This presentation was made by Laurence CARTER, World Bank, at the 11th Annual Meeting of the OECD Network of Senior PPP and Infrastructure Officials held at the OECD, Paris, on 27 March 2018
2. INFRASTRUCTURE PRIORITIZATION
CHALLENGE
• Investment needs in all sectors
• Limited public resources, fiscal restrictions
• Decentralized infrastructure planning
• How to optimize public resources?
• How to compare different investment options?
Need objective way to prioritize infrastructure investments
2
3. METHOLDOLOGICAL/PRACTICAL
CHALLENGES
• Limited project data availability & quality
• Limited technical and institutional capacity
• Reversion to political selection
• High costs/time to run SCBA appraisal for large sets of projects
• Some policy goals difficult to monetize via CBA:
–Social cohesion
–Culture
–Climate resilience
–Wealth redistribution
3
4. • Quantitative, practical decision tool for infrastructure project
prioritization
• Combines social-environmental and financial-economic data
into two composite indices to compare proposed projects
within a sector
• Displays project information in a simple visual interface
INFRASTRUCTURE PRIORITIZATION
FRAMEWORK (IPF)
4
5. THE IPF PROCESS
I. Criteria Consensus between decision makers, experts, and
key stakeholders
II. Data
III. Calculate Composite
Indicators
IV. IPF Matrix
V. Project
Selection
Source project data
Combine criteria into two composite indicators
Combine SEI, FEI, and budget constraint to
visualize relative project performance
Based on informed deliberation
Feedback
5
7. A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
IJ
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
YZ
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
IJ
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
YZ
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Lower Priority Projects
High Priority
Projects
Fundable
projects given
budget
constraint
Financial-
Economic
Priority
Projects
Social-Environmental Priority
Projects
SEI
FEI Fundable projects given
budget constraint
IPF OUTPUT: PROJECT PRIORITIZATION
MATRIX
7
8. IPF Pilot Year Sector Stakeholders involved
Pilot 1
2013-
2014
– Transport
– Irrigation
– Urban
– Ministry for Planning and Investment
Pilot 2
2014-
2014
– Water Supply and
Sanitation
– Transport
– Ministry of Economics and Finance
Pilot 3
2015-
2017
– Irrigation
– Ministry of Public Works and Housing
– FAO
Pilot 4
2016-
2017
– Water Supply/Drainage
– National Planning Department
– National Water Supply and Drainage Board
Pilot 5
2015-
2017
– Interurban Roads,
– Small Water Reservoirs
– Ministry of Social Development
– Ministry of Finance
OVERVIEW OF THE PILOTS
8
9. 1. IPF can help improve project data
availability and comparability
2. Methods and safeguards must be
considered to manage potential bias
3. Effective IPF implementation requires
building capacity
4. IPF works best if integrated in the
infrastructure planning process
• Significant improvement in quality of data can be
achieved with little effort
• Criteria discussion as catalyst to improve
information levels
• Standards and guidelines for feasibility studies
• Inherent bias
• Methodological manipulation
• Safeguards (transparency requirements and
independent auditing)
• Sufficient technical knowledge to specify and
calculate variables, weights and composite indices
• Policy knowledge and political authority
• Training on CBA basics
• Familiarizing with MCA methodology
• Potential sequencing conflicts
• Role of central government to oversee and
provide guidance
• Integration with country infra planning
KEY LESSONS
9
10. Expanding the
scope
• Including climate and
disaster resilience
dimension
• Index summarizing resilience
• To be piloted in 3 countries for Energy,
Water and Transport this year
NEXT STEPS
10
11. Improving the
model
• Coordination with PPP
identification tools
• PPP Screening Tool being tested in Rwanda, Uganda,
Kenya, Pakistan, others…
• Linking IPF and PPP Screening Tool
NEXT STEPS
11
12. Making it more
accessible
• Add-in to run IPF
in excel
• Run fully in Excel, to enable....
• …improved access
NEXT STEPS
12