Review of the 2008-2012 Mauritania Country Assistance Strategy Completion Report (CASCR)
This review examines the implementation of the FY2008-FY2011 Mauritania Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) of FY2007, and assesses the CAS Completion Report (CASCR). The CAS was implemented by IDA. The overarching objective of the CAS (as expressed in the results matrix) was to contribute to poverty... Full Description »
This review examines the implementation of the FY2008-FY2011 Mauritania Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) of FY2007, and assesses the CAS Completion Report (CASCR). The CAS was implemented by IDA. The overarching objective of the CAS (as expressed in the results matrix) was to contribute to poverty reduction through the different channels of its interventions in Mauritania. The CAS objectives were organized under the same five pillars as the poverty reduction support program 2 (PRSP 2): (i) accelerate growth and maintain macroeconomic stability by strengthening the macro-economic framework, private/financial sector and competitiveness, growth potential in key sectors, and infrastructure; (ii) anchor growth in the economic environment of the poor through the development of rural and urban sectors, micro-finance and MSE, and targeted poverty alleviation programs; (iii) develop human resources and generalize access to basic social services via improved access to education and vocational, technical training, to health and nutrition, to water and sanitation, to basic services and increased rights awareness; (iv) improve good governance and capacity building through modernization of public administration, efficient management of public property and decentralization; and (v) reinforce pilot programs, monitoring, evaluation and coordination. IEG rates the overall outcome of Bank assistance as unsatisfactory, below the CASCR rating of moderately unsatisfactory. IEG’s rating reflects the fact that a majority of the intended outcomes set out in the CAS were only partially achieved or not achieved – this much is acknowledged in the CASCR. Bank support contributed to strengthening the legal framework and institutional capacity for managing oil revenues and other natural resources, to addressing the issue of locust invasions, and to improving the quality of basic education. Good progress was made in improving the living conditions of rural communities through implementation of CDD programs and in facilitating access to basic services in urban areas. However, only limited progress was achieved in a large number of areas, including the capacity for macroeconomic analysis, the institutional framework for financial and transport sectors, sustainable irrigation schemes, access to basic services, employment opportunities and micro-credits, quality and relevance of higher education, civil service management, public resource management and decentralization. The Bank played an insignificant role and/or achieved little progress in the areas of a modern business environment, tools for managing the fishery sector, rural electrification, land tenure reforms, maternal health services and HIV/AIDS treatment, and gender equality. Finally, no information is provided in terms of helping the country strengthen monitoring, evaluation and coordination capacities. The CASCR draws several sound lessons based on the difficult experience with CAS design and implementation. IEG concurs with all these lessons, and wishes to underscore two additional points. First, there needs to be greater adherence to the practice rather than the rhetoric of selectivity. The Mauritania CAS, for all its overwhelming scope, was designed “with the aim of selecting specific strategies to maximum impact”. This failure at being strategically selective even when strategic selectivity was an explicit goal and specific tools (i.e., strategic positioning tool) were developed to promote its application, calls for a careful reflection on the meaning and implications of selectivity. Second, IEG stresses the urgency of the need to rebuild statistical and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) capabilities in the context of developing local capacities, and the need to sharpen the results focus of the next CAS in order to better capture development outcomes and better learn from failure.
Content Type : Reports , Doc Sub Category : CAS Completion Report Reviews , Country : Mauritania
September 17, 2013
Mauritania: Country Assistance Evaluation
This country assistance evaluation (CAE) provides an independent assessment of World Bank assistance to Mauritania during the period 1992–2003. The CAE examines whether: (a) the objectives of Bank assistance were relevant; (b) the Bank's assistance program was effectively designed and consistent... Full Description »
This country assistance evaluation (CAE) provides an independent assessment of World Bank assistance to Mauritania during the period 1992–2003. The CAE examines whether: (a) the objectives of Bank assistance were relevant; (b) the Bank's assistance program was effectively designed and consistent with its objectives; and (c) the Bank's program achieved its objectives and had a substantial impact on the country's development during this period. Examining these questions allows the CAE to draw lessons and recommendations for future Bank assistance. Annex D describes the methodological approach.
Content Type : Reports , Doc Sub Category : Country Program Evaluations , Country : Mauritania
August 10, 2005