Mongolia Country Program Evaluation FY05-13 : An Independent Evaluation
From 2005 to 2013, a mining boom quickly promoted Mongolia from a low-income to a middle-income country. Although the World Bank Group strategy initially overlooked the challenge of the mining boom, the new country management team that came on boar...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Report |
| Language: | English en_US |
| Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2016
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2016/02/25002402/mongolia-country-program-evaluation-fy05-13-independent-evaluation http://hdl.handle.net/10986/23825 |
| Summary: | From 2005 to 2013, a mining boom quickly
promoted Mongolia from a low-income to a middle-income
country. Although the World Bank Group strategy initially
overlooked the challenge of the mining boom, the new country
management team that came on board in 2005 decided to
prioritize mining issues in a more selective framework. This
involved taking a set of bold steps to support Bank Group
engagement in the extractive industry, including basing for
the first time a senior mining specialist in the field and
conducting an in-depth political economy analysis. Building
on this, the country team was able to design a comprehensive
program of outreach to the government, parliament, and civil
society to build a consensus on the need for efficient and
fiscally sustainable management of earnings from the
revenues derived from the mineral boom. The Independent
Evaluation Group considers the Bank’s performance to be
satisfactory; however, its contribution to outcomes remains
moderately satisfactory. The Bank revised its strategy to
adopt relevant objectives centered on the mining agenda and
designed an overall effective program. The Bank displayed
flexibility and innovation in implementing the program and
built awareness about environmental issues. As to results on
the ground, Bank projects have had a highly satisfactory
impact in improving rural livelihoods and reducing herders’
vulnerability. Looking ahead, the Bank Group would need to:
(i) build demand and capacity for good governance; (ii)
pursue efforts to improve public investment; (iii)
strengthen domestic capacity for policy simulation; (iv)
assist in the strengthening of the banking system; and (v)
support fiscal decentralization. In the interests of
selectivity, the Bank could scale back its support for the
urban sector. |
|---|