Search

This paper is a survey of practices and results that have been observed in the implementation of PBGs, drawing largely upon four in-depth Project Performance Assessment Reports undertaken by IEG, in Serbia, Macedonia, and Montenegro. It also draws upon IEG’s evaluations of Ghana’s Poverty Reduction Support Credits, which provide background material on the 2015 Ghana PBG. A recent World Bank review of the Albania PBG was also taken into consideration. The report draws on IEG’s technical analyses, coordinated with relevant units of the World Bank and, finally, interviews with a cross-section of World Bank staff. It therefore represents an initial step in building greater awareness of a relatively new and important tool in development finance.

Access to adequate housing is critically important to the health and wellbeing of the world’s population. Yet, despite the fact that this statement is part of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and has been on the global policy agenda for many years, hundreds of millions of people continue to live in inadequate conditions with little or no access to decent housing. The demand for housing solutions will increase as urbanization and population growth persists. The United Nations Human Settlements Program (UN-Habitat) has estimated that the number of people living in slums around the world will rise to 900 million by 2020 if nothing is done. Asia and Africa will face special challenges, because urbanization in those regions is proceeding rapidly. Housing is frequently unaffordable to all but the top earners. A recent report estimates a housing affordability gap affecting 330 million households, with 200 million households in the developing world living in slums (McKinsey Global Institute 2014). Research has shown that more and better housing increases the welfare of occupants. Homeownership may increase stability and civic engagement, and provide financial security in old age. Improvements in housing also have important benefits to the economy. Housing construction and home improvement generate demand for professional, skilled, semi-skilled, and unskilled labor; and allow many micro and small businesses to flourish. The housing market is an important component of national economies and housing booms and busts can have significant effects on the macro economy and financial sector. The core purpose of this learning product is to generate knowledge and provide lessons learned from World Bank Group support to housing finance. Lessons were derived primarily from evaluated interventions in the form of World Bank loans or International Finance Corporation (IFC) investments and advisory services. World Bank technical assistance and knowledge products and interventions on housing finance matters were considered when provided in the context of lending operations. One limitation faced in preparation of this learning product was the lack of coverage of stand-alone World Bank advisory services.

Land rights and the systems that administer them can vary significantly across the world and within countries (World Bank 2003). For a number of reasons, land rights may be unclear or insecure. Securing land rights plays an important role in driving economic growth and poverty reduction. In recent years there has been increasing awareness of the relevance of land tenure issues to food security, climate change, rapid urbanization, informality, and indigenous peoples’ rights. The World Bank Group has a long history of developing and implementing projects aimed at securing land rights through a variety of interventions. This note synthesizes cross-cutting findings from 14 Independent Evaluation Group assessments of land administration projects that the World Bank has supported from 1998 to 2014. The project-level assessments reviewed for this report contain a wealth of information about how the Bank Group approached different problems related to strengthening land administration systems in diverse environments. This information is relevant to both land administration specialists and experts in other fields whose work is impacted by land tenure issues.

Transformational engagements are a critical pillar of the World Bank Group’s strategy for achieving its twin goals of extreme poverty elimination and shared prosperity. This learning product uses evaluative evidence from the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) to understand the mechanisms and conditions for transformational engagements and the implications for the World Bank Group if it seeks to rely on such engagements to more effectively pursue its goals.

Effective environmental and social risk management in development policy financing (DPF) is central to achieving the World Bank’s goals of ending extreme poverty and promoting shared prosperity in a sustainable manner. If the World Bank is supporting far-reaching member country reforms that are intended to contribute to the twin goals, then it should seek to understand the impact of those reforms on the poor. It should also ensure that the country’s natural capital and long-term growth prospects will not be undermined. The objective of this learning product is therefore to assess the application of the elements of the World Bank operational policy (OP 8.60) governing DPF related to the implementation of the environmental and social risk management requirements of the policy, and identify lessons learned and good practices. The focus of the study is on Bank actions, policies, procedures, and guidance for environmental and social risk management, based largely on a desk-based portfolio review of a large, random sample of development policy operations (DPOs), complemented by assessment of other relevant documents, and interviews with key stakeholders. This approach requires the Bank to determine whether specific policies supported by a DPO are likely to have significant poverty and social or environmental effects. The Bank emphasized the potential of OP 8.60 to promote positive environmental and social development from the time the policy was approved in 2004.

Access to financial services has long been believed to lift people out of poverty by allowing them to seize economic opportunities and increase their welfare. Despite rapid progress of 700 million people gaining access to formal financial services, 2 billion remain excluded. Financial inclusion -- access by poor families and microenterprises to financial services -- has been an objective of the World Bank Group for a long time, reaffirmed in 2013 by President Jim Kim’s commitment to the Universal Access Goal by 2020. This evaluation examines the relevance and effectiveness of seven years (FY07-13) of World Bank Group support to financial inclusion and its impact on the poor. It found that the World Bank Group contributed significantly to progress in financial inclusion globally and in client countries. It has “reached” a substantial share of the microfinance industry. Its support is strategically aligned with countries’ needs, focusing primarily on countries with low inclusion rates and addressing development priorities. The Bank Group has also contributed to the sustainability of microfinance services. Yet the Bank Group’s approach to identify and tackle constraints to financial inclusion at the country level is not sufficiently comprehensive. This is of particular concern for areas that are not subject to prudential regulations, like mobile money and rural savings and credit cooperatives. Even though the Bank Group was able to leverage its impact through international partnerships, these bear costs and risks and often lack results frameworks. But most importantly, the commitment to the Universal Access Goal and the resulting “push” for enabling access to financial services through transaction accounts may create a bias for driving up sheer access numbers. This may be problematic for several reasons: (i) access does not necessarily lead to inclusion, given high dormancy rates of newly created accounts; (ii) the link between access to finance and poverty alleviation is neither certain nor well understood, given the evidence that, in spite of modest benefits, the promise of microfinance pulling millions out of poverty has not been fulfilled; and (iii) current trends suggest one billion people may still lack access by 2020. These remaining financially excluded will increasingly be broadly distributed across many countries and predominantly in rural areas. Providing access to them is likely to require subsidization. Striking a balance between the costs and benefits of universal inclusion and weighing these against the cost and benefits of other competing development priorities will be essential.

The objective of this review is to synthesize existing evaluative evidence and generate new evidence on the quality of the Results Frameworks (RFs) of development policy operations (DPOs). The study is organized around a number of evaluative questions on various aspects of DPO design, implementation, reporting, and evaluation. Its focus is on the quality of RF, taking objectives and coverage for granted. The study does not cover the scope and coverage of reform programs underpinning DPOs, including the relevance of objectives, or the choice of policy areas and the links between DPOs and country assistance strategies. It generally does not look at program achievements and outcomes, except in cases when it is required for assessing the quality of prior actions (PAs). The structure of the review is: chapter one presents the methodology; chapter two has the findings with respect to the presentation and clarity of RFs; chapter three discusses evidence of the quality of PAs and their contribution to the robustness of RFs; chapter four discusses findings with respect to the use of programmatic approach in DPOs relevant for RFs; chapter five discusses strengths and weaknesses in the ME framework of DPOs; chapter six discusses reporting of DPO results at completion and implications for IEG validation and evaluation of DPOs.

From 2005 to 2013, a mining boom quickly promoted Mongolia from a low-income to a middle-income country. Although the World Bank Group strategy initially overlooked the challenge of the mining boom, the new country management team that came on board in 2005 decided to prioritize mining issues in a more selective framework. This involved taking a set of bold steps to support Bank Group engagement in the extractive industry, including basing for the first time a senior mining specialist in the field and conducting an in-depth political economy analysis. Building on this, the country team was able to design a comprehensive program of outreach to the government, parliament, and civil society to build a consensus on the need for efficient and fiscally sustainable management of earnings from the revenues derived from the mineral boom. The Independent Evaluation Group considers the Bank’s performance to be satisfactory; however, its contribution to outcomes remains moderately satisfactory. The Bank revised its strategy to adopt relevant objectives centered on the mining agenda and designed an overall effective program. The Bank displayed flexibility and innovation in implementing the program and built awareness about environmental issues. As to results on the ground, Bank projects have had a highly satisfactory impact in improving rural livelihoods and reducing herders’ vulnerability. Looking ahead, the Bank Group would need to: (i) build demand and capacity for good governance; (ii) pursue efforts to improve public investment; (iii) strengthen domestic capacity for policy simulation; (iv) assist in the strengthening of the banking system; and (v) support fiscal decentralization. In the interests of selectivity, the Bank could scale back its support for the urban sector.

Kazakhstan made steady progress on poverty reduction and social development during the review period, driven by impressive economic growth and rising hydrocarbon prices. Yet, the country continues to grapple with a number of systemic challenges, including: a lack of progress on economic diversification and anticorruption; a dominant role of the state in the economy; a lack of skills in the labor force; and a legacy of environmental problems inherited from the Soviet era. The quality of the Bank Group dialogue with the government was exceptionally high throughout the evaluation period. The Bank Group has established itself as a trusted adviser to the government, with a proven track record of timely delivery of high-quality technical and policy advice, including cabinet-level ‘brainstorming sessions’ and the client-funded Joint Economic Research Program (JERP). Implementation of the JERP suggests that it could become a powerful tool for strengthening the partnership, advancing the reform agenda, and gradually building up the lending program. At the same time, the fully demand-driven nature of the program imposed limitations on the Bank in defining strategic priorities in its advisory work, disseminating findings, and engaging local partners. Looking forward, the Bank Group will need to (i) link the JERP with concrete sector investments and advance monitoring and evaluation (M&E) tools to track its effectiveness; (ii) disclose the main policy recommendations; (iii) engage local partners and civil society to advance transparency and accountability and build capacity; (iv) select and prepare of a set of analytical products independently and in line with the World Bank Group’s global development mandate; and (v) be more selective and strategic in sector engagement.

The year 2015 is pivotal in international development. In the lead-up to 2000, the global community came together at various conferences to agree on, for the first time in known history, shared development goals. The eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) set 18 targets that were aimed at significantly reducing disease, illiteracy, gender inequality, hunger, and poverty, and improving access to water and sanitation by 2015. Leading up to this point where the era of the MDGs concludes, progress has been monitored and discussions started well ahead of this momentous year to define and meet the more ambitious Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), building on and bringing to fruition what has been started under the MDG agenda. Much progress has been made toward achieving the MDGs. The world reached the poverty reduction target five years ahead of schedule, and progress has been reported in a number of other areas. However, considerable challenges remain: even while declaring success on MDG1, roughly a billion people remained in poverty. A large number of MDG targets will not be met by the end of 2015, and progress remains uneven among the different countries. Moreover, new challenges to progress are emerging deriving from natural and manmade calamities. To deliver on the twin goals and the post-2015 agenda, the Bank Group would benefit from a clearly articulated role, approach, and expected contribution to the SDGs, both externally for enhancing partnerships and internally to facilitate prioritization and synergies. As this paper has shown, the World Bank Group works actively in many areas relevant to the SDGs, actually many more than covered here, but various evaluations have pointed to the importance of multi-sector integrated approaches that challenge countries and their partners to find new ways of working. The challenges that the SDGs aim to address, and the SDGs themselves, are complex, and solutions will have to be tailored to context, bring together multiple actors, and benefit from dynamic, constantly adjusted planning and execution that is informed by ongoing monitoring and evaluation.

From 2004 to 2012, Zambia experienced a combination of good economic policies and high rates of growth not seen since the early years after its independence. While growth was mainly driven by rising copper prices, other factors contributed to Zambia’s ability to take advantage of this growth. The international debt relief programs in 2004-2005 almost eliminated public debt and provided the fiscal space for selective, high-priority investments and expanded social programs. The privatization of the copper mines brought new investment in rehabilitation and expansion of production. The period also saw a substantial expansion of primary education and progress in dealing with the most pervasive public health problems. These positive developments set the stage for Zambia to tackle its pervasive poverty. In practice, however, sustained growth over the period has led to little poverty reduction, especially in rural areas of the country. The Bank Group and other donors provided critical support at the beginning of the evaluation period, when Zambia’s debt level became unsustainable. The Bank provided substantial support for capacity development and better functioning institutions. The Bank’s efforts to strengthen public administration and improve governance met with some partial successes in enhanced audit and procurement capacity, and the achievement of Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative compliance. However, despite nearly a decade of implementation, the Integrated Financial Management Information Systems (IFMIS), is still only partially operational. Further, the Zambian government has not followed through on its positive discourse regarding decentralization of government authority.

This report by the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) summarizes the experiences of and draws lessons from the country program evaluations of four natural resource-rich countries: the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, and Zambia. It concludes that although the challenges identified in these countries are not unique, they manifest themselves with particular intensity in three closely interrelated areas that need to be defined and structured as a coherent strategy: (i) management of revenues from an exhaustible resource; (ii) growth and employment in the non-extractive sectors, and (iii) inclusive growth and reduction of poverty. Overall, looking at the four resource-rich countries in this evaluation, one does not see the World Bank Group as having a consistent framework for engagement, driven by the defining characteristics of these countries—their rich endowment with non-renewable natural resources and dependence on revenues from their exploitation. Each of the four stories evolved in a unique way that depended on how the country teams decided to react to differing country circumstances. The main challenge for the Bank Group in these countries today is how to stay relevant and competitive, as its value proposition is no longer its financial resources, but its knowledge and global experience, which may call for a more modest scope of interventions while keeping the focus on key challenges.

As the result of past investments in gas and mining sectors and high world commodity prices, the Bolivian economy grew considerably during the last seven years. Prudent macroeconomic policies and high taxes on hydrocarbon revenues led to a significant accumulation of fiscal surplus and external reserves. Under a state-led development model, the government led by President Morales pursued redistributive policies and invested heavily in road construction. However, it has retained far more of the conservative fiscal and macroeconomic policies than would have been predicted. Sustained growth has translated into significant poverty reduction and improved equity as unskilled labor, including from indigenous groups, benefited from booming non-tradable sector activities. The availability of hydrocarbon revenues, however, created little incentive for the government to address the structural issues in the economy. The Plurinational State of Bolivia is more resource dependent, institutions are weak, decision making is increasingly discretionary, productivity remains low both inside and outside the agriculture sector and environmental degradation is worsening. Going forward, the Bank Group should develop a long-term partnership with the government as well as groups outside of the government. The Bank should scale up the good practice programs in agriculture and help the government develop a strategy for improving agricultural productivity and rural development more broadly. In transport, the Bank should continue to focus on road maintenance to complement the construction programs of the government and other partners.

Global alliance for vaccines and immunization (GAVI) is the third largest multilateral in the health sector. It has a single-purpose mandate, to increase access to immunization in poor countries. The World Bank is a founding partner to GAVI and remains a major partner, particularly at a financial level by supporting operations of two major innovative financial mechanisms on its behalf. The Bank’s most significant contribution is a key role in the establishment and management of two innovative financing mechanisms (International Finance Facility for Immunisation (IFFIm) and Advanced Market Commitment (AMC)) that have contributed one-third of GAVI’s financial resources from 2000 to 2010. The relationship with GAVI has been collegial and constructive in countries where there is engagement, but in many countries the Bank is not substantially involved in immunization. This review concludes that the status quo leaves organizational synergies untapped, and that stronger Bank involvement, drawing on its strengths in sustainable funding for immunization, addressing inequities in access to immunization, investments in health systems strengthening, and donor coordination in health can help achieve greater development results.

GFDRR was established in September 2006 as a global partnership of the World Bank, UN agencies and bilateral donors, located in World Bank headquarters in Washington, DC. Its missions are (a) to mainstream disaster reduction and climate change adaptation (CCA) in country development strategies, and (b) to foster and strengthen global and regional cooperation among various stakeholders under the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) system. GFDRR supports the implementation of the UN 2005-2015 Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA). This international agreement in relation to disaster risk reduction (DRR) arose from a 168-nation UN conference held in Kyoto, Japan, in 2005. The key player for coordinating the implementation of HFA is the UNISDR bureau with headquarters in Geneva and eight regional offices worldwide. Another UN agency with operational responsibility for UN disaster related work is the UNDP-BCPR. These two UN agencies and GFDRR have complementary goals, creating potential for collaboration among the three organizations, but also calling for care in monitoring the risk of overlapping work among them and other DRR actors. UNISDR was a founding partner of GFDRR and UNDP-BCPR became a permanent observer to GFDRR in 2008.

This country program evaluation (CPE) assesses the outcomes of the World Bank Group (WBG) program in Timor-Leste during the review period (2000 to 2010). The WBG’s strategy during this period was to support the government of the nascent country in three broad areas: (a) poverty alleviation and the provision of basic social services, including health and education; (b) development of state institutions, including creating good governance and building the capacity of state institutions; and (c) promoting sustainable nonpetroleum growth, especially through the development of agriculture and the private sector. The CPE rates the overall outcome of its support to the country over the review period as moderately unsatisfactory. The Bank Group strategy was broadly congruent with the country‘s own aspirations, but its relevance and effectiveness waned through the evaluation period. To boost the WBG‘s role as an effective partner in Timor Leste’s development, independent evaluation group (IEG) recommends that the WBG: (i) set its key objective as one of supporting vigorous and sustainable non-oil growth, creating jobs and improving infrastructure; (ii) in consultation with development partners, sharply prioritize its program, being realistic about time frames; (iii) increase its focus on effective human resource development for institution building and improved governance; (iv) follow more closely its own guidance on dealing with fragile states; (v) ensure more active management of its assistance program, strengthening its capacity to deliver timely high-quality policy and technical advice; (vi) be realistic with regard to the situation on the ground and what is needed to attain development objectives; (vii) make International Finance Corporation’s (IFC’s) interventions of sufficient scale to address the objectives of its program; and (viii) bolster monitoring and evaluation (M and E) by focusing on a few key results and improving statistical capacity to obtain reliable data of sufficient frequency.

Since the cessation of conflict, Mozambique has achieved impressive economic growth and has become an example of successful post conflict reconstruction and development, moving from a one-party state to a multiparty democracy and from a socialist, command economy to a market-based economy. Mozambique’s development has been strongly supported by foreign aid, and since 2001 average annual disbursements of official development assistance (ODA) have amounted to over 1 billion dollar, or 12 percent of gross domestic product (GDP). Strong economic growth has contributed to a decline in income poverty, but the level of overall poverty remains high. This country program evaluation (CPE) focuses on the Bank’s program for FY2001-08, examining the following questions: did the Bank correctly assess the problems Mozambique faced?; was the Bank’s strategy appropriate for meeting the country’s development needs?; how effective was Bank assistance in implementing those strategies?; what were the outcomes of the assistance?; and to what extent did the Bank, other development partners, the government, or exogenous forces contribute to outcomes? The CPE is organized as follows: Chapter one assesses Mozambique’s economic and social development and identifies major development priorities and constraints facing the country. Chapter two is an overview of the Bank’s program of lending and analytic and advisory activities (AAA). Chapters three, four, and five cover thematic aspects: stabilization and growth (including infrastructure and agriculture development), poverty reduction and human development, and governance. Chapter six covers International Finance Corporation (IFC) activities in Mozambique, and chapter seven assesses partnership and harmonization. The last chapter contains conclusions, lessons, and recommendations.

This report evaluates International Development Association (IDA) support to Nepal during 2003-2008. IDA’s overarching goal during this period was to support the Government’s efforts to reduce poverty and improve human well-being. IDA focused on helping to foster broad-based growth, social development, social inclusion, and good governance. The evaluation highlights the need to introduce greater realism into the country assistance strategy, and to retain flexibility to adjust to changing circumstances. It also stresses the need to consult widely and continually with national stakeholders and development partners. In addition, it points to the importance of making agriculture and rural development central to the program. The evaluation also focuses on the significance of designing and implementing a mechanism to systematically track the impact of the Poverty Alleviation Fund and adjust its design to enhance benefits to the poor. Finally, supporting reforms in public finance management through policy based lending or (if the prerequisites for budget support cannot be met) a sector-wide approach is also a key.

This country assistance evaluation assesses the outcomes of the World Banks program in Nigeria during the period 1998–2007. The Country Assistance Evaluation focuses on the objectives of that assistance and the extent to which outcomes were consistent with those objectives. It looks at the Banks contribution to the achievement of those outcomes and at the lessons for the Banks future activities in Nigeria and in other countries. The evaluation includes a review of relevant documents, complemented by interviews with Bank staff and other key donors, as well as with representatives of the Nigerian government, the private sector, and civil society. Overall, the outcomes of the Bank program in Nigeria are rated as moderately unsatisfactory. This reflects an improvement relative to IEG’s 2000–04 assessment, which rated the outcome of Bank assistance as unsatisfactory. The current assessment recognizes the country’s signal achievements in maintaining macroeconomic stability and laying the basis for more effective and cost-efficient performance of the central government. There are major risks associated with this, however. The earnings from Nigeria’s oil and gas resources require strong management that puts the national interest ahead of that of individuals and state governments. In the fragmented context of Nigerian politics, that is a tough proposition to maintain. If the government shows the necessary leadership and successfully leverages the resources it has to provide incentives to state governments to do a better job of delivering social services, there is the potential for real progress in reducing poverty and achieving the MDGs.

This evaluation assesses the outcomes of World Bank Group’s (WBG’s) development support to the West Bank and Gaza for the period 2001-09. It covers the programs of the World Bank - International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), International Development Association (IDA), International Finance Corporation (IFC), and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA). The main objectives of the WBG program were broad, reflecting the extremely volatile political situation, characterized by frequent humanitarian and economic crises that required abrupt shifts in the Bank’s strategy. The WB is both the main economic adviser to the Quartet on the Middle East and the administrator of large donor trust funds. The WBG made important contributions in identifying obstacles to development, estimating their costs, and promoting the search for reasonable compromises. The Bank Group program needs to recognize that the long-term development effectiveness of its support is heavily dependent on the Israeli-Palestinian political framework, as well as close alignment of its efforts with those of other donors. Other specific recommendations of this evaluation include: developing a medium-term strategy with a focused results framework; exploring opportunities for closer cooperation with Arab donors; helping the Palestinian Authority (PA) to develop a long-term strategy to reduce aid dependence; and identifying opportunities for Israeli-Palestinian cooperation on different aspects of development.

Cambodia emerged in the early 1990s from 30 years of conflict, the brutal Khmer Rouge era, and a decade of Vietnamese occupation, with one of the world’s lowest per-capita incomes, and with social indicators far behind those of neighboring Southeast Asian countries. Physical infrastructure had been largely destroyed. United Nations intervention led to a peace agreement in 1991, a new constitution, elections, and formation of a coalition government, although a reduced level of conflict and political instability continued until the late 1990s. The government began a process of economic liberalization in the late 1980s which has been sustained. The donor world responded rapidly to Cambodia’s huge resource need with a high level of concessional aid which has been sustained. Since the mid-1990s the economy has been growing steadily; by 2006, per-capita incomes were double the 1998 level and the incidence of poverty had been significantly reduced. Social indicators have improved, generally to above the average for low-income countries, but are still well below those for most Southeast Asian countries. The Bank has focused on governance issues with increasing intensity in each succeeding country assistance strategy, and has worked with other donors in a number of areas. Progress has been made on certain governance-related issues such as public financial management, including expenditure reorientation, the poverty focus in health and education services, and support for decentralized, community-based development programs.

The World Bank’s assistance strategies showed strong client orientation and were aligned with Uganda’s poverty reduction strategy. The programs were substantially effective in decentralization, public sector reform, growth and economic transformation, education, and water and sanitation. However, more could have been done to help counter the perception of increasing corruption, improve power supply, reduce transport costs, enhance agricultural productivity, and help with family planning and reproductive health. The AfDB’s assistance was also relevant and aligned with the government’s development goals. Its support substantially achieved its objectives for decentralization, public sector finance, growth and economic transformation, improved competitiveness, agriculture, and water and sanitation, as well as education and health. However, there were some shortcomings in the assistance provided for power and roads and in reducing corruption. This report evaluates World Bank and African Development Bank assistance to Uganda during 2001-07. The motivation to undertake a joint evaluation was the shift to a common strategic framework, the Uganda Joint Assistance Strategy (UJAS), to guide the formulation and delivery of their programs. Under a common strategic framework joint evaluation is, in principal, more cost effective than the equivalent separate evaluations, since at least some aspects of the evaluation can be done together. This also helps to reduce government transaction costs. The evaluation discusses the outcome of the support of each bank, rates each independently, noting that the two banks are of different size, capacity, and institutional setting. In addition, the two banks have programs that were not implemented jointly but in parallel, although they regularly engaged with one another as development partners. The outcome ratings for the two institutions are therefore not comparable and should not be used to imply that one institution did ‘better’ than the other.

The provention consortium was created in February 2000 as a formal partnership between the World Bank, other International Financial Institutions (IFIs), bilateral donor organizations, the insurance sector, the academic community, and civil society. Designed as a think-tank to commission research and to disseminate risk reduction tools, the provention secretariat was to rotate from one partner organization to another. Thus, after three years at the Bank, the secretariat was transferred to the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) in Geneva. The overall goal of provention is to reduce the social, economic, and environmental impacts of natural disasters on vulnerable populations in developing countries in order to alleviate poverty and contribute to sustainable development. This is achieved through (a) forging partnerships; (b) promoting policy; (c) improving practice; and (d) sharing knowledge. Under the Washington-based Secretariat, provention supported four types of activities: applied research studies, pilot and demonstration projects, education and training activities, and workshops and conferences. Provention was repeatedly criticized for its weak governance structure. Therefore, the secretariat commissioned a governance review in 2005. The governance review recommended reactivating the presiding council (PC); replacing the Steering Committee (SC) by a forum to discuss the impact of disasters in developing countries; and creating an Advisory Committee as the main governing body.