Publications

	Table of Contents
p. 12 of 30 BACK | NEXT Executive Summary I. The Setting II. Key Variables Affecting Project Quality A. The Approval Culture B. Ownership C. Quality of Macro and Sectoral Analyses D. Portfolio Management E. Institutional Capacity Assessment F. Beneficiary Involvement in Preparation and Implementation G. Evaluation of Risks/Sensitivity Analysis H. Clarity and Implementability of Project Design I. Role of the Bank in Project Administration J. Responsibility for Project Quality K. Major Themes in Project Quality Analysis III. Assessment of Current Bank Practices and Areas for Improvement IV. Findings, Recommendations and Action Plan V. Implications and Monitoring Arrangements

Report of the Task Force on Improving Project Quality : II. Key Variables Affecting Project Quality

---

F. Beneficiary Involvement in Preparation and Implementation

32. While projects may be assessed as technically, economically and financially viable ex ante, envisaged project benefits are not likely to be achieved without the active cooperation of project beneficiaries, local agencies, people's organizations and NGOs. This is particularly important in certain sectors such as agriculture and social infrastructure, as well as in PIDCs and other small countries. Thus, beneficiary involvement at all stages of the project cycle becomes a critical determinant of project quality, especially when close involvement of beneficiaries is needed in project implementation and operation, such as for projects in the social sectors and in rural and agricultural development. As is borne out by the Bank's post-evaluation exercises, several of the Bank's projects have had shortcomings in this area owing to (i) lack of a coordinated and clear approach to addressing this issue; (ii) inadequate resources, both staff and consultants, available for this purpose; (iii) project preparation deadlines that exert pressure to cut short initiatives in this area; (iv) lack of expertise to undertake such consultation effectively; and (v) inadequate appreciation of social issues by staff and consultants, who are by profession primarily technical and economics focused.

33. The situation, however, is changing for the better: AGSD has been established with Bankwide accountability to coordinate and promote the addressing of social issues and beneficiary involvement in project preparation and implementation. More staff with social science backgrounds have been recruited. Bank guidelines now require that formal social analysis processes and related beneficiary consultations be incorporated as an integral part of project processing. Consultants implementing Bank-financed feasibility studies are required to link up with local expertise to undertake required beneficiary consultations. In this context, the Task Force considers that AGSD should be given a more proactive role in project preparation.

34. Still, more remains to be done at all phases of the project cycle. Beneficiary consultation at the earlier project stages, such as during project identification and programming, needs to be carried out consistently. Application of the process approach would help. The limited number of experienced, socially oriented consulting firms, both within DMCs and internationally, remains a serious constraint. Appreciation by government agencies of the l significance of this issue and their acquisition of related skills and capacity also need to be addressed systematically, particularly because the final responsibility for project implementation rests with the DMC.

Back E. Institutional Capacity Assessment	Next G. Evaluation of Risks/Sensitivity Analysis