World Bank Engagement at the State Level : The Cases of Brazil, India, Nigeria and Russia
Beginning in the late 1990s, the World Bank significantly expanded its engagement at the state level in Brazil, India, Nigeria, and Russia. This pilot cross-country study reviews the selected cases of World Bank's lending and analytic work at...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Brief |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2012
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2009/09/12815111/world-bank-engagement-state-level-cases-brazil-india-nigeria-russia http://hdl.handle.net/10986/10525 |
| Summary: | Beginning in the late 1990s, the World
Bank significantly expanded its engagement at the state
level in Brazil, India, Nigeria, and Russia. This pilot
cross-country study reviews the selected cases of World
Bank's lending and analytic work at the state level in
those four large federated countries. In each case, state
governments were the Bank's principal development
partners. The study looks at the evolution of the four
country strategies and the Bank's mode of engagement at
the state level, in order to draw lessons from that
experience both for the Bank and for its federal and state
partners. State-level engagement posed several strategic and
operational questions, among them which states to engage,
the scope of engagement, and the modalities of engagement.
The Bank set out its approach to selecting states in country
strategy documents. The findings are worth highlighting.
First, the study confirms the desirability of continued
selective Bank lending in a few states. However, the poverty
impact of those interventions could be enhanced by balancing
states' propensity to reform and the concentration of
poverty within them, giving greater weight to the needs of
poorest states. Second, continued focus on public finance
management as the core area appears sound, irrespective of
whether engagement is confined to this area or serves as an
entry point for broader engagement. And third, there is
considerable scope for greater impact from analytic work,
knowledge transfer, and expanded knowledge sharing not so
much concepts and theories as practical experience of what
works and what does not. |
|---|