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.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Independent Evaluation Group
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!
id dig-okr-1098637670
record_format koha
spelling dig-okr-10986376702024-05-02T18:46:43Z The World Bank Group in Bangladesh, Fiscal Years 2011–20 Country Program Evaluation Independent Evaluation Group RISK IDENTIFICATION VULNERABILITIES IMPLEMENTATION PARTNERSHIP FRAMEWORK ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT GENDER DISPLACED POPULATIONS JOBS CLEAN ENERGY 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. 2022-07-11T14:09:14Z 2022-07-11T14:09:14Z 2022 Working Paper Document de travail Documento de trabajo http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/099519306302224872/IDU0e81315990bb700422b0903d0d341cb4024c0 https://hdl.handle.net/10986/37670 English en_US Country Program Evaluation; CC BY 3.0 IGO http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo World Bank application/pdf text/plain application/pdf Washington, DC : World Bank
institution Banco Mundial
collection DSpace
country Estados Unidos
countrycode US
component Bibliográfico
access En linea
databasecode dig-okr
tag biblioteca
region America del Norte
libraryname Biblioteca del Banco Mundial
language English
en_US
topic RISK IDENTIFICATION
VULNERABILITIES
IMPLEMENTATION
PARTNERSHIP FRAMEWORK
ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT
GENDER
DISPLACED POPULATIONS
JOBS
CLEAN ENERGY
RISK IDENTIFICATION
VULNERABILITIES
IMPLEMENTATION
PARTNERSHIP FRAMEWORK
ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT
GENDER
DISPLACED POPULATIONS
JOBS
CLEAN ENERGY
spellingShingle RISK IDENTIFICATION
VULNERABILITIES
IMPLEMENTATION
PARTNERSHIP FRAMEWORK
ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT
GENDER
DISPLACED POPULATIONS
JOBS
CLEAN ENERGY
RISK IDENTIFICATION
VULNERABILITIES
IMPLEMENTATION
PARTNERSHIP FRAMEWORK
ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT
GENDER
DISPLACED POPULATIONS
JOBS
CLEAN ENERGY
Independent Evaluation Group
The World Bank Group in Bangladesh, Fiscal Years 2011–20
description 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.
format Working Paper
topic_facet RISK IDENTIFICATION
VULNERABILITIES
IMPLEMENTATION
PARTNERSHIP FRAMEWORK
ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT
GENDER
DISPLACED POPULATIONS
JOBS
CLEAN ENERGY
author Independent Evaluation Group
author_facet Independent Evaluation Group
author_sort Independent Evaluation Group
title The World Bank Group in Bangladesh, Fiscal Years 2011–20
title_short The World Bank Group in Bangladesh, Fiscal Years 2011–20
title_full The World Bank Group in Bangladesh, Fiscal Years 2011–20
title_fullStr The World Bank Group in Bangladesh, Fiscal Years 2011–20
title_full_unstemmed The World Bank Group in Bangladesh, Fiscal Years 2011–20
title_sort world bank group in bangladesh, fiscal years 2011–20
publisher Washington, DC : World Bank
publishDate 2022
url http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/099519306302224872/IDU0e81315990bb700422b0903d0d341cb4024c0
https://hdl.handle.net/10986/37670
work_keys_str_mv AT independentevaluationgroup theworldbankgroupinbangladeshfiscalyears201120
AT independentevaluationgroup countryprogramevaluation
AT independentevaluationgroup worldbankgroupinbangladeshfiscalyears201120
_version_ 1798164842480140288