Completion and Learning Review Bosnia and Herzegovina FY16-FY21 Country Partnership Framework - June 30, 2022

Jul 19, 2026

Upload by Rowan

This independent evaluation reviews the World Bank Group Completion and Learning Review (CLR) for Bosnia and Herzegovina’s Country Partnership Framework (CPF) spanning FY16–FY20 and adjustments at the FY19 Performance and Learning Review stage. The WBG program targeted major development constraints, including public sector efficiency, conditions for private sector growth, and resilience to natural shocks. Results show mixed achievement across eight objectives: focus areas I and II delivered limited gains, business climate improvements were absent, and health service quality evidence was lacking. WBG performance is assessed as fair, with implementation generally well executed despite shortcomings in coherence and indicator design.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages37

Reading Time1 h 33 min

Executive Summary

Review scope and CPF context

Ratings and development outcome assessment

Focus area results (I-III)

WBG performance and key issues

Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized CLR Review Independent Evaluation Group Completion and Learning Review Bosnia and Herzegovina FY16-FY21 Country Partnership Framework June 30, 2022 Ratings | | CLR Rating | CLRR (IEG) Rating | | --- | --- | --- | | Development Outcome: | Moderately Satisfactory | Moderately Unsatisfactory | | WBG Performance: | Good | Fair | I. Executive Summary i. This review of the World Bank Group’s (WBG) Completion and Learning Review (CLR) covers the period FY16-FY20 of the Country Partnership Framework (CPF), and its adjustments at the FY19 Performance and Learning Review (PLR) stage. ii. The WBG program sought to address some of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s (BiH) main development challenges: its disproportionately large public sector and its heavy dependence on remittances, fueling consumption-based growth. The CPF addressed problems identified in the 2015 Systematic Country Diagnostics for BiH, which were included in the Reform Agenda 2015-2018, a document agreed in July 2015 between the Council of Ministers of BiH, the Governments of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FBIH), Republika Srpska (RS), the Brčko District, and the 10 cantons that make the territory of BiH. The Reform Agenda listed six areas of importance: (i) public finance, taxation and fiscal sustainability; (ii) business climate and competitiveness; (iii) labor market; (iv) social welfare and pension reform; (v) rule of law and good governance; and (iv) public administration reform. The areas covered the nine constraints the Systematic Country Diagnostic (SCD) identified, most of them addressed in the CPF’s three Focus Areas (FA) of increasing public sector efficiency and effectiveness (FA I), creating conditions for accelerated private sector growth (FA II), and building resilience to natural shocks (FA III) . iii. IEG rates the CPF development outcome as Moderately Unsatisfactory. Of the eight objectives, one was achieved, two were mostly achieved, and five were partially achieved. Substantive outcome gains in Focus Area I (increasing public sector efficiency and effectiveness) included: making data on public sector arrears in RS and FBIH publicly available (objective 1, partially achieved), reducing the amounts transferred to the pension system in FBIH and improving the financial sustainability of the railways in Republika Srpska (Objective 2, partially achieved), and aligning and raising taxes on tobacco to European Union (EU) standards and improving services of water and wastewater (Objective 3, partially achieved) . There were no gains in reducing public sector arrears and general government pension expenditure (Objective) or in reducing the fiscal burden of SOEs (Objective 2), and there is no evidence of improvements in the quality of health services (Objective 3). In Focus Area II (creating conditions for accelerated private sector growth) there were some gains in expanding finance for MSME and in increasing formal employment in the private sector and employment through IFC investments (Objective 4, mostly achieved); there were temporary gains in improving the targeting of social assistance programs but not in increasing labor force participation (Objective 5, partially achieved) and in saving energy and expanding renewable energy capacity but not in reducing travel time among major growth poles (Objective 6, mostly achieved) . There were no gains in improving the business climate. (Objective 4) . In Focus Area III (building resilience to natural shocks) there were gains in assisting people in areas prone to or affected by floods and strengthening the capacity to manage floods (Objective 8, achieved), but not in expanding the collection rate and the disposal capacity of landfills to reach minimum EU standards (Objective 7, partially achieved) . iv. WBG performance was Fair. The WBG designed a relevant strategy and produced a results framework which reflected the twin goals. The

FAQs

What period does the CLR cover for Bosnia and Herzegovina’s CPF?

The review covers FY16–FY20 under the Country Partnership Framework, including adjustments made at the FY19 Performance and Learning Review stage.

How are development outcome and WBG performance rated?

Development outcome is rated Moderately Unsatisfactory by IEG, while WBG performance is rated Good by CLR (IEG) as Fair.

Which CPF focus areas are included and what were the main results?

The CPF includes Focus Area I (public sector efficiency), Focus Area II (private sector growth conditions), and Focus Area III (resilience to natural shocks). Gains were limited in Focus Areas I and II, business climate improvements were not observed, and resilience support for floods was achieved while landfill capacity improvements were only partially achieved.

Jul 19, 2026

Upload by Rowan