PROJECT INFORMATION DOCUMENT (PID)

CONCEPT STAGE

Report No.: AB1984

Project Name / RAPID RESPONSE TA
Region / EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA
Sector / General public administration sector (80%);Other social services (10%);General education sector (10%)
Project ID / P096861
Borrower(s) / MINISTRY OF FINANCE
Implementing Agency / Executive Office of the President
Environment Category / [ ] A [ ] B [X] C [ ] FI [ ] TBD (to be determined)
Date PID Prepared / November 22, 2005
Estimated Date of Appraisal Authorization / May 19, 2006
Estimated Date of Board Approval / August 10, 2006
  1. Key development issues and rationale for Bank involvement

Since the end of the civil war in 1997, Tajikistan has achieved political and macroeconomic stability: in the past 5 years the economy grew on average by 10 percent a year and the Government has been successful in maintaining overall fiscal discipline and prudent monetary policy, as well as reducing its external debt to below 40% of GDP. However, despite this, almost 2/3 of the population still lives on less than US$2.5 per day. One of the key factors threatening the medium-term performance of the Tajik economy is the weak capacity and performance[1] of its Public Sector, its low degree of accountability[2] and its drain on scarce resources. The quality of social services has significantly deteriorated, which weakens the quality of human capital and the competitiveness of the Tajik Economy. Tajikistan remains the only country in ECA region that is unlikely to meet most of the global MDGs,[3] largely due to capacity constraints. The private sector is strongly affected by the public sector’s weak performance, which engenders an unfavorable business environment and investment climate. The weak performance of the governance system thus continues to pose considerable risk to the sustainability of the economic growth and poverty reduction.

The Project thus will provide advisory support to the implementation of key government strategies to address weaknesses in the governance system, including the public-private sector interface.

  1. Proposed objective(s)

The development objective of the project is (i) to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of public administration both at central and local levels, (ii) increase efficiency and effectiveness of public expenditure systems, (iii) improve the public-private sector interface by strengthening the enabling conditions for private sector development

  1. Preliminary description

The main focus of the proposed project is to help build capacity for the implementation of three key Government strategies, as referred to above. The substantive focus of the project would be as follows[4]:

a)  Implementation support to administrative and civil service reform, including support for streamlining organizational structures and service delivery management systems of core ministries, civil service professionalization, and improving incentive systems (1.7 million US$)

b)  Capacity building for effectively linking policies to budgets including strengthening macroeconomic forecasting systems, prioritization in public investment planning and medium term budget planning, as well as expenditure planning in key social sectors (1.4 million US$),

c)  Developing the public-private sector interface, including support for improving regulatory quality and service delivery of inspection agencies, capacity building for the State Privatization Committee in managing enterprise restructuring processes and support to the design and implementation of the Private Sector Development Strategy (1.3 million US$)

d)  Supporting project management and tracking reform implementation (0.65US$).

  1. Safeguard policies that might apply

This is a TAL and no safeguard policies apply

  1. Tentative financing

Source: / ($m.)
BORROWER/RECIPIENT / 0
IDA GRANT FOR DEBT VULNERABLE / 6
Total / 6
  1. Contact point

Contact: Tony Verheijen

Title: Sr Public Sector Spec.

Tel: (202) 458-2264

Fax: (202) 614-7777

Email:

[1] Based on the latest Governance Research Indicators (GRICS) assessment, both government effectiveness and regulatory quality in Tajikistan remains weak, even compared to other Central Asianstates (Annex 1).

[2] The main conclusions of BEEPS 2005 highlight a slightly improved performance on corruption indicators, though on inspections, tax and customs Tajikistan continues to lag behind other CIS states.

[3] The World Bank, Millennium Development Goals: Progress and Prospects in Europe and Central Asia region, 2005.

[4] A detailed description of project components is included in Annex 2