Search

Content type
Topic:Fragile States, Conflict, & Violence
Displaying 1 - 10 of 71

Unlocking the potential of the private sector in conflict-affected situations

Web Resource
Photo: Small Store, Sana'a, Yemen, Credit: Rod Waddington.
Up to two-thirds of the world’s extreme poor will live in conflict-affected situations (FCS) by 2030, according to World Bank Group (WBG) estimates. Advancing development outcomes in FCS is therefore central to the WBG’s mission, and the private sector is key to increasing economic growth and breaking the cycles of violence and fragility. The 2011 World Development Report: Conflict Security and Show MoreUp to two-thirds of the world’s extreme poor will live in conflict-affected situations (FCS) by 2030, according to World Bank Group (WBG) estimates. Advancing development outcomes in FCS is therefore central to the WBG’s mission, and the private sector is key to increasing economic growth and breaking the cycles of violence and fragility. The 2011 World Development Report: Conflict Security and Development, and the WBG’s first Fragility, Conflict, and Violence (FCV) strategy (2020-2025) have both highlighted the critical role of the private sector in its approach to FCS. The private sector can create jobs, provide livelihoods and services, and contribute to sustainable development across multiple sectors. However, despite its potential for impact, the private sector in FCS is often informal, constrained, distorted, and may involve actors that are part of the conflict. With a focus on unlocking this potential, supporting private investments in FCS has been a strategic priority for both the Bank Group’s International Finance Corporation (IFC) and Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) for over a decade. Both institutions have committed to scaling up their activities in FCS significantly. IFC has committed to delivering 40% of its business volume in International Development Association (IDA) and FCS countries, and 15–20% in low-income IDA and IDA FCS countries by 2030. MIGA has committed to increasing the share of the volume of guarantees issued to projects in FCS and IDA countries to 30– 33% by fiscal year 2023. What has been learned from past support for private investments in FCS? A recent IEG evaluation assesses IFC’s and MIGA’s support for private investments and their development impact on FCS and identifies key constraining factors and possible trade-offs that investors, practitioners, and policymakers should consider. The evaluation finds that while both IFC and MIGA have gradually deployed new approaches and instruments in FCS, they have not exhibited an upward trend sufficient to achieve the targets. This is in part the result of private businesses often being limited by insecurity, the lack of basic infrastructure—such as electricity—, weak governance and corruption, and lack of access to finance and land. These factors translate into financial and non-financial risks that deter private investors away from FCS and constrain the pipeline of bankable projects for IFC and MIGA to support.  Evidence shows that many private investments supported by IFC and MIGA in FCS have been effective, despite the heightened risks in fragile contexts. Evaluated IFC-supported private sector investments during the 2010-2021 period performed just below investments in non-FCS environments, driven by the strong performance of projects in infrastructure, larger FCS economies, and with repeat IFC clients. And, in many instances, successful investments showed effects well beyond the projects, such as the development of local markets.  Concentrated in traditionally well performing sectors, such as infrastructure, evaluated MIGA guarantees in FCS environments outperformed those in non-FCS. Another factor contributing to the high ratings was working with sophisticated international companies that tend to be better capitalized and have more diversified revenue sources compared to local firms (which MIGA cannot generally support). Leveraging this performance with increasing activities in FCS remains a challenge. Under the IFC 3.0 strategy, IFC has deployed tools to support its engagement in FCS and tackle constraints to private investments in FCS. These include the blending of private and public funds to mitigate financial risks in high-risk environments, efforts to scale up upstream market creation activities to develop bankable projects, instruments to strengthen country diagnostics to better understand the intrinsic market characteristics of every country to address them more effectively, and adjusting its measuring and monitoring framework to better account for development impacts. While some of these recent instruments could bear fruit in the future, it is yet too early to assess their impact. Early assessment of a new tool: the IDA Private Sector Window The World Bank Group’s fund for the world’s poorest countries, IDA, launched the Private Sector Window (PSW), now the WBG’s most prominent blended finance instrument. The PSW uses non-commercial, development funds to mobilize private investments in underserved sectors and markets in FCS countries. An early IEG assessment shows that while the PSW allowed IFC and MIGA to support some projects in new markets and sectors, its usage was below expectations as the financial risk mitigation offered by the PSW is only one of the factors deterring private investments in high-risk countries.  The private sector in low-income and fragile countries needs more than credit.  A shortage of bankable projects that meet the IFC’s and MIGA’s standards, more so than the availability of finance, limits scaling up business in fragile contexts. Addressing this constraint warrants further shifts towards efforts to develop projects and warrants changes in the institutions’ business models.  Factors and Trade-Offs to Consider in Scaling Up Investments in FCS This is where efforts to scale up upstream market creation activities come into play and where trade-offs need to be considered. Recognizing the difficult landscape in FCS, IFC and MIGA should continue to review their financial risk and implications in their portfolio approach to ensure that their risk tolerance, acceptance of higher costs, and longer project gestation periods align with their strategic intentions.  IFC and MIGA should also recalibrate further their approaches, client engagements and instruments in FCS to enhance the pipeline of bankable projects. They should take full advantage of their toolboxes to build capacity among less experienced clients and seek to expand their client base beyond those meeting IFC and MIGA standards and policies to include smaller, local, and regional firms.  Close coordination between IFC, MIGA, and the World Bank could enhance their effectiveness in addressing weak governance, uncertainty, underdeveloped regulatory regimes, poorly functioning institutions, and other non-financial risks limiting private investments. It is also important to recognize the heterogeneity in country characteristics and pursue differentiated strategies based on country-specific conflict analyses and diagnostics of opportunities and constraints for private investments. Furthermore, IFC and MIGA should identify metrics and targets specifically for FCS countries to focus their efforts and track progress in implementing the Bank Group’s FCV strategy. These lessons emerging from IEG’s evaluation can guide the institutions as they advance in their commitments and unlock the full potential of the private sector.  Pictured above: Small Store, Sana'a, Yemen. Photo Credit: Rod Waddington.

The World Bank Group in Chad, 2010 to 2020

Web Resource
A man leads his cows through the brush, with a mountain range in the background. Photo Credit: Nature Picture Library/Alamy Stock Photo
This evaluation assesses the development effectiveness of the World Bank Group’s country engagement in Chad during Fiscal Years 2010–20. This evaluation assesses the development effectiveness of the World Bank Group’s country engagement in Chad during Fiscal Years 2010–20.

Country Program Evaluation - Papua New Guinea: An Evaluation of World Bank Support FY08–22 (Approach Paper)

PDF file
This Country Program Evaluation (CPE) will assess the World Bank Group’s engagement in Papua New Guinea between FY08 and FY22. The Papua New Guinea has an abundant resource endowment of oil and mineral wealth, but this wealth has not translated into significant welfare gains for most citizens. Papua New Guinea’s fragmented geography and frequent exposure to disasters caused by natural hazards Show MoreThis Country Program Evaluation (CPE) will assess the World Bank Group’s engagement in Papua New Guinea between FY08 and FY22. The Papua New Guinea has an abundant resource endowment of oil and mineral wealth, but this wealth has not translated into significant welfare gains for most citizens. Papua New Guinea’s fragmented geography and frequent exposure to disasters caused by natural hazards present significant challenges for delivering services to citizens. The evaluation is designed to derive lessons from Bank Group engagement in Papua New Guinea to inform the next Country Partnership Framework (CPF). The CPE will also provide lessons on the implementation of the International Development Association special themes of climate change, gender, and fragility, conflict, and violence and of the cross-cutting issues of debt sustainability and governance and institutions. Lessons may also be of relevance to other resource-rich countries.

When the financing stops: the World Bank, Chad, and shades of engagement

Web Resource
When the financing stops: the World Bank, Chad, and shades of engagement
Lessons from evaluation point to the merits of continuing analytical work even when direct financial support is prohibited.Lessons from evaluation point to the merits of continuing analytical work even when direct financial support is prohibited.

MIGA’s Experience with Non-Honoring of Sovereign, Sub-Sovereign, and State-Owned Enterprise Financial Obligation Guarantees

PDF file
Protect losses concept and shielding incoming disaster as an umbrella stopping the domino effect or falling dominos as a business guarantee metaphor as a 3D illustration. Photo Credit: Shutterstock/Lightspring
This meso evaluation provides the first assessment of MIGA’s 10-year experience with its Non-Honoring of Sovereign, Sub-sovereign and State-Owned Enterprises Financial Obligation insurance products and the extent to which they helped MIGA enhance its additionality, development impact, and achieve its strategic objectives.This meso evaluation provides the first assessment of MIGA’s 10-year experience with its Non-Honoring of Sovereign, Sub-sovereign and State-Owned Enterprises Financial Obligation insurance products and the extent to which they helped MIGA enhance its additionality, development impact, and achieve its strategic objectives.

Conversations: Leveraging the Private Sector for Sustainable Development in FCV - What does it take?

Web Resource
Conversations: Leveraging the Private Sector for Sustainable Development in FCV - What does it take?
IEG · Leveraging the Private Sector for Sustainable Development in FCV: What does it take? Since the inception of the 2011 World Development Report (WDR 2011), the World Bank Group’s approach to Fragility, Conflict, and Violence (FCV) has emphasized the importance of job creation, especially led by the private sector, to help break these cycles of violence and fragility. The private sector in Show More IEG · Leveraging the Private Sector for Sustainable Development in FCV: What does it take? Since the inception of the 2011 World Development Report (WDR 2011), the World Bank Group’s approach to Fragility, Conflict, and Violence (FCV) has emphasized the importance of job creation, especially led by the private sector, to help break these cycles of violence and fragility. The private sector in fragile situations is often informal and highly constrained. It also faces a distorted playing field with a strong presence of Estate Owned Enterprises, for example, or entities that might be a party to a conflict.  The private sector is nonetheless a key vehicle for providing livelihoods, income, and services to people.  Carmen Nonay, IEG’s Director of Finance, Private Sector, Infrastructure, and Sustainable Development, facilitated this conversation to take stock of the lessons learned at World Bank Group after 10 years from the publication of the WDR2011, and to explore what it takes to support private sector development in fragile contexts. Three guests joined her in conversation: Aline Sara, CEO of Natakallam; Laure Wessemius-Chibrac, CEO of the Dutch Netherlands Advisory Board on Impact Investment at the Global Steering Group for Impact Investment; and Stephan Wegner, Senior Evaluator and Fragility and Conflict Specialist at IEG. Read the Related Report: IFC’s and MIGA’s Support for Private Investment in Fragile and Conflict-Affected Situations: Fiscal Years 2010–21 Transcript Carmen Nonay: Can you tell us about your experience launching a business in a fragile and conflict-affected setting? Aline Sara: Natakallam is a social enterprise that hires refugees and their host community members as online tutors, teachers and translators. Natakallam’s core goal is to provide income to refugees, no matter their location, and no matter their status in a country. Natakallam is a digital program that operates online, with the backbone being in physical presence and in fragile states. But, because we are a double-sided market, our customers are mostly in developed countries. I think it is interesting to acknowledge that perspective. Most of our employees are located in fragile settings, mainly in the Middle East, Sub-Saharan Africa, and in Latin America. The core of our operations began in Lebanon, supporting Syrian refugees. Carmen Nonay: What were some of the challenges you faced and how did you overcome them? Aline Sara: From an operational perspective, the biggest challenge has been dealing with working rights for the populations we're working with, who are mostly refugees. Other challenges include the lack of access to a reliable Internet connection, and now to electricity, especially given the situation in Lebanon.  Another challenge is figuring out payment mechanisms for the individuals we are hiring. Funding and fundraising are a challenge as well.  My experience has been less exhaustive from an investment perspective because Natakallam has mostly operated through its self-generated revenue and non-dilutive investments and grants. I can however say that it is tricky to raise money for an operation like ours because, even though we operate within the digital economy, we are very heavily focused on hiring humans who operate and live in difficult circumstances. There is then a problem with risks at Natakallam and certain investors are less likely to take on such risks. Add to this the fact that patient capital is less available. I would highlight those as very operational challenges that we face working in these countries. Carmen Nonay: Let me now turn to Stephan Wegner, our Senior Evaluation Officer here in IEG. Stephan, could you tell us more about some of the main lessons learned from your work assessing private sector development support? Stephan Wegner: The World Bank Group and many other Development Finance Institutions have recognized that fragile and conflict-affected states require a differentiated approach to support the private sector. They've adapted their instruments to help scale up private sector investment, and some institutions also seek to incorporate conflict analysis. But despite changing their approaches and instruments, we see little impact in terms of scaling up private sector investments. When we looked at the portfolio of evaluated projects, we found that projects performed quite well, especially in the infrastructure sector, as well as those investments in larger countries and of larger size. Now, among the instrument innovations that we've seen are blended finance solutions, which blend funding from public and private sector sources. These have been introduced to address financial risks that private sector investors face in high-risk markets. One example is the IDA Private Sector Window, which was introduced in 2018 and added to the toolbox focusing on the most fragile markets where the World Bank Group offers support. The early experience with that instrument showed some positive results in terms of allowing the private sector arms of the World Bank, IFC and MIGA, to enter new sectors in markets where they were not previously present. We also saw that the uptake has been somewhat limited, indicating that non-financial risks might be more important than the financial risks this finance instrument is designed to address. We are finding that the lack of a pipeline of bankable projects is a more binding constraint than the availability of finance or funds to scale up business in fragile contexts. We've identified a couple of areas where we think Development Finance Institutions can change their business models and further adapt their toolboxes to help them achieve their strategic objectives of increasing business in fragile conflict-affected situations. The first one is the heterogeneity of countries. Differences in country conditions call for differentiated strategies that are based on a thorough analysis and diagnostic of opportunities and constraints in those countries, building on an understanding of the drivers of fragility and conflict. The second area is the limited number of clients with which these institutions are used to work. This implies a need for these institutions to go beyond their client base to more informal, less experienced clients. It requires more patience, capacity building, and a hand-holding type of approach to them. What we found in our work is that many projects were linked to upstream work through efforts to reform a sector and provide capacity building and advisory services that have facilitated the development of a pipeline of bankable projects in fragile settings. We see this evidence as a promising approach to increase the pipeline towards increased efforts in fragile and conflict-affected states. Supporting private investments in fragile contexts is very expensive. It involves higher costs of doing business, longer time horizons for generating projects, and the patient capital that Aline was referring to earlier. Overall, we are still learning which models and approaches are effective in fragile contexts. Supporting private sector activities requires continuous experimentation, the adaptation of approaches and models, and learning as we go along. Carmen Nonay: Let me now turn to Laure. What are some of the lessons that you have learned in your role as CEO of the Dutch Netherlands Advisory Board on impact investing? And, looking into the future, what do you think it will take to increase the pipeline of bankable projects in fragile and conflict-affected situations? Laure Wessemius-Chibrac: I'm responding as CEO of the Netherlands Advisory Board on Impact Investing, but also with a couple of other hats on: I used to be the Managing Director of the investment branch of Cordaid, the NGO based in the Netherlands, and they've had the chance to work a lot in conflict-affected states and in fact that’s where they particularly focus on. I'm completely in line with what Stephan said a little bit earlier about the various points regarding the immense complexity of the situation and the fact that you need a lot of flexibility and adaptability to be able to work in this context. When I was at Cordaid, we were active in different countries over 3 continents and not one context was similar to the other. This underscores the point that we, as a foundation, had the flexibility to adapt our business model and investment strategy to various contexts. That was a big change for us and it’s not always easy to achieve for development finance institutions. Stephan also mentioned the need for capacity building, and I could not agree more. This is connected to your second question regarding how to increase the pipeline of bankable projects. In many of these contexts, the informal sector accounts for anywhere between 50% to 90% of the economic activity. So it's very difficult to invest and increase the pipeline if you do not ensure that there's a gradual building of this pipeline at several levels. In previous conversations with Stephan and the evaluation team, I have always asked the question: what is a bankable project? And I'm pretty sure that if you ask various types of investors, you're going to have many different answers. And I'm sure that for IFC and MIGA, the definition would be slightly different than that from a foundation like Cordaid. The word bankable is often associated with risk-adjusted returns. But when, as Stephan mentioned, the cost of doing business in fragile contexts is 2.5 times more expensive than in other developing countries, how can you ever have a return that is actually adjusted to the risk?  One of the big lessons learned, in our experience, is that you need to diminish the risk where you can, and this brings me to the topic of foreign currency and local currency. We have wonderful instruments offered by currency funds, but unfortunately, the burden of the costs of the hedging very often is borne by the enterprise that we're financing. This results in unbearable costs. What we've learned is that by trying to innovate on solutions, decreasing the costs is actually a good way of increasing the number of bankable projects just because they have reduced risk and they have a more acceptable level of return. Working on the capacity is a very important point, especially if you try to build a pipeline with more informal sector participation. It needs time and patience. Aline talked about patient capital earlier and I couldn't agree more. You can't look at quarterly results when you expect to trigger long-term change in certain situations. The approach as an investor is very different when arriving in fragile and conflict-affected states. If you focus on these situations, you know that there are inevitable cycles of crisis that come again and again and again. And you know you need to be prepared for these crises, and when you have a large organization like IFC, you can be very diversified, which is a great tool to have. Having a portfolio approach towards your investments is worth mentioning because if investors decide to invest in a pool of countries, they can be prepared to maybe make some losses with some of them, or some sectors. For instance, I heard Stephan mentioning that projects in the infrastructure sector are performing well, so if investors are performing well on that part of their portfolio, they might be more accepting of making losses on other parts of their portfolio. Carmen Nonay: Now I'd like to turn to Aline. You have heard some of IEG's analysis and that of an impact investor. Do these findings and proposals resonate with you as an entrepreneur? And what will it take to scale up social enterprises like yours? Aline Sara: You know everything I've heard strongly resonates with my experience. I chose, as the founder of a small social enterprise, not to typically seek investments. As I mentioned, Natakallam has grown from its operations and its self-generated revenue as well as from a combination of non-dilutive grants from foundations, competitions that we've won, etc. From our perspective, as a 6-year-old enterprise, we made a deliberate choice to not go to investors because we knew that they would see too much risk in the work we're doing. They would also not necessarily be ready to wait for us to get to a better point after investing in us. Things might have changed in the interim now. Natakallam continues to grow and we're now looking at impact investments, which I think is itself a term that is sometimes thrown around a little bit loosely and can be looked at in a different way. But this resonates with our experience which is why today Natakallam has not gone for investments yet. Perhaps that will change. I feel like we haven't talked about impacts as much, right? I'm hearing more about the risks from the investor’s perspective, and I feel that sometimes the impact gets lost in the discussion. Natakallam prides itself on being an impact-first for-profit social enterprise, which itself is something that is a complicated topic.  But one thing I find is sometimes missing from the discussion is what does impact mean? Laure raised a very good point by pointing to the meaning of a bankable project and as she was speaking I quickly Googled the definition. The first thing that came up is very often used in the Hollywood sector, or the entertainment sector, for a project that's going to bring back return and success. How does one define success for social enterprise? Are we talking about the returns on investment or are we talking about the impact? What is deep impact versus breath of impact? These are all topics that I sometimes find aren't addressed enough. Everything that I heard Laure pointed out to is the risks, the fluctuations, and the uncertainty when you're operating in fragile states. I mean half of the refugees we work with were affected by the Beirut bombings and from one day to the next we lost our payment mechanism to Beirut, where the entire banking sector crumbled, and even the wealthiest of Lebanese could not pull out their money. So it's a very different ball game when you are investing in fragile States and investors have to be ready to put a whole other level of skin in the game. Carmen Nonay: Laure, you have heard Aline talk about a call for the redefinition of bankable. What is your reaction to that? Laure Wessemius-Chibrac: It's interesting that she considered that her enterprise presented too much risk and she was hesitant to attract investors. I understand that and also see that there are more and more investors asking about what return they can expect. We talked a lot about risk-adjusted returns, but some investors, impact investors, are asking about fair returns. Particularly in asset classes such as private equity, where investors often expect double-digit returns and multiples, you start realizing that in reaching those returns they negatively impact their employees or their customers, either because customers overpay for their services or their products, or because employees are underpaid. I think that's also part of the redefinition of what is bankable and what our returns and what are fair returns. Carmen Nonay: Thank you for joining us for this conversation and to explore more evidence and lessons learned on what works, what doesn't, and why.

IFC’s and MIGA’s Support for Private Investment in Fragile and Conflict-Affected Situations

Web Resource
Overlooking the central Kumasi market at closing time in Kumasi, Ghana, June 22, 2006.  Image credit: Jonathan Ernst / World Bank
This evaluation assesses IFC’s and MIGA’s effectiveness in supporting private investment and development impact in Fragile and Conflict-affected Situations (FCS) and identifies key factors constraining private investment in FCS and possible trade-offs that practitioners and policy-makers need to consider. This evaluation assesses IFC’s and MIGA’s effectiveness in supporting private investment and development impact in Fragile and Conflict-affected Situations (FCS) and identifies key factors constraining private investment in FCS and possible trade-offs that practitioners and policy-makers need to consider.

A closer look at World Bank Development Policy Financing in fragile states

Web Resource
A monument of a broken cylinder being held up by a statue with five arms. The “Saving Iraqi Culture” monument in Baghdad designed by sculptor Mohammed Ghani Hikmat. Iraq is one of top five DPF recipients in FCV settings. Credit: Rasool Ali/Shutterstock
Revaluating what “good” looks like in volatile and uncertain situations to promote more informed risk-taking. Revaluating what “good” looks like in volatile and uncertain situations to promote more informed risk-taking.

Gros plan sur le financement à l’appui des politiques de développement dans les États fragiles

Web Resource
A monument of a broken cylinder being held up by a statue with five arms. The “Saving Iraqi Culture” monument in Baghdad designed by sculptor Mohammed Ghani Hikmat. Iraq is one of top five DPF recipients in FCV settings. Credit: Rasool Ali/Shutterstock
Réévaluer la réalité du « bien » dans les situations volatiles et incertaines pour favoriser une prise de risque plus éclairée.Réévaluer la réalité du « bien » dans les situations volatiles et incertaines pour favoriser une prise de risque plus éclairée.

Country platforms in fragile states: A new path for development cooperation

Web Resource
View of Delmas 32, Port-au-Prince, Haiti from 2012. Credit: Dominic Chavez / World Bank.
Country platforms can enhance development cooperation in the hardest places. For governments and partners embracing collaborative, risk-informed and adaptive ways of working, these platforms offer a more effective ecosystem for collective action.Country platforms can enhance development cooperation in the hardest places. For governments and partners embracing collaborative, risk-informed and adaptive ways of working, these platforms offer a more effective ecosystem for collective action.