Show Me the Money II : From Concept to Practice
More than a year and a half has passed since International Finance Corporation (IFC) Advisory Services in Eastern Europe and Central Asia (AS ECA) introduced a standard methodology for assessing aggregate cost savings (ACS) for businesses resulting from IFC-supported business enabling environment (BEE) reforms. Within the region, thirteen regulatory reforms in six countries have been assessed with this methodology, showing an estimated $301 million in cost savings for the private sector with an average impact of $29 for every dollar spent on these advisory projects. These results look impressive, but they also raise questions on the concept and application of the methodology: How do the authors know this is adequate impact for the resources invested? What else needs to be done to refine the approach? Can these types of impact measures be applied as decision tools at the program level? On a global level, a review of project supervision reports from the current active BEE portfolio reveals that fifteen projects are reporting on the corporate-wide standard ACS indicator. Thus, another question emerges: What does it take to implement a consistent approach across regions?
| Summary: | More than a year and a half has passed
since International Finance Corporation (IFC) Advisory
Services in Eastern Europe and Central Asia (AS ECA)
introduced a standard methodology for assessing aggregate
cost savings (ACS) for businesses resulting from
IFC-supported business enabling environment (BEE) reforms.
Within the region, thirteen regulatory reforms in six
countries have been assessed with this methodology, showing
an estimated $301 million in cost savings for the private
sector with an average impact of $29 for every dollar spent
on these advisory projects. These results look impressive,
but they also raise questions on the concept and application
of the methodology: How do the authors know this is adequate
impact for the resources invested? What else needs to be
done to refine the approach? Can these types of impact
measures be applied as decision tools at the program level?
On a global level, a review of project supervision reports
from the current active BEE portfolio reveals that fifteen
projects are reporting on the corporate-wide standard ACS
indicator. Thus, another question emerges: What does it take
to implement a consistent approach across regions? |
|---|