Independent Evaluation of IFC's Development Results 2009: Knowledge for Private Sector Development (Independent Evaluation Group Studies)

9780821379868......Page 1
Contents......Page 3
Abbreviations......Page 7
Definitions of Evaluation Terms......Page 9
Acknowledgments......Page 11
Foreword......Page 13
Avant-propos......Page 15
Prólogo......Page 17
Arabic Foreword......Page 19
Executive Summary......Page 21
Résumé analytique......Page 27
Resumen ejecutivo......Page 35
Arabic Executive Summary......Page 43
IFC Management Response to IEG-IFC......Page 51
Chairperson’s Summary: Committee on Development Effectiveness (CODE)......Page 57
Advisory Panel Statement......Page 59
Growing Participation of the Private Sector in Development......Page 65
1.2 Knowledge Accumulation Is Key for Future Productivity......Page 66
Implications for IFC......Page 68
Part I: Financing Development......Page 69
Portfolio Pattern......Page 71
2.2 IFC Tended to Invest in Countries with Lower Prior Levels of Foreign Direct Investment to GDP......Page 74
2.17 On a Cumulative Basis, High/High Outcomes Were Achieved Half the Time......Page 84
Part II: Knowledge for Development......Page 91
Knowledge, Development, and the Private Sector......Page 93
Growth of IFC Advisory Services and Strategic Considerations......Page 95
3.3 Government Clients Predominate for Business Enabling Environment and Infrastructure Work......Page 99
3.4 Two Main Funding Sources: Donors and IFC......Page 104
3.1 How Does IFC’s Delivery Approach Compare with That of Other Development Institutions?......Page 115
Conclusions......Page 129
Recommendations......Page 131
Appendixes......Page 133
A: Project Sample Representativeness—Investment Operations......Page 135
B: Project Evaluation Methodology—Investment Operations......Page 137
C: Further Details on Results Characteristics—Investment Operations......Page 143
D: Risk-Adjusted Expected Development Outcome Regression: Model Specification, Analysis, and Preliminary Results......Page 145
E: Chronology of IFC Advisory Services......Page 149
F: Advisory Services Facilities, by Region......Page 153
G: Project Sample Representativeness—Advisory Services......Page 155
H: Project Evaluation Methodology—Advisory Services......Page 159
I: Findings from IFC-Commissioned Reviews of IFC Advisory Services......Page 161
J: High-Level Comparison of IFC Advisory Services with Other Multilateral Development Banks......Page 165
Endnotes......Page 179
Bibliography......Page 185
2.7 IFC Work Quality Improved Again......Page 76
2.3 Illustrations of High and Low Project Development Outcomes......Page 77
2.4 Measuring IFC Work Quality......Page 78
2.18 Best Results When IFC Investments Were Made in the Wake of a Crisis......Page 85
3.2 How Is Development Effectiveness Rated?......Page 117
3.15 Strategic Relevance Was Often Rated High, Impact Achievement Much Less So......Page 118
3.16 Environmental and Social Sustainability Project Ratings Have Lagged Behind Those of Other Business Lines......Page 119
3.5 Illustrations of IFC Additionality......Page 125
3.6 How Is IFC Additionality Rated?......Page 126
1.4 Bank Group Knowledge Services Are Increasingly Aimed at the Private Sector......Page 67
2.1 Methodologies Employed by IEG to Evaluate IFC Investment Operations......Page 72
2.3 IFC Has Made Up a Higher Share of Multilateral Development Bank Finance in Asia, MENA, and LAC......Page 73
2.6 Country Business Climate Risk Improved in Most Regions......Page 75
2.10 Better Ratings Again in Europe and Central Asia and in Latin America and the Caribbean......Page 79
2.12 External Risks Were Highest in Sub-Saharan Africa......Page 80
2.13 Performance Was Strong in IFC’s Strategic Sectors......Page 81
2.15 Environmental and Social Effects Performance Has Declined Sharply for Financial Intermediary Operations......Page 82
2.16 Project Development Outcomes and IFC Profitability Were Strongly Correlated......Page 83
2.4 Selected Lessons from Regional and Global Investments......Page 89
3.2 Seventy-Seven Percent of Advisory Services Staff Are Based in the Field......Page 96
3.4 Highest Share of Operations Is in Sub-Saharan Africa......Page 98
3.5 Delivery Structure for IFC Advisory Services Projects in Africa......Page 101
3.7 Discussion of Activities and Complementarities with Others in Project Approvals Is Weak......Page 103
3.5 Donor Funding Leverage Has Been Highest in South Asia......Page 105
3.6 Middle East and North Africa Region and Infrastructure Have the Most, Though Still Limited, Cost Contributions by Clients......Page 106
3.10 Project Completion Report Quality, by Business Line......Page 109
3.11 Project Completion Report Quality, by Region......Page 110
3.9 Few External Reviews Have Thus Far Focused on Impact......Page 111
3.13 Advisory and Investment Services Linkages Are Greatest for Access to Finance Operations......Page 112
3.10 By Business Line, Resources Have Tended to Be Allocated to Countries in Greatest Need......Page 116
3.11 Selected Ratings, by Product......Page 120
3.19 The Overall Relationship between Advisory and Investment Services Performance Is Moderate......Page 121
3.22 Client Commitment: Better Ratings When Client Contributed......Page 122
3.25 Better M&E Quality, Better Ratings......Page 123
3.27 Slightly Lower Performance for Recently Completed Operations......Page 124
2.3 In Argentina, Performance Fell Dramatically as the Business Environment Deteriorated......Page 86
3.1 Methodologies Employed by IEG to Evaluate IFC Advisory Services......Page 94
3.7 Some Free or Near-Free Advisory Services Operations Cross-Subsidize IFC Investments......Page 107
3.8 Ratio of Staff to Consultant Expenses Is Roughly 1:1......Page 108