FY 2024 Brazil Country Opinion Survey Report ECR Business Intelligence Team | October 2024 Acknowledgements The Brazil 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) and Svetlana Markova (Senior External Affairs Officer). Yulia Danilina, Jessica Cameron, Nan Lin, and Sofya Gubaydullina oversaw the design, reporting, and analysis of the survey results. Noreen Wambui and Irina Popova provided data support. BI acknowledges the significant contribution from the Brazil country team and independent field agency, PoderData. In particular, BI is grateful for the support from Maria Elisa Dias Diniz Costa (Senior External Affairs Officer) and Juliana Neves Soares Brescianini (Operations Analyst), who coordinated the survey-related activities from Brasília, Brazil. Contents Objectives Methodology Overview Overall Context Overall Attitudes Toward the World Bank Group World Bank Group’s Support for Development Areas World Bank Group’s Engagement on the Ground in Brazil World Bank Group’s Financial Instruments and Knowledge Work The Future Role of the World Bank Group in Brazil Communication and Outreach Sample Demographics and Detailed Methodology 3 Objectives This survey was designed to assist the World Bank Group (WBG) in better understanding how stakeholders in Brazil perceive the WBG. The survey explored the following questions: 1. Overall Context: How familiar are they with the WBG? How much do they trust the WBG? 2. Key Indicators: What opinion do key stakeholders have of the WBG regarding its effectiveness, relevance, alignment with Brazil’s development priorities, and other key indicators? Are opinions improving or declining? 3. Development Priorities: What areas of development are perceived to be the most important? Have the priorities changed over the past three years? How effective is the WBG perceived to be in these areas? 4. Engagement on the Ground: How is the WBG perceived as a development partner in Brazil? Are opinions improving or declining? 5. Financial Instruments and Knowledge Work: What do key stakeholders value the most regarding the WBG’s work in Brazil? What opinion do key stakeholders have of WBG financial instruments and knowledge products? Are opinions improving or declining? What are stakeholders’ suggestions for improving WBG’s effectiveness? 6. Communication and Outreach: What are the preferred communication channels? Are there differences among stakeholder groups in terms of preferred channels? 7. Message Recall: What key topics that the WBG communicates do stakeholders recall? Is there a relationship between message recall and views of the WBG’s work? 4 Methodology Overview Government Institution 31% ▪ Fielded February – May 2024 ▪ 858 potential participants were asked to complete a mostly quantitative survey Subnational Government 20% ▪ Respondents completed the questionnaire online ▪ List of names provided by the WBG country team and Civil Society 14% supplemented by the field agency ▪ Process managed on the ground by the fielding agency Private Sector 9% ▪ 159 participants (19% response rate) ▪ 36% from Southeast; 31% from Center-West Academia/Research Center 9% ▪ 45% currently collaborate with the WBG Media 8% ▪ Compared to FY19 Country Survey ▪ 300 participants (32% response rate) Bilateral or Multilateral Agency 7% ▪ 32% from Southeast; 31% from Center-West ▪ 32% collaborated with the WBG Office of a Parliamentarian 4% Click here for details of the Respondent Sample and Methodology. What is your primary professional affiliation? (Select only 1 response) Q (Percentage of Respondents, N=159) 5 6 Overall Context “Prioritize the reduction of inequalities in all its initiatives. Promote intersectoral coalitions that bring together governments, the private sector, academia, and civil society organizations to tackle complex challenges, boosting dialogue, understanding, and collaboration. Listen to and work more closely with representatives of the users of public policies, such as communities and civil society organizations. Better publicize studies, opportunities, and funding lines.” (Civil Society Respondent) Q In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG could do to increase its effectiveness in Brazil? (N=81) Increased Familiarity with the World Bank Group ▪ Comparison of FY19 and FY24: Respondents in this year’s Country Survey reported higher levels of familiarity with the All Respondents 7.2 WBG compared to respondents in the FY19 Survey: Mean familiarity: FY24 = 7.2 Media 7.7 FY19 = 6.6 Academia/Research Center 7.6 ▪ Collaboration with the WBG: Respondents who indicated that they collaborate with the WBG reported significantly Subnational Government 7.5 higher levels of familiarity with the institution’s work: Mean familiarity: Collaborate with WBG = 7.7 Government Institution 7.5 Do not collaborate = 6.8 Private Sector 7.4 ▪ Stakeholders: Although respondents from bilateral or multilateral agencies and civil society indicated low familiarity with the WBG compared to respondents from other Bilateral or Multilateral Agency 6.9 stakeholder groups, this difference did not reach statistical significance. Civil Society 6.3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating of Familiarity How familiar are you with the work of the World Bank Group in Brazil? 7 Q Scale: 1 Not familiar at all – 10 Very familiar Statistically similar between stakeholder groups Stakeholders Most Familiar with the WBG and IDB ▪ Respondents in this year’s Country Survey were asked to FY19 indicate their familiarity with the work of several international World Bank Group 7.2 Mean = 6.6 organizations and the World Bank Group. Of these organizations, respondents in Brazil indicated the highest Inter-American Development FY19 levels of familiarity with the work of the WBG and Inter- 7.1 Mean = American Development Bank, followed by the UN. Bank (IDB/BID) 6.2 Respondents were least familiar with the work of the New Development Bank in Brazil. United Nations 6.6 ▪ Year comparison: It should be noted that respondents in this year’s Country Survey reported significantly higher levels of familiarity with the Inter-American Development Bank European Union 5.7 (IDB/BID) and the Development Bank of Latin America and the Caribbean (CAF) compared to respondents in FY19. International Monetary Fund 5.5 Development Bank of Latin America and the Caribbean 5.2 FY19 Mean = 4.5 (CAF) New Development Bank (NDB) 4.8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating of Familiarity How familiar are you with the work of these organizations in Brazil? Scale: 1 Not familiar at all – 10 Very familiar 8 Q Ratings for the IDB and WBG were statistically similar, otherwise WBG ratings are significantly higher than all other organizations. The WBG is One of the Most Academia / research centers 8.0 Trusted Institutions in Brazil World Bank Group* 7.7 7.1 Respondents in Brazil gave the highest ratings of trust for Regional development banks 7.6 academia and the World Bank Group. Of note, trust ratings (e.g., IDB, FONPLATA, CAF, 6.2 for all institutions significantly improved in FY24 compared to NDB)* the FY19 Survey. Despite this improvement, the media and Brazil’s Central Bank* 7.6 National Congress were the least trusted institutions 6.6 studied. 7.4 United Nations* 6.5 7.4 Civil society* 6.1 7.3 National government* 4.7 6.8 Subnational government 6.5 International Monetary Fund* 5.9 6.4 Private sector* 5.8 5.8 Media* 5.3 FY24 National Congress / legislative 5.6 branch* 4.0 FY19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 How much do you trust each of the following institutions to do what is right for Brazil? Mean Rating of Trust Q Scale: 1 Not at all – 10 Very much *Significant difference between years 9 10 Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group “The World Bank has added a lot to the country. In my opinion, it depends much more on Brazil's contribution.” (Academia Respondent) “Get out of São Paulo and travel more around Brazil.” (Private Sector Respondent) Q In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG could do to increase its effectiveness in Brazil? (N=81) Key Performance Indicators Increasingly Positive In FY24, respondents gave significantly higher ratings for the Effectiveness in helping Brazil 7.3 WBG’s effectiveness in helping Brazil achieve development achieve results^* results, its relevance to development in Brazil, alignment with 6.9 their development priorities, and its positive influence on shaping development policy. Stakeholder group differences of Relevant role 7.1 note: in development* 6.6 ▪ Respondents from the subnational government gave the highest ratings for the WBG’s relevance (mean = 8.0), whereas respondents from civil society and academia gave significantly lower ratings (means = 6.1 and 6.4, respectively). Aligned with development 7.1 priorities* FY24 6.7 ▪ Respondents from subnational government and private sector FY19 gave the highest ratings for the WBG’s positive influence (means = 7.9 and 7.8, respectively). In contrast, respondents from civil society and academia gave significantly lower ratings (means = 5.9 Positive influence on shaping 7.0 and 6.1, respectively). development policy* 6.6 ▪ Respondents from subnational governments and bilateral or multilateral agencies gave the highest ratings for the WBG’s work to help end poverty in Brazil (means = 7.7 and 7.5, respectively). 7.0 In contrast, respondents from civil society gave significantly lower Helps end poverty in Brazil ratings (mean = 5.7). 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating The WBG currently plays a relevant role in development in Brazil. Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree Q The WBG has a positive influence on shaping the development policy in Brazil. Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree The WBG’s work is aligned with what I consider the development priorities for Brazil. Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree *Significant difference The WBG’s work helps end poverty in Brazil. Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree between years How effective is the WBG in helping Brazil achieve development results? Scale: 1 Not effective at all – 10 Very effective ^Compared to a mean score of the two questions asked in FY19: "Overall, please rate your impression of the WBG’s effectivenes s in Brazil. Scale: 1 Not effective at all – 10 Very effective; To what extent does the WBG’s work help to achieve development results in Bra zil? 11 Scale: 1 To no degree at all – 10 To a very significant degree Familiarity Leads to More Positive Perceptions 8.2 Comparing ratings of key performance indicators among Trust the WBG to do what 7.3 respondents highly familiar with the WBG (ratings of 8- is right for Brazil* 6.6 10 on a 10-point scale) and those with little familiarity with the WBG (ratings of 1-4 on a 10-point scale), one 7.7 can see that the more familiar stakeholders are with the Effectiveness in helping Brazil 7.2 WBG, the more positive perceptions they have of the to achieve results* WBG and its work. 5.5 7.6 Meaningful engagement and outreach can continue Relevant role in development* 6.8 to increase positive perceptions. 5.9 7.6 Alignment with development 6.7 priorities* 5.9 7.5 Positive influence on shaping 6.6 development policy* 5.8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating How familiar are you with the work of the WBG in Brazil? High Familiarity (8-10) Some Familiarity (5-7) Low Familiarity (1-4) How much do you trust the WBG to do what is right for Brazil? Scale: 1 Not at all – 10 Very much *Significant difference between Q The WBG has a positive influence on shaping the development policy in Brazil. Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree levels of familiarity The WBG currently plays a relevant role in development in Brazil. Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree The WBG’s work is aligned with what I consider the development priorities for Brazil. Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree How effective is the WBG in helping Brazil achieve development results? Scale: 1 Not effective at all – 10 Very effective 12 Brazil On Par with Other Latin America and the Caribbean and IBRD Countries on KPIs 7.7 Trust the WBG to do what is right 7.5 7.4 7.3 Effectiveness in helping to achieve 7.3 results 7.2 Brazil FY24 7.1 Relevant role in development 7.3 Other Latin 7.1 America and the Caribbean FY24 7.1 Other IBRD FY24 Alignment with development priorities 7.2 7.2 7.0 Positive influence on shaping 7.2 development policy 7.1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating Other FY24 Latin America and the Caribbean countries: Belize, Chile, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Paraguay, and Uruguay, . 13 Q Other FY2r IBRD countries: Bosnia & Herzegovina, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Georgia, Morocco, Moldova, Namibia, Paraguay, Poland, Seychelles, Tunisia, Uruguay, and Vietnam Stakeholder Trends across Performance Indicators Respondents from subnational governments and bilateral or All Respondents 7.3 multilateral agencies had the highest mean ratings across the aggregated responses to the eighteen COS indicator questions. In contrast, respondents from academia and civil Subnational Government 8.0 society had significantly lower ratings. ▪ Collaboration with the WBG: Respondents who Bilateral or Multilateral Agency 7.9 indicated that they collaborate with the WBG gave significantly higher ratings across the aggregated indicator questions compared to respondents who did not Private Sector 7.6 collaborate with the WBG: Mean rating: Collaborate with WBG = 7.9 Media 7.5 Do not collaborate = 6.9 Government Institution 7.4 Academia/Research Center 6.8 Civil Society 6.3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating of Aggregated Indicator Questions Q All Indicator Questions were asked on a Scale from 1 to 10. Click here for details of these Indicator Questions. A significant difference between stakeholder groups. 14 15 World Bank Group’s Support for Development Areas “Support public and private institutions with financial resources: - In the development of knowledge production, innovation, and scientific research in the area of health and technology; - Support the expansion of comprehensive education in the country, considering that Brazil has the shortest classroom time; - Investing in basic sanitation in Brazil.” (Civil Society Respondent) Q In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG could do to increase its effectiveness in Brazil? (N=81) Development Areas High for academia (79%) and private sector (71%) Education 50% for WBG Focus Social protection / inclusion 48% Water / sanitation 44% As in FY19, education was the top area where stakeholders would like the WBG to focus its resources in FY24. Climate change 41% Social protection/inclusion was a much greater priority in FY24, Environment / natural resource mgmt. 39% identified by more than ten times as many respondents compared Public sector governance 29% to FY19, and became the #2 development priority in Brazil. Agriculture / food security 25% Similarly, climate change was identified by more than five times as many respondents compared to FY19, becoming the #4 Transport infrastructure 24% development priority in Brazil in FY24. Digital infrastructure development 23% Urban development 21% Jobs 15% In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG could do to increase its effectiveness in Brazil? Macroeconomic stability 15% “Prioritize investments in key areas such as education, housing, Health / pandemic preparedness 13% income generation, urban development and the prison system.” (Subnational Government Respondent) Gender equity 12% “Studies and projects focused on urban infrastructure and Energy 12% environmental goals are important for contributing to development Disaster risk management 12% in Brazil.” (Bilateral or Multilateral Respondent) Private sector development 10% High for private sector (43%) “Supporting projects that are smaller financially but have a significant impact on society. For example, with traditional and Other 6% indigenous communities.” (Government Institution Respondent) Debt management 5% Trade 1% Which areas should the WBG prioritize to have the most impact on development results in Brazil? 16 Q (Select up to 5) (Percentage of Respondents, N=157) Effectiveness of WBG’s Sectoral Support The WBG’s work in environment/natural resource management and water supply/sanitation received the highest effectiveness ratings. Of note, this Finance / Institutions / Economic Growth year’s survey respondents rated the WBG’s work in gender equity, social 7.4 protection, governance, and transport significantly higher than in FY19. Public sector governance* 6.9 Human Development 7.3 Debt sustainability 7.4 6.6 Gender equity* 6.5 Private sector development 6.1 FY24 7.2 6.6 FY19 Social inclusion 6.7 Macroeconomic stability 7.0 FY24 6.4 Health 6.6 Job creation / employment 6.0 FY19 6.9 6.1 Education 6.5 Trade 6.2 6.8 Social protection* 5.6 Infrastructure 7.5 Water supply and sanitation Environmental Sustainability 7.3 7.5 Environment / natural 7.5 Transport* 6.7 resource management 7.2 7.3 Media respondents gave Digital development 6.5 significantly lower ratings 7.4 for the WBG’s work on the Climate change 7.1 FY24 7.3 FY24 environment (4.8) and FY19 Urban development 7.0 climate change (5.2) *Significant difference compared to other Agriculture and 7.4 FY19 between years 6.9 stakeholder groups food security 6.8 Energy / extractives 6.7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating of Effectiveness Mean Rating of Effectiveness How effective has the WBG been at achieving development results in each of these areas in Brazil? Scale: 1 Not effective at all – 10 Very effective Q (If you have NO exposure to/experience in working in any of the sectors listed below, please respond “Don’t know”) 17 18 World Bank Group’s Engagement on the Ground in Brazil “Bring the WB closer to academia, civil society organizations, and the private sector.” (Academia Respondent) “More work with sub-national units.” (Government Institution Respondent) Q In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG could do to increase its effectiveness in Brazil? (N=81) The WBG Increasingly Seen as an Effective Partner In FY24, respondents gave the WBG the highest ratings for being a long-term partner to Brazil. In addition, respondents perceived the WBG as significantly more accessible, Being a long-term partner to 8.3 responsive, and flexible than in FY19. Stakeholder group Brazil 8.1 differences of note: ▪ Respondents from subnational government and private sector gave the highest ratings for the WBG’s responsiveness (both Access to WBG staff and 7.6 means = 7.9), whereas respondents from civil society gave experts* 7.1 significantly lower ratings (mean = 5.8). ▪ Respondents from subnational government and private sector gave the highest ratings for the WBG’s accessibility (means = 7.3 Openness (sharing data and 8.8 and 8.1, respectively). In contrast, respondents from civil other information) FY24 society and media gave significantly lower ratings (means = 7.2 6.7 and 6.3, respectively). FY19 Responsiveness to needs in 7.1 In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG Brazil* 6.3 could do to increase its effectiveness in Brazil? “Improving the communication process and greater participation with the private sector.” (Subnational Government Respondent) 7.0 Flexibility when circumstances change in Brazil^* “Expand partnerships with international organizations, think 5.8 tanks, and other development agents to gain scale and broaden impact.” (Bilateral or Multilateral Respondent) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating To what extent is the WBG an effective development partner in terms of the following? Q Scale: 1 To no degree at all – 10 To a very significant degree ^Compared to the mean of institutional flexibility 19 and flexibility to changes in the country context asked in FY19. *Significant difference between years The WBG Increasingly Seen as Effectively Collaborating with Stakeholders 8.1 In FY24, respondents perceived the WBG as collaborating Subnational government significantly more effectively with the National government and other donors and development partners. The WBG’s collaboration with the private sector and civil society 8.1 National government* improved compared to FY19, but this difference did not reach 7.4 statistical significance. Stakeholder group differences of note: Other donors and ▪ Respondents from the private sector and the media gave the development partners (e.g., 7.7 highest ratings for the WBG’s collaboration with the private sector IDB, CAF, AFD, NDB, UN, 6.7 (means = 8.3 and 9.1, respectively), whereas respondents from FONPLATA)* government institutions and the subnational government gave significantly lower ratings (both means = 5.8). 7.1 Academia / research centers FY24 ▪ Respondents from the private sector gave the highest ratings for FY19 the WBG’s collaboration with academia (mean = 8.8), whereas respondents from academia, civil society, and government 6.9 Private sector institutions gave significantly lower ratings (means = 6.3, 6.5, 6.4 and 6.4, respectively). Civil society (e.g., NGOs, 6.8 In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG CBOs) 6.4 could do to increase its effectiveness in Brazil? “Communicate with civil society in accessible language. Include National Congress / 5.6 traditionally marginalized groups in this dialogue. Stimulating legislative branch multisectoral debate is also important.” (Civil Society Respondent) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating To what extent is the WBG an effective development partner in Brazil, in terms of collaborating with the following Q groups? Scale: 1 To no degree at all – 10 To a very significant degree *Significant difference between years 20 Stakeholders want the Bank to Collaborate More with Subnational Government, Civil Society, and Academia Although the WBG received the highest rating for its Top for subnational Subnational collaboration with the subnational government, a government (75%) and 52% government institutions (67%) government majority of respondents in this year’s survey indicated that, in addition to its partnership with the National government, the WBG should collaborate Top for civil society more with the subnational government. Four in ten (86%) Civil society 44% respondents wanted to see the WBG collaborate more with civil society and academia. Academia / research 40% centers In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG could do to increase its effectiveness in Brazil? Private sector 27% Top for private “Getting closer to grassroots civil society sector (92%) organizations to learn their realities, understand their problems, and propose community solutions.” (Civil Society Respondent) Other donors and 14% development partners “Strengthen the relationship with municipalities; strengthen support for the governance of sub-national spheres.” (Subnational Government Respondent) National Congress / 8% legislative branch Other 2% In addition to its partnership with the National government, which of the following Q should the WBG collaborate with more to have greater impact in Brazil? (Select up to 2) (Percentage of Respondents, N=140) 21 22 World Bank Group’s Financial Instruments and Knowledge Work “Acting more strongly in partnership with regional development banks, whether in credit programs (for the public or private sectors) or through technical cooperation to disseminate good practices and training for the banks themselves and for specific target audiences (such as sub-national entities and small entrepreneurs).” (Government Institution Respondent) Q In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG could do to increase its effectiveness in Brazil? (N=81) Financial Resources Of more value to considered the Bank’s subnational government (81%), but of less value Financial resources 58% to media (17%) Greatest Value Technical assistance and 42% implementation support In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG Of more could do to increase its effectiveness in Brazil? Knowledge and value to 36% analytical products media (92%) “More funding for social impact. Expand lines of financing for medium and small financial institutions.” (Private Sector Respondent) Mobilizing third party 15% financial resources “Financing for the private sector.” (Parliamentarian Respondent) Convening / bringing together “Together with the financial support for the projects, they should 13% different groups of stakeholders offer operational advice that maximizes the expected end result by maximizing the most efficient use of financial resources.” (Subnational Government Respondent) Capacity development Of more value to subnational 12% government (29%) and training “Supporting, on a larger scale, through technical assistance, the design of projects at the sub-national level.” (Civil Society Respondent) Development partner 8% “Provide ongoing training for the technical staff of public coordination servants who will manage the projects and/or programs requested.” (Subnational Government Respondent) Other 2% Which WBG instruments do you VALUE the most in Brazil? (Select up to 2) Q (Percentage of Respondents, N=157) 23 WBG Financial Instruments Seen as Increasingly Meeting Brazil’s Needs Regarding the WBG’s financial instruments, respondents had The WBG insists on accountability the highest levels of agreement that the WBG insists on through its lending (e.g., 8.3 accountability through its lending. It should also be noted performance-based financing, resources tied to results) that respondents had significantly higher levels of agreement that the WBG’s financial instruments meet Brazil’s needs The conditions of the WBG’s 7.7 this year compared to the FY19 survey. Stakeholder group financing are competitive differences of note: compared to markets ▪ Respondents from the subnational government had the highest levels of agreement that the WBG’s financial instruments meet The WBG effectively monitors and 7.7 Brazil’s needs (mean = 7.9). In contrast, respondents from evaluates the projects it supports in Brazil 7.6 academia and media had significantly lower levels of agreement (means = 6.3 and 4.8, respectively). FY24 The WBG’s Environmental and 7.3 ▪ Respondents from the subnational government had the highest Social Framework requirements FY19 levels of agreement that the WBG provides timely financial are reasonable 7.0 support (mean = 7.5), whereas respondents from civil society and the private sector had significantly lower levels of agreement The WBG’s financial instruments (means = 5.6 and 4.8, respectively). (i.e., budget support, loans, 7.1 grants, trust funds) meet the 6.0 ▪ Respondents from the subnational government, bilateral or needs of Brazil* multilateral agencies, and the private sector had the highest levels of agreement that the WBG effectively monitors and evaluates the The WBG provides financial 6.5 projects it supports (means = 8.3, 8.3, and 8.4, respectively). In contrast, respondents from civil society and media had support in a timely manner^ 6.5 significantly lower levels of agreement (means = 5.9 and 6.2, respectively). 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements? Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree Q ^Compared to "The World Bank Group disburses funds promptly" in FY19 *Significant difference between years 24 62% of Respondents Have Used the WBG’s Knowledge Work and Reported Much More Positive Perceptions of It The WBG brings global expertise to Brazil 8.9 More than 6 in 10 respondents reported having as part of its knowledge work* 8.0 used the WBG’s knowledge work in the past. Working with the WBG increases Brazil’s 8.7 institutional capacity* 7.5 I am satisfied with the quality of the WBG’s 8.6 knowledge work in Brazil* 6.7 No Significance of contribution WBG’s 8.4 38% Have you ever knowledge work makes to development results in Brazil* 6.9 used the WBG’s The WBG’s knowledge work is tailored to 8.0 knowledge Brazil’s context* 6.8 Yes Have you work? 62% ever used the WBG’s When I need to consult the WBG’s 7.3 knowledge knowledge work, I know how to find it 6.2 work? Yes The WBG’s publications are adequately 7.0 disseminated* No 5.8 *Significant difference 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 between usage Mean Rating Have you ever used the WBG’s knowledge work, including participating in workshops or training programs? (Percentage of Respon dents, N=136) Q To what extent do you agree with the following statements? Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree How significant a contribution do you 25 believe the WBG’s knowledge work makes to development results in Brazil? Scale: 1 Not significant at all – 10 Very significant WBG Knowledge Work Perceived More Positively Respondents had the highest levels of agreement that the WBG brings global expertise to Brazil, significantly The WBG brings global expertise to Brazil 8.7 improved compared to respondents in FY19. In addition, as part of its knowledge work^* 7.9 respondents this year had significantly higher levels of agreement that the WBG’s knowledge work is tailored to Working with the WBG increases Brazil’s 8.4 Brazil’s context and significantly higher ratings for the institutional capacity 8.0 contribution it makes to development results in Brazil compared to respondents in FY19. Stakeholder group differences of note: I am satisfied with the quality of the WBG’s 8.3 knowledge work in Brazil ▪ Respondents from the subnational government and private sector had the highest levels of agreement that working with the WBG increases Brazil’s institutional capacity (both Significance of contribution WBG’s 7.8 means = 9.0). In contrast, respondents from academia and knowledge work makes to development 7.1 FY24 civil society had significantly lower levels (both means = results in Brazil* 7.7). FY19 The WBG’s knowledge work is tailored to 7.7 ▪ Respondents from the private sector had the highest levels Brazil’s context^^* of agreement that the WBG’s knowledge work is tailored to 7.0 Brazil’s context (mean = 8.8). In contrast, respondents from civil society had significantly lower levels (mean = 6.5). When I need to consult the WBG’s 7.1 In your opinion, what is the most important knowledge work, I know how to find it thing the WBG could do to increase its effectiveness in Brazil? The WBG’s publications are adequately 6.8 “Greater dissemination and training on the Bank's policies, disseminated 6.3 especially in tendering, environmental, and social issues.” (Subnational Government Respondent) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating To what extent do you agree with the following statements? Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree How significant a contribution do you believe the WBG’s knowledge work makes to development results in Brazil? Q Scale: 1 Not significant at all – 10 Very significant ^Compared to “Source of relevant information on global good practices" asked in FY19. 26 ^^Compared to “Adaptable to Brazil’s specific development challenges and country circumstances" in FY19 *Significant difference between years 27 The Future Role of the World Bank Group in Brazil “The WBG could emphasize project financing, structuring, and preparation of infrastructure projects, and work more strongly with regional and sub-national development finance institutions in Brazil.” (Private Sector Respondent) “Use cutting-edge research to analyze economic and social aspects of Brazil… Propose solutions based on this research.” (Academia Respondent) “Capacity building for sub-national governments.” (Government Institution Respondent) Q In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG could do to increase its effectiveness in Brazil? (N=81) How can the Bank increase its effectiveness? Open-Ended Responses Engage with more non-government stakeholders, build capacity, and better align with Brazil’s needs, context, and capacity. Engagement • More engagement and collaboration Communication • Greater partnership with the media 26% with civil society, private sector, academia, and the media 13% • More promotion/awareness • More collaboration with subnational of the WBG’s work Communication government and municipalities • Broader dissemination • Engage with other development Engagement of results partners Operational Effectiveness Operational • Better understand the local Knowledge • More training/capacity building Effectiveness context, capacity, etc. • More flexibility to adapt to 16% • More dissemination of project Financial 12% local circumstances results and knowledge products Support • More tailored analysis of Brazil’s Knowledge economy and development needs Financial • Private sector funding Results • Smaller projects with large Focus Area Support impact Focus Area • Projects that touch on multiple 10% • Partner with regional layers of governance development banks 15% • Education • Sanitation Results • Less bureaucracy 8% • More transparency • Environmental sustainability In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG Q could do to increase its effectiveness in Brazil? (N=81) 28 How can the Bank increase its effectiveness? Open-Ended Responses Engage with more non-government stakeholders, build capacity, and better align with Brazil’s needs, context, and capacity. Engagement Focus Area “To widely and educationally disseminate its initiatives to civil society and social “In your financing and analytical work, consider multi-level governance, such as integrating participation bodies.” (Government Institution Respondent) actions between levels of government. Numerous public policies require this integration, and the WBG can make this possible and achieve results, so it could induce results for society.” (Government Institution Respondent) “Partnerships with sub-national entities.” (Parliamentarian Respondent) “Invest much more in basic sanitation.” (Government Institution Respondent) “Greater priority [should be] given to supporting initiatives by civil society and sub-national governments.” (Government Institution Respondent) “Continue to identify educational, social, and economic deficits in order to mitigate the problems related to these issues.” (Subnational Government Respondent) “Broaden the dialogue with Brazilian civil society organizations, highlighting the correlation “Actions and projects aimed at reducing greenhouse gases and adapting gray infrastructure between Brazilian experiences and the WBG.” (Civil Society Respondent) to green infrastructure, given that this is the most effective action for adapting to climate change.” (Government Institution Respondent) “Partnerships with Brazilian academic institutions.” (Academia Respondent) “Investing in social inclusion.” (Parliamentarian Respondent) Knowledge “Although I read and follow all the GBM reports on Brazil and other Latin American countries, many do not. Perhaps it would be useful to distill the main conclusions/arguments in a more agile way to reach more people.” (Academia Respondent) “Present analytical reports on pressing issues in Brazil, such as political polarization and the impact of disinformation on society, for example.” (Private Sector Respondent) “Expand its training to subnational entities on loan modalities and public debt management, with a focus on subnational rather than the Union.” (Subnational Government Respondent) “Having regional offices with the infrastructure and technical capacity to provide closer support to projects financed by the Bank.” (Government Institution Respondent) In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG Q could do to increase its effectiveness in Brazil? (N=81) 29 How can the Bank increase its effectiveness? Open-Ended Responses Engage with more non-government stakeholders, build capacity, and better align with Brazil’s needs, context, and capacity. Operation Effectiveness Communication “Recognize, in a more realistic way, the technical limitations of sub-national “Expanding the dissemination of its studies on Brazil's socio-economic, environmental and governments.” (Subnational Government Respondent) climate realities by promoting events, seminars, courses, and debates, in partnership with federal and state governments, public banks, academia, and productive agents.” “Improving mechanisms so that resources reach grassroots communities and their (Government Institution Respondent) organizations.” (Civil Society Respondent) “Better promotion of the WBG's work in the press.” (Media Respondent) “Create a network of project executors to share good practices.” (Subnational Government Respondent) Results “Make it easier for smaller municipalities to access WBG resources by working on smaller “Having a greater understanding of local conditions to enable financing structures that don't projects in poorer regions, balancing the current strategy of larger projects.” require such an inefficient degree of monitoring.” (Private Sector Respondent) (Government Institution Respondent) “Improving the procurement process, which is complex and bureaucratic, discouraging “Better adaptation of its instruments to the local reality.” institutions and staff.” (Government Institution Respondent) (Government Institution Respondent) “Be less bureaucratic.” (Subnational Government Respondent) “Expanding the Bank's team of specialists and regionalizing its operations. Brazil is a vast country with many projects running in parallel.” (Government Institution Respondent) Financial Support “1) Use national legal and regulatory frameworks; 2) Adapt policies, processes, and “Flexibility in the use of funding resources, since the problems faced by federal, state, and procedures for indirect operations (through financial institutions); 3) Offer the option of municipal governments are dynamic.” (Subnational Government Respondent) operating without a sovereign guarantee.” (Subnational Government Respondent) “Financing small projects.” (Government Institution Respondent) “Increase its capacity to address development issues in the country based on the knowledge it possesses.” (Private Sector Respondent) “Increase the volume of resources.” (Subnational Government Respondent) In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG Q could do to increase its effectiveness in Brazil? (N=81) 30 31 Communication and Outreach “Improve communication and dissemination of the programs and results of the conducted studies.” (Parliamentarian Respondent) “To be known. To make it easier and more transparent for you to operate in Brazil.” (Private Sector Respondent) “Public studies could be more widely disseminated through social networks, debates, and thematic agendas. Given the Bank's capacity for articulation and influence, experts could provide more access to thematic partners.” (Civil Society Respondent) “It needs to appear more on social media as a way of disseminating information about Brazil.” (Bilateral or Multilateral Respondent) Q In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG could do to increase its effectiveness in Brazil? (N=81) Events, e-Newsletters, and Direct Contact were Most Preferred for Receiving WBG Communication Respondents most preferred to receive Bank communications through events/conferences/seminars/workshops (in person or online), e-newsletters, and direct contact with staff. Preferred WBG Channel Bilateral or Academia / All Government Subnational Multilateral Private Research Respondents Institution Government Agency Civil Society Sector Center Media Event / conference / seminar / 49% 51% 57% 67% 30% 55% 60% 18% workshop (in person or online) e-Newsletters 45% 44% 39% 44% 50% 91% 30% 36% Direct contact with staff 43% 36% 54% 44% 35% 18% 60% 73% (e.g., in person, virtually, phone, email) Direct messaging 29% 36% 25% 11% 35% 9% 10% 55% (e.g., WhatsApp) Social media* 15% 8% 4% 33% 30% 9% 30% 9% (e.g., Facebook, Twitter) How would you prefer to receive communication from the WBG? (Select up to 2) Q (Percentage of Respondents, N=133) *Significant difference between stakeholder groups 32 Nearly Three-Quarters Engaged with the WBG Recently, most often through Direct Contact or Events 73% of respondents recalled hearing or seeing something about the WBG recently. Respondents often reported seeing/hearing about the WBG through direct contact with staff and events/conferences/seminars (in person or online). Direct contact with WBG staff 58% High for subnational government Event / conference / seminar (88%) and private 47% sector (83%) (in person or online) Social media 39% No Newspapers 27% 36% (print or online) WBG websites / World Bank 32% Do you recall Brazil website seeing or hearing e-Newsletters 22% anything about the WBG Direct messaging 21% recently? Television (TV) 17% Yes 73% Radio 5% Other 5% Blogs 4% Podcasts 2% Do you recall seeing or hearing anything about the WBG recently? (N=134) Q Where do you recall seeing or hearing this information? (Select all that apply) (Percentage of Respondents, N=98) 33 WBG Work on Climate Change and Poverty and Inequality were the Most Commonly Recalled Topics Respondents most frequently recalled WBG work or research on climate change and poverty and inequality. Climate change (incl. Amazon) 59% Poverty and inequality 53% Human capital (education, health) 38% WBG economic forecasts 36% High for private sector (67%) and academia (86%) Women empowerment 27% High for private sector (67%) Digital economy 25% High for private sector (50%) and academia (57%) Job creation / employment 22% High for subnational government (46%) Food security 22% Debt relief for developing countries 19% Tax reform 16% Pandemic preparedness 12% High for academia (43%) Other 12% Youth development 11% Changes to the WBG financial and operational model 8% If you answered “Yes” for E2, what topics were included in what you saw or heard about WBG’s work or research? 34 Q (Select all that apply) (Percentage of Respondents, N=93) Climate Change Communications can be More Impactful when Related to Stakeholders’ Top Concerns: Drought and Floods More than 8 in 10 respondents were very concerned about more frequent/severe droughts and more frequent/severe floods regarding the potential impacts of climate change in Brazil. Decreased water availability/quality, more frequent/intense wildfires, more frequent/severe heatwaves, and land/forest degradation were also of great concern to respondents. These key areas of concern should be considered to make communications about climate change more impactful. Very concerned Somewhat concerned A little concerned Not concerned at all More frequent and severe droughts 82% More frequent and severe floods 81% Decreased water availability / quality 79% More frequent and intense wildfires 78% More frequent and severe heatwaves 78% Land and forest degradation 75% Loss of jobs 61% Extinction of plant / animal species 60% Decreased crop yields / increased food insecurity 60% Air pollution 50% Coastal flooding due to sea level rise 47% Increased erosion of shoreline 42% Climate-driven migration 34% Q How concerned are you about the following potential impacts of climate change in Brazil? (Percentage of Respondents, N=~129) 35 Message Recall Increases Familiarity and Leads to More Positive Perceptions of the WBG and its Work 7.8 Familiarity with the WBG 6.2 8.0 Trust the WBG to do what is right for Brazil Do you recall seeing 7.1 or hearing anything about the WBG 7.8 recently? Effective in helping Brazil achieve development results 6.4 Yes 7.5 No Relevant role in development 5.9 7.5 Aligned with development priorities 6.3 7.4 Positive influence on shaping development policy 6.2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating These findings suggest that respondents who are more frequently exposed to information about the WBG or who actively engage with WBG staff and knowledge work (read research papers, etc.) are also more likely to hold more positive views about the WBG’s work. How familiar are you with the work of the World Bank Group in Brazil? Scale: 1 Not familiar at all – 10 Extremely familiar How much do you trust the WBG to do what is right for Brazil? Scale: 1 Not at all – 10 Very much Q Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree: The WBG currently plays a relevant role in development in Brazil. The WBG has a positive influence on shaping the development policy in Brazil. The WBG’s work is aligned with what I consider the development priorities for Br azil. 36 How effective is the WBG in helping Brazil achieve development results? Scale: 1 Not effective at all – 10 Very effective 37 Sample Demographics and Detailed Methodology Sample Demographics What is the primary specialization Do you of your work? (N=130) collaborate/work Other 14% with the World Bank Group (WBG) Generalist (specialize in multiple Yes sectors) 11% in Brazil? 45% (N=159) No Public sector governance 10% 55% Social protection 8% Respondents from subnational government were significantly more likely to indicate that they collaborate with the WBG Education 7% (81%) whereas respondents from civil society, academia, and the media were Environment / natural resource mgmt. 6% significantly less likely to collaborate with the WBG (23%, 14%, and 0%, respectively). Water / sanitation 6% Agriculture and food security 5% MIGA, 4% ICSID, 1% Macroeconomics, fiscal / debt mgmt. 4% Transport 3% IFC Which of the 15% Privates sector development / trade 3% following WBG Climate change 2% agencies do you collaborate/work Health / pandemic preparedness 1% with in Brazil? Digital development 1% (N=72) World Bank Percentages equal more than 100% Energy 1% because respondents could choose (IBRD) multiple agencies within the WBG. 89% Urban development 1% Legal / human rights 1% 38 Sample Demographics (continued) What’s your age? (N=132) Prefer not to specify, 2% 26-35 10% 36-45 28% Female 37% What is your 46-55 25% gender? (N=132) Male 56 and above 36% 61% Prefer not to specify 1% North, 4% South 8% Southeast Which best represents Northeast 36% your geographic 22% location? (N=128) Center-West 31% 39 Detailed Methodology From February to May 2024, a total of 858 stakeholders in Brazil were invited to provide Percentage of Respondents FY 2019 FY 2024 their opinions on the WBG’s work by participating in a Country Opinion Survey (COS). A list of Government Principals: Office of the potential participants was compiled by the WBG country team and the field agency. President, Vice President, Minister, 7% 4% Participants were drawn from the Offices of the President, Vice President, Minister, and Parliamentarian/National Congress Parliament/National Congress, government institutions, subnational governments, bilateral or Government Institutions: Employee of a multilateral agencies, the private sector, civil society, academia, and the media. Ministry, Department, Project Implementation 29% 31% Unit, Independent Government Institution, Of these stakeholders, 159 participated in the survey (19% response rate). Respondents Judiciary, State-Owned Enterprise completed the questionnaire via an online platform. Subnational Government 15% 20% The results of this year’s survey were compared to the FY19 Survey with a response rate of 32% (N=300). Bilateral/Multilateral Agency: Embassy, Development Organization, Development 4% 7% Comparing responses across Country Surveys reflects changes in attitudes over time, but Bank, UN Agency also changes in respondent samples, changes in methodology, and changes to the survey instrument itself. To reduce the influence of the latter factor, only those questions with similar Civil Society Organization: Local and regional NGOs, Community-Based response scales/options were analyzed. This year’s survey had a similar distribution of Organization, Private Foundation, 15% 14% respondents across stakeholder groups with a slight outreach to and/or response from Professional/Trade Association, subnational governments. Any differences in stakeholder composition between the two years Faith-Based Group, Youth Group should be considered when interpreting the results of the past-year comparison analyses. Private Sector: Private Company, Financial Key statistically significant findings (tested at the research standard of p < .05) are noted 13% 9% Sector Organization, Private Bank throughout the report. Academia / Research Center 10% 9% Breakdowns for individual questions by stakeholder group can be found in the “Brazil COS FY24 Appendices with data breakdowns.xlsx” file published in the WBG Microdata Library, Media 5% 8% along with the survey microdata and this report. Total Number of Respondents 294 159 40 Indicator Questions Every country that engages in the Country Opinion Survey (COS) must include specific indicator questions, several of which are aggregated for the World Bank Group’s annual Corporate Scorecard and are highlighted in red below. A1_5. How much do you trust the World Bank Group to do what is right for Brazil? Scale: 1 Not at all – 10 Very much A2. How effective is the World Bank Group in helping Brazil achieve development results? Scale: 1 Not effective at all – 10 Very effective A3. How significant a contribution do you believe the WBG's knowledge work make to development results in Brazil? Scale: 1 Not significant at all – 10 Very significant To what extent do you agree with the following statements? Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree A4. The WBG currently plays a relevant role in development in Brazil. A5. The WBG’s work is aligned with what I consider the development priorities for Brazil. A6. The WBG has a positive influence on shaping development policy in Brazil. A7. The WBG’s work helps end poverty in Brazil To what extent is the WBG an effective development partner in terms of each of the following? Scale: 1 To no degree at all – 10 To a very significant degree C1_1. Responsiveness to needs in Brazil C1_2. Access to WBG staff and experts C1_3. Flexibility when circumstances change in Brazil C1_5. Being a long-term partner to Brazil To what extent is the WBG an effective development partner in Brazil, in terms of collaborating with the following groups? Scale: 1 To no degree at all – 10 To a very significant degree C2_1. National government C2_4. Private sector C2_5. Civil society C2_6. Other development partners To what extent do you agree with the following statements? Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree C4_1. The WBG’s financial instruments (i.e., budget support, loans, grants, trust funds) meet the needs of Brazil. C6_1. I am satisfied with the quality of the WBG’s knowledge work in Brazil. C6_4. The WBG’s knowledge work is tailored to Brazil’s context. 41 Thank you For more information about this report or the Country Opinion Survey program, please contact: countrysurveys@worldbankgroup.org