The World Bank Group in Bangladesh, Fiscal Years 2011–20
This Country Program Evaluation (CPE) assesses the development effectiveness of the World Bank Group’s engagement with Bangladesh during the past decade (fiscal year [FY]11–20) and provides lessons to inform the next Bank Group supported strategy with Bangladesh and to countries facing similar challenges. The Bank Group made important contributions over the past decade to help Bangladesh address several of its development challenges. Most notable include increasing power generation capacity, improving access to clean energy, all season roads, primary and secondary education, reducing child and maternal mortality and improving financial inclusion. However, achievements fell short in several areas, including insufficient investment in data and measurement particularly on learning outcomes and limited progress on regional connectivity. In other areas, domestic vested interests prevailed resulting in little progress in improving the business environment, natural resource management, banking reform and tariff reform. Bank Group support adapted in response to changing circumstances following the Padma Bridge cancellation by reallocating resources to sectors in which the Bank Group had more traction and a long-standing history of effective engagement. However, rising fiscal vulnerabilities received insufficient attention. Despite a deteriorating trend in institutional quality and economic management and declining core IDA allocation, the Bank Group significantly increased financing to Bangladesh, including through IDA’s Scale Up Facility. Key lessons include: (i) Rebalancing the portfolio in the face of a difficult political economy helped the Bank Group remain relevant in Bangladesh; (ii) Where reform is deemed critical to sustain development progress but government commitment is weak or absent, continued targeted analysis of key development constraints can help prepare the ground for future action when a window of opportunity presents itself; (iii) Measuring improvements in the quality of education requires deliberate and ongoing investment in data collection; (iv) Increasing overall IDA financing in the context of deteriorating CPIA rating raises a question about the significance that IDA assigns to measures of institutional quality and governance; (v) Given underlying concerns with data quality and coverage, the World Bank might have been more qualified in its public statements about the quality of the macroeconomic framework; and (vi) Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP) arrangements between the World Bank and the IMF constrain the ability of the World Bank to provide comprehensive and timely assessments of financial sector vulnerabilities in nonsystematically important economies.
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Working Paper biblioteca |
| Language: | English en_US |
| Published: |
Washington, DC : World Bank
2022
|
| Subjects: | RISK IDENTIFICATION, VULNERABILITIES, IMPLEMENTATION, PARTNERSHIP FRAMEWORK, ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT, GENDER, DISPLACED POPULATIONS, JOBS, CLEAN ENERGY, |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/099519306302224872/IDU0e81315990bb700422b0903d0d341cb4024c0 https://hdl.handle.net/10986/37670 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | This Country Program Evaluation (CPE)
assesses the development effectiveness of the World Bank
Group’s engagement with Bangladesh during the past decade
(fiscal year [FY]11–20) and provides lessons to inform the
next Bank Group supported strategy with Bangladesh and to
countries facing similar challenges. The Bank Group made
important contributions over the past decade to help
Bangladesh address several of its development challenges.
Most notable include increasing power generation capacity,
improving access to clean energy, all season roads, primary
and secondary education, reducing child and maternal
mortality and improving financial inclusion. However,
achievements fell short in several areas, including
insufficient investment in data and measurement particularly
on learning outcomes and limited progress on regional
connectivity. In other areas, domestic vested interests
prevailed resulting in little progress in improving the
business environment, natural resource management, banking
reform and tariff reform. Bank Group support adapted in
response to changing circumstances following the Padma
Bridge cancellation by reallocating resources to sectors in
which the Bank Group had more traction and a long-standing
history of effective engagement. However, rising fiscal
vulnerabilities received insufficient attention. Despite a
deteriorating trend in institutional quality and economic
management and declining core IDA allocation, the Bank Group
significantly increased financing to Bangladesh, including
through IDA’s Scale Up Facility. Key lessons include: (i)
Rebalancing the portfolio in the face of a difficult
political economy helped the Bank Group remain relevant in
Bangladesh; (ii) Where reform is deemed critical to sustain
development progress but government commitment is weak or
absent, continued targeted analysis of key development
constraints can help prepare the ground for future action
when a window of opportunity presents itself; (iii)
Measuring improvements in the quality of education requires
deliberate and ongoing investment in data collection; (iv)
Increasing overall IDA financing in the context of
deteriorating CPIA rating raises a question about the
significance that IDA assigns to measures of institutional
quality and governance; (v) Given underlying concerns with
data quality and coverage, the World Bank might have been
more qualified in its public statements about the quality of
the macroeconomic framework; and (vi) Financial Sector
Assessment Program (FSAP) arrangements between the World
Bank and the IMF constrain the ability of the World Bank to
provide comprehensive and timely assessments of financial
sector vulnerabilities in nonsystematically important economies. |
|---|