PROJECT INFORMATION DOCUMENT (PID) APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.: AB4237 Aceh Economic Development Financing Facility Project Name Public Disclosure Authorized Region EAST ASIA AND PACIFIC Sector Private Sector (100%) Project ID P109024 Borrower(s) REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA Ministry of Finance Jl. Lapangan Banteng Timur No 2-4 Indonesia 10710 Tel: +62 (0)21 384-1067 Fax: +62 (0)21 380-8395 Implementing Agency State Ministry for the Development of Disadvantaged Areas (KPDT) and Government of Aceh, Indonesia Public Disclosure Authorized Environment Category [] A [X ] B [ ] C [ ] FI [ ] TBD (to be determined) Date PID Prepared November 5, 2008 Date of Appraisal April 21, 2008 Authorization Date of Board Approval November 30, 2008

Country and Sector Background

1. The devastation of the December 2004 Tsunami coupled with the preceding years of civil unrest contributed to high unemployment and poverty in Aceh. A large share of the Aceh

Public Disclosure Authorized population remains vulnerable with average consumption just above the poverty line, so that a small shock such as the end of the reconstruction effort could send them back into poverty. The Tsunami not only caused tremendous loss of life, but ended the prospects of long term employment for many people. It is estimated that 80,000 small and medium sized enterprises (SME)1, providing employment to 140,000 people were destroyed. The reconstruction has created new job opportunities in some sectors (construction, transport), but these jobs have been closely linked to the availability of reconstruction funds and are not likely to be sustainable in the long run. Annex 1 provides details on country and sectoral issues.

2. The Government of Indonesia (GOI), through the Agency for Rehabilitation and Reconstruction for Aceh and Nias (BRR), and the provincial Government of Aceh (GoA) have committed to building the community of Aceh back to being stronger and better than it was pre- Tsunami. Both have identified economic growth and development as essential elements of

Public Disclosure Authorized recovery from the Tsunami. The GoA, in its Medium Term Development Plan (RPJMD), has identified key factors hampering Aceh’s economic development as weak government

1BAPPENAS, 2005, “Indonesia: Preliminary Damage and Loss Assessment. The December 26, 2004 Natural Disaster”, A Technical Report prepared by BAPPENAS and the International Donor Community.

1 institutions, damaged infrastructure and low investment levels. The RPJMD also identifies key constraints for economic activity for some sectors: in agriculture, availability of land, low productivity, low quality of production and lack of access to inputs and markets are identified as constraints in manufacturing, weak business environment, low quality of production as well as the failure to adopt recent technological changes. Aceh’s economy is dominated by oil and gas production, which accounts for 28 percent of regional GDP (2007) and over 90 percent of the province’s exports. However, the mining and related manufacturing sectors have been declining for several years and known gas reserves are projected to decline to near zero by 2014. This together with current growth trends, concentrated in sectors linked to the availability of large funds for reconstruction reinforces concerns regarding Aceh’s economy beyond 2009.

3. Aceh’s economy contracted in 2004 (pre-Tsunami) by 10 percent and experienced a further 10 percent decline in 2005 (post-Tsunami). The contraction in the economy was the result of the declining mining and related manufacturing sectors, and the impact of the Tsunami, which caused a decline of the manufacturing and agricultural sectors. The economy grew at a modest 1.6 percent in 2006, driven mostly by growth in the services sector, related to the reconstruction effort. In 2007 Aceh’s economy continued to decline, a result primarily of the decline in the oil and gas sectors. Without a significant recovery of the agricultural and manufacturing sectors, Aceh will be facing a structural downturn as the reconstruction effort winds down in 2009. This could have negative implications for employment and poverty alleviation efforts2.

4. The current reconstruction effort, estimated at approximately US$7.7 billion spread over a five years period (2005-2009), is one of the largest such efforts in a developing country. The generosity of donors and the reconstruction program have been lifting Aceh’s economy in the short run. The reconstruction effort commenced in 2005 and by 2006 was the main driver of economic growth. The reconstruction effort has been creating a real construction boom in some parts of the province, but since it has not addressed issues related to the competitiveness of Aceh’s economy and the sustainability of current growth trends, it is not strictly in line with the BAPPENAS Master Plan which foresees the recovery of Aceh’s economy as part of the third phase of the province’s reconstruction. In addition, the large aid influx and initial supply side constraints have contributed to high inflation levels. Inflation reached over 40 percent year-on- year in December 2005. The differential between Aceh and the national inflation level has been declining since then, but in May 2008 inflation in Aceh, at 15.3 percent, was still significantly higher than the national inflation level, at 10.4 percent.

5. In Aceh, investment as a share of GDP was only 7 percent in 2004, well below the levels in the rest of Indonesia or other countries in the region. Investment has increased significantly since then, a result of the massive reconstruction funds being invested in the province, and by 2006 it was worth 14 percent of GDP. This is still significantly lower than investment in the rest of the country. A renewed effort is needed to rehabilitate the agricultural sector to improve job opportunities in the longer term. The pre-conditions for economic recovery are in place. There is better political stability and greater institutional support for economic growth. Knowledge is accumulating as to the realistic possibilities of critical sectors to develop and the framework for a coherent economic growth strategy is coming into place. The next phase in providing assistance to the communities and rural areas in Aceh should expand upon the past successes.

2 World Bank, 2008, “Aceh Poverty Assessment 2008”, Jakarta.

2 6. GoA’s Economic Development Strategy. Recognizing the extent of the devastation, the GOI declared the Tsunami in Aceh a national disaster and formulated a master plan for the reconstruction of Aceh. Challenges to the successful recovery of Aceh were identified, which included socio-economic needs of all sectors, restoration of local institutions and implementation capacity as well as building peace and reconciliation. One of the key principles of this plan was that “reconstruction should not rebuild poverty, but ensure that local economies are robust enough to prevent poverty over the long term”. The GoA through its elected Governor has again become the leader in strategic planning and direction for Aceh. Recently, it released its Medium Term Development Plan and (details on the RPJMD can be found in Annex 1). The GoA has elaborated its strategic framework for economic development based on the Triple-A concept, comprising of an Atlas (compilation of relevant economic data), Agenda (providing the economic development vision and strategies to promote economic development) as well as the Aturan-main, which explains the institutional mechanisms by which this vision and strategies can be implemented. This framework identifies three lead economic sectors for the province (agriculture, trade and services), key because of their contribution to both regional production as well as employment.

Objectives

7. The project will promote post-tsunami economic recovery and foster sustainable equitable long-term economic development in Aceh in line with the GoA’s own plans for economic development (RPJMD). To achieve this, the project will finance sub-projects that contribute toward the following development objectives, identified by the GoA as key for sustainable economic development in Aceh:

(a) Development of job-creating, market-driven enterprises engaged in value-added processing and manufacturing, especially in agriculture and fisheries;

(b) Sustainable improvement of production quality and value in agriculture, fisheries and estate crops that contributes to alleviation of poverty;

(c) Increase in international trade, especially direct exports; and

(d) Increase in domestic and foreign investment in Aceh.

8. These development objectives will be achieved through the following intermediate outcomes: (i) Improving the Business Environment: a better enabling environment for private sector development and investment; (ii) Private Sector Support: support to improving the productivity of the private sector, farmers and fishermen; and (iii) Public Infrastructure: financing of economic infrastructure necessary for business development and job creation. The beneficiaries of sub-projects will be either directly or indirectly the people and communities of Aceh. As a result of the defined beneficiary pool, the proponents of sub-projects will not be individuals. The focus of the project is on sustainable and equitable economic development. The project, while a sizable amount, is very small when measured against the economic development challenges and needs of Aceh and as such will serve as a starting point and demonstration of what can be done in the Aceh province.

3 9. An important aspect of the project will be the building of capacity at BAPPEDA, the Development and Planning Agency of Aceh. BAPPEDA, with the assistance of an international consultant firm, will learn through hands on experience how to evaluate, select and monitor the implementation of sub-projects to support long term economic development. This is particularly important in light of the large amount of resources available to the provincial government and the recent decision to allocate the Special Autonomy Fund on a programmatic basis between the provincial and district governments. The experience gained under the project will better position the GoA to further its economic development agenda from its own resources.

10. The following key performance indicators (KPI) will be used to assess progress toward achieving results in the development outcomes mentioned above:

(a) Number of business constraints that were successfully alleviated in Aceh (b) Employment generated in enterprises supported by the project (c) Number of users of public infrastructure financed by the project (d) Success rate of sub-projects financed by the project

Rationale for Bank Involvement

11. The World Bank will serve as the partner agency. Its extensive involvement in Aceh as well as its broader developmental work in Indonesia and else where in the world provides it with a strong background for the project (Annex 2 provides a list of projects supported by the World Bank Group and other agencies). The World Bank has responded to the GOI request for assistance across areas where the institution possesses comparative advantage, building much on the central directions set out in the Indonesia Country Assistance Strategy FY04-07, namely the emphasis on the role of communities and local governments in shaping their own development objectives, and on the emphasis of the recently approved Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) 2009-12 for Indonesia on relying and strengthening government systems. The CPS also foresees continued World Bank involvement in Aceh and Nias for the duration of the CPS (until 2012) and the need for the MDF to support the transition from post-Tsunami reconstruction towards sustainable economic development in Aceh.

Description

12. The EDFF project, a US$50 million Facility funded by a grant from the MDF, consists of two components-- the first is a financing facility (US$44.5 million) and the second component will facilitate and strengthen the operation of the GoA’s and KPDT project management capacity (US$5.5 million).

Financing

Source: ($m.) Borrower 2.85 Single Purpose Trust Fund 50 Total 52.85

4 Implementation

13. The project will use a management structure supportive of local government participation, capacity building and achieving the maximum benefits from the EDFF. The implementation of the overall project rests with the GoA thru BAPPEDA, which will house the PMU. The PMU will be supported by an international consultant management firm. The individual sub-projects will be implemented by third parties as specified in this document. The overall process of evaluating, selecting and monitoring of selected sub-projects has been designed to minimize unnecessary interference and duplication. Sub-project selection will take place after project approval to ensure transparency and consistency in the selection process. The BAPPEDA will manage the PMU and will play a key role in the selection process of sub- projects through leadership and participation in the Selection Committee. Although BAPPEDA Aceh will be the implementing agency of the EDFF at the provincial level, to ensure EDFF supports the implementation of the GoA strategies related to economic development in the province, it will be key to ensure the support of the relevant Dinas and district governments for activities financed through this project. The EDFF will support provincial level programs for the development of economic clusters; as such the fiscal responsibility for continuing activities financed through EDFF lies with the provincial government. Nonetheless it will be important to ensure the participation of the relevant districts and/ or Dinas in the identification of priorities and the design of subprojects. BAPPEDA Aceh has initiated discussions with the relevant Dinas which will intensify in the initial phases of project implementation. In addition, agencies proposing subprojects for EDFF funding will be required to consult extensively with the relevant Dinas and district governments and to report their consultation efforts in the application.

14. The BAPPENAS, as the GoI’s executing agency, will be responsible for EDFF’s overall planning and evaluation consistent with the grant agreement between the World Bank and the GOI. It will also provide the necessary coordination with the Ministry of Finance (MOF), the KPDT and other central government agencies. The BAPPENAS will be responsible for counterpart financing (government staff honoraria, taxes and other operational expenses) for BAPPENAS and KPDT. The KPDT will be responsible for overall project implementation and budget execution including making an annual budget application to the MOF and establishing a project satker (Satuan Kerja) to be located in BAPPEDA Aceh that will be responsible for overall management of the annual budget (DIPA). The budget application will be allocated in the following manner: (i) payment to the consulting firm assisting BAPPEDA and KPDT, (ii) operating costs of BAPPEDA Aceh and KPDT, (iii) block grant for sub-projects to the GoA. Further allocation of the block grants will not be possible at the time of the preparation of budget document (DIPA) since projects selection (and allocation of funds to sectors and districts) is part of project implementation. Finally, it will be responsible for dealing with withdrawal applications by the SIAs after they have been approved by the PMU.

Sustainability

15. A number of steps in the context of the EDFF are being (and will be) undertaken to promote the sustainability of economic development based upon the private sector and to facilitate the transition of local and provincial governments’ beyond BRR’s mandate. Sub-project applications will be evaluated based upon a number of factors, one of those will be (to the extent appropriate), the likely sustainability of the impact and results of the sub-project as well as its

5 ability to enhance the capacity of those involved in the sub-project as well as those who may later have some role in managing to ensuring continued results of the sub-project. To that effect, the evaluation of subprojects will pay particular attention to the inclusion of the relevant Dinas and/ or District governments in consultations and the design of the subproject as appropriate. To the extent that activities will require the relevant Dinas and/ or District Government to assume responsibilities related to the subproject after completion, this should be clearly reflected and addressed in the application. Project sustainability is further enhanced by the GoA’s commitment to improve it business environment and to help facilitate private sector development and resulting job creation. The EDFF has been under preparation for sometime and, throughout this period, the GoA and the BRR have been very active and committed to EDFF objectives. The project approach permits attention to be paid initially to sub-projects with the greatest likelihood to show immediate results in addition to others that meet the terms and conditions of the facility. Support provided under the project also aims to further support sustainability by establishing a mechanism within the Facility to enhance GoA capacity to oversee similar activities in the future through the use of its own resources. These benefits should continue beyond the end of EDFF.

16. Technical Assistance: The EDFF and some of the sub-projects will include TA components that emphasize hands-on training of those involved (often including beneficiaries) in the sub-project as well as GoA staff. Such TA is an important tool that will contribute to ensuring quality in the economic development sub-projects and should help to prepare local authorities for the post-BRR era. These capacity building efforts will cover a number of aspects of sub-project selection and implementation, including sub-project preparing detailed design and tender documents, safeguards compliance, procurement, sub-project supervision, and other development monitoring tools and anti-corruption measures.

17. Ownership: Steps will be taken to ensure that the GoA and as applicable the local communities in which sub-projects are implemented develop a sense of ownership with respect to the sub-projects financed by the EDFF. The GoA (thru its PMU) will be selecting all sub- projects. All sub-project proposals will be required to show endorsement by the beneficiary communities or districts. The extent to which the agency proposing a subproject has undertaken consultations with the beneficiary communities and the relevant Dinas and/ or District Government and the degree of ownership of the project by these will be key selection criteria.

Lessons Learned from Past Operations in the Country/Sector

18. The project builds upon a large body of research and experience in private sector development and specifically draws upon the World Bank’s broad experience and specific Indonesian experience. A number of lessons have been learned from the review of reconstruction related economic development efforts to date. The project design takes into account the following lessons:

(a) The project reflects lessons learned from analytical work following the Tsunami undertaken by the World Bank. The GoA has large resources at its disposal and it will continue to have resources for the foreseeable future. An inefficient allocation of resources and weak public financial management capacity however, is preventing

6 translating such large resources into better public services or a stronger economy3. Analysis of economic fundamentals has also identified some of the key problems facing Aceh today which this project will try to address.

(b) The need for government commitment and ownership. It has been seen in a number of projects that without government’s real commitment, the project will not maximize the benefit and could fail to be sustainable. The GoA is highly committed to this project and has identified job creation, sustainable economic development and a viable private sector as essential to addressing post Tsunami reconstruction, objectives to be supported by the EDFF. The GoA has also committed to assign a team responsible for the EDFF project.

(c) The need for transparency and a clear communications strategy. Clear and available information about the sub-projects, their successes and failures will help to provide valuable lessons to others in the community and may help to lessen distrust and the suspicion of favoritism. It will also facilitate “managing expectations” of citizens which will be critical as people seek jobs and face uncertain economic times.

(d) The need to balance reconstruction needs. It is critical to design a sub-project selection process that originates with the local government so that investments financed respond to community needs and at the same time provide added capacity to the implementing party if it is the local government. As a result, the EDFF is designed to provide coordination and efficient management of available resources and sub-projects which reflect the overall economic development needs and priorities outlined in the GoA’s own economic development strategy. This will be achieved by requiring that EDFF-financed sub-projects be selected by the GoA based upon established criteria.

(e) The importance of a strong focus on results coupled with achievable realistic milestones has been incorporated in project design.

(f) The need for professional assistance in setting up and operating the PMU has also been incorporated in the EDFF.

(g) Lessons from other projects in the area of economic development being implemented in Aceh. There have been a series of projects focusing on livelihoods and economic recovery in the province. After over 3 years of implementation, these projects offer important lessons of what works and what does not and what are some of the success factors. The next CFAN meeting end of 2008 will focus on lessons learned in the reconstruction effort, including economic development. In addition, BRR will lead an exercise to distill lessons learned by agencies implementing projects in Aceh in the area of livelihoods and economic development and how these can be applied to the design of projects to be financed by EDFF.

(h) The need to ensure that the project will benefit both men and women. The project recognizes that without particular attention being paid to women’s special needs

3 World Bank, 2006, ‘Aceh Public Expenditure Analysis – Spending for Reconstruction and Poverty Reduction’

7 and constraints to increased participation, their ability to benefit from this project as well as to contribute to economic development in the province will be reduced. Therefore the project will take women’s special needs into account, strive to strengthen women’s participation in the economy and consider constraints for their participation. This will include measures for ensuring that gender considerations are addressed and monitored in the design and implementation of subprojects wherever possible. An inception report in the early stages of project implementation will further elaborate on the strategy to take women’s special needs into account in the preparation of subprojects.

Safeguard Policies (including public consultation)

Safeguard Policies Triggered by the Project Yes No Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) [ X] [ ] Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) [ ] [X ] Pest Management (OP 4.09) [ ] [X ] Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) [ ] [X ] Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) [ ] [X ] Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) [ ] [ X] Forests (OP/BP 4.36) [ ] [X ] Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) [ ] [X ] Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60)* [ ] [ X] Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) [ ] [X ]

List of Factual Technical Documents

Number Study/Report Date 1. “Aceh Green – Green Economic Development and Investment Strategy for Aceh 2007 Province, Indonesia”, Concept Paper presented by Governor of Aceh in the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Bali, Indonesia, December 2007 2. Aspinall, Edward,” The Helsinki Agreement: A More Promising Basis for Peace in 2005 Aceh?” Policy Studies n20, East-West Center Washington DC. 3. BAPPENAS, “Indonesia: Preliminary Damage and Loss Assessment. The December 2005 26, 2004 Natural Disaster”, A Technical Report prepared by BAPPENAS and the International Donor Community. 4. Barron, Patrick, Clark, S. and Daud, M., “Conflict and Recovery in Aceh. An 2005 Assessment of Conflict Dynamics and Options for Supporting the Peace Process”, Jakarta: The World Bank and Decentralization Support Facility. 5. Beukering, Pieter J.H. van, Cesar, H.S.J. and Janssen, M.A., “Economic valuation of 2003 the Leuser National Park on Sumatra, Indonesia”. Ecological Economics 44. 6. Blackett, Hugh and Irianto, N, “Forest Resources and Forest Industries in Aceh”. 2007 Report of the FAO Forestry programme for early rehabilitation in Asian Tsunami- affected countries (OSRO/GLO/502/FIN). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 7. BPS, “Analisis dan Penghitungan Tingkat Kemiskinan”, BPS, Jakarta. 2005

* By supporting the proposed project, the Bank does not intend to prejudice the final determination of the parties’ claims on the disputed areas

8 8. BRR and Partners, “Aceh and Nias – Two Years after the Tsunami. 2006 Progress 2006 Report”, Jakarta/Banda Aceh. 9. Budidarsono, Suseno, Wulan, Y.C., Budi, Joshi, L. and Hendratno, S., 2007 (in press), 2007 “Livelihoods and Forest Resources in Aceh and Nias for a Sustainable Forest Resource Management and Economic Progress”. ICRAF Working Paper, Bogor, World Agro forestry Centre, Indonesia. 10. Burke, Adam and Afnan, “Aceh: Reconstruction in a Conflict Environment. Views 2005 from civil society, donors and NGOs”, Indonesian Social Development Paper n8, Jakarta: Decentralization Support Facility. 11. CSIRO, 2008, “Environmental Management for a Sustainable Economic Development 2008 Strategy for Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam”, Policy Note prepared for the World Bank. 12. Czaika, Mathias and Krisztina Kis-Katos, “Civil Conflict and Displacement. Village- 2007 Level Determinants of Forced Migration in Aceh”, HiCN Working Paper No. 32, Households in Conflict Network, Institute of Development Studies, Brighton, UK. 13. Djankov, Simeon, Caralee McLiesh and Rita Ramalho, 2006, “Regulation and 2006 Growth”, Economic Letters, V92, I3, September 2006, pp.395-401 14. Eye on Aceh, “ Aceh: Logging a Conflict Zone”, Banda Aceh 2004 15. Eye on Aceh, “Sebuah Agenda Rakyat? Bantuan Pasca Tsunami di Aceh”, Banda Aceh 2006 16. Fahey, Stephanie, “The Socioeconomic Impact of the Indian Ocean Tsunami”, Presentation, Research Institute for Asia and the Pacific, University of Sydney. 17. Foreign Investment Advisory Service, International Finance Cooperation and The 2005 World Bank, “ Indonesia - Aceh/Nias, Mini Diagnostic Analysis of the Investment Climate” , Banda Aceh 18. Friedman, Jed, “"Measuring Poverty Change in Indonesia, 1984-1999: How Responsive 2005 is Poverty to Growth?" in Spatial Inequality and Development, R. Kanbur and A. Venables (eds.), Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 163-208. 19. GAPERDA ( Aceh Planter Association), “The Pillar for Aceh Expectation for Aceh 2005 Recovery, Presentation at Aceh Chamber of Commerce and Industry”, Banda Aceh 20. Garland, Kip, “Opportunities for Innovation in Economic Development for Banda 2005 Aceh, Indonesia, Final Report. 21. GTZ and Government of Aceh Province, “Aceh Triple A Project, Local Economic 2007 Development” , Banda Aceh 22. GTZ, “ Business Climate Survey, Assessment of the Investment Climate in Aceh Utara 2007 and Lhokseumawe, Final Report, Banda Aceh 23. Indonesia Centre for Agro Socio Economic Research and Development, “ Food and 2005 labor Market Analysis and monitoring System in Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam Province”, Final Report, Indonesia Agriculture Research and Development, Ministry of Agriculture, Jakarta 24. International Finance Cooperation, 2008, “Aceh Investment Climate Policy”, 2008 Presentation, Banda Aceh 25. International Finance Cooperation, “ Marine Fisheries Master Plan for Re-Development 2006 in Aceh, Indonesia”, Prepared for International Finance Cooperation, Private Enterprise Partnership for Aceh and Nias and BRR, International Finance Cooperation, Banda Aceh 26. International Foundation for Electoral Systems, 2007, “2006 Pilkada Elections in Aceh: 2007 An Overview of Pre and Post Election Surveys”, Washington DC 27. Jamassy, Owin, “Qualitative analysis of the impact of political conflict – natural 2007 disaster and the distribution of aid on poverty in Nanggro Aceh Darussalam”, background report prepared for the World Bank, Banda Aceh. Unpublished. 28. Kirkpatrick, Colin and David Parker, 2005, “Towards Better Regulation? Assessing the 2005 Impact of Regulatory Reform in Developing Countries”, Paper prepared for the CRC workshop 22-24 June 2005, University of Manchester, UK 29. Kuru, George, “ FAO Assessment of Timber Demand and Supply for Post Tsunami 2005 Reconstruction in Indonesia”, FAO

9 30. Loayza, Norman and Claudio Raddatz, 2006, “The Composition of Growth Matters for 2006 Poverty Reduction”, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper n4077, December 2006. 31. Mahdi, Saiful, “Where do IDPs Go? Evidence of Social Capital from Aceh Conflict and 2007 Tsunami IDPs”, paper presented at the First International Conference of Aceh and Indian Ocean Studies, organized by the Asia Research Institute in the National University of Singapore and the Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Agency for Aceh and Nias (BRR), Banda Aceh, Indonesia, 24-27 February 2007. 32. McGahey, Stan, “ Tourism Development in Aceh, USAID/A-TARP, Presented to BRR, 2006 Banda Aceh 33. McKeon, Jock, “ Using Data for Ex- Ante Preparedness for Disaster Management, 2007 tracking the 2004 Indian Ocean Earthquake and Tsunami Reconstruction Fund in Indonesia” , PREM, Poverty Reduction Group, The World Bank. 34. Mehlum, Halvor, Moene, K. and Torvik, R., “Institutions and the Resource Course”, 2006 The Economic Journal, v116, i508, pp.1-20, January 2006. 35. Ministry of Environment Republic of Indonesia, “ Rapid Environmental Impact 2005 Assessment, Banda Aceh, Sumatra”, Ministry of Environment Republic of Indonesia 36. Missbach, Antje, “Aceh Homebound?”, in Inside Indonesia No. 90: Special Aceh 2007 Reports. 37. Multi Donor Fund, “Implementing Projects, Achieving Results”, Progress Report III, 2006 December 2006. Banda Aceh 38. Nkusu, Mwanza, “Aid and the Dutch Disease in Low-Income Countries: Informed 2004 Diagnoses for Prudent Prognoses”, International Monetary Fund Working Paper 04/49. 39. Overseas Development Institute, “ODI/UNDP Cash Learning Project – Workshop in 2005 Aceh, Indonesia” by the Humanitarian Policy Group of the Overseas Development Institute, London, UK. 40. Overseas Development Institute, “The Indian Ocean Tsunami: What Are the Economic 2004 Consequences?”, News Release, London 41. Phillips, Michael, Budhiman, Agus, Ackerman, John and Subasinghe, Rohana, 2005 “Aquaculture Assessment”, Presentation, FAO, DGA, NACA in collaboration with Ujung Batee Regional Centre for Brackish water Aquaculture Development, Aceh, Banda Aceh 42. Project, Aceh Partnership for Economic Development (UNDP Planning and 2007 Development Agency, Aceh), “ Cattle and Goat livestock Portrait in Aceh and the Potential to Develop Into Agribusiness Sector in Aceh, Banda Aceh, Unpublished. 43. PT Hatfield Indonesia, “Findings and Recommendations of the Ecological Risk 2007 Assessment Conducted in Aceh Singkil and Aceh Selatan, Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam”. A draft report prepared for the Multi Donor Fund / BRR. 44. PT. Geotrav Bhuana Survey, “ Identifikasi dan Inventarisasi Sumber Daya Perikanan, 2006 Kajian Pengembangan Sumber Daya Pesisir dan Laut Pantai Timur dan Pantai Barat Propinsi Nanggroe Aceh Darusslam Pasca Tsunami”, Bappeda Provinsi Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam, Banda Aceh 45. PT. Geotrav Bhuana Survey,” Kajian Pengembangan Sumber Daya Pesisir Laut pantai 2006 Timur dan Pantai Barat, Provinsi Nanggroe Aceh Darusslam (Pasca Tsunami”, Banda Aceh 46. Roberts, John, “ The Indian Ocean Tsunami: How can the region recover 2005 economically?”, Overseas Development Institute, London 47. Rodriguez, Joanna, “ Financial Services to Rebuild Livelihoods in Aceh”, ILO Aceh, 2005 submitted at Micro Finance Conference, Banda Aceh 48. Ross, Michael, “Resources and Rebellion in Aceh, Indonesia”, in Collier, Paul and 2005 Sambanis, Nicholas (eds.), “Understanding Civil War. Evidence and Analysis”, Volume 2: Europe, Central Asia and other regions, The World Bank. 49. Ross, Michael, ‘The Natural Resources Curse’, in Bannon, Ian and Collier, Paul (eds.), 2003 “Natural Resources and Violent Conflict – Options and Actions”, The World Bank

10

50. Save the Children, “ Livelihoods Assessment, North East Coast, Aceh Province”, Band 2005 Aceh 51. Schulze, Kirsten E., “The Free Aceh Movement (GAM): Anatomy of a Separatist 2004 Organization”, Policy Studies n2, East West Center Washington DC. 52. Sukma, Rizal, 2004, ”Security Operation in Aceh: Goals, Consequences and Lessons”, 2004 Policy Studies n3, East-West Center Washington DC. 53. Summary of FAO, DGA and NACA Workshop, “ Sustainable Aquaculture 2005 Rehabilitation in Aceh “, Banda Aceh 54. Timmer, C. Peter, “How Indonesia connected the Poor to Rapid Economic Growth”, in 2007 World Bank, 2007, “Delivering on the promise of Pro-Poor Growth – Insights and Lessons from Country Experiences”, edited by Timothy Besley and Louise J. Cord. 55. UNDP ERTR Aceh, “ Feasibility of Feedlot Investment in Aceh”, Banda Aceh, 2008 Unpublished 56. UNDP, Construction Boom Survey, UNDP ERTR Aceh, Banda Aceh. Unpublished 2006 57. United Nations Development Programme, “An Assessment of Needs to Build Capacity 2005 to Support Community Recovery”. Banda Aceh, Indonesia 58. United Nations Environment Programme, “Environment and Reconstruction in Aceh: 2007 Two year after Tsunami” , Kenya. 59. World Bank, “ Aceh Poverty Assessment, The Impact of the Conflict, The Tsunami, 2008 and Reconstruction on Poverty in Aceh”, The World Bank Jakarta, 60. World Bank, “ Indonesia Economic and Social Update”, The World Bank, Jakarta 2005 61. World Bank, “ World Bank Response to the Tsunami Disaster”. Washington. D.C. 2005 62. World Bank, “Aceh Economic Update April 2007”, Banda Aceh/ Jakarta: The World 2007 Bank. 63. World Bank, “Aceh Economic Update November 2007”, Banda Aceh/ Jakarta: The 2007 World Bank. 64. World Bank, “Aceh Economic Update April 2008”, Banda Aceh/ Jakarta: The World 2008 Bank 65. World Bank, “Aceh Reconstruction Update” 2008 66. World Bank, “Aceh Flood. Damage and Loss Assessment”, The World Bank. 2007 67. World Bank, “Aceh Public Expenditure Analysis – Spending for Reconstruction and 2006 Poverty Reduction”, Banda Aceh/ Jakarta: The World Bank. 68. World Bank, “Indonesia Public Expenditure Review 2007 – Spending for 2007 Development: Making the Most of Indonesia’s New Opportunities”, Jakarta: The World Bank. 69. World Bank, “Pengelolaan Kinerja Pemerintah Daerah di Aceh”, Banda Aceh/ Jakarta: 2007 The World Bank. 70. World Bank, 2000, “Empirics of the link between growth and poverty”, PREM Notes 2000 Economic Policy n45, October 2000. 71. World Bank/ Kecamatan Development Program, “2006 Village Survey in Aceh: An 2007 Assessment of Village Infrastructure and Social Conditions”, Banda Aceh/Jakarta: The World Bank/KDP. 72. World Bank, 2008, ‘Aceh Economic Prospects – Identification of Priorities and Gaps in 2008 the Government of Aceh’s Sustainable Economic Development Plans and Strategies’, draft report, prepared by Swisscontact. 73. Wu, Treena, 2006, “The Role of Remittances in Crisis. An Aceh Research Study”, HPG 2006 Background Paper, the Humanitarian Policy Group in the Overseas Development Institute, London, UK.

11 Contact point:

Contact: Thomas A. Rose Title: Adviser Tel: (202) 458-0397 Fax: (202) 614-0883 Email: [email protected]

For more information contact:

The InfoShop The World Bank 1818 H Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20433 Telephone: (202) 458-4500 Fax: (202) 522-1500 Email: [email protected] Web: http://www.worldbank.org/infoshop

12