March 2023 FY 2022 Panama Country Opinion Survey Report ECR Business Intelligence Team Acknowledgements The Panama 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 Panama country team independent fielding agency Gallup Panama. In particular, BI is grateful for the support from Maria De Los Angeles Luque Cansino (Operations Officer) who coordinated the survey related activities from Panama City, Panama. 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 and Instruments The Future Role of the WBG in Panama 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 Panama 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 Panama’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? 4 Overall Context 5 Country Direction and Economic Opportunity Although 4 in 10 respondents felt that Panama is headed in the right direction, a majority of respondents felt that economic opportunities in the country are decreasing, a noticeable increase compared to the FY19 results. Country Direction Perceptions of Economic Opportunity 2019 2022 20% 31% Increasing 26% The right direction 40% The wrong direction 33% 55% Decreasing Not sure 34% 36% Staying about the 26% same Q In general, would you say that Panama is headed in ... ? (N=121) % of respondents shown. Do you think that economic opportunity for citizens in Panama is … ? (FY19 N=137; FY22 N=121) % of respondents shown. Significantly different between years. 6 Familiarity with the World Bank Group 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Year comparison: Respondents in this year’s Country Survey had significantly lower levels of All Respondents 6.4 familiarity with the World Bank compared to FY19 (FY22 mean = 6.4; FY19 mean = 7.5) Employee of a Ministry/PMU/Consultant 7.9 Collaboration: Respondents who collaborate with the WBG reported significantly higher levels of familiarity with the work of the World Bank Civil Society 6.5 compared to respondents who do not collaborate (WB collaborators mean = 8.4; non-collaborators Office of President/PM/ 6.4 mean = 6.2). Minister/Parliamentarian Private Sector 6.2 Acedemia 6.1 Local Government 6.1 Bilateral/Multilateral Agency 5.8 Q How familiar are you with the work of these organizations in Panama? The World Bank (IBRD) (1: Not familiar at all – 10: Extremely familiar) Mean familiarity rating shown. 7 Familiarity with the WBG vs. Other Development Banks 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Stakeholders express higher familiarity with the work of Inter-American Development Bank than The Inter-American Development Bank 7.1 the World Bank. However, this year ratings for all development banks were significantly lower than (IDB/BID)* 8.0 in FY19. 6.6 The World Bank (IBRD)* 7.4 The International Finance Corporation (IFC), 6.6 the World Bank Group’s private sector arm 6.2 The Latin American Development Bank (CAF)* 6.9 The Central American Bank for Economic 5.4 Integration (CABEI/BCiE) 5.3 FY22 FY19 Q How familiar are you with the work of these organizations in Panama? (1: Not familiar at all – 10: Extremely familiar). Mean familiarity rating shown. *Significantly different between years. 8 Vs. FY19 Development Priorities Education Job creation/employment 55% 69% -15 +42 Health 41% Although education remains the top development +29 priority this year as it was in FY19, there were Anti-corruption 36% +13 fewer respondents selecting it this year. Transport 27% +23 Job creation/employment significantly grew in Food security 21% importance, from 13% of respondents selecting it in FY19 to 55% in FY22, making it the #2 Agriculture and rural development 20% +7 development priority. Private sector development 18% +14 Noticeable increases in priority were also seen for Development of indigenous population 17% +10 health, anti-corruption and transport, which rounded out the top five priorities in FY22. Public sector governance/reform 17% -24 Public sector governance/reform, the #3 priority Energy 16% in FY19, waned significantly in priority this year. Natural resource management 15% Water and sanitation 15% Judiciary reform 14% It should be noted that there was a change in the methodology for this question: In FY19, respondents Climate change 12% could select up to three priorities, while in FY22 they could select up to five. Economic growth; competitive business 12% Disaster risk management 12% Effective response to the COVID-19 11% ICT 11% Please identify which of the following development priorities you consider the most Social protection 11% Q important in Panama. (Choose no more than 5) (N=121). % of respondents shown. 9 Trust in Institutions The World Bank Group 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 7.5 8 9 10 The World Health Organization (WHO) 7.4 The WBG, along with the WHO and UN, are the most trusted organizations in Panama. The United Nations (UN) 7.3 The national government and National Assembly The International Monetary Fund 6.9 were the least trusted institutions. Media (international, domestic, and web-based) were Regional development banks 6.9 trusted only slightly more than the national government. Bilateral organizations 6.8 International civil society 6.3 Domestic private sector 6.3 Domestic civil society 6.3 Faith-based institutions 6.2 International private sector 6.1 International media and their web presence 6.0 Web based media 5.8 Domestic traditional media 5.6 The national government 5.5 The National Assembly 3.5 To what extent do you trust each of the following groups to do what is right? Q (1: To no degree at all – 10: To a very significant degree). Mean rating shown. 10 Attribution of Failure Corruption, poor coordination and excessive bureaucracy within the government, and reforms not well thought out in light of country challenges were the main reasons for slow/failed reforms in Panama according to respondents. Corruption 32% Poor coordination and excessive bureaucracy 31% within the government Reforms are not well thought out in light of 29% country challenges Pressure from outside interest groups 22% Inadequate capacity in the government 20% Political pressures and obstacles 20% Inadequate private sector participation 13% Inadequate citizen/civil society participation 12% Inadequate government accountability 7% Inadequate donor coordination 5% Q When economic and/or social reform efforts fail or are slow to take place in Panama, which of the following would you attribute this to? (Choose no more than 2) (N=121). % of respondents shown 11 Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group 12 Key Performance Indicators In FY22, responses to the key indicator questions were notably higher than the FY19 COS, significantly so for the WBG’s relevance, influence, and overall effectiveness. Diff in % high vs. FY22 FY19 FY19 Mean Mean Achieving Results 19% 21% 59% +11 7.5 7.2 Relevance* 20% 26% 54% +9 7.5 6.9 Influence* 19% 31% 50% +13 7.4 6.8 Alignment 21% 33% 46% +4 7.1 6.9 Effectiveness 23% 33% 44% -14 7.1 7.5 Low (1-5) Neutral (6-7) High (8-10) *significantly different between years Overall, please rate your impression of the effectiveness of these organizations in Panama. The World Bank (IBRD) (1: Not effective at all – 10: Very effective) Overall, the World Bank Group currently plays a relevant role in development in Panama (1: Strongly disagree – 10: Strongly agree) The World Bank Group’s work is aligned with what I consider the development priorities for Panama (1: Strongly disagree – 10: Strongly agree). Q To what extent does the World Bank Group’s work help to achieve development results in Panama? (1: To no degree at all– 10: To a very significant degree) 13 To what extent does the World Bank Group influence the development agenda in Panama? (1: To no degree at all – 10: To a very significant degree). Effectiveness of the WBG vs. Other Development Banks 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 As in FY19, respondents gave the highest effectiveness ratings to The Inter-American The Inter-American Development Bank 7.4 Development Bank (IDB/BID) and The World (IDB/BID) 7.7 Bank (IBRD). 7.1 The World Bank (IBRD) 7.5 6.7 The Latin American Development Bank (CAF)* 7.3 The International Finance Corporation (IFC), 6.5 the World Bank Group’s private sector arm The Central American Bank for Economic 6.0 Integration (CABEI/BCiE) 6.2 FY22 FY19 Q Overall, please rate your impression of the effectiveness of these organizations in Panama. (1-"Not effective at all", 10-"Very Effective"). Mean effectiveness rating shown. *Significantly different between years. 14 Greatest Value Vs. FY19 Capacity development related to World Capacity development related to WBG supported Bank Group supported projects 37% +2 projects and financial resources were the most highly valued activity of the WBG in Panama, Financial resources 36% +8 according to respondents. It should be noted that 7 in 10 civil society and Technical assistance 27% +7 academia respondents selected capacity development as the WBG’s greatest value, much more than respondents from other stakeholder Formal policy advice, studies, analyses 25% -9 groups. In contrast, a majority of respondents from Implementation support 17% bilateral/multilateral agencies, private sector, ministry employees/PMUs, and high-level government Bringing together different groups of officials considered the WBG’s financial resources stakeholders 15% as its greatest value to Panama. Data and statistics 9% Promoting knowledge sharing 8% Mobilizing third party financial resources 7% Donor coordination 6% When thinking about the World Bank Group’s role in Panama, which activity do you Q VALUE the most? (Choose no more than 2) (N=121) % of respondents shown. 15 Overall Ratings for Indicator Questions Aggregating across the twenty-five COS indicator 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 questions, respondents across stakeholder groups gave statistically similar rankings for the WBG in All Stakeholder Groups 7.3 Panama. Employee of Ministry/ PMU/ Collaboration: Respondents who collaborate with 7.8 Consultant the WBG had significantly higher mean ratings for the aggregated indicator questions (mean rating = Academia 7.8 8.3) compared to respondents who do not collaborate with the WBG (mean rating = 7.2). Local Government 7.7 Office of the President/PM/ 7.5 Minister/Parlamentarian Civil Society 7.2 Bilatral/Multilateral Agency 6.4 Private Sector 6.4 Q Aggregated mean rating for all indicator questions, all asked on 10-pt. scale. Mean rating shown. 16 World Bank Group’s Support in Development Areas 17 Effectiveness of WBG’s Support in Sectoral Areas The WBG’s work in global pandemics, equality of opportunity and public sector governance/reform received the highest ratings of effectiveness. Ratings of the WBG’s effectiveness across sectors were statistically similar to those in FY19, except for water and sanitation, which was rated significantly lower this year compared to FY19. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 7.5 7.0 Global pandemics Economic growth 7.4 7.4 7.0 Equality of opportunity Logistics, trade, and exports 6.6 7.1 6.9 7.4 Natural resource management Public sector governance/reform 7.2 7.2 6.9 7.2 Private sector development 6.5 Health 7.2 6.9 Development of indigenous Energy 7.1 7.2 population 7.7 6.9 Disaster risk management 7.2 7.2 Social protection 7.0 6.8 Water and sanitation* 7.6 7.1 Education 6.6 6.6 Anti-corruption 6.8 Information and communications 7.1 technology 7.1 6.6 Urban development 6.8 Agriculture and rural development 7.1 FY22 6.7 6.5 Transport 7.2 FY19 7.1 Gender equity 7.2 6.3 Job creation/employment 6.5 How EFFECTIVE do you believe the World Bank Group is in terms of the work it does in the following areas of development in Panama? Q (If you have NO exposure to/experience in working in any of the sectors listed below, please respond “Don’t know”) 18 (1: Not effective at all – 10: Very effective) Mean rating shown. *Significantly different between years WBG Helping the Poorest in Panama Respondents’ perceptions of the WBG’s support to the poorest significantly improved compared to FY19. Around half of respondents (48%) agree that WBG’s help is either fully sufficient or somewhat sufficient. 8% To a fully sufficient degree 3% 40% To a somewhat sufficient degree 29% 33% To a somewhat insufficient degree 40% 7% To a very insufficient degree 6% FY22 FY19 12% Don’t know 22% Q To what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group’s work and support help the poorest in Panama? (Select only 1 respo nse) 19 (FY19 N=128; FY22 N=121) % of Respondents shown. Significantly different between years World Bank Group’s Work and Engagement on the Ground 20 The WBG as a Treating clients and stakeholders in Panama 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8.1 8 9 10 Development Partner with respect 8.1 8.4 Staff preparedness 7.9 The WBG is seen as a long-term partner that Collaboration with the Government 8.0 treats clients and stakeholders with respect, 7.6 collaborates with the Government and openly 7.8 Openness* shares data and other information. 7.3 7.8 Ratings for a number of these aspects of the WBG Being a long-term partner 8.1 as a development partner significantly improved compared to the FY19 survey, including openness, Access to WBG staff and experts* 7.6 6.9 access to WBG staff, responsiveness, flexibility, and FY22 collaboration with other donors and development Collaboration with other donors and 7.6 FY19 partners, the private sector, and civil society. development partners* 6.8 7.5 Straightforwardness and honesty 7.8 7.5 Responsiveness to needs* 6.8 7.3 Being inclusive 7.1 7.2 Collaboration with the private sector* 6.4 7.1 Flexibility when circumstances change* 6.4 7.1 Collaboration with civil society* 6.3 To what extent is the World Bank Group an effective development partner in Q Panama, in terms of each of the following? (1: To no degree at all – 10: To a very significant degree). Mean rating shown. *Significantly different between years. 21 The WBG as a Development Partner 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 The WBG insists on accountability through 8.0 its lending Respondents gave the highest ratings for the WBG insisting on accountability and increasing Working with the WBG increases Panama’s 7.9 Panama’s institutional capacity. institutional capacity 7.5 7.7 The WBG measures results effectively 7.4 The WBG’s Environmental and Social 7.7 Framework requirements are reasonable 7.3 The WBG’s conditions on its lending are 7.3 reasonable 7.2 7.1 The WBG disburses funds promptly 7.3 The WBG’s approvals and reviews are done 7.0 in a timely fashion 7.1 The WBG takes decisions quickly in 6.9 Panama 6.5 FY22 FY19 To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements about the Q World Bank Group in Panama? (1: Strongly disagree – 10: Strongly agree). 22 Mean rating shown. World Bank Group’s Knowledge Work and Activities 23 WBG’s Knowledge Work: Key Indicators Respondents gave the highest ratings for the technical quality of the WBG’s knowledge products; however, ratings in FY22 were significantly lower than in FY19. The majority of respondents reported consulting WBG knowledge work a few times a year or more often. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Weekly 11% Technical quality of the WBG's knowledge 7.7 work and activities* 8.2 Monthly 10% Meeting Panama’s needs for knowledge 7.4 A few times a year 42% services 7.0 Rarely 27% Contribution of the WBG's knowledge work 7.3 and activities to development results in Panama 7.5 Never 10% FY22 FY19 The World Bank Group meets Panama’s needs for knowledge services (e.g., research, analysis, data, technical assistance) (1: S trongly disagree – 10: Strongly agree). Mean rating shown. Overall, how significant a contribution do you believe the World Bank Group's knowledge work and activities make to development results in your country? (1: Not significant at all– 10: Very Q significant). Mean rating shown. Overall, how would you rate the technical quality of the World Bank Group's knowledge work and activities? (1: Very low technical quality– 10: Very high technical quality). 24 Mean rating shown. Significantly different between years. How frequently do you consult World Bank Group’s knowledge work and activities in the work you do? (N=121). % of respondents shown. Attributes of the WBG’s Knowledge Work The WBG’s knowledge products were most highly 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 rated for being a source of relevant information Are source of relevant information on global 8.0 on global good practices and adaptable to good practices 7.9 Panama’s specific development challenges and country circumstances. Are adaptable to Panama’s specific 7.9 development challenges and country 7.4 Ratings for nearly all aspects of the WBG’s circumstances* knowledge work were slightly higher this year than in FY19; however, only being adaptable to 7.6 Are timely 7.5 Panama’s specific development challenges and country circumstances reached statistical significance. 7.4 Are translated enough into local language 7.1 Include appropriate level of stakeholder 7.3 involvement during preparation 7.0 Panama received value for money from the 7.1 WBG’s Reimbursable Advisory 6.9 Services (RAS) 7.0 Are adequately disseminated 6.5 FY22 FY19 In Panama, to what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group’s Q knowledge work and activities: (1: To no degree at all – 10: To a very significant 25 degree). Mean rating shown *Significantly different between years. The Future Role of the World Bank Group in Panama 26 Areas the WBG Should Prioritize with its Resources Education 63% Overall, respondents’ top focus areas for the WBG Job creation/employment 48% were aligned with their development priorities for Health 37% Panama. Transport 26% In FY22, as in FY19, respondents thought the WBG Agriculture and rural development 24% should prioritize education in Panama, which was Anti-corruption 23% also their top development priority. Food security 21% Energy 20% Of note, job creation/employment and transport were of much more priority to respondents this year Development of indigenous population 20% compared to FY19. Job creation increased by 40 Private sector development 19% percentage points and transport by 24 percentage Water and sanitation 19% points compared to FY19. Public sector governance/reform 18% Economic growth and bussiness environment 17% Natural resource management 17% It should be noted that there was a change in the methodology Climate change 13% for this question: In FY19, respondents could select up to three Equality of opportunity 12% priorities, while in FY22 they could select up to five. Disaster risk management 11% Effective response to the COVID-19 pandemic 9% Urban development 9% Judiciary reform 8% Information and communications technology 7% Social protection 7% Gender equity 6% Global/regional integration 5% When thinking about how the World Bank Group can have the most impact on development results in Panama, which sectors do you believe the World Bank Q Group should prioritize with its resources (financial and knowledge services) in Panama? (Choose no more than 5) (N=121). % of respondents shown. 27 Making the WBG’s Advice of Greater Value More public disclosure of its work 42% Four in ten respondents said that more public disclosure of WBG work and increasing capacity Increase the level of capacity development 39% in the country development in Panama would make the WBG’s guidance and advice of greater value. Respondents also Provide more adequate data/knowledge on 31% said that the WBG should provide more adequate Panama’s economy data/knowledge on Panama’s economy, increase its Increase the level of country specific country specific expertise, and be more sensitive 31% expertise toward the political and social realities in Panama. Be more sensitive toward political and social 29% realities Respondents from academia, private sector, and local government were the most likely to say that the WBG Reduce the complexity of obtaining World 21% Bank Group financing should have more public disclosure of its work. Employees of Ministries/PMUs/Consultants and Work faster 20% respondents from local government were the most likely Incorporate more innovative technologies to say that the WBG should increase the level of into its work and support 17% capacity development in Panama. Help to bring discipline/effective supervision 15% to implementation of WBG projects Respondents from civil society were the most likely to say that the WBG should be more sensitive toward Collaborate more effectively with 13% political and social realities whereas respondents from Government clients bilateral/multilateral agencies were the most likely to say Increase availability of Reimbursable 4% that the WBG should increase its country specific Advisory Services (RAS) expertise. Ensure greater selectivity in its work 3% Be less influenced by developed countries 2% Which of the following SHOULD the WBG do to improve its advice and guidance and their priorities Q in Panama? (Choose no more than 3) (N=121). % of respondents shown. 28 The WBG Should Collaborate More with … Vs FY’19 As in FY19, respondents indicated that the WBG Local government 63% +16 should collaborate more with local government and academia. This year, respondents increasingly wanted the WBG to collaborate more with Academia/think tanks/ 53% +9 research institutes NGOs/CBOs compared to FY19. Over half of respondents from Employee of a NGOs/CBOs +29 50% Ministry/PMU/Consultants group would like to see more collaboration with beneficiaries (56%). Private sector +11 39% It should be noted that there was a change in the methodology +10 for this question: In FY19, respondents could select up to Beneficiaries 24% groups, while in FY22 they could select up to three. Donor community +15 21% Media 18% +9 In addition to the regular relations with the national government, which THREE of the following groups should the World Bank Group collaborate Q with more in your country? (Choose no more than 3) (FY22 N=121). 29 % of respondents shown. Communication and Outreach 30 Information Sources about Economic and Social Development Issues Local television 61% A majority of respondents reported using local Social media 61% television and social media. High-level government officials, employees of International television 26% ministries/PMUs/Consultants, local government, and civil society were most likely to utilize local Local newspapers 26% television whereas respondents from bilateral/ Periodicals 21% multilateral agencies, private sector, and civil society were more likely to use social media. Blogs 21% Respondents from academia reported using social media and international television equally. Websites/apps of international TV 16% Websites/apps of international 14% newspapers/ magazines Websites/apps of local TV 8% Other 6% International radio 4% Websites/apps of local 3% newspapers/magazines International newspapers 2% Which would you say are your MAIN sources of news about economic and social Q development issues in Panama? (Choose no more than 3) (N=121). 31 % of respondents shown. Preferred WBG Information Sources Vs FY’19 Respondents preferred to obtain information from the e-Newsletters 45% +4 WBG from e-Newsletters and WBG seminars/ workshops/conferences. -6 WBG seminars/workshops/ conferences 44% Preference for WBG social media was much higher this year compared to FY19. Of note, respondents World Bank Group’s social media 36% +24 from private sector, civil society, and bilateral/ multilateral agencies were much more likely to prefer Webinars or online events hosted by WBG 36% WBG social media than respondents from other stakeholder groups. World Bank Group’s publications and other 35% +6 written materials A majority of respondents from local government Direct contact with World Bank Group 26% -4 preferred direct contact with WBG, significantly more than respondents from other stakeholder groups. World Bank Group’s website 25% +1 Interviews and press conferences for the 17% Panama’s media World Bank Group’s blogs 7% How would you prefer to obtain information about the World Bank Group Q and its work? (Choose no more than 3) (FY22 N=121) 32 % of respondents shown. Frequency of WBG Engagement Press coverage in local or global media were the most frequent engagements with the WBG, followed by visiting the WBG website or consulting WBG research papers. Not at all Every few months Every few weeks Every few days Read, viewed or heard a story about the WBG in global media 13% 41% 39% 7% Read, viewed or heard a story about the WBG in local media 16% 47% 27% 10% Visited a WBG website 21% 41% 33% 5% Read some or all of a WBG research paper or publication 26% 52% 14% 7% Read a WBG e-newsletter 34% 44% 17% 5% Interacted with the WBG on Social Media 39% 29% 26% 7% Attended an event/conference hosted by the WBG 54% 32% 11% 3% Participated in a webinar or online event hosted by the WBG 55% 33% 8% 4% Met professionally with WBG staff 55% 29% 9% 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 = ~121) 33 Demographics of the Sample 34 Respondent Profile: Affiliation and Specialization Current Affiliation Specialization Local Government Office or Staff 17% Education 18% Employee of Ministry 12% Other 17% Poverty 8% Academia/Research Institute/Think Tank 12% Generalist 8% Multilateral Agency 10% Finance and markets 7% Private Sector Organization 10% Macroeconomics, fiscal management 6% NGO/Community Based Organization 7% Communications, public affairs 5% Environment, natural resources 4% Office of a Minister 6% Health, nutrition 3% Independent Government Institution 4% Transport 3% Office of a member of Parliament 3% Governance, anti-corruption 2% PMU/Consultant/Contractor 3% Social protection 2% Water, sanitation 2% Bilateral Agency 3% Agriculture, rural development 2% Media 3% Tourism 2% Office of the President, Prime Minister 2% Demographics, migration 2% State-Owned Enterprise 2% Trade and competitiveness 2% Note that for further Professional/Trade association Jobs 1% 2% analyses, some respondent groups Energy 1% Other 2% were combined (for Climate change 1% Financial Sector/Private Bank 1% details in the Gender 1% Private Foundation 1% Methodology section). Urban development 1% Q Which of the following best describes your current affiliation? (Select only 1 response) (N=121). % of respondents shown 35 Please identify the primary specialization of your work. (Select only 1 response) (N=121). % of respondents shown Respondent Profile: Collaboration with the WBG Collaboration with the WBG Collaboration Institution The World Bank (IBRD) 85% 17% Yes The International Finance Corporation (IFC) 10% No 83% The Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) 5% Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, MIGA, ICSID) in your country? (N=121) Q Which of the following agencies of the World Bank Group do you primarily collaborate/work with in Panama? (Select only ONE response) (N=20) 36 Respondent Profile: Demographics Age Gender 25 and under 0% 26-35 9% 32% Female 36-45 23% Male 46-55 29% 68% 56 and above 39% Level within organization Location Panama City 72% Junior level 8% Provincial capital 12% Mid-level staff 12% Rural areas 12% Mid-level Indigenous areas 4% decision-maker / 27% manager What’s your gender? (N=121) Senior level 53% What’s your age (N=121) Q Which best represents your geographic location? (N=121) 37 Within your organization, would you describe yourself as … ? (N=121) Methodology 38 Methodology From June 2022 to October 2022, stakeholders of the WBG in Panama were invited to provide their opinions on the WBG’s work in the country by participating in a Country Opinion Survey. A total of 1,030 stakeholders were asked to participate, drawn from the Office of the President, Prime Minister, a Minister, or a member of Parliament/Legislative body; ministries, ministerial departments, or implementation agencies; project management units (PMUs) overseeing implementation of WBG projects or consultants and contractors working on WBG-supported projects and programs; local governments; independent government institutions; the judiciary; state-owned enterprises; bilateral and multilateral agencies; private sector organizations; the financial sector and private banks; private foundations; NGOs and community-based organizations; professional and trade associations; faith-based groups; youth groups; academia, research institutes, or think tanks; and the media. A total of 121 stakeholders participated in the survey (12% response rate). Respondents completed the questionnaire via the fielding agency’s online platform. Every country that engages in the Country Opinion Survey (COS) must include specific indicator questions that will be aggregated for the World Bank Group’s annual Corporate Scorecard (please refer to the Indicator questions section of this report). 39 Year Comparisons % of Respondents FY19 FY22 The results of this year’s Country Survey were High-level government offices: Office of the President, Office of Prime Minister, compared to those in the Country Survey conducted 2% 12% Office of a Minister, Office of a member of in FY19 (response rate was 12%, N=138). Parliament / legislative body Comparing responses across Country Surveys reflect Government Institutions: employees of changes in attitudes over time, but also changes in ministries, PMUs, consultants on WBG- respondent samples and changes to the survey supported projects, independent 38% 21% instrument itself. To reduce the influence of the latter government institutions, the judiciary, and factor, only those questions with similar response state-owned enterprises scales/options were analyzed. Local Government 6% 17% The distribution of respondent samples from the FY19 and FY22 Country Surveys used in the year Bilateral/Multilateral Agency: embassy, diplomatic, military, UN, regional 15% 13% comparisons analyses are listed in the table on the right. development bank This year’s survey saw increased outreach and responding from high-level government officials and Civil Society Organizations (CSO): local government, but less responding from media and NGOs/community-based organizations, government institutions. These differences in 7% 9% private foundations, professional/trade stakeholder compositions among survey respondents associations should be taken into account when interpreting the results of the past-year comparison analyses. Private Sector: private sector organizations and financial sector/ 17% 11% private banks Academia/Research Institute/Think Tank 7% 12% Media 6% 3% Other 2% 2% Total Number of Respondents 121 135 40 Statistical Analysis Groups n % Office of the President, Prime Minister/ Minister / Parliamentarian: includes 14 12% To analyze responses by stakeholder groups, responses respondents from the three high-level to the question “Which of the following best describes government offices your current affiliation?” were re-grouped and recoded into nine groups (please see the table to the right). Employee of a Ministry: includes employees of ministries and respondents from project 18 15% management units (PMUs) / consultants on Scale bucketing: WBG-supported projects When mentioning Low, Neutral, and High in scales throughout the report: 1-5 is low, 6-7 is neutral and 8-10 Local government 21 17% is high. Statistical significance: Bilateral/Multilateral Agency 16 13% Key statistically significant findings are noted throughout Private Sector: includes private sector the report, please refer to the Appendix (a separate organizations and financial sector/private 13 11% attachment) for a complete detail of responding banks Civil Society: includes NGOs/community- Significance is defined as p-value < .05 based organizations, professional/trade 11 9% associations, private foundations Academia/Research Institute/Think Tank 14 12% Other: includes respondents from independent government institutions, state-owned 14 12% enterprises, the media and other groups Total 121 100% 41 Indicator questions A5_4. To what extent do you trust the World Bank Group to do what is right? (1: To no degree at all – 10: To a very significant degree) B2. Overall, the World Bank Group currently plays a relevant role in development in Panama (1: Strongly disagree – 10: Strongly agree) B3. The World Bank Group’s work is aligned with what I consider the development priorities for Panama (1: Strongly disagree – 10: Strongly agree) B4_1. Overall, please rate your impression of the effectiveness of these organizations in Panama. The World Bank (IBRD)(1: Not effective at all – 10: Very effective) B5. To what extent does the World Bank Group’s work help to achieve development results in Panama? (1: To no degree at all– 10: To a very significant degree) B6. To what extent does the World Bank Group influence the development agenda in Panama? (1: To no degree at all– 10: To a very significant degree) C2:C13. To what extent is the World Bank Group an effective development partner in Panama, in terms of each of the following? Collaboration with the private sector, Being inclusive, Straightforwardness and honesty, Access to WBG staff and experts, Being a long-term partner, Responsiveness to needs, Collaboration with the Government, Flexibility when circumstances change, Collaboration with civil society, Treating clients and stakeholders in Panama with respect, Openness (sharing data and other information), Collaboration with other donors and development partners (1: To no degree at all – 10: To a very significant degree) C14. To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statement? – The World Bank Group takes decisions quickly in Panama (1: Strongly disagree – 10: Strongly agree) C22:C23. To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements about the World Bank Group in Panama? – The World Bank Group’s financial instruments (i.e., investment lending, Development Policy Loan, Trust Funds, etc.) meet the needs of Panama, The World Bank Group meets Panama’s needs for knowledge services (e.g., research, analysis, data, technical assistance) (1: Strongly disagree – 10: Strongly agree) E7. In Panama, to what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group’s knowledge work and activities: Are adaptable to Panama’s specific development challenges and country circumstances (1: To no degree at all– 10: To a very significant degree) E8. Overall, how significant a contribution do you believe the World Bank Group's knowledge work and activities make to development results in your country? (1: Not significant at all – 10: Very significant) E9. Overall, how would you rate the technical quality of the World Bank Group's knowledge work and activities? (1: Very low technical quality – 10: Very high technical quality) Note: Corporate Scorecard questions are highlighted RED 42