FY 2024 Poland Country Opinion Survey Report ECR Business Intelligence Team | July 2024 Acknowledgements The Poland 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 Poland country team and independent field agency Opinia24. In particular, BI is grateful for the support from Krzysztof Bastian (External Affairs Consultant), who coordinated the survey-related activities from Warsaw, Poland. 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 Work and Engagement on the Ground in Poland Financial Instruments and Knowledge Work The Future Role of the World Bank Group in Poland Communications 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 Poland perceive the WBG. The survey explored the following questions: 1. Overall Context: How familiar are stakeholders 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 Poland’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 and Work on the Ground: What do key stakeholders value the most and the least when it comes to the WBG’s work in Poland? How is the WBG perceived as a development partner? Are opinions improving or declining? 5. Financial Instruments and Knowledge Work: What are key stakeholders’ opinions 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 do stakeholders recall when the WBG communicates? Is there a relationship between message recall and views of the WBG’s work? 4 Methodology Overview Government Institution 28% ▪ Fielded March 2024 – May 2024 ▪ 709 potential participants were asked to complete a mostly Local Government Office or Staff 25% quantitative survey ▪ Respondents completed the questionnaire online Civil Society Organization 13% ▪ List of names provided by the WBG country team and supplemented by the field agency Academia / Research Centers 11% ▪ Process managed on the ground by the field agency Media 9% ▪ 149 participants (21% response rate) ▪ 48% from the Warsaw & agglomeration Private Sector 8% ▪ 51% currently collaborate with the WBG Bilateral or Multilateral Agency 4% ▪ Compared to FY21 Country Survey ▪ 83 participants (19% response rate) Office of the Prime Minister, 1% ▪ Respondents completed the questionnaire online and on paper Minister ▪ 42% collaborated with the WBG Office of a Parliamentarian 1% Click here for details of the Respondent Sample and Methodology. What is your primary professional affiliation? Q (Select only 1 response) (Percentage of Respondents, N=149) 5 6 Overall Context “It is important that the WBG operates flexibly and is adapted to local conditions. Cooperation with local communities and non-governmental organizations can be a key element in increasing the effectiveness of the WBG in Poland and can help build trust in the WBG. The WBG should better inform the public about its activities and achievements.” (Local Government Respondent) Stakeholders Most Familiar with the European Union ▪ Respondents in this year’s Country Survey were asked 8.5 European Union to indicate their familiarity with the work of several international organizations and the World Bank Group (WBG). Of these organizations, respondents in Poland indicated the highest levels of familiarity with the work 6.4 World Bank Group of the European Union. Respondents were least 6.7 familiar with the work of the International Monetary Fund and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). 5.9 European Investment Bank (EIB) ▪ Respondents’ familiarity with the WBG in this year’s survey has decreased slightly since FY21, although the FY24 change was statistically nonsignificant. United Nations (incl. specialized 5.6 agencies, e.g. UNICEF, UNHCR, FY21 IOM) European Bank for 5.5 Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) 5.2 International Monetary Fund 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 Poland? Q Scale: (1-"Not familiar at all", 10-"Extremely familiar") 7 Familiarity with the World Bank Group ▪ Collaboration with the WBG: Respondents who indicated that they collaborate with the WBG reported significantly higher levels of familiarity with the institution’s work: All Respondents* 6.4 Mean familiarity: Collaborate with WBG = 7.1 Academia 7.3 Do not collaborate = 5.7 Government Institutions 7.0 ▪ Stakeholders: Respondents from academia, government institutions, and the private sector indicated significantly higher familiarity with the WBG than respondents from other Private Sector 6.9 stakeholder groups, particularly those from civil society and local government, who reported the lowest familiarity with Media 6.3 the WBG's work. Local Government 6.0 Civil Society 5.0 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 Poland? (World Bank Group) Q Scale: 1 Not familiar at all – 10 Extremely familiar (N=149) *Significant difference between stakeholder groups 8 ^The Government Institutions group includes respondents from Government Institutions and the Office of the President / Prime Minister / Minister Trust in WBG Increasing Local government 7.5 7.4 Civil society (e.g., NGOs, CBOs)* 6.8 Respondents in Poland gave the highest trust ratings for 7.3 the local government, civil society, and academia. Academia / research centers ▪ Respondents from the private sector and academia had National government* 6.9 3.5 the highest trust ratings in the WBG (means = 7.9 and 7.5, respectively). In contrast, respondents from civil society 6.9 European Commission and local government had significantly lower trust ratings in the WBG (means = 5.9 and 6.1, respectively). 6.7 World Bank Group 6.4 ▪ Trust ratings increased for most institutions studied in both FY24 years, especially for civil society, the national government, Regional development banks 6.7 (e.g., EIB, EBRD)* 5.8 FY21 the private sector, and the media. United Nations (incl. specialized 6.6 agencies, e.g. UNICEF, UNHCR, 5.8 IOM)* 6.5 Private sector* 5.5 6.3 International Monetary Fund 6.0 5.8 Media* 4.4 Central Bank (National Bank of 5.3 Poland)* 4.5 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 Poland? *Significant difference between years Mean Rating of Trust Q Scale: 1 Not at all – 10 Very much (FY24 N=~139; FY21 N=~69) 9 10 Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group “Currently, the WBG operates mainly at the government level, which can limit its understanding of the specific needs and challenges at the local level. Strengthening cooperation with local communities, NGOs, and the private sector can help the WBG identify and implement projects that have a real impact on the lives of people in Poland.” (Government Institution Respondent) Q In your opinion, what is the most important thing the World Bank Group could do to increase its effectiveness in Poland? (N=64) Significant Improvement in Key Performance Indicators In FY24, respondents gave significantly higher ratings for the WBG’s effectiveness in achieving results in Effectiveness in achieving results 6.8 Poland, positive influence on shaping development in Poland*^^ 5.4 policy in Poland, and relevance to development in the country. Stakeholders' perception of the WBG’s alignment with development priority stayed at the 6.6 Alignment with development same level as in FY21. priorities 6.5 Positive influence on shaping 6.6 development policy*^ FY24 4.5 FY21 How effective has the WBG been in achieving development results in Poland? Q Scale: 1 Not effective at all – 10 Very effective The WBG’s work is aligned with what I consider the development priorities for 6.0 Poland. Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree Relevant role in development* The WBG has a positive influence on shaping development policy in Poland. 5.3 Scale: 1 To no degree at all – 10 To a very significant degree The WBG currently plays a relevant role in development in Poland. Scale: 1Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree The WBG’s work helps end poverty and reduce inequality in Poland. Scale: 1 5.6 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree Ends poverty and reduces inquality ^In FY21, the question was: “To what extent does the World Bank Group influence the development agenda in Poland? Scale: 1 To no degree at all – 10 To a very significant degree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating ^^Compared to a mean score of the two questions asked in FY21: "Overall, please rate your impression of the WBG’s effectiveness in Poland. Scale: 1 Not effective at all – 10 Very effective; To what extent does the WBG’s work help to achieve development results in Poland? Scale: 1 To no degree at all – 10 To a very significant degree *Significant difference between years 11 Stakeholders from the 6.8 6.8 Effectiveness in helping 6.3 Private Sector, Academia, Poland achieve results 6.9 6.9 and Media Have More 7.0 Positive Perceptions of 6.1 6.7 Government Institutions Trust the WBG to do what is 5.9 Local Government the WBG right for Poland* 7.9 7.5 Civil Society 6.9 Private Sector Comparisons of key performance indicators (KPIs) 6.6 ratings among different stakeholder groups reveal that 6.3 Academia Alignment with development 6.4 respondents from the private sector, academia, and priorities 7.3 Media media rated the World Bank Group (WBG) highest 6.9 across all KPIs. In contrast, civil society respondents 6.5 provided significantly lower ratings. 6.6 6.6 Positive influence on 5.8 shaping 7.0 development policy 6.9 6.9 5.8 6.0 Relevant role in 5.2 development 6.4 *Significant difference between 6.4 stakeholder groups 6.5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Q For question wording and scales, please see the previous slide. Mean Rating 12 Familiarity Leads to More Positive Perceptions Comparing key performance indicators ratings among 7.5 respondents highly familiar with the WBG (ratings of 8- Trust* 6.6 10 on a 10-point scale) and those with little familiarity 5.2 with the WBG (ratings of 1-4 on a 10-point scale), one can see that the more familiar stakeholders are with the 7.4 WBG, the more positive their perceptions of it and its Effectiveness in achieving results* 6.7 work are. 5.4 7.3 Meaningful engagement and outreach can continue Alignment* 6.5 to increase positive perceptions. 4.9 7.3 Influence* 6.5 5.4 6.5 Relevance* 6.0 4.4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating How familiar are you with the work of the WBG in Poland? High Familiarity (8-10) Some Familiarity (5-7) Low Familiarity (1-4) The WBG currently plays a relevant role in development in Poland. Scale: 1Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree *Significant difference between Q To what extent do you trust the WBG to do what is right? Scale: 1 To no degree at all – 10 To a very significant degree levels of familiarity The WBG has a positive influence on shaping development policy in Poland? Scale: 1 To no degree at all – 10 To a very significant degree How effective has the WBG been in achieving development results in Poland? Scale: 1 Not effective at all – 10 Very effective The WBG’s work is aligned with what I consider the development priorities for Poland. Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree 13 Poland’s Key Performance Indicators are Somewhat Lower than those of Other ECA Countries and High- Income Countries 6.8 Effectiveness in helping to achieve 7.0 results 7.3 6.7 Trust the WBG to do what is right 7.3 7.6 6.6 Alignment with development priorities 7.0 7.5 6.6 Posititve influence on shaping Poland FY24 6.8 development policy 6.9 Other HICs FY23-FY24* 6.0 Relevant role in development 6.9 ECA FY23** 7.4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating *Other High-Income Countries (HICs) FY23-FY24: Chile, Croatia, Romania, Seychelles, Uruguay Q **Europe and Central Asia (ECA) FY23: Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kyrgyz Republic, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Romania, Serbia, Turkey, Uzbekistan 14 Stakeholder Trends Across Performance Indicators Media and private sector respondents had the highest mean rating across the aggregated responses to the eighteen COS All Respondents 6.5 indicator questions. In contrast, respondents from the civil society had significantly lower ratings. Media 7.0 ▪ Collaboration with the WBG: Respondents who indicated that they collaborate with the WBG gave significantly higher ratings across the aggregated indicator Private Sector 6.8 questions compared to respondents who do not collaborate with the WBG: Mean rating: Collaborate with WBG = 6.8 Academia 6.8 Do not collaborate = 6.2 Local Government 6.6 Government Institutions 6.5 Civil Society 5.5 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 on these Indicator Questions. 15 16 World Bank Group’s Support for Development Areas “To increase effectiveness in Poland, the WBG should focus on such priorities as green and digital transformation to reduce emissions and environmental pollution while supporting energy security.” (Academia Respondent) Q In your opinion, what is the most important thing the World Bank Group could do to increase its effectiveness in Poland? (N=64) Development Areas Energy 51% for WBG Focus Climate change 49% Environment / natural resource 40% In FY24, energy, climate change, environment / natural resource management management, demographic crisis, and jobs / skills development Demographic crisis 35% were considered the top areas where stakeholders would like the WBG Jobs / skills development 29% to focus its resources. Education 27% ▪ As in FY21, climate change remains the top priority for Public sector governance 26% stakeholders; however, in FY24 more respondents prioritized energy (from 12% in FY21 to 51% in FY24). Health / pandemic preparedness 25% Digital infrastructure development 25% Urban development 16% Agriculture / food security 16% Private sector development 14% In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG Social protection 12% could do to increase its effectiveness in Poland? Water / sanitation 12% “Investments in clean energy and climate change adaptation that could boost economic growth.” (Government Institution Respondent) Transport infrastructure 12% Judicial reform 10% “Increase presence on industry expressions (not banking, but e.g., energy, etc.). Cooperate with local NGOs and local governments. Create Debt management 8% regional branches.” (Civil Society Respondent) Gender equity 8% Which areas should the WBG prioritize to have the most impact on development results in Poland? (Select up to 5) 17 Q (Percentage of Respondents, N=146) Effectiveness of WBG’s Sectoral Support The WBG’s work in energy/extractives, urban development, climate change, and public sector governance received the highest effectiveness ratings. Finance / Institutions / Economic Growth 6.2 Human Development Public sector governance 6.1 5.9 Regional integration Social inclusion 6.1 FY24 Private sector development 5.9 5.5 FY21 Social protection FY24 FY21 6.1 Macroeconomic & fiscal stability 5.4 Health 5.7 5.5 Job creation/employment Environmental Sustainability Infrastructure 6.2 6.4 Climate change Energy / extractives 6.2 6.2 Environment / natural resource 6.1 Urban development management 6.7 FY24 6.0 5.8 Digital development^ 5.4 Disaster risk management 5.8 FY21 5.8 FY24 Water supply and sanitation infrastructure 6.6 5.4 Land use FY21 5.8 Transport 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating of Effectiveness 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating of Effectiveness How effective has the WBG been at achieving development results in each of these areas in Poland? 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”) ^ compared with “Information and communications technology” in FY21 18 19 World Bank Group’s Work and Engagement on the Ground in Poland “I think that better cooperation with third sector organizations and think tanks could increase the effectiveness of the bank's activities, also by influencing decision-makers through better communication of recommendations through this additional channel..” (Civil Society Respondent) Q In your opinion, what is the most important thing the World Bank Group could do to increase its effectiveness in Poland? (N=64) The WBG Remains a Long-term Partner and a Knowledge Provider In FY24, respondents continued to see the WBG as a long- Being a long-term partner to 7.5 term partner. They gave relatively high ratings for the Poland 7.3 institution’s role as a knowledge provider for public stakeholders, for being open, and for serving as a convening 7.1 Being a knowledge provider for power for stakeholders. Perceptions of staff accessibility public stakeholders have also improved, although not significantly. Respondents gave relatively lower ratings for the Bank’s Openness (sharing data and 7.0 responsiveness to country needs. other information) 7.0 Being a convening power for 7.0 FY24 In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG stakeholders FY21 could do to increase its effectiveness in Poland? “Perhaps a social campaign that will explain in simple language Access to WBG staff and 6.9 what the World Bank does, what role it plays, what its tasks are, experts 6.2 and that of course - it is not a "typical bank" that grants loans and offers deposits and savings accounts.” (Media Respondent) 6.4 Responsiveness to needs in Poland “Make greater use of local and regional expert knowledge when 6.7 developing reports and recommendations.” (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 Poland, in terms of each of the following? Q Scale: 1 To no degree at all – 10 To a very significant degree 20 The WBG Seen as Effectively Collaborating with the National Government and Other Donors 7.1 In FY24, respondents continue to see the WBG collaborating well National government 6.5 with the national government and other donors and development partners. Perceptions of collaboration with these Other donors and development 6.7 stakeholder groups have slightly improved since FY21. partners (e.g., EBRD, EIB, UN agencies) 6.2 Academia / research centers / 6.6 think tanks 6.4 Local government FY24 Civil society (e.g., NGOs, 6.3 FY21 CBOs) 6.0 In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG could do to increase its effectiveness in Poland? 6.1 Private sector 6.1 “Greater cooperation with the local government level. These are the partners who require the most support (especially expert support and support related to improving staff qualifications).” 5.7 Parliament / legislative branch (Private Sector Respondent) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating To what extent is the WBG an effective development partner in Poland, in terms of collaborating with the following groups? Q Scale: 1 To no degree at all – 10 To a very significant degree 21 More than Half of All Stakeholders Want the Bank to Collaborate More with Local Government • Respondents from local government would like the Local government 61% WBG to collaborate more with local government (91%) and civil society (46%). • Respondents from the civil society would like the Civil society (e.g., NGOs, CBOs) 44% WBG to collaborate more with the civil society (84%) and local government (53%). Academia / research centers / think 30% tanks • Respondents from academia would like the WBG to collaborate more with academia (67%) and civil society (58%). Private sector 21% In your opinion, what is the most important thing the Parliament / legislative branch 11% WBG could do to increase its effectiveness in Poland? “I think that better cooperation with third sector organizations and think tanks could increase the effectiveness of the bank's Other donors and development 10% activities, also by influencing decision-makers through better partners communication of recommendations through this additional channel.” (Civil Society Respondent) In addition to its partnership with the national government, which of the following should the WBG collaborate Q with more to have a greater impact in Poland? (Select up to 2) (Percentage of Respondents, N=132) 22 23 Financial Instruments and Knowledge Work “The WBG should increase the intensity of its presence in the Polish public space, especially in local government and the private sector in financial and advisory terms.” (Local Government Respondent) “Prepare a support instrument for the continuous provision of expert and advisory support in the development of cities and their functional areas.” (Civil Society Respondent) Q In your opinion, what is the most important thing the World Bank Group could do to increase its effectiveness in Poland? (N=64) Knowledge, Analytical Products, and Financial Resources are Considered the Bank’s Greatest Values In FY24, knowledge, analytical products, and financial resources were considered the greatest Knowledge and analytical 47% values of the WBG in Poland. products In FY24, WBG’s financial resources were much more Financial resources 42% in demand among respondents in Poland than in FY21 (from 8% in FY21 to 42% in FY24). Technical assistance and 36% implementation support In your opinion, what is the most important thing the Convening / bringing together WBG could do to increase its effectiveness in Poland? 30% different groups of stakeholders “The WBG ought to be more active in promoting its initiatives outside of Warsaw, to reach out to specialist Mobilizing third party financial 19% groups with long-run cooperation offers, to establish closer resources stable links to academia, to be more active in promoting and financing research infrastructures, to support the teaching of Capacity development and economics at universities, to reach out to academics with 17% training policy-relevant research support.” (Civil Society Respondent) Other 1% Which WBG instruments do you VALUE the most in Poland? (Select up to 2) Q (Percentage of Respondents, N=149) 24 WBG is Seen as Effectively Monitoring and Evaluating Projects Regarding the WBG’s financial instruments, respondents had the highest levels of agreement that the WBG effectively The WBG effectively monitors and 7.2 monitors and evaluates the projects it supports in Poland. evaluates the projects it supports in Poland 6.6 In FY24, significantly fewer stakeholders agreed that the WBG’s financial support was timely compared to FY21. 6.1 The WBG provides financial support in a timely manner*^ FY24 7.0 FY21 In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG 5.7 could do to increase its effectiveness in Poland? The WBG’s financial instruments meet the needs of Poland “Grant loans to local governments and public institutions without the 5.9 guarantee of the State Treasury. Treat countries at the level of development of Poland differently than the poorest countries. There 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 should be fewer requirements regarding the number of documents Mean Rating needed to draw up a loan agreement.” (Government Institutions Respondent) 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” asked in FY21. 25 63% of Respondents Have Used the WBG’s Knowledge; Those Who Have Were Satisfied With its Quality I am satisfied with the quality of the WBG’s 7.8 knowledge work in Poland* 6.8 Have you ever used the WBG’s knowledge work, including participating The WBG brings global expertise to Poland 7.7 in workshops, study tours, or training as part of its knowledge work* 6.9 programs? Working with the WBG increases Poland’s 7.7 institutional capacity * 6.4 Have you used WBG The WBG’s knowledge work is tailored to 7.1 advisory No Poland’s context* services and 5.8 37% analytics in the past? The WBG’s knowledge work is relevant to 6.9 the country's needs* 5.7 Yes 63% Yes When I need to consult the WBG’s 6.5 No knowledge work, I know how to find it* 6.3 The WBG’s knowledge work 5.8 recommendations are systematically implemented in the country* 5.2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Mean Rating Have you ever used the WBG’s knowledge work, including participating in workshops, study Q tours, or training programs? (Percentage of Respondents, N=131) *Significant difference between groups To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements? 26 Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree WBG Knowledge Work is Perceived as Increasing Institutional Capacity and Contributing to Development Results I am satisfied with the quality of the WBG’s 7.6 knowledge work in Poland In FY24, most respondents were satisfied with WBG’s The WBG brings global expertise to Poland 7.5 knowledge work quality. Respondents had the highest as part of its knowledge work^ 7.2 levels of agreement that the WBG brings global expertise to Poland as part of its knowledge work and Working with the WBG increases Poland’s 7.4 that working with the WBG increases Poland’s institutional capacity 6.9 institutional capacity. Knowledge work contributes to development 6.8 In FY24, stakeholders had significantly higher levels of results in Poland* 5.1 FY24 agreement that the WBG’s knowledge work contributes to development results in Poland. The WBG’s knowledge work is tailored to 6.8 FY21 Poland’s context^ 6.6 However, the rating for systematic implementation of the WBG recommendations was the lowest (mean=5.6). The WBG’s knowledge work is relevant to 6.6 the country's needs ▪ Respondents from civil society and local government were significantly less likely to agree When I need to consult the WBG’s 6.5 with the statement that they know how to find the knowledge work, I know how to find it WBG’s knowledge work (means = 5.0 and 6.0, The WBG’s knowledge work 5.6 respectively). Of note, these two groups were the recommendations are systematically least familiar with the WBG’s work. implemented in the country 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements? Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree Mean Rating Q How significant a contribution do you believe the World Bank Group's knowledge work and activities make to development results in Poland? Scale: 1 Not significant at all – 10 Very significant *Significant difference between groups ^Compared to "Are a source of relevant information on global good practices" and “Are adaptable to Poland’s specific 27 development challenges and country circumstances”, respectively, asked in FY21. 28 The Future Role of the World Bank Group in Poland How can the WBG increase its effectiveness? Open Ended Responses Collaborate with local stakeholders, communicate results, greater dissemination of work Operational • Direct engagement with local governments, provide them with more Engagement • More active collaboration with local Effectiveness* information on cooperation 20% governments to better understand their challenges 29% opportunities Operational • Active involvement of local experts • Better understanding of country Effectiveness, 29% • Broader engagement and dialogue context, adaptation of solutions with civil society, academia, and the • Greater reliance on local experts, Engagement, private sector more engagement with civil society 20% and the private sector in Poland • More flexibility in bureaucratic Financial Communication • A more widespread dissemination of procedures for countries like Poland Support, 4% the WBG’s work in Poland 20% • Provide more information about Financial • Direct support to local governments Knowledge, WBG’s work in Poland and • Tailor financial instruments to 11% Support opportunities for cooperation market needs Communication, • Increasing the Bank’s visibility (brand 4% • Advisory support with subsequent Focus 20% recognition) in Poland, particularly co-financing Area, 12% among the younger generation of civil society leaders and academia Knowledge • More capacity building, especially as part of project implementation support (particularly for local Focus Area • Energy, climate change adaptation 11% governments) • Quality of life, urban development 12% • Education and governance • Reach out to the local expert community, inform them about WBG reports, and collaborate with them • Digital transformation In your opinion, what is the most important thing the World Bank Group could do to increase its effectiveness in Poland? (N=64) Q *All percentages are counted based on the total number of topics mentioned by the respondents; individual comments could be counted multiple times depending on the number of topics they cover. 29 Demands for the WBG to be more collaborative, use local knowledge, communicate more, and disseminate knowledge and results Communication Operational Effectiveness “Engage in local initiatives that have a real impact on change (success stories, local “Better confront its recommendations with national conditions in the political/economic/social experiments, model solutions, small-scale tests).” (Civil Society Respondent) dimension. This would significantly increase the effectiveness of the WBG's operations. Broader and less occasional contact with the third sector would be very advisable when developing and “Increase your activity and presence as an expert. Today, the WBG is perceived as a implementing the WBG projects.” (Civil Society Respondent) financing institution and not necessarily with good intentions (maximizing profit).” (Bilateral/Multilateral Agency Respondent) “In the required application documentation for new projects and in monitoring their implementation, take into account to a greater extent the specificity of national law, i.e. the Bank “More active work with the media - better information, data transfer, training, meetings should make its requirements more flexible depending on the level of advancement and practical with experts, seminars with the possibility of the media asking detailed questions.” implementation of legal, technical, environmental, demographic and economic solutions in a (Media Respondent) given country. ” (Government Institution Respondent) “The WBG should increase the intensity of its presence in the Polish public space, “To take into account the characteristics of economic processes in a country that has no especially in local government and the private sector in financial and advisory terms.” independent experience in state management. Take into account the mentality of the people (Local Government Respondent) formed by authoritarian dictatorship.” (Media Respondent) Engagement Knowledge “I think that better cooperation with third sector organizations and think tanks could increase the effectiveness of the bank's activities, also by influencing decision-makers through better “Increase the level of reaching potential stakeholders with knowledge about the possibilities of communication of recommendations through this additional channel.” cooperation with WBG. This should be disseminated and promoted. I have the impression that this (Academia Respondent) knowledge is elitist and not very common..” (Civil Society Respondent) “Build interest among young representatives of the so-called pressure groups, i.e. trade unions, NGOs, agricultural organizations, organizations of industry representatives, who have not had “A project at the government level implementing good management, transparency of officials. I contact with the WBG so far,or have only recently obtained such contact.” imagine a multi-year program with set goals, training of the entire administration, which would lead to (Civil Society Respondent) the depoliticization of the administration and the creation of a government of specialists.” (Media Respondent) Q In your opinion, what is the most important thing the WBG could do to increase its effectiveness in Poland? (N=64) 30 31 Communications and Outreach “Be more visible, be more active. Get those reports out on social media, in particular LinkedIn and Twitter.” (Civil Society Respondent) “If the WBG is active in Poland, it should take care of raising awareness of the brand and organization. Greater recognition can contribute to the interest of a larger group of people in the activities and support of the WBG (the more entities know what the WBG's activities are, the greater the chance for cooperation).” (Private Sector Respondent) Q In your opinion, what is the most important thing the World Bank Group could do to increase its effectiveness in Poland? (N=64) Event/conference/seminar and Direct Contact were Most Preferred for Receiving WBG Communication Preferred WBG Channel All Government Local Civil Society Private Sector Academia Media Respondents Institution Government Event / conference / seminar / 69.0% 64.9% 79.4% 57.9% 80.0% 75.0% 60.0% workshop (in person or online) Direct contact with staff (e.g., in 61.2% 62.2% 64.7% 63.2% 50.0% 50.0% 80.0% person, virtually, phone, email) e-Newsletters 31.0% 35.1% 26.5% 36.8% 30.0% 41.7% 10.0% Social media (e.g., Facebook, 10.1% 5.4% 2.9% 5.3% 10.0% 16.7% 20.0% Twitter) Direct messaging (e.g., 7.0% 2.7% 5.9% 21.1% 10.0% 0.0% 10.0% WhatsApp, Telegram, Viber) How would you prefer to receive communication from the WBG? (Select up to 2) Q (Percentage of Respondents, N=129) 32 4 in 10 Engaged With the WBG Recently, Most Often Through Direct Contact with WBG Staff and WBG’s Events 44% of respondents recalled hearing or seeing something about the WBG recently. Respondents most often reported seeing/hearing about the WBG through direct contact with the WBG staff or through events/conferences/seminars. Direct contact with WBG staff 63% Event / conference / seminar (in 39% person or online) Social media 35% Do you recall Yes seeing or hearing 44% anything about WBG websites 26% No the WBG 56% recently? Newspapers (print or online) 16% Direct messaging 11% e-Newsletters 9% Television (TV) 7% Blogs 4% Radio 2% Do you recall seeing or hearing anything about the WBG recently? (N=129) Q Where do you recall seeing or hearing this information? (Check all that apply) (Percentage of Respondents, N=57) 33 WBG Work on Climate Change was the Most Commonly Recalled Topic Respondents most frequently recalled WBG work or research Climate change 53% on climate change, human capital, WBG economic forecasts, and the digital economy. Human capital (education, health) 25% WBG economic forecasts 22% Digital economy 22% Job creation / employment 18% Ending poverty in developing 7% countries Changes to the WBG financial 7% and operational model Women empowerment 4% Pandemic preparedness 2% Food security 2% If you answered “Yes” for E2, what topics were included in what you saw or heard about WBG’s work or research? Q (Select all that apply) (Percentage of Respondents, N=55) 34 Climate Change Communications can be More Impactful when Related to Stakeholders’ Top Concerns: Heatwaves, Droughts and Water Availability Most respondents were very concerned about more frequent and severe heatwaves, droughts, and water availability and quality as potential impacts of climate change in Poland. Air pollution and land and 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 heatwaves 73% More frequent and severe droughts 67% Decreased water availability / quality 60% Air pollution 58% Land and forest degradation 52% More frequent and severe floods 50% Extinction of plant / animal species 49% Decreased crop yields 45% Climate-driven migration 42% More frequent and intense wildfires 32% Coastal flooding due to sea level rise 23% Loss of jobs 22% Increased erosion of shoreline 20% Q How concerned are you about the following potential impacts of climate change in Poland? (Percentage of Respondents, N=~132) 35 36 Sample Demographics and Detailed Methodology Sample Demographics Which of the Currently, do you following WBG World Bank (IBRD) 95% professionally agencies do you collaborate/work collaborate/work with the WBG in with in Poland? Poland? (N=149) (N=76) International Finance No Yes Corporation (IFC) 16% 49% 51% Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency 3% (MIGA) What’s your age? Which best (N=128) 25 or younger 1% represents your Warsaw & geographic 48% agglomeration 26-35 9% location? Regional (N=128) capital & 30% 36-45 35% agglomeration 46-55 35% Non-capital 16% city/town 56 and above 14% Rural area 5% Prefer not to 6% specify 37 Detailed Methodology Percentage of Respondents FY 2021 FY 2024 From March 2024 to May 2024, a total of 709 stakeholders of the WBG in Poland were Government Principals: Office of the Prime invited to provide their opinions about the WBG’s work in the country by participating in a 2% 2% Minister, Minister, Parliamentarian Country Opinion Survey (COS). A list of potential participants was compiled by the WBG country team and the field agency. Participants were drawn from the Office of the Prime Government Institutions: Employee of a Minister or a Minister, the office of a parliamentarian, government institutions, local Ministry, Department, Project Implementation 35% 28% governments, bilateral/ multilateral agencies, the private sector, civil society organizations, Unit, Independent Government Institution, Judiciary, State-Owned Enterprise academia, and the media. Local Government 10% 25% A total of 149 stakeholders participated in the survey (21% response rate). Respondents completed the questionnaires via an online platform. Bilateral/Multilateral Agency: Embassy, Development Organization, Development 5% 4% This year’s survey results were compared to the FY21 Survey, with a response rate of Bank, UN Agency 19% (N=83). Civil Society Organization: Local and Comparing responses across Country Surveys reflects changes in attitudes over time, as regional NGOs, Community-Based Organization, Private Foundation, 9% 13% well as changes in respondent samples, methodology, and the survey instrument itself. To Professional/Trade Association, reduce the influence of the latter factor, only questions with similar response scales/options Faith-Based Group, Youth Group were analyzed. This year’s survey saw an increased outreach to and/or response from local Private Sector: Private Company, Financial government but a decrease from government institutions and academia. These differences in Sector Organization, Private Bank, Small, 7% 8% stakeholder composition between the two years should be considered when interpreting the Micro & Medium Enterprise results of the past-year comparison analyses. Academia/Research Institute/Think Tank 19% 11% Key statistically significant findings (tested at the research standard of p < .05) are noted throughout the report. Media 6% 9% Breakdowns for individual questions by stakeholder group can be found in the “Poland COS Other 6% 0% FY24 Appendices with data breakdowns.xlsx” file published in the WBG Microdata Library, Total Number of Respondents 83 149 along with the survey microdata and this report. What is your primary professional affiliation? Q (Select only 1 response) (Percentage of Respondents, N=149) 38 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_4. How much do you trust each of the following institutions to do what is right for Poland? Scale: 1 Not at all – 10 Very much A2. How effective is the World Bank Group (WBG) in helping Poland achieve development results? Scale: 1 Not effective at all – 10 Very effective A3. How significant a contribution do you believe the World Bank Group's knowledge work makes to development results in Poland? Scale: 1 Not significant at all – 10 Very significant To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements about the WBG’s work in Poland? Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree A4. The World Bank Group currently plays a relevant role in development in Poland. A5. The World Bank Group’s work is aligned with what I consider the development priorities for Poland. A6. The WBG has a positive influence on shaping development policy in Poland A7. The WBG’s work helps end poverty and reduce inequality in Poland. To what extent is the World Bank Group an effective development partner in Poland, 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 Poland C1_2. Access to WBG staff and experts C1_6. Being a long-term partner to Poland To what extent is the WBG an effective development partner in Poland, in terms of collaborating with the following groups?: Scale: 1 To no degree at all – 10 To a very significant degree C2_1. Collaboration with the National government C2_4. Collaboration with the private sector C2_5. Collaboration with civil society C2_6. Collaboration with other donor and development partners To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements? Scale: 1 Strongly disagree – 10 Strongly agree C4_1. The WBG’s financial instruments meet the needs of Poland (i.e., investment lending, Development Policy Loan, Trust Funds, Program-for-Results). C4_2. The WBG provides financial support in a timely manner C6_1. I am satisfied with the quality of the WBG’s knowledge work in Poland. C6_4. The WBG’s knowledge work is tailored to Poland’s context. 39 Thank you For more information about this report or the Country Opinion Survey program, please contact: countrysurveys@worldbankgroup.org