EAP - The Pacific Infrastructure Challenge - World Bank (2006).pdf

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Some of these reforms have already been tried in the Pacific, with mixed success. We discuss each reform below, highlighting past successes or failures, and attempt to identify the criteria for success. Below, we examine the full suite of policies which, if consistently implemented, would result in: Improved rural infrastructure access More efficient service provision, and Appropriate pricing. 7.2.1 Benchmarking Benchmarking infrastructure performance will help to identify whether reforms are actually necessary, and if so, in what areas. Although this sounds straightforward, governments often embark on programs that include a ‘checklist’ of sector reforms, without stopping to consider whether each specific component is actually necessary. Benchmarking helps to avoid a ‘cookie cutter’ sector reform strategy, which may be unsuited to the specific issues a country faces. Benchmarking involves measuring a company or utility’s performance against key performance indicators. IBNET 16 , (a benchmarking ‘start-up kit’, funded by DfID and managed by the World Bank), defines two forms of benchmarking: Metric benchmarking: Quantitative measurement of performance against other organizations over time. Metric benchmarking provides utilities with information on performance gaps. However, it does not always provide an indication of explanatory factors, such as geography, weather or social customs that impact performance Process benchmarking: The analysis of a utility’s own business processes and comparison with those of organizations with exemplary performance in those processes. Process benchmarking recognizes that the best performance for one utility may not be equal to the best performance of peer utilities, given a unique set of explanatory factors. It involves measuring the best performance that can be achieved under the particular constraints and circumstances that exist for a specific utility. This includes tracking the utility’s own performance over time to identify trends and improvements. Regional benchmarking has already been initiated in the Pacific in the electricity and water sectors. Electricity utility performance is benchmarked annually, and WSS utilities are benchmarked every few years. These programs have faced some challenges: Many utilities lack the human resources capacity to undertake the required data gathering, even on an annual basis Utilities do not adopt a common approach to measuring performance for each indicator; therefore comparisons are not always accurate. Currently the benchmarking analysis and results are produced by the Pacific Power Association (PPA) and Pacific Water Association (PWA). The regional nature of these benchmarking initiatives does help to alleviate the capacity and capability constraints. The PPA is also helping to train utility staff on measuring performance to achieve more consistent results. 16 www.ib-net.org 44
These benchmarking initiatives could be strengthened as a driver of efficiency and sector reform if the results were made public. Currently electricity sector benchmarking data can only be reviewed by PPA member organizations, and no member can publish this information. This has resulted in several separate benchmarking studies being carried out each time this sort of information is required. Each time infrastructure performance information is needed, consultants, donors or lending agencies must request the information directly from each utility, creating a further capacity burden on countries with limited human resources. In addition, keeping the results confidential does not help to create the incentives for improved efficiency one could expect from such a program. Other sectors would also benefit from benchmarking initiatives. If this were initiated, there would be value in considering a regional infrastructure benchmarking unit, which would take responsibility for developing measures, gathering consistent and accurate data, and publishing sector reports. A non-country specific unit of this nature would help to ensure objectivity, and would help to overcome capacity and capability constraints. Box 7.4: Examples of Successful Benchmarking Performance benchmarking has been employed successfully in the water and sewerage sector in England and Wales. Utilities provide OFWAT (the regulator) with service performance data, which is then published in a set of ‘performance scorecards’. It has also been implemented successfully in Sao Paulo and Indonesia. Here, benchmarking brought about significant improvements in pollution levels, following the publication of industry ratings on environmental compliance. Benchmarking has also been effective in the urban Water and Sanitation sector in Vietnam. Data were collected from 67 urban water companies, reviewed by the World Bank and the water utilities for consistency and reasonableness, and used to compile a performance baseline and performance targets for water utilities. These performance targets are being used to define the eligibility criteria of water utilities to access credit under the Vietnam Urban Water Supply Development Project. Source: “Utility Benchmarking” B Kingdom and V Jagannathan, March 2001; IBNET Benchmarking in the Urban Water Sector Vietnam Developing an effective benchmarking program involves 17 : Choosing measurable and meaningful indicators of performance: – Some indicators may be expressed as indices that are adjusted for different operating conditions – Indicators should draw on data that can be relatively easily or reliably collected, and that are unambiguous – Indicators should reflect conditions over which the service providers have control Using an independent, international body to compile the data and analyze the results Communicating performance results in a way that will allow the public to make an informed assessment of relative performance, and set realistic expectations for improvements Publicizing the results Creating incentives and penalties that reward good service providers and encourage underperformers to improve. 17 “Utility Benchmarking” Viewpoint, March 2001, B Kingdom and V Jagannathan 45
Page 2 and 3: The Pacific Infrastructure Challeng
Page 4 and 5: Table of Contents 1 Acronyms and Ab
Page 6 and 7: Figure 8.4: Annual Per Capita Inves
Page 8 and 9: Box 7.9: ECTEL - Regulatory Coopera
Page 10 and 11: kWh MDG MIAA MIPA MNOC MOTCA MOU MP
Page 12 and 13: 2 Executive Summary This discussion
Page 14 and 15: Fiscal, regulatory and policy decis
Page 16 and 17: Figure 2.2: Estimated Annual Invest
Page 18 and 19: 3 What’s the Purpose of the Discu
Page 20 and 21: Box 4.2: Improving Infrastructure f
Page 22 and 23: 5 How well are Pacific Countries Pe
Page 24 and 25: Figure 5.1: Access to Electricity 1
Page 26 and 27: Water tariffs are often too low In
Page 28 and 29: Table 6.1 shows that in addition to
Page 30 and 31: These characteristics mean that Pac
Page 32 and 33: 6.2 Challenges to Institutions and
Page 34 and 35: 6.2.2 Demographic Issues in the Reg
Page 36 and 37: These high rural populations mean t
Page 38 and 39: Figure 6.3: Comparison of Defining
Page 40 and 41: Lack of legal and regulatory suppor
Page 42 and 43: 7 Challenge: How do we Lift Perform
Page 44 and 45: 7.1.2 Poor Policy Design and Coordi
Page 46 and 47: different, some efficiency may be g
Page 48 and 49: Figure 7.1: Accountability in Infra
Page 50 and 51: Box 7.3: Expert Panels can Improve
Page 54 and 55: 7.2.2 Choose an Appropriate Reform
Page 56 and 57: Box 7.5: Public Sector Reforms in t
Page 58 and 59: Pacific countries, management salar
Page 60 and 61: There are three classic types of pr
Page 62 and 63: While private sector involvement ma
Page 64 and 65: Air services would also benefit fro
Page 66 and 67: 7.2.5 Regional Coordination One opt
Page 68 and 69: 8 What’s the Size of the Challeng
Page 72 and 73: Figure 8.5: Mainlines Trend 0.600 N
Page 76 and 77: Figure 8.11: Total Annual Per Capit
Page 78 and 79: 9 How do we meet the Challenge This
Page 80 and 81: Box 9.3: Can private sector involve
Page 82 and 83: Box 9.6: How can the public sector
Page 84 and 85: The proportion of mainline access a
Page 86 and 87: Box A.2: Introducing Telecommunicat
Page 88 and 89: Universal Access Universal access r
Page 90 and 91: good example of this. The Kiwi Shar
Page 92 and 93: Figure A.7: Reported Faults per 100
Page 94 and 95: Table A.1: Institutional Indicators
Page 96 and 97: and there have been calls to recons
Page 98 and 99: A.2 Electricity Sector Analysis A s
Page 100 and 101: Figure A.10: Average Electricity Ta
Page 102 and 103:
Figure A.11: Economies of Scale in
Page 104 and 105:
interest rate relief on a US$9m loa
Page 106 and 107:
As Figure A.14 shows, Vanuatu perfo
Page 108 and 109:
Table A.3: Industry Structure and G
Page 110 and 111:
Regional Cooperation in Electricity
Page 112 and 113:
A.3 Water and Sanitation Sector Ana
Page 114 and 115:
Figure A.17: Availability of Water
Page 116 and 117:
Figure A.20: Staff per 1000 Connect
Page 118 and 119:
including full operating expenses a
Page 120 and 121:
Corporatization is often employed t
Page 122 and 123:
operating costs, collections levels
Page 124 and 125:
Figure A.25: Road Network Density v
Page 126 and 127:
Federated States of Micronesia at b
Page 128 and 129:
In Samoa: Samoa’s Public Works De
Page 130 and 131:
Many Pacific countries already outs
Page 132 and 133:
4. Domestic and Pacific Island serv
Page 134 and 135:
Figure A.31: TEU Throughput Levels
Page 136 and 137:
system reduces cargo handling effic
Page 138 and 139:
Economies of Scale Port operations
Page 140 and 141:
The landlord model is the most comm
Page 142 and 143:
Fiji 84 Ports The Maritime and Port
Page 144 and 145:
Apia Port has become one of the bes
Page 146 and 147:
Kiribati 90 Ports The Kiribati Port
Page 148 and 149:
In Shipping: Services are considere
Page 150 and 151:
Figure A.36: Total Passenger Throug
Page 152 and 153:
Airline Services Figure A.38 illust
Page 154 and 155:
establishment period. For the offic
Page 156 and 157:
Vanuatu 101 Airports Vanuatu Limite
Page 158 and 159:
Samoa 104 The Samoa Airport Authori
Page 160 and 161:
Institutional Arrangements in Aviat
Page 162 and 163:
Summary of Aviation Analysis The Pa
Page 164 and 165:
Fiji Kiribati Marshall Islands Micr
Page 166 and 167:
Barbados Dominica Grenada Jamaica M
Page 168 and 169:
Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste T
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Samoa Solomon Islands Timor-Leste T
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
“A-Z World Airports Online” www
show all

EAP - The Pacific Infrastructure Challenge - World Bank (2006).pdf

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?