Develop mechanisms and instruments between Bank, IFC and MIGA such as joint action plans, coordinated business development and integrated product offerings in strategically important countries to offer a wellsequenced package of forestrelated products and services to clients and better use the synergies between the public and private sector arms of the World Bank Group. Depending on country circumstances, opportunities for synergies exist in such areas as: mobilization of private funds for conservation, including by encouraging private investment in sustainable tourism and markets for eco-friendly products use of IFC advisory services focused on leveling the playing field for community forestry and small and medium enterprises in the sector potential combination of Bank policy reform and IFC/MIGA support to catalytic investments with demonstration effects in timber concessions certification and industry standards for biodiversityfriendly business practices where experience shows that voluntary industry action can be effectively supported by government policies REDD/carbon finance agenda where pilot investments supported by IFC can complement the policy-level work led by the Bank and its forest-related partnerships.
In a few cases World Bank Group cooperation has facilitated effective forest sector&ndash related outcomes. The Bank Group has been most effective as an institution when the World Bank's work to help countries lower barriers to private sector entry in the forest sector has been combined with IFC and MIGA support to catalyze sustainable investments in the forest sector. Action on such complementary services was found in China, Nicaragua, Russia, and Uruguay but nowhere else.
Original Response: Agreed: Management agrees that close collaboration at the country-level is needed between the Bank, IFC and MIGA and could lead to better outcomes. Ideally, Bank investment should focus on policy and institutional reforms which help create the enabling environment for the type of private investments which can be mobilized by the private sector. At the same time, Management is of the view that a coordinated approach would be viable in only limited conditions, where there was both government demand for this type of sequencing, and private sector interest in investment.
The demand-driven nature of Bank lending would makes strategic sequencing of interventions somewhat challenging.
Consequently this objective can be best promoted by opportunistic interventions, constant exchange of information of planned activities at early stages of project preparation and joint missions rather than rigid action plans.
The Bank and IFC, together with MIGA, will launch consultations between the agencies to identify and remove impediments to smooth collaboration and how to enhance joint engagement with client countries. This will happen both at the level of management and task teams.
IFC will continue to look for synergistic opportunities and collaborate with the Bank and MIGA at the strategic and project levels where it makes sense in certain countries and markets.
MIGA will actively collaborate with the Bank and/or IFC when supporting FDI into these projects, and will look for synergistic opportunities within the WBG.
IFC/WB Action 7A: Improve information exchange between IFC and the World Bank
Indicator: Data about respective pipeline operations is regularly exchanged as the basis for forward planning
Baseline: Ad hoc
Target: Quarterly joint team meetings held between IFC and WB staff
Timeline: Launched by FY14
WB/IFC Action 7B: Coordination in pipeline development between Bank and IFC
Indicator: Number of countries where there are complementary Bank and IFC projects
Baseline: None
Target: 3 FIP operations underway with IFC and WB involvement
Timeline: FY15
WB/IFC Action 7C: Undertake a joint Bank-IFC workshop to identify and subsequently address constraints and impediments to more effective collaboration
Indicator: workshop held
Baseline: None
Target: one workshop including regional representation.
Timeline:
FY15
Actions 7A, 7B, and 7C are achieved and therefore the recommendation is complete.
All actions were complete last year, thus there is no update this year.
IEG notes that the FAP has just been approved and the envisioned coordination is therefore ongoing. IEG recognizes the FIP operations underway. However as far as IEG is aware there has been no workshop including regional representation. IEG would like to learn more about how the quarterly joint team meetings held between IFC and WB staff are improving information exchange between IFC and the World Bank. Management's comments - in a follow-up round - indicated that "while the WBG Management team acknowledges that progress has been slower than desirable with MIGA , there are some new and promising example of collaboration with IFC, that should bring important results and serve as a catalyzer of new joint initiative. It is particularly work mentioning that joint work is happening in Liberia, Mozambique, Colombia, Indonesia and Laos. "
The Committee on Development Effectiveness (CODE) met on April 6, 2016 to consider World Bank Group Forest Action Plan FY16-20: The WBG Contribution to the Forest Agenda. (CODE2016-0016).
The committee welcomed the Forest Action Plan (FAP), and commended Management for its upstream, programmatic and cross-cutting approach to meeting global forest challenges and promoting the forest agenda. Members strongly supported Management's long-term commitment to sustaining forests through the plan, unlocking its full potential to climate-smart development and poverty reduction through WBG interventions, including IFC and MIGA. Members acknowledged the importance of a stronger role of the WBG in the forest agenda and a balanced approach between conservation and sustainable forest use.
The committee appreciated the pivotal roles of such cross-cutting themes as strong institutions and good governance in addition to rights and participation, which would include the gender component. Members drew attention to the implementation challenges of the FAP, including inter alia, effectively addressing such sensitive issues as biodiversity and habitats, indigenous peoples, cultural heritage and safeguards. Members highlighted the importance of partnerships and encouraging participation from WBG clients, NGOs, local communities and bilateral donors in preparation of Country Forest Notes. Members also commented on the importance of developing a cohesive financial architecture together with bilateral ODA and other international forest-related financing mechanisms. Members appreciated the landscape approach and the plan's emphasis on land-use planning. They underscored the need for seeking more opportunities to work with the private sector and other partners on sustainable supply chains. Some members noted the importance of supporting clients to address the drivers of deforestation and to tackle illegal logging.
Members underscored the significance of country ownership and the need to empower local communities as beneficiaries of sustainable forest management. Members supported knowledge transfer of good practices and implementation design, noting the opportunity for South-South cooperation. The committee also urged Management to remain engaged in an open dialogue with stakeholders during the implementation of the FAP.
The FAP was endorsed and a FY18 Mid-Term Review was agreed to.
While the WBG Management team acknowledges that progress has been slower than desirable with MIGA , there are some new and promising example of collaboration with IFC, that should bring important results and serve as a catalyzer of new joint initiative. It is particularly work mentioning that joint work is happening in Liberia, Mozambique, Colombia, Indonesia and Laos.
A significant amount of progress has been made in the past year on the IEG recommendation in support of stronger collaboration between the different WBG agencies, galvanized by the Forest Action Plan. Information is being exchanged, per the Action Plan, about potential opportunities, in part evidenced by IEG's recent mission to Ethiopia where a dialogue is underway about different opportunities in the sector, although as indicated in the MAR, this is at an early stage. While IEG recognizes that the Advisory Services historically provided by IFC are in flux, IEG also found that these services were useful in helping to level the playing field for community forestry and small and medium enterprise sector (e.g. Bolivia) it would be useful as part of the MAR process to better understand how these historical services will be supported in the sector going forward. It would also be useful to comment on how opportunities to demonstrate economically and socially sustainable timber extraction are being designed and coordinated in light of emerging new technologies for tracking, verification and reporting, and the tools made available through the IFC performance standards,
IFC/WB Action 7A: Ongoing (delayed)
- Exchanges between WB and IFC colleagues have drastically increased and has become much more systematic, both at the country-level and at the corporate level:
o at the country-level, IFC and WB teams are exchanging information on on-going dialogue on forest sector, potential opportunities of collaboration. Joint missions are organized. Examples: Mozambique, Colombia, Ghana, Ethiopia, Vietnam, Lao PDR, etc.
o at the corporate-level: the preparation of the Forest Action plan has galvanized strategic discussions between WB and IFC to (i) identify countries with high potential of collaboration, (ii) define collaboration models (captured in the Forest Action Plan). WBG participation to international event (such as World Forestry Congress in Durban, Finance conference in London) include joint WB/IFC colleagues.
IFC/WB Action 7B: Ongoing
- IFC and WB teams have been working together on a number of countries on specific programmatic approaches: Indonesia, Lao PDR, Ghana, Peru and Colombia, Liberia, Ethiopia). Joint missions are organized.
IFC/WB Action 7C: Ongoing
- The preparation of the Forest Action Plan has galvanized strategic discussion on joint engagement.
IFC Management has indicated that this recommendation is still Active and has rated itself Medium based on the self-reported findings that Country, project and practice-level communications (e.g. in Mozambique, Colombia, Vietnam, Lao PDR etc.) have improved and IFC participation in land-related events has increased. Management has also indicated and IEG recognizes that WBG reorganization has delayed formalization of consultations. Preliminary preparations are underway for a workshop to be organized in FY15. IFC has also had substantial involvement in FIP programming (Indonesia, Lao PDR, Ghana, and Peru).
IFC/WB Action 7A: Ongoing (delayed)
- country, project and practice-level communications (e.g. in Mozambique, Colombia, Vietnam, Lao PDR etc.) have improved and IFC participation in land-related events has increased.
- WBG reorganization has delayed formalization of consultations.
IFC/WB Action 7B: Ongoing
- IFC has substantial involvement in FIP programming (Indonesia, Lao PDR, Ghana, and Peru). There has been IFC-WB consultation at varying degrees.
IFC/WB Action 7C: Ongoing
- preliminary preparations underway for workshop to be organized in FY15.