale: 1-10 (1: Strongly disagree – 10: Strongly agree) 40 Note: Corporate Scorecard questions are highlighted RED