Publication: Senegal's Infrastructure: A Continental Perspective
Loading...
Date
2011-06
ISSN
Published
2011-06
Editor(s)
Abstract
Between 2000 and 2005 infrastructure made a contribution of 1 percentage point to Senegal's improved per capita growth performance, placing it in the middle of the distribution among West African countries during the period. Raising the country's infrastructure endowment to that of the region's middle-income countries (MICs) could boost annual growth by about 2.7 percentage points. Senegal has made significant progress in some areas of its infrastructure. In the transport sector, road standards are adequate and their quality average. Senegal has also strengthened the road institutional framework with the creation of the Second Generation Road Fund (FERA) and the Road Maintenance Executing Agency. It has also managed to have a toll road concession granted for the Dakar-Diamniadio Toll Highway. The tariffs in the railway sector are internationally competitive, and there has been improvement in the financial viability of ports. After Nigeria, the country stands as an emerging hub and a major player in air transport. Also, Senegal has managed to introduce private participation in electricity generation, and the unbundling of the electricity sector is under way even as the country actively participates in the regional power market. The country is on track to meet the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in improved water. In the information and communication technology (ICT) sector there has been an impressive expansion of the mobile and Internet markets. Senegal already spends around $911 million per year on infrastructure, equivalent to about 11 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP). Almost $312 million a year is lost to inefficiencies of various kinds, associated mainly with under-pricing in the power and water sectors, poor financial management of utilities, and inefficient allocation of resources across sectors. If Senegal could raise tariffs to cost-recovery levels and reduce operational inefficiencies in line with reasonable developing-country benchmarks, it could substantially boost its infrastructure sector.
Link to Data Set
Citation
“Briceño-Garmendia, Cecilia M.; Torres, Clemencia; Dominguez, Carolina. 2011. Senegal's Infrastructure: A Continental Perspective. Africa Infrastructure Country Diagnostic;. © World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/27256 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.”
Associated URLs
Associated content
Other publications in this report series
Journal
Journal Volume
Journal Issue
Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
Publication Senegal's Infrastructure : A Continental Perspective(2011-09-01)Infrastructure contributed 1 percentage point to Senegal's improved per capita growth performance between 2000 and 2005, placing it in the middle of the distribution among West African countries. Raising the country's infrastructure endowment to that of the region's middle-income countries (MICs) could boost annual growth by about 2.7 percentage points. Senegal has made significant progress in some areas of its infrastructure, including the transport, electricity, water, and information-and-communication-technology (ICT) sectors. But looking ahead, the country faces important infrastructure challenges, including improving road conditions, boosting air and rail traffic, updating electricity infrastructure, and boosting the pace of expansion of the water-and-sanitation network. Senegal currently spends around $911 million per year on infrastructure, with $312 million lost annually to inefficiencies. Comparing spending needs with existing spending and potential efficiency gains leaves an annual funding gap of $578 million per year. Senegal has the potential close this gap by bringing in more private-sector investment.Publication Benin's Infrastructure(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2011-06)Between 2000 and 2005 infrastructure made an important contribution of 1.6 percentage point to Benin's improved per capita growth performance, which was the highest among West African countries during the period. Raising the country's infrastructure endowment to that of the region's middle-income countries could boost annual growth by about 3.2 percentage points. Benin has made significant progress in some areas of its infrastructure. The rural road network is in relatively good condition, and about 30 percent of the rural population has access to an all-season road, a level above the country's peers. Air transport connectivity has improved. Also, important market liberalization reforms designed to attract private capital to the water and information and communications technology (ICT) sectors have boosted performance. In particular, increased competition in the ICT market has contributed to the rapid expansion of mobile and Internet services. Addressing Benin's infrastructure challenges will require sustained expenditures of $712 million per year over the next decade, with heavy emphasis on capital expenditure. Almost half of the total relates to the transport sector. At 16.6 percent of Benin's 2005 gross domestic product (GDP), this effort is almost at the level of other Sub-Saharan African countries. Benin already spends around $452 million per year on infrastructure, equivalent to about 10.5 percent of its GDP. Almost $101 million a year is lost to inefficiencies of various kinds, associated mainly with under pricing in the power and water sectors; poor financial management of utilities; and inefficient allocation of resources across sectors. If Benin could raise tariffs to cost-recovery levels, and reduce operational inefficiencies in line with reasonable developing-country benchmarks, it could substantially boost flows to the infrastructure sectors. Comparing spending needs with existing spending and potential efficiency gains (and assuming that the inefficiencies are fully captured) leaves an annual funding gap of $210 million per year. By far the largest share of the gap can be traced to the water supply and sanitation sectors. Benin has the potential to close this gap by adopting alternative technologies in water supply, transport and power. Savings from alternative technologies could amount to as much as $227 million per year.Publication Ghana’s Infrastructure : A Continental Perspective(2011-03-01)Infrastructure contributed just over one percentage point to Ghana's annual per capital GDP growth during the 2000s. Raising the country s infrastructure endowment to that of the region's middle-income countries could boost the annual growth rate by more than 2.7 percentage points. Ghana has an advanced infrastructure platform when compared with other low-income countries in Africa. The country s coverage levels for rural water, electricity, and GSM signals are impressive. A large share of the road network is in good or fair condition. Institutional reforms have been adopted in the ICT, ports, roads, and water supply sectors. Ghana s most pressing challenges lie in the power sector, where outmoded transmission and distribution assets, rapid demand growth, and periodic hydrological shocks leave the country reliant on high-cost oil-based generation. Exceptionally high losses in water distribution leave little to reach end customers, who are thus exposed to intermittent supplies. Addressing Ghana's infrastructure challenges will require raising annual expenditures to $2.3 billion. The country already spends about $1.2 billion per year on infrastructure, equivalent to about 7.5 percent of GDP. A further $1.1 billion is lost each year to inefficiencies, notably underpricing of power.Ghana's annual infrastructure funding gap is about $0.4 billion per year, chiefly related to power and water. Following its recent oil discoveries, Ghana can raise additional public funding from increased tax receipts. The country has several strong areas on which to build and a solid economic base from which to fund incremental efforts.Publication Ghana's Infrastructure(Washington, DC, 2010-03)Infrastructure contributed just over one percentage point to Ghana's improved per capita growth performance during the 2000s, though unreliable power supplies held growth back by 0.5 percentage points. Raising the country's infrastructure endowment to that of the region's middle-income countries could boost annual growth by more than 2.7 percentage points. Today, Ghana has a very advanced infrastructure platform when compared with other low-income countries in Africa. But as the country approaches the middle-income threshold, it will need to focus on upgrading its infrastructure indicators in line with this benchmark. The Africa Infrastructure Country Diagnostic (AICD) has gathered and analyzed extensive data on infrastructure in more than 40 Sub-Saharan countries, including Ghana. The results have been presented in reports covering different areas of infrastructure, including ICT, irrigation, power, transport, water, and sanitation, and different policy areas, including investment needs, fiscal costs, and sector performance. This report presents the key AICD findings for Ghana and allows the country's infrastructure situation to be benchmarked against its African peers. Given that Ghana is a relatively well-off low-income country well on its way to reaching middle-income status, two sets of African benchmarks will be used to evaluate Ghana's situation. Detailed comparisons will also be made with immediate regional neighbors in the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). As on the rest of the continent, West Africa's growth performance improved markedly in the 2000s. The overall improvement in per capita growth rates has been estimated at around 2 percent, of which 1.1 percent is attributable to better structural policies and 0.9 percent to improved infrastructure. During the five years from 2003 to 2007, Ghana's economy grew at an average annual rate of 5.6 percent, which accelerated to 7.3 percent in 2009. Ghana's infrastructure improvements added just over one percentage point to the per capita growth rate for the period 2003 to 2007.Publication ECOWAS's Infrastructure : A Regional Perspective(2011-12-01)Infrastructure improvements boosted growth in the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) by one percentage point per capita per year during 1995-2005, primarily thanks to growth in information and communication technology. Deficient power infrastructure held growth back by 0.1 percent. Raising the region's infrastructure to the level of Mauritius could boost growth by 5 percentage points. Overall, infrastructure in the 15 ECOWAS countries ranks consistently behind southern Africa across many indicators. However, there is parity in access to household services -- water, sanitation, and power. ECOWAS has a well-developed regional road network, though sea corridors and ports need attention. Surface transport is expensive and slow, owing to cartelization, restrictive regulations, and delays. There is no regional rail network. Air transport has improved despite the lack of a strong hub-and-spoke structure. Safety remains a concern. Electrical power, the most expensive and least reliable in Africa, reaches 50 percent of the population but meets just 30 percent of demand. Regional power trading would bring substantial benefits if Guinea could become a hydropower exporter. Prices for critical ICT services are relatively high. Recent panregional initiatives have improved roaming. New projects are underway to provide access and improved services to unconnected countries. Completing and maintaining ECOWAS's infrastructure will require sustained spending of $1.5 billion annually for a decade, with one-third going to power. Although the necessary spending is only 1 percent of regional GDP, some countries' share is between 5 and 25 percent of national GDP. Clearly, external assistance will be needed.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
Publication Governance Matters IV : Governance Indicators for 1996-2004(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2005-06)The authors present the latest update of their aggregate governance indicators, together with new analysis of several issues related to the use of these measures. The governance indicators measure the following six dimensions of governance: (1) voice and accountability; (2) political instability and violence; (3) government effectiveness; (4) regulatory quality; (5) rule of law, and (6) control of corruption. They cover 209 countries and territories for 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, and 2004. They are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 37 separate data sources constructed by 31 organizations. The authors present estimates of the six dimensions of governance for each period, as well as margins of error capturing the range of likely values for each country. These margins of error are not unique to perceptions-based measures of governance, but are an important feature of all efforts to measure governance, including objective indicators. In fact, the authors give examples of how individual objective measures provide an incomplete picture of even the quite particular dimensions of governance that they are intended to measure. The authors also analyze in detail changes over time in their estimates of governance; provide a framework for assessing the statistical significance of changes in governance; and suggest a simple rule of thumb for identifying statistically significant changes in country governance over time. The ability to identify significant changes in governance over time is much higher for aggregate indicators than for any individual indicator. While the authors find that the quality of governance in a number of countries has changed significantly (in both directions), they also provide evidence suggesting that there are no trends, for better or worse, in global averages of governance. Finally, they interpret the strong observed correlation between income and governance, and argue against recent efforts to apply a discount to governance performance in low-income countries.Publication Measuring Financial Inclusion : The Global Findex Database(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2012-04)This paper provides the first analysis of the Global Financial Inclusion (Global Findex) Database, a new set of indicators that measure how adults in 148 economies save, borrow, make payments, and manage risk. The data show that 50 percent of adults worldwide have an account at a formal financial institution, though account penetration varies widely across regions, income groups and individual characteristics. In addition, 22 percent of adults report having saved at a formal financial institution in the past 12 months, and 9 percent report having taken out a new loan from a bank, credit union or microfinance institution in the past year. Although half of adults around the world remain unbanked, at least 35 percent of them report barriers to account use that might be addressed by public policy. Among the most commonly reported barriers are high cost, physical distance, and lack of proper documentation, though there are significant differences across regions and individual characteristics.Publication Design Thinking for Social Innovation(2010-07)Designers have traditionally focused on enchancing the look and functionality of products.Publication Governance Matters VIII : Aggregate and Individual Governance Indicators 1996–2008(2009-06-01)This paper reports on the 2009 update of the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) research project, covering 212 countries and territories and measuring six dimensions of governance between 1996 and 2008: Voice and Accountability, Political Stability and Absence of Violence/Terrorism, Government Effectiveness, Regulatory Quality, Rule of Law, and Control of Corruption. These aggregate indicators are based on hundreds of specific and disaggregated individual variables measuring various dimensions of governance, taken from 35 data sources provided by 33 different organizations. The data reflect the views on governance of public sector, private sector and NGO experts, as well as thousands of citizen and firm survey respondents worldwide. The authors also explicitly report the margins of error accompanying each country estimate. These reflect the inherent difficulties in measuring governance using any kind of data. They find that even after taking margins of error into account, the WGI permit meaningful cross-country comparisons as well as monitoring progress over time. The aggregate indicators, together with the disaggregated underlying indicators, are available at www.govindicators.org.Publication Government Matters III : Governance Indicators for 1996-2002(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2003-08)The authors present estimates of six dimensions of governance covering 199 countries and territories for four time periods: 1996, 1998, 2000, and 2002. These indicators are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 25 separate data sources constructed by 18 different organizations. The authors assign these individual measures of governance to categories capturing key dimensions of governance and use an unobserved components model to construct six aggregate governance indicators in each of the four periods. They present the point estimates of the dimensions of governance as well as the margins of errors for each country for the four periods. The governance indicators reported here are an update and expansion of previous research work on indicators initiated in 1998 (Kaufmann, Kraay, and Zoido-Lobat 1999a,b and 2002). The authors also address various methodological issues, including the interpretation and use of the data given the estimated margins of errors.