Search

Central America is undergoing an important transition, with urban populations increasingat accelerated speeds, bringing pressing challenges as well as opportunities to boost sustained,inclusive and resilient growth. Today, 59 percent of Central America's population lives in urban areas, but it is expected that within the next generation 7 out of 10 people will live in cities, equivalent to adding 700,000 new urban residents every year. At current rates of urbanization, the region’s urban population will double in size by 2050, welcoming over 25 million new urban dwellers, calling for better infrastructure, higher coverage and quality of urban services and greater employment opportunities. As larger numbers of people concentrate in urban areas, Central American governments at the national and local levels face both opportunities and challenges to ensure the prosperity of their country's present and future generations.

Prior to the political and security crisis of 2012, Mali, a large landlocked country in West Africa already ranked among the poorest countries in the world. In early 2012, the vast northern regions fell under the control of extremist forces, while a coup d’état in Bamako threw the country into political instability and turmoil. A strong international military response in early 2013 prevented further destabilization, though part of the North remains outside government control and insecurity has spread to Bamako and the South. The signing of a peace agreement in June 2015 has revived hopes for peace and stability. The WBG has continued to support Mali throughout the crisis. An Interim Strategy Note (ISN, FY14-15) addressed the root causes of Mali’s underestimated fragility, namely weak governance, extremely high demographic growth and the consequences of climate change. This CPF will continue to address the drivers of Mali’s fragility, with a strong focus on governance, while building on the progress and experience of the ISN. Drawing from the recent Systematic Country Diagnostic (SCD), which stresses the criticality of improving rural livelihoods to sustainable poverty reduction, the Framework intends to contribute to improving rural incomes by increasing productivity and resilience in the four livelihood zones of the country. Accordingly, the CPF proposes orientations for the WBG engagement around three areas of focus: (i) improve governance, by strengthening public resource management at central and local levels and fostering citizen engagement; (ii) create economic opportunities, by enhancing the productive capacity of smallholders, increasing agricultural value added and diversification to catalyze transformation, and improving basic services by developing infrastructure and connectivity; and (iii) build resilience, by developing human capital, strengthening safety nets, improving risk management mechanisms for the poor and vulnerable and mitigating climate shock. A comprehensive program has been proposed for the first two years of the CPF that includes knowledge activities and development policy operations to address the binding constraints to poverty reduction, as well as citizen engagement, investment financing, partner-funded and joint IFC/IDA investments and guarantees. Key areas include the reinsertion of ex-combatants, competitiveness and agricultural productivity, statistical capacity, climate change, water and sanitation, safety nets programs, energy, irrigation and transport.

Latin America and the Caribbean (LCR) will be center stage in the global development debate as leaders from around the world convene in Lima, Peru for the annual meetings of the World Bank Group and International Monetary Fund. Critical progress in poverty reduction has been made in the region over the last decade. The region’s bottom 40 percent of the population saw growth eclipsing that seen by the group in every other region in the world. However, a global slowdown in economic growth and activity challenges these positive strides. The stories in this report embody concrete successes of countries working together with the World Bank. Innovative development approaches were designed and implemented. Individuals, communities, countries, and even regions benefited from better health, education, governance, disaster risk management, and more.

This paper reviews the experiences of intergovernmental fiscal systems (IGFS) to look for possible lessons for how Official Development Assistance (ODA) is delivered. Specifically, it compares IGFS and ODA in two specific respects. The first is the proportion of public resources that central governments make available to sub-national governments on a conditional basis, and how that compares with the proportion of non-earmarked ODA given to low income countries. The second is the role of performance outcome in resource allocation to sub-national governments and how that compares with the role of performance in ODA, particularly multilateral ODA allocation. The comparisons show that: (i) the share of earmarked ODA is more than three times higher than that of conditional grants in intergovernmental systems, suggesting that donors in ODA rely more on earmarking to influence the spending decisions of the recipient countries than their federal governments do on conditional grants to induce policy changes in their own sub-national governments; and (ii) none of the OECD countries currently use outcome measures in determining resource allocation to their sub-national governments for a variety of good reasons, and the recent debate as to whether multilateral ODA allocation should be based on development outcomes seems to ignore this experience.