Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Public Disclosure Authorized
Report No. 5361 1-MA
PROJECT PAPER
ON A
PROPOSED ADDITIONAL LOAN
Public Disclosure Authorized IN THE AMOUNT OF EURO 60 MILLION (US$81.5 MILLION EQUIVALENT)
TO THE
CAISSE POUR LE FINANCEMENT ROUTIER WITH THE GUARANTEE OF THE KINGDOM OF MOROCCO
FOR A
SECOND RURAL ROADS PROJECT Public Disclosure Authorized
April 1, 2010
Sustainable Development Maghreb Department Middle East and North Africa Region
This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the Public Disclosure Authorized performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS Exchange Rates Effective: February 28, 201 0 Currency Unit = MAD (Moroccan Dirham) USD 1= MAD 8.24670 MAD 1= USD 0.12126 EURO 1= MAD 11.20438 MAD 1= EURO 0.08925
WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Metric System
FISCAL YEAR January 1 -December 3 1
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AFD Agence Franqaise de Developpement AFESD Arab Fund for Economic and Social Development CFR Caisse pour le Financement Routier CNER Centre National D' Etudes et de Recherches Routieres DPET Provincial Branch of the Directorate of Roads (Direction Provinciale de 1 'Equipement et des Transports) DR Directorate of Roads DRET Regional Branch of the Directorate of Roads (Direction Rdgionale de 1 'Equipernent et des Transports) EIB European Investment Bank ERR Economic rate of return EU European Union GDP Gross domestic product IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and Development JBIC Japan Bank for International Cooperation JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency NW-2 Government's Second National Rural Roads Program OPEC Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries RED Roads Economic Decision Model SWAP Sector-wide approach
Vice President: Shamshad Akhtar Country Director: Mats Karlsson Sector DirectodManager: Laszlo LoveUJonathan Walters Task Team Leader: Abdelmoula Ghzala FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
KINGDOM OF MOROCCO SECOND RURAL ROADS PROJECT-ADDITIONAL LOAN
PROJECT PAPER
CONTENTS
Project Paper Datasheet ...... i A . Introduction ...... 1 B . Background and Rationale for Additional Financing ...... 1 C . Proposed Changes ...... 4 D . Consistency with the Country Assistance Strategy ...... 6 E . Economic Analysis of Cost Overrun or Financing Gap ...... 7 F . Expected Outcomes ...... 8 G . Sustainability ...... 8 H . Benefits and Risks ...... 8 I . Financial Terms and Conditions for the Additional Financing ...... 8
Annex 1 : Revised Results Framework and Monitoring Indicators ...... 9 Annex 2: Program (NRRP-2) and Project Revised Cost Estimates and Financing Plans ...... 11 Annex 3 : Updated Economic Evaluation ...... 15 Annex 4: Country at a Glance ...... 24 Annex 5: MAP (IBRD 34660) ...... 26
This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties . Its contents may not be otherwise disclosed without World Bank authorization .
MOROCCO MA-SECOND RURAL ROADS PROJECT-ADDITIONAL LOAN
Project Paper Datasheet
Team Leader: Abdelmoula M. Ghzala Expected Closing Date: June 30,2014 Environmental category: B Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan Partial Assessment Joint IFC: Joint Level: In ancing) Date: April 1, 2010 Team Leader: Abdelmoula M. Ghzala Country Director: Mats Karlsson Sectors: Roads and highways (1 00%) Sector Managermirector: Jonathan D. Walters Themes: Rural services and infrastructure (1 00%) Project ID: P110833 Environmental category: Partial Assessment Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan Additional Financing Type: Cost Overrun Joint IFC: Joint Level:
Source Local Foreign Total Contributions from communes, provinces and regions 17.00 11.40 28.40 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development 48.90 32.60 81.50 French Agency for Development (AFD) 48.90 32.60 81.50 Total: 114.90 76.60 191.40
:Y 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 4nnual 0.00 20.00 35.00 20.50 6.00 hmulative 0.00 20.00 55.00 75.50 81.50
i Does the project require any exceptions from Bank policies? Re$ Section Appraisal of Project Activities [ ]Yes [XINO Have these been approved by Bank management? [XIYes [ ]No Does the project include any critical risks rated “substantial” or “high”? [ ]Yes [XINO Re$ Section Project Risks and Mitigating Measures
Project development objective Ref: Section Bank Response The objective of the Project is to increase rural populations’ access to all-weather roads in support of the Government Second Rural Roads Program (NRRP-2).
Project description [one-sentence summary of each component] Ref. Section Bank Response The proposed project consists of two components involving the rehabilitatiodupgrading of about 7,800 km of rural roads retained in the Government’s Second Rural Roads National Program (NRRP-2):
0 A - Rural roads financed by the Caisse pour le Financement Routier (CFR): This component will support the rehabilitation or upgrading of about 4,600 km of rural roads (including small, complementary road-related infrastructure) financed by the Caisse pour le Financement Routier (CFR). B - Rural roads financed by the Directorate of Roads (General Budget and Road Fund): This component will support the rehabilitation or upgrading of about 3,200 km of rural roads (including small, complementary road-related infrastructure) financed by the Directorate of Roads through its budget and the Road Fund.
Which safeguard policies are triggered, if any? Ref: Section Appraisal of Project Activities The original Project is Environmental Assessment Category B. Several Safeguard Policies were triggered under the original Project. These include OP 4.01 (environmental assessment), and OP 4.12 (involuntary resettlement). These Safeguard Policies continue to apply to the activities under the Project, to be financed with the additional financing. The activities to be financed with the proposed additional financing will continue to be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the environmental management plan and the resettlement policy framework prepared for the project.
.. 11 A. Introduction
1. This Project Paper seeks the approval of the Executive Directors to provide an additional financing in the amount of €60 million (US$8 1.5 million equivalent) in the form of a loan to the Caisse pour le Financement Routier (CFR or the Borrower) with the guarantee of the Kingdom of Morocco for the Second Rural Roads Project (P094007, Loan 7378-MOR). The Project is an operation supporting implementation of the Government’s second National Rural Roads Program (NRRP-2).
2. The proposed additional financing would permit completion of activities of the Project, which are currently unfinished due to unanticipated increases in the costs of key inputs (oil, bitumen, construction materials, consumables, labor, etc.), and would support a financing gap due to shortfalls in non-World Bank donor finance. In addition, after the launch of the Project the Government has made the decision to accelerate the implementation of the NRRP-2 (completion by 2012 instead of 2015) by concomitantly executing its initially planned two phases to be both completed by 2012 (both phases are therefore merged). This will result in the need to complete the financing plan earlier than anticipated. No changes to the objectives, activities or general design and implementation modalities of the Project are proposed. The additional financing will thus allow the original development objectives of the Project to be achieved.
B. Background and Rationale for Additional Financing
Country and sector context
3. Poverty in Morocco is largely rural; some two-thirds of Moroccans living below the poverty line live in rural areas. To meet the Millennium Development Goals, Morocco will have to address poverty in rural areas. A government priority is to improve access of rural dwellers to basic infrastructure and social services and to reduce the large inequities between provinces in access. To achieve its objectives, the government launched in 2004 the 2020 Rural Development . Strategy. A key element of this strategy is to create rural infrastructure, including rural roads, drinking water, and electricity.
4. The Government’s first National Program of Rural Roads (NPRR-1) was launched in 1995 and finished in 2006. This program rehabilitated over 1 1,000 kilometers of unpaved roads. The results have been impressive, according to evaluations of the program. In villages that gained access to an all-weather road the net enrollment ratio of girls in primary school rose from 28 percent to 68 percent and the price of some staple foods declined by 50 percent.
5. At the start of the NRRP-2, launched in 2005, about 54 percent of Morocco’s rural inhabitants lived within one kilometer of an all-weather road. Access varied substantially between provinces, ranging from 79 percent of the rural population with access in the better served provinces to 23 percent in the worse served ones. Morocco’s road network comprised about 57,347 kilometers of classified roads (national, regional and provincial), 33 percent of which was unpaved. The density of the road network was low, with less than 80 kilometers of
1 roads per 1,000 square kilometers. The unpaved road network was unreliable, with rain and snow leaving many sections out of service for 30 to 60 days a year.
6. The NRRP-2 aims to expand access to an all-weather road to 67 percent of the rural population in 2010 and to 80 percent by the end of the Program in 2012. It will do this by rehabilitating 15,560 kilometers of rural roads. The NRRP-2 relies on a strong participatory process, with regions, provinces and local councils being systematically involved in the selection and funding of projects. It also incorporates a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation system to enable decision-makers to effectively track implementation progress and results and to address challenges as they arise.
7. Funding for road maintenance is currently generated from two sources: the Road Fund, and the general budget. The Road Fund, a treasury special account, is funded through various road user charges, including fuel taxes, vehicle registration fees, and an axle-load tax levied on freight vehicles. The Caisse pour le Financement Routier (CFR) was established in 2004 as a public entity with administrative and financial autonomy (law 57-03) to mobilize finance through borrowing for investment in rural roads, with repayment being made from the Road Fund. The CFR, which is under the Ministry of Equipment and Transport, pools all funds provided by donors and local authorities (regions, provinces, and communes) in support of NRRP-2. It operates under the financial oversight of the Ministry of Finance.
Program and Project description
8. The NRRP-2 consists of 1,058 road subprojects for a total length of 15,560 kilometers. All of the upgraded or rehabilitated roads will: (a) contribute to improving rural access in a cost- effective manner or with satisfactory economic rates of return in the case of roads with higher traffic volumes, (b) have acceptable technical standards including for road safety and village crossings, and (c) be implemented in accordance with the Bank's environmental and social safeguards policies.
9. The total estimated cost of the NRRP-2 in 2006 was US$1.373 billion equivalent (MAD 11.321 billion) covering two phases. The estimated costs of phase 1 and phase 2 were respectively US$688 million equivalent (MAD 5.675 billion) and US$685 million equivalent (MAD 5.646 billion).
10. The Bank-financed Project supporting implementation of the first phase of NRRP-2 was approved by the Board on May 2,2006, and became effective on December 4,2006.
11. The present Project's objective is to increase rural populations' access to all-weather roads in support of the first phase (2005-2010) of the Government's program. However, as indicated in paragraph 2 above, the Government has made the decision to merge the two phases of NRRP-2, the Project's overall objective to be included in the Loan Agreement for the proposed Additional Financing would need to be slightly revised to read as follows: "The objective of the Project is to increase rural populations' access to all-weather roads in support of the Guarantor's Program". This removes the reference to the first phase of the program. The development objectives of the Project would however remain the same. The Project would achieve this revised objective through its two existing components, which used to constitute
2 phase 1 of the Government's program. Component A (financed by the project: Loan No. 7378- MOR), Rural Roads Financed by the Caisse pour le Financement Routier (CFR), supports the rehabilitation or upgrading of about 4,600 kilometers of rural roads (including small, complementary road-related infrastructure), with an initial estimated cost of about US$412.56 million equivalent. This is the only Component which is financed with Loan No. 7378-MOR. Component B, Rural Roads Financed by the General Budget and the Road Fund, supports the rehabilitation or upgrading of about 3,200 kilometers of rural roads (including small, complementary road-related infrastructure), with an initial estimated cost of about US$275.60 million equivalent. The Project's original development objectives, activities, design, and scope have not changed.
Estimated Estimated Length cost cost Components Financing (km) Million Million MAD US$ IBRD, Communes and A. Rural roads financed by CFR 4,600 3,402.28 412.56 other co-financiers B. Rural roads financed by General Budget and 3,200 2,272.77 275,60 General Budget and Road Fund Road Fund IBRD Front End Fee 1.40 0.17 1 7,800 I 5,676.45 I 688.33
Performance of the Bank-financed Project
12. The Project has been consistently rated as satisfactory for both the Project development objective and implementation progress. There are no outstanding or unresolved fiduciary, environmental, social or any safeguard problems. The Borrower (CFR) and the government are committed to the Project, and the Borrower has complied with the covenants specified in the Loan Agreement. The program accounts were audited for fiscal years ending December 31, 2006, December 3 1,2007 and December 3 1,2008. Unqualified reports were issued for all three years.
13. The latest Implementation Status and Results report (ISR) affirms that the Project is likely to achieve its objectives (As of June 2009, 66.9 percent against an objective of 67 percent by 2010) of the rural population had access to an all-weather road). The Bank and the French Development Agency (Agence Franqaise de De'veloppement, AFD) are pooling funds (in support of a sector-wide approach) in the CFR. All IBRD funds are fully committed, and as of February 28, 2010, an amount of about Euros 49.20 million (82 percent) of the funds had been disbursed. The total amount is expected to be fully disbursed by December 2010. Funds of the European Investment Bank are already fully disbursed.
14. Works have been implemented in accordance with the Project's environmental management plan. An environmental monitoring report, submitted to the Bank in April 2007 as well as the regular Bank's supervision missions recorded no significant environmental impacts
3 arising from the activities of the Project. The safety record of the Project is excellent based on monitoring by the CFR and the project management unit.
15. During the preparation of the Project, a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) was prepared in order to address the potential cases of land acquisition. The RPF contains provisions designed to address appropriately cases of appropriation and/or expropriation of private land. Most rehabilitation or upgrading of works carried out under the NRRP2 are expected to take place on reserved rights of way or on existing tracks or roads. Only one case of land expropriation has been reported as initiated (Meknes, RP 7020) in 2008 on an amicable basis (land owners have not sought judicial recourse). However, the delay to resolve this land acquisition case according to all the terms set forth in the RPF prepared for the project has led the Bank and the Borrower to agree to exclude this road from the list of those financed by the World Bank loan. On the basis of the above case, due diligence by the Project Management Unit will be strengthened in order to ensure better compliance with the applicable safeguards policy (O.P. 4.12) and the procedures described in the agreed WF. In particular, the Project Management Unit will be required to strengthen collection of data from provincial departments, monitoring, record keeping and reporting on social safeguards related matters specifically on cases of land acquisition and/or land expropriation to the World Bank in order to respond in a timely basis to all cases of land acquisition that may arise in the course of project implementation. Also, the Bank will strengthen its oversight of environmental and social safeguards through enhanced supervision.
Proposed additional financing
16. The proposed Additional Financing is intended to address unanticipated increases in the costs of key inputs (construction costs and contracts) and activities of the Project for which there is a financing gap (details provided in Table 2 below). The overall costs are nearly 27.5 percent higher than what was estimated at appraisal. The total amount of additional World Bank financing that will be required has been estimated at about US$8 1.5 million equivalent.
17. The proposed Additional Financing will be used: (a) to cover project’s cost overruns; and (b) to finance a funding gap for activities appraised as part of NRRP-2, but for which no other financier has been found. It will also allow acceleration of the implementation of the NW-2so that the program can be completed by 20 12 rather than 20 15 as originally planned. The proposed Additional Financing is assessed as being an appropriate means of addressing the needs that have emerged in implementation. Since the additional resources will finance activities that were appraised as part of the original Project and that are included in the present Component A of the Project as described in paragraph 11 above, there is no need for an appraisal of the activities to be financed with the proposed additional financing.
C. Proposed Changes
18. No changes to the objectives (subject to what is indicated in that respect in paragraph 1 1 above), activities, general design, scope, target indicators or implementation modalities of the Project are proposed.
4 19. The original Project is Environmental Assessment Category B. Several Safeguard Policies were triggered under the original Project. These include OP 4.01 (environmental assessment), and OP 4.12 (involuntary resettlement). These Safeguard Policies continue to apply to the activities under Component A of the Project, to be financed with the additional financing. The activities to be financed with the proposed additional financing will continue to be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the environmental management plan and the resettlement policy framework prepared for the project.
20. The additional financing plan is summarized below in Table 2. The detailed financing plan is presented in annex 2. Table 2: Additional financing plan of the Project (US%million) Additional Financing Plan addressing the Required additional Financing requirtments Component
A. Rural roads financed by CFR B. Rural roads financed by Seneral Budget and Road Fund [BRD Front - End Fee
80.0 189.4 269.4 77.9 28.4 81.5 81.5 100% 28.9% 10.5% 30.3% 30.3%
21. The CFR and the Directorate of Roads (DR) are taking the necessary measures both at the central and local levels to facilitate securing the additional contributions of the Communes (about US$28.4 million equivalent).
22. The closing date of the additional financing will be June 30, 2014.
23. Implementation arrangements. The existing Project’s implementation arrangements will remain in place. The CFR and the Directorate of Roads (DR) will continue to serve as the implementing agencies for the Project, with each agency being responsible for those rural roads it finances. Under a framework agreement, the DR (and its deconcentrated offices) will continue to act as the oversight entity and construction manager for all NRRP-2 rural road subprojects, including those financed by the CFR. With the assistance of its network of regional and provincial offices, the DR has performed satisfactorily in preparing and monitoring execution of NRRP-2’s rural road subprojects. The CFR has administrative and financial responsibility for the rural roads financed under Component A of the Project.
24. FinanciaZ management. The Project will continue to use the financial management arrangements that are already in place. The financial management risk assessment originally conducted in 2006 was updated in the light of the overall financial management performance during the past years. According to Morocco’s 2007 Country Financial Accountability Assessment, the overall risk assessment of the public financial management system in Morocco is low. The entity and project risk is low due to continuing the same activities under the same
5 implementation and management procedures and the satisfactory financial management performance. Thus, the overall financial management risk is assessed as “low.”
25. Procurement. The Project will continue to use the procurement arrangements that are already in place and satisfactorily complied with. The institutional arrangements for procurement are used for all contracts financed by CFR regardless of the source of funding. The CPAR update of September 2008 reconfirmed that the procurement risk as executed by the Administration and public enterprises is low. The DR and its regional and provincial branches (DRE and DPE) have considerable experience with projects financed by the World Bank and other donors. The CFR has competent procurement staff and has developed a satisfactory procurement and contract management capacity. Procurement will be carried out in accordance with the “Consultant Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants by World Bank Borrowers,” published by the Bank in May 2004 and revised in October 2006; and (b) the “Procurement Guidelines: Procurement under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits” published by the Bank in May 2004 and revised in October 2006, as well as (c) “Guidelines On Preventing and Combating Fraud and Corruption in Projects Financed by IBRD Loans and IDA Credits and Grants” known as the ‘2006 Anti-Corruption Guidelines.’ There is no retroactive financing under this loan, nor funding of any contract committed before the date of negotiation of the loan agreement for the proposed additional financing. For all bidding processes launched after the date of negotiations of the Loan Agreement for the proposed Additional Financing, the standard bidding documents will be revised to assure consistency with the Bank Guidelines’ revision dated October 2006 and the Anti-corruption Guidelines. Overall procurement risks are deemed to be low.
26. In order to have the bidding documents acceptable to the Bank, each bidding document and each contract for goods and works to be financed from the proceeds of the Loan for the proposed Additional Financing, the supplier, the contractor and the sub-contractors will permit the Bank, at its request, to examine their records, accounts and documents related to the bid and contract’s execution, and to audit the said records and said accounts and documents by auditors designated by the Bank. The deliberate and material violation of this clause by the supplier, the contractor or sub-contractors could turn out to be an obstructive maneuver.
27. The CFR’s standard bidding documents made consistent with conform Bank Guidelines above mentioned in the paragraph 25 are utilizable for all contracts related to the rural roads included in the NRRP-2 and financed by the CFR under the threshold for National Competitive Bidding (NCB).
28. Procurement Plan. A first Procurement Plan has been established in March 19,2010.
29. Disbursement. The disbursement methods currently in place will continue to be followed for the additional financing activities. The details will be presented in the Disbursement Letter for the proposed Additional Financing.
D. Consistency with the Country Assistance Strategy
30. The Bank’s Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) for Morocco, discussed by the Board on May 8, 2005, had four strategic objectives. These were: (i) to improve competitiveness and the investment climate, (ii) to increase access to basic services by poor and marginalized groups, (iii)
6 to improve the efficiency of the education, and (iv) to improve water management and access to water and sanitation services. The issue of governance cuts across the entire CAS, from the efficiency of service delivery to the rules that govern economic activities. These strategic objectives are in line with the government’s own development objectives, which are to generate sustainable growth capable of energizing the labor market, reducing unemployment, raising the standard of living of citizens, and progressively eliminating poverty and exclusion. The NRRP-2 is a central element of the CAS, addressing its strategic objectives 1 and 2. The Country Partnership Strategy (CPS, FY10-13) for Morocco was presented to the Board on January 26, 2010. The CPS outlines three main axes of support of the Bank’s program (i) growth, competitiveness and employment; (ii) service delivery to citizens and (iii) sustainable development in a changing climate. The additional financing for this project is proposed in the CPS under the Service delivery pillar although the project also supports the objectives of the growth and competitiveness pillar as well.
E. Economic Analysis of Cost Overrun or Financing Gap
3 1. An economic analysis of the project on the basis of the new cost projections indicates that the Project remains economically viable (see Table 3). An overall economic evaluation of the NRRP-2 was done using the roads economic decision (RED) model on the basis of the final list of rural roads to be improved under the program, the road works already executed in phase 1 and the updated cost estimates for phase 2. The NRRP-2 program will improve a total of 15,560 kilometers of roads, of which 9,640 kilometers will be upgraded. The total cost of the program is estimated to be MAD 14.436 billion (US$1.750 billion equivalent), of which 76 percent is committed for upgrading works. On average, the cost of works under the NRRP-2 currently stands at about US$0.07 million per kilometer for rehabilitation and at US$O.13 million per kilometer for upgrading (paved). This represents an increase in unit costs of road works in relation to the 2005 appraisal estimates of 24 percent for upgrading works and 45 percent for rehabilitation works.
32. The evaluation was done for a period of 15 years assuming a discount rate of 12 percent. The evaluation shows that the program has an economic rate of return of 17 percent; with a global net present value of US$357 million (see table 3). Sensitivity analyses were run to assess the impact of increased investment costs and/or lower benefits for road users. The ERR drops to 13 percent when costs increase by 20 percent, and falls to 13 percent if benefits are 20 percent lower than estimated. A combination of the two scenarios results in a marginal economic rate of return of only 10 percent. The switching value analysis shows that for the ERR to be exactly 12 percent; costs would need to increase by 29 percent or benefits to drop by 23 percent. These results indicate a satisfactory economic justification for the NRRP-2.
Table 3: Economic analysis: Current calculations compared with original appraisal estimates I I Current estimates I Original amraisat estimate I 1 Net Benefits (using roads economic decision model) I US$ 357 million I US$ 373 million I I Internal Rate of Return I 17% I 19% I Note: Assuming a discount rate of 12 percent.
7 F. Expected Outcomes
33. The proposed additional financing will permit the Project to realize its original development objectives. The key performance indicators listed below remain the same: The national rural road accessibility indicator (defined as the percentage of the . population living within one kilometer from an all-weather road) increases from 54 percent in 2005 to 67 percent in 2010 and to 80 percent at program completion in 2012. The accessibility differential indicator (a measure devised to quantify the accessibility . gap between the ten provinces with the lowest accessibility and the ten provinces with the highest accessibility) improves from 0.43 in 2001 to 0.60 in 2010 to 0.65 in 2012. Transport service improvement indicator (a measure to assess the impact of improved . rural roads on the quality of intercity transport services for passengers) shows that at least 80 percent of all sample roads that have been open to traffic for two or more years offer an improved quality of service, reflected in higher service frequency, more comfortable vehicles, or lower rates.
G. Sustainability
34. The Borrower and the government have demonstrated their commitment to the Project since the loan Agreement for Loan No. 7378-MOR became effective in December 2006. The Project’s implementers have monitored performance of contractors to ensure that they adhere to all aspects of the contract, including to the Bank’s Safeguard Policies, and have taken corrective action when warranted. The Borrower and the government have also consistently allocated the funds needed to maintain and operate the infrastructure as mentioned in paragraph 7 of this Project Paper.
H. Benefits and Risks
35. Benefits. Two-thirds of the Moroccan poor live in rural areas. The Project will generate significant benefits for this part of the population which represents 44 percent of the total population of the country, and who will enjoy access to cheaper and better quality (more frequent, speedier, and more comfortable) transportation services. This will facilitate access to social and economic services (health, education, and markets). Farmers, in particular, will benefit through quicker and cheaper distribution of agricultural inputs and marketing of products.
36. Risks. There are no new identified risks. Those included in the 2006 appraisal document for the Project have so far been adequately addressed.
I. Financial Terms and Conditions for the Additional Financing
37. Financial terms for this additional IBRD Loan would be a Variable Spread 21-year maturity, including an eleven-year grace period. Payments would occur bi-annually on the same dates as the ones for reimbursement of the original Loan, June 1 and December 1, commencing on June 1,2021 and ending on December 1, 2030.
8 Annex 1: Revised Results Framework and Monitoring Indicators Results Framework PDO Outcome Indicators Use of Outcome Information
(a) Increase accessibility of rural - National Rural Road Accessibility - The government will track population to all-weather roads Index (NRRAI) increase from 54 progress with meeting percent in 2005 to 67 percent in rural infrastructure 2010 (63 percent by the Mid-Term accessibility targets, both Review and 80 percent in 2012 when the NRRAI and the ADI. the NRRP-2 is completed)
(b) Reduce access differentials - Accessibility differential Indicator between provinces (ADI) improved from 0.43 in 2001 to 0.60 in 2010 to 0.65 in 2012
(c) Improve quality of service of - By 201 0, at least 80 percent of roads - Verify impact of road inter-city transport for passengers in the sample will show quality program on improving improvement two years after open to transport service for the traffic. rural populations. Intermediate Results Results Indicators for Each Use of Results Monitoring One per Component Component Zomponent: Eomponent: Component: - Component A - Rural Roads Number of kilometers of roads Assess physical progress financed by the CFR launched under CFR’s road of CFR’s road program program, DR’s road program, and and NRRP-2 in general - Component B Rural Roads - the whole NRRP-2 financed by the General Budget Assess progress with and Road Fund Rural population given road providing road access to accessibility under CFR’s program the rural population and the whole NRRP-2 Sectoral agencies and Performance of NRRP-2’s other stakeholders use it monitoring and evaluation system Assess success of Quality of the dissemination and activity, steer if outreach program. Relevance of necessary. information circulated and No. of target institutions Assess quality of the Manual for rural roads Strengthening of local consulting design and appraisal firms’ capacities and improvement Check compliance with in the quality of detailed studies project covenant Funding for road maintenance Ensure good use of road maintenance funds Overall road network condition
9 pa .Ie 0L c) .I E B Yv) L 2 5 0 f W 2 eL .c)v) I---If 0 B m'?S &J e W 0 2E =oo 3fi,2x xx xx PI- s m *z10
I I I I I I I I 1 I I .-$ jsUP 6 T
n C 0 .I I 3 FA
8 - C P m * N -a d U E M s C .I ma" C iE 5 C m B r .I .- c)4 by Gc)8 G V
2CIm 9z
E
c) EM * 8 a U I? U 5h .;: E- 3 E- rg 8 ;g c) c= IJ c 'S &14 .- a
c [s U 1 42 6:0
*v) 0) 0 n u8 I I c) N\D 3 P d - 9m U 3 xrr) v, 9 f 3 3 d T
L I- 0 0m 0 0 N N Annex 3: Updated Economic Evaluation The Government decided to boost the annual pace of rural road rehabilitatiodupgrading from the current 1,500 kilometers to 2,000 kilometers, thereby achieving the original government’s objective of an 80 percent rural accessibility index by 2012. For the selection of roads to be included in the NRRP-2, the Borrower and the government followed a strong participatory approach involving all local authorities. Following this process, a program of rural roads, describing the nature of works to be undertaken under each operation and a projected implementation calendar, were adopted in 2005, comprising 1,058 road subprojects for a total length of 15,560 kilometers. This program has been revised in 2008 to take into account the road works executed between 2005 and 2008 and, for the economic analysis, has been broken down into two successive phases of four years each. The following update of the economic analysis concerns the entire NRRP-2, based on actual 2005-08 road work costs.
The Second National Rural Roads Program (NRRP-2) The first National Program of Rural Roads (NOR-l), which was launched by the government in 1995 and now completed, aimed at increasing rural road accessibility to 54 percent. Rural population counted as inaccessible are those living in doors (rural settlements) of 50 or more households, living at a distance over one kilometer from an all-weather road. This excludes the much dispersed population for whom providing all-weather, motorized access is unaffordable. While this represents a major leap compared with the start of this program, it is still substantially short of the government’s goal to provide the vast majority of the rural population with reliable road access.
The NRRP-2, which the Project supports, reflects the government’s goal to give priority to improved rural accessibility in its transportation policy. The NRRP-2 is thus intended to expand on efforts undertaken under the NPRR- 1 in terms of increasing the percentage of rural population given access to an all-weather road from 54 percent at the start of the program, to 80 percent when the program is completed in 2012. The current 2008 accessibility index is 64 percent. The figure below presents the evolution of the paved roads length in Morocco.
Beneficiaries. The main beneficiaries of the NRRP-2 and the Project are people living near the roads to be improved. These people, who were isolated, enjoy easier all-weather access to essential social and economic services (health, education, and markets). These roads have a significant impact more specifically in the agricultural sector, by facilitating the distribution and marketing of agricultural products, thereby increasing the sector’s productivity. Services should also benefit from the NRRP-2 since improved roads facilitate the recruitment of teachers and medical personnel, and the acquisition of goods.
Experience under the First National Program of Rural Roads (NPRR-1) has also demonstrated that the rehabilitating and upgrading of rural roads led to significant improvement in both transport services’ quality and competitiveness, and to a large drop in transport fares. A socioeconomic impact study of NPRR-1, done by the Centre National d’Etudes et de Recherches Routiires (CANER) and completed in 2008, evaluated four road sections completed under NPRR-1. The study shows that (a) the average travel speeds before construction were 12 kilometer per hour and after construction 42 kilometer per hour (250 percent increase); (b) the
15 passengers transport costs were before construction around 0.94 MAD/passenger-kilometers on the dry season and 3.59 MAD/passenger-kilometers on the critical wet season and after construction 0.4 1 MAD/passenger-kilometers all year (56 percent decrease in the dry season and 88 percent decrease in the wet season); (c) the freight costs on one road were before construction 32.5 MAD/ton-kilometers and after construction 8.70 MAD/ton-kilometer (73 percent decrease); (d) the vehicle operating costs (fuel, tires and maintenance) were before construction 350 MAD/day and after construction 150 MAD/day (57 percent reduction); and (e) the average cost of commodities (e.g., sugar, butane gas, flour) decreased by 23 percent in the dry season and 36 percent on the wet season.
Finally, the use of labor-intensive techniques, which will be encouraged in the manual for rural roads design and appraisal prepared during the first phase and currently followed, provide rural inhabitants with opportunities for temporary work and training in construction techniques. People who benefit from the training and experience can find employment in other infrastructure projects, thereby fostering overall economic and social development in the country’s rural areas. These benefits are unfortunately difficult to quantify and have not been integrated into the economic analysis of the project.
Methodology used for economic analysis
Two different approaches are commonly used to evaluate the economic feasibility of rural road projects: (a) for low-volume roads (which generally have traffic above 30-50 vehicles per day), a cost-benefit analysis (cost benefit analysis) was chosen, with a calculation of the investment’s economic rate of return(ERR) and net present value (NPV). This approach is justified by the fact that these roads serve not only to improve rural accessibility, but also to complete the road grid in the country; (b) for very low-volume roads (which handle less than 30-50 vehicles per day), a cost-effectiveness analysis was applied. Most of those roads aim at reducing the isolation of rural populations and linking them to basic infrastructures and social and economic services (for example, schools, health centers, village markets, and the like).
Cost-benefit analysis (cost benefit analysis). The cost-benefit analysis was done according to the roads economic decision (RED) model developed by the World Bank for the economic evaluation of investments and maintenance alternatives for low-volume roads. The RED model adopts the consumer’s surplus approach to estimate project benefits that are comprised of road user costs (vehicle operating costs, travel time costs and accident costs) savings, which are estimated using road user costs relationships from the highway development and management model (HDM-4). It is generally agreed that the investments on each road subproject should yield an ERR higher than 12 percent to be considered acceptable.
Cost-effectiveness analysis. A cost-effectiveness analysis of very low-volume roads was done by calculating the total investment cost per beneficiary person. By nature, these roads will serve the country’s most isolated populations and therefore have low populatiodkilometers ratios. Cost-effectiveness analysis incorporate beneficiaries (people living along roads included under the program), and indirect beneficiaries (people living along other roads connected to the project road and who will use the project road to gain access to social centers and economic services). A new global analysis of roads to be improved under NRRP-2 has demonstrated that 2.86 million people would benefit directly and about 760,000 people indirectly from roads under the program,
16 representing a total population of nearly 3.62 million people, including persons living in douars of less than 50 households. Considering only persons living in douars of more than 50 households, at appraisal in 2005, it was estimated that a total population of nearly 2.9 million will benefit from the program. For very low-volume roads, it was agreed with the DR that US$490 per beneficiary is a reasonable maximum cost-effectiveness analysis threshold target for roads in the NRRP-2.
Basic data used in the RED model Maintenance costs. In the context of the study of maintenance strategies for the Moroccan road network, the CANER evaluated annualized maintenance costs for paved and unpaved roads, by traffic range. These costs are summarized in table 1 below. Table 1 - Unit Annualized Maintenance Cost (in MAD/kilometer per yr)
30 < <50 50< Road user costs. Road user costs were estimated in 2005 for five different vehicle types (passenger cars, pick-up trucks or utility vehicles, four-wheel drive vehicles, medium trucks and heavy trucks), based on the vehicle fleet characteristics and unit cost collected by CANER in 2005. Economic road user costs were updated to reflect 2008 costs taking into account the inflation between 2005 and 2008 (1 0 percent), the increase in GDP per capita, in current costs, between 2005 and 2008 (23 percent), and the increase in fuel cost between 2005 and 2008 (12 percent for diesel and 14 percent for gasoline). The 2008 costs are set out in detail in table 2. Table 2 - Vehicle Fleet Characteristics and Economic Unit Costs (2008) Four-wheel Medium Heavy Car Pickup Drive Truck Truck Economic Unit Costs New Vehicle Cost (MADivehicle) 97,713 123,206 250,493 292,320 676,936 Fuel Cost (MADiliter) 3.44 4.78 4.78 4.78 4.78 Lubricant Cost (MADIliter) 12.21 12.21 12.21 12.21 12.21 New Tire Cost (MADitire) 648.24 964.59 1,297.59 2,775.00 5,020.53 Maintenance Labor Cost (MADihor) 88.56 88.56 88.56 88.56 88.56 Crew Cost (MADihour) 0.00 99.63 99.63 45.92 44.28 Value of Passenger Time (MADihour) 12.30 12.30 12.30 0.00 0.00 Interest Rate (%) 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Utilization and Loading Kilometers Driven per Year (kilometer) 15000 35000 20000 60000 70000 Hours Driven per Year (hour) 169 394 230 732 877 Service Life (years) 10 IO 10 12 10 Percent of Time for Private Use (%) 90 0 90 0 0 Gross Vehicle Weight (tons) 1.20 1 SO 1.so 7.50 15.00 Number of Passenger 3 3 3 0 0 17 Vehicle operating costs were then evaluated for different vehicle types and roughness levels, as reflected in table 3. Table 3 - Vehicle Operating Costs Roughness Sensitivity (in MADhehicle-km) 2.85 5.54 Traffic composition. Table 4 below indicates the typical traffic composition by type and traffic range. The annual traffic growth was estimated to be five percent for all vehicles, based on past trends. The overall network traffic utilization has increased from 2003 to 2007 by 5.4 percent per year to reach in 2007 60.41 million vehicle-kilometers (Provincial road traffic increased by 6.7 percent per year). The vehicle fleet has increased from 2003 to 2006 by 4.4 per year. The generated traffic was estimated assuming a price elasticity of demand equal to one. This is a conservative assumption of the generated traffic based on empirical evidence in developing countries. Table 4 - Traffic ComDosition Medium Traffic Range I Car Pickup Four-wheel Drive Truck Heavy Truck (vehicles per day) (YO) (YO) (YO) (YO) (YO) < 30 4 3 2 4 2 30 < Economic analysis of the NRRP-2 An overall economic evaluation of the NRRP-2 was done using the model on the basis of the final list of rural roads to be improved under the program, the roadRED works already executed in phase 1 and the updated cost estimates for phase 2. Table 5 presents the MRRP-2 road works length and financial costs per network type. The NRRP-2 program represents a total length of 15,427 kilometers of roads, of which 9,640 kilometers will be upgraded. The total cost of the program is estimated to be MAD 14,4 17 million, of which 76 percent is committed for upgrading works. On average, the cost of works under the NRRP-2 currently stands at about MAD 0.589 million per kilometers for rehabilitation and at MAD 1.142 million per kilometers for upgrading (paved). This represents an increase in unit costs of road works in relation to the 2005 appraisal estimates in the order of 24 percent for upgrading works and 45 percent for rehabilitation works. 18 National 97 50 147 Regional 113 Provincial 5,;;; ~ 1,506 6,;:; Non Classified 1 5,293 1 1,738 1I 7,03 1 1 Total 11,010 j 3,407 1 14,417 The first phase of the NRRP-2 program represents road works that amount to 39 percent of the total program length and 39 percent of the total program estimated costs, as show on table 6 below. 9,640 I 5,787 I 15,427 I 100% cost I Phase 1 I 4,914 I 706 1 5,620 I 39% (million MAD) Phase 2 1 6,096 I 2,701 1 8,797 1 61% Total I 11,010 I 3,407 1 14,417 I 100% Although the NRRP-2 program represents a total length of 15,427 kilometers of roads, the program’s economic analysis was carried out on a total length of 14,913 kilometers. The remaining 514 kilometers of roads (3 percent) that were not analyzed are located in the southern areas of Morocco and therefore serve nomadic populations that could not be surveyed by DR’s deconcentrated offices. These roads were nevertheless included in the NW-2in the interest of full country-wide road coverage and social cohesion. The economic analysis considered a matrix of representative road classes by traffic range, as shown on table 7 below. (million MAD) 30 < <50 5,484 1,892 7,376 53% so< 1 OO< <250 1,775 ~ 261 2,036 15% >250 ! 546 1 20 I1 565 I1 4% 1 Total 10,692 I 3,154 I 13,845 I 100% 19 Cost-Benefit Analysis. The evaluation was done for a period of 15 years and adopting a discount rate of 12 percent. The evaluation shows that the program has an economic rate of return of 17 percent; with a global net present value of MAD 3,130 million (see table 8). Sensitivity analyses were run to assess the impact of increased investment costs and/or lower benefits for road users. As table 9 below indicates, the ERR drops to 13 percent when costs increase by 20 percent; and falls to 13 percent if benefits are 20 percent lower than estimated. A combination of the two scenarios results in a marginal economic rate of return of only 10 percent. The switching value analysis shows that for the ERR to be exactly 12 percent; costs would need to increase by 29 percent or benefits to drop by 23 percent. These results indicate a satisfactory economic justification for the NRRP-2. osts +20%, Benefits -20% Cost increase for ERR to fall to 12% The evaluation shows that, as expected, very low volume roads, with traffic lower than 30 vehicles per day, yield an ERR less than 12 percent and the roads with high ERR are those that handle a traffic volume higher than 50 vehicles per day, or those on which the current road condition is very poor, thus resulting in the highest benefits for users in connection with the planned rehabilitation or upgrading works (see table 10). Table 10 - NRRP-2 ERR Per Traffic Range TratfSc Range Road Work (vehicles per day) Upgrading Rehabilitation Total < 30 1 Yo 5 YO 30< GO 13% 16% 50< Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. For very low-volume roads, which, as shown in table 10 above, do not meet the economic return criteria (Le,, ERR >12%), a cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out. This analysis covered 2,454 kilometers of roads (16 percent of the total program length) representing a cost of MAD 1,730 million (12 percent of the total program cost). These roads serve a population of 263,208 people (see table 11 below). This analysis shows that 61% of these roads meet the selected criteria in terms of cost-effectiveness (e.g., a per-beneficiary cost below US$490). On the other hand, there are 966 remaining kilometers of roads that do not meet cost-effectiveness criteria. 20 Table 11 - NRRP-2 Program Beneficiary Population Roads with ERR < 12% 2,454 16% 1,730 11% IRoads with ERR < 12%, but pass cost-effectiveness analysis I 1,488 ~ 10%1 9481 6%1 192,822 Roads with ERR < 12%, but fail cost-effectiveness analysis I 966) 6%/ 7821 5%1 70,386 Total NRRP-2 evaluated with RED I 14,9131 10Ooh 15,5761 100%1 3,495,660 Economic Analysis of the second phase of the NRRP-2 The second phase of the NRRP-2 consists of 702 operations totaling 9,456 kilometers of roads for an estimate cost of MAD 8,797 million (Le., 61% of the total cost of the NRRP-2). The economic analysis of the second phase was done with the RED model with identical assumptions to those used for the economic analysis of the whole NRRP-2, namely a period of 15 years, a traffic growth rate of 5 percent, and a discount rate of 12%. Like the overall NRRP-2, the second phase of the program has a very large number of roads (4,8 18 kilometers) that handle traffic from 30 to 50 vehicles per day. As shown in table 12 below, these roads represent a total investment of MAD 4,510 million, of which 68 percent for upgrading works and 32 percent for rehabilitation works. Table 12 - Second Phase NRRP-2 Length < 30 (km) 30< <50 50< Cost-Benefit Analysis. The RED model was used to evaluate projects with traffic data totaling 9,077 kilometers (96 percent of the second phase program). The evaluation shows that the second phase of the NRRP-2 has an overall ERR of 15 percent and a NPV of MAD 8,415 million. Sensitivity tests identical to those done for the NRRP-2 were also conducted (see table 14). They demonstrate the marginal feasibility of the second phase under a 20 percent cost increase scenario or 20 percent lower benefits scenario. The combination of these two scenarios yields an ERR of 9 percent, indicating that an effort should be made to limit any increase in project costs in the future. The switching value analysis shows that for the ERR to be exactly 12 21 percent; costs. would need to increase by 21 percent or benefits to drop by 17 percent. These results indicate a satisfactory economic justification for the second phase of the NRRP-2 I Program Evaluated with RED ] 9,077 8,415 1 1,325 1 15% I Benefits - 20% Roads under the second phase with an ERR exceeding 12 percent represent a total length of 4,868 kilometers and a cost of MAD 4,261 million, or 51 percent of the second phase?s total cost. The ERR for these roads is 21 percent, and the NPV is MAD 1,800 million. As expected, the roads with a high ERR are those that handle a traffic volume higher than 50 vehicles per day. Roads with traffic less than 30 vehicles per day or roads to be upgraded with traffic between 30 and 50 vehicles per day have an ERR below 12 percent (see table 15). Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. For very low-volume roads, which, as shown in table 15 above, do not meet the economic return criteria (Le,, ERR >12%), a cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out. This analysis covered 4,208 kilometers of roads (46 percent of the total program length) representing a cost of MAD 4,153 million (49 percent of the total program cost). These roads serve a population of 859,376 people (see table 16 below). This analysis shows that 53% of these roads meet the selected criteria in terms of cost-effectiveness (e.g., a per-beneficiary cost below qS$490). On the other hand, there are 1,980 remaining kilometers of roads that do not meet cost-effectiveness criteria. These roads are located in rough, mountainous terrain or on poor soils, and therefore present important execution problems that increase costs. In the absence of paving or protective surface treatment, these roads would have little prospect of lasting very long. They are generally located in the most isolated areas, e.g., in mountainous regions such as Azilal and Chefchaouen, and therefore have real impact in terms of rural accessibility and social cohesion within the country. The population benefiting from road built under the first phase of the NRRP-2 is about 2.10 million people. 22 Roads with ERR < 12% 4,208 46% 4,153 49% 859,376 Roads with ERR < 12%, but pass cost-effectiveness analysis I 2,2281 1,8861 22%1 605,2611 Roads with ERR < 12%, but fail cost-effectiveness analysis I 1,9801 22%] 2,2671 27%1 254,116 Total Second Phase NRRP-2 evaluated with RED I 9,0771 100%1 8,4151 loo%/ 2,100,478 23 Annex 4: Country at a Glance Morocco at a glance 12/9/09 M. Elst Lower. POVERTY and SOCIAL & Nom middle- Morocco A+ica income 2008 Populawn, mid-year (m!f/tons) 31 2 325 3 702 Life expectanq GNI pe? capita (Arbs nWM, US$) 2 520 3242 2 078 GNI (A~/Jsmefhod US$ brllmos) 808 1,053 7 692 Avenge annual growth. 200208 I T Populatron (%) 11 19 12 GNI Gross Labor fofce f%J 21 30 16 per primary Most newt estimate {latest wr available, 2002081 capita enrollment Poverty (% of popu/atJon below nallOnal poverty he) Uman populatwn (%of total w!aUon) 55 57 41 Llfe expectancy 51 tHNl [years) 71 70 68 Infant mrtaliW (per 1,ooO /we bnths) 32 32 46 Child malnutnlon p6 of chrldfen under 5) 10 26 Access to improved water source Access to an impmved water source I% of populatfon) 83 88 86 Literacy (96 dpopulanon age j5+) 56 73 83 I Gross pnrnary ehmilment p6 of SchoOfJge populafrcn) 107 106 109 MoroKO Mabe 112 109 112 -L~ill~lemcome WWB Female 102 104 106 KEY ECONOWC RATIOS and LONG-TERM TRENDS 1988 l998 2007 2008 GDP (US$b//lronsJ 222 40 0 75 2 889 capital formtmVGDP 21 0 26 0 32 5 36 3 Gross Trade Exports of goods and seMces/GDP 25 9 24 4 35 7 36 7 Gross domestic sawngslGDP 20 8 223 23 4 228 ~rossnamnai wvlngs/~~~ 23 6 25 6 32 3 302 T current accwnt bJlanceiGDP 21 -04 -01 -5 4 Interest payments‘GDP 44 28 09 08 Total debWGDP 95 1 59 1 27 3 23 4 Total debt service!exports 24 7 23 8 11 6 98 .L Present value of debffGDP 25 4 20 0 Present value of debwexparts 55 1 41 3 tndebtedness 1988-98 199808 2007 2008 2008-12 (~vengeannua! growth) GDP 24 46 27 56 43 GDP per wptta 06 34 15 43 27 Exports of qoods and services 59 75 52 -1 1 17 STRUCTURE Of the ECONOMY 1988 1998 2007 2008 7) (94 of GDPJ Agriculture 177 202 137 146 20 Industry 277 27 3 I5 345 503 IO Manutactunnq 180 173 150 140 services 477 521 590 550 0 03 c 05 DE 07 PB ~mseho~dfinal consumption expenemre 638 610 58 4 60.0 1I General gov’i final umsurnptron expendnure 154 167 18.2 172 -GCF -3W Imports of goods and services 262 28 1 449 502 1 1488-98 199808 2007 2008 (avenge annuili growm) -1 Agriculture -05 36 -204 164 IndUStIy 31 42 66 26 Manutactunnq 31 33 41 21 Swyices 33 51 71 44 Household final consiimplion expenditure 23 39 29 85 General gov’i final consumption expendrture 38 32 43 48 ~rosscapita! formation 21 80 13 1 I4 3 -Exyan, ‘IPlrnOPs Imports of qoods and services 57 80 Note 2008 data are prelimrnafy estimates This table was produced from the oevebpnient Economics LDB database * mediamonds show four key indicators in the country (in bold) compared mm as incomegroup average ~tdata are misslng. me diamond will w incomplete 24 PRICES and GOVERNMENT FINANCE 1988 1948 2007 2008 Domestic prices t% chaw? 1 87 Consumer prices 23 27 20 39 a impricit G5P defl8tor 53 122 39 59 4 Government finan# (70 Of GDP inchides CriWnl yfGntS) i Cumnt revenue 175 243 273 295 "0" Current budget balance -34 79 33 42 Overat sumiu5idefd -104 -25 32 04 TRADE 1988 1998 2007 2008 (USmrll ons) Tobl exports (job) 4002 7 144 15 129 19934 AgnCUtttJre 920 1.627 3265 3632 PrwSphms rock 506 459 743 223.1 lilaRulilCttlreS 1,367 3.932 8480 8.818 Tot31 imports (ctfj 5049 143275 31.894 41 53% Food 509 1,191 3.262 4 11" Fuel and energy 628 922 5,590 3214 Capital goo& 1 OtX 2.567 6.814 9.158 puce 80 175 241 Expoit ndex (eOfN=lOOt 97 impon pice index (2000="00) 95 I00 153 res Term of trade j2OOO= 100) RI 97 114 128 BALANCE et PAYMENTS t988 1998 2007 2508 (USS mtliionsj Exports of qdsand service5 5755 9971 27,268 32792 @T imports of qmds ai@ se~yiccs 5857 11,426 ?A fila 45,638 Resource ba&nce -:01 -1 455 -7 532 -12.846 Net incame -1 037 1034 -305 -752 Net cunent transbrs 1596 2345 7 6b4 8 852 Current accaunt -144 -482b bafanc? 45P 70 FinaRClnQ tt?il'tS (net) -256 391 2 137 3343 Changes tn net reSeNe5 -201 -247 -2057 1478 Memo: Reserves includmq qold {US$ mi'l'cnsl 564 4,649 27.034 28.801 Conwerwm rate (5EC ioc;ri/USSI 92 96 82 78 EXTERNAL DEBT and RESOURCE FLOWS 1488 1998 2007 2008 (LJSSm iioosi TObi debt cutstandrnq and disbursed 21 "I7 23C48 2c.543 20825 iBRD 2533 3388 2,578 2543 t-1631 A IDA 41 29 17 16 Tchi debt sewce 1749 2895 dole 4203 IERD 386 493 399 386 i@A 1 2 I 1 Comwsit on of net reswrce flaws 3 8021 C7ffie~Igrants 108 353 5.33 461 ilflicial creditors 457 -447 821 1,758 Private creditors 188 362 -170 -655 Foreign direct invesmmmt \net rnftow) 85 i2 2.507 2,466 13 24 -64 118 l"*orid Bank prqram ~:o~m~~m~nts 200 144 2m 250 Disbursements 4?5 253 418 242 repayments 2% 2M Pnnclpal $89 2aa Net flow 227 -35 123 -2 3 Jfiaerestpayments 198 207 104 125 Net transfes 29 -242 18 -I48 World LEISprepare4 b) cniintn iinit flgrires $om othef:"lollcf Bannc Tlie Bank Group This tab+? staff ma) diffw pubtished data 129'09 25 Annex 5: MAP (IBRD 34660) 26 MAP SECTION IBRD 34660 14° 12° 10° 8° TANGIER 4° 2° 36° Mediterranean Sea Tétouan AL HOCEIMA NADOR Larache Saïda To Alger CHECHAOUENE MOROCCO Ksar el Kebir Ahfir SECOND RURAL ROADS PROJECT Berkane Ouezzane Aknoul OUJDA Souk el Arbo du Rharb Rhafsai Saka MOTORWAYS (IN SERVICE) O Taourirt . S ebo MOTORWAYS UNDER CONSTRUCTION ur TAOUNATE SIDI Jerada Guercif MEDITERRANEAN ROCADE (UNDER CONSTRUCTION) KENITRA KACEM 34° TAZA Ain Bini a NATIONAL ROADS Sale y u Mathar MEKNES lo Debdou RABAT FES u OTHER CLASSIFIED ROADS o Bou Tiflet M Mohammedia R Sefrou d RIVERS AND WADIS e e ALGERIA 34° g u reg KHEMISSET O ELEVATIONS ABOVE 1,000 METERS CASABLANCA IFRANE SELECTED CITIES AND TOWNS BEN SLIMANE Azrou Rommani Oulmes BOULEMANE PROVINCIAL CAPITALS Azemmour Missour EL JADIDA O Berrechid u NATIONAL CAPITAL e d Jarf Lasfar E Benahmed INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARIES r SETTAT Oued KHENIFRA Rb i Zem Sidi a INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY (APPROXIMATE) Midelt Smail KHOURIBGA Bouârfa Sidi Fkih To Laghouat Bennour Ben El Borouj Salah Kasba-Tadla BENI MELLAL SAFI 32° Youssoufia Boudenib FIGUIG To Bechar Chemaia EL KELAA ERRACHIDIA DES AZILAL 32° SRARHNA Oued Tennsift Goulmima Demnate Tinerhir CHICHAOUA MARRAKECH Erfoud ESSAOUIRA TAHANNAOUT Boumalne Imin Tanout Amizmiz OUARZAZATE Tamanar Argana O Agdz u Tazenakht ed Dr uss aa ATLANTIC OCEAN . So O Zagora AGADIR TAROUDANNT 30° Y R Irhem A D N 30° U TATA O B TIZNIT E Tafraoute A T O X I M AP P R ALGERIA Ifni Ifni Bou Izakran GOULIMINE CANARY Draa ISLANDS 0 25 50 75 100 Miles (Spain) Oued 28° TAN-TAN This map was produced by the Map Design Unit of The World Bank. The boundaries, colors, denominations and any other information 0 25 50 75 100 Kilometers shown on this map do not imply, on the part of The World Bank Group, any judgment on the legal status of any territory, or any endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. 28° 14° Tarfaya 12° 10° 8° 6° 4° 2° MARCH 2006