Search

Displaying 1 - 13 of 13

Lesson
Nonrevenue water will remain a neglected issue without serious government and development partner support and targeted project actions. The project’s high target levels for NRW, at 70%, reflected a low priority given by both government and ADB. There were no specific actions outlined in the project design to achieve reductions in NRW. Metering should have improved the ability to monitor and control losses. Although impressive results in metering were achieved, the priority appears to have been to improve collection efficiency rather than seriously address NRW.

Project Number: 40296-013, 45299-001
Project Name: Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Project
Report Date:
Lesson
A simplified monitoring and evaluation system, with direct reporting to the executing agency, would have led to better assessment of the project’s performance. The ability to evaluate project performance and benefits was seriously compromised when the collection of performance data was discontinued even though collection was required under the loan agreement. The PPMS for the project was complex and was maintained only for the duration of each loan’s implementation period.

Project Number: 40296-013, 45299-001
Project Name: Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Project
Report Date:
Lesson
Long-term engagement is needed to foster private sector participation in water supply provision. Along with other development partners, ADB has contributed significantly to the development of an enabling environment for private sector engagement in the provision of WSS services in Armenia. This would not have been possible without ADB’s long-term engagement in the sector through this project and other interventions. ADB support to draft the PPP law (approved in June 2019) and continuing support on regulations will further enhance the enabling environment.

Project Number: 40296-013, 45299-001
Project Name: Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Project
Report Date:
Lesson
The strategic oversight of funds is enhanced when their governance structure includes some form of third-party engagement. The original Board paper outlined the governance structure of CCF and included at its apex ADB and external financing partners, whose function would be to provide strategic direction to the CCF and to meet ADB for annual consultations and to review progress, administration, and the annual work program. Since there are no external financing partners, ADB sits alone at the apex of the governance structure.

Project Number: No PN
Project Name: Climate Change Fund, 2008–2019
Report Date:
Lesson
Technical assistance with a narrow focus, immediate policy relevance, and carried out with national champions with financial and/or planning authority was key to the successful integration of climate technologies in country investment plans. Careful and realistic planning is required for the production and dissemination of outputs, since this involves multiple institutions within a given timeframe.

Project Number: No PN
Project Name: Climate Change Fund, 2008–2019
Report Date:
Lesson
Institutional capacity development on climate change in ADB’s DMCs requires long-term engagement. Just over half of CCF resources went toward capacity development. The lack of basic climate data, technical expertise, and qualified local staff in many DMCs means that some processes, especially baseline studies, vulnerability assessments, and cost–benefit analysis of mitigation and adaptation measures, have to be adjusted to reflect realities on the ground.

Project Number: No PN
Project Name: Climate Change Fund, 2008–2019
Report Date:
Lesson
Clear delineation of country activities with transparent funding allocations in cross-border RCI TA projects involving several countries helps smooth implementation and increase project success. The transaction costs in cross-border RCI TA projects tend to be high both in terms of resources and the time required to achieve agreement among stakeholders in the participating countries. It takes much longer to negotiate and agree to a common proposal in a cross-border RCI TA project than in a usual TA project.

Project Number: No PN
Project Name: Regional Cooperation and Integration Fund, 2007–2019
Report Date:
Lesson
Active engagement of national stakeholders and ADB resident missions from the outset helps improve ownership and project success. The likelihood of success is greater when an RCIF TA project is designed with genuine consultation with concerned line ministries, national agencies, the private sector (if relevant), and ADB resident missions. Active engagement of in-country stakeholders helps ADB to identify binding constraints and solutions, and to internalize implementation challenges at the TA design stage. This makes clear the roles and responsibilities of each stakeholder.

Project Number: No PN
Project Name: Regional Cooperation and Integration Fund, 2007–2019
Report Date:
Lesson
Policy dialogue with the government is crucial for improving capacity in the areas of road asset management, road safety, and traffic monitoring. (i) If the road asset management tools developed under the project were used as envisaged, this would improve the performance of the road sector in the long term. (ii) It is essential that investment in road safety is based on knowledge of road safety conditions, which need to be measured so remedial actions can be proposed and assessed.

Project Number: 28261-023
Project Name: Fiji: Third Road Upgrading (Sector) Project
Report Date:
Lesson
Lack of baseline data hampered evaluation. Higher priority should have been given to ensuring that baseline data was collected and reported during project implementation. The data that should have been collected includes (i) benchmarking data, to provide MPAF management with objective reference points for impact evaluation corresponding with the needs of the port users and consumers; (ii) benefit monitoring data, to ensure that the project benefits actually accrue to the port users; and (iii) post-project performance evaluation data, to assess overall effectiveness of the project.

Project Number: 32525-013
Project Name: Fiji Ports Development Project (Loan 1902-FIJ)
Report Date:
Lesson
More rigorous risk assessment during project processing would have allowed for better monitoring of key assumptions during implementation. Related to the above lesson on better consultation, the project should have done a better risk assessment. A key impact assumption overlooked was elimination of the port service charge by shipping agents and companies.

Project Number: 32525-013
Project Name: Fiji Ports Development Project (Loan 1902-FIJ)
Report Date:
Lesson
More thorough stakeholder consultation during project processing could have led to a better project design. The project processing missions could have consulted the key project stakeholders more effectively. For example, a decrease in the port service charge by 50% in 2009 and its elimination by 2010 was cited as a project benefit, but this would have required agreement of the shipping agents and shipping companies to implement. The same applies to the Lautoka reclamation component, which should have been undertaken only after commitments by shipping companies and agents had been obtained.

Project Number: 32525-013
Project Name: Fiji Ports Development Project (Loan 1902-FIJ)
Report Date:
Lesson
The project could have benefited from more careful preparation. The project was prepared through a sequence of four processing missions, without the benefit of dedicated project preparatory TA. In retrospect, given the weaknesses in the DMF, the four departures from the original scope of work, and the methodological shortcomings in the EIRR calculation, the project could have benefited from more careful preparation.

Project Number: 32525-013
Project Name: Fiji Ports Development Project (Loan 1902-FIJ)
Report Date: