An Evaluation of World Bank Group Activities in...

Capturing Technology for Development An Evaluation of World Bank Group Activities in Information and Communication Technologies

Volume 2: Appendixes

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

wb350881

Typewritten Text

65375 v2

Contents APPENDIXES

APPENDIX A: METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................. 1

APPENDIX B: LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................................... 6

APPENDIX C: SURVEY ............................................................................................................................ 18

APPENDIX D: WORLD BANK ICT SECTOR PROJECTS APPROVED FY03–10 ................................... 35

APPENDIX E: SAMPLE OF ICT APPLICATIONS REVIEWED BY IEG ................................................... 41

APPENDIX F: IFC ICT SECTOR INVESTMENTS, FY03–10 .................................................................... 49

APPENDIX G: MIGA GUARANTEES IN THE ICT SECTOR, FY03–10 .................................................... 53

APPENDIX H: WORLD BANK ICT AAA, FY03–10 .................................................................................. 54

APPENDIX I: WORLD BANK PROJECTS WITH ICT APPLICATIONS, FY03–09 ................................... 56

APPENDIX J: WORLD BANK GROUP SECTOR/THEMATIC STRATEGIES REVIEWED BY IEG, FY03–10 ............................................................................................................................................................... 57

BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................................ 58

1

Appendix A: Methodology Objective

1. The evaluation aims to respond to the following overarching question related to the World Bank Group’s support for information and communication technologies (ICT): Has Bank Group support for ICT been relevant and effective in leveraging ICT for development? The evaluation looked into the relevance and effectiveness in each of the four dimensions through which ICT can help achieve development outcomes:

Enhance productivity, economic growth, and job creation. Improve the quality and reach of services to the public. Increase transparency, efficiency, and accountability in governance and government

functions. Increase equity and integration of marginalized groups.

2. IEG has sought to answer the main evaluative question above by addressing the following questions and sub-questions:

In what ways has ICT been shown to impact productivity, economic growth, and job creation; the quality and reach of services to the public; transparency, efficiency, and accountability in governance and government functions; and equity and integration of marginalized groups (the development objectives)?

Do Bank Group country strategies, country programs, and individual lending and investment operations recognize and incorporate the potential of ICT for achieving development objectives?

Insofar as they have sought to do this, to what extent has the Bank Group been relevant and effective?

What are the internal and external factors (for example, skills and organizational structure) of relevance and success (if any) for the Bank Group in this area?

3. The evaluation findings were developed through desk reviews, background studies, IEG project assessments, country case studies, interviews, and a survey of task team leaders. The main building blocks of the evaluation are described below.

World Bank Group Strategies

4. IEG reviewed Bank Group sector strategies or implementation updates (17 strategy documents), IFC and MIGA corporate strategies and work program documents, and department and regional strategies issued between FY03 and FY10 to assess the extent to which ICT was incorporated as a tool to support development outcomes. (A complete list of sector strategies is in appendix J.)

5. A structured desk review of recent and previous Country Assistance / Partnership Strategies for 20 countries assessed the extent to which countries have recognized the

APPENDIX A METHODOLOGY

2

benefits and possibilities of ICT and whether they identified ICT as a tool to support development outcomes.1

World Bank Group Operations Portfolio

6. The evaluation reviewed a random sample of completed and ongoing Bank Group operations (including lending, investments, guarantees, advisory services, and analytic and advisory activities [AAA]) approved during FY03–10 to assess the relevance and effectiveness of these operations, factors of success, and sustainability of results. IEG reviewed two sets of projects: (i) ICT sector – involving ICT regulatory and policy reform, infrastructure and networks, information technology and media, and ICT skills; and (ii) ICT applications – ICT components in public sector government, the social sectors, and commerce and banking, among others.

7. Results from project assessments were informed by an analysis of the portfolios of the World Bank, International Finance Corporation (IFC), and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) in the ICT sector and in ICT applications, which covered relevant activities approved during FY03–10, including lending, investment, guarantees, advisory services, and AAA.

8. The review of Bank Group operations was complemented by field validations in three countries (Burkina Faso, Guatemala, and Kenya). The validations also served to assess the coordination, complementarity, and coherence of interventions by each of the three Bank Group institutions. As part of the validations, interviews were conducted with Bank Group country directors, country managers, resident representatives, task team leaders, government officials, industry experts, academics, consumer advocates, and other stakeholders.

9. IEG used a common template for the assessment of ICT sector and ICT application projects, covering the following questions: (i) relevance of objectives; (ii) appropriateness of design and IFC’s additionality; (iii) project outputs; and (iv) outcomes, impacts, and sustainability of results.

ICT Sector Operations

10. IEG reviewed a sample of World Bank, IFC, and MIGA ICT sector projects approved between FY03and FY09. The review covered 65 World Bank operations, 47 IFC investments, and five MIGA projects. Projects were assessed using a standardized template as described above, using project appraisal, supervision, and monitoring and evaluation documents, as well as industry databases available from the World Bank or external sources. Where projects were too recent to evaluate outputs or outcomes, the review focused on the appropriateness of design and on relevance.

1 Angola, Argentina, Belarus, Benin, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Costa Rica, Croatia, El Salvador, Guatemala, India, Iraq, Kenya, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Papua New Guinea, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, and Yemen.


3

11. The population of World Bank ICT sector projects approved between FY03 and FY09 included 95 projects, both investment loans and Development Policy Operations, which supported regulatory and sector reform, aimed to increase access to information infrastructure, or helped the development of the ICT sector (a complete list of projects is in appendix D). From the universe of 95 operations, IEG randomly selected a statistically significant sample of 65 projects. IEG also reviewed relevant Activity Completion Summaries, self-reporting instruments prepared for completed AAA activities.

12. For IFC, the analysis was based on a structured review of a random sample of ICT investments. The universe of IFC projects supported between FY03 and FY09 consisted of 87 projects (100 investments) representing 75 companies (see appendix F). IEG drew a random sample of 47 projects (companies), of which 22 were in telecommunications and 25 in the IT / media subsectors. IEG also reviewed Expanded Project Supervision Reports (XPSRs) and Evaluative Notes prepared for projects in the ICT sector during calendar years 2003–09.

13. IEG conducted an econometric analysis to investigate the role of competition in mobile telephone diffusion. Using a country-level, panel data set (2003-10), the change in mobile penetration rate was modeled as a function of a set of explanatory variables thought to influence the adoption of mobile telephony. It was assumed that the adoption of mobile technology (penetration) occurs through the interaction of individuals. The lag of mobile penetration was used to model this behavior. Controlling for the level of competition in mobile telephone service (monopoly, partial competition, full competition) as defined by the ITU and the World Bank, overall country characteristics (International Country Risk Guide), and technological innovation (annual dummy variables), we found evidence to suggest that the rate of mobile adoption is significantly related to mobile penetration in the preceding period. Holding constant technological innovation (annual time dummies), country characteristics and “diffusion,” competition was found to significantly increase the rate of mobile phone penetration. Partitioning the sample into partially competitive and fully competitive markets, we tested the independent effects of World Bank and IFC investments on the rate of mobile diffusion.

Operations with ICT Applications

14. IEG reviewed the universe of World Bank projects approved between FY03 and FY10 (2nd quarter) to determine the population of projects with ICT components or subcomponents, using text search software with 30 ICT-related search items. Of the 1,756 projects that IEG screened, 1,302 had ICT components or subcomponents. IEG selected a statistically significant random sample of 91 projects for its assessment. All sampled projects were further divided into three categories depending on the estimated importance of the role of ICT in the overall project: crucial to achieve the project’s development objectives, that is, the project would have not achieved its intended development objectives without the implementation of the ICT component or subcomponent; important for one aspect of the project (for example, for piloting or sustainability); or minor for achieving the project development objectives. A complete list of sampled projects is in appendix E

15. IEG project reviews identified the extent to which ICT components and subcomponents (i) played a role in achieving the project development objectives, (ii) were


4

relevant to the country priorities and conditions, (iii) were successfully implemented; and (iv) have made a difference to project outcomes.

16. For IFC, the analysis of ICT applications focused on a purposive sample of projects in mobile banking and m-health, and advisory services related to these investments.

Nonlending Activities

17. As self-evaluation of the performance of World Bank nonlending activities is less developed than in the case of lending operations, the evaluation assessed these activities from four angles: (i) an overview of the World Bank AAA portfolio (410 activities) based on the self-assessments of the extent to which the AAA objectives were met (according to Activity Completion Summaries), without independently validating each AAA intervention; (ii) a review of AAA in conjunction with the assessment of a sample of ICT lending operations; (iii) as part of the analysis of 20-country cases; and (iv) through an econometric analysis of the effect of ICT AAA in competition and the diffusion of mobile telephony. For IFC, the evaluation reviewed the portfolio of ICT-related advisory services from different business lines, and assessed selected activities linked to sampled investments, as well as closed advisory services projects.

Background Papers

18. The evaluation was informed and draws on background work on global trends in the ICT sector, regulatory frameworks, and the respective roles of the private and public investment sectors. Key findings of the paper are reflected in the evaluation report. IEG also commissioned a literature review on the link of ICT access and use to development outcomes: (i) economic growth and job creation; (ii) the quality and reach of services to the public; (iii) transparency, efficiency and accountability in governance and government functions; and (iv) greater equity among social groups, integration of marginalized groups into the economy, and empowering the disempowered.

Focus Groups, Interviews, and Surveys

Task Team Leader Focus Groups 19. IEG held four focus group discussions with Bank and IFC project task team leaders/investment officers. These discussions helped gather further information from the task team leaders regarding their experience in preparing and implementing ICT projects or ICT applications. In all meetings, participants were encouraged to put forward any pertinent issues. Two of the focus groups covered operations supporting ICT applications, and two groups covered ICT sector operations for the Bank and IFC.

Interviews 20. In addition to the interviews conducted during field validations, IEG interviewed Bank Group staff including from the ICT unit, IFC investment and strategy officers, and staff from anchor units and OPCS.

Task Team Leader Survey


5

21. An Internet-based survey was conducted for Bank project task team leaders. The purpose of the survey was to get a deeper understanding of organizational aspects of the delivery of Bank Group ICT products, including aspects of Bank Group institutional organization in ICT and the degree of collaboration and synergies among the various units. The survey results are presented in appendix C.

6

Appendix B. Literature Review2 ICT Support for Poverty and Development

1. ICT is often described as a general purpose technology; support for ICT is not a development objective in and of itself for the Bank Group, but rather a means to address development challenges (see Chapter 2).

2. This evaluation assessed the empirical evidence available to support each of the development objectives, and thus the relevance of Bank Group use and support of ICT. The results, based on a literature review, are presented in the following sections.

ICT MATTERS FOR GROWTH, BUT MOST EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE COMES FROM DEVELOPED COUNTRIES

3. ICT matters for growth and development. Both the ICT sector proper and ICT applications can have significant economic impacts, and the two are somewhat symbiotic. The ICT sector itself can be an engine of growth and is generally regarded as a source of innovation, with some of the highest growth in productivity over the years. By increasing the availability of ICT, the sector enables wider application and use of ICT. Use of ICT can increase firm-level productivity through efficiency gains from access to information and reduction of transaction costs (Brynjolfsson and Hitt 2000; Stiroh 2002; Brynjolfsson and others 2007). The use of ICT in applications also can increase the efficiency of government services and service delivery to the public (in health and education, for example).

4. ICT supports growth through several channels or transmission mechanisms. ICT generates a “growth dividend” by increasing the flow of information and reducing transaction costs (the costs of exchanging goods and services in a market or within an organization); improving the functioning of markets and expanding market boundaries; and increasing productivity through better management in both the public and private sectors. ICT lowers both the fixed costs of acquiring information and the variable costs of participating in markets (Norton 1992; Roeller and Waverman 2001).

5. Growth theories help to conceptually indentify three interrelated stages in considering the contributions of ICT to growth.1 The investment stage is related to the expansion of production capacity — capital deepening in existing industries where labor combines with greater quantities of capital, increasing labor productivity (Pilat 2004). Productivity gains in the ICT-producing sector have been sufficiently large to positively affect the economy wide average, at least in the case of the U.S. (Jorgenson and Stiroh, 2000). If growth contributions are limited to the investment stage, only a narrow range of sectors will show limited improvement in growth performance, and such gains in growth performance will fade as the investment push comes to an end.

2 The governance, service delivery and marginalization sections of this review are largely based on research done by RAND Europe for this evaluation.

APPENDIX B LITERATURE REVIEW

7

6. The innovation stage also raises productivity by introducing new production processes and products. For example, in ICT-producing industries, ICT goods and services may increase the efficiency of existing capital and labor, increasing multifactor productivity (Pilat 2004), thereby extending the growth contribution past the initial investment stage.

7. Finally, the transformation stage is related to greater use of ICT, creating a more competitive and more dynamic economic environment which is conducive to sustained growth. Network and spill-over effects of ICT increase the information available to market participants and lower transaction costs. At this stage, the contribution of ICT to economic growth will be broad-based and sustainable beyond the initial investment push only if ICT raises the productivity of ICT-using sectors and makes the whole economic system more efficient (Pilat 2004). The largest benefits to development are expected from innovations and use of ICT applications.

8. Consensus has emerged that both the production and use of ICT contribute to aggregate productivity (Jorgenson and Stiroh 2000; Jorgenson and Vu 2005). Total factor productivity increased from 21 percent of world economic growth between 1990 and 1995 to 29 percent between 1995 and 2003. This has been associated to a significant extent with the ICT revolution. The share of this gain attributable to the ICT sector has declined, while productivity growth in ICT-using industries has accelerated. Two important components of the ICT sector, equipment manufacturing and information technology-enabled services (ITES), are highly concentrated regionally, and productivity gains generated are being captured largely by consumers in developed countries, not by developing country producers (Best and Kenny 2009).

9. The process of economic growth has a long list of determinants with a high degree of simultaneity and endogeneity, but the evidence does suggest that the adoption of ICT has positive impacts on firm performance and productivity, even in countries and industries for which little evidence is available at more aggregate levels of analysis.

10. Macroeconomic evidence of mobile telephony’s impact on growth in developing countries is well established. Researchers have found significant impacts of increased mobile penetration on the rate of economic growth for the average developing country (1980–2005). Roeller and Waverman (2001) established a causal relationship between the spread of telecommunications and productivity in developed Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries for the period 1970–90. The spread of modern, fixed-line telephony alone was responsible for one-third of the OECD’s output growth over the period. However, they note the existence of threshold effects at near universal penetration of telecommunication services.

11. Waverman, Meschi, and Fuss (2005)2 examined data on 92 countries, both high and low income, from 1980 to 2003, to test whether the introduction and rollout of mobile phone networks added to economic growth. The study results showed that mobile telephony has a positive and significant impact on economic growth, and this impact may be twice as large in developing countries as in developed countries. Given that differences in the speed, penetration, and diffusion of mobile telephony explain differences in growth rates between developing countries, the resulting gaps in mobile penetration and diffusion will manifest in continuing differences in future growth rates (Waverman, Meschi, and Fuss (2005)3


8

12. While the Waverman and others study provides further support for the beneficial growth impact of ICT network development, in this case mobile, on economic growth. But the study does not identify the facilitating factors that stimulated growth in the above-average countries, the barriers facing the below-average countries, or how to overcome those barriers. It does not recognize the vastly different economic circumstances that exist among countries or provide a basis for establishing investment priorities or sector policies for any specific country, the World Bank or other donors that may wish to assist countries in developing their ICT sectors.

13. Sridhar and Sridhar (2009) find, for a sample of 63 developing countries between 1990 and 2001, a 10 percent increase in cell phone penetration results in a 0.1 percent increase in national output. (Sridhar and Sridhar 2009, pp. 108-109). Qiang (2009b) estimated the average growth effect of fixed line, mobile, internet, and broadband services for a sample of 120 developed and developing countries covering the period 1980–2006. Qiang’s findings for mobile telephony are in-line with previous research (Waverman, Meschi, and Fuss 2005); a 10 percent increase in mobile penetration can be expected to increase economic growth in low- and middle-income countries by .81 percentage points. The results for Internet and broadband are more tentative given the recent adoption of these technologies, with little confirming evidence from the literature.

14. Policy makers and economists should be aware of the caveats surrounding the findings supporting the contribution of ICT to economic growth in developing countries, aside from issues of endogeneity. Roller and Waverman (2005) mention three important factors to take into consideration. First, low growth is not solely a function of ICT but is also a function of poor governance and lack of physical and human capital, among other factors. Second, the more recent the technological advance—for example, broadband— the less likely it is that advances in penetration rates will exhibit real trends. Finally, the growth in mobile penetration has been rapid and started from zero, which could confound the econometrics.

15. Microeconomic analysis has also shown voice telephony to have considerable impact on firm and labor productivity and enhanced market efficiencies through the diffusion of information (Jensen 2007; Aker 2008, 2010), noting in some cases pro-poor effects of ICT (Klonner and Nolen 2008). Although the evidence is sparse, there is no reason to believe that investments in ICT would be less effective in developing countries than in developed ones (Best and Kenny 2009).

16. Research has indentified necessary conditions and priority areas for maximizing the potential role of ICT investment in enhancing growth and job creation. According to the findings from previous research, successful and effective ICT investment requires: (i) co-investment in human and organizational capital, consistent with current and future demand, and (ii) a favorable regulatory and institutional environment for entrepreneurship and transaction.

THERE IS LIMITED EVIDENCE OF HOW ICT AFFECTS THE QUALITY AND REACH OF SERVICES TO THE PUBLIC

17. The desire to mitigate failures in the delivery of services underpins interventions to integrate ICT into service delivery processes. ICT is integrated by introducing e-services to


9

replace or complement existing services or integrating ICT into processes involved in delivering non-e-services. ICT affects the delivery of services by altering communication flows, technology and/or the quality, reliability, and value of information (Frenzel and Frenzel 2004; Ayo and Ota 2008: Tomasi and others 2009; Mutula and Mostert 2010).

18. ICT can offer different opportunities for change in the delivery of services. ICT can contribute to change in access to and management and storage of information and communication among those involved in service delivery. This can result in new ways of managing operations, engaging in skill development (Kim, Kim, and Yoon 1992), providing for feedback, and networking and collaboration between distant and near individuals and communities (Shivute, Maumbe, and Owei 2008). For example, the Belo Horizonte telemedicine project in 2003 in Brazil affected health care services through networking and collaboration. It allowed for collaboration between clinics and hospitals through videoconferences and teleconsulting and reduced the number of specialist referrals required (Tomasi and others 2009).

19. ICT appears to affect service delivery outcomes through efficiency, effectiveness, and access to services. ICT may help reduce the minimum unit cost of a particular service by reducing transaction time and improving staff productivity levels through automating banking services (Osabuohien 2008); maximize the total benefit of services in the short run; or increase incentives for continuing investment, innovation, and improvement of service provision.

20. In addition, ICT can prevent opportunities for corruption and fraud—by limiting face-to-face interactions in transferring funds in banking, for example (Osabuohien 2008). However, in contrast, surveillance of ICT could be expensive, or information provided to the systems may be inaccurate (Gething and others 2006), not useful, or late and fragmented (Tomasi and others 2009), thus possibly contributing to inefficiencies in service delivery (Martinez and others 2005).

21. ICT can provide new means for communication and access to information that overcomes distance, communicates new viewpoints, and provides space for deliberation (Thompson 1999). For example, distance learning can allow for access to continued education among students in areas of low socioeconomic development, where such opportunities may not be readily available (Baggaley, Belawali, and Malik 2009). However, ICT does not necessarily lead to greater access for all recipients; instead, the distribution of ICT could follow dimensions of exclusion—for example, as ICT adoption and networks could be adopted more easily in dense urban areas rather than more isolated rural communities (Goolsbee and Klenow 2002; Unwin 2009), or limited by moral hazard (for example, through laziness, corruption, complacency, and the like).

22. For example, high tariffs for mobile telephony could result in access only for those of certain income levels: in Costa Rica, surveys of mobile telephone tariffs in Latin America help reveal that affordability based on income and tariffs affects the penetration of mobile telephony and lower levels of use among poor sectors (Galperin and Mariscal 2007). A case study in Kerala and Andhra Pradesh, India, found that information and communication technologies and development (ICTD) telecentres were used mainly by men with middle or high incomes and aspirations, and with at least a secondary school education, and thus


10

displayed distributional impacts favoring those who are better off (Kuriyan and Ray 2009). Moreover, access does not necessarily improve recipients’ welfare and/or development, so we need to ensure that we understand how changes in access relate to the wider development context.

23. Not only can ICT affect service delivery outcomes along the dimensions of efficiency, effectiveness, and access, but these consequences vary across the types of service delivery. Infrastructural services, such as electricity, can contribute to productivity gains by stimulating other services, such as schools, markets, and water services, and by enabling business or agricultural activity. However, this does not necessarily occur. ICT can be intentionally used for specific purposes in health care at various stages of service delivery, from the design of drugs to transport and communication, through to how frontline providers and patients interact. Improved health status (and ultimately improved welfare and productivity) requires each patient to have access to health care resources and knowledge specific to their location and situation.

24. In a synthesis of case studies, predominantly in Bangladesh, Brazil, India, and Uganda, Brewer and others (2005) suggest that while there are areas where ICT is unlikely to have an impact on health care, they can be effective in improving disease control, telemedicine, doctors’ efficiency, low-cost diagnosis, data collection and patient management. The contribution of ICT to this progression can depend on how they are embedded in local cultures, processes and experts, and if the technology formats are compatible with local technologies and capabilities. For example, three case studies of e-health programs in the Philippines found that communities were more receptive to using ICT when they were appropriate to local conditions (Marcelo 2009).

25. By changing educational service delivery, ICT can contribute to meeting the Millennium Development Goals (Nambiar 2005). ICT can affect administration, pedagogy, and curriculum in educational service delivery. Changing information, technologies and communication flows can affect how education is provided, what is taught, and what resources are available to support the process of delivery (Arredondo and others 2001; Mutula 2002; Thadaboina 2009). This could allow for more customized learning opportunities to suit local contexts. Changes in education and training can have important implications for other services (such as healthcare). For example, patients could be educated to make use of health care in a timely fashion or to engage with medical and public health advice, and health care providers could be given greater access to or more specialized training, such as improved distance learning.

26. However, discussions of how ICT can contribute to education suggest that school infrastructure, resources, distribution of skills, and cultural and political factors can affect how and if ICT results in changes in learning and teaching (Akinsanmi 2005; Nambiar 2005). For instance, in the One Laptop per Child Initiative, though laptops were designed to function well physically in developing countries, using such technologies in teaching and learning still requires compatibility with network and human capabilities. ICT must operate within system innovations, in training educational content, maintenance, and sustained commitment for long-term changes in education (Kraemer, Dedrick, and Sharma 2009).


11

27. E-finance can provide new opportunities for those in developing countries to access financial services, including economic actors, such as small and medium-sized enterprises. Access to financial services, such as banking or insurance, is often beyond the reach of population groups in developing countries. ICT could allow financial services to become available through new channels (Kumar and others 2006, Diniz, Pozzebon, and Martin 2008). For instance, WIZZIT, a mobile banking provider in South Africa, allows customers to use mobile phones to make payments to other persons, transfer money, and buy airtime (Ivatury 2009). However, the impact of e-finance—including e-banking—on financial activities in developing countries can vary by the extent of reliable, secure and accurate information; existing coverage and use of ICT; local culture and practices; and legal and regulatory frameworks (Raihan 2001).

28. There are potentially competing and complementary interests between service providers and recipients in financial services and, more specifically, banking services. On the one hand, providers are concerned with productivity and profitability and how this links to customer satisfaction. On the other hand, recipients are likely to be concerned with the security, reliability, and speed of services. For example, ICT could facilitate greater effectiveness and efficiency in banking and financial transactions by automating financial activities. ICT could remove elements of human contact and potential opportunities for fraud, coercive behavior and corruption in financial transactions (Ayo and Ota 2008; Osabuohien 2008); ICT could be used in developing locally and culturally specific financial markets and arrangements (for example, microcredit, Sharia shared funds), or used to facilitate networking and access to information by financial service providers and users of the service.

ICT PRESENTS NEW OPPORTUNITIES TO TRANSFORM THE WORKINGS OF GOVERNMENT

29. With greater connectivity, information flows, online government operations, and accessible information, ICT could be a means to make government more effective, accountable, and transparent. The international development agenda has increasingly focused on good governance as a means of improving development outcomes (Akokpari 2003; G8 Gleneagles 2005; Asian Development Bank 2010), especially through the use of ICT. The old model of information technology (IT), which enabled the automation of internal processes of government by processing data, has been enhanced through the development of ICT, which supports and transforms the external workings of governance by processing and communicating data (Heeks 2001).

30. Efficiency, accountability, and transparency are fundamental to good governance and are especially relevant to the logic that frames how ICT can affect governance. Although initially contested (see, for instance, Leff 1964; Bayley 1966), there is now a broad consensus among development actors that bad governance is one of the primary causes of underdevelopment (seen, for instance, in the development of the Monterrey Consensus; Ciborra and Navarra 2005). Corruption can be negatively associated with developmental objectives (Kaufmann 1998), and better governance can be positively associated with improved investment and growth rates (ODI 2006). Indeed, poor governance was one of the four categories identified to explain why some regions are failing to meet the Millennium Development Goals (Sachs and McArthur 2005).


12

31. ICT is increasingly presented as a possible mechanism to foster good governance in developing countries (Madon 2004; Ndou 2004, p. 9; Ciborra and Navarra 2005, p. 141; Nayaran and Nerurkar 2006). The use of ICT for this purpose introduces the concept of e-governance. Okot-Uma and London (2000, p. 5) provide a useful working definition for e-governance as:

A concept and emerging practice, E-governance seeks to realize processes and structures for harnessing the potentialities of information and communication technologies (ICTs) at various levels of government and the public sector and beyond, for the purpose of enhancing good governance.

32. ICT can be a channel for the pursuit of good governance goals. A plausible case can be made that by supporting the smooth operation of the market and inhibiting corruption, e-governance could encourage investment and increase the effectiveness of government programs and activities (Krishna and Walsham 2005). E-governance can also present developing countries with a unique opportunity to catch up with the developed world and enter the global economy by overcoming traditional barriers such as physical or telecommunications infrastructure (Basu 2004). This could be achieved by leaping over successive older generations of technology to newer, more efficient, and cheaper systems (Basu 2004). According to this rationale, the implementation of e-governance would increase developing countries’ competitiveness, enabling them to compete in global markets as external service providers (Basu 2004; Ndou 2004) whilst strengthening their governance institutions and rendering these more efficient, accountable and transparent.

33. On the other side, strong arguments can be made that e-governance does not necessarily contribute to such development opportunities and to good governance (Dada 2006). Bekkers and Homburg (2007) highlight a gap between rhetoric about e-government and implementation of e-government initiatives. Looking at policy documents from Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, Denmark and the Netherlands, they suggest that there are strong myths about e-government, the inevitability of technological progress, rational planning and empowered citizens (Bekkers and Homburg 2007), while e-government initiatives are not used as primary outlets for government communication (Lau and others 2008).

34. The implementation of e-government can also be associated with a number of important challenges and risks. E-governance interventions tend to be resource-intensive (Wade 2002, p. 445), involve high costs (Alican 2007), and have a very high failure rate (Aykac and others 2009; Heeks 2001; Heeks 2003; Ndou 2004; Stanforth 2006). Heeks (2003) estimates that as little as one-seventh of such interventions are successful, which is an important consideration given the high cost of e-governance interventions and developing countries’ limited resources. Failed interventions can also have adverse effects on, for example, countries’ credit ratings (Stanforth 2006). Often e-governance initiatives involve gaps between design and reality, between the technology and the social environment, between public and private sector priorities and organizations, and between technologies for developed countries and systems in developing countries (Heeks 2003; Dada 2006; Alican 2007).


13

35. Additionally, dependency in technological design and innovation is also a risk that merits consideration. ICT is often conceived and developed within a developed country context and exported to developing countries (Leye 2009, p. 31). Developing countries could become increasingly dependent on technological innovation conceptualized in and for a very different context (Wade 2002, p. 443; Leye 2009, p. 31). They also could risk becoming more vulnerable to the complexities of hardware and software, and reliant on providers of key ICT services (Wade 2002, p. 444).

36. The key technological innovation needed to foster greater efficiency, accountability and transparency in government and governance lies in information networks, and transferring government activity and interaction through new communication channels. Examples of this include using ICT for the payment of property tax or applying for driving licenses, limiting the scope for corruption, publishing central and municipal budgets online, increasing transparency, and paperless communication and operations within government departments, and strengthening accountability (Bhatnagar 2002).

37. The scope of the evidence base for the dynamic impacts of e-government interventions is narrow. Few studies consider long-term developmental impacts of e-government (Madon 2004). Chatfield and Alhujran (2009) suggest that e-government studies in Arab countries tend to be single-country studies. Though they compare across country-level studies (for example, Ciborra and Navarra 2005), their analysis remains static and they do not consider the impact of e-government initiatives, restricting their comparison to an analysis of the digital divide. A similar approach is taken by Lau and others (2008) in looking at the status of e-governance in Argentina, Brazil and Mexico; this study also refrains from assessing the ongoing impacts of e-governance through access and use of technologies.

38. E-government research primarily consists of studies involving observations and evaluations of e-government outputs and outcomes, with less attention to the processes and contexts that influence the realization of such outputs and outcomes. A few researchers have attempted empirical studies that consider the context and processes involved in e-government initiatives (Bellamy and Taylor 1998, Jonas 2000, and Fountain 2001); however, the evidence base for how processes and contexts contribute to ongoing outcomes in government activities and structures remains limited (Yildiz 2007).

39. In addition, very few cases of ICT impact on corruption have been independently audited (Bhatnagar 2003), even when successfully implemented. For instance, e-governance interventions are not always effective in fostering efficiency, accountability and transparency because funds are concentrated in other realms of governance than government, such as civil society. The relative ease of investing in e-governance interventions in realms of governance such as civil society, as opposed to government, makes such investments attractive to aid agencies. However, ICT may further increase the digital divide, depriving those without access or know-how of the chance to avail themselves of opportunities presented by ICT, further marginalizing the most deprived (Basu 2004; Vaccaro and Madsen 2009).

40. ICT infrastructure is often shown to play an important role in e-government interventions (Devadoss and others 2003; Gichoya 2005; Chen and others 2006). In order to


14

foster accountability, transparency, and efficiency, citizens must be able to access technology so they can use online government services. Access to and use of ICT have often been found to be influenced by infrastructure and connectivity (Hari 2000; Nayaran and Nerurkar 2006), such as telephone lines, high penetration of the internet, the presence of computers and/or the number of kiosks (Bhatnagar 2002). Depending on the local history of ICT development, the most appropriate technologies for e-government could vary. For instance, where mobile communications are more developed and stable than internet or fixed-line communications, mobile technology could become the primary mechanism for e-citizens and e-services. Limited availability of basic technological infrastructure could also present a significant challenge in this regard. Furthermore, even when basic infrastructures are in place, the high cost of broadband and internet connections limit the access to ICT and therefore the scope of e-governance interventions (Basu 2004; Ndou 2004; Ciborra and Navarra 2005).

41. Finally, data infrastructure can also be an important consideration. Data is needed to track the development of e-governance interventions and evaluate the cost and benefits of such projects (Ciborra and Navarra 2005). Furthermore, the compatibility of systems, as well as appropriate hardware and software, can allow for harnessing the benefits of e-government (Gupta, Dasgupta and others 2008). Internal e-governance projects require unified compatible systems to ensure communication flows, as well as consolidated databases with carefully recorded data to ensure effectiveness and good decision making (Basu 2004). This can include customized content that is available in local languages (Hari 2000; Nayaran and Nerurkar 2006).

42. Availability of resources and financing affects the feasibility of e-governance interventions (Devadoss and others 2003; Basu 2004; Gichoya 2005; Chen and others 2006). E-government initiatives often have long payback periods, and are subsequently capital intensive (Hari 2000; Nayaran and Nerurkar 2006). E-governance often requires ongoing investment from design through to implementation, and through the monitoring and evaluating of the scheme to upgrading the systems in place. This can prove to be especially challenging within a developing country context due to limited resources and dependency on aid programs, which are often implemented within a specific timeframe.

43. In addition, the regulatory environment can be key to the sustainability of e-governance by affecting the price and competitiveness of broadband (Aykac and others 2009; Fourati 2009). Labor laws and policies can also play an important part in determining how new tasks and rules are introduced, which in turn can affect performance (Ndou 2004).

44. In particular, e-governance mechanisms can be affected by the wider legal framework; compatibility between the legal framework and ICT requirements can assist in ensuring access to and use of ICT by different actors. For example, e-government initiatives involving e-payment or digital signatures require a supportive legal framework. Legal frameworks can also help in fostering trust in e-governance systems, and between citizens and governments (Basu 2004). A supportive and appropriate legal framework can be particularly important within a developing country context, where privacy and security issues can be obstacles to ICT uptake (Al-Jaghoub and others 2010; Basu 2004).

45. Wider political, economic, technological, social, and cultural contexts influence how e-government initiatives play out in developing countries across the domains of e-


15

administration, e-services and e-citizen, and e-society. The diversity of such contexts adds to the uncertainty about how e-governance will contribute to desired governance outcomes.

46. The theoretical arguments as to whether ICT foster good governance and maximize development outcomes remain vague and contradictory at times. It is also difficult to tease out continuities and strong supporting evidence in empirical studies as to what affects how e-government contributes to improved efficiency, transparency and accountability in government and governance.

DESPITE FEARS THAT ICT MAY ENTRENCH THE DIGITAL DIVIDE ICT COULD SERVE AS A TOOL THAT PROMOTES

GREATER EQUALITY

47. In some parts of the world, it is evident that ICT is contributing to “revolutionary changes in business and life,” but in others, they are creating greater disparities (Mansell 1999, p. 2). As societies become increasingly dependent on new or changed ICT, those who find access difficult are progressively marginalized and excluded.

48. ICT has the potential to be “a formidable and effective development tool” that in some cases can allow “leapfrogging” (Steinmueller 2001)—the idea that countries and societies can jump over one or more generations of technology and that poor nations can thus move more rapidly to the modern information age (Sunden and Wicander 2003, p.21). In the absence of supporting capacities and institutions, ICT may entrench inequality. ICT can enhance and magnify existing capacities and capabilities (Toyama 2010; Warschauer and Ames 2010) and thus may further increase inequalities, marginalize those without access or know-how by depriving them of the opportunities that ICT offers (Basu 2004; Vaccaro and Madsen 2009).

49. A dynamic perspective is needed to understand the relationship between ICT and social change. For evaluation purposes, this means finding evidence on impact is likely to be much more difficult than on process features such as project set up and operation. Hence, much of the literature leans towards process as opposed to impact of ICT (Sey and Fellows 2009).

50. Certain models of technology can foster inclusion. For example, the Universal Service model was intended to ensure that telecommunication services were available to customers for whom the marginal cost of providing access or service was above the private or commercial value, but below the societal value. Universal Service providers found ways to convert these customers to commercially viable ones, for instance, by encouraging them to make more calls and to seek employment, and buy goods and services over the communications network. As well, the Open Systems model, allowing anyone to connect, and “social distance-shrinking” technologies and models, such as shared lines, shared mobiles, and public points of presence, can mobilize local social inclusion.

51. Sensitivity to local and social context may help to enhance the usefulness of ICT-related efforts. Inclusion policies are necessary and important but their success may depend on such factors as: which groups are excluded from what; the different mechanisms, degrees and forms of exclusion; the boundaries of the groups; differences within and between groups; (perceived and actual) costs and benefits of exclusion and ways to produce


16

inclusion; and the duration of exclusion. For some, ICT may simply not be relevant in a context of immediate daily struggle for food, and other day-to-day pressures for survival.

52. Success of the programs that promote ICT usage with the goal of fostering equality is much greater if the contextual factors that underlie existing disparities in the developing countries are carefully considered and utilized. For instance, when considering gender issues, it is important to recognize that women in developing countries Evidence on the empowerment of women in rural Ghana and Nigeria using ICT programs indicate that their success can depend on diverse contextual circumstances and socioeconomic factors, ranging from polygamy, tribal differences, and membership of community organizations (Ogunlade 2006; Kwapong 2007). Rural women’s choices and willingness to pay for ICT can be systematically improved when local and regional contexts are well considered.

53. At an industrial level of analysis, the growth of an active ICT sector can provide opportunities for otherwise marginalized groups to find employment. However, policies and programs seeking to create growth and employment may find that existing inequalities seen in the broader fabric of society are reproduced if gendered roles, local customs, norms and practices that affect both labor markets and households are not taken into account (Arun and Arun 2002; Best, Thakur and others 2007; Best and Kumar 2008). Evidence suggests that a burgeoning ICT sector presents marginalized groups with greater opportunities when training programs allow them to approach the sector with easily recognizable skills (Braimah and King 2006). These examples indicate policies seeking sectoral and industrial growth in ICT are better served when accompanied with schemes that offer training and skills development at both local and national levels (Steinmueller 1995).

54. Evidence from Bangladesh and South Africa indicate that many public institutions such as universities and schools do not have systems and capacity that are sufficient for the accumulation of skills or for offering formal training (Roknuzzaman 2006; Chigona, Chigona and others 2010). Public institutions such as these stand to benefit from ICT-based projects and interventions that focus on skills and training that can then go on to make secondary impacts on the economy and poverty alleviation.

55. Overlooking the importance of training, learning, skills and the accumulation of technological capabilities may result in disappointments about technology transfer to developing countries. Simply supplying physical artifacts or discrete pieces of information is often insufficient in terms of “catch-up” because making artifacts and information useful requires skills and capabilities on the part of the user (Bell and Pavitt 1993; Chataway and Wield 2000). Power does not reside in the information itself, it is in knowing how to make sense of it and being able to undertake actions with it (Sen 1999). The more knowledge that an individual has about technologies and about how to use them in particular business or social contexts, the more that individual is likely to benefit. Broad empirical findings on measuring access to information suggest that it is not a difficult task to access information, relative to the greater challenge of assessing the transformation of that data into meaningful knowledge (Avgerou 1998; Gigler 2004; Heeks 2005).

56. Rapid investment in physical capital is significant, but on its own is unlikely to meet optimistic expectations. It is partially in search of learning opportunities that the


17

excluded try and congregate amongst the more included, regardless of the state of ICT. Dhaka sees a net influx of 50 people an hour. But London also sees six people an hour, and New York sees double that, despite the fact that these countries have adopted and integrated ICT extensively. New ICT does not appear to have diminished the importance of distance to inclusion efforts: the phenomenon is still apparent across the world. It is difficult to overstate the importance of the role that formal and more tacit forms of training and experience can play in helping to maximize technological benefit, as digital divides persist even in urban settings and entire sections of the urban population fail to benefit from the skills, education and support necessary to become and remain connected with ICT (Graham 2002).

18

Appendix C. Survey IEG conducted a survey to seek the views of World Bank task team leaders about their experiences in including (or not including) ICT in the operations they manage. The survey was sent to 1,048 task team leaders of IBRD and IDA operations approved between 2003 and 2010, including both investment and development policy operations. Task team leaders were asked to fill in the questionnaire referring to their most recently approved project. Only task team leaders that were active staff were contacted, and 74 percent of them (774 task team leaders) answered the survey. According to the responses, surveyed task team leaders have been working at the World Bank for an average of over 10 years; 49 percent are based in the field and 51 percent in Headquarters.

The survey was conducted using a web-based program to create a user-friendly electronic on-line questionnaire, which included both, multiple choice and open-ended questions, 20 questions total.

Questions were related to the role played by ICT in the operations, sources and effectiveness of support on ICT issues, factors that enabled or constrained achievement of results, and collaboration within Bank Group and with other stakeholders.

Results

1. More than 60 percent of the operations (both investment and development policy lending) included ICT.

This operation that you task manage/managed ...

Answer Options Response (percent)

Response (count)

is a stand-alone ICT operation or includes ICT as a component/subcomponent or within project component(s)

60.2% 466

includes no ICT 38.4% 297

Other (please specify) 1.4% 11

APPENDIX C SURVEY

19

2. ICT was not relevant for achieving the project development objectives in almost 63 percent of the operations that did not include ICT.

For those operations that did not include ICT, why was ICT not included?*


Response (count)

ICT was not relevant to achieving the objectives of the operation

62.6% 214

Client’s lack of interest to include ICT 10.8% 37

Other donors already providing support for ICT 8.2% 28

Including ICT components or sub-components would require special technical expertise which is hard to get within/outside the Bank

6.4% 22

Including ICT components or sub-components would make the project too complex to prepare/implement given the country conditions

4.7% 16


Lack of Bank budget to include ICT components/sub-components

2.9% 10

* Respondent could choose all responses that apply in his project.

3. Sixty percent of the operations included ICT within component(s) or sub-component(s) of a

project in a non-ICT sector.

For those operations that did include ICT ...


Response (count)

ICT is included within component(s) or sub-component(s) of a project in a non-ICT sector

60.5% 286

ICT is a sub-component of a project in a non-ICT sector 13.1% 62


ICT is a component of a project in a non-ICT sector 9.5% 45

ICT is one of the sectors supported by a multi-sector operation (e.g., an electrification and telecommunications access project, a competitiveness DPL)

3.8% 18

This is a stand-alone ICT operation (its main objective is to support ICT regulatory/policy reform, or investments in ICT infrastructure or for the development of the ICT sector, or programs to increase ICT access such as OBA)

3.2% 15

APPENDIX C SURVEY

20

4. ICT was considered to play an important role supporting the delivery of significant project outputs in forty three percent of the cases.

What is the role played by ICT for achieving the project development objectives?


Response (count)

Important: ICT supports the delivery of significant project outputs or to ensure sustainability, but not essential to achieve the overall project development objectives

43.1% 204

Critical: without ICT, the project will not achieve its development objectives 19.0% 90

Minor: ICT plays a small role for achieving project results—if ICT is not implemented as expected, no important outputs will be jeopardized

18.6% 88

IT only to support implementation of the project itself (e.g., hardware, software or communications equipment for project implementing unit)

13.5% 64


5. The main objective to which ICT contributes was the increased / improved delivery of services

to the public in sixty percent of the cases.

What is the main development objective to which ICT contributes in your project? *


Response (count)

Increased/improved delivery of services to the public 60.3% 246

Increased accountability, efficiency and transparency of government functions

58.8% 240

Enhanced economic growth and job creation 15.4% 63

Other (Please specify below) 14.0% 57

Greater equity among social groups, integration of marginalized groups into the economy, empower the disempowered

13.2% 54

*Respondent could choose all responses that apply in his project.

6. In 81 percent of the cases, equipment purchase and installation is the main activity of ICT in the projects.

The following are part of the ICT activities in your project: *

Answer Options Response (percent)* Response (count)

Equipment purchase and installation (hardware, software) 80.9% 330

Training 60.5% 247

Technical assistance 58.1% 237

Physical infrastructure 28.9% 118

Studies 26.2% 107

Policy conditionality 9.3% 38

Other (Please specify below) 9.3% 38

* Respondents could choose all responses that apply in his project.

APPENDIX C SURVEY

21

7. Mainly, ICT expertise was sought from Bank staff from same unit or another unit in the Region. Please identify the primary source from which you sought expertise on ICT issues for this operation

Answer Options Response (percent) Response (count)

Bank staff from same unit or another unit in the Region 30.1% 123

Consultant hired by my unit 27.0% 110

None needed (see question 9) 13.2% 54

Bank staff from Global ICT Department (formerly “CITPO”) 12.3% 50


Bank staff from my sector’s network anchor 3.9% 16

Could not obtain needed expert (see question 8) 1.2% 5

Global Expert Team (e.g., Health Systems, Public Sector Performance, Social Safety Nets)

1.0% 4

8. Team could not obtain needed expert on ICT issues.

Please specify what kind of expertise you were not able to secure and where you sought this expertise (if that option was chose in question 7)

“ICT expertise - could not afford under BB allowed”.

“I sought support of [the regional] IT team - none was available. This specific request was related to basic hardware. However I also inquired about specialized expertise - for example colleagues that can explain me special requirements of large servers, say 100 TB. There were several other examples. I could not get a name”.

“I could not secure expertise on hydromet equipment and technology. Also I could not secure procurement expertise to help review of the technical specifications for the hydromet equipment to be purchased. Instead, the project has to hire an international hydromet specialist to help them with the review of technical design and preparation of bidding documents”.

Random selection of responses

9. Please explain why no expert support was needed for ICT aspects of this operation.

50 explanations received—They were sort in three categories.

Category Response (percent)

Response (count)

ICT activities managed by the client 58.0% 29 ICT activities were simple enough to be managed by the project team

26.0% 13

Other 16.0% 8

APPENDIX C SURVEY

22

10. ICT support was substantially effective in more than 43 percent of the cases.

Please characterize how effective is/was the ICT support you received (identified in question 7)


Response (count)

Substantially 43.3% 152

Fully 32.5% 114

Partially 19.4% 68

Poorly/Not at all 4.8% 17

11. The implementation of ICT in the different operations followed/is following the same pace as the other project components in more than one third of the cases.

How was/has been the implementation of ICT in this operation?


Response (count)

About the same as the other project components 38.2% 155

Implementation of ICT has not started yet 20.4% 83

Slower than the other project components 17.0% 69

Other (please specify) - e.g., if your operation is a stand-alone ICT project then compare it to its initial implementation plan; if multiple ICT components implemented at different paces, please provide details below

13.5% 55

Faster than the other project components 8.6% 35

The ICT component/subcomponent was not/will not be implemented (e.g., was dropped) (see question 12)

2.2% 9

12. The ICT component/subcomponent was not/will not be implemented because ….

Please specify why it was not/will not be implemented. (if that option was chose in question 11)

“Not important enough in the reforms package. Government decided to go the private sector route. Staff support periodical (although capable)”.

“We work on Rural Health Project and there is no need of ICT at this stage”.

“Project was cancelled”.

“The ICT Consultant hired by the Central Bank failed to perform his duties satisfactorily and was sacked”.

“The Government found that it was taking longer/was more difficult than expected”.

Random selection of responses

APPENDIX C SURVEY

23

13. For 43 percent of the operations, the expected results from ICT have been substantially achieved.

To what extent will/have the expected results from ICT be achieved/been achieved in this operation?


Response (count)

Substantially 43.3% 136

Fully 21.7% 68

Partially 19.1% 60

Too early to tell 13.7% 43

Poorly/Not at all 2.2% 7

14. Government commitment is/was the main factor that facilitated achievement of results related to ICT

What are the main factors that facilitated achievement of results related to ICT in your operation?*


Response (count)

Government commitment 58.1% 157

Intensive implementation support/supervision by Bank team 52.6% 142

Implementation/technical capacity of counterparts 50.0% 135

Project implementation readiness 24.4% 66

Conducive policy/legal/regulatory environment 9.6% 26

Other (please specify below) 8.1% 22

None 3.7% 10

* Respondent could choose up to three responses.

APPENDIX C SURVEY

24

15. On the other hand, delays in implementation on government side due to limited counterpart capacity is/was the main factor that hindered achievement of results related to ICT.

What are the main factors that hindered achievement of results related to ICT in your operation? *


Response (count)

Delays in implementation on government side due to limited counterpart capacity

41.1% 111

Bank procurement procedures 31.5% 85

Lack of complementary factors (e.g., training, other infrastructure such as electricity, maintenance)

23.0% 62

Overall project delays due to factors external to the operation (e.g., government budget approvals)

22.6% 61

None 17.0% 46


Lack of government commitment 11.5% 31

Poor policy/legal/regulatory environment 6.7% 18

Delays in implementation on Bank side 2.6% 7


16. Technical knowledge, financing, and bringing in experience from other countries were key

value added that the World Bank provides by supporting ICT.

In your experience with this operation, what is the key value added that the World Bank provides by supporting ICT. *


Response (count)

Technical knowledge 60.6% 240

Financing 58.8% 233

Bringing in experience from other countries 58.8% 233


Donor coordination 11.9% 47

No value added 2.5% 10


APPENDIX C SURVEY

25

17. Did this operation involve collaboration within the World Bank Group (e.g., your team with country departments, IFC, MIGA), other development finance institutions or the private sector regarding ICT? (Check all that apply) and please characterize how it has worked/worked.*

Answer Options

Necessary but did not

happen

Happened but did not work at all

Worked partially

Worked substantially

Fully worked

Not applicable

Response (count)

Within World Bank- with procurement staff

11 3 45 112 129 74 371

Within World Bank- with country departments

10 3 29 78 52 165 337

Within World Bank- with the networks

25 3 32 49 32 187 328

With private sector 16 3 34 46 27 188 313

With other IFIs 8 6 12 40 13 230 309

With IFC 9 6 7 12 6 266 306

With NGOs 9 5 9 16 10 250 298

With MIGA 8 3 2 1 0 281 295

* Respondent could choose all responses that apply in his project.

18. Is there anything else you think the evaluation should be aware of regarding ICT in Bank operations? 304 responses were received and here are a few examples.

“The potential for ICT driven impact on Bank operations varies across sectors but it is rarely factored in as a specific deliverable. Client awareness, disposition and willingness to include direct ICT support at project design stage are crucial for its success”.

“(1) Bank’s procurement guidelines related to ICT need to be updated and enforced consistently throughout the institution. (2) Procurement specialists’ capacity of reviewing ICT documents needs to be substantially strengthened. (3) Supervision budget for projects with big ICT components should be increased for proper supervision”.

“I think we should always try to find a way of including ICT components, whether in health, education, microfinance and any other because ICT has many applications that can reduce transaction costs, lessen information asymmetry and provide access in many of our interventions. Task Teams should ask themselves whether ICT can resolve any of the above for them. But the teams need ICT expertise in terms of concepts and especially when it comes to procurement. Many governments are not eager to sponsor large ICT operations where the Bank is involved because of the onerous procurement processes associated with these kinds of interventions”.

“All I can say is that task team leaders have not been sensitized to the value of including ICT in operations, especially DPLs”.

“The Bank does not manage ICT components very well. We need technical support within the Bank, beyond specialist procurement reviews, to be able to give quality advise on technology choices and technical specifications, supervise (with additional budget since this requires an expert who is not normally a part of skill set required for supervision). Because of lack of advice, procurement difficulties, delays in implementation, costly preparation and supervision, I see a strong reluctance in the task team leaders and the management to support ICT. That is a pity since ICT can be extremely helpful in improving transparency, governance, accountability, service delivery, and value enhancement of services. Instead of being on the cutting edge of this exceptionally useful tool, the Bank is shying away from it in projects while it is making very good use of it in its own operations- that is an unbelievable inconsistency. ICT is not the magic wand but it is an enabler of efficiency and effectiveness of policies. I hope this survey brings out some of the constraints facing the teams, increase management attention to use of ICT in our operations, and mobilize the necessary resources and management support”.

APPENDIX C SURVEY

26

Demographics of question 1 Includes no ICT Includes ICT Total

Active projects 199 395 594 Closed projects 98 82 180 DPLs 79 48 127 Investments 218 429 647 Task team leader on the field 125 229 354 Task team leader in HQ 153 221 374 Not answered 19 27 46 Average of years in the Bank 10 10 10 Region

Africa 98 127 225 E. Asia & Pacific 46 77 123

Europe & Central Asia 52 87 139 Latin America & Caribbean 46 78 124

Middle East & N. Africa 19 24 43 South Asia 36 84 120

Sector Board Agriculture and Rural Development 36 74 110

Economic Policy 39 28 67 Education 18 50 68

Energy and Mining 35 37 72 Environment 9 16 25

Financial and Private Sector Development 28 33 61 Financial Management 1 2 3

Global Information/Communications Technology 0 12 12 Health, Nutrition and Population 22 47 69

Poverty Reduction 10 3 13 Procurement 0 1 1

Public Sector Governance 10 44 54 Social Development 8 8 16

Social Protection 17 31 48 Transport 22 41 63

Urban Development 21 25 46 Water 21 25 46

Total of responses 297 477 774

APPENDIX C SURVEY

27

Demographics of the answer “ICT was not relevant for achieving the objective of the operation” on question 2

Percentage of total responses

in question 2

Active projects 125 54 Closed projects 63 56 DPLs 49 53 Investments 143 56 Task team leader on the field 83 53 Task team leader in HQ 104 57 Not answered 5 1 Average of years in the Bank 11 NA Region

Africa 58 47 E. Asia & Pacific 31 62

Europe & Central Asia 40 70 Latin America & Caribbean 27 52

Middle East & N. Africa 14 58 South Asia 22 54

Sector Board Agriculture and Rural Development 23 52

Economic Policy 26 59 Education 8 50

Energy and Mining 30 70 Environment 5 56

Financial and Private Sector Development 20 61 Financial Management 1 33

Health, Nutrition and Population 9 32 Poverty Reduction 6 38

Public Sector Governance 6 67 Social Development 5 71

Social Protection 9 45 Transport 13 54

Urban Development 11 48 Water 20 71

Total responses 192 347

APPENDIX C SURVEY

28

For this operation…

ICT is a component of a project

in a non-ICT sector

ICT is a sub-

component of a project

in a non-ICT sector

ICT is included

within component(s)

or sub-component(s) of a project in

a non-ICT sector

ICT is one of the

sectors supported

by a multi-sector

operation

This is a stand-

alone ICT operation

Other Total

Active projects 39 55 240 7 14 37 392 Closed projects 6 7 46 11 1 10 81

DPLs 1 5 21 11 9 47 Investments 44 57 265 7 15 38 426

Task team leader on the field 23 33 137 9 4 22 228 Task team leader in HQ 21 24 139 7 11 21 223 Not answered 1 5 10 2 0 4 22

Average of years in the Bank 11 9 10 9 10 12 10

Region Africa 10 18 70 6 4 16 124

E. Asia & Pacific 6 6 44 5 5 11 77 Europe & Central Asia 12 19 48 3 1 3 86

Latin America & Caribbean 4 8 55 1 2 7 77 Middle East & N. Africa 2 4 12 1 1 5 25

South Asia 11 7 57 2 2 5 84

Sector Board Agriculture and Rural Development 5 6 57 0 0 4 72

Economic Policy 2 3 13 7 0 2 27 Education 4 7 30 0 0 10 51

Energy and Mining 5 5 19 2 1 3 35 Environment 1 0 12 0 1 2 16

Financial and Private Sector Development 5 5 18 3 1 3 35 Financial Management 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Global Information/Communications Technology 0 0 0 0 11 1 12 Health, Nutrition and Population 5 8 29 0 1 5 48

Poverty Reduction 0 0 2 0 0 1 3 Procurement 1 0 0 0 0 0 1

Public Sector Governance 11 7 21 3 0 2 44 Social Development 1 1 4 0 0 2 8

Social Protection 1 3 24 0 0 2 30 Transport 3 7 28 0 0 3 41

Urban Development 1 9 10 2 0 3 25 Water 0 0 19 1 0 4 24

Total 45 62 286 18 15 47 473

APPENDIX C SURVEY

29

What is the role played by ICT for achieving the project development objectives?

Critical: without ICT, the project

will not achieve its

development objectives

Important: ICT supports the delivery of significant

project outputs or to ensure

sustainability, but not essential

to achieve the overall project development

objectives

IT only to support

implementation of the

project itself

Minor: ICT plays a small role for

achieving project results

Other

Total

Active projects 81 160 55 73 23 392 Closed projects 9 44 9 15 4 81

DPLs 0 28 3 11 5 47 Investments 90 176 61 77 22 426

Task team leader on the field 44 100 28 40 16 228 Task team leader in HQ 44 96 31 43 9 223 Not answered 2 8 5 5 2 22

Average of years in the Bank 10 10 11 11 12 11

Region Africa 22 58 16 21 7 124

E. Asia & Pacific 15 31 15 11 5 77 Europe & Central Asia 23 41 9 10 3 86

Latin America & Caribbean 10 33 9 22 3 77 Middle East & N. Africa 4 10 3 4 4 25

South Asia 16 31 12 20 5 84

Sector Board Agriculture and Rural Development 10 27 19 14 2 72

Economic Policy 4 17 0 6 0 27 Education 5 22 6 9 9 51

Energy and Mining 5 17 5 5 3 35 Environment 1 9 0 5 1 16

Financial and Private Sector Development 10 10 2 7 6 35 Financial Management 0 1 0 0 0 1

Global Information/ Communications Technology 12 0 0 0 0 12

Health, Nutrition and Population 8 21 7 10 2 48 Poverty Reduction 1 0 2 0 0 3

Procurement 1 0 0 0 0 1 Public Sector Governance 15 20 2 6 1 44

Social Development 1 2 3 2 0 8 Social Protection 8 16 3 3 0 30

Transport 5 24 7 5 0 41 Urban Development 3 9 5 7 1 25

Water 1 9 3 9 2 24

Total 90 204 64 88 27 473

APPENDIX C SURVEY

30

What is the main development objective to which ICT contributes in your project?*

Enhanced economic

growth and job creation

Increased/ improved delivery of services to the public

Increased accountability, efficiency and transparency

of government functions

Greater equity among social

groups, integration of marginalized groups into

the economy, empower the

disempowered

Other Total





Region Africa 21 61 70 12 12 176

E. Asia & Pacific 8 37 36 8 14 103 Europe & Central Asia 13 53 38 10 8 122


South Asia 11 45 43 16 9 124





Global Information/Communications Technology 8 11 7 3 0 29 Health, Nutrition and Population 0 29 27 6 6 68

Poverty Reduction 0 0 1 0 0 1 Procurement 0 1 1 0 0 2

Public Sector Governance 6 17 37 3 2 65 Social Development 0 4 3 2 1 10

Social Protection 4 18 19 8 1 50 Transport 4 22 17 2 6 51

Urban Development 2 8 11 3 24 Water 0 14 12 3 6 35

Total 63 246 240 54 57 660 * Respondent could choose all responses that apply in his project.

APPENDIX C SURVEY

31

To what extend will/have the expected results from ICT be achieved / been achieved in your operation?

Fully Partially

Poorly/ Not at all

Substantially Too

early to tell

Total





Region Africa 14 22 2 36 11 85

E. Asia & Pacific 12 5 2 19 7 45 Europe & Central Asia 20 5 29 9 63


South Asia 11 14 25 6 56





Global Information/Communications Technology 5 1 0 4 2 12 Health, Nutrition and Population 5 9 1 16 3 34

Poverty Reduction 1 0 0 0 0 1 Procurement 1 0 0 0 1

Public Sector Governance 4 11 0 18 2 35 Social Development 0 1 0 2 0 3

Social Protection 3 3 1 7 3 17 Transport 6 2 0 12 3 23

Urban Development 4 1 0 4 2 11 Water 4 0 1 11 1 17

Total 68 60 7 136 43 314

APPENDIX C SURVEY

32

What are the main factors that facilitated achievement of results related to ICT in your operation?*

Implementation/techn

ical capacity of counterpar

ts

Project implement

ation readiness

Conducive policy

/legal/regulatory

environment

Government

commitment

Intensive implement

ation support/

supervision by Bank

team

None Other Total

Active projects 106 57 18 118 116 7 14 436 Closed projects 29 9 8 39 26 3 8 122

DPLs 12 1 5 24 15 3 2 62 Investments 123 65 21 133 127 7 20 496

Task team leader on the field 69 35 11 78 84 5 9 291 Task team leader in HQ 62 29 14 74 53 5 13 250 Not answered 4 2 1 5 5 0 0 17

Average of years in the Bank 11 10 11 10 10 10 11 10

Region Africa 30 16 8 46 42 3 7 152

E. Asia & Pacific 21 14 3 24 23 2 0 87 Europe & Central Asia 41 15 6 25 32 0 2 121

Latin America & Caribbean 11 10 3 21 10 2 8 65 Middle East & N. Africa 9 2 1 9 6 1 0 28

South Asia 23 9 5 32 29 2 5 105

Sector Board Agriculture and Rural Development 17 9 1 16 19 2 0 64

Economic Policy 6 3 3 14 9 1 1 37 Education 19 7 0 17 10 1 3 57

Energy and Mining 10 7 5 5 16 0 1 44 Environment 6 3 1 6 3 1 2 22

Financial and Private Sector Development 11 5 0 14 12 1 0 43 Financial Management 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 4

Global Information/ Communications Technology 7 2 1 7 7 0 2 26

Health, Nutrition and Population 11 5 3 19 16 1 4 59 Poverty Reduction 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 3

Procurement 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 Public Sector Governance 13 8 6 25 19 1 2 74

Social Development 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 5 Social Protection 6 2 1 8 6 1 2 26

Transport 11 9 2 7 9 0 3 41 Urban Development 5 2 1 7 4 0 0 19

Water 10 2 0 9 8 0 2 31

Total 135 66 26 157 142 10 22 558 * Respondent could choose up to three responses.

APPENDIX C SURVEY

33

What are the main factors that hindered achievement of results related to ICT in your operation?*

Delays in implement

ation on governme

nt side due to limited

counterpart capacity

Lack of governm

ent commitm

ent

Delays in implement

ation on Bank side

Bank procureme

nt procedure

s

Overall project

delays due to factors external to

the operation

(e.g., government

budget approvals)

Poor policy/ legal/

regulatory environmen

t

Lack of complementary factors

(e.g., training,

other infrastructur

e such as electricity,

maintenance)

None Other Total

Active projects 98 25 7 75 51 15 28 47 26 372

Closed projects 13 6 0 10 10 3 18 15 16 91

DPLs 8 6 2 3 1 7 10 13 50

Investments 103 25 7 83 58 17 39 52 29 413 Task team leader on the field 65 18 4 48 33 10 16 36 14 244 Task team leader in HQ 42 13 3 34 27 8 28 25 26 206

Not answered 4 0 0 3 1 0 2 1 2 13 Average of years in the Bank 9 10 9 10 9 9 11 9 11 10

Region

Africa 36 6 1 21 19 6 12 20 12 133

E. Asia & Pacific 19 5 2 18 7 2 5 8 1 67

Europe & Central Asia 17 6 4 15 11 2 9 7 11 82 Latin America &

Caribbean 15 3 0 10 9 5 10 6 6 64

Middle East & N. Africa 5 2 0 4 3 1 3 3 1 22

South Asia 19 9 0 17 12 2 7 18 11 95

Sector Board Agriculture & Rural

Development 12 2 0 9 8 0 6 14 2 53

Economic Policy 6 5 0 2 2 1 4 6 6 32

Education 10 2 1 9 7 1 6 5 6 47

Energy and Mining 11 1 1 6 6 0 1 3 2 31

Environment 3 1 0 3 3 1 2 2 2 17 Financial & Private

Sector Development 10 1 0 4 2 2 3 3 5 30

Financial Management 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 Global Information/

Communications Technology 3 1 0 5 2 2 0 2 3 18

Health, Nutrition & Population 16 4 0 8 8 4 4 9 4 57

Poverty Reduction 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1

Procurement 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 3 Public Sector Governance 18 5 2 16 4 5 3 10 6 69

Social Development 1 1 1 2 3 0 0 0 0 8

Social Protection 4 0 1 5 5 0 2 2 3 22

Transport 10 3 0 5 2 0 7 4 0 31

Urban Development 1 1 0 2 3 1 4 1 0 13

Water 5 4 1 9 5 1 2 1 2 30

Total 111 31 7 85 61 18 46 62 42 463 * Respondent could choose up to three responses.

APPENDIX C SURVEY

34

Primary source of expertise on ICT Percentage

Responses

Average rating

Bank staff from Global ICT Department (formerly “CITPO”) 12.3 50 3.3 Global Expert Team (e.g., Health Systems, Public Sector Performance, Social Safety Nets)

1.0 4 3.3

Bank staff from same unit or another unit in the Region 30.1 123 3.2 Consultant hired by my unit 27.0 110 3.1 Bank staff from my sector’s network anchor 3.9 16 3.1 Other (please specify) 11.3 46 2.3 None needed 13.2 54 0.1 Could not obtain needed expert 1.2 5 0.0

35

Appendix D. World Bank ICT Sector Projects Approved FY03-FY10

Commitment in $Million

Approval FY

Project ID

Project Name Country Lending Instrum

ent Sector Board IBRD IDA ICT

Total Commitment

2003 P081845 Development Support Credit

Bangladesh

DPL Public Sector Governance

0.0 300.0 N/A 300.0

2003 P081849 BD: Telecommunications Technical Assist.

Bangladesh

Investment

Global Information / Communications Technology

0.0 9.1 9.1 9.1

2003 P073367

Decentralized Infrastructure for Rural Transformation

Bolivia Investment

Energy and Mining

0.0 20.0 5.6 20.0

2003 P067051 PAL Bulgaria DPL Financial and Private Sector Development

150.0 0.0 N/A 150.0

2003 P071443 BF-Compet & Enterprise Dev (FY03)

Burkina Faso

Investment

Financial and Private Sector Development

0.0 30.7 15.9 30.7

2003 P081924

Rep of Congo Emergency Recovery and Community Support Project

Congo, Republic of

Investment

Urban Development

0.0 41.0 1.7 41.0

2003 P082739 Ec Fiscal Consolid. & Comp. Growth Adj.

Ecuador DPL Economic Policy

50.0 0.0 N/A 50.0

2003 P076271 ID-PPITA Indonesia

Investment


17.1 0.0 3.4 17.1

2003 P069890 PSAL 2 Latvia DPL Public Sector Governance

20.2 0.0 N/A 20.2

2003 P049878 MZ-EMPSO Mozambique

DPL Economic Policy

0.0 120.0 N/A 120.0

2003 P074760 NI PSAC Nicaragua

DPL Economic Policy

0.0 15.0 N/A 15.0

2003 P067575 PSAL 2 Romania DPL Financial and Private Sector Development

300.0 0.0 N/A 300.0

2003 P066385 Rwanda - Institutional Reform Credit

Rwanda DPL Economic Policy

0.0 85.0 N/A 85.0

2003 P075739 Samoa - Telecommunications & Post Reform

Samoa Investment


0.0 4.5 4.5 4.5

APPENDIX D WORLD BANK ICT SECTOR PROJECTS

36

Approval FY

Project ID



Total Commitment

2003 P051609 Private Investment Promotion Project

Senegal Investment


0.0 46.0 13.9 46.0

2003 P077586 Economic Reform TA

Sri Lanka

Investment


0.0 15.0 0.6 15.0

2003 P078726 UY Public Services & Social Sectors SAL

Uruguay DPL Urban Development

151.5 0.0 N/A 151.5

2003 P077818 ERIPTA Supplementary Credit

Zambia Investment


0.0 7.5 2.5 7.5

2004 P083720 AF: Emergency Communications Development

Afghanistan

Investment


0.0 22.0 23.2 22.0

2004 P072003 BJ-PRSC 1 Benin DPL Economic Policy

0.0 20.0 N/A 20.0

2004 P080827 BR Loan for Sust. and Equitable Growth

Brazil DPL Financial and Private Sector Development

505.1 0.0 N/A 505.1

2004 P081637 PAL 2 Bulgaria DPL Public Sector Governance

150.0 0.0 N/A 150.0

2004 P076908 BF PRSC 3 Burkina Faso

DPL Poverty Reduction

0.0 50.0 N/A 50.0

2004 P078994 BF PRSC 4 Burkina Faso


0.0 60.0 N/A 60.0

2004 P071144

DRC Private Sec Dev Competitiveness (FY04)

Congo, Democratic Republic of

Investment


0.0 120.0 23.4 120.0

2004 P074758 HN PRSC Honduras


0.0 58.8 N/A 58.8

2004 P072395 MW-FIMAG SAL (FY04)

Malawi DPL Economic Policy

0.0 50.0 N/A 50.0

2004 P074685 Poverty Reduction Support Credit I

Nepal DPL Economic Policy

0.0 70.0 N/A 70.0

2004 P082885 Nicaragua PRSC I Nicaragua


0.0 70.0 N/A 70.0

2004 P074972 PAL 2 Ukraine DPL Public Sector Governance

250.0 0.0 N/A 250.0

2004 P082759 Vietnam PRSC III Vietnam DPL Economic Policy

0.0 100.0 N/A 100.0


37

Approval FY

Project ID



Total Commitment

2005 P078673 PRSC Armenia DPL Economic Policy

0.0 20.0 N/A 20.0

2005 P074938 PRSC Azerbaijan

DPL Economic Policy

0.0 20.0 N/A 20.0

2005 P083887 Development Support Credit

Bangladesh

DPL Economic Policy

0.0 200.0 N/A 200.0

2005 P078675 PAL III Bulgaria DPL Social Development

150.0 0.0 N/A 150.0

2005 P078995 PRSC V Burkina Faso


0.0 60.0 N/A 60.0

2005 P076807 CL-Infrastructure for Territorial Dvlpmt

Chile Investment

Transport 50.3 0.0 12.6 50.3

2005 P083856

Second Fiscal Consolidation and Competitive Growth SAL

Ecuador DPL Economic Policy

100.0 0.0 N/A 100.0

2005 P077749 ET-PRSC 2 DPL (FY05)

Ethiopia DPL Public Sector Governance

0.0 130.0 N/A 130.0

2005 P078458 ET-ICT Assisted Dev SIM (FY05)

Ethiopia Investment


0.0 25.0 25.0 25.0

2005 P089873 HT Economic Governance Reform Adj. Operation.

Haiti DPL Economic Policy

0.0 61.0 N/A 61.0

2005 P088060

IR - Bam Earthquake Emergency Reconstruction.

Iran, Islamic Republic of

Investment

Urban Development

220.0 0.0 5.7 220.0

2005 P075805 MZ-PRSC (FY05) Mozambique


0.0 60.0 N/A 60.0

2005 P093294 Nepal Economic Reform TA (NERTA)

Nepal Investment


0.0 3.0 0.3 3.0

2005 P088448 OECS-Telecomm & ICT Development Pro

OECS Countries

Investment


1.4 1.4 2.8 2.7

2005 P078806 Pakistan PRSC I Pakistan DPL Poverty Reduction

0.0 300.0 N/A 300.0

2005 P085192 PRSC I Rwanda DPL Poverty Reduction

0.0 65.0 N/A 65.0

2005 P081771 E-Sri Lanka Development

Sri Lanka

Investment


0.0 53.0 53.0 53.0


38

Approval FY

Project ID



Total Commitment

2005 P088929 TN-ICT Sector Development Project

Tunisia Investment


13.1 0.0 13.1 13.1

2005 P086360 Vietnam - PRSC IV Vietnam DPL Economic Policy

0.0 100.0 N/A 100.0

2005 P040631 ZM-Econ Mgmt & Growth Credit (FY05)

Zambia DPL Economic Policy

0.0 40.0 N/A 40.0

2006 P090829 AF Program. Support for Inst. Bldg II

Afghanistan

DPL Economic Policy

0.0 80.0 N/A 80.0

2006 P093459 AM -PRSC 2 Armenia DPL Economic Policy

0.0 20.0 N/A 20.0

2006 P090832 Development Support Credit III

Bangladesh

DPL Economic Policy

0.0 200.0 N/A 200.0

2006 P078807 First Development Policy Grant

Bhutan DPL Economic Policy

0.0 15.0 N/A 15.0

2006 P078996 PRSC VI Burkina Faso


0.0 60.0 N/A 60.0

2006 P094321 GT-Support Rural Econ.Dev. Program

Guatemala

Investment

Agriculture and Rural Development

30.0 0.0 15.7 30.0

2006 P057761 MW-Infrastr Srvcs SIM

Malawi Investment

Energy and Mining

0.0 40.0 1.5 40.0

2006 P092965 MN-Info & Com Infra Dev

Mongolia Investment


0.0 8.0 8.0 8.0

2006 P089989 NI Rural Telecom Nicaragua

Investment


0.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

2006 P092944 PRSC II Rwanda DPL Poverty Reduction

0.0 55.0 N/A 55.0

2006 P079316 DPL I Ukraine DPL Economic Policy

251.3 0.0 N/A 251.3

2006 P079344 Vietnam - ICT Development

Vietnam Investment


0.0 93.7 93.7 93.7

2007 P094103 3A-Telecommunications APL (FY07)

Africa Investment


0.0 164.5 164.5 164.5

2007 P093460 PRSC 3 Armenia DPL Economic Policy

0.0 28.0 N/A 28.0


39

Approval FY

Project ID



Total Commitment

2007 P074801 DSC-IV Bangladesh

DPL Public Sector Governance

0.0 200.0 N/A 200.0

2007 P083313 BJ-PRSC 3 Benin DPL Poverty Reduction

0.0 30.0 N/A 30.0

2007 P073458 BT Private Sector Development

Bhutan Investment


0.0 8.0 7.0 8.0

2007 P102576 CF-Development Policy Operation DPO FY07

Central African Republic

DPL Economic Policy

0.0 82.0 N/A 82.0

2007 P093610 eGhana Ghana Investment


0.0 40.0 18.5 40.0

2007 P101570 Mauritius Development Policy Loan

Mauritius DPL Economic Policy

30.0 0.0 N/A 30.0

2007 P089816 NI PRSC II Nicaragua


0.0 25.0 N/A 25.0

2007 P090690 PK PRSC II Pakistan DPL Poverty Reduction

0.0 350.0 N/A 350.0

2007 P098926 eRwanda Project Rwanda Investment


0.0 10.0 0.4 10.0

2008 P101486 PRSC 4 Armenia DPL Economic Policy

0.0 18.5 N/A 18.5

2008 P110167 BD Transitional Support Credit

Bangladesh

DPL Economic Policy

0.0 200.0 N/A 200.0

2008 P104881 Compet & Integrated Growth Opportunity

Benin Investment


0.0 25.0 1.2 25.0

2008 P094288 LB - Reform Implementation DPL

Lebanon DPL Energy and Mining

100.0 0.0 N/A 100.0

2008 P106650 MU-Dev.Pol.Loan (intermediate)


30.0 0.0 N/A 30.0

2008 P096389 DPL 2 Ukraine DPL Economic Policy

300.0 0.0 N/A 300.0

2009 P106369 RCIP - Phase 2 - Rwanda Project

Africa Investment


0.0 24.0 24.0 24.0

2009 P111432 RCIP - Phase 3 Africa Investment


0.0 151.0 151.0 151.0


40

Approval FY

Project ID



Total Commitment

2009 P106752 AR Unleashing Productive Innovation

Argentina

Investment


150.0 0.0 36.0 150.0

2009 P111222 BT Development Pollicy Grant 3

Bhutan DPL Economic Policy

0.0 20.2 N/A 20.2

2009 P115173 CR Pub Fin & Compet. DPL/ DDO

Costa Rica

DPL Economic Policy

500.0 0.0 N/A 500.0

2009 P113451 Mali - PRSC-3 Mali DPL Poverty Reduction

0.0 65.0 N/A 65.0

2009 P106589 MX IT Industry Development Project

Mexico Investment


80.0 0.0 80.0 80.0

2009 P112334

UG: Energy for Rural Transformation APL2

Uganda Investment

Energy and Mining

0.0 75.0 9.2 75.0

2010 P108368 Africa:Central African Backbone - APL1A

Africa Investment


0.0 26.2 26.2 26.2

2010 P113370 eBenin Project Benin Investment


0.0 15.0 15.0 15.0

2010 P114937 Economic Governance Reform Grant - DPG 2

Guinea-Bissau

DPL Economic Policy

0.0 6.0 N/A 6.0

2010 P116608 Mauritius Fourth Development Policy Loan


50.0 0.0 N/A 50.0

2010 P112625 Economic Recovery Development Policy Operation

Moldova DPL Economic Policy

0.0 25.0 N/A 25.0

2010 P118636 Samoa Economic Crisis Recovery Support Credit

Samoa DPL Economic Policy

0.0 20.0 N/A 20.0

2010 P113148

Solomon Islands Telecommunications and ICT Development Project

Solomon Islands

Investment


0.0 3.3 3.3 3.3

41

Appendix E. Sample of World Bank Projects with ICT Applications Reviewed by IEG

Commitment in $Million

FY Approved

Project ID

Project Name Country Sector Board IBRD IDA ICT Total

Commitment

2003 P008314 District Heating Project Bulgaria Energy and Mining 34.2 0.0 3.1 34.2

2003 P073427 Revenue Administration Reform Project

Bulgaria Public Sector Governance

34.2 0.0 35.0 34.2

2003 P063546 Pension System Investment Project

Croatia Social Protection 27.3 0.0 7.0 27.3

2003 P075056 Food and Drugs Capacity Building Project

India Health, Nutrition and Population

0.0 54.0 Negligible 54.0

2003 P071063 Governance Technical Assistance Project

Kyrgyz Republic

Public Sector Governance

0.0 7.8 6.4 7.8

2003 P072960 Customs Development Project

Russian Federation


140.0 0.0 175.0 140.0

2003 P067103 Participatory Agricultural Development and Empowerment Project

Tanzania Agriculture and Rural Development

0.0 56.6 4.7 56.6

2004 P081558 3rd Social Action Fund (FAS III)

Angola Social Protection 0.0 55.0 Negligible 55.0

2004 P060786 Public Sector Modernization Project

Armenia Public Sector Governance

0.0 10.2 7.3 10.2

2004 P076234 Rural Investment Project (AZRIP)

Azerbaijan Social Development 0.0 15.0 1.9 15.0

2004 P083890 Economic Management TA Program (EMTAP)

Bangladesh


0.0 20.0 6.6 20.0

APPENDIX E SAMPLE OF WB PROJECTS WITH ICT APPLICATIONS

42

FY Approved

Project ID


Commitment

2004 P081969 Enterprise Growth & Bank Modernization

Bangladesh


0.0 250.0 Negligible 250.0

2004 P085230 Development of the National Statistical System

Burkina Faso


0.0 10.0 7.8 10.0

2004 P078627 Economic Management Support Project

Burundi Public Sector Governance

0.0 26.0 21.0 26.0

2004 P078209 Development Learning Centre Project

Kenya Education 0.0 2.7 2.3 2.7

2004 P083543 Road Maintenance Program (Phase 2)

Lao PDR Transport 0.0 22.7 1.1 22.7

2004 P082187 Mali Development Learning Center project - LIL

Mali Education 0.0 2.5 2.4 2.5

2004 P078891 Public Sector Technical Assistance Project

Nicaragua Public Sector Governance

0.0 23.5 15.5 23.5

2004 P083370 Pakistan- Public Sector Capacity Building Project

Pakistan Public Sector Governance

0.0 55.0 20.6 55.0

2004 P075163 Hazard Risk Mitigation & Emergency Preparedness Project

Romania Urban Development 150.0 0.0 4.8 150.0

2004 P079925 Sustainable Management of Mineral Resources Project

Uganda Energy and Mining 0.0 25.0 3.8 25.0

2004 P083597

Second Economic and Financial Management Project-Supplemental Credit

Uganda Public Sector Governance

0.0 14.6 41.7 14.6

2004 P070197 Urban Upgrading Project

Vietnam Urban Development 0.0 222.5 1.7 222.5

2004 P082498 RY-Social Fund for Development III

Yemen, Republic of

Social Protection 0.0 60.0 19.5 60.0


43

FY Approved

Project ID


Commitment

2005 P086807 Integrated Coastal Zone Management & Clean-Up Project (APL #1)

Albania Environment 0.0 17.5 0.6 17.5

2005 P082328 Integrated Municipal Project - Betim Municipality

Brazil Environment 24.1 0.0 7.9 24.1

2005 P082973 Water And Sanitation Sector Support Project 1st APL

Colombia Water 70.0 0.0 0.8 70.0

2005 P086953 Land Administration II El Salvador


40.2 0.0 2.7 40.2

2005 P086518 SME Financing & Development

India Financial and Private Sector Development

120.0 0.0 Negligible 120.0

2005 P091787 Public Sector Reform Capacity Building Loan

Jordan Public Sector Governance

15.0 0.0 2.5 15.0

2005 P078674

Economic Policy & Public Expenditure Management Technical Assistance Project (PEMTAG)

Kosovo Public Sector Governance

0.0 5.5 1.6 5.5

2005 P074755 State Judicial Modernization Project

Mexico Public Sector Governance

30.0 0.0 13.5 30.0

2005 P088992 Private Sector Development Credit II

Mongolia Financial and Private Sector Development


2005 P088150 Federal Government Economic Reform and Governance Project

Nigeria Public Sector Governance

0.0 140.0 143.0 140.0

2005 P077306 Pakistan Tax Administration Reforms Project


24.4 78.5 96.3 102.9

2005 P082625 Vilcanota Valley Rehabilitation and Management Project

Peru Urban Development 5.0 0.0 1.0 5.0

2005 P092786 Human Capital Technical Assistance (SIDEM APL #1)

Slovak Republic

Education 6.5 0.0 2.7 6.5


44

FY Approved

Project ID


Commitment

2006 P079734 East Africa Trade and Transport Facilitation Project

Africa Transport 0.0 199.0 26.0 199.0

2006 P099201 Judicial Modernization Project

Azerbaijan Public Sector Governance

0.0 21.6 10.0 21.6

2006 P063081 Public Sector Financial Management Reform Support

Georgia Public Sector Governance

0.0 3.0 10.0 3.0

2006 P092986 GH-Economic Management Cap. Bldg. Project.

Ghana Financial and Private Sector Development

0.0 25.0 25.1 25.0

2006 P088797 Multi-Sectoral HIV/AIDS Program

Ghana Health, Nutrition and Population


2006 P082242 Nutrition and Social Protection project

Honduras Social Protection 0.0 20.0 0.6 20.0

2006 P081516 Judicial Branch Modernization

Honduras Public Sector Governance

0.0 15.0 9.8 15.0

2006 P090567

Institutional Reform and Capacity Building Technical Assistance Project

Kenya Public Sector Governance

0.0 25.0 16.5 25.0

2006 P084977 Health & Social Protection Project

Kyrgyz Republic

Health, Nutrition and Population

0.0 15.0 1.4 15.0

2006 P083499 Railways Reform Macedonia, FYR

Transport 19.4 0.0 2.0 19.4

2006 P089859

Legal & Judicial Implementation & Institutional Support Project

Macedonia, FYR


12.4 0.0 2.4 12.4

2006 P084148

Irrigation, Rural Livelihoods and Agricultural Development Project

Malawi Agriculture and Rural Development


2006 P076872 Second Improvement to Financial Reporting and Auditing Project


0.0 84.0 84.0 84.0


45

FY Approved

Project ID


Commitment

2006 P090116 PE Rural Electrification Peru Energy and Mining 50.0 0.0 0.3 50.0

2006 P078894 Real Property Rights Consolidation Project

Peru Public Sector Governance

25.0 0.0 40.8 25.0

2006 P090309 Judicial Reform Romania Public Sector Governance

130.0 0.0 21.5 130.0

2006 P082492 Marine and Coastal Environment Management

Tanzania Environment 0.0 51.0 Negligible 51.0

2006 P092484 Planning and Financial Management Capacity Building Program

Timor-Leste


0.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

2007 P094084 West Africa Agricultural Productivity Program (WAAPP)

Africa Agriculture and Rural Development

0.0 45.0 1.0 45.0

2007 P100582 Real Estate Registration Azerbaijan Agriculture and Rural Development

30.0 0.0 19.0 30.0

2007 P101641 Forest Additional Financing Project

Bosnia and Herzegovina


0.0 3.4 0.7 3.3

2007 P089793 State Pension Reform II TAL

Brazil Public Sector Governance

5.0 0.0 9.0 5.0

2007 P084002 Urban and Water Development Support Project

Cameroon Urban Development 0.0 80.0 Negligible 80.0

2007 P102778 Revenue Administration Modernization Project

Croatia Public Sector Governance

68.0 0.0 36.0 68.0

2007 P089898 Education Quality And Secondary Education

Guatemala Education 80.0 0.0 11.5 80.0

2007 P087106 Land Administration II APL

Guatemala Agriculture and Rural Development

62.3 0.0 12.6 62.3


46

FY Approved

Project ID


Commitment

2007 P105386 Natural Disaster Mitigation - Additional Scale Up Financing

Honduras Urban Development 0.0 9.0 1.1 9.0

2007 P096439 MN-Sustainable Livelihoods Project II

Mongolia Agriculture and Rural Development


2007 P101964 National Program Support for Tax Administration Reform.

Philippines Public Sector Governance

11.0 0.0 3.0 11.0

2007 P089733 Judicial Reform Support Project

Russian Federation


50.0 0.0 146.0 50.0

2007 P095873 TP-Education Sector Support

Timor-Leste

Education 0.0 6.0 Negligible 6.0

2008 P106259 Second Education Quality Improvement Program

Afghanistan


2008 P100806

AR Sustainable Natural Resources Management (formerly Sustainable Forestry Development)

Argentina Agriculture and Rural Development


2008 P110679 ARP/II-Integrated Solid Waste Management

Azerbaijan Urban Development 29.5 0.0 7.7 29.5

2008 P099126 Institutional Capacity Building Project for Procurement

Bhutan Public Sector Governance


2008 P101206

Expanding Access to Reduce Health Inequities Project (APL III)—Former Health Sector Reform - Third Phase (APL III)

Bolivia Health, Nutrition and Population

0.0 18.5 11.9 18.5

2008 P101324 Minas Gerais Partnership II SWAP

Brazil Public Sector Governance

976.0 0.0 18.5 976.0

2008 P108791

International Institute for Water and Environmental Engineering (2ie)

Burkina Faso


2008 P106603 Road Asset Management Project

Cambodia Transport 0.0 30.0 1.4 30.0


47

FY Approved

Project ID


Commitment

2008 P084160 Transparency and Accountability Capacity Building Project

Cameroon Public Sector Governance

0.0 15.0 5.9 15.0

2008 P103441 Second Public Expenditure Management

Chile Public Sector Governance

24.8 0.0 21.4 24.8

2008 P091949

Gansu Cultural and Natural Heritage Protection and Development Project

China Urban Development 38.4 0.0 Negligible 38.4

2008 P105164 Second Student Loan Support Project, APL Phase I

Colombia Education 300.0 0.0 Negligible 300.0

2008 P090010 DO Social Sectors Investment Program

Dominican Republic

Social Protection 19.4 0.0 10.8 19.4

2008 P109932 DO Emergency Recovery & Disaster Mgmt

Dominican Republic


80.0 0.0 3.0 80.0

2008 P074011 Ethiopia/Nile Basin Initiative: Ethiopia-Sudan Interconnector

Ethiopia Energy and Mining 0.0 41.1 1.0 41.1

2008 P106993 Integrated Financial Management Additional Financing

Guatemala Public Sector Governance

20.0 0.0 49.8 20.0

2008 P106699

Haiti - Urban Community Driven Development Project / PRODEPUR

Haiti Agriculture and Rural Development


2008 P106689

Haiti Emergency Recovery and Disaster Management (Additional Financing)

Haiti Urban Development 0.0 7.4 Negligible 7.4

2008 P102547 Elementary Education (SSA II)

India Education 0.0 600.0 Negligible 600.0

2008 P096998 Customs Development Project

Kazakhstan


18.5 0.0 8.5 18.5

2008 P107248 Economic Governance & Institutional Reform

Liberia Public Sector Governance

0.0 11.0 2.5 11.0

2008 P101446 Enhanced Justice Sector Services Project - Mongolia

Mongolia Public Sector Governance

0.0 5.0 1.3 5.0

2008 P093132 Dam Safety and Water Resources Planning (DSWRPP)

Sri Lanka Agriculture and Rural Development

0.0 65.3 4.6 65.4

2008 P097329 Public Sector Capacity Building

Sri Lanka Public Sector Governance

0.0 22.6 3.2 22.6


48

FY Approved

Project ID


Commitment

2008 P107015 Civil Service Modernization Project Supplemental Loan

Yemen, Republic of


0.0 14.0 9.9 14.0

2009 P101171 AR SOC&FISC NTL ID SYS II

Argentina Public Sector Governance

20.0 0.0 18.7 20.0

2009 P107772 Second Education Quality and Relevance (APL 2)

Armenia Education 0.0 25.0 4.1 25.0

2009 P104752 Paraíba Rural Poverty Brazil Agriculture and Rural Development


2009 P106855 General Education Quality Improvement Project - APL 1 (GEQIP)

Ethiopia Education 0.0 50.0 21.4 50.0

2009 P108757

Second National Program for Community Empowerment in Rural Areas Addit

Indonesia Social Development 300.0 0.0 2.4 300.0

2009 P100740 Project for Indonesian Tax Administration Reform (PINTAR)

Indonesia Public Sector Governance

110.0 0.0 109.5 110.0

2009 P106528 Results-based Management and Budgeting

Mexico Public Sector Governance

17.2 0.0 15.6 17.3

2009 P114508 Third Partnership for Polio Eradication Project

Pakistan Health, Nutrition and Population


2009 P103160 Social Safety Net Technical Assistance Project

Pakistan Social Protection 0.0 60.0 10.8 60.0

2009 P113489 Additional Financing of Health Sector Development

Sri Lanka Health, Nutrition and Population


2009 P106220 Timor Leste - Youth Development Project

Timor-Leste

Social Development 0.0 2.1 Negligible 2.1

2009 P107845 Second Basic Education

Uzbekistan Education 0.0 28.0 Negligible 28.0

49

Appendix F. IFC ICT Sector Investments, FY03-FY10

Commitment in $Millions

Approval FY

Institution Number

Project Short Name

Institution Legal Name Country Sector

Total Original

Commitment

2003 54356 Vodafone Albania

Vodafone Albania SH.A Albania Telecommunications 41.4

2003 54090 Great Infotech Global Infotech Holdings, Inc.

China IT / Media 3.5

2003 54162 Celtel DROC II Celtel Congo (RDC) s.p.r.l.


Telecommunications 20.0

2003 54300 NewPath NewPath Ventures LLC India IT / Media 10.0

2003 513699 DQE Plc DQ Entertainment Plc India IT / Media 3.0

2003 54358 Rubicon Jordan Training Technology Group

Jordan IT / Media 1.0

2003 513753 Mexmal Grupo Mexmal Mexico IT / Media 10.0

2003 54346 TIM Peru TIM Peru S.A.C. Peru Telecommunications 70.0

2003 53950 SVI Software Ventures Int'l., Inc

Philippines IT / Media 4.0

2003 53708 Ru-Net ruNet Holdings Limited Russian Federation

IT / Media 6.0

2003 54402 Dialog Dialog Telekom Ltd. Sri Lanka Telecommunications 50.0

2003 54095 Glass Egg Glass Egg Digital Media Limited

Vietnam IT / Media 1.8

2003 53942 Novica United Novica United, Inc. World Region IT / Media 1.5

2004 518835 Grameen Phone II

GrameenPhone Limited Bangladesh Telecommunications 30.0

2004 504680 DECL Digicel Limited Caribbean Region Telecommunications 14.8

2004 516717 Sonda Sociedad Nacional de Procesamiento de Datos S.A.

Chile IT / Media 10.0

2004 522101 CMScomputers CMS Computers Ltd India IT / Media 22.5

2004 516681 TRG Pakistan TRG Pakistan II Limited Pakistan IT / Media 5.0

2004 517714 Globe Telecom Globe Telecom, Inc. Philippines Telecommunications 20.0

2004 516914 TV3 Russia Independent Network Television Holdings, Ltd.

Russian Federation

IT / Media 10.5

2004 513876 Meteksan Sistem

Meteksan Sistem ve Bilgisayar Teknolojileri A.S.

Turkey IT / Media 8.5

2004 51450 Zain Zambia Celtel Zambia Limited Zambia Telecommunications 0.3

2005 52377 Celtel III Celtel Africa Region Telecommunications 40.0

2005 52377 Celtel Warrants Celtel Africa Region Telecommunications 1.0

APPENDIX F IFC ICT SECTOR INVESTMENTS, FY03-FY10

50

Approval FY

Institution Number

Project Short Name


Total Original

Commitment

2005 52377 Celtel IV Celtel Africa Region Telecommunications 6.4

2005 531083 HiSoft Tech HiSoft Technology International Limited


2005 535103 Scancom Scancom Limited Ghana Telecommunications 40.0

2005 534642 KPIT KPIT Cummins Infosystems Limited

India IT / Media 13.5

2005 522707 Millicom Lao Millicom Lao Company Limited

Lao People's Democratic Republic


2005 53887 MTNN II MTN Nigeria Communications Limited

Nigeria Telecommunications 35.0

2005 528725 Millicom Paraguay

Telefonica Celular del Paraguay SA

Paraguay Telecommunications 15.0

2005 54032 True Move True Move Company Ltd.

Thailand Telecommunications 33.0

2005 54398 Avea Avea Iletisim Hizmetleri A.S

Turkey Telecommunications 120.0

2006 557339 Areeba Afghan Areeba Afghanistan Limited

Afghanistan Telecommunications 45.0

2006 518835 Grameen PhoneIII

GrameenPhone Limited Bangladesh Telecommunications 59.0

2006 537002 Chinasoft Chinasoft International Limited


2006 537441 VeriSilicon VeriSilicon Holdings Co., Ltd.


2006 557719 Neophotonics Neophotonics, Inc China IT / Media 10.0

2006 557659 Digicel Haiti Unigestion Holdings S.A. Haiti Telecommunications 15.0

2006 545992 Indecomm Indecomm Global Services

India Telecommunications 2.6

2006 543114 Wataniya Maldives

Wataniya Telecom Maldives Pvt. Ltd.

Maldives Telecommunications 20.0

2006 562475 Paktel 2005 Paktel Limited Pakistan Telecommunications 35.0

2006 516914 TV3 Russia II Independent Network Television Holdings, Ltd.

Russian Federation

IT / Media 10.0

2007 564533 GDS China Global Data Solutions Ltd


2007 570233 CDV China Digital Video, Ltd China IT / Media 10.0

2007 513769 Celtel DRC Celtel Congo (RDC) s.p.r.l.



2007 557659 Digicel Haiti II Unigestion Holdings S.A. Haiti Telecommunications 15.0

2007 567996 Celtel Madagascar

Celtel Madagascar Limited

Madagascar Telecommunications 25.0

2007 567995 Celtel Malawi Celtel Malawi Limited Malawi Telecommunications 15.0

2007 516914 TV3 Russia III Independent Network Television Holdings, Ltd.

Russian Federation

IT / Media 22.0

2007 570853 PM Russia PM Invest Company Limited

Russian Federation

IT / Media 50.0

2007 567638 Digicel Samoa Telecom Samoa Cellular Limited

Samoa Telecommunications 8.2


51

Approval FY

Institution Number

Project Short Name


Total Original

Commitment

2007 54223 Celtel SierraLeone

Celtel Sierra Leone Ltd. Sierra Leone Telecommunications 25.0

2007 568096 Horizon III Horizon Equity Fund III South Africa IT / Media 10.0

2007 54398 Avea Long-term Avea Iletisim Hizmetleri A.S

Turkey Telecommunications 120.0

2007 52637 Celtel Uganda Li

CelTel Limited (Uganda) Uganda Telecommunications 20.0

2008 50502 Telecel III Telefonica Celular de Bolivia S.A.

Bolivia Telecommunications 30.0

2008 612998 Ruralfone Local Serviços De Telecomunicações Ltda

Brazil Telecommunications 3.0

2008 615558 Onatel Burkina Onatel S.A. Burkina Faso Telecommunications 11.3

2008 527064 MillicomCambodia

CamGSM Company Limited

Cambodia Telecommunications 40.0

2008 618250 Teylium - T Plus T+ Telecomunicacoes S.A

Cape Verde Telecommunications 5.9

2008 564614 EASSy Cable West Indian Ocean Cable Company Ltd

Eastern Africa Region


2008 621591 Connectiva Connectiva Systems, Inc.


2008 620345 Idea Cellular Idea Cellular Limited India Telecommunications 84.0

2008 620590 Digicel PNG Digicel (PNG) Limited Papua New Guinea


2008 562374 ElectroCom PLT Electro-Com, Ltd. Russian Federation


2008 500545 Dialog II Telekom Malaysia Sri Lanka Telecommunications 100.0

2008 572457 Voxiva Voxiva, Inc. World Region IT / Media 5.0

2009 557339 MTNA Mod Areeba Afghanistan Limited

Afghanistan Telecommunications 75.0

2009 626075 Grupo ASSA Grupo ASSA Worldwide S. L.

Argentina IT / Media 5.0

2009 623214 EDC China EDC China Holding Ltd China IT / Media 20.0

2009 625008 Digicel Fiji Digicel (Fiji) Limited Fiji Telecommunications 22.9

2009 632455 Zain Ghana Zain Communication Ghana Limited

Ghana Telecommunications 90.0

2009 621985 Digicel Honduras

Digicel Honduras S.A. de CV

Honduras Telecommunications 70.0

2009 501548 Tecnotree Tecnomen Lifetree Corporation


2009 620227 Midas Midas Communications Technologies Pvt. Ltd.

India Telecommunications 12.5

2009 625015 Digicel Kiribati Digicel (Kiribati) Limited Kiribati Telecommunications 1.8

2009 623424 DineroMail - EQ DineroMail Inc. Latin America Region

IT / Media 5.0

2009 618842 EastNets Eastern Networks -(IT) Solution Provider Corp

Middle East & N. Africa Region

IT / Media 10.0

2009 622528 Nasoft North American Software S.A. de C.V.

Mexico IT / Media 8.0


52

Approval FY

Institution Number

Project Short Name


Total Original

Commitment

2009 627144 Helios Towers Helios Towers Nigeria Limited


2009 625106 Digicel Panama Digicel (Panama) S.A. Panama Telecommunications 50.0

2009 622076 Asteros Group Asteros Technology Solutions Holding Ltd

Russian Federation

IT / Media 2.5

2009 568574 Digicel Samoa 2 Digicel (Samoa) Ltd Samoa Telecommunications 10.5

2009 625013 Digicel Tonga Digicel (Tonga) Limited Tonga Telecommunications 6.8

2009 625014 Digicel Vanuatu Digicel (Vanuatu) Limited Vanuatu Telecommunications 9.0

2009 625374 Wataniya Palestine

Wataniya Palestine Mobile Telecommunication Company

West Bank and Gaza


2010 649924 Helios HTA Helios Towers Africa Limited

Africa Region Telecommunications 25.0

2010 646345 Softwell Softwell Solutions em Informatica Ltda. EPP

Brazil IT / Media 4.8

2010 641469 Millicom Chad Millicom Tchad S.A Chad Telecommunications 21.2

2010 655444 TIGO - Colombia

Colombia Movil S.A. E.S.P.

Colombia Telecommunications 40.0

2010 630472 Millicom DRC Millicom DRC Congo, Democratic Republic of


2010 637952 Vodafone Ghana

Vodafone Ghana Ghana Telecommunications 100.0

2010 630692 Comcel S.A. Comunicaciones Celulares S.A.

Guatemala Telecommunications 35.0

2010 646184 Suvidhaa Suvidhaa Inforserve Private Limited


2010 644638 YellowPepper Yellowpepper Holding Corp

Latin America Region

IT / Media 3.0

2010 562233 Zain Malawi Dist

Stanbic Malawi Malawi Telecommunications 5.8

2010 631506 Metronet Metro Net, S.A.P.I. de C.V.

Mexico IT / Media 5.0

2010 627144 Helios Towers RM

Helios Towers Nigeria Limited


2010 620590 Digicel PNG II Digicel (PNG) Limited Papua New Guinea


53

Appendix G. MIGA Guarantees in the ICT Sector, FY03-FY10

Guarantee Amount in $Million

Fiscal Year

Issued

Project ID Host Country Project Enterprise Sector

Guarantee Amount (Gross)

2003 3848 Burundi Africell S.A. Telecommunications 0.9

2003 4810 Mali Ikatel S.A. Telecommunications 39.6

2003 1457 Nigeria Mobile Telephone Networks Nigeria Communications Telecommunications 50.0

2004 5639 Nigeria IP Satellite Services Ltd. of Nigeria Internet 11.4

2004 4569 Syrian Arab Republic Spacetel Syria S.A. Telecommunications 75.0

2005 5814 Ghana Scancom Ltd. Telecommunications 99.0

2006 5943 Bangladesh Sheba Telcom (Pvt.) ltd. Telecommunications 78.3

2006 4033 Nigeria Vee Networks Limited Telecommunications 45.0

2006 6293 Sierra Leone PCS Holding Sierra Leone Ltd. (PCSH) Internet 3.4

2007 6589 Afghanistan Areeba Afghanistan LLC Telecommunications 74.5

2007 6147 Guinea Orange Guinee S.A. Telecommunications 59.4

2008 7213 Central African Republic Orange Centrafrique S.A. Telecommunications 37.7

2008 7212 Guinea-Bissau Orange Bissau S.A. Telecommunications 25.9

Total Guarantee Amount 600.1

54

Appendix H. World Bank ICT AAA Delivered in FY03-FY10 Figure 1. ICT AAA, by Product Line and Year of Delivery to the Client

Figure 2. ICT AAA, by Product Line

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Number of Activities

Other

PPIAF

KP

ESW

TA

Amount in Millions

0

50

100

150

200

250

0

50

100

150

200

250

Average

Cost per Activity in $T



Average Cost per Activity in $T

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Average

Cost per Activity in $T



Average Cost per Activity in $T

APPENDIX H WORLD BANK ICT AAA, DELIVERED IN FY03-FY10

55

Figure 3. Activity Completion Summary Ratings for ICT Economic and Sector Work, by Development Objective

Figure 4. Activity Completion Summary Ratings for ICT Non-Lending Technical Assistance, by Development Objective

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Inform Lending Inform Government

Policy

Build Client Analytical Capacity

Inform / Stimulate Public Debate

Influence Development Community


Fully

Largely

Partially

No

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Assist in Client Policy / Program Implementation

Develop / Strengthen Institutions

Facilitate Knowledge Exchange


Fully

Largely

Partially

No

56

Appendix I. World Bank Projects with ICT Applications Approved in FY03-FY09

Figure 1. Number of Projects with and without ICT Applications Components and Subcomponents, FY03-FY09

Figure 2. Percentage of Projects with ICT Applications Components and Subcomponents from Four Main Sectors (All Projects with ICT Applications = 100%)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09

Number of Projects

With ICT No ICT

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09

Percent of Projects Education

Transport

Health, Nutrition and Population


57

Appendix J. World Bank Group Sector/Thematic Strategies Reviewed by IEG, FY03-FY10

Sector Board

/Theme Classification

Report Title Date Published World Bank Group

Coverage

1 Agriculture and Rural Development

Agriculture Action Plan 2010 - 2012 July 2009 IBRD/IDA, MIGA, IFC

2 Economic Policy None

3 Education Education Sector Strategy Update November 2005 IBRD/IDA

4 Energy and Mining Renewing our Energy Business. World Bank Group Energy Program. Implementation - Progress Report 2001-03

February 2004 IBRD/IDA, MIGA, IFC

5 Environment Sector Strategy Implementation Update: Third Review December 2007 IBRD/IDA

6 Financial Sector Financial Sector Strategy for the World Bank Group April 2007 IBRD/IDA, MIGA, IFC

7 Forest Management Sector Strategy Implementation Update: Third Review December 2007 IBRD/IDA

8 Gender Gender Equality as Smart Economics: A World Bank Group Gender Action Plan September 2006 IBRD/IDA, IFC, MIGA

9 Global Information/Communications Technology

Information and Communication Technologies: A World Bank Group Strategy

April 2002 IBRD/IDA, IFC, MIGA

10 Health, Nutrition and Population

Healthy Development - The World Bank Strategy for Health, Nutrition, and Population Results Implementation of the World Bank’s Strategy for Health, Nutrition, and Population (HNP) Results: Achievements, Challenges, and the Way Forward

April 2007 April 2009

IBRD/IDA IBRD/IDA

11 Infrastructure Progress Report Fiscal Year 2009 - Infrastructure Recovery and Assets Platform (INFRA) - Sustainable Infrastructure Action Plan (SIAP)

December 2009 IBRD/IDA, MIGA, IFC

12 Poverty Reduction None

13 Private Sector Development

Private Sector Development Strategy - Mid Cycle Implementation Progress Paper (MCIPP)

June 2009

IBRD/IDA, MIGA, IFC

14 Procurement None

15 Public Sector Governance

Sector Strategy Implementation Update FY05 (Part Two—Implementation Update for Public Sector Governance) February 2006 IBRD/IDA

16 Governance and Anticorruption

Implementation Plan For Strengthening World Bank Group Engagement On Governance And Anticorruption

September 2007 IBRD/IDA, MIGA, IFC

17 Social Development Empowering People by Transforming Institutions: Social Development in World Bank Operations July 2005 IBRD/IDA

18 Social Protection Sector Strategy Implementation Update: Third Review December 2007 IBRD/IDA

19 Transport Safe, Clean, and Affordable. Transport for Development - The World Bank Group’s Transport Business Strategy 2008-2012

December 2008 IBRD/IDA, MIGA, IFC

20 Urban Development Systems of Cities. Harnessing urbanization for growth and poverty alleviation

November 2009 IBRD/IDA

21 Water

Water Resources Sector Strategy: Strategic Directions for World Bank Engagement Sector Strategy Implementation Update FY05 (Part Two—Implementation Update for the Water Supply and Sanitation Sector)

February 2003 February 2006

IBRD/IDA IBRD/IDA

58

Bibliography

Abramovsky, L., and R. Griffith. 2005. “Outsourcing and Offshoring of Business Services:

How Important is ICT?” IFS Working Papers WP05/22, The Institute for Fiscal

Studies, London.

______. 2009. “ICT, Corporate Restructuring and Productivity.” IFS Working Papers

WP09/10, Institute for Fiscal Studies, London.

Acemoglu, D., and F. Zilibotti. 2001. Productivity Differences. The Quarterly Journal of

Economics 116 (2): 563–606.

Acemoglu, D., P. Aghion, C. Lelarge, J. Van Reenen, and F. Zilibotti. 2007. “Technology,

Information, and the Decentralization of the Firm.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics

122(4): 1759–99.

Aggarwal, R., and M. Esposito. 2001. “Entrepreneurship.” In The Technology Entrepreneur’s

Guidebook. Washington, DC: Technology Partners, Inc.

Aker, J. C. 2008. “Does Digital Divide or Provide?” Working Paper, Bureau for Research and

Economic Analysis of Development, Berkeley, CA.

_____. 2010. “Information from Markets Near and Far: Mobile Phone on Agricultural

Markets in Niger.” American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 2: 46–59.

Akinsanmi, T. 2005. “Encouraging the Effective and Sustainable Use of Information and

Communication Technologies for Promoting Education and Development.” In

Harnessing the Potential of ICT for Education: Proceedings from the Dublin Global Forum of

the United Nations ICT Task Force, ed. B. Bracey and T. Culver. New York: United

Nations.

Akokpari, J. 2003. “NEPAD’s African Peer Review Mechanism: Prospects and Challenges of

Implementation.” OSSREA Newsletter 21 (3).

Al-Jaghoub, S., H. Al-Yaseen, and M. Al-Hourani. 2010. "Evaluation of Awareness and

Acceptability of Using e-Government Services in Developing Countries: the Case of

Jordan." Electronic Journal Information Systems Evaluation Volume 13(1): 1-8.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

59

Alican, F. 2007. "Experts without Expertise: E-Society Projects in Developing Countries –

The Case of Turkey." Information Polity: The International Journal of Government &

Democracy in the Information Age 12(4): 255-63.

Andres, L., D. Cuberes, M. Astou Diouf, and T. Serebrisky. 2007. “Diffusion of the Internet:

A Cross-Country Analysis.” Policy Research Working Paper 4420, Latin America

and the Caribbean Region, Sustainable Development Department, World Bank,

Washington, DC.

Arellano, M., and S. Bond. 1991. “Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo

Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations.” The Review of Economic

Studies 58 (2): 277–97.

Arredondo, M. A., R. Catalàn, J. Montesinos, and S. Monsalve. 2001. “Introducing New

Information and Communication Technologies in Two Rural Schools of Central

Chile: An Ethnographic Approximation.” In Internet and Society in Latin America and

the Caribbean, ed. M. Bonilla and G. Cliche. Penang: IDRC and Southbound.

Arun, S., and T. Arun. 2002. “ICTs, Gender and Development: Women in Software

Production in Kerala.” Journal of International Development 4(1): 39–50.

Asian Development Bank. 2010. "Poverty Reduction Framework: Pillars and Themes of the

Enhanced Poverty Reduction Strategy." Retrieved 20 August, 2010, from

http://www.adb.org/poverty/pillars-themes.asp

Atzeni, G. E., and O. A. Carboni. 2006. “ICT Productivity and Firm Propensity to Innovative

Investment: Evidence from Italian Microdata.” Information Economics and Policy 18

(2): 139–56.

Avgerou, C. 1998. "How Can IT Enable Economic Growth In Developing Countries?"

Information Technology for Development 8(1): 15 - 28.

Aykac, D., R. De Kervenoael, N. Kasap, and E. Eryarsoy. 2009. "An Actor-Network Theory (ANT)

Approach: Analysis of Turkish E-Government Gateway Initiative."

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1362598

Ayo, C., and A.A. Adebiyi. 2008. “A Framework for e-Commerce Implementation: Nigeria a

Case Study.” Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce 13 (2).

http://www.arraydev.com/commerce/jibc/2008-08/Ayo.pdf

BIBLIOGRAPHY

60

Ayo, C., and N. Ota. 2008. “A Framework for e-Commerce Implementation: Nigeria, a Case

Study.” Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce 3(2).

http://www.arraydev.com/commerce/jibc/2008-08/Ayo.pdf

Baggaley, J., T. Belawati, and N. Malik. 2009. “Distance Education in Asia Pacific. “ In Digital

Review of Asia Pacific, 2009–2010, ed. S. Akhtar and P. Arinto. Ottawa: Orbicom and

IDRC. http://www.digital-review.org/themes/48-distance-education.html

Balatchandirane, G. 2007. “IT Clusters in India.” IDE Discussion Paper 85.2007.1, IDE-

JETRO, Chiba, Japan.

http://ir.ide.go.jp/dspace/bitstream/2344/421/3/ARRIDE_Discussion_No.85_bala

tchandirane.pdf

Banerjee, A., S. Cole, E. Duflo and L. Linden. 2005. “Remedying Education: Evidence from

Two Randomized Experiments in India.” NBER Working Paper No. 11904. National

Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., Cambridge, MA.

Barrera-Osorio, F. and L. Linden. 2009. “The Use and Misuse of Computers in Education:

Evidence from a Randomized Experiment in Colombia.” Policy Research Working

Paper Series 4836, World Bank, Washington, DC.

Bartelsman, E., J. Haltiwanger, and S. Scarpetta. 2004. “Microeconomic Evidence of Creative

Destruction in Industrial and Developing Countries.” IZA Discussion Paper 1374,

The Institute for the Study of Labor, Bonn.

_____. 2009. “Cross-Country Differences in Productivity: The Role of Allocation and

Selection.” IZA Discussion Paper 4578, The Institute for the Study of Labor, Bonn.

Basu, S. (2004). "E-government and developing countries: an overview." International

Review of Law, Computers & Technology 18(1): 109-132.

Basu, S., J.G. Fernald, N. Oulton, and S. Srinivasan. 2004. “The Case of the Missing

Productivity Growth, or Does Information Technology Explain Why Productivity

Accelerated in the United States but Not in the United Kingdom?” NBER

Macroeconomics Annual 18: 9–63.

Bayley, D. 1966. "The Effects of Corruption in a Developing Nation." Western Political

Quarterly 19: 719-32.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

61

Bekkers, V., and V. Homburg. 2007. “The Myths of e-Government: Looking Beyond the

Assumptions of a New and Better Government.” The Information Society 23(5): 373–

82.

Bell, R. M., and K. Pavitt. 1993. “Technological Accumulation and Industrial Growth:

Contrasts between Developed and Developing Countries.” Industrial and Corporate

Change 2(1): 157–210.

Bellamy, C., and J. Taylor. 2008. Governing in the Information Age. Buckingham and Bristol:

Open University Press.

Berkman Center for Internet and Society. 2010. Next Generation Connectivity: A Review of

Broadband Internet Transitions and Policy from Around the World. Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University, Beckman Center for Internet and Society.

http://transition.fcc.gov/stage/pdf/Berkman_Center_Broadband_Study_13Oct09.p

df

Bertrand, W. E. 2010. “Higher Education and Technology Transfer: The Effects of

Technosclerosis on Development.” Journal of International Affairs 64(1): 101–19.

Beshouri, Christopher P., and Jon Gravråk. 2010. “Capturing the Promise of Mobile

Banking in Emerging Markets.” McKinsey Quarterly (February).

Best, M., and C. Kenny. 2009. “ICTs, Enterprise and Development.” In Information Technology

for Development, ed. T. Unwin. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.

Best, M., K. Jones, I. Kondo, D. Thakur, E. Wornyo, and C. Yu. 2007. “Post-Conflict

Communications: The Case of Liberia.” Communications of the ACM 50(10): 33–39.

Best, M. L. and R. Kumar 2008. "Sustainability Failures of Rural Telecenters: Challenges

from the Sustainable Access in Rural India (Sari) Project." Information Technologies and

International Development 4(4): 31-45.

Best, M. L., D. Thakur and B. E. Kolko. 2007. “The Contribution of User-Based Subsidies to

the Impact and Sustainability of Telecenters – The Ecenter Project in Kyrgyzstan.”

http://mikeb.inta.gatech.edu/uploads/papers/eCenter.ICTD2009.pdf

Bhatnagar, S. 2002. "Egovernment: Lessons from Implementation in Developing Countries."

Regional Development Dialogue 24: 164-174.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

62

_____. 2003a. "The Economic and Social Impact of E-Government." Background Paper for

UNDESA publication: E-Government— the Citizens and the State: Debating

Governance in The Information Age. World Public Sector Report.

http://www.iimahd.ernet.in/~subhash/pdfs/UNDESAeGovReport.pdf

_____. 2003b. "Transparency and Corruption: Does E-Government Help?" Draft paper for

the compilation of CHRI.

http://www.iimahd.ernet.in/~subhash/pdfs/CHRIDraftPaper2003.pdf

Bhatnagar, S., with J. Tominaga, S. Madon, and D. Bhatia. 2007. “Impact Assessment Study

of Computerized Services Delivery Projects from India and Chile.” IT @ WB Staff

Working Paper 2, World Bank, Washington, DC.

Brabham, D.C. 2008. “Crowdsourcing as a Model for Problem Solving: An Introduction and

Cases.” Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies

14: 75-90

Braimah, I., and R.S. King. 2006. “Reducing the Vulnerability of the Youth in Terms of

Employment in Ghana through the ICT Sector.” International Journal of Education and

Development Using ICT 2(3): 23–32.

Brewer, E., M. Demmer, B. Du, M. Ho, M. Kam, S. Nedevschi, J. Pal, R. Patra, S. Surana,

and K. Fall. 2005. “The Case for Technology in Developing Regions.” Computer 38(6):

25–38.

Brynjolfsson, E., and L.M. Hitt. 1996. “Paradox Lost? Firm-Level Evidence on the Returns to

Information Systems Spending.” Management Science 42 (4): 541–58.

_____. 2000a. “Beyond Computation: Information Technology, Organizational

Transformation and Business Performance.” The Journal of Economic Perspectives 14(4):

23–48.

_____. 2000b. “Computing Productivity: Firm-Level Evidence.” The Review of Economics and

Statistics 85(4): 793–808.

Brynjolfsson, E., A. McAfee, M. Sorell, and F. Zhu. 2007. “Scale without Mass: Business

Process Replication and Industry Dynamics.” Working Paper, Harvard Business

School, Technology and Operations Management Unit, Cambridge, MA.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

63

Bughin, J., M. Chui, and J. Manyika. 2010. “Clouds, Big Data, and Smart Assets: Ten Tech-

enabled Business Trends to Watch.” McKinsey Quarterly (August).

Calderon, C. 2009. “Infrastructure and Growth in Africa.” World Bank Policy Research

Working Paper 4914. World Bank, Washington, DC.

Calderon, C., and L. Serven. 2008. “Infrastructure and Economic Development in Sub-

Saharan Africa.” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4712, World Bank,

Washington, DC.

Camfield, J., A. Kobulsky, and J. Paris. 2007. “A Report Card for One Laptop per Child—

Closing the Digital Divide via ICTs and Education: Successes and Failures.

http://joncamfield.com/essays/Camfield_Report_Card_for_OLPC.pdf

Carrillo, P., M. Onofa and J. Ponce. 2010. “Information Technology and Student

Achievement: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment in Ecuador.” Inter-

American Development Bank, Washington, DC.

Chataway, J., and D. Wield. 2000. “Industrialization, Innovation and Development: What

Does Knowledge Management Change?” Journal of International Development 12(6):

803–24.

Chatfield, A. T. and O. Alhujran. 2009. "A Cross-Country Comparative Analysis of

Egovernment Service Delivery Among Arab Countries." Information Technology for

Development 15(3): 151-170.

Chen, Y., H. Chen, W. Huang, and R.K.H. Ching. 2006. "E-Government Strategies in

Developed and Developing Countries: An Implementation Framework and Case

Study." Journal of Global Information Management 14(1): 23-46.

Chigona, A., W. Chigona, and Z. Davis. 2010. “Motivating Factors: Educators’ Use of ICT in

Schools in Disadvantaged Areas in the Western Cape. “ In Proceedings of the

International Conference on Information Management and Evaluation, ed. Irwin Brown.

Reading, U.K.: Academic Publishing.

Ciborra, C., and D. Navarra. 2005. “Good Governance, Development Theory and Aid Policy:

Risks and Challenges of e-Government in Jordan.” Journal of Information and

Technology for Development 11(2).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

64

Chigona, A., W. Chigona, M. Kausa, and P. Kayongo. 2010. "An Empirical Survey on

Domestication of ICT in Schools in Disadvantaged Communities in South Africa."

International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication

Technology 6(2).

Cohewy, P. F., and J.D. Aronson, with D. Abelson. 2009. Transforming Global Information and

Communication Markets: The Political Economy of Innovation. Cambridge, MA: MIT

Press.

Dada, D. 2006. "The Failure of E-Government in Developing Countries: A Literature

Review." The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries 26(0).

Devadoss, P., S. Pan, and J.C. Huang. 2003. "Structural Analysis of E-Government

Initiatives: A Case Study of SCO." Decision Support Systems 34(3): 253-69.

Diepeveen, S., O. Yaqub, J. Chataway, and T. Ling. 2010. “An Evaluation Framework for

ICTs and Development Outcomes in the Delivery of Services to the Public.” RAND

Corporation.

Diniz, E., M. Pozzebon, and J. Martin. 2008. “Banking Technology to Scale Microfinance: The

Case of Correspondent Banking in Brazil.” ICIS 2008 Proceedings, Paper 144.

http://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2008/144.

Diniz, E., M. Pozzebon, M. Jayo, and E. Araujo. 2008. “The Role of Information and

Communication Technologies (ICT) in Improving Microcredit—The Case of

Correspondent Banking in Brazil.” Journal of Global Information Technology

Management , Special Issue on Information Technology Research in Brazil 12(2).

Dollinger, M.J. 2003. “Entrepreneurship: Strategies and resources.” Upper Saddle River:

Prentice Hall.

Draca, M., R. Sadun, and V.J. Reenen. 2006. “Productivity and ICT: A Review of the

Evidence.” CEP Discussion Paper No. 749, Center for Economic Performance,

London.

Driesen, D. M., and D. Popp. 2010. “Meaningful Technology Transfer for Climate

Disruption.” Journal of International Affairs 64(1): 1-15.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

65

Duncombe, R., and R. Heeks. 2002. “Enterprise across the Digital Divide: Information

Systems and Rural Microenterprise in Botswana.” Journal of International

Development 14 (1): 61–74.

Dymond, A. 2010. “Universal Service: The Trends, Opportunities, and Best Practices for

Universal Access to Broadband Service.” Intelecon, Vancouver.

Etzkowitz, H., N. Gupta, and C. Kemelgor. 2010. “The Gender Revolution in Science and

Technology.” Journal of International Affairs 64(1): 83-99.

Federal Communications Commission. 2010. Connecting America: The National Broadband

Plan. Washington, DC: GPO.

Forestier, E., J. Grace, and C, Kenny. 2002. “Can Information and Communication

Technologies be Pro-poor?” Telecommunications Policy 26(11): 623–46.

Fountain, J. E. 2001. Building the Virtual State: Information Technology And Institutional Change.

Washington, D C: Brookings Institution Press.

Fourati, K. 2009. Half Full or Half Empty? The Contribution of Information and

Communication Technologies to Development. Global Governance 15: 37–42.

Frenzel, J. C., and C. W. Frenzel. 2004. Management of Information Technology. Boston, MA:

Course Technology, PTR.

G8 Gleneagles. 2005. The Gleneagles Communiqué. Gleneagles, G8.

Galperin, H., and J. Mariscal. 2007. “Mobile Opportunities: Poverty and Mobile Telephony

in Latin America and the Caribbean.” Ottawa, DIRSI (Regional Dialogue on the

Information Society), IDRC.

Gasmi, F., A. Maingard, P. Noumba Um, and L . Recuero Virto. 2011. “ Empirical Evidence

on the Impact of Privatization of Fixed-Line Operators on Telecommunications

Performance—Comparing OECD, Latin American, and African Countries. IDEI

Working Paper No. 660. Institut d’Économie Industrielle, Toulouse.

Gething, P., A. Noor, P.W. Gikandi, E. A. A. Ogara, S. I. Hay, M. S. Nixon, R. W. Snow, and

P. M. Atkinson. 2006. “Improving Imperfect Data from Health Management

Information Systems in Africa Using Space-time Geostatistics.” PLos Medicine 3(6):

e271.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

66

Gichoya, D. 2005. "Factors Affecting the Successful Implementation of ICT Projects in

Government." The Electronic Journal of e-Government 3(4): 175-84.

Gigler, B.S. 2004. Including the Excluded- Can ICTs Empower Poor Communities? Towards an

Alternative Evaluation Framework Based on the Capability Approach.

www.citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.103.7002

Goolsbee, A., and P.J. Klenow. 2002. “Evidence on Learning and Network Externalities in

the Diffusion of Home Computers.” Journal of Law and Economics 45(2): 317-43.

Graham, S. 2002. "Bridging Urban Digital Divides? Urban Polarisation and Information and

Communications Technologies (ICTs)." Urban Studies 39(1): 33-56.

Gruber, H. 2001. “Competition and Innovation—The Diffusion of Mobile

Telecommunications in Central and Eastern Europe.” Information Economics and

Policy 13(1): 20-34.

Gruber, H., and F. Verboven, F. 2001. “The Diffusion of Mobile Telecommunications

Services in the European Union.” European Economic Review 45 (3): 577-88.

Gupta, B., and S. Dasgupta. 2008. “Adoption of ICT in a Government Organization in a

Developing Country: An Empirical Study.” The Journal of Strategic Information

Systems 17(2).

Hall, B. H., F. Lotti, and J. Mairesse. 2008. “Employment, Innovation, and Productivity:

Evidence from Italian Microdata.” Industrial and Corporate Change 17 (4): 813-39.

Hari, S. S. 2000. “Ways and Means of Bridging the Gap between Developed and Developing

Countries.” High-Level Panel on Information Technology and Public

Administration, United Nations, New York.

http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/APCITY/UNPAN0146

48.pdf

Heeks, R.B. 2001. "Understanding E-Governance for Development." IGovernment Working

Paper Series No. 11, Institute for Development Policy and Management, University

of Manchester, Manchester, U.K.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

67

_____. 2003. “Most eGovernment-for-Development Projects Fail: How Can Risks be

Reduced?” iGovernment Working Paper 14, Institute for Development Policy and

Management, University of Manchester.

_____. 2003. “Causes of eGovernment Success and Failure: Factor Model IDPM.” Institute

for Development Policy and Management, University of Manchester.

_____. 2005. “e-Government as a Carrier of Context.” Journal of Public Policy 25: 51–74.

Heeks, R., and S. Bhatnagar. 2001. “Understanding Success and Failure in Information Age

Reform.” In Reinventing Government in the Information Age: International Practice in IT-

enabled Public Sector Reform, ed. R. Heeks. London: Routledge.

Hsieh, C. T., and P.J. Klenow. 2010. “Development Accounting.” American Economic Journal:

Macroeconomics 2 (1): 207–23.

Hsieh, C. T., and P.J. Klenow. 2007. “Relative Prices and Relative Prosperity.” The American

Economic Review 97 (3): 562–85.

_____. 2009. “Misallocation and Manufacturing TFP in China and India.” The Quarterly

Journal of Economics 124 (4).

IFC (International Finance Corporation, the World Bank Group). 2007. “IFC Strategic

Directions FY08-10: Creating Opportunity.” IFC, Washington, DC.

IEG (Independent Evaluation Group, the World Bank Group).4 2001. Information

Infrastructure: The World Bank Group's Experience. Washington, DC: World Bank.

_____. 5 2003. Power for Development: A Review of the World Bank Group’s Experience with

Private Participation in the Electricity Sector. Washington, DC: World Bank.

_____. 2008. Using Knowledge to Improve Development Effectiveness: An Evaluation of World

Bank Economic and Sector Work and Technical Assistance, 2000-2005. Washington, DC:

World Bank

_____. 2011a. Assessing IFC's Poverty Focus and Results. Washington, DC: World Bank.

_____. 2011b. World Bank Support to Education Since 2001: A Portfolio Note. Washington, DC:

World Bank.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

68

ITU (International Telecommunication Union). 2009a. Confronting the Crisis—ICT Stimulus

Plans for Economic Growth. Geneva: ITU.

_____. 2009b. Measuring the Information Society. The ICT Development Index. Geneva: ITU.

_____. 2010a. Measuring the Information Society. Geneva: ITU.

_____. 2010b. The World in 2010. Geneva: ITU Market Information and Statistics Division.

_____. 2011. Trends in Telecommunication Reform 2010/11. Geneva: ITU.

Ivatury, G. 2009. “Using Technology to Build Inclusive Financial Systems.” In New

Partnerships for Innovation in Microfinance, ed. I. Matthäus-Maier and J. D. von

Pischke. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.

Jack, W., and T. Suri. 2011. Mobile Money: The Economics of M-Pesa. NBER Working Paper

No. 16721, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., Cambridge, MA.

James, J. 2006. “The Internet and Poverty in Developing Countries: Welfare Economics

versus a Functionings-based Approach.” Futures 38 (3): 337–49.

Jensen, R. 2007. “The Digital Provide: Information (Technology), Market Performance, and

Welfare in the South Indian Fisheries Sector.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics

122(3): 879–924.

Jonas, D. K. (2000). "Building state information highways: Lessons for public and private

sector leaders." Government Information Quarterly 17(1): 43-67.

Jones, M. T. 2010. “Is the Google World a Better Place?” Journal of International Affairs 64(1):

181–93.

Jorgenson, D. W. 2005. “Accounting for Growth in the Information Age.” In Handbook of

Economic Growth, vol. 1. New York and London: North-Holland Elsevier.

Jorgenson, D. W., and K.J. Stiroh. 2000. “Raising the Speed Limit: U.S. Economic Growth in

the Information Age.” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 31(1): 125–236.

Jorgenson, D. W., and K. Vu. 2005. “Information Technology and the World Economy.” The

Scandinavian Journal of Economics 107 (4): 631-50.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

69

Katz, R. L., and J.G. Avila. 2010. “The Impact of Broadband Policy on the Economy.”

Proceedings of the 4thd ACORN-REDECOM Conference, May 14-15. Brasilia.

http://www.acorn-redecom.org/papers/acornredecom2010katz.pdf

Kaufmann, D. 1997. Revisiting Anti-Corruption Strategies: Tilt Towards Incentive-Driven

Approaches? In Corruption and Integrity Improvement Initiatives in Developing

Countries. New York, NY: United Nations.

Kenny, C. 2002. “Should We Try to Bridge the Global Digital Divide?” info 4(3): 4–10.

_____. 2003. “The Internet and Economic Growth in Less-developed Countries: A Case of

Managing Expectations?” Oxford Development Studies 31(1): 99–113.

_____. 2006. Overselling the Web? Development and the Internet. Boulder: Lynne Rienner

Publishers.

Kenny, C., B. Lanvin, and A. Lewin. 2003. “The Access Divide: 1990 to 2000 in World Bank

Global ICT Department.” In “ICT and Development.” World Bank Working Paper

27877, World Bank, Washington, DC.

Kenny, R., and C. Kenny. 2010. “Superfast: Is it Really Worth a Subsidy?” info 13(4).

Khalil, M and E. Olafson. 2009. "Enabling Innovative Entrepreneurship through Business

Incubation." In The Innovation for Development Report 2009-10: Strengthening Innovation

for the Prosperity of Nations. ed. Augusto Lopez-Claros.

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INFORMATIONANDCOMMUNICATIONAN

DTECHNOLOGIES/Resources/ChapterKhalil_Olafsen.pdf

Kim, C.O., Y.K. Kim, and C.B. Yoon. 1992. “Korean Telecommunications Development:

Achievements and Cautionary Lessons.” World Development 20(12): 1829–41.

Klonner, S., and P. Nolen. 2008. “Does ICT Benefit the Poor? Evidence from South Africa.”

http://ifap-is-observatory.ittk.hu/node/583

Kobia, D. 2010. “Open Source Mapping as Liberation Technology.” Journal of International

Affairs 64(1): 195–203.

Kozma, R. B. 2005. “National Policies that Connect ICT-based Education Reform to

Economic and Social Development.” Human Technology 1 (2): 117–56.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

70

_____. 2008. “Comparative Analysis of Policies for ICT in Education.”In International

Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education, Springer

International Handbooks of Education, vol. 20: 1083–96. Berlin and Heidelberg:

Springer-Verlag.

Kraemer, K.L., J. Dedrick and P. Sharma. 2009. “One laptop per child: vision vs. reality.”

Communications of the ACM. 52(6): 66-73

Krishna, S., and G. Walsham. 2005. “Implementing Public Information Systems in

Developing Countries: Learning from a Success Story.” Information Technology for

Development 11(2): 123–40.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/itdj.20007/pdf

Kshetri, N. 2007. “Barriers to e-Commerce and Competitive Business Models in Developing

Countries: A Case Study.” Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 6(4): 443–52.

Kumar, A., A. Nair, A. Parsons, and E. Urdapilleta. 2006. “Expanding Bank Outreach

Through Retail Partnerships: Correspondent Banking in Brazil.” World Bank

Working Paper No. 85, World Bank, Washington, DC.

Kuriyan, R., and I. Ray. 2009. “Outsourcing the State? Public-Private Partnerships and

Information Technologies in India.” World Development 37(10): 1663–73.

Kwapong, O. A. T. F. 2007. "Problems of Policy Formulation and Implementation: The Case

of ICT Use in Rural Women’s Empowerment in Ghana." International Journal of

Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology 3(2): 68-88.

Lau, T. Y., M. Aboulhoson, et al. 2008. "Adoption of E-Government in Three Latin American

Countries: Argentina, Brazil and Mexico." Telecommunications Policy 32(2): 88-100.

Leff, N. 1964. "Economic Development through Bureaucratic Corruption." American

Behavioral Scientist 8: 8-14.

Leye, V. 2009. "Information and Communication Technologies for Development: A Critical

Perspective." Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International

Organizations 15(1): 29-35.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

71

Madon, S. 200). "Evaluating the Developmental Impact of E-governance Initiatives: An

Exploratory Framework." The Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing

Countries 20(5): 1-13.

Mansell, R. 1999. "Information and Communication Technologies for Development:

Assessing the Potential and the Risks." Telecommunications Policy 23(1) 35-50.

Marcelo, A. B. 2009. “Telemedicine in Developing Countries: Perspectives from the

Philippines.” In Telehealth in the Developing World 2009, ed. R. Wooten, N.G. Patil,

R.E. Scott, and K. Ho. Ottawa: IDRC.

Mariscal, J., and H. Galperin. 2007. Digital Poverty: Perspectives from Latin America and the

Caribbean. Ottawa: IDRC.

Martinez, A., V. Villarroel, J. Seoane, and F. Pozo. 2005. “Analysis of Information and

Communication Needs in Rural Primary Health Care in Developing Countries.”

IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine 9(1): 66–72.

Morrison, E., R. Pepper, and E.J. Rueda-Sabater. 2008. “The Emerging Nexus: Now Is the

Time to Plot a Balanced Course that Delivers on the Promise of ICT and Networks.”

In The Global Information Technology Report 2007–2008. Geneva: World Economic

Forum.

Mutula, S. M. 2002. “The Cellular Phone Economy in the SADC Region: Implications for

Libraries.” Online Information Review 26(2): 11–19.

Mutula, S. M., and J. Mostert. 2010. “Challenges and Opportunities of e-Government in

South Africa.” The Electronic Library 28 (1): 38–53.

Nambiar, M. M. 2005. “ICT for Education: The Experience of India.” In Harnessing the

Potential of ICT for Education: A Multistakeholder Approach, ed. B. Bracey and T. Culver.

New York, NY: The United Nations Information and Communications Technologies

Task Force.

Narayan, G., and A. Nerurkar. 2006. “Value-Proposition of e-Governance Services: Bridging

Rural-Urban Digital Divide in Developing Countries.” International Journal of

Education and Development Using ICT 2 (3).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

72

National Audit Office (U.K.). 2006. Delivering Successful IT-Enabled Business Change. London:

The Stationery Office.

Ndou, V. 2004. "E–Government for Developing Countries: Opportunities and Challenges."

The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries 18(1): 1-24.

Nelson, A. 2011. “How mapping, SMS platforms saved lives in Haiti earthquake.” PBS

MediaShift. Blog. Retrieved 2011-03-08 from http://tinyurl.com/6enlkdb

New Zealand Ministry of Economic Development. 2008. Incubator Support Program:

Evaluation Report. Wellington: Ministry of Economic Development.

Norton, Seth W. 1992. “Transactions Costs, Telecommunications, and the Microeconomics

of Macroeconomic Growth.ǁ Economic Development and Cultural Change 41 (1): 175-

196.

Obayelu, A., and I. Ogunlade. 2006. "Analysis of the Uses of Information Communication

Technology (ICT) for Gender Empowerment and Sustainable Poverty Alleviation in

Nigeria." International Journal of Education and Development using Information and

Communication Technology 3: 45-69.

ODI (Overseas Development Institute). 2006. “Governance, Development and Aid

Effectiveness: A Quick Guide to Complex Relationships.” ODI Briefing Paper. ODI,

London.

OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2002. Measuring the

Information Economy. Paris: OECD.

_____. 2003. The Sources of Economic Growth in OECD Countries. Paris: OECD.

_____. 2005. Guide to Measuring the Information Society. Paris: OECD.

_____. 2009a. Guide to Measuring the Information Society. Paris: OECD.

_____. 2009b. ICTs for Development—Improving Policy Coherence. Development Dimension

Series. Paris: OECD.

_____. 2009c. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2009. Paris: OECD.

Okot-Uma, R. and C. London. 2000. "Electronic Governance: Re-Inventing Good

Governance." Commonwealth Secretariat, London.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

73

Osabuhoien, Evans. 2008. “ICT and Nigerian Banks' Reforms: Analysis of Anticipated

Impacts in Selected Banks.” Global Journal of Business Research 2(2): 67–76.

Park, W. 2010. “The Copyright Dilemma: Copyright Systems, Innovation and Economic

Development.” Journal of International Affairs 64(1): 53–67.

Peňa-Lopez, I. 2009. “Measuring Digital Development for Policy-Making: Models, Stages,

Characteristics and Causes.” Ph.D. dissertation, Universitat Oberta de Catlunya.

http://ictlogy.net/works/reports/projects.php?idp=1409

Pepper, R., E.J. Rueda-Sabater, B.C. Boeggeman, and J. Garrity. 2009. “From Mobility to

Ubiquity: Ensuring the Power and Promise of Internet Connectivity... for Anyone,

Anywhere, Anytime.” In The Global Information Technology Report 2008–2009.

Geneva: World Economic Forum.

Pilat, D. 2004. “The ICT Productivity Paradox: Insights from Micro Data.” OECD Economic

Studies No. 38, 2004/1.

Qiang, Z.-W. C. 2009a. “Broadband Infrastructure Investment in Stimulus Packages:

Relevance for Developing Countries.” ICT Sector Unit, World Bank, Washington,

DC.

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTINFORMATIONANDCOMMUNICATION

ANDTECHNOLOGIES/Resources/2828221208273252769/Broadband_Investment_i

n_Stimulus_Packages.pdf

_____. 2009b. “Telecommunications and Economic Growth.” ICT Sector Unit, World Bank,

Washington, DC.

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTINFORMATIONANDCOMMUNICATION

ANDTECHNOLOGIES/Resources/282822-

1208273252769/Broadband_Investment_in_Stimulus_Packages.pdf

Roknuzzaman, M. 2006. "A Survey of Internet Access in a Large Public University in

Bangladesh." International Journal of Education and Development using Information and

Communication Technology 2(3): 86-105.

Raihan, A. 2001. “The State of E-Finance in Developing Countries: Bangladesh Perspective.”

A Paper presented in Expert Group Meeting on Improving Competitiveness of SMEs

BIBLIOGRAPHY

74

in Developing Countries: Role of Finance, including E-finance to Enhance Enterprise

Development, October 22-24, Geneva, Palais des Nations.

Rodriguez, F., and E.J. Wilson. 2000. “Are Poor Countries Losing the Information

Revolution?” University of Maryland, College Park.

Roeller, L. H., and L. Waverman. 2001. “Telecommunications Infrastructure and Economic

Development: A Simultaneous Approach.” American Economic Review. 91(4).

Rouvinen, P. 2004. “Diffusion of Digital Mobile Telephony—Are Developing Countries

Different?” Helsinki: ETLA, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.

_____. 2006. “Diffusion of Digital Mobile Telephony: Are Developing Countries Different?”

Telecommunications Policy 30 (1): 46–63.

Sachs, J., and J. McArthur. 2005. “The Millennium Project: A Plan for Meeting the

Millennium Development Goals.” Lancet 365: 347–53.

http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/documents/LancetwithMcArthurJan222005-

TheMillenniumProject.pdf

Sampat, B. 2010. “Research Locally, Diffuse Globally? American Universities, Patents, and

Global Public Health.” Journal of International Affairs 64(1): 69-81.

Schreyer, P. 2002. “The Contribution of Information and Communication Technology to

Output Growth: A Study of the G7 Countries.” OECD Science, Technology and

Industry Working Papers 2002/2, OECD, Paris.

Sen, A. 199). Development as Freedom. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Seo, H.-J., and Y. S. Lee. 2006. “Contribution of Information and Communication

Technology to Total Factor Productivity and Externalities Effects.” Information

Technology for Development 12 (2): 159–73.

Sey, A., and M. Fellows. 2009. “Literature Review on the Impact of Public Access to

Information and Communication Technologies.” CIS Working Paper 6, University

of Washington, Seattle.

Shane, S. 2008. The Illusions of Entrepreneurship: The Costly Myths that Entrepreneurs, Investors,

and Policy Makers Live By. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

75

Shivute, M., B. Maumbe, and V. Owei. 2008. The Use of Information and Communication

Technology for Health Service Delivery in Namibia. Journal of Telemedicine and

Telecare 14(6): 285-89.

Sridhar, K. S., and V. Sridhar. 2009. “Telecommunications Infrastructure and Economic

Growth: Evidence from Developing Countries.” Applied Economics and International

Development 7(2): 37-56.

Ssewanyana, J. K. 2007. “ICT Access and Poverty in Uganda.” International Journal of

Computing and ICT Research 1(2): 10–19.

Stanforth, C. 2006. "Analysing eGovernment Implementation in Developing Countries

Using ActorNetwork Theory." University of Manchester, U.K.

http://itidjournal.org/itid/article/viewFile/229/99

Steinmueller, E. W. 2001. "ICTs and the Possibilities of Leapfrogging by Developing

Countries." International Labor Review 140: 193-210.

Stiroh, K. J. 2002. “Information Technology and the U.S. Productivity Revival: What Do the

Industry Data Say?” The American Economic Review 92 (5): 1559–76.

Sundén, S., and G. Wicander. 2003. “Bridging the Digital Divide—ICT Solutions Supporting

Economic and Social Development for the Unseen Majority. “ In HumanIT 2003, ed.

J.S. Pettersson. Karlstad University Studies 2003: 26. Karlstad: Karlstad University.

Syverson, C. 2010. “What Determines Productivity?” NBER Working Paper No. 15712,

National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.

Tessa, B., and P. Kurukulasuriya. 2010. “Technologies for Climate Change Adaptation:

Emerging Lessons from Developing Countries Supported by UNDP.” Journal of

International Affairs 64(1): 17–31.

Thadaboina, V. 2009. “ICT and Rural Development: A Study of Warana Wired Village

Project in India.” Transition Studies Review 16(2): 560–70.

Thompson, D. 1999. “James Madison on Cyberdemocracy.” In Democracy.Com? Governance

in a Networked World, ed. E. C. Kamarck and J. Nye. Hollis, NH: Hollis Publishing

Company.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

76

Thorbecke, W. 2009. “An Empirical Analysis of East Asian Computer Exports.” ADB

Institute Working Paper No. 160, Asian Development Bank Institute, Tokyo.

http://www.adbi.org/files/2009.11.06.wp160.analysis.east.asian.computer.exports.

pdf

Tomasi, E., L. A. Facchini, E. Thumé, M.F.S. Maia, and A. Osorio. 2009. “Information

Technology for Primary Health Care in Brazil.” In Telehealth in the Developing World

2009. London and Ottawa: IDRC and Royal Society of Medicine.

Toyama, K. 2010. “Can Technology End Poverty?” Boston Review November/December.

UN (United Nations). 2009. The Millennium Development Goals Report 2009. New York:

United Nations.

UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development). 2009. Information

Economy Report 2009. Geneva: UNCTAD.

_____. 2010. Information Economy Report 2010: ICTs, Enterprises and Poverty Alleviation.

Geneva: UNCTAD.

UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). 2004. ICT Policies and e-Strategies in the

Asia-Pacific: A Critical Assessment of the Way Forward, ed. Phet Sayo, James George

Chacko, and Gopi Pradhan. New Delhi: Elsevier.

Universalia. 2007. Independent Evaluation of the Information for Development (info Dev) Global

Trust Funded Program, Volume 1 Final Report

Unwin, T. 2009a. “Development Agendas and the Place of ICTs.” In ICT4D: Information and

Communication Technology for Development, ed. T. Unwin. Cambridge, Cambridge

University Press: 7-38.

_____. 2009b. ICT4D. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.

Vaccaro, A., and P. Madsen. 2009. “ICT and an NGO: Difficulties in Attempting to Be

Extremely Transparent.” Ethics and Information Technology 11(3): 221–31.

van Ark, B., M. O'Mahony, and M.P. Timmer. 2008. “The Productivity Gap Between Europe

and the United States: Trends and Causes.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 22 (1):

25–44.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

77

Wade, R. 2002. "Bridging the Digital Divide: New Route to Development or New Form of

Dependency?" Global Governance 8(4): 443-67.

Ware, D., E. J. Rueda-Sabater, F. Gil de Bernabe y Varela, J. Garrity, and J. Lighton. 2010.

“ICT and the Sustainable Competitiveness of Cities.” In The Global Information

Technology Report 2009-2010. Geneva: World Economic Forum.

Warschauer, M., and M. Ames. 2010. “Can One Laptop per Child Save the World's Poor?”

Journal of International Affairs 64(1): 33-51.

Waverman, L., M. Meschi, and M. Fuss. 2005. “The Impact of Telecoms on Economic

Growth in Developing Countries.” In Africa: The Impact of Mobile Phones, Vodafone

Policy Paper No. 2. Newbury, Berkshire, U.K.: Vodafone.

Welch, T., and R. Molz. 2002. “How Does Trade Sale Privatization Work? Evidence from the

Fixed-Line Telecommunications Sector in Developing Economies.” FEEM Working

Paper No. 79, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, Milan.

http://www.feem.it/web/activ/_activ.html

William, J., and T. Suri. 2011. “Mobile Money: The Economics of M-Pesa.” NBER Working

Paper No. 16721, NBER, Cambridge, MA.

World Bank. 2002. Information and Communication Technologies: A World Bank Group Strategy.

Washington, DC: World Bank.

_____. 2006. 2006 Information and Communications for Development: Global Trends and Policies.

Washington, DC: World Bank.

_____. 2008. “Impact Study of Computerized Services Delivery Projects in India and Chile.”

S. Bhatnagar. World Bank Report No. 42147, Washington, DC.

_____. 2009a. “Development Policy Lending Retrospective: Flexibility, Customization, and

Results.” OPCS, the World Bank, Washington, DC.

_____. 2009b. Information and Communications for Development for 2009: Extending Reach and

Increasing Impact. Washington, DC: World Bank.

_____. 2009c. “Quality Assessment of the Lending Portfolio.” Quality Assurance Group,

World Bank Group, Washington, DC.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

78

_____. 2010a. Africa's Infrastructure: A Time for Transformation, ed. V. Foster and C. Brceňo-

Garmendia. Washington, DC: Agence Française de Développement and the World

Bank.

_____. 2010b. Kenya at the Tipping Point? Poverty Reduction and Economic Management

Unit, Africa Region. Washington, DC: World Bank.

World Bank Group. 2003. ICT and Development: Enabling the Information Society. Global

Information and Communication Technologies Department. Washington, DC: World

Bank.

_____. 2010. Information & Communication Technologies: 2011 Sector Strategy Approach Paper.

Washington, DC: The World Bank Group.

World Economic Forum. 2009a. The Global Information Technology Report 2008-2009: Mobility

in a Networked World. Geneva: World Economic Forum.

_____. 2009b. ICT for Economic Growth: A Dynamic Ecosystem Driving the Global Recovery.


_____. 2010. The Global Information Technology Report 2009–2010: ICT for Sustainability.


_____. 2011. The Global Information Technology Report 2010–2011: Transformations 2.0. Geneva:

World Economic Forum.

Yildiz, M. (2007). "E-government research: reviewing the literature, limitations and ways

forward." Government Information Quarterly 24(3): 646-665.

4 In 2001 the IEG group responsible for this evaluation was working under an earlier name, and as two separate groups: OED (the Operations Evaluation Department [World Bank]) and OEG (the Operations Evaluation Group [IFC]).

5 In 2003 the IEG group responsible for this evaluation was working under an earlier name, and as three separate groups: OED, OEG, and OEU (the Operations Evaluation Unit [MIGA]).

An Evaluation of World Bank Group Activities in...

Documents

Transcript of An Evaluation of World Bank Group Activities in...