1 / 15

Review of EC Investment Support Facilities

Review of EC Investment Support Facilities. Craig Davies PPC Executive Secretary Priority Environmental Investment Programme Regional Meeting Brussels, 26 November 2007. Background to the evaluation. EC has increasingly used ISFs as vehicles for its support for environmental infrastructure

mika
Download Presentation

Review of EC Investment Support Facilities

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Review of EC Investment Support Facilities Craig DaviesPPC Executive Secretary Priority Environmental Investment Programme Regional Meeting Brussels, 26 November 2007

  2. Background to the evaluation • EC has increasingly used ISFs as vehicles for its support for environmental infrastructure • The DABLAS Task Force asked for a forward-looking review of ISFs • Funding provided by the UK (DFID) • Review managed by the PPC Secretariat • Review implemented by COWI A/S (Denmark)

  3. Evaluation methodology • Issues to be addressed: • General characteristics of ISFs • Impact of ISFs on environmental investments • Sustainability of the contribution made by ISFs • Catalysing effect on investment by IFIs • Other impacts • Three sources of data • Review of documentation • Stakeholder survey • Telephone interviews

  4. ISFs: timescale and scope

  5. ISFs: sectors covered

  6. ISFs: funding and management

  7. ISFs: budgets and activities

  8. ISFs: impacts on investments

  9. How well have ISFs met stakeholder needs?

  10. How have ISFs supported IFI operations?

  11. What are the main advantages of an ISF?

  12. How have ISFs provided opportunities for skills transfer?

  13. Key findings • ISFs have made important contributions to promoting IFI investment in environmental infrastructure • Rapid, high-quality project preparation support is most valued by stakeholders • Other activities (capacity building, matchmaking etc) are considered less important • IFIs have led on project selection • IFIs are not usually involved in signing off consultants’ work • Management could be strengthened – Steering Committees

  14. Recommendations: future ISFs should…. • focus on their core strength – high quality project preparation support • be more tightly focused on specific countries and sectors • have a duration of 3-5 years, reflecting a typical project cycle • involve IFIs in preparation of ToRs, tendering and sign-off of consultancy services • have improved management, transparency and visibility

  15. Discussion point: options for future ISFs • Future ISFs (if agreed) will be funded through the IPA and ENPI instruments • How can the lessons learned from past ISFs be reflected in the design and implementation of IPA/ENPI programmes?

More Related