01. Annual Reports & Independent Evaluations

1,030 items available

Permanent URI for this collection

http://hdl.handle.net/10986/1

Sub-collections of this Collection

Items in this collection

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5

The World Bank Annual Report 2022: Helping Countries Adapt to a Changing World

(Washington, DC : World Bank, 2022) World Bank

The Annual Report is prepared by the Executive Directors of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the International Development Association (IDA)--collectively known as the World Bank--in accordance with the by-laws of the two institutions. The President of the IBRD and IDA and the Chairman of the Board of Executive Directors submit the Report, together with the accompanying administrative budgets and audited financial statements, to the Board of Governors.
The World Bank Annual Report 2021: From Crisis to Green, Resilient, and Inclusive Recovery

(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2021-10-01) World Bank

The Annual Report is prepared by the Executive Directors of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the International Development Association (IDA)--collectively known as the World Bank--in accordance with the by-laws of the two institutions. The President of the IBRD and IDA and the Chairman of the Board of Executive Directors submits the Report, together with the accompanying administrative budgets and audited financial statements, to the Board of Governors.
Lessons from Environmental Policy Lending

(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2016-06-29) Independent Evaluation Group

The World Bank offers three main categories of financing: investment project financing directly finances specific investments; Program for results financing uses country systems and disburses based on achievement of specific results; and Development Policy Financing (DPF) supports a government program of policy and institutional actions. The DPF instrument is intended to achieve development results primarily through the supported policy reforms and associated policy dialog and support. This learning product focusses on the World Bank’s experience with DPOs in the Environment sector, broadly defined. For the purposes of this review, environmentalDPOs were defined to be any policy lending operation mapped to the Environment and Natural Resources (ENR) Global Practice or, prior to that, the Environment Sector Board, or any other policy lending operation with an environmental or disaster risk management theme as the primary or secondary theme (see Appendix C). This experience covers a wide range of sectors, including climate change mitigation and adaptation, green growth, natural resource management, disaster risk management, forestry, environmental policy, and others. Much of the experience is very new, with 25 of the 64 operations yet to be evaluated. Many of the active programs are among the first environmental DPOs in their country or region. Many operations were designed and implemented by teams that included staff with relatively little policy lending experience, and so the opportunity for learning is substantial.
Learning from IDA Experience: Lessons from IEG Evaluations

(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2016) Independent Evaluation Group

At the United Nations General Assembly in September 2015, world leaders endorsed 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a successor framework to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Placing economic, social, and environmental sustainability at the center of development, the new agenda has the potential for a historic shift in achieving the goal of ending poverty and promoting shared prosperity. Within this changed and changing context, the operations and modus operandi of the International Development Association (IDA) are being examined. As the world’s largest provider of financial resources to the poorest countries, it is expected to deliver greater results in the new development paradigm. In line with the commitment to learning from the past, this synthesis report presents findings from recent evaluations and analysis from the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG). Focusing on the special themes under IDA16 and IDA17, it aims to offer evaluation evidence on what has and has not worked in IDA priority areas in order to support the IDA18 replenishment discussions.
Zambia Country Program Evaluation FY04-13: An Independent Evaluation

(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2015) Independent Evaluation Group

From 2004 to 2012, Zambia experienced a combination of good economic policies and high rates of growth not seen since the early years after its independence. While growth was mainly driven by rising copper prices, other factors contributed to Zambia’s ability to take advantage of this growth. The international debt relief programs in 2004-2005 almost eliminated public debt and provided the fiscal space for selective, high-priority investments and expanded social programs. The privatization of the copper mines brought new investment in rehabilitation and expansion of production. The period also saw a substantial expansion of primary education and progress in dealing with the most pervasive public health problems. These positive developments set the stage for Zambia to tackle its pervasive poverty. In practice, however, sustained growth over the period has led to little poverty reduction, especially in rural areas of the country. The Bank Group and other donors provided critical support at the beginning of the evaluation period, when Zambia’s debt level became unsustainable. The Bank provided substantial support for capacity development and better functioning institutions. The Bank’s efforts to strengthen public administration and improve governance met with some partial successes in enhanced audit and procurement capacity, and the achievement of Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative compliance. However, despite nearly a decade of implementation, the Integrated Financial Management Information Systems (IFMIS), is still only partially operational. Further, the Zambian government has not followed through on its positive discourse regarding decentralization of government authority.