Abstract

The authors have assembled 1960–2012 infrastructure stock data from 145 countries to estimate the demand for infrastructure services in emerging markets and developing economies. This paper identifies that the required resource flows to satisfy new demand while maintaining service for existing infrastructure amounts to $836 billion or 6.1 percent of current gross domestic product per year over the period 2014–20. The annual infrastructure investment gap for emerging markets and developing economies is $452 billion per year, which implies that emerging markets and developing economies should almost double their current spending. The paper also estimates that half of the spending should be allocated to maintenance of existing assets. Acknowledging the challenges to compare infrastructure investment estimates across different methodologies, the authors recognize this result as a lower bound estimate and compare the results with others available in the literature. Document type: Book

Abstract

This policy paper is motivated by the Government’s “Pakistan: Framework for Economic Growth (FEG) 2011” which places weak corporate governance at the top of the “software” constraints to growth. The efforts to reform the State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) have stalled in Pakistan for almost five years—with significant negative implications not only in terms of fiscal losses, but also deteriorated and cost-ineffective service delivery. The paper suggests a number of urgent policy measures designed to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of SOEs. These include basic governance reforms, revamped commercialization processes and enhanced market regulations. The paper also provides some perspectives on international experience on SOE reforms combined with some suggestions on how the Government can move forward. The Policy Working Paper Series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about development issues. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. The papers carry the names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent. SOE Reform: Time for Serious Corporate Governance Document type: Book

Abstract

The devastating civil war in Syria is arguably one of the major civil conflicts in recent times. The conflict started with protests in March 2011 and soon after escalated to a violent internal war with no end in sight to this date. The conflict has by the end of 2014 caused well in excess of 150,000 fatalities, and 6 million internally displaced people (UN), and led 3 million refugees to move out of the country (UNHCR). Beyond the human tragedy, the conflict has disrupted the functioning of the economy in many ways. It has destroyed infrastructure, prevented children from going to school, closed factories and deterred investments and trade. The economic effects of the war extend beyond the country’s borders affecting also the neighboring countries. In particular trade is one of the main channels through which the effects of the crisis are transmitted to neighboring countries. For example, the demand for goods and services in Syria is likely to have fallen thus affecting the many exporters to Syria in neighboring countries. Moreover, to the extent that Syria has become harder to cross, the war may have made trade through Syria more difficult. At the same time producers in neighboring countries may have replaced Syrian producers in Syria and in other markets as their productive assets in Syria were destroyed. This report examines the effects of the Syrian war on the Lebanese economy via one of the most important channels through which the economic impact of the war occurs, i.e. the trade channel. In doing so, it partly updates and extends the previous economic assessment of World Bank (2013b) carried out last year. Focusing specifically on trade allows us to examine in more depth the trade effects than that report was able to do. Indeed, we go beyond the effects on aggregate and sectoral imports and exports to also examine the effects on exports at firms’ level, comparing the effects in Lebanon with those in other neighboring countries, including Jordan, Turkey and Iraq.

Abstract

year after the onset of Ebola, the estimated GDP losses for the three countries through 2015 total US$2.2 billion (US$240 million for Liberia, US$535 million for Guinea and US$1.4 billion for Sierra Leone). This is the result of the severe impact of the epidemic which has been exacerbated by the large decline in the world price of iron ore and severe corporate governance issues in mining in Sierra Leone. Important differences among the three countries are emerging. Liberia is gradually returning to normalcy, Guineas economy is stagnating, and Sierra Leone is suffering a severe recession. This update presents the World Banks most recent analysis of the economic and fiscal effects of the Ebola epidemic on the three countries. In relation to our January 2015 report it contains: 1) an updated status for the economies of Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone; and 2) a brief description of these countries Economic Recovery Plans with indicative estimates of their potential impact on growth. As of April 2015, the Ebola epidemic has been largely contained but the negative effects on the economies of Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone loom large amidst continued uncertainty about the timing of complete eradication. The crisis continues to adversely affect these economies, so pace of recovery in these countries will depend heavily on adequate financing and effective implementation of the recovery plans. Ultimately, Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone will need the strong support from the development community over the next years to both make up for the losses incurred during the Ebola crisis and make these economies less vulnerable for the future.