2015
The South-South Experience Exchange Facility
Implementation Progress Report
The South-South Experience Exchange FacilityImplementation Progress Report 2015
This report, covering the calendar year ending December 31, 2015, was prepared by Degi Young (Program Manager), Richard Crabbe, Nuria Perez Tello, Rayco Bejarano Garcia, and Latifah Alsegaf.
AcknowledgmentsThe report benefited from guidance and inputs from Abha Joshi-Ghani, Roby Senderowitsch, and Steffen Soulejman Janus. Peer reviewers were Ellen de Vreede, Seth Ayers, Arathi Sundaravadanan, Kimberly Versak, Peter Schierl, Shobha Kumar, and Carlos Sabatino.
Contributions for the results stories were provided by Harriet Nannyonjo, Taoufiq Bennouna, Fanny Weiner, and Quang Hong Doan.
Bruno Bonansea was the cartographer, Sheldon Lippman was the editor, and Susanne Kasielke was the graphic designer.
Questions and comments regarding this report may be emailed to [email protected].
2 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AFR Sub-Saharan Africa Region
CY Calendar Year
DGEP Dirección General de Empresas Públicas
EAP East Asia and the Pacific Region
ECA Europe and Central Asia Region
LCR Latin America and the Caribbean Region
MNA Middle East and North Africa Region
SAR South Asia Region
South-SouthFacility South-South Experience Exchange Facility
3CONTENTS
CONTENTS
AbbreviationsandAcronyms 2
WelcomeMessage 4
Overview 6
South-SouthFacilityataGlance 7
Map:South-SouthFacilityKnowledgeExchanges 8
I.ImplementationProgress 9A. Overall Grant Status 10B. Approved Grants 10C. Portfolio Status 13D. Contributions 13
II.2016ClientSurvey 14A. Results 16B. Lessons and Client Responses from South-South Exchange 17
III.South-SouthFacilityGrantsinAction 19A. Protecting Morocco’s Coastline 20B. Strengthening Service Delivery by State-Owned Enterprises in Paraguay 22C. Promoting Provincial-led Growth in Vietnam 24D. Developing Education Leaders in Jamaica 26
Annexes 29Annex 1: South-South Facility Grants Approved in 2015 29Annex 2: South-South Facility Grants under Implementation as of December 31, 2015 32Annex 3: South-South Facility Grants Completed in 2015 35Annex 4: Countries Providing and Receiving Knowledge in the South-South Facility 38
4 WELCOME MESSAGE
WelcomeMessage
In 2014, a South-South Facility-funded exchange was arranged between Honduras and Colombia. Honduras recognized an opportunity to learn from Colombia how to mainstream the incorporation of disaster risk information into land use planning at the local level and environmental management at the watershed level. Eighty-seven percent of the ex-change participants reported increased knowledge on specific methodologies of how to incorporate di-saster risk management into their plans. As a result, an action plan was developed.
One year after the exchange, as part of the 2016 South-South Facility survey, one of the participants said, “These exchanges are very important as a mechanism for (1) strengthening institutional capac-ity, (2) creating means for comparing progress in different issues between countries, (3) sharing expe-riences to solve similar problems, and (4) creating strategic alliances.”
In the 2016 South-South Facility Experience Ex-change Facility (South-South Facility) survey, 93 per-cent of participants involved in a South-South knowl-edge exchange indicated that the exchange helped to achieve their stated objectives primarily by finding solutions to their problem. The Honduras-Colombia exchange is just one illustration of the strong links and powerful results of such an exchange funded by the South-South Facility.
Honduras ranks among countries worldwide most affected by climate change and disasters triggered by natural events. Over the past 30 years, more than 15,000 Honduran citizens were killed and more than four million were affected by disasters. The country’s economic damage amounted to US$4.5 billion. The expected average loss from future disasters is almost 30 percent of capital/investment costs. The high vulnerability to natural hazards has hindered efforts by the Government of Honduras to reduce poverty and sustain economic growth
5WELCOME MESSAGE
It is an honor for me to be part of this journey of eradicating poverty and boosting shared prosperity through knowledge sharing and I would like to ex-press my sincere gratitude to you, our South-South Facility partners, for your continued support in this critical work.
SANJAY PRADHAN Vice President, Leadership, Learning and Innovation
Chairman, South-South Facility Oversight Committee
This 2015 Implementation Progress Report is a testa-ment to the successful performance of the South-South Facility. There has been grant funding awarded to 215 knowledge exchanges, and the 196 com-pleted exchanges have had a tremendous effect on accelerating development processes across a global network created through peer-to-peer learning.
The South-South Facility receives growing requests from World Bank clients for knowledge exchanges. The lessons learned from South-South Facility surveys and bilateral discussions with South-South Facility partners focus on a need to finance an inte-grated knowledge-sharing approach that responds directly to the needs of these clients. This strategic plan may take the form of a longer-term engage-ment or through improving a country’s capacity to share knowledge with other countries. In the fol-lowing year the South-South Experience Exchange Facility is committed to implementing this strategy.
6 OVERVIEW
Overview
ground information on South- South knowledge exchanges as well as a suite of useful tools and resources for enhancing the effectiveness of such exchanges. The online library can be accessed at http://wbi.worldbank.org/sske. Some of the main site features include:
• Results stories that demonstrate ways in which South-South knowledge exchanges have built local capacity;
• Examples of successful South-South knowledge exchange financing approaches;
• “The Art of Knowledge Exchange”, a planning guide that helps development practitioners and government officials design results-oriented knowledge exchanges;
• An interactive map that shows results stories by country; and
• A media library that shares images, audio, and video associated with successful knowledge exchanges.
The locations of South-South knowledge exchanges are pinpointed on the map on page 8.
Launched in October 2008 as a multi-donor trust fund, the South-South Experience Exchange Facility (South-South Facility) enables sharing development experiences and knowledge among World Bank cli-ent countries by funding knowledge exchange activi-ties. The South-South Facility funds such knowledge exchanges based on demand expressed by the knowledge-recipient countries and designed with a focus on achieving results.
The South-South Facility comprises a diverse mix of partners. The six original partners are China, Denmark, Mexico, the Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom. India, Russia, and Colombia joined in 2010. Indonesia joined in 2013. Six are middle income countries (China, Colombia, India, Indone-sia, Mexico, and Russia). Membership contributions pledged and received to date total US$14.3million, of which US$13.1 million has been allocated (includ-ing administrative costs).
The South-South Facility results are captured in the interactive South-South Knowledge Exchange Library. The Web-based Library provides back-
7
of the respondents in 2016 client survey indicated an increase in their capacity to
find solutions to their development challenges
84%
OVERVIEW
KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGES have been completed to date
196
South-South Facility at a Glance
KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGES have been approved
countries have RECEIVED knowledge
SOUTH-SOUTH FACILITY
RESULTS STORIES are posted on the interactive online
Knowledge Exchange Library.
of the respondents in 2016 client survey,
indicated that South-South knowledge exchanges
have helped achieve their stated objectives
215
countries have PROVIDED knowledge
3 COUNTRIES JOINED AS KNOWLEDGE PROVIDERS
93%
Jordan Paraguay Trinidad & Tobago
127
69 KNOWLEDGE-RECEIVING countries are also KNOWLEDGE-PROVIDING countries.
10891
3 COUNTRIES JOINED AS KNOWLEDGE RECEIVERS
Lebanon Tonga West Bank & Gaza
Note: Facts are cumulative as of December 31, 2015.
34
174
knowledge exchanges funded and completed in 2014
clients surveyed
2016 CLIENT SURVEY
response rate among clients in the 2016 client survey
82%
8
Carib
bean
Inse
tEu
rope
Inse
t
55
55
5566
99
3636
55
1818
1717
2020
4466
88
66
77
99
7744
55
44
44
1010
1010
12122525
111155
66
44
55
99
4444
1212
66
4444
55
99
55
1111
111144
55
44
55
44
44
99
55
44
88
44
66
551515
1010
1313DO
MIN
ICAN
REPU
BLIC
TRIN
IDAD
&TO
BAGO
GREN
ADA
ST. V
INCE
NT A
NDTH
E GRE
NADI
NES
DOM
INIC
A
BARB
ADOS
ST. K
ITTS
AND
NEVI
S
ANTI
GUA
&BA
RBUD
A
ST. L
UCIA
ROM
ANIA
SERB
IA
BULGARIA
FYR
MAC
EDON
IA
CROA
TIA
BOSN
IA &
HERZ
EGOV
INA
CZEC
HRE
PUBL
IC
POLA
ND
SLOV
ENIA
SLOV
AKRE
PUBL
IC
KOSO
VO
PAPU
ANE
W G
UINE
A
INDO
NESI
ASI
NGAP
ORE
MAL
AYSI
A
PHIL
IPPI
NES
REP.
OFKO
REA
CHIN
A
INDI
A
BANG
LADE
SH
MYA
NMAR
LAO
P.D.R
.
THAI
LAND
CAM
BODI
AVIET
NAM
SRI L
ANKA
ARGE
NTIN
ACH
ILE
URUG
UAY
BOLI
VIA PA
RAGU
AY
PERU
ECUA
DOR
BRAZ
IL
SURI
NAM
ECO
LOM
BIA
MEX
ICO
JAM
AICA
BELI
ZEGU
ATEM
ALA
EL S
ALVA
DOR CO
STA
RICA
PANA
MA
NICA
RAGU
A
TONG
A
HOND
URAS
MAU
RITI
US
MAD
AGAS
CAR
LESO
THO
SOUT
HAF
RICA
NAM
IBIA BO
TSW
ANA
ZAM
BIA
RWAN
DABU
RUND
I
KENY
AUG
ANDA
ETHI
OPIA
NIGE
RM
ALI
MAU
RITA
NIA
BURK
INA
FASO
BENI
N
EQ. G
UINE
A
GABO
NNIGE
RIA
GHAN
A
CÔTE
D’IV
OIRE
SENE
GAL
THE
GAM
BIA
CABO
VERD
E
MOR
OCCO
TUNI
SIA
JORD
AN
LEBA
NON
ALGE
RIA
ANGO
LA
ARAB
REP
. OF
EGY
PT
PAKI
STAN
AFGH
ANIS
TAN
KAZA
KHST
AN KYRG
YZRE
P.TA
JIKIS
TAN
ARM
ENIA
RUSS
IAN
FEDE
RATI
ON
TURK
EY
MOL
DOVA
UKRA
INE
LATV
IAES
TONI
ARU
SSIA
NFE
D.
MOZ
AMBI
QUERE
P. O
FYE
MEN
SOUT
HSU
DAN
SUDA
N
MON
GOLI
A
UZBE
KIST
AN
TURK
MEN
ISTA
N
AZER
.GE
ORGI
A
VANU
ATUSO
LOM
ONIS
LAND
S
BHUT
ANNE
PAL
MAL
DIVE
S
SEYC
HELL
ES
REP.
OF
CONG
ODE
M. R
EP.
OF C
ONGO
C.A.
R.CA
MER
OON
DJIB
OUTI
SOM
ALIA
CHAD
LIBE
RIA
SIER
RA L
EONE
MAL
AWI
TANZ
ANIA
TIM
OR-L
ESTE
GUIN
EA-B
ISSA
U
HAIT
I
La R
éuni
on(F
r.)
WES
T BAN
K AN
D GA
ZA
IBRD
384
99
FEBR
UARY
201
6
COUN
TRIE
S REC
EIVI
NG O
RPR
OVID
ING
KNOW
LEDG
E
PRO
VIDE
D KN
OWLE
DGE
NUM
BER
OF P
ROJE
CTS
9+ 4–8
1–3
This
map
was
pro
duce
d by
the
Map
Des
ign
Uni
t of T
he W
orld
Ban
k.Th
e bo
unda
ries
, col
ors,
den
omin
atio
ns a
nd a
ny o
ther
info
rmat
ion
show
n on
this
map
do
not i
mpl
y, o
n th
e pa
rt o
f The
Wor
ld B
ank
Gro
up, a
ny ju
dgm
ent o
n th
e le
gal s
tatu
s of
any
terr
itory
, or a
nyen
dors
emen
t or a
ccep
tanc
e of
suc
h bo
unda
ries
.
GSD
PMM
ap D
esig
n U
nit
RECE
IVED
KNO
WLE
DGE
SOU
TH-S
OU
TH F
ACIL
ITY
KNO
WLE
DG
E EX
CHA
NG
ES(a
s of
Dec
embe
r 20
15)
MAP OF SOUTH-SOUTH FACILITY EXCHANGES
MA
P O
F SO
UTH
-SO
UTH
FA
CIL
ITY
KN
OW
LED
GE
EX
CH
AN
GE
S (a
s o
f D
ecem
ber
201
5)
Janu
ary
2016
MAP OF SOUTH-SOUTH KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGES 9
I. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS
10 I. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS
B. APPROVED GRANTS
As of the end of 2015, the accumulated approved grants dispensed for South-South knowledge exchanges totaled US$12.0 million. Lower-income countries account for a significantly larger amount of grants approved due to the South-South Facility’s focus on lower-income countries during the first three years of its operations. Since the introduction of middle-income countries, the share for lower-income country grants has remained fairly consistent at approximately 70 percent; however, in 2014 it dropped to 59 percent. In 2015, the share for lower-income country grant approvals rose again to 74 percent (Figure 2).
Figure 2: Comparison of grant approvals by coun-try income levels, CY2008-2015 (US$ millions)
A. OVERALL GRANT STATUS
South-South knowledge exchanges are increasingly being used to support the development goals of the World Bank’s lending portfolio. In 2009, only 30 percent of grants approved were associated with World Bank lending projects. In 2015, 72 percent of the grants approved were associated with World Bank lending projects.
Since its inception, the South-South Facility has approved 215 grants of which 196 are completed (Figure 1). There is growing demand for knowledge exchanges; however, due to financial restraints, only 22 grants were approved during 2015 (Annex 1), this number represents 73 percent of the proposals received. At the end of 2015, 19 grants were under implementation. The majority of grants that are under implementation are in the Latin America and the Caribbean Region (Annex 2).
Thirty-five grants were completed in 2015, one less than the number completed in 2014 (Annex 3). The high completion rate is a reflection of the prompt completion of knowledge exchanges within the year.
Figure 1: Number of grants approved, active, and closed by calendar year
Over the past eight years the Sub-Saharan Africa Region (AFR) has had the largest share of total approved South-South Facility grants. This changed in 2015. Both Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean Region (LCR) have an equally large share (23 percent). Over the past two years (2014-2015), the approved grants in Latin America and the Caribbean have doubled compared to those of any other Region and account for 44 percent
Closed GrantsActive Grants
Num
ber
of
Gra
nts
50
40
30
20
10
0
2009 2011 2012 2013 20142010 2015
Note: 2009 includes one approved grant from 2008.
Lower-income CountriesMiddle-income CountriesTotal
Mill
ions
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
2009 2011 2012 2013 201420102008 2015
Approved Grants
11I. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS
of the grants approved in Latin America and the Caribbean Region since inception. The Middle East and North Africa Region (MNA) has also shown an increase over the past two years in the number of grants approved. The last two years account for 52 percent of the grants approved in Middle East and North Africa Region since inception. In 2015, the Middle East and North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa Regions had the same percentage of grants approved (Figure 3).
Figure 3: Percentage of approved grants by Region
Figure 4: Percentage of regions receiving knowledge from other regions (CY2008-2015)
Inner circle shows totals for CY2008-2015 and outer circle shows totals for CY2015
Note: Percentage of number of exchanges approved within each Region
One of the advantages of the South-South Facility is that it provides an opportunity for countries to find global solutions to their development challenges. Fifty-four percent of the approved grants repre-sent cross-regional knowledge exchanges. Seventy percent of the knowledge sought by East Asia and the Pacific Region (EAP) is from other Regions. Sub-Saharan Africa and East Asia and the Pacific Regions are top receivers of knowledge (24 percent each) from other Regions (Figure 4).
23%
18%
19%
5%
5%
14%
41%23%
18%
14%
13%
8%
East Asia & Pacific
Sub-Saharan Africa
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & North Africa
South Asia
Latin America and the Caribbean Region shares most of its knowledge with other Regions (36 per-cent), followed closely by East Asia and the Pacific Region (28 percent). Overall, Latin America and the Caribbean Region is the leading knowledge-sharing region within the South-South Facility (Figure 5). The Latin America and the Caribbean Region shares approximately 41 percent of the overall knowledge. The majority of the knowledge sharing is within the Region, approximately 54 percent of the knowledge shared by Latin America and the Caribbean Region is to other LCR countries.
Figure 5: Percentage of regions providing knowledge to other regions (CY2008-2015)
East Asia & Pacific
Sub-Saharan Africa
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & North Africa
South Asia
24%
24%
15%
6%
18%
14%
East Asia & Pacific
Sub-Saharan Africa
Europe & Central Asia
Latin America & Caribbean
Middle East & North Africa
South Asia
11%
28%
4%36%
16%
4%
12
Table 2: Top 10 countries providing knowledge in South-South Facility exchanges
The top nine sectors with more knowledge exchang-es have stayed the same in 2014 and 2015. However the distribution within the sectors varied slightly. In 2015, the health, nutrition and population sector increased by one percent, and the water sector decreased by one percent (Table 3).
Table 3: Sectoral focus of approved knowledge exchanges (Cumulative CY2008-2015)
Vietnam and India continue to be the participating countries that most request knowledge through the South-South Facility. However, in 2015, two lower- income countries in Latin America and the Caribbean have increased their interest in seeking knowledge from others. Honduras and Nicaragua have moved up from the sixth and ninth position to the shared third position also with Tanzania (Table 1).
Table 1: Top 10 countries receiving knowledge in South-South Facility exchanges
Five of the top 10 knowledge-providing countries within the South-South Facility are within the Latin America and the Caribbean Region. Brazil contin-ues to be the highest knowledge provider. There was, however, a change in 2015. Colombia moved from the fourth highest knowledge provider to the third, a reflection of the growing interest in learning from Colombia (Table 2). In the East Asia and Pacific Region, China is the highest knowledge provider followed by Indonesia. India has the largest com-bined number of exchanges. It is the second largest knowledge recipient and the second largest knowl-edge provider.
I. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS
Countries receiving knowledge
Number of exchanges(CY2008-2015)
Vietnam 15
India 12
Honduras 10
Nicaragua 10
Tanzania 10
Bolivia 9
Ghana 9
Nigeria 9
Tajikistan 9
St. Lucia 8
Uganda 8
Countries providing knowledge
Number of exchanges(CY2008-2015)
Brazil 36
India 25
Colombia 20
Chile 18
China 17
South Africa 13
Mexico 12
Indonesia 11
Peru 11
Philippines 11
Sectoral topics of exchange Percentage
Governance and Public Sector Management 16
Financial and Private Sector Development 9
Agriculture and Rural Development 7
Health, Nutrition and Population 7
Urban Development 6
Education 6
Energy 6
Transport 5
Social Development 5
13
2014
D. CONTRIBUTIONS
As of the end of 2015, the total South-South Facility contributions stands at US$14.3 million. Since 2012, all new contributions have come from middle-income countries (China, Colombia, India, Indonesia, Mexico and Russia). Middle-income countries have contributed 49 percent of the South-South Facility’s total contributions.
Figure 7: Yearly partners’ contribution to the South-South Facility (US$ million)
C. PORTFOLIO STATUS
The percentage of grants disbursed for middle-income countries increased in 2015. In 2014 the percentage disbursed by middle-income countries represented 25 percent of the total while in 2015 it represented 40 percent. The disbursement amount dropped in 2015 (Figure 6); however, overall 94 per cent of the total allocated grant amount has disbursed signifying utilization of the funds to support just-in-time knowledge sharing.
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
China Denmark Indonesia Netherlands Spain
Colombia India Mexico Russia United Kingdom
2013
I. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS
20122011201020092008
Note: No contributions were received in 2015
Figure 6: Amount disbursed in CY2009-2015 (US$ millions)
Lower-income CountriesMiddle-income CountriesTotal
Mill
ions
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0
2009 2011 2012 2013 20142010
Calendar Year
2015
MAP OF SOUTH-SOUTH KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGES 14
II. 2016 CLIENT SURVEY
The value of meeting people from various parts of the world who practically have the same problem but through South-South got opportunity to find a way to solve that problem.
Participant from the Knowledge Exchange on Energy Efficiency Measures in Public Buildings, between Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbia
It was successful in the sense that the key officials at the local level are in sync now to deliver key reform strategies that the central Government of Bhutan has initiated in a more collaborative and coordinated manner.
Participant from the Knowledge Exchange Bhutan: Capacity Building in Municipal Finance
South-South Knowledge Exchange will be very helpful if it can be done before starting any project.
Participant from the Knowledge Exchange Lessons from Indonesia for Lao PDR on Implementing Community-Based Nutrition Interventions
II. 2016 CLIENT SURVEY 15
These exchanges are very important as a mechanism for (1) strengthening institutional capacity, (2) creating means for comparing progress in different issues between countries, (3) sharing experiences to solve similar problems, and (4) creating strategic alliances.
Participant from the Knowledge Exchange on Incorporation of Disaster Risk Management in Territorial Planning in Latin American and the Caribbean Region
I can testify on the benefit of this exchange for our project. A number of innovative actions were done based on this exchange.
Participant from the Knowledge Exchange on Strengthening Quality of Services by Community Nutrition Workers in Madagascar
16 II. 2016 CLIENT SURVEY
The challenge faced by most clients is how to translate the concepts that they have observed in an exchange into actionable solutions in their home country. Eighty-four percent of the respondents in-dicated an increase in their capacity to find solutions to their development challenges, or new implemen-tation know-how (Figure 8). This was done primarily by customizing an approach to their problem and de-veloping an action plan. Eighty-four percent in 2016 represents a marked increase from 2015 where only approximately two-thirds of the respondents speci-fied an increase in their capacity to find solutions.
In December 2015, the World Bank surveyed 174 stakeholders and participants of World Bank client countries involved in 34 knowledge exchanges that were funded by the South-South Facility and completed in 2014. The survey had an 82 percent response rate among clients with 28 out of 34 exchanges responding across diverse sectors and regions. The survey was instrumental in capturing client feedback on results and lessons of South-South knowledge exchanges.
A. RESULTS
Ninety-three percent of clients involved in the knowledge exchange indicated that the South-South knowledge exchange helped them to achieve their development objectives.1 The sustained high-level response to this question in both 2015 and 2016 reaffirms the overall value of the knowledge exchanges for the clients.
In general, the outcome of South-South knowledge exchanges is that it exposes countries to different approaches to tackling a problem. When asked to explain the factors that helped to achieve their objectives, 94 percent of the respondents to the 2016 survey indicated that the knowledge exchange was instrumental in raising their awareness of what is possible and improving their understanding of how to solve a problem (Figure 8).2
1 Based on response to Question 2 of Client Survey: “Did this South-South Knowledge Exchange help you (or your organization) achieve the objective(s)?”
2 Based on response to Question 3 of Client Survey: “How did this South-South Knowledge Exchange help you (or your organization) achieve the objective(s)?”
Figure 8: Comparison of client perceptions on how South-South knowledge exchange helps to achieve objectives
20152014
2016
Raised awareness
0% 40% 60% 80% 100%20%
Improved consensus and teamwork
New implementation know-how
Informed decision to develop a new loan
Enhanced networks
“It was an excellent opportunity to explore new knowledge, technologies, and material, sharing options from Brazil as South-South representative country.”
Participant from the Knowledge Exchange Reshaping Pakistan’s Agricultural Innovation System: Learning from the experience of EMBRAPA, Brazil
17II. 2016 CLIENT SURVEY
B. LESSONS AND CLIENT RESPONSES FROM SOUTH-SOUTH EXCHANGE
The 2016 survey highlighted several lessons drawn from South-South knowledge exchanges.
“Follow-up on the South-South knowledge exchanges is critical”
Participant from the Knowledge Exchange Building skills for preparing and
introducing e-Procurement in Tajikistan
The above quote was a common sentiment among many participants. Suggesting ways to follow-up were varied. In some cases, the emphasis was on measuring the impact of the original exchange; in other cases, having more sessions with the partici-pants (virtually or face to face) for a certain period of time was considered important.
A small percentage indicated that they were not sure if the knowledge exchange met the stated objectives; however, they all felt that the knowledge exchange was helpful to them. They saw the value of the knowledge exchange as a way to raise aware-ness, network with other practitioners, and find solutions to their development challenges.
“Currently, we continue to follow the action plan that we had developed after our exchange visit in Bangladesh. The plan had three stages with short term, medium, and long term. We are applying the me-dium term now.”
Participant from the Knowledge Exchange Strengthening Quality of Services by Community Nutrition Workers in Madagascar
18
Overall the lessons learned from the 2016 survey are similar to those gathered in the 2015 survey. All comments as well as the experience gained over the years of the South-South Facility have been taken into account to design a new strategy for the South-South Facility. This proposed strategy aims to address the concerns voiced by the participants and organizers of the exchanges by:
• Introducing programmatic knowledge sharing that will enable multiple countries to participate in multiple exchanges over a period of time;
• Utilizing facilitators that will ensure appropri-ate design, implementation, and monitoring of knowledge exchanges; and
• Providing tools and services to ensure that institutions are well prepared to share their knowledge to other countries.
Participants were also keen on obtaining in-depth learning for themselves and, as such, expressed the need to have internships or some form of appren-ticeship.
Another common thread among comments related to the design of the knowledge exchange. In some cases the participants felt that the right mix of people had not been assembled for the exchange or that the sessions did not go into much depth or that the agencies providing the knowledge were not fully prepared.
II. 2016 CLIENT SURVEY
“These exchanges should be seen as a process rather than as isolated events.”
Participant from the Knowledge Exchange on Implementing Multidimensional Measures of Wellbeing (Bolivia, Ecuador, Bhutan, Mexico)
“Follow-up actions should be monitored and those agencies which implement the lessons learnt from such exchanges should be en-couraged by facilitating further exchanges, not just South-South but also South-North so that different but useful knowledge can be acquired and implemented to benefit the developing agencies.”
Participant from the Knowledge Exchange Bhutan: Capacity Building in Municipal Finance
19III. SOUTH-SOUTH FACILITY GRANTS IN ACTION
III. SOUTH-SOUTH FACILITY GRANTS IN ACTION
20 III. SOUTH-SOUTH FACILITY GRANTS IN ACTION
tions and good practice approaches in promoting integrated management. The knowledge exchange was planned as a study tour in the states of Odisha and Gujarat in India, which had successfully dealt with similar challenges.
What has happened so far?
In November 2014, ten high-level government representatives and decision-makers from Morocco’s Ministries of Environment and Tourism visited key coastal project sites in India. They discussed with Indian policymakers and project beneficiaries the experiences gained through implementation of India’s coastal management project, and shared ideas for creating jobs. The Moroccans gained understanding of innovative practices for addressing protecting natural resources and ecosystems and how to drive a multisectorial approach for integrated participation. They also picked up ideas to encour-age job creation by supporting entrepreneurs and small and medium-size enterprises.
What was the objective of the exchange?
Morocco’s diverse coastline is an environmental amalgamation of land, fresh and brackish waters, and marine life. Each of these domains is managed by a different entity. Protecting the coastline as well as developing its natural resources requires all concerned ministries and agencies to plan and inte-grate their annual work programs. Officials involved in Morocco’s coastal zone management project recognized the need to learn more about innova-
Recipient country: Morocco
Knowledge-providing country: India
South-South Facility funding: US$43,772
Sector: Sustainable Development
Task team leader: Taoufiq Bennouna
A. Protecting Morocco’s Coastline
21III. SOUTH-SOUTH FACILITY GRANTS IN ACTION
“The exchange of experience with India allowed the Moroccan delegation to acquire a broader vision than that of the Mediterranean. Without this experience, the vision of the Moroccan delegation on coastal zone management would have remained limited, with only a regional perspective.”
−MME.BOUCHRAOUJIDI,Project Management Unit, Morocco Integrated
Coastal Zone Management Project
What results have been achieved?
Upon their return home, study tour participants prepared a follow-up action plan with input from the local beneficiaries and experts. The exchange has enhanced cross-sector coordination among the Ministries of Environment and Tourism along with the stakeholders of coastal natural resources. Working together, these groups are currently playing a key integrated role in designing a World Bank- funded operation that will scale up the project activities to cover the entire length of Morocco’s coastline.
The exchange continues to elicit strong support from stakeholders in Morocco’s integrated coastal management project:
Image by Pawel Ryszawa
22 III. SOUTH-SOUTH FACILITY GRANTS IN ACTION
countries how to implement the plan in a way that supports organizations to provide efficient services. In addition, DGEP officials needed ideas to equip them to prepare a corporate governance framework that would guide their monitoring and general over-sight functions.
The proposed exchange was therefore structured to enhance the knowledge and skills of decision-mak-ers and technical staff in Paraguay to enable them to develop an effective oversight system for state-owned enterprises. Chile and Peru, two neighbors that have outperformed Paraguay in the service-providing sector, were found to be the right fit as knowledge providers.
What has happened so far?
Through a series of meetings and workshops, the Paraguayan delegation learned about good practice approaches in oversight and corporate governance of state-owned enterprises. The Paraguayans noted that the legal framework of Chile’s Sistema de
What was the objective of the exchange?
Over the past decade, even while coverage of basic services has generally improved significantly in Paraguay, the country has lagged behind in some areas when compared with its regional peers. The General Directorate for Public Enterprises, Dirección General de Empresas Públicas (DGEP), was estab-lished to provide technical support for oversight of state-owned enterprises that provide basic services. After finalizing its Action Plan for 2014/15, DGEP expressed strong interest in learning from other
Recipient country: Paraguay
Knowledge-providing country: Chile and Peru
South-South Facility funding: US$46,691
Sector: Public Sector Governance
Task team leader: Fanny Weiner
B. Strengthening Service Delivery by State-Owned Enterprises in Paraguay
23III. SOUTH-SOUTH FACILITY GRANTS IN ACTION
nies of Paraguay. Without this exchange, our views when analyzing the political options would have been fewer and would have only included the ones learnt in courses, seminars, and conferences unlike the broader and more pragmatic vision that we got by learning on-site from [the] experiences of other countries of the region.”
−ELVIOBRIZUELA, Director of the State-Owned Enterprise Oversight Unit
What results have been achieved?
The Paraguayans have applied lessons from the two study tours to update the organization’s Action Plan. They have also provided input toward developing a Corporate Governance Framework for monitoring and oversight of small- and medium-scale enterpris-es. Based on the learning experience, the govern-ment is currently revising the Public Procurement Law to include a specific section for state-owned enterprises.
Empresas Públicas (State-Owned Enterprises Sys-tem) and the transparency law that it was develop-ing were highly relevant to their own context. They found particularly inspiring the organizational model of Peru’s Fondo Nacional de Financiamiento de la Actividad Empresarial del Estado (National Fund for Financing State Business Activity) and its experi-ence in implementing reforms. The exchange cre-ated momentum for change among the delegates and inspired motivation for their reform process; the exposure to other experiences served as “self-benchmarking” for them.
“The exchange helped to identify possible conflicts and issues that we may find when implementing [a particular] model of corporate governance of our enterprises. It also helped us to know alternatives in the adoption of a decentralized model of corpo-rate governance. This plays an essential part in the plan to improve efficiency of the public companies and when done, it will improve the corporate gov-ernance model that will be set in the public compa-
24 III. SOUTH-SOUTH FACILITY GRANTS IN ACTION
Recipient country: Vietnam
Knowledge-providing country: India
South-South Facility funding: US$48,643
Sector: Energy and Mining; Financial and Private Sector Development
Task team leader: Quang Hong Doan
C. Promoting Provincial-led Growth in Vietnam
What was the objective of the exchange?
In order to fully take advantage of the operation of a new petrochemical complex and related industries, leaders and officials of Thanh Hoa Province, Viet-nam, needed policies to address creating and main-taining a conducive investment climate and to at-tract required private investment. Thanh Hoa officials had a strong desire to learn what other developing countries or subnational governments have under-taken in a similar situation. The proposed exchange therefore aimed to enhance the capacity of Thanh Hoa policymakers to develop feasible action plans. The preferred option for the exchange was a study tour to India’s Gujarat State, home of the largest refinery and petrochemicals complex ever built.
25III. SOUTH-SOUTH FACILITY GRANTS IN ACTION
What results have been achieved?
Thanh Hoa Province applied the experience and knowledge from the tour to revise the master plan for the expanded Nghi Son Economic Zone (from 18,000 hectares to 106,000 hectares), which received government approval in June 2015. The province then successfully brought on board the private sec-tor to develop a new industrial zone, and a seaport was constructed in September 2015.
What has happened so far?
A delegation of Thanh Hoa officials held discus-sions with the Federal Ministries of Finance, Industry and Mining, and Transport and Sea Port; Gujarat’s Chamber of Industry; State Ministry of Energy and Petro-chemistry; Industry University; and the Reli-ance Petro-chemical Complex. In meetings with In-dian businesses in Gujarat State and New Delhi, the Vietnamese delegation learned about policy mecha-nisms to support overseas investment by enter-prises. They also met with the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry to explore the potential for linkages between Indian enterprises and Thanh Hoa in information technology, agricul-tural machinery, and chemical and pharmaceutical production using products of oil refinery.
26 III. SOUTH-SOUTH FACILITY GRANTS IN ACTION
What was the objective of the exchange?
In an effort to increase the capacity of its education leaders, the Government of Jamaica sought means to strengthen mechanisms for developing stronger leadership and system accountability. The Jamaican Government had been instrumental in implement-ing reforms to improve learning achievement for all school-age children in the island nation. But this challenge had been exacerbated by the absence of a strategic plan that addresses the issue. Jamaica expressed interest in learning from Malaysia’s experi-ence, specifically how to design and implement competency-based leadership development to increase the effectiveness of education system lead-ers in delivering education services. The exchange would enable the Jamaicans to examine existing strategies, programs, and initiatives with a view toward designing contextually relevant responses to support education transformation in Jamaica.
Recipient country: Jamaica
Knowledge-providing country: Malaysia
South-South Facility funding: US$49,392
Sector: Education
Task team leader: Harriet Nannyonjo
D. Developing Education Leaders in Jamaica
27III. SOUTH-SOUTH FACILITY GRANTS IN ACTION
What results have been achieved?
The Jamaican team who participated in the tour has led the preparation of a national strategy to develop leadership of under-enrolled or multi-grade schools. There is increased institutional collaboration in tack-ling the challenge and working together on solutions for developing education leadership at all levels of service delivery.
A national workshop has been held to share lessons learned from the exchange with Malaysia. It brought together over 200 participants, including school principals and Ministry of Education officials. The gathering also discussed ideas regarding education leadership development that could be incorporated into implementation of Jamaica’s Education Sector Transformation Program.
What has happened so far?
Malaysia was chosen as a knowledge provider because, like Jamaica, it is a developing country and has a similar education structure and decentral-ized education system to promote school-based management. A study tour to Malaysia enabled Jamaican officials to gain insight into how Malaysia structures and implements capacity building of its education leaders. Participants learned new strate-gies and good practice approaches that will aid in improving student performance outcomes and rais-ing the standard of leadership in Jamaica’s schools. The delegation returned to Jamaica with enhanced knowledge supported by solid working examples; and confidence and motivation to contribute to re-forming how the country trains, mentors, and holds its education leadership accountable.
28 III. SOUTH-SOUTH FACILITY GRANTS IN ACTION
What was the situation prior to the exchange?
Overall, we at the National College for Educational Leadership needed to focus on improving leader-ship at various levels. First, we had an unstructured approach to professional development of teachers and education leaders; and second, we needed to rationalize its teacher training institutions. Despite knowing that many of the issues were negatively impacting teacher education programs, no strategic plan existed for addressing them. Third, we recog-nized its need to improve oversight. The pastoral care leader’s role as a part of the mid-level leader-ship team in secondary schools had low visibility. Consequently, there was variation in practice within and across schools.
What were the results from the exchange?
Face-to-face conversations in Malaysia with scholars and practitioners who had published papers on sys-tems, school, and distributive leadership validated the need for Jamaica to raise the visibility of pastoral care leaders in the school system. The Jamaican team that visited Malaysia also experienced firsthand a training program for mid-level leaders, including pastoral care. The Jamaican team gained insights on changes that could be made to improve teacher ed-ucation in Jamaica and returned home with a sense of urgency in addressing teacher education matters among policy-makers and other stakeholders. Fol-lowing the exchange with Malaysian counterparts, we prepared a proposal for a structured approach to teachers’ continuous professional development.
What have you done differently since the exchange?
The College is better equipped to work toward the goals set for developing Jamaica’s educational lead-ers. Teacher training institutions have been engaged to streamline and offer courses for teacher profes-sional development. A technical working group has been assembled for re-positioning leadership
training for education officers. We have begun work on the development of a strategic plan for addressing priority issues and have held a system-wide discussion with stakeholders and pertinent practitioners that focused on development of a strategy to include themes for a module to enhance the competencies of pastoral leaders and aspirants. Also, included within this strategy is a recommenda-tion for the development of a regulatory policy to undergird the practice of pastoral care leaders.
What would have happened if you didn’t have the exchange?
Without the exchange, the focus may have not been on improving leadership at all levels of education provision. Teacher professional development, for example, may not have become a major focus in Jamaica at this time; it would certainly have taken much longer to streamline the approach to profes-sional development of Jamaica’s teachers. Also, there would have been major delays in addressing the identified issues regarding developing education leaders. The various organizations represented in the technical working group would not be collabo-rating, and Jamaica’s educators would have limited motivation to activate a system response to the increasing social crisis among the country’s second-ary school population.
CLIENT FEEDBACK FROM DR. MAURICE SMITH, PRINCIPAL DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL COLLEGE FOR EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP, JAMAICA.
Dr. Maurice Smith, Principal Director of the National College for Educational Leadership (left) with Dr. Guan Eng Chan, Chief Secretary - Ministry of Higher Education (right)
29ANNEX
ANNEX 1: South-South Facility Grants
Approved in 2015
30 ANNEX 1
No. Region Grant Name Requesting Country
Providing Country
Approval Date
Closing Date
Grant Amount (US$)
1. Sub-Saharan AfricaMauritania Livestock Value Chain Development
Mauritania Zambia 01/12/2015 02/27/2015 29,934
2. Sub-Saharan Africa
Strengthening Institutional and Strategic Capacity of the Zambezi Valley Develop-ment Agency (ZVDA) to Manage Invest-ments and Improve the Business Environ-ment
Mozambique Chile 03/13/2015 03/16/2016 43,125
3. Sub-Saharan AfricaReinforcing Cameroon Public Investment Management Through a Differentiated Exchange of Experience
Cameroon Malaysia 06/11/2015 12/30/2016 49,000
4. Sub-Saharan AfricaStrengthening the Water Sector Reform Process in Nigeria
NigeriaBrazil, Colombia
10/20/2015 06/30/2016 47,000
5. East Asia & PacificImproving disaster preparedness for the elderly and persons with disabilities
TongaTrinidad and Tobago
09/17/2015 06/30/2016 45,000
6.Europe & Central Asia
Teacher Reforms in Moldova Moldova Brazil, Chile 02/26/2015 02/24/2016 47,670
7.Latin America & Caribbean
Using Health Information Systems for Results in the Caribbean
Dominica, St. Lucia
Belize, Domini-can Republic
04/27/2015 04/29/2016 49,900
8.Latin America & Caribbean
Understanding the Cost of Non Communi-cable Diseases in the Caribbean
Dominica, St. Lucia
Jamaica 04/27/2015 04/29/2016 49,900
9.Latin America & Caribbean
Promoting Accountable and Inclusive Institutions in Paraguay: Learning from implementation of Access to Information legislation
ParaguayBrazil, Chile, Uruguay
05/08/2015 11/30/2015 44,328
10.Latin America & Caribbean
Access to markets and value chains for Indigenous People
Paraguay Brazil 06/11/2015 04/01/2016 49,000
11.Latin America & Caribbean
Integration of transport and urban planning exchange
EcuadorBrazil, Colom-bia, Chile
06/19/2015 06/30/2016 49,000
12.Latin America & Caribbean
Entrepreneurial Exchange Startup Jamaica Jamaica Jordan 07/23/2015 06/30/2016 49,999
13.Latin America & Caribbean
Boosting the Information Technologies and Information Technologies Enabled Services (IT and ITES) Sector in Nicaragua
NicaraguaColombia, Mexico
09/08/2015 04/29/2016 49,950
14.Latin America & Caribbean
Improving Public Sector Governance HondurasColombia, Chile, Peru
11/04/2015 04/16/2016 49,000
15.Latin America & Caribbean
South-South Exchange on Population and Dwelling Censuses for Nicaragua
NicaraguaBrazil, Uruguay, Paraguay
11/12/2015 06/30/2016 49,000
16.Middle East & North Africa
Innovation and Entrepreneurship Capacity Building to Support Mobile Internet Eco-system in Lebanon
Lebanon Chile 03/12/2015 11/01/2015 48,922
17.Middle East & North Africa
Water supply: exchange of experiences from Tunisia to Djibouti
Djibouti Tunisia 03/13/2015 11/30/2015 47,828
18.Middle East & North Africa
Piloting and Scaling-up effective Grievance Redress Mechanisms in Social Safety Net Projects
West Bank & Gaza, Egypt
Philippines 05/27/2015 09/30/2015 40,146
19.Middle East & North Africa
Decentralization and Local Government Development
Tunisia Turkey 12/02/2015 01/31/2016 49,000
20. South AsiaEnvironmental Regulators on Environmental Performance Rating and Disclosure
IndiaGhana, Indonesia
04/29/2015 04/28/2016 49,900
31ANNEX 1
No. Region Grant Name Requesting Country
Providing Country
Approval Date
Closing Date
Grant Amount (US$)
21. South AsiaBhutan: Improving budgeting learning exchange
BhutanThailand, Philippines
07/30/2015 06/30/2016 49,000
22. South AsiaCommunity Action for Health and Nutrition
India Indonesia 12/24/2015 06/30/2016 49,900
Summary of Grants Approved by Region in 2015
Region Grant Amount ($) Grant Amount as % of Total
Sub-Saharan Africa 169,059 16%
East Asia & Pacific 45,000 4%
Europe & Central Asia 47,670 5%
Latin America & Caribbean 440,077 42%
Middle East & North Africa 185,896 18%
South Asia 148,800 14%
Total 1,036,502 100%
32 ANNEX
ANNEX 2: South-South Facility Grants
under Implementation as of December 31, 2015
33ANNEX 2
No. Region Grant Name Requesting Country
Providing Country
Approval Date
Closing Date
Grant Amount (US$)
1. Sub-Saharan Africa
Strengthening Institutional and Strategic Capacity of the Zambezi Valley Develop-ment Agency (ZVDA) to Manage Invest-ments and Improve the Business Environ-ment
Mozambique Chile 03/13/2015 03/16/2016 43,125
2. Sub-Saharan AfricaReinforcing Cameroon Public Investment Management Through a Differentiated Exchange of Experience
Cameroon Malaysia 06/11/2015 12/30/2016 49,000
3. Sub-Saharan AfricaStrengthening the Water Sector Reform Process in Nigeria
NigeriaBrazil, Colombia
10/20/2015 06/30/2016 47,000
4. East Asia & Pacific
Knowledge sharing and experience exchange on the optimal utilization and management of external financing for development
VietnamChina, Indonesia, Philippines
11/03/2014 01/31/2016 49,000
5. East Asia & PacificImproving disaster preparedness for the elderly and persons with disabilities
TongaTrinidad and Tobago
09/17/2015 06/30/2016 45,000
6.Europe & Central Asia
Railway Sector Knowledge Exchange Ukraine Poland 11/26/2014 03/31/2016 49,000
7.Europe & Central Asia
Teacher Reforms in Moldova Moldova Brazil, Chile 02/26/2015 02/24/2016 47,670
8.Latin America & Caribbean
Using Health Information Systems for Results in the Caribbean
Dominica, St. Lucia
Belize, Domini-can Republic
04/27/2015 04/29/2016 49,900
9.Latin America & Caribbean
Understanding the Cost of Non Communi-cable Diseases in the Caribbean
Dominica, St. Lucia
Jamaica 04/27/2015 04/29/2016 49,900
10.Latin America & Caribbean
Access to markets and value chains for Indigenous People
Paraguay Brazil 06/11/2015 04/01/2016 49,000
11.Latin America & Caribbean
Integration of transport and urban planning exchange
EcuadorBrazil, Colom-bia, Chile
06/19/2015 06/30/2016 49,000
12.Latin America & Caribbean
Entrepreneurial Exchange Startup Jamaica Jamaica Jordan 07/23/2015 06/30/2016 49,999
13.Latin America & Caribbean
Boosting the Information Technologies and Information Technologies Enabled Services (IT and ITES) Sector in Nicaragua
NicaraguaColombia, Mexico
09/08/2015 04/29/2016 49,950
14.Latin America & Caribbean
Improving Public Sector Governance HondurasColombia, Chile, Peru
11/04/2015 04/16/2016 49,000
15.Latin America & Caribbean
South-South Exchange on Population and Dwelling Censuses for Nicaragua
NicaraguaBrazil, Uruguay, Paraguay
11/12/2015 06/30/2016 49,000
16.Middle East & North Africa
Decentralization and Local Government Development
Tunisia Turkey 12/02/2015 01/31/2016 49,000
17. South AsiaEnvironmental Regulators on Environmen-tal Performance Rating and Disclosure
IndiaGhana, Indone-sia
04/29/2015 04/28/2016 49,900
18. South AsiaBhutan: Improving budgeting learning exchange
BhutanThailand, Phil-ippines
07/30/2015 06/30/2016 49,000
19. South AsiaCommunity Action for Health and Nutrition
India Indonesia 12/24/2015 06/30/2016 49,900
ANNEX 2: South-South Facility Grants
under Implementation as of December 31, 2015
34 ANNEX 2
Summary of Grants Under Implementation by Region in 2015
Region Grant Amount ($) Grant Amount as % of Total
Sub-Saharan Africa 139,125 15%
East Asia & Pacific 94,000 10%
Europe & Central Asia 96,670 10%
Latin America & Caribbean 395,749 43%
Middle East & North Africa 49,000 5%
South Asia 148,800 16%
Total 923,344 100%
35ANNEX
ANNEX 3: South-South Facility Grants
Completed in 2015
36 ANNEX 3
No. Region Grant Name Requesting Country
Providing Country
Approval Date
Closing Date
Grant Amount (US$)
1. Sub-Saharan AfricaFacilitating Expressway Development in Ethiopia through Collaboration: Leveraging China’s 25 Years of Experience
Ethiopia China 10/31/2013 06/30/2015 45,861
2. Sub-Saharan Africa3A-Strategies for Tackling non-Communi-cable Diseases: Case of Cancer Care and Control
Uganda, Botswana
Kenya, Rwanda, Zambia
02/25/2014 02/25/2015 48,357
3. Sub-Saharan AfricaKnowledge exchange on agricultural productivity and commodity value-chain creation
Uganda Senegal 03/16/2014 03/19/2015 7,167
4. Sub-Saharan AfricaImproving the institutional capacity of Cabo Verde to support the tourism sector through a national tourism organization
Cape Verde Seychelles 05/15/2014 04/30/2015 42,372
5. Sub-Saharan AfricaCapacity Development for Somalia Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR) process
Somalia Rwanda 09/21/2014 09/03/2015 44,317
6. Sub-Saharan Africa Mauritius Education Hub Mauritius Brazil, India 10/06/2014 09/30/2015 25,353
7. Sub-Saharan AfricaImproving the institutional capacity of Madagascar to support the tourism sector’s development
Madagascar Malaysia 11/17/2014 04/30/2015 49,819
8. Sub-Saharan AfricaMauritania Livestock Value Chain Development
Mauritania Zambia 01/12/2015 02/27/2015 29,934
9. East Asia & PacificMeeting Indonesia’s Urban Development Challenge: South-South Exchange on national urban programs
IndonesiaSouth Africa, India
05/01/2014 06/30/2015 47,924
10. East Asia & PacificVietnam Subnational Economic Develop-ment: lessons from India’s Experience
Vietnam India 06/06/2014 03/30/2015 48,643
11. East Asia & Pacific
The Revision of Village Legislation in Timor-Leste: exchanging experiences with other developing countries facing similar challenges
Timor-Leste
Mozambique, South Africa, Nepal, India, Vanuatu
08/12/2014 01/31/2015 38,519
12.Europe & Central Asia
Routine maintenance of rural roads through the concept of microenterprises
Armenia Peru 06/03/2014 05/31/2015 34,865
13.Europe & Central Asia
Strengthening Municipal Financing Mechanisms in Tajikistan
TajikistanBangladesh, Georgia
07/18/2014 11/30/2015 46,064
14.Europe & Central Asia
Promoting broadband market development
Kyrgyzstan Croatia 08/11/2014 07/31/2015 29,405
15.Europe & Central Asia
Learning from the Romanian Experience in the District Heating Sector
Moldova Romania 12/01/2014 12/15/2015 38,901
16.Latin America & Caribbean
Efficient Municipal Enterprises for enhancing delivery of basic public services
Ecuador Colombia 01/23/2014 05/16/2015 22,379
17.Latin America & Caribbean
Knowledge exchange between Mexico and Morocco in the renewable energy sector
Mexico Morocco 05/01/2014 05/31/2015 42,863
18.Latin America & Caribbean
Nicaragua learns from Land Administra-tion experience in Croatia and Macedonia
NicaraguaMacedonia, Croatia
06/06/2014 03/31/2015 48,767
19.Latin America & Caribbean
Improving landfill operation standards and social inclusion plans, in municipalities and national financing programs in Argentina and Bolivia
Bolivia, Argentina
Colombia, Peru
08/28/2014 09/15/2015 48,815
20.Latin America & Caribbean
South-South Exchange to improve the Management of Health Technologies (medical equipment) in the Public Health System
Nicaragua, El Salvador
Brazil 09/25/2014 09/15/2015 23,941
21.Latin America & Caribbean
Jamaica learning from Malaysia Education Leadership Development
Jamaica Malaysia 11/26/2014 12/31/2015 47,534
37
No. Region Grant Name Requesting Country
Providing Country
Approval Date
Closing Date
Grant Amount (US$)
22.Latin America & Caribbean
Strengthening of a Geo-Referenced Information System, as a tool of the State’s Strategic Planning, with special emphasis in the subnational levels
BoliviaEcuador, Chile, Peru
11/26/2014 04/15/2015 23,089
23.Latin America & Caribbean
Building a Corporate Governance Framework for State-Owned Enterprises in Paraguay
Paraguay Peru, Chile 12/01/2014 05/31/2015 46,691
24.Latin America & Caribbean
Environmental sustainable cacao production for small scale IP and Afro-descendants farmers in Honduras
HondurasDominican Republic
12/02/2014 06/30/2015 49,500
25.Latin America & Caribbean
Promoting Accountable and Inclusive Institutions in Paraguay: Learning from implementation of Access to Information legislation
ParaguayBrazil, Chile, Uruguay
05/08/2015 11/30/2015 44,328
26.Middle East & North Africa
Road Maintenance and Performance Contracts: The Uruguayan and Argentinian Experience
MoroccoUruguay, Argentina
04/22/2014 04/17/2015 47,739
27.Middle East & North Africa
National railways reform in Egypt: experiences from Morocco and Tunisia
EgyptMorocco, Tunisia
06/06/2014 09/30/2015 37,737
28.Middle East & North Africa
Djibouti South-South Development Exchange Roundtable, sectorial five-year action plans for implementing Vision 2035
DjiboutiRwanda, Cape Verde, Mauritius
06/09/2014 01/30/2015 49,958
29.Middle East & North Africa
Study tour for knowledge and experience exchange on integrated water resources management
Morocco China 06/27/2014 04/30/2015 48,825
30.Middle East & North Africa
Study Tour for Knowledge Exchange on integrated coastal zone management
Morocco India 06/30/2014 06/30/2015 45,590
31.Middle East & North Africa
Innovation and Entrepreneurship Capacity Building to Support Mobile Internet Ecosystem in Lebanon
Lebanon Chile 03/12/2015 11/01/2015 48,922
32.Middle East & North Africa
Water supply: exchange of experiences from Tunisia to Djibouti
Djibouti Tunisia 03/13/2015 11/30/2015 47,828
33.Middle East & North Africa
Piloting and Scaling-up effective Grievance Redress Mechanisms in Social Safety Net Projects
West Bank & Gaza, Egypt
Philippines 05/27/2015 09/30/2015 40,146
34. South AsiaIncreasing VAT revenues and transparency in Bangladesh
Bangladesh Vietnam 08/11/2014 01/15/2015 46,400
35. South AsiaBusiness community support for tax reform exchange
Bangladesh Vietnam 12/09/2014 12/31/2015 19,799
ANNEX 3
Summary of Completed Grants by Region in 2015
Region Final Grant Amount ($) Final Grant Amount as % of Total
Sub-Saharan Africa 293,180 21%
East Asia & Pacific 135,086 10%
Europe & Central Asia 149,236 11%
Latin America & Caribbean 397,907 28%
Middle East & North Africa 366,744 26%
South Asia 66,199 5%
Total 1,408,351 100%
38 ANNEX
ANNEX 4: Countries Providing and Receiving Knowledge
in the South-South Facility
39ANNEX 4
CountriesNumber of exchanges providing
knowledgeNumber of exchanges receiving
knowledge
1 Afghanistan 3
2 Algeria 1
3 Angola 1
4 Antigua and Barbuda 1
5 Argentina 5 1
6 Armenia 2 5
7 Azerbaijan 1
8 Bangladesh 6 5
9 Barbados 1
10 Belize 2 1
11 Benin 1 2
12 Bhutan 1 3
13 Bolivia 3 9
14 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1
15 Botswana 1 2
16 Brazil 36 1
17 Bulgaria 1
18 Burkina Faso 5 3
19 Burundi 1
20 Cabo Verde 2 3
21 Cambodia 1 1
22 Cameroon 2
23 Central African Republic 2
24 Chad 1
25 Chile 18
26 China 17 2
27 Colombia 20 1
28 Congo, Democratic Republic of 1
29 Congo, Republic of 3
30 Costa Rica 2
31 Cote d'Ivoire 1
32 Croatia 3
33 Czech Republic 1
34 Djibouti 3
35 Dominica 1 6
36 Dominican Republic 7
37 Ecuador 3 3
38 Egypt, Arab Republic of 2 3
39 El Salvador 2 2
40 Equatorial Guinea 1
41 Estonia 1
42 Ethiopia 4 7
43 Gabon 1
40 ANNEX 4
CountriesNumber of exchanges providing
knowledgeNumber of exchanges receiving
knowledge
44 Gambia, The 1 2
45 Georgia 1 1
46 Ghana 3 9
47 Grenada 1 5
48 Guatemala 2 1
49 Guinea-Bissau 1
50 Haiti 4
51 Honduras 2 10
52 India 25 12
53 Indonesia 11 5
54 Jamaica 6 4
55 Jordan 1
56 Kazakhstan 1 1
57 Kenya 3 2
58 Korea, Republic of 2
59 Kosovo 1
60 Kyrgyz Republic 1 4
61 Lao People´s Democratic Republic 2 5
62 Latvia 1
63 Lebanon 1
64 Lesotho 1 3
65 Liberia 3 3
66 Macedonia, former Yugoslav Republic of 2 1
67 Madagascar 1 3
68 Malawi 1
69 Malaysia 9
70 Maldives 1
71 Mali 1 2
72 Mauritania 2
73 Mauritius 4 4
74 Mexico 12 2
75 Moldova 2 6
76 Mongolia 1 3
77 Morocco 4 4
78 Mozambique 1 5
79 Myanmar 2
80 Namibia 2
81 Nepal 3 3
82 Nicaragua 3 10
83 Niger 1 2
84 Nigeria 2 9
85 Pakistan 3 2
86 Panama 5 1
87 Papua New Guinea 1 2
41ANNEX 4
CountriesNumber of exchanges providing
knowledgeNumber of exchanges receiving
knowledge
88 Paraguay 1 3
89 Peru 11 2
90 Philippines 11 4
91 Poland 1
92 Reunion 1
93 Romania 5 1
94 Russian Federation 3 3
95 Rwanda 6 4
96 Senegal 3 5
97 Serbia 1
98 Seychelles 1
99 Sierra Leone 1
100 Singapore 3
101 Slovak Republic 1
102 Slovenia 1
103 Solomon Islands 1
104 Somalia 1
105 South Africa 13 1
106 South Sudan 2
107 Sri Lanka 2 2
108 St. Kitts and Nevis 2
109 St. Lucia 1 8
110 St. Vincent and the Grenadines 1 4
111 Sudan 1
112 Suriname 1
113 Tajikistan 1 9
114 Tanzania 10
115 Thailand 6 1
116 Timor-Leste 2
117 Tonga 1
118 Trinidad and Tobago 1 1
119 Tunisia 4 3
120 Turkey 5
121 Turkmenistan 1
122 Uganda 2 8
123 Ukraine 1
124 Uruguay 4
125 Uzbekistan 3
126 Vanuatu 1 1
127 Vietnam 5 15
128 West Bank and Gaza 1
129 Yemen, Republic of 4
130 Zambia 3 4
The World Bank1818 H Street, NWWashington, DC 20433, USA