How to Make Grants a Better Match for Private Sector Development

World Bank

World Bank, Washington, DC

关键词: MATCHING GRANTS;    GRANT MODALITIES;    MEASURING SUCCESS;    MONITORING AND EVALUATION;   

RP-ID  :  ACS20984

学科分类：社会科学、人文和艺术（综合）

来源: World Bank Open Knowledge Repository

【 摘 要 】

Matching grants (MGs) have beenimplemented by the World Bank for over two decades. Theyremain a very popular instrument for private sectordevelopment interventions, despite often challengingimplementation and insufficient evidence of impact. Theobjective of this study is to synthesize the currentknowledge on MGs and to review the experience with thisinstrument, as designed and implemented by the World Bankfrom the early 1990s to the present. In doing so, we hope toequip teams in charge of ongoing and planned MG operationswith a better understanding of the instrument and to helpthem choose the design and implementation arrangements thatare best fitted to their objectives. The authors look atboth the ‘why’ and the ‘how’ of MG programs, focusing onthose aiming to foster private sector development and smalland medium enterprises (SMEs) competitiveness primarilythrough the use of business development services (BDS). Theauthors also look at how success is defined and question theway the outcome of MG programs is often assessed. While 75percent of projects in the sample were deemed to have somedegree of success, the definition of success rarely reflectsa measurement of broad and sustainable economic benefitsthat will justify the subsidization of private enterpriseswith public funds. We argue that this is linked to a commonweakness in identifying a sound economic rationale, such asa specific market failure to be solved, and in subsequentlynot focusing the design and measurement of the MG on thefund’s additionality beyond the private benefit ofrecipients. The authors conclude that a robust definition ofthe economic rationale is a critical prerequisite for theuse of MG programs and should include, among others, anidentification of a specific market failure, considerationof alternative instruments, cost-benefit analysis,assessment of the potential for additionality andspillovers, and a realistic exit strategy. The authorsrecommend an equally robust monitoring and evaluation(M&E) system tied directly to the economic rationale,which is essential for real-time assessment of impact,potential course correction, and learning, and could beutilized to gauge additionality and sustainability.Increased attention to these elements could help teams makethe most of this potentially powerful instrument for privatesector development and competitiveness.