NDBP under the PIFF II:
“The Pacific Financing Facility under which this loan has been signed is in accordance with the objectives set out for the Investment Facility in the Cotonou Agreement in particular the focus on private sector development. The development of SMMI businesses is one of the keys to sustained employment growth in such countries, and is crucial to both poverty reduction and the building of stable democratic societies, and enjoys full support of the relevant Pacific Governments.
Financial market liquidity in the Pacific Islands, where it exists, is primarily of a short term nature and the lack of longer term financing precludes many SMMI projects from obtaining suitable funding from local sources. This facility is clearly targeting the SMMI sector and the key value added component is to encourage the development of a large number of SMMI projects in the private sector. It has increased employment across a wide range of sectors and has constituted an important component of long term external funding to the respective banking sectors. It also addresses micro-finance needs by giving the least privileged strata of the population access to appropriate credit facilities.” Source: “Project Progress Report” (of the operation’s contract n° 23209 with the DBS), EIB, 07/01/2009 (p2)
The Fact Sheet A for the operation further mentions as EIB value-added, with exactly the same wording as for the PIFF II:
for EIB financing operations in the region (iii) potentially assist in the development of new financial products under Cotonou.”
2006_EAU
SENEGAL The appraisal authorisation from the EIB only mentions the conformity of the project with the objectives of the Cotonou agreement.
“Fact sheet A: Appraisal Authorisation”, EIB, 2007 p2
The financial report edited by the EIB described the project in the context of the national water reform. The population needs are explicitly described as well as the institutional development of the sector.
The actors who have intervened or will intervene in the water reform are identified by the EIB. The Bank provides a large analysis of these actors (in terms of financial viability, institutional capacities, technical capacities...).
“Rapport financier. Projet: Programme eau Sénégal”, EIB, 2007, p 9
2007_ACPGLOG
SOCREDO At the time when the IF was approved by the EIB, specific environmental projects were not yet defined. However, as regards the project selection process described, the conformity with the development needs should be respected.
With respect to the stakeholder’s point of views, no evidence was found in that respect.
“SOCREDO-ligne de crédit environnement (2007-328)”, EIB, 2007, p8
2009_MICRO
FINANCE_ACP As no country/regions development needs have been identified, the conformity with the development needs can not be assessed. However the documents take into account the stakeholders’ support only in terms of financial support.
Class* Institution Amount, U SD** m %
C - class BMZ 39 9%
IFC 150 36%
KfW 130 31%
EIB 50 12%
Dev. Bank of Austria 26 6%
FMO 20 5%
415 100%
B - class
Total post-Second Close
“Fact sheet B: financing proposal”, EIB, 2009, p 1
I-1.3.4 Final beneficiaries are identified in project documentation
General An EIB staff member mentioned that final beneficiaries are not considered as such in terms of impact in ESIAF:
“Dans le cadre actuel (ex ante) on ne dit rien sur les bénéficiaires finaux. Cela dit toutefois quelque chose sur (i) la qualité des intermédiaires financiers et l’environnement macro-financier, (iii) l’impact spécifique en termes de
développement et (iii) les éventuelles dimensions développement spécifiques1. Mais vu que c’est ex ante, on ne peut dire grand-chose sur l’impact (emplois créés etc.) de façon ex ante. Mais ce n’est pas tant ce qu’on nous demande dans l’IF. Lorsqu’on a fait l’évaluation il y a qqs années (Lomé IV), quand on avait visité un quart des bénéficiaires, on avait dit que ce serait l’unité d’évaluation de la BEI (EV) qui serait chargée de faire ce type de rapport, car mesure ex-post. On le trouvera donc dans le rapport ACP sur les lignes de crédit. »
Source : MN 007
MID-TERM EVALUATION OF THE IF AND EIBOR OPERATIONS IN ACP/OCTS
ADE - EGEVAL II
Final Report September 2010 Annexe 9/Page 30
An EIB staff member considers that Cotonou does not mention that EIB operations themselves should target the poor:
“Lots of emphasis on “targeting the poor in the operations”. I know it is an objective of the Cotonou Agreement. But Cotonou does not mention that EIB operations themselves should target the poor. Targeting the poorest segments of the population is also difficult with instruments supposed to be revolving (vs. grants). That is a tricky exercise.” “It should also be differentiated between the EU and the IF development objectives.” Source: MN 020
2003_BOAD PG IV Final beneficiaries are identified of this loan to a regional bank BOAD, namely:
private sector companies in countries of intervention of the BOAD and operating in the following sectors : industry, agro-business, mining, tourism, transportation, communications, services related to those sectors and health and education2.
Source : « Fact Sheet A : Proposition portant sur l'instruction d'une nouvelle opération » (of the operation), EIB, 26 September 2003 (p1)
2003_Dakar-
Ziguinchor The direct beneficiaries are the Republic of Senegal through its Ministry of Infrastructure, Equipment and Transport.
According to an EIB staff member, the final beneficiaries can be identified through the economic rate of return. The rail and roads are considered as dangerous and their utilization is sometimes impossible. Consequently, the sea link allows the local population to travel more safely and easily between Dakar and Ziguinchor. Furthermore the children take the boat in order to go to school. The trade should also be facilitated.
The PJ reports estimated an economic rate of return at 14%. This includes the savings in vehicle transport costs, savings in road tear and wear and gains in the producer surplus of the boat operator.
Even if the final beneficiaries are suggested by the PJ report, there is no explicit reference to them. No evidence has been found regarding the effective impact on the local population.
Sources : MN017 & « Rapport d’instruction », EIB, 2004, Annex F
2003_MAURITIUS
CONTAINER In all documents prepared by the EIB, the beneficiary is clearly identified. From the EIB’s point of view, the final beneficiary corresponds to the borrower. Regarding the final beneficiaries in terms of development needs, the EIB does not clearly identify them.
« Preliminary Information Note », EIB, 2004
« Fact sheet A : proposal to appraise a new operation », EIB, 2004 « Fact sheet B: financing proposal », EIB, 2004
« Mauritius: Mauritius Container Terminal II Project. Extension of the Mauritius Container Terminal. Cotonou Agreement-Loan from the Bank’s own resources. Ops B Financial report», EIB, 2004
« Appraisal Report – Mauritius Container Terminal II – Mauritius », EIB, 2004 « Note conjointe », EIB, 2004
2003_GILGEL
GIBE The beneficiary in terms of financing is well defined. However, the population targeted by the project is not identified through the EIB’s internal documents. Only the European Community mentions the beneficiary in terms of economic and social development.
2 « Entreprises du secteur privé d’un des pays d’intervention de la BOAD (Union Économique et Monétaire Ouest Africaine : Bénin, Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, Guinée-Bissau, Mali, Niger, Sénégal et Togo) opérant dans les secteurs de l’industrie, de l’agro-industrie, les mines, le tourisme, les transports, les communications et les services liés à ces secteurs ainsi que l’éducation et la santé ».
“Currently, about 15% of Ethiopia’s population lives in areas that are electrified, with only 6% directly connected. The objective of Government under the Universal Electricity Access Program is to increase the 15% figure to 50% over the next 5 to 10 years. It is expected that the provision of electricity for productive purposes and social services will have a significant impact on improving the social and economic well being of the rural population.”
“Ethiopia - Country strategy paper and indicative programme for the period 2008-2013”, European Community, 2007, p 51
2004-WAGP The beneficiaries are the VRA and other electricity companies. The final beneficiaries, their clients, are not explicitly identified in the project documents.
Sources Factsheet A and B, Appraisal Report.
2001_Moma
Titanium For this kind of project the main benefit, beyond that of the promoter, is the economic activity it generates and its spill over on the local populations. These aspects are duly taken into account (e.g. in EIB Appraisal Report Moma Titanium. Luxembourg 27, 2003. PJ/I&S/2003-
259/GCE/MUG/ms. (NB complementary to D24) but no target population is defined in advance of the project implementation that would allow to verify that the anticipated benefits have
effectively materialised for that population.
2004_Lumwana For this kind of project the main benefit, beyond that of the promoter, is the economic activity it generates and its spill over on the local populations. These aspects are duly taken into account in the case of the Lumwana project, both by the EIB(e.g. in EIB. Board of Directors, Lumwana Copper Project. Luxembourg 26 septembre 2006, Document 06/354., section 2.11) and by the promoter in their regular activity reports (cf. Lumwana Mining Company, Monthly Project Report, January 2010)
sections on health safety, environment and human resources) but no target population is defined in advance of the project implementation that would allow to verify that the anticipated benefits have effectively materialised for that population.
2005_ACPGLOB
CA2006 Final beneficiaries (in this case the lower end of SMEs) 2005_EMP
AFRICA FUND II Final beneficiaries (in this case investee companies) are identified in terms of sectors and eligibility only for financing by this financial intermediary. Actual beneficiaries are identified only in project monitoring reports.
2005_ACPGLOB
CA2004 Final individual beneficiaries (in this case the lower end of SMEs) are not identified ex ante, and this is normal for this type of operation
2005_ACPGLOB
CA2006 Final beneficiaries (in this case the lower end of SMEs) 2005_ACPGLOB
ADEMI Final beneficiaries (in this case micro and small enterprises) are not identified ex ante, and this is normal for this type of operation. They are identified in terms of category and eligibility only for financing by this financial intermediary.
Actual beneficiaries are identified only in project monitoring reports.
2006_EAU
SENEGAL The facts sheets established by the EIB identify clearly the final beneficiary of the programme, i.e. Société Nationale des Eaux du Sénégal”. From the EIB’s point of view, the final beneficiary corresponds to the borrower.
Regarding the final beneficiaries in terms of development needs, the EIB does not clearly identify them. Only the expected result in terms of new social connections to drinking water is evaluated in the appraisal authorisation.
“Fact sheet B: financing proposal”, EIB, 2007, p1
“Fact sheet A: Appraisal Authorisation”, EIB, 2007 p1-2
In its financial report, the EIB considers that new water connections allowed by the project will mainly concern the poorest population. However, this is highlighted in the specific context of
MID-TERM EVALUATION OF THE IF AND EIBOR OPERATIONS IN ACP/OCTS
ADE - EGEVAL II
Final Report September 2010 Annexe 9/Page 32
mainly correspond to the poorest population, the revenues growth of SONES could be less than expected.
“Rapport financier. Projet: Programme eau Sénégal”, EIB, 2007, p13
2007_ACPGLOG
SOCREDO The borrower, as the direct beneficiary, is identified in each project documents provided. The identification of other beneficiaries is not stated in the documents.
As the eligible projects are classified by the EIB under the following categories: renewable energies, waste water treatment, wastes collect and treatment, investment allowing a better energy
management, investment allowing pollution reduction. Consequently, the local projects financed are deemed to benefit to all population in French Polynesia as well as the population throughout the entire world.
2008_EDFI Final beneficiaries are identified only ex-post
2009_MICRO
FINANCE_ACP The direct beneficiary is clearly identified by the EIB. As stated, the EIB’s objective through this project is to ensure that microfinance institutions continue to provide financial services to micro-enterprises and low-income economically active people.
“Fact sheet A : Appraisal Autorisation ”, EIB, 2009, p 3