Evaluation of EU Support to the Transport Sector in Africa 2005-2013 Final Report Volume 3, Annex 3 June 2016 ______
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Evaluation of EU support to the transport sector in Africa 2005-2013 Final Report Volume 3, annex 3 June 2016 ___________ Evaluation carried out on behalf of the European Commission International Cooperation Evaluation of EU Support to the Transport Sector in Africa 2005-2013 3 and Development EuropeAid Consortium composed of ECDPM, Ecorys, Lattanzio, Mokoro and Particip Leader of the Consortium: Ecorys Framework Contract Lot 1: Multi-country evaluation studies of economic sectors/themes of EC external cooperation Specific Contract N°2013/330827 Evaluation of EU Support to the Transport Sector in Africa 2005 – 2013 This evaluation was commissioned by the Evaluation Unit of the Directorate General for International Cooperation and Development – EuropeAid (European Commission) Evaluation Team John Clifton (Team Leader) Klaus Broersma Max Hennion Basile Keita Mark Watson Project Director: Martin van der Linde Project Manager: Michiel Modijefsky Management assistant: Kim Groenewegen The opinions expressed in this document represent the authors’ points of view, which are not necessarily shared by the European Commission or the authorities of the countries involved. © cover picture rights Evaluation of EU Support to the Transport Sector in Africa 2005-2013 3 This evaluation has been carried out by: ECORYS Nederland B.V. Watermanweg 44 3067 GG Rotterdam P.O. Box 4175 3006 AD Rotterdam The Netherlands T +31 (0)10 453 88 00 F +31 (0)10 453 07 68 E [email protected] Registration no. 24316726 W www.ecorys.nl Evaluation of EU Support to the Transport Sector in Africa 2005-2013 5 Table of Contents Annex 3. Responses to the Judgement Criteria and Indicators per EQ EQ1: Evaluation of EU policies and strategies in response to needs. 11 EQ2: Move from project-based to sector-wide approach 47 EQ3. Transport sector management 81 EQ4. Infrastructure operation and maintenance 153 EQ5. Economic and social development 205 EQ6. Contribution to poverty alleviation 251 EQ7. Regional integration 281 EQ8. Selection, planning and prioritisation of EU support to infrastructure investment 311 EQ9. Support modalities, cooperation frameworks, implementation mechanisms and legal instruments. 329 EQ10. Procedures and resources 351 Evaluation of EU Support to the Transport Sector in Africa 2005-2013 7 List of Acronyms ADF African Development Fund ADM Aid Delivery methods AITF Africa Infrastructure Trust Fund CDC Capacity Development Component (Uganda) CEM Country Economic Memorandum COMESA Common Market for East & Central Africa COA Chart of Accounts CRIS Common RELEX Information System CSP Country Strategy Paper CSO Civil Society Organisation DAC Development Assistance Committee (OECD) DCI Development Co-operation Instrument EAC East African Community EC European Commission ECOWAS Economic Community Of West African States EDF European Development Fund EU European Union HIPC Highly Indebted Poor Countries IFS-RRM Instrument for Stability - Rapid Reaction Mechanism KJAS Kenya Joint Assistance Strategy LAPSSET Lamu Port Southern Sudan-Ethiopia Transport MEDA Euro-Mediterranean Partnership MOFPED Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (Uganda) NSAPVD Non-State Actors and Local Authorities in Development NIF Neighbourhood Investment Facility NIP National Indicative Programme PFM Public Finance Management PEFA Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability RF Road Fund RMI Road Maintenance Initiative RRC Regional Resource Centres RTTP Rural Travel and Transport Programme (Ethiopia) SADC Southern African Development Community SBS Sector Budget Support SPSP Sector Programme Support Project SSATP Sub-Sahara Africa Transport Programme STABEX Stabilisation of export earnings Evaluation of EU Support to the Transport Sector in Africa 2005-2013 9 Annex 3. Responses to the Judgement Criteria and Indicators per EQ EQ1: Evaluation of EU policies and strategies in response to needs. EQ1: To what extent have changing policies and strategies for EU support been responsive to the evolving needs of the transport sector in Africa? JC 1.1. EU policies, strategies and support objectives are responsive to expressed national priorities for the transport sector in African countries There is strong evidence that EU policies (compliant with principles adopted by the European Parliament), strategies and objectives are largely coincident with national sector policies, but this coincidence is not due to reactive adaptation of EU transport sector policies to national policies, rather the reverse process i.e. national policies, whilst reflecting national perceptions of need, were drafted and/or amended to comply with the policies of international donors (EU, WB, Danida, SIDA), in most countries the drafting being undertaken by donor-funded consultants. There appear to have been limitations on the scope of the consultation process at national (and regional levels) including lack of long term vision, politically motivated prioritisation choices and unrealistic commitments all of which have impacted on sector strategies and programming. On the other hand it does not appear that such national and EU policies and priorities were dissonant to any great degree even if the process of achievement of such coincidence was not led by the partner country. That being said the EU analysis of national transport sector problems and needs was generally speaking sound, albeit concentrating on the roads sub-sector. Less convincing is the logic for selection of EU support, usually high value works (for which there was certainly expressed national priority) and technical assistance for which there was less national expressed priority), often with a de facto PMU function, concentrating on the EU projects. A consistently expressed national priority was (and is) for roads as opposed to other land transport modes. Little national attention has been given to other modes except in recent years as bulk transport of mineral extraction product is required for increasingly large investment in extractive industries. Indicator 1.1.1. EU policies, strategies and support objectives reflect the expressed priorities of partner governments as set out in national (sector) development programmes. There has been a consistent convergence of EU and national transport sector policies since the 8th EDF, with increasing development of sector wide approaches and reflection of national policies and priorities as the quality of national poverty reduction and sector strategy documents has improved. However, there is a noticeable tendency for EU policies, strategies and objectives to ‘lead’ government policies which are then formulated and/or amended in compliance with international donor policies e.g. ‘Towards Sustainable Transport Infrastructure: A Sectoral Approach in Practise, 1996’ which was broadly compliant with policy developments of other major sector donors such as WB, clearly identifies shaping of national sector policy frameworks as an activity. Evaluation of EU Support to the Transport Sector in Africa 2005-2013 11 9th EDF The programming guidelines note that where there is a sound ‘up to date’ sector strategy and an agreed MTEF, well integrated with a PRSP (if existing) and fully supported by other donors, EC response strategy should support existing national sector programmes (possibly using budget support). In the case of weak structural strategies, priority objectives of EU support should include: promotion of dialogue; updating sector policy; SWAp; institutional capacity building; PSA, strengthening maintenance management; securing adequate funding; rehabilitation of strategic roads. Almost all West and Central Africa countries, at the beginning of the reference period fell into the second category, particularly Francophone countries where capability of governments for developing sector strategies, MTEF and even PRSP were still very limited, notably by lack of data and also planning administrative culture. National priorities were a shopping list for donors rather than a nationally-owned strategic vision of development, and integration of the transport sector into this vision. EU first contributed in adjusting to national priorities and expressed needs by having them structured in such a way that allows policy dialogue along with the requirements of the community of donors. 10th EDF Programming orientations notes that national development agendas shall be the starting point for the country analysis and preparation of EU country strategy. To the extent possible the response cycle shall be aligned with the partners own strategies, policy analysis and budget cycles. In most West and Central African countries, the 9th EDF transport sector programmes had sector master plans elaborated by consultants, with limited formal capacity development and consultations, even when meetings were organised regionally and with the participation of local stakeholders (administration, NGOs and CSOs). The content of those consultations were systematically deceptive for the EU and its consultants in terms of orientations and information. Participants usually did not commit much time and efforts to a donor-led process, urging rather for physical infrastructures able to relieve the daily endeavour of mobility and accessibility. However, having PRSP and sector strategy ready and adopted by governments (more rarely by parliaments), detailed together with a sector master plan and the related prioritization of investments and regulatory measures, the EDF10 strategies in NIPs were backed by national priorities as required by Paris Declaration