World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia FY2017 Serbia Country Opinion Survey Report THE WORLD BANK GROUP Public Opinion Research Group 1 August 2017 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia Acknowledgements The Serbia Country Opinion Survey is part of the County Opinion Survey Program series of the World Bank Group. This report was prepared by the Public Opinion Research Group (PORG), led by Sharon Felzer (Senior Communications Officer, Head of PORG). Jing Guo, Svetlana Markova, and Jessica Cameron oversaw design, reporting, and analysis. Calita Woods, Dania Mendoza, and Noreen Wambui provided data support. PORG acknowledges the significant contribution from Serbia country team and Ipsos Strategic Marketing, a local independent fielding agency. In particular, PORG is grateful for the support from Vesna Kostic (Senior Communications Officer) who provided guidance on the survey related activities from Belgrade, Serbia. 1 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia Table of Contents I. Objectives ...................................................................................3 II. Methodology ...............................................................................3 III. Demographics of the Sample.......................................................4 IV. General Issues Facing Serbia .......................................................8 V. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group .......................15 VI. Sectoral Effectiveness................................................................21 VII. How the World Bank Group Operates .......................................24 VIII. World Bank Group’s Knowledge and Instruments .....................30 IX. The Future Role of the World Bank Group in Serbia ..................34 X. Communication and Outreach ..................................................38 XI. Appendices ................................................................................42 2 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia I. Objectives This survey was designed to assist the World Bank Group (WBG) in gaining a better understanding of how stakeholders in Serbia perceive the WBG. The survey explored: ▪ General Issues Facing Serbia ▪ Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group ▪ World Bank Group’s Effectiveness and Results ▪ The World Bank Group’s Knowledge Work and Activities ▪ Working with the World Bank Group ▪ The Future Role of the World Bank Group in Serbia ▪ Communication and Information Sharing ▪ Background Information II. Methodology From March to June 2017, 1008 stakeholders of the WBG in Serbia were invited to provide their opinions on the WBG’s work in the country by participating in a Country Opinion Survey. Participants were drawn from the Office of the President, Prime Minister; office of a minister; office of a parliamentarian; ministries/ministerial departments/implementation agencies; Project Management Units (PMUs) overseeing implementation of WBG projects; consultants/ contractors working on WBG-supported projects/programs; local governments; bilateral/ multilateral agencies; private sector organizations; private foundations; the financial sector/ private banks; NGOs/community based organizations; the media; independent government institutions; trade unions; faith-based groups; youth groups; academia/research institutes/think tanks; the judiciary branch; and other organizations. A total of 280 stakeholders participated in the survey (28% response rate). Respondents either received the questionnaires via email and returned it accordingly, or completed the questionnaire on an independent online platform, Qualtrics. Every country that engages in the Country Opinion Survey (COS) must include specific indicator questions that will be aggregated for the World Bank Group’s annual Corporate Scorecard. These questions are identified throughout the survey report. The results in this year’s Country Survey were compared to those in the Country Survey conducted in FY’14 (response rate was 41%, N=247). Data were weighted to reach the same stakeholder composition in two years, which allows for year comparisons. Stakeholder groups which were not present in both fiscal years were not included in the comparison. Respondents who belonged to the “other” stakeholder category were not included either. As a result, mean ratings, percentages of respondents, and the total number of respondents in both years are slightly different from those of the original data reported in the FY’14 COS report and the non- weighted data presented in appendices A, B, C, D, and F. For the weighted stakeholder breakdown and year comparison results, please refer to Appendix E (page 102). 3 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia III. Demographics of the Sample Current Position ▪ For further analyses, respondents from the Office of the President/Prime Minister and the office of a minister were combined. Respondents from financial sector/private banks and private sector organizations where combined. Respondents from private foundations, NGOs/community based organizations, and trade unions were combined in the “CSO” category; and the small number of respondents from independent government institutions, the judiciary branch, and other organizations were included in the “Other” category. There were no respondents from youth groups and faith-based groups. Percentage of Respondents (N=280) Employee of a Ministry, Ministerial Department or Implementation Agency 19% Academia/Research Institute/Think Tank 15% NGO/Community Based Organization 11% Local Government Office or Staff 10% Private Sector Organization 10% PMU overseeing implementation of project/Consultant/Contractor 7% Media (press, radio, TV, web, etc.) 7% Bilateral/Multilateral Agency 5% Office of Parliamentarian 4% Independent Government Institution (i.e., Regulatory Agency, Central Bank/oversight institution) 3% Office of Minister 3% Office of the President, Prime Minister 2% Private Foundation 2% Financial Sector/Private Bank 1% Trade Union 1% Judiciary Branch 1% Other 1% “Which of the following best describes your current position?” (Respondents chose from a list.) 4 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia III. Demographics of the Sample (continued) Area of Primary Specialization Percentage of Respondents (N=280) Governance 15% Generalist (specialized in multiple sectors) 12% Education 9% Macroeconomics and fiscal management 9% Finance and markets 8% Transport and ICT 7% Urban, rural, and social development 6% Social protection and labor 5% Agriculture 5% Energy and extractives 4% Health, nutrition, and population 4% Trade and competitiveness 4% Environment and natural resources 3% Poverty 2% Jobs 2% Fragility, conflict and violence 2% Water 1% Public-private partnerships 1% Gender 1% Climate change <1% “Please identify the primary specialization of your work.” (Respondents chose from a list.) 5 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia III. Demographics of the Sample (continued) Geographic Locations ▪ The small number of respondents from South Serbia, Central Serbia, and Vojvodina were combined into the “other” category. Geographic location comparisons between “Belgrade” and “other” can be found in Appendix C (page 84). Percentage of Respondents (N=280) Central Serbia, South Serbia, 6% 6% Vojvodina, 12% Belgrade, 76% "Which best represents your geographic location?" (Respondents chose from a list.) Exposure to Agencies within the World Bank Group Percentage of Respondents (N=280) The Multilateral Other, <1% Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA), 1% None, 12% The International Finance Corporation (IFC), 9% The World Bank (IBRD), 78% "Which of the following agencies of the World Bank Group do you primarily engage with in Serbia?" (Respondents chose from a list.) (Note: percentages may not total 100 due to rounding) 6 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia III. Demographics of the Sample (continued) Familiarity with the World Bank Group ▪ Year comparison: Respondents in this year’s Country Survey had significantly higher levels of familiarity with the WBG than respondents in the FY’14 Country Survey (weighted mean in FY’17 = 6.4; weighted mean in FY’14 = 5.8)1. ▪ Respondents’ levels of familiarity with the WBG were significantly, strongly correlated with their ratings of the WBG’s overall effectiveness in Serbia, and significantly, moderately correlated with the extent to which the WBG plays a relevant role in development in Serbia, and the extent to which the WBG contributes to the country’s development results. Mean Familiarity Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 All Respondents 6.4 PMU/ Consultant/ Contractor 7.9 Office of the President/ Prime Minister/ 7.7 Minister Bilateral/ Multilateral Agency 7.2 Media 7.0 Employee of a Ministry 6.6 Academia/ Research Institute/ Think Tank 6.5 Office of Parliamentarian 6.3 Other 6.2 CSO 5.8 Private Sector/ Financial Sector/ Private Bank 5.6 Local Government 4.8 "How familiar are you with the work of the World Bank Group in Serbia?" (1 - "Not familiar at all", 10 - "Extremely familiar") 1 Please refer to Appendix E (page 95) for more details on weighting. The means in the chart were calculated based on un-weighted data. 7 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia IV. General Issues Facing Serbia Headed in the Right Direction2 ▪ Year comparison: This year’s respondents were significantly more likely to say that Serbia is headed in the right direction compared to respondents in FY’14. ▪ Stakeholder groups: In this year’s Country Survey, respondents from the Office of the President/Prime Minister/Minister and employees of a ministry were significantly more likely to indicate that Serbia is headed in the right direction, while respondents from CSOs and bilateral/multilateral agencies were significantly less positive about the prospect of Serbia. Percentage of Respondents (FY 2017 N=278; FY 2014 N=253) 55% The right direction 40% 16% The wrong direction 22% 29% FY 2017 Not sure 39% FY 2014 "In general, would you say that Serbia is headed in ...?" (Respondents chose from a list.) (Note: percentages may not total 100) 2 Percentages presented in the chart were calculated based on weighted data from FY’17 and FY’14. 8 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia IV. General Issues Facing Serbia (continued) Development Priority ▪ Year comparison: Respondents in the previous FY’14 Country Survey indicated that the most important development priorities in Serbia were “public sector governance/reform” (44%), “job creation/employment” (38%), and “domestic private sector development” (32%). Percentage of Respondents (N=280) Education 56% Public sector governance/reform 38% Private sector development 25% Job creation/employment 21% Anti corruption 19% Judiciary reform 19% Economic growth 16% Agriculture and rural development 16% Health 14% Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted social assistance) 12% Poverty reduction 10% Global/regional integration 6% Information and communications technology 6% Energy 6% Natural resource management 5% Food safety 4% Pollution 3% Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 3% Urban development 2% Disaster risk management 2% "Listed below are a number of development priorities in Serbia. Please identify which of the following you consider the most important development priorities in Serbia. (Choose no more than THREE)" (Respondents chose from a list. Responses combined. Top 20 of 28 response options shown.) 9 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia IV. General Issues Facing Serbia (continued) What Would Contribute Most to Reducing Poverty ▪ Year comparison: In the previous FY’14 Country Survey, respondents indicated that the greatest contributors to poverty reduction in Serbia were “economic growth” (53%), “job creation/employment” (38%), “domestic private sector development” (37%), and “education” (28%). Percentage of Respondents (N=280) Economic growth 64% Job creation/employment 43% Education 30% Agriculture and rural development 24% Private sector development 24% Anti corruption 21% Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 17% Social protection 16% Public sector governance/reform 13% Information and communications technology 9% Judiciary reform 9% Health 5% Trade and exports 5% Natural resource management 4% Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, transportation) 4% Global/regional integration 3% Energy 2% Gender equity 2% Disease (e.g., cancer, heart deficiencies) 1% Food safety 1% "Poverty reduction is a broad term that encompasses work in many different areas. Which THREE areas of development listed below do you believe would contribute most to reducing poverty in Serbia? (Choose no more than THREE)" (Respondents chose from a list. Responses combined. Top 20 of 27 response options shown.) 10 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia IV. General Issues Facing Serbia (continued) Factors Contributing to “Shared Prosperity” ▪ Year comparison: In the previous FY’14 Country Survey, respondents indicated that shared prosperity can be best achieved through “consistent economic growth” (49%), “better employment opportunities for young people” (32%), and “education and training that better ensure job opportunity” (32%). Percentage of Respondents (N=280) Education and training that better ensure job 39% opportunity Better entrepreneurial opportunities (i.e., to start 31% small and medium sized businesses) Consistent economic growth 30% A growing middle class 22% Better employment opportunities for young people 17% Better opportunity for the poor who live in rural areas 13% More reliable social safety net 13% Greater access to health and nutrition for citizens 8% Greater voice and participation for citizens to help 8% ensure greater accountability Greater access to micro-finance for the poor 6% Better opportunity for the poor who live in urban 5% areas Better quality public services 4% Better employment opportunities for women 2% Other 1% "The World Bank Group’s “Shared Prosperity” goal captures two key elements, economic growth and equity. It will seek to foster income growth among the bottom 40 percent of a country’s population. Improvement in the Shared Prosperity Indicator requires growth and well-being of the less well-off. When thinking about the idea of “shared prosperity” in your country, which of the following TWO best illustrate how this would be achieved in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO)" (Respondents chose from a list. Responses combined.) 11 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia IV. General Issues Facing Serbia (continued) Gap between the Rich and the Poor Percentage of Respondents (N=280) Not a problem at Don’t know, 2% all, 4% A small problem, 2% A moderately big problem, 33% A very big problem, 59% "Do you think the gap between the rich and the poor is a very big problem, a moderately big problem, a small problem or not a problem at all in Serbia?" (Respondents chose from a list.) Global Climate Change Percentage of Respondents (N=280) Don’t know, 1% Not a problem, 3% Not too serious problem, 13% A very serious problem, 39% A somewhat serious problem, 44% "In your view, is climate change a very serious problem, somewhat serious, not too serious, or not a problem?" (Respondents chose from a list. ) 12 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia IV. General Issues Facing Serbia (continued) Early Childhood Development Percentage of Respondents (N=280) A slightly Not an important important development development priority, 1% priority, 1% A moderately important development priority, 9% A very important development priority, 90% "In your view, is early childhood development (i.e. nutrition, growth, care, and education) a very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not an important development priority in Serbia?" (Respondents chose from a list.) (Note: percentages may not total 100 due to rounding) Business Environment Percentage of Respondents (N=280) A slightly Not an important important development priority, 1% Don’t know, 1% development priority, 1% A moderately important development priority, 21% A very important development priority, 76% "In your view, is improvement of business environment a very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not an important development priority in Serbia?" (Respondents chose from a list.) 13 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia IV. General Issues Facing Serbia (continued) Infrastructure Quality Percentage of Respondents (N=280) A slightly Not an important Don’t know, 1% important development priority, 1% development priority, 1% A moderately important development priority, 26% A very important development priority, 71% "In your view, is improvement of infrastructure quality a very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not an important development priority in Serbia?" (Respondents chose from a list.) Energy Security Percentage of Respondents (N=280) A slightly Not an important Don’t know, 1% important development priority, 1% development priority, 4% A very important A moderately development important priority, 53% development priority, 41% "In your view, is improvement of energy security a very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not an important development priority in Serbia?" (Respondents chose from a list.) 14 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia V. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group Attributing Failed/Slow Reform Efforts ▪ Year comparison: Respondents in the previous FY’14 Country Survey most often attributed failed or slow World Bank Group assisted reform efforts to “lack of levels of capacity in government” (41%), “the government working inefficiently” (32%), and “reforms not being well thought out in light of country challenges” (31%). Percentage of Respondents (N=280) Reforms are not well thought out in light of 39% country challenges Political pressures and obstacles 31% Lack of/inadequate levels of capacity in 30% Government Poor coordination within the Government 20% The World Bank Group is not sensitive enough to 18% political/social realities on the ground There is not an adequate level of citizen/civil 12% society participation The Government works inefficiently 10% The World Bank Group does not do adequate 6% follow through/follow-up Poor coordination within the World Bank Group 5% Poor donor coordination 5% The World Bank Group works too slowly 4% Other 3% "When World Bank Group assisted reform efforts fail or are slow to take place, which of the following would you attribute this to? (Choose no more than TWO)" (Respondents chose from a list. Responses combined.) 15 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia V. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group (continued) As noted in the “Methodology” section, the indicator questions referred to throughout the survey report are questions that are asked in every country that engages in the Country Opinion Survey. These will be aggregated for the World Bank Group’s annual Corporate Scorecard. The World Bank Group’s Overall Effectiveness3 (Indicator Question) Mean Effectiveness Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.7 FY 2017 All respondents* FY 2014 6.2 "Overall, please rate your impression of the World Bank Group's effectiveness in Serbia." (1 - "Not effective at all", 10 - "Very effective") (*Significantly different between FY 2017 and FY 2014) Achieving Development Results (Indicator Question) Mean Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.9 FY 2017 All respondents FY 2014 6.6 "To what extent does the World Bank Group’s work help to achieve development results in Serbia?" (1-"To no degree at all", 10-"To a very significant degree") WBG Staff Preparedness Mean Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 7.1 FY 2017 All Respondents 6.7 FY 2014 "To what extent do you believe the World Bank Group’s staff is well prepared (e.g., skills and knowledge) to help Serbia solve its most complicated development challenges?" (1-"To no degree at all", 10-"To a very significant degree") 3 Means presented in the charts on this page were calculated based on weighted data. 16 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia V. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group (continued) The World Bank and the IFC Working Together ▪ Only those stakeholders who responded “Yes” to the question “Do your projects involve both the World Bank and the IFC?” provided their views on the working relationship between the World Bank and the IFC. Percentage of Respondents (N=93) Don`t know, 26% The two institutions work The way the two well together, 55% institutions work together needs improvement, 19% “If your projects involved both the World Bank and the IFC, what was your view on the two institutions working together in Serbia?” (Respondents chose from a list.) 17 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia V. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group (continued) Overall Ratings for Indicator Questions by Stakeholder Groups ▪ Stakeholder groups: Respondents across stakeholder groups had statistically similar overall ratings for the indicator questions. Responses for individual indicator questions by stakeholder groups can be found in Appendix B (see page 60). ▪ Collaboration: Respondents who collaborate with the WBG had significantly higher mean ratings for the aggregated responses to the twenty-six COS indicator questions (mean rating = 7.1) compared to respondents who do not collaborate with the WBG (mean rating = 6.4). Responses for individual indicator questions by exposure to the WBG can be found in Appendix F (page 102). Mean Ratings 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 All Stakeholder Groups 6.7 Other 7.4 PMU/ Consultant/ Contractor 7.3 Employee of a Ministry 6.9 Private Sector/ Financial Sector/ Private Bank 6.8 Office of Parliamentarian 6.7 Local Government 6.7 Bilateral/ Multilateral Agency 6.6 Academia/ Research Institute/ Think Tank 6.5 Office of the President/ Prime Minister/ 6.5 Minister CSO 6.4 Media 6.1 Mean Ratings for All Indicator Questions by Stakeholder Groups on a Scale from 1 to 10 18 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia V. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group (continued) Greatest Value ▪ Year comparison: Respondents in the previous FY’14 Country Survey indicated that the World Bank Group’s greatest value to Serbia was its “financial services” (49%) and “capacity development” (40%). Percentage of Respondents (N=280) Financial resources 22% 17% 39% Capacity development related to World Bank 23% 9% 32% Group supported projects Technical assistance (system oriented) 9% 15% 24% Policy advice, studies, analyses 10% 14% 24% Implementation support 11% 12% 23% Bringing together different groups of 8% 7% 15% stakeholders Promoting knowledge sharing 8% 7% 15% Mobilizing third party financial resources 4% 6% 10% Data and statistics 8% 10% Donor coordination 6% Greatest value Second greatest value Other 1% "When thinking about the World Bank Group’s role, which activity do you believe is of greatest VALUE and which activity is of second greatest value in Serbia?" (Respondents chose from a list.) 19 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia V. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group (continued) Greatest Weakness ▪ Year comparison: Respondents in the previous FY’14 Country Survey indicated that the World Bank Group’s greatest weaknesses in its work in Serbia were being “not willing to honestly criticize policies and reform efforts in the country” (21%) and “not adequately sensitive to political/social realities in Serbia” (18%). Percentage of Respondents (N=280) Not willing to honestly criticize policies and reform efforts 24% in the country Not enough public disclosure of its work 21% World Bank Group’s processes too complex 20% World Bank Group’s processes too slow 19% Not collaborating enough with stakeholders outside the 15% Government Not adequately sensitive to political/social realities in 14% Serbia Too influenced by developed countries 11% Not exploring alternative policy options 8% Its advice and strategies do not lend themselves to 6% practical problem solving Not aligned with country priorities 5% Other 3% Not aligned with other donors’ work 3% Staff too inaccessible 3% Arrogant in its approach 2% The credibility of its knowledge/data 1% Not client focused 1% Don`t know 0% "Which of the following do you identify as the World Bank Group’s greatest WEAKNESSES in its work in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO)" (Respondents chose from a list. Responses combined.) 20 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia VI. Sectoral Effectiveness Effectiveness of WBG’s Support in Sectoral Areas: Year Comparison4 Mean Effectiveness Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, transportation) 7.0 6.7 Financial markets* 6.8 5.7 Public sector governance/reform* 6.8 6.1 Economic growth* 6.7 5.9 Energy* 6.6 5.9 Global/regional integration 6.5 6.1 Private sector development* 6.5 5.8 Trade and exports* 6.4 5.4 Agriculture and rural development 6.3 Disaster risk management* 6.3 4.1 Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 6.3 5.7 Job creation/employment* 6.2 5.2 Pollution 6.2 Education 6.2 5.8 Poverty reduction 6.2 5.8 Water and sanitation* 6.1 5.6 Health 6.1 5.8 Gender equity 6.0 Urban development 6.0 Social protection 6.0 5.7 Climate change (e.g., mitigation, adaptation) 5.9 5.4 Food safety 5.8 Natural resource management 5.7 5.2 FY 2017 Judiciary reform 5.6 FY 2014 Anti corruption 5.5 5.5 Crime and violence 5.3 "How EFFECTIVE do you believe the World Bank Group is in terms of the work it does in the following areas of development in Serbia?" (1-"Not effective at all", 10-"Very effective") (*Significantly different between FY 2017 and FY 2014) 4 Means presented in this chart were calculated based on weighted data. See Appendix E for details. 21 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia VI. Sectoral Effectiveness (continued) Effectiveness of WBG’s Support in Sectoral Areas: Collaboration5 Mean Effectiveness Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Financial markets 7.3 6.6 Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, transportation) 7.2 7.0 Energy* 7.1 6.3 Economic growth 7.1 6.5 Global/regional integration 7.0 6.3 Public sector governance/reform 7.0 6.6 Private sector development* 6.9 6.2 Trade and exports 6.6 6.4 Gender equity* 6.6 5.7 Water and sanitation 6.6 5.9 Pollution 6.6 6.0 Health 6.5 5.9 Urban development* 6.5 5.7 Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 6.5 6.2 Poverty reduction 6.4 6.0 Job creation/employment 6.4 6.1 Education 6.4 6.0 Disaster risk management 6.4 6.3 Social protection 6.4 5.8 Agriculture and rural development 6.4 6.4 Climate change (e.g., mitigation, adaptation) 6.2 5.9 Food safety 6.0 5.7 Collaborating Natural resource management 5.9 with the WBG 5.6 Anti corruption 5.7 Not collaborating 5.4 with the WBG Judiciary reform 5.6 5.5 Crime and violence 5.6 5.3 "How EFFECTIVE do you believe the World Bank Group is in terms of the work it does in the following areas of development in Serbia?" (1-"Not effective at all", 10-"Very effective") (*Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators with the WBG) 5 Note in the Appendix on the sectoral effectiveness (Appendix A, page 43) that primarily informed stakeholders responded to this question. Respondents were given the option of “don’t know” if they did not have exposure to the WBG’s work in certain development areas. 22 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia VI. Sectoral Effectiveness (continued) The WBG Promoting Private Public Partnerships Mean Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 All Respondents 6.3 “To what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group’s work helps to find solutions that promote private public partnerships in Serbia?" (1 - "To no degree at all", 10 - "To a very significant degree") Helping the Poorest Percentage of Respondents (N=280) To a fully sufficient degree, 5% Don`t know, 24% To a very To a insufficient somewhat degree, 10% sufficient To a somewhat degree, 45% insufficient degree, 17% “To what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group's work and support help the poorest in Serbia?” (Respondents chose from a list.) (Note: percentages may not total 100 due to rounding) 23 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia VII. How the World Bank Group Operates The World Bank Group’s Work in Serbia: Year Comparison6 Mean Level of Agreement 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Overall the World Bank Group currently plays a 7.0 relevant role in development in Serbia*¹ 6.4 The World Bank Group’s work is aligned with 6.6 FY 2017 what I consider the development priorities for Serbia¹ 6.2 FY 2014 "To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the World Bank Group’s work in Serbia?" (1-"Strongly disagree", 10-"Strongly agree") (*Significantly different between FY 2017 and FY 2014) ¹Indicator Question The World Bank Group’s Work in Serbia: Collaboration Mean Level of Agreement 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 7.7 Overall the World Bank Group currently plays a relevant role in development in Serbia*¹ 6.6 The World Bank Group’s work is aligned with 7.1 what I consider the development priorities for Serbia*¹ 6.3 Collaborating with the WBG Not collaborating with the WBG "To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the World Bank Group’s work in Serbia?" (1-"Strongly disagree", 10-"Strongly agree") (*Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators with the WBG) ¹Indicator Question 6 Means in the chart were calculated based on weighted data. 24 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia VII. How the World Bank Group Operates (continued) Overall Perceptions: Year Comparison7 Mean Level of Agreement 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 7.9 The World Bank Group disburses funds promptly 8.2 The World Bank Group provides effective 7.6 implementation support (i.e., supervision of projects) 7.7 Working with the World Bank Group increases 7.5 Serbia’s institutional capacity 7.9 The World Bank Group effectively monitors and 7.5 evaluates the projects and programs it supports* 7.9 The World Bank Group’s approvals and reviews are 7.5 done in a timely fashion 7.5 The World Bank Group’s “Safeguard Policy” 7.4 requirements are reasonable 7.6 Where country systems (e.g., procurement, financial 7.2 management, etc.) are adequate, the World Bank 7.3 Group makes appropriate use of them¹ The World Bank Group’s conditions on its lending are 7.1 reasonable 7.4 FY 2017 The World Bank Group takes decisions quickly in 6.6 FY 2014 Serbia¹ 6.2 "To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements?" (1-"Strongly disagree", 10-"Strongly agree") (*Significantly different between FY 2017 and FY 2014) ¹Indicator Question 7 Means in the chart were calculated based on weighted data. 25 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia VII. How the World Bank Group Operates (continued) Overall Perceptions: Collaboration Mean Level of Agreement 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 8.4 The World Bank Group disburses funds promptly* 7.7 Working with the World Bank Group increases 8.0 Serbia’s institutional capacity* 7.2 The World Bank Group provides effective 7.9 implementation support (i.e., supervision of projects) 7.4 The World Bank Group effectively monitors and 7.8 evaluates the projects and programs it supports 7.3 The World Bank Group’s approvals and reviews are 7.5 done in a timely fashion 7.5 Where country systems (e.g., procurement, financial 7.5 management, etc.) are adequate, the World Bank 7.1 Group makes appropriate use of them¹ The World Bank Group’s “Safeguard Policy” 7.5 requirements are reasonable 7.4 The World Bank Group’s conditions on its lending are 7.3 reasonable 6.9 The World Bank Group takes decisions quickly in 7.0 Serbia*¹ 6.3 Collaborating with the WBG Not collaborating with the WBG "To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements?" (1-"Strongly disagree", 10-"Strongly agree") (*Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators with the WBG) ¹Indicator Question 26 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia VII. How the World Bank Group Operates (continued) The WBG as an Effective Development Partner: Year Comparison8 Mean Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Being a long-term partner*¹ 8.3 7.5 Collaboration with the Government*¹ 7.9 7.4 Treating clients and stakeholders in Serbia with 7.8 respect¹ 7.6 Straightforwardness and honesty¹ 6.9 7.0 Staff accessibility¹ 6.8 7.0 Openness (sharing data and other information)¹ 6.7 7.0 Collaboration with other donors and development 6.7 partners¹ 6.7 Helping to bring discipline/effective supervision to 6.7 implementation of investment projects¹ Being inclusive¹ 6.6 6.1 Responsiveness to needs¹ 6.5 6.2 Collaboration with the private sector¹ 6.1 Flexibility (in terms of changing country 6.1 circumstances)¹ 5.7 The speed in which it gets things accomplished on the 6.0 ground¹ 6.2 Collaboration with civil society¹ 6.0 FY 2017 Flexibility (in terms of the institution’s products and 6.0 FY 2014 services)¹ 5.8 "To what extent is the World Bank Group an effective development partner in Serbia, in terms of each of the following?" (1-"To no degree at all", 10-"To a very significant degree") (*Significantly different between FY 2017 and FY 2014) ¹Indicator Question 8 Means in the chart were calculated based on weighted data. 27 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia VII. How the World Bank Group Operates (continued) The WBG as an Effective Development Partner: Collaboration Mean Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Being a long-term partner¹ 8.6 8.1 Treating clients and stakeholders in Serbia with 8.2 respect¹ 7.6 Collaboration with the Government¹ 8.1 7.8 Staff accessibility*¹ 7.4 6.4 Straightforwardness and honesty¹ 7.3 6.7 Openness (sharing data and other information)*¹ 7.2 6.4 Collaboration with other donors and development 7.1 partners*¹ 6.4 Helping to bring discipline/effective supervision to 7.0 implementation of investment projects¹ 6.5 Responsiveness to needs*¹ 6.9 6.2 Being inclusive¹ 6.9 6.3 Collaboration with civil society*¹ 6.7 5.8 Flexibility (in terms of changing country 6.5 circumstances)*¹ 5.8 Collaboration with the private sector¹ 6.5 6.0 Flexibility (in terms of the institution’s products and 6.3 services)¹ 5.7 The speed in which it gets things accomplished on the 6.2 ground¹ 5.9 Collaborating with the WBG Non-collaborating with the WBG "To what extent is the World Bank Group an effective development partner in Serbia, in terms of each of the following?" (1-"To no degree at all", 10-"To a very significant degree") (*Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators with the WBG) ¹Indicator Question 28 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia VII. How the World Bank Group Operates (continued) Internal Measuring and Monitoring Mean Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 All Respondents 6.5 "To what extent do you believe the World Bank Group measures and corrects its work in real time in Serbia?" (1-"To no degree at all", 10-"To a very significant degree") Reimbursable Advisory Services Mean Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 All Respondents 6.4 “To what extent do you believe that Serbia received value for money from the World Bank Group’s Reimbursable Advisory Services (RAS)?" (1 - "To no degree at all", 10 - "To a very significant degree") 29 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia VIII. World Bank Group’s Knowledge and Instruments Frequency of Consulting WBG Knowledge Work and Activities9 Percentage of Respondents (FY 2017 N=278; FY 2014 N=241) 10% Weekly 8% 20% Monthly 27% 39% A few times a year 39% 24% Rarely 20% FY 2017 7% FY 2014 Never 6% "How frequently do you consult World Bank Group's knowledge work and activities in the work you do?" (Respondents chose from a list.) 9 Means in the charts on this page were calculated based on weighted data. 30 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia VIII. World Bank Group’s Knowledge and Instruments (continued) Meeting Serbia’ Knowledge Needs10 (Indicator Question) Mean Level of Agreement 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.4 FY 2017 All Respondents* 5.9 FY 2014 "The World Bank Group meets Serbia's needs for knowledge services (e.g., research, analysis, data, technical assistance)" (1-"Strongly disagree", 10-"Strongly agree") (*Significantly different between FY 2017 and FY 2014) Contribution of the WBG’s Knowledge Work and Activities (Indicator Question) Mean Significance Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.6 All Respondents* FY 2017 7.7 FY 2014 "Overall, how significant a contribution do you believe the World Bank Group's knowledge work and activities make to development results in your country?" (1-"Not significant at all", 10-"Very significant") (*Significantly different between FY 2017 and FY 2014) Technical Quality of the WBG’s Knowledge Work and Activities (Indicator Question) Mean Technical Quality Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 7.3 All Respondents FY 2017 7.6 FY 2014 "Overall, how would you rate the technical quality of the World Bank Group's knowledge work and activities?" (1-"Very low technical quality", 10-"Very high technical quality") 10 Means in the charts on this page were calculated based on weighted data. 31 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia VIII. World Bank Group’s Knowledge and Instruments (continued) Qualities of the WBG’s Knowledge Work and Activities11 Mean Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Are source of relevant information on global 7.4 good practices 7.8 6.8 Are relevant to country challenges Are accessible (well written and easy to 6.7 understand) 7.0 6.5 Lead to practical solutions 6.8 6.3 Are timely 6.3 Include appropriate level of stakeholder 6.3 involvement during preparation 6.2 6.2 Are adequately disseminated 6.6 Are adaptable to Serbia’s specific development 6.1 FY 2017 challenges and country circumstances*¹ 6.7 FY 2014 6.0 Are translated enough into local language 5.6 "In Serbia, to what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group’s knowledge work and activities:" (1-"To no degree at all", 10-"To a very significant degree") (*Significantly dfferent between FY 2017 and FY 2014) ¹Indicator Question 11 Means in the chart were calculated based on weighted data. 32 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia VIII. World Bank Group’s Knowledge and Instruments (continued) Meeting Serbia’s Needs for Financial Instruments12 (Indicator Question) Mean Level of Agreement 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.1 All Respondents* FY 2017 5.5 FY 2014 "The World Bank Group’s financial instruments (i.e., investment lending, Development Policy Loan, Trust Funds, etc.) meet the needs of Serbia." (1-"Strongly disagree", 10-"Strongly agree") (*Significantly different between FY 2017 and FY 2014) Effectiveness of WBG’s Instruments Mean Effectiveness Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Trust funds and grants 6.9 Investment Project Financing (IPF) 6.9 Guarantees 6.7 Program-for-Results Financing (PforR) 6.6 Development Policy Financing (DPF) 6.6 IFC Advisory Services 6.5 IFC Investment Services 6.4 "How effective do the World Bank Group's activities below support Serbia's efforts to achieve development results?" (1 - "Not effective at all", 10 - "Very effective") 12 Means in the chart were calculated based on weighted data. 33 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia IX. The Future Role of the World Bank Group in Serbia Making the World Bank Group of Greater Value ▪ Year comparison: Respondents in the previous FY’14 Country Survey indicated that the World Bank should “increase the level of capacity development in country” (35%), “reach out more to groups outside of Government” (29%), “collaborate more effectively with Government clients” (22%), and “offer more innovative financial products” (19%) to make itself of greater value in Serbia. Percentage of Respondents (N=280) Reduce the complexity of obtaining World Bank Group 26% financing Help to bring discipline/effective supervision to 25% implementation of investment projects Increase the level of capacity development in the country 23% Reach out more to groups outside of Government 19% Collaborate more effectively with Government clients 16% (e.g., national, state, local) Offer more innovative knowledge services 16% Improve the quality of i ts experts as related to Serbia’s 14% s pecific challenges Offer more innovative financial products 13% Provi de more adequate data/knowledge/statistics/figures 10% on Serbia’s economy Improve the competitiveness of its financing compared to 10% markets (e.g., cost, timeliness, other terms) Work faster 8% Increase availability of Reimbursable Advisory Services 5% (RAS) Other 3% Ensure greater selectivity in its work 2% "Which of the following SHOULD the World Bank Group do to make itself of greater value in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO)" (Respondents chose from a list. Responses combined.) 34 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia IX. The Future Role of the World Bank Group in Serbia (continued) The World Bank Group Should Collaborate More with … ▪ Year comparison: Respondents in the previous FY’14 Country Survey indicated that the World Bank Group should work more with “private sector” (45%), “local government” (39%), and “academia/think tanks/research institutes” (34%) to ensure better development results in Serbia. Percentage of Respondents (N=280) Private sector 40% Local government 37% Academia/think tanks/research institutes 33% Beneficiaries 31% NGOs/Community Based Organizations 18% Media 11% Youth/university groups 8% Donor community 6% Parliament 5% Other 1% Foundations 1% Don`t know <1% "In addition to the regular relations with the national government, which TWO of the following groups should the World Bank Group collaborate with more in your country?" (Respondents chose from a list. Responses combined.) 35 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia IX. The Future Role of the World Bank Group in Serbia (continued) Where the World Bank Group Should Focus its Resources ▪ Year comparison: Respondents in the previous FY’14 Country Survey indicated that the World Bank Group should focus its resources on “public sector governance/reform” (38%), “domestic private sector development” (37%), and “education” (26%). Percentage of Respondents (N=280) Education 35% Private sector development 30% Job creation/employment 29% Public sector governance/reform 25% Economic growth 22% Health 16% Poverty reduction 15% Judiciary reform 14% Agriculture and rural development 14% Anti corruption 14% Energy 11% Transport 10% Social protection 7% Global/regional integration 7% Pollution 6% Information and communications technology 6% Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 5% Climate change (e.g., mitigation, adaptation) 4% Disaster risk management 4% Financial markets 4% “When thinking about how the World Bank Group can have the most impact on development results in Serbia, in which sectoral areas do you believe the WBG should focus most of its resources in Serbia? ( Choose no more than THREE)” (Respondents chose from a list. Responses combined. Top 20 of 28 response options shown.) 36 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia IX. The Future Role of the World Bank Group in Serbia (continued) Future Combination of the WBG Services13 ▪ Year comparison: This year’s respondents were significantly more likely to indicate that the WBG should offer more knowledge services compared to respondents in the FY’14 Country Survey. Percentage of Respondents (FY 2017 N=277; FY 2014 N=227) 41% Knowledge products 26% 22% The combination is appropriate for Serbia 42% 19% Financial services 27% 10% Don`t know 0% 6% Convening services 5% FY 2017 FY 2014 2% None of the above 0% "When considering the combination of services that the World Bank Group offers in Serbia, and taking into account its limited level of resources, which ONE of the following do you believe the World Bank Group should offer more of in Serbia?" (Respondents chose from a list. Responses combined.) (Percentages may not total 100 due to rounding) 13 Percentages in the chart were calculated based on weighted data. 37 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia X. Communication and Outreach Note: When considering the World Bank Group’s future outreach with key constituencies, please see Appendix B (page 60) for all responses by stakeholder groups. General Information Sources ▪ Year comparison: Respondents in the previous FY’14 Country Survey indicated that they got most of their information about economic and social development issues in Serbia from “the Internet” (76%) and “local newspapers” (38%). Percentage of Respondents (N=280) Internet 76% Social media (e.g., blogs, Facebook, Twitter, 20% YouTube, Flickr) Periodicals 16% Local television 14% Local newspapers 12% Other 9% International television 6% International newspapers 5% Local radio 1% International radio 0% "How do you get most of your information about economic and social development issues in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO)" (Respondents chose from a list. Responses combined.) 38 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia X. Communication and Outreach (continued) Preferred Information Sources ▪ Year comparison: Respondents in the previous FY’14 Country Survey indicated that they would prefer to receive information from the World Bank Group through its “seminars/ workshops/conferences” (47%) and “e-Newsletters” (41%). Percentage of Respondents (N=280) e-Newsletters 47% World Bank Group’s 35% seminars/workshops/conferences World Bank Group’s website 25% World Bank Group’s publications and other 23% written materials Direct contact with World Bank Group (i.e., 22% face to face meetings/discussions) Social media (e.g., blogs, Facebook, Twitter, 12% YouTube, Flickr) Mobile phones 2% Other 0% "How would you prefer to receive information from the World Bank Group? (Choose no more than TWO)" (Respondents chose from a list. Responses combined.) 39 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia X. Communication and Outreach (continued) Access to Information14 ▪ Year comparison: This year’s respondents were significantly more likely to be aware of the AI policy than the respondents in the FY’14 Country Survey. Percentage of Respondents (FY 2017 N=278; FY 2014 N=252) 28% Yes FY 2017 15% FY 2014 72% No 85% "Are you aware of the World Bank Group's Access to Information Policy under which the WBG will now disclose any information in its possession that is not on a list of exceptions?" Access to the Internet ▪ Year comparison: This year’s respondents were significantly more likely to have reliable access to the Internet than the respondents in the FY’14 Country Survey. Percentage of Respondents (FY 2017 N=278; FY 2014 N=253) 99% Yes 89% FY 2017 1% No FY 2014 11% "Do you have reliable access to the Internet?" Percentage of Respondents (N=233) High speed/WiFi 99% Dial-up 1% "Which Internet connection do you use primarily when visiting a World Bank Group website?” (Respondents chose from a list.) 14 Percentages presented in the first two charts were calculated based on weighted data. 40 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia X. Communication and Outreach (continued) The WBG Website Usage15 Percentage of Respondents (FY 2017 N=278; FY 2014 N=253 ) 84% Yes 79% FY 2017 16% No FY 2014 21% "Do you use/have you used the World Bank Group website??" Use of the WBG’s Social Media Channels Percentage of Respondents (FY 2017 N=280) Yes 21% No 79% "Do you currently consult the World Bank Group social media sites (e.g., blogs, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Flickr)?" Percentage of Respondents (N=280) Weekly 7% Monthly 22% A few times a year 24% Rarely 30% Never 18% "How frequently do you consult the World Bank Group’s social media channels (e.g., blogs, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Flickr) for information/knowledge that you can use in your work?" (Respondents chose from a list. ) (Note: percentages may not total 100 due to rounding) 15 Percentages presented in the chart were calculated based on weighted data. 41 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia XI. Appendices A. Responses to All Questions across All Respondents...................... 43 B. Responses to All Questions by Stakeholder Groups ...................... 60 C. Responses to Indicator Questions by Geographic Location........... 84 D. Responses to Selected Questions by Level of Collaboration with the World Bank Group ........................................................................ 86 E. Responses to Selected Questions by Year..................................... 95 F. Indicator Questions as a Function of Exposure to the WBG ........ 102 G. WBG Country Opinion Survey FY 2017 – Serbia Questionnaire . 103 Serbia 42 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia Appendix A: Responses to All Questions across All Respondents (N=280) All rating scale questions are presented with the total number of respondents that provided a rating (N), the number of respondents who indicated that they “Don’t know” (DK), the mean rating across all respondents (Mean), and the standard deviation of this mean (SD). Indicator questions are noted with an asterisk (*). A. General Issues Facing Serbia Percentage of Respondents 1. In general would you say that Serbia is headed in ... ? (N=280) The right direction 56.1% The wrong direction 15.4% Not sure 28.6% 2. Listed below are a number of development priorities in Serbia. Please identify which of the following you consider the most important Percentage of Respondents development priorities in Serbia? (Choose no more than THREE) (Responses Combined; N=280) Education 55.7% Public sector governance/reform (i.e., government effectiveness, public financial 38.2% management, public expenditure, fiscal system reform) Private sector development 25.4% Job creation/employment 21.4% Anti corruption 19.3% Judiciary reform 18.9% Economic growth 16.4% Agriculture and rural development 15.7% Health 13.9% Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted social assistance) 11.8% Poverty reduction 10.4% Global/regional integration 6.4% Information and communications technology 6.1% Energy 6.1% Natural resource management 4.6% Food safety 3.6% Pollution 2.9% Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 2.9% Urban development 2.1% Disaster risk management 1.8% Gender equity 1.8% Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, transportation) 1.4% Crime and violence 1.4% Climate change (e.g., mitigation, adaptation) 1.4% Disease (e.g., cancer, heart deficiencies) 1.1% Financial markets 0.7% Water and sanitation 0.7% Trade and exports 0.7% 43 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia A. General Issues Facing Serbia (continued) 3. Poverty reduction is a broad term that encompasses work in many different areas. Which THREE areas of development listed below do you believe would Percentage of Respondents contribute most to reducing poverty in Serbia? (Choose no more than THREE) (Responses Combined; N=280) Economic growth 63.6% Job creation/employment 42.5% Education 29.6% Agriculture and rural development 24.3% Private sector development 23.6% Anti corruption 20.7% Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 17.1% Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted social assistance) 16.4% Public sector governance/reform (i.e., government effectiveness, public financial 12.5% management, public expenditure, fiscal system reform) Information and communications technology 8.9% Judiciary reform 8.6% Health 5.0% Trade and exports 4.6% Natural resource management 4.3% Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, transportation) 3.9% Global/regional integration 3.2% Energy 1.8% Gender equity 1.8% Disease (e.g., cancer, heart deficiencies) 1.1% Food safety 1.1% Crime and violence 0.7% Climate change (e.g., mitigation, adaptation) 0.7% Financial markets 0.7% Disaster risk management 0.4% Water and sanitation 0.4% Pollution 0.0% Urban development 0.0% 44 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia A. General Issues Facing Serbia (continued) 4. The World Bank Group’s “Shared Prosperity” goal captures two key elements, economic growth and equity. It will seek to foster income growth among the bottom 40 percent of a country’s population. Improvement i n the Shared Prosperity Indicator requires growth and well-being of the less well-off. When thinking about the idea of “shared prosperity” in your country, which of the following TWO best illustrate how this would be achieved in Serbia? Percentage of Respondents (Choose no more than TWO) (Responses Combined; N=280) Education and training that better ensure job opportunity 38.9% Better entrepreneurial opportunities (i.e., to start small and medium sized 30.7% businesses) Consistent economic growth 29.6% A growing middle class 22.1% Better employment opportunities for young people 16.8% Better opportunity for the poor who live in rural areas 13.2% More reliable social safety net 13.2% Greater access to health and nutrition for citizens 7.9% Greater voice and participation for citizens to help ensure greater accountability 7.5% Greater access to micro-finance for the poor 6.1% Better opportunity for the poor who live in urban areas 4.6% Better quality public services 4.3% Better employment opportunities for women 2.1% Other 1.4% 5. Do you think the gap between the rich and the poor is a very big problem, a moderately big problem, a small problem, or not a problem at all in Serbia? Percentage of Respondents (Select only ONE response) (N=280) A very big problem 58.9% A moderately big problem 33.2% A small problem 2.1% Not a problem at all 3.6% Don’t know 2.1% 6. In your view, is climate change a very serious problem, somewhat serious, not too serious, or not a problem in your country? (Select only ONE Percentage of Respondents response) (N=280) A very serious problem 38.9% A somewhat serious problem 43.6% Not too serious problem 13.2% Not a problem 3.2% Don’t know 1.1% 7. In your view, is early childhood development (i.e. nutrition, growth, care, and education) a very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not Percentage of Respondents an important development priority in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) (N=280) A very important development priority 89.6% A moderately important development priority 8.6% A slightly important development priority 1.1% Not an important development priority .7% 45 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia A. General Issues Facing Serbia (continued) 8. In your view, is improvement of business environment a very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not an important development Percentage of Respondents priority in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) (N=280) A very important development priority 76.1% A moderately important development priority 20.7% A slightly important development priority 1.4% Not an important development priority 1.1% Don’t know .7% 9. In your view, is improvement of infrastructure quality a very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not an important development Percentage of Respondents priority in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) (N=280) A very important development priority 71.4% A moderately important development priority 26.1% A slightly important development priority 1.4% Not an important development priority .7% Don’t know .4% 10. In your view, is improvement of energy security a very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not an important development Percentage of Respondents priority in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) (N=280) A very important development priority 53.2% A moderately important development priority 40.7% A slightly important development priority 3.9% Not an important development priority 1.4% Don’t know .7% 46 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia B. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group Familiarity N DK Mean SD 1. How familiar are you with the work of the World Bank Group in Serbia? 280 0 6.35 2.19 (1-Not familiar at all, 10-Extremely familiar) Effectiveness* N DK Mean SD 2. Overall, please rate your impression of the World Bank Group’s effectiveness 250 30 6.76 1.97 in Serbia. (1-Not effective at all, 10-Very effective) Staff Preparedness N DK Mean SD 3. To what extent do you believe the World Bank Group’s staff is well prepared (e.g., skills and knowledge) to help Serbia solve its most complicated 226 54 7.07 2.18 development challenges? (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) 4. When thinking about how the World Bank Group can have the most impact on development results in Serbia, in which sectoral areas do you believe the World Bank Group should focus most of its resources (financial and Percentage of Respondents knowledge services) in Serbia? (Choose no more than THREE) (Responses Combined; N=280) Education 35.0% Private sector development 29.6% Job creation/employment 28.9% Public sector governance/reform (i.e., government effectiveness, public financial 25.0% management, public expenditure, fiscal system reform) Economic growth 21.8% Health 15.7% Poverty reduction 14.6% Judiciary reform 13.9% Agriculture and rural development 13.6% Anti corruption 13.6% Energy 11.1% Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, transportation) 9.6% Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted social assistance) 7.1% Global/regional integration 6.8% Pollution 5.7% Information and communications technology 5.7% Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 5.4% Climate change (e.g., mitigation, adaptation) 4.3% Disaster risk management 3.6% Financial markets 3.6% Water and sanitation 3.2% Natural resource management 3.2% Food safety 2.1% Urban development 1.8% Gender equity 1.8% Disease (e.g., cancer, heart deficiencies) 1.4% Crime and violence 1.1% Trade and exports 1.1% 47 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia B. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group (continued) 5. When thinking about the World Bank Group’s role, which Percentage of Respondents (N=280) activity do you believe is of greatest VALUE and which activity Greatest 2nd Greatest is of second greatest value in Serbia? Value Value Combined Financial resources 22.5% 16.8% 39.3% Capacity development related to World Bank Group supported 22.5% 9.3% 31.8% projects Technical assistance (system oriented) 9.3% 15.4% 24.6% Policy advice, studies, analyses 10.4% 13.9% 24.3% Implementation support 11.1% 11.8% 22.9% Bringing together different groups of stakeholders 7.9% 7.1% 15.0% Promoting knowledge sharing 7.5% 7.1% 14.6% Mobilizing third party financial resources 3.9% 6.4% 10.4% Data and statistics 1.8% 8.2% 10.0% Donor coordination 3.2% 2.5% 5.7% Other 0.0% 1.4% 1.4% 6. Which of the following do you identify as the World Bank Group’s greatest Percentage of Respondents WEAKNESSES in its work in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO) (Responses Combined; N=280) Not willing to honestly criticize policies and reform efforts in the country 23.9% Not enough public disclosure of its work 20.7% World Bank Group’s processes too complex 20.0% World Bank Group’s processes too slow (e.g., too bureaucratic in its operational 19.3% policies and procedures) Not collaborating enough with stakeholders outside the Government 14.6% Not adequately sensitive to political/social realities in Serbia 13.9% Too influenced by developed countries 11.4% Not exploring alternative policy options 7.9% Its advice and strategies do not lend themselves to practical problem solving 6.4% Not aligned with country priorities 5.4% Other 2.9% Not aligned with other donors’ work 2.9% Staff too inaccessible 2.5% Arrogant in its approach 2.1% The credibility of its knowledge/data 1.4% Not client focused 0.7% Don`t know 0.0% 7. To what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group’s work and Percentage of Respondents support help the poorest in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) (N=280) To a fully sufficient degree 5.4% To a somewhat sufficient degree 44.6% To a somewhat insufficient degree 16.8% To a very insufficient degree 9.6% Don`t know 23.6% 48 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia B. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group (continued) 8. How EFFECTIVE do you believe the following World Bank Group’s Effectiveness instruments are in supporting Serbia Government’s efforts to reduce poverty? (1-Not effective at all, 10-Very effective) N N/A Mean SD 1. Investment Project Financing (IPF) 183 97 6.86 2.29 2. Development Policy Financing (DPF) 177 103 6.59 2.26 3. Program-for-Results Financing (PforR) 158 158 6.60 2.35 4. Trust funds and grants 173 107 6.89 2.44 5. Guarantees 129 151 6.65 2.22 6. IFC Investment Services 146 134 6.38 2.41 7. IFC Advisory Services 164 116 6.55 2.46 9. In addition to the regular relations with the national government, which TWO of the following groups should the World Bank Group collaborate with more Percentage of Respondents in your country? (Choose no more than TWO) (Responses Combined; N=280) Private sector 39.6% Local government 37.1% Academia/think tanks/research institutes 33.2% Beneficiaries 31.4% NGOs/Community Based Organizations 18.2% Media 11.1% Youth/university groups 7.9% Donor community 6.4% Parliament 4.6% Other 1.4% Foundations 1.4% Don`t know 0.4% To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the World Level of Agreement Bank Group’s work in Serbia? (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) N DK Mean SD 10. Overall the World Bank Group currently plays a relevant role in 250 30 7.04 2.26 development in Serbia* 11. The World Bank Group’s work is aligned with what I consider the 246 34 6.65 2.24 development priorities for Serbia* 49 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia B. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group (continued) To what extent is the World Bank Group an effective development partner in Degree Serbia, in terms of each of the following? (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) N DK Mean SD 12. Responsiveness to needs* 222 58 6.54 2.24 13. Flexibility (in terms of the institution’s products and services)* 213 67 6.01 2.30 14. Flexibility (in terms of changing country circumstances)* 220 60 6.08 2.32 15. Being inclusive* 205 75 6.58 2.36 16. Openness (sharing data and other information)* 230 50 6.74 2.35 17. Collaboration with the Government* 222 58 7.90 1.92 18. The speed in which it gets things accomplished on the ground* 222 58 6.04 2.26 19. Helping to bring discipline/effective supervision to implementation of 214 66 6.72 2.40 investment projects* 20. Collaboration with civil society* 196 84 6.13 2.37 21. Staff accessibility* 227 53 6.84 2.48 22. Collaboration with other donors and development partners* 188 92 6.74 2.28 23. Collaboration with the private sector* 170 110 6.17 2.28 24. Straightforwardness and honesty* 219 61 6.97 2.43 25. Treating clients and stakeholders in Serbia with respect* 227 53 7.84 2.33 26. Being a long-term partner* 236 44 8.31 2.01 27. When World Bank Group assisted reform efforts fail or are slow to take place, which of the following would you attribute this to? (Choose no more Percentage of Respondents than THREE) (Responses Combined; N=280) Reforms are not well thought out in light of country challenges 38.9% Political pressures and obstacles 30.7% Lack of/inadequate levels of capacity in Government 30.4% Poor coordination within the Government 20.0% The World Bank Group is not sensitive enough to political/social realities on the 18.2% ground There is not an adequate level of citizen/civil society participation 11.8% The Government works inefficiently 10.4% The World Bank Group does not do adequate follow through/follow-up 5.7% Poor coordination within the World Bank Group 5.4% Poor donor coordination 4.6% The World Bank Group works too slowly 3.6% Other 2.5% 50 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia C. World Bank Group’s Effectiveness and Results 1. In your opinion, how IMPORTANT is it for the World Bank Group to be Importance involved in the following areas of development in Serbia? (1-Not important at all, 10-Very important) N DK Mean SD 1. Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted social assistance) 254 26 7.24 2.50 2. Gender equity 253 27 6.58 2.60 3. Private sector development 265 15 8.26 1.90 4. Education 265 15 8.54 1.95 5. Public sector governance/reform (i.e., government effectiveness, public 266 14 8.33 2.03 financial management, public expenditure, fiscal system reform) 6. Global/regional integration 262 18 7.44 2.31 7. Food safety 244 36 7.09 2.32 8. Urban development 251 29 7.10 2.28 9. Energy 263 17 7.88 2.08 10. Water and sanitation 253 27 7.49 2.19 11. Pollution 257 23 7.91 2.09 12. Job creation/employment 266 14 8.40 1.90 13. Health 261 19 8.30 1.98 14. Financial markets 248 32 7.82 2.15 15. Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, transportation) 261 19 8.00 1.96 16. Agriculture and rural development 254 26 8.19 1.89 17. Trade and exports 247 33 7.29 2.19 18. Crime and violence 242 38 6.50 2.70 19. Natural resource management 245 35 6.78 2.52 20. Climate change (e.g., mitigation, adaptation) 258 22 7.47 2.38 21. Poverty reduction 258 22 8.43 2.02 22. Anti corruption 252 28 8.10 2.32 23. Judiciary reform 251 29 8.18 2.13 24. Economic growth 259 21 8.58 1.74 25. Disaster risk management 253 27 7.45 2.23 26. Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 252 28 7.71 2.24 27. Disease (e.g., cancer, heart deficiencies) 244 36 7.18 2.48 28. Information and communications technology 254 26 7.81 2.25 51 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia C. World Bank Group’s Effectiveness and Results 2. How EFFECTIVE do you believe the World Bank Group is in terms of the work Effectiveness it does in the following areas of development in Serbia? (1-Not effective at all, 10-Very effective) N DK Mean SD 1. Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted social assistance) 168 112 6.04 2.41 2. Gender equity 150 130 6.10 2.31 3. Private sector development 170 110 6.51 2.22 4. Education 180 100 6.18 2.37 5. Public sector governance/reform (i.e., government effectiveness, public 197 83 6.79 2.30 financial management, public expenditure, fiscal system reform) 6. Global/regional integration 159 121 6.55 2.51 7. Food safety 125 155 5.83 2.35 8. Urban development 146 134 6.04 2.37 9. Energy 161 119 6.66 2.33 10. Water and sanitation 135 145 6.17 2.36 11. Pollution 139 141 6.23 2.41 12. Job creation/employment 166 114 6.25 2.39 13. Health 163 117 6.16 2.48 14. Financial markets 149 131 6.88 2.21 15. Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, transportation) 171 109 7.08 2.22 16. Agriculture and rural development 158 122 6.37 2.27 17. Trade and exports 143 137 6.47 2.19 18. Crime and violence 124 156 5.40 2.53 19. Natural resource management 127 153 5.70 2.50 20. Climate change (e.g., mitigation, adaptation) 149 131 5.99 2.57 21. Poverty reduction 175 105 6.18 2.54 22. Anti corruption 156 124 5.51 2.69 23. Judiciary reform 157 123 5.58 2.64 24. Economic growth 178 102 6.73 2.52 25. Disaster risk management 153 127 6.35 2.48 26. Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 155 125 6.30 2.52 Achieving Development Results* N DK Mean SD 3. To what extent does the World Bank Group’s work help to achieve development results in Serbia? (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant 240 40 6.88 2.08 degree) To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the World Bank Group in Serbia? (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) N DK Mean SD 4. The World Bank Group’s financial instruments (i.e., investment lending, 224 56 6.15 2.29 Development Policy Loan, Trust Funds, etc.) meet the needs of Serbia* 5. The World Bank Group meets Serbia’s needs for knowledge services (e.g., 238 42 6.50 2.35 research, analysis, data, technical assistance)* Reimbursable Advisory Services* N DK Mean SD 6. To what extent do you believe that Serbia received value for money from the World Bank Group’s Reimbursable Advisory Services (RAS)? 172 108 6.42 2.26 (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) 52 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia D. The World Bank Group’s Knowledge Work and Activities 1. How frequently do you consult World Bank Group’s knowledge work and Percentage of Respondents activities in the work you do? (N=280) Weekly 10.0% Monthly 18.9% A few times a year 38.2% Rarely 25.7% Never 7.1% In Serbia, to what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group’s Degree knowledge work and activities: (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) N DK Mean SD 2. Are timely 217 63 6.38 2.19 3. Include appropriate level of stakeholder involvement during preparation 216 64 6.35 2.30 4. Lead to practical solutions 228 52 6.55 2.22 5. Are accessible (well written and easy to understand) 225 55 6.75 2.22 6. Are source of relevant information on global good practices 229 51 7.43 2.05 7. Are relevant to country challenges 225 55 6.81 2.25 8. Are adequately disseminated 207 73 6.27 2.28 9. Are translated enough into local language 199 81 6.05 2.50 10. Are adaptable to Serbia’s specific development challenges and country 216 64 6.16 2.34 circumstances* Overall Evaluations N DK Mean SD 11. Overall, how significant a contribution do you believe the World Bank Group’s knowledge work and activities make to development results in your 241 39 6.65 2.06 country?* (1-Not significant at all, 10-Very significant) 12. Overall, how would you rate the technical quality of the World Bank Group’s knowledge work and activities?* (1-Very low technical quality, 10-Very high 235 45 7.33 1.90 technical quality) 53 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia E. Working with the World Bank Group To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements? Level of Agreement (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) N DK Mean SD 1. The World Bank Group disburses funds promptly 163 117 7.96 1.96 2. The World Bank Group effectively monitors and evaluates the projects and 220 60 7.50 2.09 programs it supports 3. The World Bank Group’s approvals and reviews are done in a timely fashion 176 104 7.49 2.01 4. The World Bank Group’s “Safeguard Policy” requirements are reasonable 148 132 7.44 2.24 5. The World Bank Group’s conditions on its lending are reasonable 177 103 7.09 2.36 6. The World Bank Group takes decisions quickly in Serbia* 196 84 6.63 2.22 7. Working with the World Bank Group increases Serbia’s institutional capacity 228 52 7.54 2.28 8. Where country systems (e.g., procurement, financial management, etc.) are 159 121 7.24 2.32 adequate, the World Bank Group makes appropriate use of them* 9. The World Bank Group provides effective implementation support (i.e., 209 71 7.65 2.16 supervision of projects) WBG Promoting PPP in Serbia N DK Mean SD 10. To what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group’s work helps to find solutions that promote private public partnerships in Serbia? (1-To no 189 91 6.31 2.21 degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) Measuring and Correcting the World Bank Group’s Work N DK Mean SD 11. To what extent do you believe the World Bank Group measures and corrects its work in real time in Serbia? (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant 171 109 6.50 2.19 degree) 54 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia F. The Future Role of the World Bank Group in Serbia 1. Which of the following SHOULD the World Bank Group do to make itself of Percentage of Respondents greater value in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO) (Responses Combined; N=280) Reduce the complexity of obtaining World Bank Group financing 25.7% Help to bring discipline/effective supervision to implementation of investment 25.0% projects Increase the level of capacity development in the country 23.2% Reach out more to groups outside of Government 19.3% Collaborate more effectively with Government clients (e.g., national, state, local) 16.4% Offer more innovative knowledge services 16.1% Improve the quality of its experts as related to Serbia’s specific challenges 14.3% Offer more innovative financial products 12.5% Provide more adequate data/knowledge/statistics/figures on Serbia’s economy 9.6% Improve the competitiveness of its financing compared to markets (e.g., cost, 9.6% timeliness, other terms) Work faster 7.9% Increase availability of Reimbursable Advisory Services (RAS) 5.0% Other 2.5% Ensure greater selectivity in its work 1.8% 2. When considering the combination of services that the World Bank Group offers in Serbia, and taking into account its limited level of resources, which ONE of the following do you believe the World Bank Group should offer more Percentage of Respondents of in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) (N=280) Knowledge products 40.4% The combination is appropriate for Serbia 21.4% Financial services 19.6% Don`t know 10.4% Convening services 6.1% None of the above 2.1% 55 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia G. Communication and Information Sharing 1. How do you get most of your information about economic and social Percentage of Respondents development issues in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO) (Responses Combined; N=280) Internet 76.4% Social media (e.g., blogs, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Flickr) 20.4% Periodicals 16.1% Local television 13.9% Local newspapers 11.8% Other 8.9% International television 6.4% International newspapers 5.4% Local radio 1.4% International radio 0.0% 2. How would you prefer to receive information from the World Bank Group? Percentage of Respondents (Choose no more than TWO) (Responses Combined; N=280) e-Newsletters 47.1% World Bank Group’s seminars/workshops/conferences 34.6% World Bank Group’s website 24.6% World Bank Group’s publications and other written materials 23.2% Direct contact with World Bank Group (i.e., face to face meetings/discussions) 21.8% Social media (e.g., blogs, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Flickr) 12.1% Mobile phones 2.1% Other 0.0% 3. Are you aware of the World Bank Group's Access to Information Policies under which the World Bank Group discloses any information in its Percentage of Respondents possession that is not on a list of exceptions? (N=280) Yes 28.2% No 71.8% Percentage of Respondents 4. Do you have reliable access to the Internet? (N=280) Yes 98.6% No 1.4% Percentage of Respondents 5. Do you use/have you used the World Bank Group website? (N=280) Yes 83.2% No 16.8% 6. Do you currently consult the World Bank Group social media sites (e.g., blogs, Percentage of Respondents Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Flickr)? (N=280) Yes 20.7% No 79.3% Percentage of Respondents 7. Have you visited the “World Bank Serbia” Facebook page? (N=280) Yes 29.3% No 70.7% 56 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia G. Communication and Information Sharing (continued) 8. Which Internet connection do you use primarily when visiting a World Bank Percentage of Respondents Group website? (N=233) High speed/WiFi 98.7% Dial-up 1.3% 9. How frequently do you consult the World Bank Group’s website and/or social media channels (e.g., blogs, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Flickr) for Percentage of Respondents information/knowledge that you can use in your work? (N=280) Weekly 6.8% Monthly 21.8% A few times a year 23.6% Rarely 30.0% Never 17.9% Please rate how much you agree with the following statements. Level of Agreement (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) N DK Mean SD 10. I find the World Bank Group’s websites easy to navigate. 206 74 7.13 2.05 11. I find the information on the World Bank Group’s websites useful. 211 69 7.75 1.81 12. The World Bank Group’s social media channels (e.g., blogs, Facebook, Twitter, 103 177 7.09 2.36 YouTube, Flickr) are valuable sources of information about the institution 13. When I need information from the World Bank Group I know how to find it 229 51 7.76 2.20 (e.g., whom to call, where to reach them, etc.) 14. The World Bank Group is responsive to my information requests and inquiries 140 140 7.55 2.57 57 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia H. Background Information 1. Which of the following best describes your current position? Percentage of Respondents (Select only ONE response) (N=280) Employee of a Ministry, Ministerial Department or Implementation Agency 18.6% Academia/Research Institute/Think Tank 14.6% NGO/Community Based Organization 11.1% Local Government Office or Staff 10.0% Private Sector Organization 9.6% Project Management Unit (PMU) overseeing implementation of 7.1% project/Consultant/Contractor working on World Bank Group sup Media (press, radio, TV, web, etc.) 7.1% Bilateral/Multilateral Agency 4.6% Office of Parliamentarian 4.3% Independent Government Institution (i.e., Regulatory Agency, Central 2.9% Bank/oversight institution) Office of Minister 2.5% Office of the President, Prime Minister 1.8% Private Foundation 1.8% Financial Sector/Private Bank 1.1% Trade Union 1.1% Judiciary Branch 1.1% Other .7% 2. Please identify the primary specialization of your work. (Select only ONE Percentage of Respondents response) (N=280) Governance 15.0% Generalist (specialized in multiple sectors) 11.8% Education 8.9% Macroeconomics and fiscal management 8.9% Finance and markets 8.2% Transport and ICT 7.1% Urban, rural, and social development 6.4% Social protection and labor 5.4% Agriculture 5.4% Energy and extractives 3.9% Health, nutrition, and population 3.6% Trade and competitiveness 3.6% Environment and natural resources 3.2% Poverty 2.1% Jobs 2.1% Fragility, conflict and violence 1.8% Water .7% Public-private partnerships .7% Gender .7% Climate change .4% 58 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia H. Background Information (continued) 3. Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group Percentage of Respondents (IDA, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? (N=280) Yes 40.0% No 60.0% 4. Which of the following agencies of the World Bank Group do you primarily Percentage of Respondents engage with in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) (N=280) The World Bank (IBRD) 77.9% The International Finance Corporation (IFC) 8.6% The Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) 1.1% Other .4% None 12.1% Percentage of Respondents 5. Do your projects involve both the World Bank and the IFC? (N=280) Yes 33.2% No 66.8% 6. If yes, what was your view of how the two institutions work together in Percentage of Respondents Serbia? (Select only ONE response) (N=93) The two institutions work well together 54.8% The way the two institutions work together needs improvement 19.4% Don`t know 25.8% 7. Which of the following describes most of your exposure to the World Bank Percentage of Respondents Group in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO) (Responses Combined; N=170) Collaborate as part of my professional duties 52.5% Use World Bank Group reports/data 27.1% Engage in World Bank Group related/sponsored events/activities 25.4% Observer (i.e., follow in media, discuss in informal conversations, etc.) 18.9% Use World Bank Group website for information, data, research, etc. 16.1% Percentage of Respondents 8. What’s your gender? (N=280) Female 52.5% Male 47.5% Percentage of Respondents 9. Which best represents your geographic location? (N=280) Belgrade 76.4% Vojvodina 12.1% Central Serbia 5.7% South Serbia 5.7% 59 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia Appendix B: Responses to All Questions by Stakeholder Groups16 Office of the President/Prime Minister/Minister N=12  Office of Parliamentarian N=12  Employee of a Ministry N=52 PMU/Consultant on a WBG-supported Project N=20  Local Government N=28  Bilateral/Multilateral Agency N=13 Private Sector/Financial Sector/Private Bank N=30  CSO N=39  Media N=20  Academia/Research Institute/Think Tank N=41  Other N=13 A. General Issues facing Serbia In general, would you say that Serbia is headed in ... ?* Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other The right direction 83.3% 41.7% 73.1% 50.0% 71.4% 30.8% 66.7% 28.2% 50.0% 51.2% 61.5% The wrong direction 0.0% 58.3% 7.7% 5.0% 3.6% 38.5% 10.0% 41.0% 10.0% 7.3% 7.7% Not sure 16.7% 0.0% 19.2% 45.0% 25.0% 30.8% 23.3% 30.8% 40.0% 41.5% 30.8% *Significantly different between stakeholder groups 16 Only 280 respondents provided information about their current positions. Therefore, only these respondents were included in the across-stakeholder analysis presented in this appendix. 60 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia A. General Issues facing Serbia (continued) Listed below are a number of development priorities in Serbia. Please identify which of the following you consider the most important development priorities in Serbia? (Choose no more than THREE) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Percentage of Respondents Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ (Responses Combined) Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted 16.7% 16.7% 21.2% 5.0% 10.7% 7.7% 3.3% 7.7% 30.0% 7.3% 0.0% social assistance) Gender equity 8.3% 8.3% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Private sector development 33.3% 25.0% 17.3% 25.0% 39.3% 23.1% 43.3% 28.2% 10.0% 14.6% 30.8% Education 41.7% 91.7% 51.9% 50.0% 50.0% 61.5% 36.7% 69.2% 50.0% 58.5% 69.2% Public sector governance/reform (i.e., government effectiveness, public financial 58.3% 8.3% 23.1% 65.0% 21.4% 61.5% 50.0% 43.6% 55.0% 24.4% 53.8% management, public expenditure, fiscal system reform)* Global/regional integration 8.3% 8.3% 5.8% 5.0% 3.6% 7.7% 10.0% 7.7% 5.0% 4.9% 7.7% Food safety 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 5.0% 3.6% 0.0% 3.3% 2.6% 0.0% 4.9% 0.0% Urban development 0.0% 0.0% 3.8% 0.0% 3.6% 7.7% 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 2.4% 0.0% Energy 8.3% 8.3% 1.9% 25.0% 3.6% 7.7% 3.3% 7.7% 5.0% 4.9% 0.0% Water and sanitation 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Pollution 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 3.6% 15.4% 3.3% 2.6% 0.0% 4.9% 0.0% Job creation/employment* 0.0% 25.0% 21.2% 5.0% 60.7% 15.4% 23.3% 15.4% 25.0% 9.8% 30.8% Health 8.3% 8.3% 15.4% 10.0% 10.7% 15.4% 10.0% 12.8% 20.0% 19.5% 15.4% Financial markets 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.6% 7.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 4.9% 0.0% transportation) Agriculture and rural development 0.0% 8.3% 13.5% 20.0% 28.6% 7.7% 20.0% 7.7% 10.0% 26.8% 7.7% Trade and exports 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.6% 7.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Crime and violence* 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% Natural resource management 0.0% 8.3% 3.8% 0.0% 7.1% 0.0% 3.3% 5.1% 5.0% 9.8% 0.0% Climate change (e.g., mitigation, 0.0% 0.0% 5.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% adaptation) Poverty reduction 16.7% 8.3% 15.4% 0.0% 14.3% 0.0% 0.0% 20.5% 5.0% 12.2% 0.0% Anti corruption 8.3% 25.0% 19.2% 25.0% 0.0% 15.4% 30.0% 23.1% 15.0% 17.1% 38.5% Judiciary reform 41.7% 25.0% 9.6% 10.0% 10.7% 23.1% 20.0% 30.8% 20.0% 22.0% 7.7% Economic growth 25.0% 8.3% 21.2% 30.0% 10.7% 0.0% 23.3% 7.7% 20.0% 14.6% 15.4% Disaster risk management 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.4% 0.0% Equality of opportunity (i.e., social 8.3% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 4.9% 0.0% inclusion) Disease (e.g., cancer, heart deficiencies) 0.0% 0.0% 3.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Information and communications 8.3% 8.3% 5.8% 15.0% 3.6% 0.0% 6.7% 0.0% 5.0% 9.8% 7.7% technology *Significantly different between stakeholder groups 61 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia A. General Issues facing Serbia (continued) Poverty reduction is a broad term that encompasses work in many different areas. Which THREE areas of development listed below do you believe would contribute most to reducing poverty in Serbia? (Choose no more than THREE) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Percentage of Respondents Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ (Responses Combined) Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Economic growth* 75.0% 75.0% 73.1% 80.0% 71.4% 38.5% 70.0% 51.3% 70.0% 51.2% 38.5% Disaster risk management 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.4% 0.0% Equality of opportunity (i.e., social 25.0% 0.0% 15.4% 10.0% 10.7% 30.8% 6.7% 30.8% 20.0% 19.5% 15.4% inclusion) Disease (e.g., cancer, heart deficiencies) 0.0% 0.0% 3.8% 0.0% 3.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Information and communications 8.3% 8.3% 3.8% 15.0% 3.6% 0.0% 13.3% 10.3% 10.0% 12.2% 15.4% technology Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted 16.7% 16.7% 15.4% 15.0% 3.6% 30.8% 3.3% 25.6% 25.0% 19.5% 15.4% social assistance) Agriculture and rural development 16.7% 41.7% 30.8% 20.0% 35.7% 7.7% 16.7% 25.6% 5.0% 26.8% 23.1% Trade and exports 8.3% 8.3% 7.7% 10.0% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 5.1% 5.0% 2.4% 0.0% Crime and violence 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% Climate change (e.g., mitigation, 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% adaptation) Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, 8.3% 8.3% 1.9% 0.0% 14.3% 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% 5.0% 4.9% 0.0% transportation) Energy 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.3% 2.6% 0.0% 2.4% 0.0% Anti corruption 8.3% 33.3% 21.2% 15.0% 7.1% 38.5% 33.3% 28.2% 25.0% 9.8% 15.4% Judiciary reform 8.3% 25.0% 5.8% 10.0% 0.0% 15.4% 10.0% 7.7% 10.0% 7.3% 15.4% Water and sanitation 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.4% 0.0% Pollution 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Job creation/employment* 33.3% 33.3% 38.5% 30.0% 82.1% 53.8% 43.3% 23.1% 50.0% 43.9% 38.5% Health 16.7% 0.0% 3.8% 5.0% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 12.2% 0.0% Financial markets 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% Public sector governance/reform (i.e., government effectiveness, public financial 8.3% 8.3% 3.8% 20.0% 7.1% 0.0% 20.0% 15.4% 20.0% 17.1% 15.4% management, public expenditure, fiscal system reform) Gender equity 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 5.1% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% Private sector development 16.7% 8.3% 21.2% 35.0% 35.7% 7.7% 40.0% 17.9% 15.0% 17.1% 38.5% Education 33.3% 25.0% 36.5% 15.0% 17.9% 53.8% 16.7% 28.2% 25.0% 36.6% 46.2% Global/regional integration 8.3% 0.0% 1.9% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% 5.1% 0.0% 2.4% 0.0% Food safety 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.3% 0.0% 0.0% 2.4% 7.7% Urban development 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Natural resource management 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 7.1% 0.0% 10.0% 5.1% 0.0% 4.9% 15.4% *Significantly different between stakeholder groups 62 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia A. General Issues facing Serbia (continued) The World Bank Group’s “Shared Prosperity” goal captures two key elements, economic growth and equity. It will seek to foster income growth among the bottom 40 percent of a country’s population. Improvement in the Shared Prosperity Indicator requires growth and well-being of the less well-off. When thinking about the idea of “shared prosperity” in your country, which of the following TWO best illustrate how this would be achieved in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Percentage of Respondents Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ (Responses Combined) Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Greater access to health and nutrition for 16.7% 0.0% 11.5% 5.0% 7.1% 0.0% 3.3% 7.7% 15.0% 9.8% 0.0% citizens Better entrepreneurial opportunities (i.e., to 33.3% 33.3% 25.0% 30.0% 39.3% 30.8% 50.0% 23.1% 30.0% 26.8% 23.1% start small and medium sized businesses) A growing middle class 8.3% 25.0% 23.1% 20.0% 21.4% 0.0% 36.7% 23.1% 15.0% 22.0% 30.8% Better opportunity for the poor who live in 8.3% 16.7% 19.2% 5.0% 3.6% 7.7% 16.7% 17.9% 15.0% 9.8% 15.4% rural areas Better opportunity for the poor who live in 8.3% 16.7% 3.8% 5.0% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 5.1% 15.0% 2.4% 0.0% urban areas Consistent economic growth 25.0% 8.3% 40.4% 35.0% 42.9% 23.1% 20.0% 20.5% 30.0% 29.3% 30.8% More reliable social safety net 25.0% 8.3% 9.6% 20.0% 7.1% 23.1% 10.0% 15.4% 15.0% 14.6% 7.7% Greater access to micro-finance for the poor 0.0% 0.0% 3.8% 10.0% 10.7% 15.4% 6.7% 7.7% 5.0% 4.9% 0.0% Greater voice and participation for citizens 16.7% 8.3% 3.8% 0.0% 3.6% 7.7% 6.7% 12.8% 10.0% 9.8% 7.7% to help ensure greater accountability Education and training that better ensure 50.0% 50.0% 34.6% 30.0% 28.6% 61.5% 33.3% 30.8% 40.0% 48.8% 53.8% job opportunity Better quality public services 0.0% 0.0% 5.8% 0.0% 3.6% 0.0% 6.7% 10.3% 0.0% 4.9% 0.0% Better employment opportunities for young 8.3% 16.7% 15.4% 35.0% 25.0% 15.4% 6.7% 20.5% 10.0% 12.2% 23.1% people Better employment opportunities for 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 3.6% 7.7% 3.3% 2.6% 0.0% 2.4% 0.0% women Other 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% Do you think the gap between the rich and the poor is a very big problem, a moderately big problem, a small problem, or not a problem at all in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other A very big problem 33.3% 66.7% 69.2% 55.0% 57.1% 46.2% 36.7% 71.8% 60.0% 65.9% 46.2% A moderately big problem 50.0% 33.3% 25.0% 35.0% 35.7% 30.8% 50.0% 25.6% 30.0% 29.3% 46.2% A small problem 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 6.7% 0.0% 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% Not a problem at all 16.7% 0.0% 3.8% 5.0% 0.0% 7.7% 6.7% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% Don’t know 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 7.1% 7.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 4.9% 0.0% 63 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia A. General Issues facing Serbia (continued) In your view, is climate change a very serious problem, somewhat serious, not too serious, or not a problem in your country? (Select only ONE response) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other A very serious problem 25.0% 66.7% 36.5% 40.0% 50.0% 15.4% 36.7% 48.7% 20.0% 41.5% 30.8% A somewhat serious problem 58.3% 25.0% 40.4% 45.0% 42.9% 61.5% 30.0% 41.0% 65.0% 41.5% 53.8% Not too serious problem 16.7% 8.3% 17.3% 5.0% 7.1% 7.7% 30.0% 7.7% 10.0% 12.2% 15.4% Not a problem 0.0% 0.0% 5.8% 10.0% 0.0% 7.7% 3.3% 0.0% 5.0% 2.4% 0.0% Don’t know 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 2.6% 0.0% 2.4% 0.0% In your view, is early childhood development (i.e. nutrition, growth, Serbia, and education) a very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not an important development priority in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other A very important development priority 75.0% 91.7% 90.4% 90.0% 96.4% 76.9% 90.0% 89.7% 90.0% 90.2% 92.3% A moderately important development 25.0% 8.3% 7.7% 10.0% 3.6% 15.4% 6.7% 10.3% 5.0% 9.8% 0.0% priority A slightly important development priority 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 3.3% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% Not an important development priority 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% In your view, is improvement of business environment a very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not an important development priority in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other A very important development priority 75.0% 75.0% 78.8% 65.0% 82.1% 84.6% 93.3% 66.7% 75.0% 70.7% 69.2% A moderately important development 25.0% 25.0% 11.5% 35.0% 14.3% 15.4% 3.3% 33.3% 20.0% 29.3% 23.1% priority A slightly important development priority 0.0% 0.0% 5.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Not an important development priority 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0% 7.7% Don’t know 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 3.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 64 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia A. General Issues facing Serbia (continued) In your view, is improvement of infrastructure quality a very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not an important development priority in Serbia?* (Select only ONE response) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other A very important development priority 91.7% 91.7% 80.8% 60.0% 78.6% 38.5% 70.0% 64.1% 55.0% 73.2% 76.9% A moderately important development 8.3% 8.3% 17.3% 40.0% 21.4% 46.2% 30.0% 33.3% 35.0% 26.8% 15.4% priority A slightly important development priority 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 2.6% 5.0% 0.0% 7.7% Not an important development priority 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% Don’t know 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% *Significantly different between stakeholder groups In your view, is improvement of energy security a very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not an important development priority in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other A very important development priority 50.0% 66.7% 50.0% 50.0% 60.7% 53.8% 53.3% 46.2% 40.0% 56.1% 76.9% A moderately important development 33.3% 33.3% 48.1% 40.0% 35.7% 38.5% 40.0% 51.3% 45.0% 36.6% 15.4% priority A slightly important development priority 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 3.6% 0.0% 6.7% 2.6% 10.0% 4.9% 7.7% Not an important development priority 8.3% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% Don’t know 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.4% 0.0% 65 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia B. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group Which of the following best describes your current position? Office of the PMU/ Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ President/ Prime Office of Employee of a Consultant/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Minister/ Minister Parliamentarian Ministry Contractor Government Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD How familiar are you with the work of the World 12 7.67 2.27 12 6.33 2.42 52 6.58 2.16 20 7.85 1.79 28 4.82 1.52 13 7.23 2.13 30 5.63 2.14 39 5.79 1.99 20 6.95 1.54 41 6.54 2.27 13 6.15 2.70 Bank Group in Serbia?* (1-Not familiar at all, 10-Extremely familiar) *Significantly different between stakeholder groups Which of the following best describes your current position? Office of the PMU/ Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ President/ Prime Office of Employee of a Consultant/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Minister/ Minister Parliamentarian Ministry Contractor Government Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD Overall, please rate your impression of the 11 7.18 2.27 12 6.42 1.88 49 6.67 2.11 20 7.60 2.16 21 6.38 1.99 12 6.50 1.78 25 7.20 1.83 34 6.38 1.65 19 6.47 2.17 37 6.97 1.67 10 6.40 2.80 World Bank Group’s effectiveness in Serbia. (1-Not effective at all, 10-Very effective) Which of the following best describes your current position? Office of the PMU/ Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ President/ Prime Office of Employee of a Consultant/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Minister/ Minister Parliamentarian Ministry Contractor Government Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD To what extent do you believe the World Bank Group’s staff is well prepared (e.g., skills and 11 7.27 2.15 11 6.45 2.30 45 6.91 2.16 20 7.35 2.72 15 7.53 2.23 12 8.08 1.24 21 7.00 2.07 31 6.87 2.06 18 6.89 2.05 34 7.12 2.21 8 6.63 2.97 knowledge) to help Serbia solve its most complicated development challenges? (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) 66 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia B. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group (continued) When thinking about how the World Bank Group can have the most impact on development results in Serbia, in which sectoral areas do you believe the World Bank Group should focus most of its resources (financial and knowledge services) in Serbia? (Choose no more than THREE) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Percentage of Respondents Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ (Responses Combined) Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Energy 16.7% 8.3% 7.7% 20.0% 21.4% 0.0% 10.0% 12.8% 10.0% 4.9% 15.4% Water and sanitation 8.3% 0.0% 3.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.1% 5.0% 4.9% 7.7% Pollution 8.3% 8.3% 3.8% 10.0% 3.6% 0.0% 6.7% 2.6% 10.0% 7.3% 7.7% Job creation/employment 33.3% 41.7% 19.2% 15.0% 42.9% 46.2% 23.3% 30.8% 45.0% 19.5% 38.5% Health 33.3% 25.0% 17.3% 30.0% 7.1% 15.4% 13.3% 17.9% 5.0% 12.2% 7.7% Financial markets 16.7% 8.3% 1.9% 0.0% 3.6% 15.4% 3.3% 5.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted 16.7% 16.7% 5.8% 0.0% 7.1% 15.4% 0.0% 7.7% 15.0% 4.9% 7.7% social assistance) Gender equity 0.0% 8.3% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 5.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Private sector development 25.0% 16.7% 25.0% 45.0% 32.1% 23.1% 53.3% 20.5% 30.0% 26.8% 23.1% Education 33.3% 50.0% 32.7% 40.0% 28.6% 61.5% 23.3% 38.5% 20.0% 39.0% 38.5% Public sector governance/reform (i.e., government effectiveness, public financial 25.0% 16.7% 17.3% 25.0% 14.3% 23.1% 36.7% 33.3% 45.0% 19.5% 23.1% management, public expenditure, fiscal system reform) Global/regional integration 0.0% 0.0% 3.8% 0.0% 10.7% 0.0% 20.0% 7.7% 0.0% 9.8% 7.7% Food safety 0.0% 0.0% 3.8% 5.0% 3.6% 0.0% 3.3% 0.0% 0.0% 2.4% 0.0% Urban development 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.1% 7.7% 0.0% 2.6% 0.0% 2.4% 0.0% Judiciary reform 8.3% 8.3% 13.5% 20.0% 3.6% 23.1% 13.3% 12.8% 5.0% 22.0% 23.1% Economic growth 25.0% 25.0% 30.8% 10.0% 14.3% 15.4% 16.7% 10.3% 35.0% 26.8% 30.8% Disaster risk management* 8.3% 0.0% 13.5% 0.0% 3.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% Equality of opportunity (i.e., social 0.0% 0.0% 5.8% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.3% 12.8% 0.0% 7.3% 15.4% inclusion) Disease (e.g., cancer, heart deficiencies) 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% Information and communications 8.3% 0.0% 7.7% 5.0% 7.1% 0.0% 6.7% 5.1% 0.0% 7.3% 7.7% technology Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, 0.0% 25.0% 13.5% 5.0% 10.7% 7.7% 6.7% 5.1% 10.0% 9.8% 15.4% transportation) Agriculture and rural development 0.0% 8.3% 15.4% 10.0% 28.6% 0.0% 13.3% 12.8% 0.0% 19.5% 15.4% Trade and exports 0.0% 8.3% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Crime and violence 0.0% 0.0% 3.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Natural resource management 0.0% 0.0% 5.8% 0.0% 7.1% 0.0% 6.7% 2.6% 0.0% 2.4% 0.0% Climate change (e.g., mitigation, 0.0% 0.0% 11.5% 0.0% 7.1% 0.0% 0.0% 5.1% 0.0% 4.9% 0.0% adaptation) Poverty reduction 25.0% 8.3% 13.5% 10.0% 21.4% 7.7% 10.0% 10.3% 30.0% 17.1% 7.7% Anti corruption 8.3% 8.3% 9.6% 15.0% 7.1% 23.1% 23.3% 17.9% 20.0% 12.2% 0.0% *Significantly different between stakeholder groups 67 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia B. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group (continued) When thinking about the World Bank Group’s role, which activity do you believe is of greatest VALUE and which activity is of second greatest value in Serbia? Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Greatest Value Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Bringing together different groups of 25.0% 0.0% 11.5% 5.0% 7.1% 0.0% 6.7% 5.1% 15.0% 7.3% 0.0% stakeholders Capacity development related to World 25.0% 25.0% 17.3% 45.0% 35.7% 0.0% 16.7% 30.8% 5.0% 22.0% 15.4% Bank Group supported projects* Technical assistance (system oriented) 16.7% 8.3% 11.5% 5.0% 0.0% 15.4% 23.3% 2.6% 10.0% 7.3% 7.7% Policy advice, studies, analyses* 0.0% 25.0% 3.8% 5.0% 3.6% 30.8% 10.0% 20.5% 5.0% 12.2% 7.7% Financial resources 16.7% 8.3% 26.9% 25.0% 39.3% 15.4% 16.7% 23.1% 30.0% 12.2% 23.1% Data and statistics 0.0% 8.3% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 2.4% 7.7% Promoting knowledge sharing 0.0% 8.3% 5.8% 15.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% 7.7% 0.0% 17.1% 7.7% Implementation support 8.3% 16.7% 11.5% 0.0% 14.3% 30.8% 6.7% 5.1% 15.0% 12.2% 15.4% Mobilizing third party financial resources 8.3% 0.0% 3.8% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 3.3% 0.0% 5.0% 7.3% 15.4% Donor coordination 0.0% 0.0% 5.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 6.7% 5.1% 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% Other 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% *Significantly different between stakeholder groups Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ 2nd Greatest Value Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Bringing together different groups of 0.0% 16.7% 7.7% 5.0% 0.0% 7.7% 3.3% 10.3% 10.0% 7.3% 15.4% stakeholders Capacity development related to World 0.0% 16.7% 1.9% 0.0% 17.9% 15.4% 16.7% 7.7% 0.0% 14.6% 15.4% Bank Group supported projects Technical assistance (system oriented) 33.3% 0.0% 25.0% 25.0% 10.7% 7.7% 20.0% 15.4% 15.0% 4.9% 0.0% Policy advice, studies, analyses 16.7% 8.3% 7.7% 30.0% 3.6% 7.7% 20.0% 10.3% 25.0% 17.1% 15.4% Financial resources 16.7% 8.3% 13.5% 15.0% 32.1% 23.1% 10.0% 17.9% 20.0% 12.2% 23.1% Data and statistics 8.3% 25.0% 9.6% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 3.3% 15.4% 5.0% 9.8% 7.7% Promoting knowledge sharing 16.7% 0.0% 5.8% 15.0% 10.7% 0.0% 6.7% 7.7% 0.0% 7.3% 7.7% Implementation support 0.0% 8.3% 15.4% 5.0% 10.7% 7.7% 16.7% 7.7% 15.0% 17.1% 7.7% Mobilizing third party financial resources 8.3% 16.7% 9.6% 5.0% 10.7% 7.7% 3.3% 2.6% 5.0% 2.4% 7.7% Donor coordination 0.0% 0.0% 3.8% 0.0% 3.6% 7.7% 0.0% 2.6% 5.0% 2.4% 0.0% Other 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 2.6% 0.0% 4.9% 0.0% 68 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia B. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group (continued) Which of the following do you identify as the World Bank Group’s greatest WEAKNESSES in its work in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Percentage of Respondents Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ (Responses Combined) Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other World Bank Group’s processes too 33.3% 8.3% 23.1% 15.0% 17.9% 0.0% 30.0% 15.4% 25.0% 22.0% 15.4% complex Not willing to honestly criticize policies 8.3% 25.0% 21.2% 45.0% 3.6% 46.2% 13.3% 33.3% 35.0% 24.4% 15.4% and reform efforts in the country* Staff too inaccessible 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.6% 15.4% 3.3% 5.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% World Bank Group’s processes too slow (e.g., too bureaucratic in its operational 25.0% 16.7% 19.2% 30.0% 17.9% 0.0% 33.3% 17.9% 25.0% 7.3% 23.1% policies and procedures) Not aligned with other donors’ work 8.3% 0.0% 1.9% 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Not aligned with country priorities 0.0% 0.0% 5.8% 5.0% 7.1% 7.7% 3.3% 7.7% 5.0% 2.4% 15.4% Not adequately sensitive to 16.7% 25.0% 13.5% 15.0% 7.1% 15.4% 13.3% 10.3% 25.0% 14.6% 7.7% political/social realities in Serbia Too influenced by developed countries 8.3% 0.0% 7.7% 15.0% 14.3% 0.0% 6.7% 7.7% 15.0% 24.4% 15.4% Not exploring alternative policy options* 8.3% 16.7% 3.8% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 17.9% 0.0% 22.0% 0.0% Not collaborating enough with 8.3% 33.3% 7.7% 5.0% 7.1% 30.8% 16.7% 25.6% 10.0% 19.5% 0.0% stakeholders outside the Government* Its advice and strategies do not lend 16.7% 0.0% 13.5% 10.0% 3.6% 7.7% 13.3% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% themselves to practical problem solving Not enough public disclosure of its work* 8.3% 50.0% 15.4% 10.0% 42.9% 15.4% 10.0% 20.5% 25.0% 17.1% 30.8% Arrogant in its approach 0.0% 0.0% 3.8% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.3% 0.0% 0.0% 2.4% 7.7% Not client focused 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.4% 0.0% The credibility of its knowledge/data 0.0% 0.0% 3.8% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% Other* 8.3% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 0.0% 23.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Don`t know 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% *Significantly different between stakeholder groups To what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group’s work and support help the poorest in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other To a fully sufficient degree 8.3% 25.0% 5.8% 5.0% 7.1% 0.0% 0.0% 5.1% 0.0% 2.4% 15.4% To a somewhat sufficient degree 50.0% 50.0% 44.2% 65.0% 39.3% 46.2% 50.0% 38.5% 40.0% 41.5% 38.5% To a somewhat insufficient degree 0.0% 0.0% 19.2% 15.0% 10.7% 7.7% 13.3% 25.6% 35.0% 19.5% 7.7% To a very insufficient degree 25.0% 16.7% 11.5% 10.0% 10.7% 7.7% 3.3% 7.7% 15.0% 4.9% 7.7% Don`t know 16.7% 8.3% 19.2% 5.0% 32.1% 38.5% 33.3% 23.1% 10.0% 31.7% 30.8% 69 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia B. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group (continued) How EFFECTIVE do you believe the following World Bank Group’s instruments are in supporting Serbia Government’s efforts to reduce poverty? (1-Not effective at all, 10-Very effective) Which of the following best describes your current position? Office of the PMU/ Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ President/ Prime Office of Employee of a Consultant/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Minister/ Minister Parliamentarian Ministry Contractor Government Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD Investment Project Financing (IPF) 9 6.00 2.18 8 7.75 2.25 33 7.00 2.47 17 7.35 2.50 19 7.26 2.02 6 6.67 2.50 23 7.22 1.91 23 5.87 2.14 14 6.64 2.65 26 6.88 2.05 5 6.40 3.78 Development Policy Financing (DPF) 9 7.11 2.26 9 7.11 2.03 31 6.55 2.59 16 6.81 1.97 19 6.68 2.47 6 6.67 2.42 21 7.14 2.24 22 5.91 1.66 15 6.33 2.32 22 6.32 2.23 7 6.57 3.26 Program-for-Results Financing (PforR) 10 6.50 2.32 9 7.00 2.12 29 6.34 2.77 17 6.59 2.48 14 7.07 1.86 7 6.43 2.37 17 7.18 1.98 17 6.41 2.15 13 6.54 2.54 20 6.40 2.30 5 6.20 3.90 Trust funds and grants 9 6.89 2.15 10 7.40 2.32 34 7.32 2.45 15 6.80 2.57 18 6.94 2.41 7 6.14 2.61 17 7.53 2.27 22 6.36 2.84 14 6.29 2.43 20 6.60 2.41 7 7.00 2.38 Guarantees 9 6.33 2.55 8 7.75 2.12 23 6.65 2.01 12 6.25 1.96 12 6.92 2.31 4 6.75 1.89 13 7.08 2.47 16 6.31 2.18 13 6.08 2.29 15 6.93 2.60 4 6.25 2.63 IFC Investment Services 10 5.40 2.41 8 7.38 1.85 26 6.35 2.40 12 6.75 2.83 13 6.62 2.26 4 5.75 2.87 18 6.83 2.15 17 5.76 2.33 15 6.80 2.51 18 6.11 2.49 5 6.00 3.67 IFC Advisory Services 12 4.92 2.84 9 7.67 1.87 27 6.04 2.24 14 7.00 2.72 15 7.20 2.43 6 6.50 3.02 18 7.17 2.15 20 6.40 1.96 16 6.94 2.59 20 6.25 2.51 7 6.43 3.36 In addition to the regular relations with the national government, which TWO of the following groups should the World Bank Group collaborate with more to successfully deliver new projects in your country? (Choose no more than TWO) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Percentage of Respondents Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ (Responses Combined) Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Beneficiaries 25.0% 25.0% 32.7% 30.0% 42.9% 46.2% 43.3% 33.3% 35.0% 12.2% 23.1% Youth/university groups 0.0% 8.3% 9.6% 5.0% 7.1% 15.4% 6.7% 7.7% 5.0% 12.2% 0.0% Private sector* 25.0% 25.0% 42.3% 30.0% 35.7% 23.1% 73.3% 28.2% 30.0% 43.9% 53.8% Local government* 58.3% 33.3% 30.8% 35.0% 82.1% 38.5% 36.7% 23.1% 25.0% 29.3% 38.5% Donor community 25.0% 0.0% 5.8% 10.0% 3.6% 23.1% 6.7% 5.1% 5.0% 0.0% 7.7% NGOs/Community Based Organizations* 8.3% 16.7% 3.8% 20.0% 7.1% 30.8% 10.0% 61.5% 20.0% 9.8% 7.7% Academia/think tanks/research 33.3% 25.0% 32.7% 35.0% 10.7% 15.4% 10.0% 25.6% 30.0% 75.6% 53.8% institutes* Parliament* 8.3% 41.7% 3.8% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.3% 2.6% 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% Foundations* 8.3% 16.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.4% 0.0% Media* 8.3% 0.0% 17.3% 10.0% 0.0% 7.7% 6.7% 7.7% 40.0% 9.8% 7.7% Other 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.1% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% Don`t know 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% *Significantly different between stakeholder groups 70 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia B. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group (continued) To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the World Bank Group’s work in Serbia? (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) Which of the following best describes your current position? Office of the PMU/ Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ President/ Prime Office of Employee of a Consultant/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Minister/ Minister Parliamentarian Ministry Contractor Government Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD Overall the World Bank Group currently plays a 11 7.00 2.72 11 7.27 2.00 45 7.44 2.29 20 7.75 2.40 23 6.65 2.31 12 7.00 2.00 25 7.08 2.25 38 6.68 2.03 19 6.63 2.27 36 6.64 2.37 10 8.10 2.13 relevant role in development in Serbia The World Bank Group’s work is aligned with what I consider the development priorities for 11 6.55 2.66 11 6.55 2.50 46 6.70 2.26 18 7.33 2.09 23 6.61 2.37 12 6.67 1.67 26 6.62 1.94 35 6.37 2.26 19 6.16 2.24 35 6.83 2.33 10 6.90 2.96 Serbia To what extent is the World Bank Group an effective development partner in Serbia, in terms of each of the following? (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) Which of the following best describes your current position? Office of the PMU/ Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ President/ Prime Office of Employee of a Consultant/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Minister/ Minister Parliamentarian Ministry Contractor Government Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD Responsiveness to needs 11 6.73 2.61 9 6.67 2.35 42 7.00 1.74 19 6.84 2.12 21 6.52 2.42 12 6.50 1.88 22 6.82 1.82 29 6.41 2.50 16 5.69 2.33 33 5.94 2.68 8 7.00 2.51 Flexibility (in terms of the institution’s products 11 6.45 2.73 9 6.11 1.90 40 6.23 2.35 18 6.22 2.53 21 6.62 2.16 9 5.33 1.87 19 6.16 1.68 30 5.77 2.57 16 5.50 1.97 31 5.58 2.39 9 6.11 2.98 and services) Flexibility (in terms of changing country 11 6.18 2.56 9 6.33 2.00 40 6.28 2.11 18 6.39 2.35 20 6.70 2.74 10 6.20 2.15 22 6.18 2.08 31 5.61 2.39 16 5.88 2.16 33 5.70 2.39 10 5.90 3.21 circumstances) Being inclusive 11 6.91 2.34 9 7.78 2.22 39 6.82 2.19 15 6.60 2.85 20 6.70 2.75 9 4.78 1.99 20 7.05 1.76 30 6.33 2.51 14 6.14 2.25 30 6.30 2.28 8 6.88 2.75 Openness (sharing data and other information) 11 7.18 2.52 8 7.38 2.45 44 7.23 1.87 19 7.42 2.14 20 6.10 2.36 11 5.73 1.95 24 7.58 1.82 32 5.91 2.72 15 6.33 2.92 36 6.44 2.32 10 7.00 3.02 Collaboration with the Government 11 7.55 2.16 9 8.22 2.22 41 8.15 1.94 19 8.16 1.80 19 8.16 1.80 11 7.45 2.46 24 8.13 .99 34 7.68 1.98 17 8.00 2.47 29 7.14 1.96 8 8.88 .83 The speed in which it gets things accomplished 11 6.27 2.65 9 6.22 1.92 44 6.00 2.34 19 5.84 2.41 17 6.47 2.48 10 6.30 1.34 23 6.17 2.19 33 5.76 2.56 15 5.87 2.23 34 5.85 2.09 7 7.00 2.16 on the ground Helping to bring discipline/effective supervision 11 6.00 2.49 8 7.13 2.17 40 7.00 2.29 18 7.22 2.18 19 7.95 1.90 7 5.86 2.41 23 7.09 2.09 30 6.07 2.59 17 6.35 2.42 35 6.34 2.51 6 6.50 4.04 to implementation of investment projects Collaboration with civil society* 11 6.27 2.57 9 6.00 2.74 31 6.94 1.67 15 6.53 2.45 19 6.68 2.60 8 4.63 1.85 20 6.65 1.79 34 5.12 2.64 13 5.46 2.18 29 5.76 2.52 7 8.14 1.07 Staff accessibility 11 7.09 2.39 7 6.29 2.21 41 7.54 1.83 20 7.60 2.93 23 6.09 2.68 11 6.27 2.10 21 7.05 2.42 33 6.58 2.81 17 6.00 2.72 33 6.67 2.31 10 7.40 2.91 Collaboration with other donors and 11 6.18 2.68 8 6.75 1.75 36 7.22 1.73 17 7.41 2.48 16 6.88 2.36 11 6.73 1.79 18 6.33 2.11 26 6.46 2.85 13 6.08 2.43 26 6.69 2.20 6 6.67 3.33 development partners Collaboration with the private sector 10 6.20 2.35 9 6.11 1.83 28 6.93 1.84 13 6.31 2.56 18 6.50 2.48 5 6.80 .84 23 5.57 2.46 19 5.89 2.64 15 5.73 2.09 25 5.92 2.45 5 6.20 2.68 Straightforwardness and honesty 11 6.82 2.75 8 7.50 2.45 42 7.31 2.03 18 7.61 2.91 22 6.82 2.48 10 6.40 1.84 22 7.59 2.36 28 6.21 2.71 15 6.20 2.27 33 6.64 2.43 10 8.10 2.47 Treating clients and stakeholders in Serbia with 11 7.91 2.81 8 8.13 2.17 45 7.96 2.03 19 8.47 2.48 21 7.48 2.36 10 8.30 1.95 23 8.26 2.03 29 7.24 2.63 16 7.75 2.54 34 7.41 2.45 11 8.36 2.42 respect Being a long-term partner 11 8.64 1.63 10 8.50 2.07 44 8.80 1.46 20 8.55 2.44 25 7.64 2.25 11 8.45 1.69 23 8.43 1.85 30 8.00 2.03 17 8.06 2.63 34 8.00 2.02 11 8.64 2.38 *Significantly different between stakeholder groups 71 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia B. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group (continued) When World Bank Group assisted reform efforts fail or are slow to take place, which of the following would you attribute this to? (Choose no more than THREE) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Percentage of Respondents Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ (Responses Combined) Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other The World Bank Group does not do 8.3% 0.0% 9.6% 0.0% 3.6% 7.7% 6.7% 2.6% 5.0% 9.8% 0.0% adequate follow through/follow-up Political pressures and obstacles 16.7% 50.0% 17.3% 40.0% 25.0% 46.2% 23.3% 46.2% 35.0% 34.1% 15.4% Reforms are not well thought out in light 25.0% 41.7% 36.5% 35.0% 32.1% 23.1% 33.3% 48.7% 40.0% 46.3% 53.8% of country challenges Poor coordination within the Government 33.3% 33.3% 21.2% 30.0% 17.9% 23.1% 30.0% 5.1% 10.0% 19.5% 15.4% The Government works inefficiently 0.0% 16.7% 7.7% 5.0% 7.1% 15.4% 20.0% 5.1% 25.0% 9.8% 7.7% Poor donor coordination 0.0% 8.3% 3.8% 10.0% 14.3% 0.0% 3.3% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 15.4% The World Bank Group is not sensitive enough to political/social realities on the 41.7% 16.7% 15.4% 15.0% 3.6% 15.4% 23.3% 25.6% 25.0% 9.8% 30.8% ground Lack of/inadequate levels of capacity in 8.3% 16.7% 26.9% 40.0% 14.3% 46.2% 30.0% 33.3% 35.0% 41.5% 30.8% Government There is not an adequate level of 8.3% 0.0% 7.7% 5.0% 32.1% 0.0% 10.0% 23.1% 0.0% 9.8% 15.4% citizen/civil society participation* The World Bank Group works too slowly 0.0% 8.3% 7.7% 5.0% 3.6% 0.0% 3.3% 0.0% 5.0% 2.4% 0.0% Poor coordination within the World Bank 16.7% 0.0% 13.5% 5.0% 7.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 4.9% 0.0% Group Other 8.3% 0.0% 5.8% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 3.3% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% *Significantly different between stakeholder groups 72 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia C. World Bank Group’s Effectiveness and Results In your opinion, how IMPORTANT is it for the World Bank Group to be involved in the following areas of development in Serbia? (1-Not important at all, 10-Very important) Which of the following best describes your current position? Office of the PMU/ Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ President/ Prime Office of Employee of a Consultant/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Minister/ Minister Parliamentarian Ministry Contractor Government Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted social 10 8.30 2.50 12 7.83 1.47 44 7.16 2.52 18 7.33 2.57 27 6.56 2.65 12 7.75 2.09 28 6.96 2.46 34 7.50 2.26 20 7.45 2.84 39 7.13 2.74 10 6.70 2.91 assistance) Gender equity 10 7.50 1.90 12 6.33 2.39 45 6.42 2.49 18 6.44 2.41 27 5.30 2.74 10 7.00 2.75 30 6.50 2.52 34 7.41 2.32 20 6.60 2.82 38 6.66 2.93 9 7.00 2.83 Private sector development 11 8.27 1.90 12 8.75 1.54 46 7.85 2.15 18 8.44 1.89 28 7.75 1.76 13 8.46 1.33 30 8.83 1.37 36 8.19 2.19 20 8.10 2.40 40 8.30 1.90 11 9.09 1.04 Education 11 9.09 1.04 11 9.36 1.12 46 8.78 1.43 19 8.42 2.17 27 7.81 2.04 13 8.62 2.02 30 8.60 1.75 36 8.56 2.21 20 8.00 2.62 41 8.61 2.05 11 8.64 2.42 Public sector governance/reform 11 8.27 2.33 12 8.17 1.70 44 8.00 2.00 19 8.89 1.59 28 7.75 2.22 13 8.77 1.42 30 9.20 1.00 36 8.42 2.14 20 8.05 2.70 41 8.34 2.02 12 7.83 2.79 Global/regional integration 10 6.50 2.88 12 8.17 2.08 45 7.24 2.13 19 8.11 1.76 28 7.36 2.13 12 7.67 1.83 30 7.43 2.50 36 7.56 2.29 20 7.50 2.50 41 7.05 2.83 9 8.33 1.41 Food safety 10 6.60 2.32 11 7.00 2.37 44 7.36 2.19 17 7.24 2.36 27 7.11 1.89 9 6.11 3.10 29 7.62 2.06 32 6.69 2.36 20 7.25 2.63 36 6.67 2.67 9 8.11 1.76 Urban development 11 7.09 2.12 12 7.08 2.07 44 7.14 2.16 19 6.89 2.38 26 7.35 1.98 9 7.33 2.55 29 7.17 2.39 33 7.30 2.30 20 6.60 2.76 39 6.79 2.52 9 7.78 1.86 Energy 10 8.00 1.89 12 7.92 2.35 46 7.67 2.19 20 8.10 2.29 28 8.07 1.72 10 8.10 2.13 29 7.90 1.88 36 7.97 1.86 20 7.90 2.27 41 7.56 2.49 11 8.27 1.56 Water and sanitation 10 7.70 1.95 12 8.58 1.73 46 7.59 2.29 19 7.11 2.23 27 7.56 2.10 9 8.11 1.83 28 7.32 1.98 33 7.03 2.28 20 7.45 2.72 40 7.35 2.28 9 8.11 1.69 Pollution 10 8.10 1.45 12 8.67 1.56 46 8.17 1.88 20 7.95 2.24 27 8.07 1.80 10 7.10 3.38 29 7.52 1.98 33 7.52 2.22 19 7.74 2.60 41 8.00 2.20 10 8.40 1.43 Job creation/employment 11 8.64 1.63 12 9.08 .90 46 8.41 2.01 19 8.16 2.14 28 8.36 1.73 13 8.62 1.66 30 8.50 1.72 35 8.74 1.44 19 8.16 2.50 41 7.95 2.07 12 8.33 2.77 Health 11 8.73 1.42 11 9.45 1.04 46 8.39 1.78 19 8.63 2.19 28 8.11 1.52 12 8.42 2.43 29 8.28 1.67 35 8.29 1.98 19 7.74 2.64 41 8.15 2.16 10 7.80 2.97 Financial markets 11 7.73 2.37 12 8.42 1.56 44 7.73 2.04 17 8.35 1.58 26 7.81 1.81 10 6.80 2.94 27 7.44 2.68 33 8.55 1.54 20 7.40 2.64 38 7.71 2.08 10 7.70 2.91 Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, transportation) 10 7.40 2.55 12 8.75 .97 45 8.22 1.76 18 8.00 2.50 28 8.36 1.81 12 7.75 1.76 29 7.45 2.26 36 7.92 1.78 20 7.50 2.46 41 8.17 1.84 10 8.20 1.62 Agriculture and rural development 10 8.30 1.42 10 9.20 .79 45 8.29 1.60 18 8.44 2.33 26 8.35 1.94 10 7.80 1.99 29 8.17 1.85 35 8.11 1.66 20 6.85 2.83 40 8.25 1.75 11 8.73 1.68 Trade and exports 10 7.50 1.90 12 7.83 1.80 45 7.56 1.96 19 7.32 2.54 26 7.58 1.98 9 7.67 1.58 27 6.70 2.55 31 7.39 1.93 20 6.75 2.90 39 6.92 2.36 9 7.89 1.45 Crime and violence 9 7.00 2.29 11 6.36 2.01 43 6.95 2.45 19 7.11 2.66 25 6.20 2.47 9 5.11 3.44 26 6.81 2.61 34 5.88 3.15 20 6.75 3.13 38 6.32 2.67 8 6.50 2.73 Natural resource management 9 6.11 2.62 12 7.08 1.98 45 7.18 2.37 19 6.95 2.63 25 6.48 2.63 10 6.30 3.33 28 6.86 2.53 32 6.84 2.23 20 6.00 2.58 38 7.03 2.71 7 6.29 2.87 Climate change (e.g., mitigation, adaptation) 11 7.09 2.51 11 7.36 1.69 46 7.57 2.17 19 7.63 2.67 27 7.74 2.14 11 7.09 3.45 29 7.28 2.03 35 7.43 2.46 20 6.75 2.49 40 7.43 2.71 9 9.33 .87 Poverty reduction 10 8.90 1.37 9 9.11 1.17 44 8.23 2.09 18 7.94 2.62 27 8.30 1.90 13 8.54 2.50 29 8.48 1.60 35 8.80 1.75 20 7.95 2.68 41 8.32 2.08 12 9.08 1.83 Anti corruption 9 8.67 1.66 10 7.60 2.17 44 7.95 2.43 19 8.16 2.85 27 7.30 2.64 11 8.09 2.66 27 8.56 1.72 35 8.63 1.94 20 8.20 2.38 41 7.90 2.51 9 8.33 1.80 Judiciary reform 9 7.78 2.17 10 7.70 1.89 44 8.05 2.42 18 8.50 2.33 26 7.46 2.47 12 7.67 2.46 27 8.33 2.06 35 8.66 1.73 20 8.15 2.32 39 8.38 1.90 11 8.73 1.19 Economic growth 9 9.33 1.12 12 8.58 1.68 43 8.70 1.54 17 8.35 1.58 28 8.18 1.70 12 8.58 1.68 29 8.97 1.45 36 8.50 1.93 20 8.15 2.43 41 8.56 1.84 12 8.83 1.70 Disaster risk management 9 7.89 2.32 12 7.75 1.60 46 7.83 2.01 18 7.50 2.33 26 7.31 2.29 12 6.42 3.20 28 7.29 2.03 36 7.22 2.10 19 7.53 2.57 38 7.26 2.46 9 8.44 1.33 Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 10 8.30 2.31 11 8.00 1.73 46 7.72 2.22 16 7.69 2.24 26 7.19 2.32 11 7.27 2.87 29 7.69 2.11 35 8.40 1.77 19 7.37 2.52 40 7.48 2.36 9 8.00 2.87 Disease (e.g., cancer, heart deficiencies) 9 8.22 2.22 11 7.27 1.85 46 7.11 2.69 18 7.89 2.45 26 7.27 1.93 10 6.90 2.77 28 7.07 2.52 32 6.69 2.75 19 6.74 2.56 37 7.30 2.37 8 7.50 3.16 Information and communications technology 11 8.09 2.12 12 8.00 1.41 47 7.70 2.20 19 7.95 2.20 27 8.22 1.72 11 7.27 2.87 28 7.93 2.49 32 8.19 2.05 19 7.53 2.52 39 7.54 2.48 9 7.11 3.18 73 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia C. World Bank Group’s Effectiveness and Results (Continued) How EFFECTIVE do you believe the World Bank Group is in terms of the work it does in the following areas of development in Serbia? (1-Not effective at all, 10-Very effective) Which of the following best describes your current position? Office of the PMU/ Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ President/ Prime Office of Employee of a Consultant/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Minister/ Minister Parliamentarian Ministry Contractor Government Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted social 10 5.90 3.07 9 6.33 1.41 29 6.55 2.38 11 5.73 2.72 16 6.38 2.87 7 5.29 1.89 18 6.28 1.49 28 5.57 2.57 15 5.40 2.38 20 6.15 2.39 5 6.80 3.70 assistance) Gender equity 9 6.67 1.87 7 6.00 2.00 26 6.62 2.62 12 6.33 2.74 15 6.53 2.17 4 4.00 2.16 18 6.28 1.74 25 5.32 2.48 13 5.23 2.17 16 6.19 2.10 5 7.60 2.30 Private sector development 9 7.33 1.73 9 6.11 1.54 25 6.92 2.48 13 6.23 1.92 14 6.43 2.71 7 6.43 2.15 22 6.41 1.89 27 6.00 2.32 15 5.93 2.46 22 6.73 2.19 7 8.14 2.12 Education 9 6.89 2.09 9 6.22 1.72 32 6.50 2.62 13 5.54 2.40 16 6.00 2.78 9 5.56 2.51 20 5.85 1.95 26 6.00 2.48 14 5.64 2.37 26 6.58 2.32 6 7.67 2.07 Public sector governance/reform 10 6.90 2.23 9 7.11 1.90 33 6.82 2.57 18 7.22 1.77 20 6.50 2.56 9 6.67 2.29 22 6.86 1.81 29 6.34 2.38 16 6.63 2.63 24 6.79 2.23 7 7.86 3.34 Global/regional integration 7 7.14 2.19 8 5.63 1.19 25 7.32 2.75 13 6.85 2.41 16 6.50 2.92 6 4.67 2.25 21 6.19 2.23 23 6.26 2.45 14 6.93 2.89 20 6.05 2.52 6 8.33 1.63 Food safety 8 6.50 2.14 9 5.89 2.03 19 6.26 2.45 10 5.20 2.25 11 6.09 2.88 4 4.50 1.73 15 5.93 2.34 16 5.31 2.73 12 5.25 2.14 17 5.88 2.29 4 7.75 1.71 Urban development 8 6.88 1.96 8 5.63 2.00 25 6.28 2.26 10 6.40 2.55 15 6.13 2.90 5 5.20 2.86 19 5.89 2.54 21 5.33 2.54 13 5.62 2.26 17 6.24 1.99 5 8.00 1.58 Energy 7 7.14 1.46 8 6.00 2.27 27 7.37 2.24 15 6.67 2.16 15 6.47 2.47 7 5.71 2.43 19 5.89 2.26 22 5.95 2.42 15 6.60 2.67 19 6.95 2.17 7 9.14 1.46 Water and sanitation 7 7.43 1.27 9 6.00 2.06 21 6.81 2.32 10 5.90 2.42 14 5.64 2.68 5 4.80 2.28 16 6.19 2.17 19 5.58 2.43 14 5.93 2.59 15 6.20 2.51 5 8.20 1.79 Pollution 7 7.86 1.57 9 6.00 2.00 24 6.79 2.52 13 6.69 2.63 12 6.00 2.59 5 4.20 2.59 16 6.00 2.25 18 5.61 2.23 13 5.62 2.40 17 6.24 2.51 5 7.60 2.30 Job creation/employment 10 6.50 2.12 9 6.00 2.00 29 6.69 2.70 12 6.50 1.57 13 6.85 2.54 7 5.57 2.07 21 6.00 2.24 24 5.96 2.51 14 5.50 2.18 21 6.05 2.46 6 7.67 3.61 Health 9 6.67 2.78 9 6.11 1.76 30 6.63 2.39 14 7.00 2.45 15 6.33 3.02 7 5.86 2.79 19 5.89 1.97 22 5.73 2.69 15 5.67 2.38 19 5.74 2.54 4 6.00 3.74 Financial markets 6 7.17 2.04 8 6.25 1.39 26 7.27 2.36 14 7.36 1.86 15 6.73 2.22 4 6.50 2.65 16 6.63 2.00 22 6.86 2.08 14 6.43 2.62 17 6.12 2.62 7 8.86 1.57 Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, transportation) 6 8.00 1.41 9 7.11 1.62 26 7.50 2.23 17 6.71 2.39 17 7.47 2.40 6 5.67 1.37 20 6.85 2.25 25 7.00 1.96 14 6.50 2.68 25 6.84 2.34 6 9.17 1.60 Agriculture and rural development 8 7.00 2.39 9 5.78 1.72 26 6.54 2.37 12 5.75 2.30 15 6.80 2.65 5 4.20 1.48 21 6.33 2.35 24 6.58 1.95 14 5.93 2.40 19 6.37 2.27 5 8.40 1.67 Trade and exports 8 7.13 1.64 9 6.00 1.22 25 6.96 2.15 11 5.45 2.07 14 6.71 2.64 5 5.60 1.52 17 6.29 2.14 19 6.42 2.36 13 5.69 2.39 16 6.69 2.39 6 8.00 1.79 Crime and violence 8 6.38 2.39 9 5.33 1.41 19 6.00 2.98 10 4.80 2.30 12 5.92 2.81 4 3.50 2.38 13 5.08 2.50 18 5.00 2.97 13 4.77 2.28 12 5.17 2.12 6 7.17 1.83 Natural resource management 7 6.71 2.29 8 5.38 1.51 21 5.90 2.95 10 5.00 2.58 13 6.77 2.62 4 3.50 2.38 15 5.80 1.97 19 5.63 2.65 12 4.75 2.53 14 5.57 2.31 4 7.25 2.22 Climate change (e.g., mitigation, adaptation) 7 7.71 2.06 9 5.33 1.73 26 6.46 3.05 11 5.73 2.87 17 6.29 2.52 5 4.40 2.07 18 6.00 2.28 21 5.62 2.60 12 4.83 2.17 17 5.88 2.71 6 7.83 2.04 Poverty reduction 9 6.67 2.45 9 6.44 2.07 28 6.21 2.91 14 5.79 2.58 15 6.60 2.67 8 6.63 1.85 19 6.42 1.74 28 5.57 2.53 14 5.43 2.62 24 6.25 2.79 7 7.57 3.31 Anti corruption 8 6.50 1.69 9 5.78 1.79 27 5.93 3.20 15 5.27 2.87 14 6.21 2.83 7 4.29 2.56 16 5.50 2.03 23 4.52 2.79 15 5.53 2.72 16 4.94 2.72 6 7.67 1.86 Judiciary reform 8 6.50 1.93 9 6.11 1.90 26 5.65 2.80 15 5.33 2.72 13 6.15 2.82 6 4.33 3.20 19 6.21 2.12 23 5.00 3.18 15 5.40 2.77 17 5.18 2.51 6 5.67 2.42 Economic growth 9 7.33 2.18 9 7.33 1.50 29 7.07 2.59 16 7.06 2.26 15 6.87 2.56 7 6.86 2.19 23 6.30 2.40 27 6.22 2.76 15 6.47 2.77 21 6.29 2.67 7 7.86 3.34 Disaster risk management 7 6.71 2.29 9 6.11 1.83 29 7.07 2.87 12 5.67 2.61 14 6.71 2.67 6 5.00 2.37 15 6.67 1.84 23 6.22 2.39 13 5.85 2.76 21 5.90 2.49 4 7.25 2.22 Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 9 6.67 2.45 9 6.11 2.09 28 6.64 2.92 12 6.50 2.65 14 6.86 2.21 5 5.00 2.74 16 6.13 2.13 21 6.14 2.41 13 5.38 2.43 23 6.13 2.80 5 7.80 2.28 74 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia C. World Bank Group’s Effectiveness and Results (continued) Which of the following best describes your current position? Office of the PMU/ Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ President/ Prime Office of Employee of a Consultant/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Minister/ Minister Parliamentarian Ministry Contractor Government Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD To what extent does the World Bank Group’s work help to achieve development results in 11 7.09 2.30 11 7.73 1.49 45 6.71 2.15 18 7.61 1.75 21 6.67 2.39 12 6.83 1.70 25 6.92 2.06 36 6.67 2.03 18 6.78 2.18 35 6.60 2.19 8 7.50 2.27 Serbia? (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the World Bank Group in Serbia? (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) Which of the following best describes your current position? Office of the PMU/ Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ President/ Prime Office of Employee of a Consultant/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Minister/ Minister Parliamentarian Ministry Contractor Government Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD The World Bank Group’s financial instruments (i.e., investment lending, Development Policy 11 6.55 2.73 10 6.50 2.01 40 6.60 2.13 17 6.76 2.02 23 5.91 2.25 10 6.00 1.89 24 6.33 2.10 30 6.13 2.10 18 4.94 2.69 34 5.68 2.59 7 6.86 2.48 Loan, Trust Funds, Program-for-Results, etc.) meet the needs of Serbia The World Bank Group meets Serbia’s needs for knowledge services (e.g., research, analysis, 12 6.67 2.61 10 6.40 2.27 39 6.69 2.24 19 7.21 1.99 22 6.55 2.42 12 6.50 1.73 25 6.56 2.12 33 6.85 2.12 18 5.33 2.85 39 5.92 2.60 9 7.22 2.82 data, technical assistance) Which of the following best describes your current position? Office of the PMU/ Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ President/ Prime Office of Employee of a Consultant/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Minister/ Minister Parliamentarian Ministry Contractor Government Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD To what extent do you believe that Serbia received value for money from the World Bank 9 6.78 2.39 9 6.67 1.50 35 6.06 2.60 17 7.47 1.94 13 6.15 2.41 6 6.00 1.79 17 7.06 1.92 24 6.38 2.04 13 6.23 1.92 22 6.32 2.38 7 5.00 3.27 Group’s Reimbursable Advisory Services (RAS)? (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) D. The World Bank Group’s Knowledge Work and Activities How frequently do you consult World Bank Group’s knowledge work and activities in the work you do? * Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Weekly 25.0% 8.3% 9.6% 45.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.1% 30.0% 2.4% 7.7% Monthly 50.0% 8.3% 19.2% 20.0% 7.1% 38.5% 10.0% 12.8% 35.0% 19.5% 15.4% A few times a year 16.7% 50.0% 40.4% 30.0% 28.6% 38.5% 30.0% 51.3% 30.0% 48.8% 30.8% Rarely 0.0% 25.0% 23.1% 5.0% 53.6% 7.7% 50.0% 25.6% 0.0% 24.4% 38.5% Never 8.3% 8.3% 7.7% 0.0% 10.7% 15.4% 10.0% 5.1% 5.0% 4.9% 7.7% *Significantly different between stakeholder groups 75 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia D. The World Bank Group’s Knowledge Work and Activities (continued) In Serbia, to what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group’s knowledge work and activities: (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) Which of the following best describes your current position? Office of the PMU/ Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ President/ Prime Office of Employee of a Consultant/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Minister/ Minister Parliamentarian Ministry Contractor Government Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD Are timely 11 6.64 2.38 9 6.22 1.86 40 6.48 1.85 18 7.67 1.97 24 6.21 2.43 11 6.55 2.21 20 6.65 1.81 30 6.03 2.30 16 5.69 2.18 31 5.90 2.53 7 7.00 2.24 Include appropriate level of stakeholder 11 6.55 2.38 9 6.78 1.79 39 6.54 1.88 18 7.56 2.15 23 6.78 2.26 12 5.50 2.68 19 6.58 1.98 31 5.90 2.55 15 5.80 2.76 30 5.60 2.14 9 6.89 3.06 involvement during preparation Lead to practical solutions 11 6.82 2.32 9 7.00 2.06 42 6.69 2.10 19 7.84 1.54 23 6.57 2.33 12 6.58 1.68 22 6.45 2.18 31 6.35 2.18 16 6.06 2.29 34 5.79 2.52 9 6.89 2.76 Are accessible (well written and easy to 11 6.82 2.14 8 7.00 2.07 41 6.61 2.08 19 8.16 1.95 23 6.39 2.44 11 6.82 2.09 22 7.18 1.84 31 6.90 2.29 17 5.76 2.36 33 6.42 2.33 9 6.44 2.55 understand) Are source of relevant information on global 11 7.91 1.64 9 7.67 2.50 42 7.29 2.08 19 8.79 1.27 26 6.77 2.60 12 7.50 1.45 21 7.76 2.02 32 7.41 1.62 17 6.59 2.29 32 7.38 1.90 8 7.25 3.01 good practices Are relevant to country challenges 11 7.27 2.37 9 7.44 2.13 41 6.54 2.12 19 8.05 1.84 24 6.71 2.56 11 6.91 2.17 22 6.55 2.28 32 6.63 2.15 16 6.44 2.42 32 6.66 2.19 8 6.88 3.09 Are adequately disseminated* 11 7.36 2.06 9 5.67 2.12 35 6.37 2.00 18 7.83 1.86 24 6.13 2.58 9 6.78 1.99 17 5.88 2.52 28 5.79 2.42 16 5.13 2.03 32 5.97 2.01 8 7.38 2.97 Are translated enough into local language 11 7.09 2.95 7 5.57 2.64 36 5.53 2.42 18 6.89 2.45 24 6.38 2.57 8 6.75 1.75 16 6.38 2.75 27 5.59 2.55 16 5.44 2.56 30 5.93 2.21 6 6.33 3.20 Are adaptable to Serbia’s specific development 11 6.73 2.72 9 6.11 1.76 38 6.13 2.29 16 7.44 2.22 24 6.38 2.63 11 6.64 2.06 21 5.90 2.43 31 5.61 2.22 16 5.56 2.39 32 6.06 2.15 7 6.00 3.32 challenges and country circumstances *Significantly different between stakeholder groups Which of the following best describes your current position? Office of the PMU/ Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ President/ Prime Office of Employee of a Consultant/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Minister/ Minister Parliamentarian Ministry Contractor Government Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD Overall, how significant a contribution do you believe the World Bank Group`s knowledge 11 7.00 2.24 9 6.89 1.69 42 6.57 1.94 18 7.67 2.14 24 6.63 2.39 13 6.54 1.71 27 6.70 1.79 34 6.65 1.81 19 5.89 2.40 35 6.34 2.06 9 7.22 3.03 work and activities make to development results in your country? Overall, how would you rate the technical quality of the World Bank Group`s knowledge work and 11 7.55 1.92 9 7.11 1.83 43 7.30 1.78 20 7.95 2.06 22 7.09 2.07 12 7.50 1.68 23 7.35 1.61 30 7.23 1.83 19 6.84 2.19 36 7.22 1.94 10 8.00 2.36 activities? (1-Not significant at all, 10-Very significant; 1-Very low technical quality, 10-Very high technical quality) 76 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia E. Working with the World Bank Group To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements? (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) Which of the following best describes your current position? Office of the PMU/ Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ President/ Prime Office of Employee of a Consultant/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Minister/ Minister Parliamentarian Ministry Contractor Government Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD The World Bank Group disburses funds 9 7.44 2.51 8 7.88 1.36 31 8.39 1.89 18 8.61 1.97 16 7.38 2.00 5 7.40 1.14 17 8.06 1.82 20 7.45 2.04 11 6.73 2.45 24 8.50 1.62 4 8.25 2.22 promptly The World Bank Group effectively monitors and 11 7.18 2.96 11 7.73 1.85 42 7.38 2.26 19 8.32 1.57 22 7.73 1.93 8 6.88 1.36 25 7.80 1.71 28 7.18 1.94 14 6.86 2.11 33 7.55 2.33 7 7.29 3.15 evaluates the projects and programs it supports The World Bank Group’s approvals and reviews 9 7.78 1.92 8 7.88 1.25 33 7.42 2.36 19 7.63 1.89 21 7.24 2.19 4 5.50 .58 19 7.79 1.44 20 7.40 2.06 12 6.50 2.15 26 7.88 2.08 5 8.40 1.52 are done in a timely fashion The World Bank Group’s “Safeguard Policy” 8 7.88 1.46 7 8.29 .95 27 7.74 2.05 17 7.76 1.89 17 7.24 2.54 4 6.25 1.89 16 7.56 2.13 17 7.18 2.24 11 5.45 2.62 20 7.80 2.65 4 8.00 2.71 requirements are reasonable The World Bank Group’s conditions on its 9 7.78 1.92 10 8.60 1.17 29 7.03 2.57 17 7.59 2.43 20 6.50 3.07 5 6.40 2.61 19 6.95 2.30 22 6.82 1.89 16 6.19 2.10 23 7.43 2.37 7 7.43 2.44 lending are reasonable The World Bank Group takes decisions quickly 11 6.73 2.76 8 8.00 1.07 37 6.81 2.01 18 7.17 2.12 18 6.61 2.81 7 5.71 2.29 24 6.25 2.15 28 6.39 1.87 14 6.21 2.36 24 6.67 2.44 7 6.43 2.64 in Serbia Working with the World Bank Group increases 11 8.18 1.66 10 7.70 2.54 42 7.26 2.71 19 8.58 1.74 22 6.95 2.68 10 7.00 2.16 25 7.92 1.63 29 7.17 2.09 17 7.00 2.42 34 7.97 2.05 9 7.22 2.95 Serbia’s institutional capacity Where country systems (e.g., procurement, financial management, etc.) are adequate, the 9 7.78 1.79 8 7.38 2.56 29 7.52 2.43 16 8.19 2.20 17 7.41 2.53 5 6.40 2.30 15 6.80 2.31 23 6.48 2.23 11 6.09 2.66 21 7.43 2.09 5 8.20 2.05 World Bank Group makes appropriate use of them The World Bank Group provides effective implementation support (i.e., supervision of 10 7.70 2.21 9 7.56 2.35 39 7.79 2.23 20 7.95 2.35 20 7.45 2.06 6 7.00 2.00 25 7.48 1.90 26 7.50 2.21 16 7.31 2.36 32 7.78 2.31 6 8.67 1.51 projects) Which of the following best describes your current position? Office of the PMU/ Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ President/ Prime Office of Employee of a Consultant/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Minister/ Minister Parliamentarian Ministry Contractor Government Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD To what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group’s work helps to find solutions that 11 6.73 2.24 8 6.88 1.73 29 5.93 2.14 14 6.43 2.24 22 6.14 2.34 7 5.71 1.38 23 6.70 2.10 23 6.39 2.10 18 5.61 2.50 28 6.39 2.50 6 7.67 2.07 promote private public partnerships in Serbia? To what extent do you believe the World Bank Group measures and corrects its work in real 11 6.73 2.15 6 7.67 1.03 35 6.26 2.29 14 7.50 1.40 18 6.17 2.18 5 5.80 1.30 18 6.72 2.08 21 6.14 2.48 13 6.00 2.12 22 6.36 2.50 8 7.38 2.56 time in Serbia? (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) 77 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia F. The Future Role of the World Bank Group in Serbia Which of the following SHOULD the World Bank Group do to make itself of greater value in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Percentage of Respondents Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ (Responses Combined) Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Offer more innovative knowledge services 41.7% 8.3% 13.5% 20.0% 17.9% 15.4% 10.0% 10.3% 15.0% 22.0% 15.4% Collaborate more effectively with Government clients (e.g., national, state, 8.3% 25.0% 19.2% 20.0% 28.6% 15.4% 16.7% 7.7% 5.0% 14.6% 23.1% local) Work faster 16.7% 0.0% 13.5% 10.0% 14.3% 7.7% 6.7% 5.1% 0.0% 2.4% 7.7% Reduce the complexity of obtaining World 33.3% 33.3% 17.3% 35.0% 28.6% 15.4% 26.7% 25.6% 35.0% 24.4% 23.1% Bank Group financing Increase availability of Reimbursable 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 15.0% 7.1% 0.0% 10.0% 7.7% 0.0% 4.9% 7.7% Advisory Services (RAS) Help to bring discipline/effective supervision to implementation of 16.7% 41.7% 25.0% 25.0% 10.7% 23.1% 23.3% 30.8% 40.0% 24.4% 15.4% investment projects Offer more innovative financial products 25.0% 16.7% 11.5% 0.0% 28.6% 15.4% 13.3% 2.6% 5.0% 17.1% 7.7% Ensure greater selectivity in its work* 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 15.4% 0.0% 5.1% 0.0% 2.4% 0.0% Provide more adequate data/knowledge/statistics/figures on 0.0% 8.3% 5.8% 5.0% 3.6% 7.7% 6.7% 15.4% 25.0% 12.2% 15.4% Serbia’s economy Improve the competitiveness of its financing compared to markets (e.g., cost, 0.0% 8.3% 11.5% 5.0% 14.3% 0.0% 10.0% 12.8% 25.0% 2.4% 7.7% timeliness, other terms) Reach out more to groups outside of 8.3% 33.3% 5.8% 10.0% 25.0% 23.1% 16.7% 46.2% 15.0% 14.6% 15.4% Government* Increase the level of capacity 16.7% 16.7% 28.8% 30.0% 7.1% 46.2% 23.3% 17.9% 5.0% 34.1% 23.1% development in the country Improve the quality of its experts as 16.7% 0.0% 23.1% 20.0% 3.6% 7.7% 26.7% 5.1% 20.0% 12.2% 7.7% related to Serbia’s specific challenges Other 0.0% 8.3% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 6.7% 2.6% 0.0% 2.4% 7.7% *Significantly different between stakeholder groups When considering the combination of services that the World Bank Group offers in Serbia, and taking into account its limited level of resources, which ONE of the following do you believe the World Bank Group should offer more of in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Financial services 8.3% 25.0% 15.4% 10.0% 39.3% 7.7% 26.7% 15.4% 15.0% 24.4% 15.4% Knowledge products 41.7% 50.0% 30.8% 55.0% 14.3% 61.5% 40.0% 48.7% 40.0% 43.9% 46.2% Convening services 25.0% 0.0% 3.8% 10.0% 7.1% 0.0% 10.0% 7.7% 5.0% 2.4% 0.0% None of the above 0.0% 0.0% 5.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 4.9% 7.7% The combination is appropriate for Serbia 25.0% 16.7% 25.0% 25.0% 32.1% 0.0% 13.3% 17.9% 30.0% 19.5% 23.1% Don`t know 0.0% 8.3% 19.2% 0.0% 7.1% 30.8% 10.0% 10.3% 10.0% 4.9% 7.7% 78 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia G. Communication and Information Sharing How do you get most of your information about economic and social development issues in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Percentage of Respondents Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ (Responses Combined) Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Local radio* 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 15.4% International radio 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Social media (e.g., blogs, Facebook, 0.0% 16.7% 21.2% 10.0% 28.6% 38.5% 23.3% 25.6% 20.0% 14.6% 15.4% Twitter, YouTube, Flickr) International newspapers* 33.3% 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 7.1% 7.7% 3.3% 12.8% 0.0% 2.4% 0.0% Local television* 41.7% 8.3% 23.1% 15.0% 14.3% 0.0% 16.7% 5.1% 5.0% 4.9% 30.8% Internet 66.7% 58.3% 71.2% 90.0% 78.6% 69.2% 86.7% 82.1% 80.0% 75.6% 61.5% Periodicals 0.0% 33.3% 11.5% 10.0% 7.1% 15.4% 20.0% 12.8% 20.0% 29.3% 15.4% International television 0.0% 0.0% 9.6% 5.0% 3.6% 0.0% 10.0% 10.3% 5.0% 4.9% 7.7% Local newspapers 25.0% 8.3% 9.6% 10.0% 10.7% 23.1% 6.7% 7.7% 35.0% 4.9% 15.4% Other 8.3% 8.3% 9.6% 5.0% 0.0% 15.4% 6.7% 10.3% 5.0% 14.6% 15.4% *Significantly different between stakeholder groups How would you prefer to receive information from the World Bank Group? (Choose no more than TWO) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Percentage of Respondents Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ (Responses Combined) Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other World Bank Group’s publications and 33.3% 16.7% 13.5% 35.0% 10.7% 23.1% 26.7% 12.8% 20.0% 39.0% 46.2% other written materials* e-Newsletters 58.3% 66.7% 40.4% 55.0% 53.6% 46.2% 63.3% 43.6% 40.0% 41.5% 23.1% World Bank Group’s 25.0% 25.0% 44.2% 45.0% 25.0% 38.5% 26.7% 33.3% 30.0% 39.0% 30.8% seminars/workshops/conferences Mobile phones 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% Direct contact with World Bank Group 25.0% 8.3% 17.3% 20.0% 21.4% 7.7% 30.0% 33.3% 25.0% 17.1% 23.1% (i.e., face to face meetings/discussions) World Bank Group’s website 41.7% 16.7% 26.9% 15.0% 28.6% 23.1% 20.0% 25.6% 35.0% 19.5% 23.1% Social media (e.g., blogs, Facebook, 8.3% 25.0% 9.6% 0.0% 17.9% 30.8% 6.7% 17.9% 5.0% 9.8% 15.4% Twitter, YouTube, Flickr) Other 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% *Significantly different between stakeholder groups 79 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia G. Communication and Information Sharing (continued) Are you aware of the World Bank Group's Access to Information Policies under which the World Bank Group discloses any information in its possession that is not on a list of exceptions? Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Yes 33.3% 25.0% 23.1% 60.0% 17.9% 30.8% 20.0% 23.1% 25.0% 36.6% 30.8% No 66.7% 75.0% 76.9% 40.0% 82.1% 69.2% 80.0% 76.9% 75.0% 63.4% 69.2% Do you have reliable access to the Internet? Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Yes 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 96.4% 100.0% 100.0% 97.4% 95.0% 97.6% 100.0% No 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.6% 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% 5.0% 2.4% 0.0% Do you use/have you used the World Bank Group website? Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Yes 83.3% 66.7% 78.8% 100.0% 75.0% 92.3% 80.0% 94.9% 95.0% 75.6% 76.9% No 16.7% 33.3% 21.2% 0.0% 25.0% 7.7% 20.0% 5.1% 5.0% 24.4% 23.1% Do you currently consult the World Bank Group social media sites? Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Yes 25.0% 33.3% 17.3% 15.0% 14.3% 15.4% 13.3% 28.2% 40.0% 19.5% 15.4% No 75.0% 66.7% 82.7% 85.0% 85.7% 84.6% 86.7% 71.8% 60.0% 80.5% 84.6% Have you visited the “World Bank Serbia” Facebook page?* Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Yes 41.7% 33.3% 28.8% 20.0% 17.9% 7.7% 23.3% 48.7% 55.0% 19.5% 23.1% No 58.3% 66.7% 71.2% 80.0% 82.1% 92.3% 76.7% 51.3% 45.0% 80.5% 76.9% *Significantly different between stakeholder groups Which Internet connection do you use primarily when visiting a World Bank Group website? Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other High speed/WiFi 90.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 95.2% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 94.7% 100.0% 100.0% Dial-up 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 4.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.3% 0.0% 0.0% 80 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia G. Communication and Information Sharing (continued) How frequently do you consult the World Bank Group’s website and/or social media channels for information/knowledge that you can use in your work? Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Weekly 8.3% 8.3% 11.5% 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 20.0% 4.9% 0.0% Monthly 8.3% 25.0% 15.4% 35.0% 14.3% 30.8% 13.3% 23.1% 30.0% 29.3% 23.1% A few times a year 25.0% 16.7% 23.1% 15.0% 14.3% 15.4% 36.7% 30.8% 30.0% 24.4% 7.7% Rarely 25.0% 33.3% 26.9% 30.0% 64.3% 38.5% 23.3% 28.2% 0.0% 26.8% 38.5% Never 33.3% 16.7% 23.1% 10.0% 7.1% 15.4% 26.7% 10.3% 20.0% 14.6% 30.8% Please rate how much you agree with the following statements. (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) Which of the following best describes your current position? Office of the PMU/ Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ President/ Prime Office of Employee of a Consultant/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Minister/ Minister Parliamentarian Ministry Contractor Government Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD I find the World Bank Group’s websites easy to 9 7.33 2.24 7 7.43 2.99 39 7.38 1.83 18 7.06 2.13 20 7.15 1.90 9 7.33 1.41 22 7.41 1.92 30 6.83 2.00 19 5.79 2.37 25 7.32 2.14 8 8.13 1.96 navigate. I find the information on the World Bank Group’s 9 7.00 2.40 8 8.00 2.33 38 7.95 1.56 18 8.39 2.03 22 7.64 1.81 9 7.78 1.09 23 8.00 1.71 30 7.27 1.44 19 6.74 2.18 27 8.19 1.57 8 8.25 2.38 websites useful. The World Bank Group’s social media channels (e.g., blogs, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Flickr) 6 6.33 2.88 5 8.20 2.05 17 7.06 2.33 6 7.67 2.25 12 8.17 2.25 2 7.00 0.00 13 7.38 2.02 17 6.47 2.58 12 6.17 2.59 10 6.50 2.32 3 9.33 1.15 are valuable sources of information about the institution When I need information from the World Bank Group I know how to find it (e.g., whom to call, 12 7.50 2.54 8 8.88 1.25 42 7.64 2.26 18 9.17 1.04 23 7.00 2.47 10 7.90 1.60 24 7.67 1.97 34 7.15 2.31 18 7.83 2.83 29 8.03 2.13 11 8.09 1.87 where to reach them, etc.) The World Bank Group is responsive to my 8 8.63 1.69 3 8.33 2.89 25 7.64 2.08 11 8.73 2.00 14 6.86 2.85 4 8.00 2.45 11 8.45 1.92 23 7.00 2.78 18 7.72 2.74 18 6.67 3.09 5 7.00 3.46 information requests and inquiries 81 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia H. Background Information Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IDA, IFC, or MIGA) in your country?* Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Yes 83.3% 0.0% 61.5% 95.0% 3.6% 61.5% 23.3% 33.3% 55.0% 14.6% 38.5% No 16.7% 100.0% 38.5% 5.0% 96.4% 38.5% 76.7% 66.7% 45.0% 85.4% 61.5% *Significantly different between stakeholder groups Which of the following agencies of the World Bank Group do you primarily engage with in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other The World Bank (IBRD) 91.7% 66.7% 90.4% 90.0% 78.6% 92.3% 63.3% 74.4% 85.0% 68.3% 53.8% The International Finance Corporation 0.0% 8.3% 3.8% 10.0% 7.1% 7.7% 16.7% 2.6% 15.0% 14.6% 7.7% (IFC) The Multilateral Investment Guarantee 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% Agency (MIGA) Other 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% None 8.3% 25.0% 3.8% 0.0% 14.3% 0.0% 20.0% 17.9% 0.0% 17.1% 30.8% Do your projects involve both the World Bank and the IFC? Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Yes 66.7% 8.3% 38.5% 55.0% 25.0% 30.8% 30.0% 25.6% 35.0% 29.3% 30.8% No 33.3% 91.7% 61.5% 45.0% 75.0% 69.2% 70.0% 74.4% 65.0% 70.7% 69.2% If yes, what was your view of how the two institutions work together in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other The two institutions work well together 50.0% 100.0% 75.0% 63.6% 42.9% 75.0% 33.3% 60.0% 42.9% 25.0% 75.0% The way the two institutions work 25.0% 0.0% 10.0% 27.3% 28.6% 25.0% 22.2% 10.0% 14.3% 25.0% 25.0% together needs improvement Don`t know 25.0% 0.0% 15.0% 9.1% 28.6% 0.0% 44.4% 30.0% 42.9% 50.0% 0.0% 82 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia H. Background Information (continued) Which of the following describes most of your exposure to the World Bank Group in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO) Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Percentage of Respondents Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ (Responses Combined) Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Observer (i.e., follow in media, discuss in 16.7% 41.7% 5.8% 5.0% 57.1% 15.4% 20.0% 23.1% 15.0% 12.2% 7.7% informal conversations, etc.)* Use World Bank Group reports/data* 8.3% 41.7% 17.3% 5.0% 10.7% 46.2% 20.0% 41.0% 70.0% 29.3% 23.1% Engage in World Bank Group 33.3% 16.7% 38.5% 45.0% 14.3% 7.7% 20.0% 20.5% 0.0% 26.8% 46.2% related/sponsored events/activities* Collaborate as part of my professional 66.7% 33.3% 69.2% 70.0% 32.1% 69.2% 46.7% 46.2% 50.0% 46.3% 46.2% duties* Use World Bank Group website for 0.0% 16.7% 5.8% 5.0% 17.9% 15.4% 13.3% 25.6% 15.0% 29.3% 23.1% information, data, research, etc. *Significantly different between stakeholder groups What’s your gender? Office of the President/ Employee Bilateral/ Private Sector/ Academia/ Prime Minister/ Office of of PMU/ Local Multilateral Financial Sector/ Research Institute/ Percentage of Respondents Minister Parliamentarian a Ministry Consultant Gov. Agency Private Bank CSO Media Think Tank Other Female 50.0% 66.7% 48.1% 50.0% 53.6% 53.8% 36.7% 64.1% 65.0% 48.8% 53.8% Male 50.0% 33.3% 51.9% 50.0% 46.4% 46.2% 63.3% 35.9% 35.0% 51.2% 46.2% 83 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia Appendix C: Responses to Indicator Questions by Geographic Location17  Belgrade N=214  Other N=66 B. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group Which best represents your geographic location? Belgrade Other N Mean SD N Mean SD Overall, please rate your impression of the World Bank 195 6.82 2.02 55 6.53 1.78 Group’s effectiveness in Serbia. (1-Not effective at all, 10-Very effective) To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the World Bank Group’s work in Serbia? (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) Which best represents your geographic location? Belgrade Other N Mean SD N Mean SD Overall the World Bank Group currently plays a relevant 197 7.12 2.26 53 6.75 2.23 role in development in Serbia The World Bank Group’s work is aligned with what I 192 6.82 2.17 54 6.06 2.41 consider the development priorities for Serbia* *Significantly different between geographic locations To what extent is the World Bank Group an effective development partner in Serbia, in terms of each of the following? (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) Which best represents your geographic location? Belgrade Other N Mean SD N Mean SD Responsiveness to needs 169 6.67 2.25 53 6.11 2.19 Flexibility (in terms of the institution’s products and 166 6.00 2.36 47 6.04 2.11 services) Flexibility (in terms of changing country circumstances) 172 6.06 2.32 48 6.17 2.36 Being inclusive 160 6.67 2.35 45 6.27 2.38 Openness (sharing data and other information) 179 6.89 2.38 51 6.22 2.19 Collaboration with the Government 175 7.93 1.87 47 7.79 2.11 The speed in which it gets things accomplished on the 173 6.08 2.29 49 5.92 2.17 ground Helping to bring discipline/effective supervision to 161 6.66 2.41 53 6.91 2.41 implementation of investment projects Collaboration with civil society 151 6.17 2.42 45 6.02 2.22 Staff accessibility 174 6.99 2.45 53 6.34 2.53 Collaboration with other donors and development partners 150 6.87 2.29 38 6.24 2.19 Collaboration with the private sector 125 6.28 2.21 45 5.87 2.48 Straightforwardness and honesty 165 7.01 2.45 54 6.85 2.40 Treating clients and stakeholders in Serbia with respect 174 7.94 2.31 53 7.51 2.39 Being a long-term partner* 181 8.46 1.94 55 7.80 2.16 *Significantly different between geographic locations 17280 respondents provided information about their geographic location. Only these respondents were included in the analysis presented in this appendix. 84 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia C. World Bank Group’s Effectiveness and Results Which best represents your geographic location? Belgrade Other N Mean SD N Mean SD To what extent does the World Bank Group’s work help to 187 6.96 2.09 53 6.58 2.02 achieve development results in Serbia? (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the World Bank Group in Serbia? (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) Which bes t repres ents your geographic location? Belgrade Other N Mean SD N Mean SD The World Bank Group’s financial ins trum ents (i.e., inves tm ent lending, Developm ent Policy Loan, Trus t 168 6.42 2.29 56 5.36 2.09 Funds , Program -for-Res ults , etc.) m eet the needs of Serbia* The World Bank Group m eets Serbia’s needs for knowledge s ervices (e.g., res earch, analys is , data, 183 6.63 2.35 55 6.05 2.31 technical as s is tance) *Significantly different between geographic locations D. The World Bank Group’s Knowledge Work and Activities In Serbia, to what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group’s knowledge work and activities: (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) Which best represents your geographic location? Belgrade Other N Mean SD N Mean SD Are adaptable to Serbia’s specific development 165 6.25 2.44 51 5.86 2.01 challenges and country circumstances Which bes t repres ents your geographic location? Belgrade Other N Mean SD N Mean SD Overall, how s ignificant a contribution do you believe the World Bank Group`s knowledge work and activities m ake 187 6.75 2.11 54 6.31 1.89 to developm ent res ults in your country? Overall, how would you rate the technical quality of the 184 7.47 1.91 51 6.80 1.78 World Bank Group`s knowledge work and activities ?* (1-Not significant at all, 10-Very significant; 1-Very low technical quality, 10-Very high technical quality) *Significantly different between geographic locations E. Working with the World Bank Group To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements? (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) Which best represents your geographic location? Belgrade Other N Mean SD N Mean SD The World Bank Group takes decisions quickly in Serbia 150 6.75 2.15 46 6.24 2.42 Where country systems (e.g., procurement, financial management, etc.) are adequate, the World Bank Group 116 7.26 2.28 43 7.19 2.44 makes appropriate use of them 85 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia Appendix D: Responses to Selected Questions by Level of Collaboration with the World Bank Group18 Note that this appendix presents comparative analysis of the data from those respondents who collaborate with the WBG vs. those respondents who do not collaborate with the WBG and covers the following selected questions from the FY17 Serbia COS questionnaire: All 10-point scale questions and question B4 “When thinking about how the World Bank Group can have the most impact on development results in Serbia, in which sectoral areas do you believe the World Bank Group should focus most of its resources in Serbia?” Collaborating with the WBG N=82 Not collaborating with the WBG N=122 B. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? Yes No N Mean SD N Mean SD How familiar are you with the work of the 112 7.36 1.84 168 5.68 2.15 World Bank Group in Serbia?* (1-Not familiar at all, 10-Extremely familiar) *Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators Currently, do you profes s ionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? Yes No N Mean SD N Mean SD Overall, pleas e rate your im pres s ion of the World Bank Group’s effectivenes s in 107 7.16 2.09 143 6.45 1.83 Serbia.* (1-Not effective at all, 10-Very effective) *Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? Yes No N Mean SD N Mean SD To what extent do you believe the World Bank Group’s staff is well prepared (e.g., skills and knowledge) to help Serbia 105 7.41 2.21 121 6.78 2.11 solve its most complicated development challenges?* (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) *Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators 18Only 280 respondents provided information about their level of collaboration with the World Bank Group (question H3 in the questionnaire). Therefore, only these respondents were included in the analysis presented in this appendix. 86 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia B. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group (continued) When thinking about how the World Bank Group can have the most impact on development results in Serbia, in which sectoral areas do you believe the World Bank Group should focus most of its resources (financial and knowledge services) in Serbia? (Choose no more than THREE) Percentage of Respondents Collaborating with Not collaborating (Responses combined) the WBG with the WBG Energy 9.8% 11.9% Water and sanitation 2.7% 3.6% Pollution 4.5% 6.5% Job creation/employment 28.6% 29.2% Health* 21.4% 11.9% Financial markets 5.4% 2.4% Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted social assistance) 6.3% 7.7% Gender equity 0.9% 2.4% Private sector development 35.7% 25.6% Education 36.6% 33.9% Public sector governance/reform (i.e., government effectiveness, public financial 30.4% 21.4% management, public expenditure, fiscal system reform) Global/regional integration* 2.7% 9.5% Food safety 2.7% 1.8% Urban development 0.0% 3.0% Judiciary reform 17.0% 11.9% Economic growth 18.8% 23.8% Disaster risk management 4.5% 3.0% Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 5.4% 5.4% Disease (e.g., cancer, heart deficiencies)* 3.6% 0.0% Information and communications technology 4.5% 6.5% Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, transportation) 8.0% 10.7% Agriculture and rural development 11.6% 14.9% Trade and exports 1.8% 0.6% Crime and violence 0.9% 1.2% Natural resource management 2.7% 3.6% Climate change (e.g., mitigation, adaptation) 1.8% 6.0% Poverty reduction 17.9% 12.5% Anti corruption* 8.0% 17.3% *Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators How EFFECTIVE do you believe the following World Bank Group’s instruments are in supporting Serbia Government’s efforts to reduce poverty? (1-Not effective at all, 10-Very effective) Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? Yes No N Mean SD N Mean SD Investment Project Financing (IPF) 83 6.94 2.38 100 6.79 2.23 Development Policy Financing (DPF) 83 6.71 2.33 94 6.49 2.20 Program-for-Results Financing (PforR) 79 6.73 2.53 79 6.47 2.17 Trust funds and grants 77 7.26 2.41 96 6.59 2.43 Guarantees 59 6.59 2.24 70 6.70 2.22 IFC Investment Services 69 6.55 2.61 77 6.22 2.23 IFC Advisory Services 76 6.64 2.66 88 6.47 2.27 87 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia B. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group (continued) To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the World Bank Group’s work in Serbia? (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? Yes No N Mean SD N Mean SD Overall the World Bank Group currently plays a relevant role in development in 106 7.68 2.21 144 6.58 2.18 Serbia* The World Bank Group’s work is aligned with what I consider the development 102 7.14 2.20 144 6.31 2.21 priorities for Serbia* *Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators To what extent is the World Bank Group an effective development partner in Serbia, in terms of each of the following? (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? Yes No N Mean SD N Mean SD Responsiveness to needs* 97 6.94 2.21 125 6.23 2.23 Flexibility (in terms of the institution’s 96 6.33 2.51 117 5.74 2.08 products and services) Flexibility (in terms of changing country 96 6.48 2.38 124 5.77 2.24 circumstances)* Being inclusive 89 6.89 2.47 116 6.34 2.25 Openness (sharing data and other 99 7.19 2.30 131 6.40 2.34 information)* Collaboration with the Government 95 8.05 1.93 127 7.78 1.91 The speed in which it gets things 98 6.23 2.30 124 5.89 2.22 accomplished on the ground Helping to bring discipline/effective supervision to implementation of 89 6.98 2.44 125 6.54 2.37 investment projects Collaboration with civil society* 79 6.66 2.30 117 5.78 2.36 Staff accessibility* 101 7.45 2.48 126 6.36 2.38 Collaboration with other donors and 87 7.10 2.26 101 6.43 2.25 development partners* Collaboration with the private sector 67 6.46 2.22 103 5.98 2.31 Straightforwardness and honesty 97 7.27 2.51 122 6.74 2.36 Treating clients and stakeholders in 99 8.17 2.43 128 7.58 2.22 Serbia with respect Being a long-term partner 99 8.56 2.07 137 8.12 1.95 *Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators 88 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia C. World Bank Group’s Effectiveness and Results In your opinion, how IMPORTANT is it for the World Bank Group to be involved in the following areas of development in Serbia? (1-Not effective at all, 10-Very effective) Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? Yes No N Mean SD N Mean SD Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted 100 7.49 2.59 154 7.07 2.43 social assistance) Gender equity 101 6.75 2.60 152 6.46 2.61 Private sector development 107 8.31 2.01 158 8.23 1.83 Education 106 8.51 2.10 159 8.57 1.85 Public sector governance/reform (i.e., government effectiveness, public financial 106 8.51 2.02 160 8.22 2.03 management, public expenditure, fiscal system reform) Global/regional integration 104 7.37 2.28 158 7.49 2.34 Food safety 95 6.78 2.43 149 7.29 2.24 Urban development 101 7.12 2.35 150 7.08 2.24 Energy 106 7.79 2.27 157 7.94 1.94 Water and sanitation 100 7.19 2.37 153 7.68 2.04 Pollution* 103 7.55 2.41 154 8.16 1.81 Job creation/employment 106 8.31 2.09 160 8.46 1.77 Health 104 8.22 2.31 157 8.36 1.74 Financial markets 99 7.78 2.36 149 7.85 2.00 Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, 101 7.81 2.10 160 8.12 1.86 transportation) Agriculture and rural development 100 8.03 2.00 154 8.29 1.81 Trade and exports 96 7.27 2.21 151 7.30 2.18 Crime and violence 97 6.46 2.82 145 6.52 2.63 Natural resource management 97 6.62 2.72 148 6.89 2.37 Climate change (e.g., mitigation, 104 7.07 2.60 154 7.73 2.18 adaptation)* Poverty reduction 102 8.29 2.28 156 8.51 1.83 Anti corruption 98 7.95 2.51 154 8.19 2.19 Judiciary reform 99 8.07 2.39 152 8.26 1.95 Economic growth 100 8.51 1.80 159 8.62 1.71 Disaster risk management 103 7.29 2.50 150 7.56 2.01 Equality of opportunity (i.e., social 100 7.76 2.34 152 7.68 2.17 inclusion) Disease (e.g., cancer, heart deficiencies) 96 7.01 2.83 148 7.28 2.23 Information and communications 101 7.50 2.57 153 8.02 2.00 technology *Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators 89 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia C. World Bank Group’s Effectiveness and Results (continued) How EFFECTIVE do you believe the World Bank Group is in terms of the work it does in the following areas of development in Serbia? (1-Not effective at all, 10-Very effective) Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? Yes No N Mean SD N Mean SD Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted 72 6.38 2.58 96 5.79 2.26 social assistance) Gender equity* 66 6.62 2.36 84 5.69 2.20 Private sector development* 73 6.92 2.17 97 6.21 2.21 Education 77 6.40 2.52 103 6.02 2.24 Public sector governance/reform (i.e., government effectiveness, public financial 87 6.97 2.33 110 6.65 2.28 management, public expenditure, fiscal system reform) Global/regional integration 61 6.97 2.46 98 6.29 2.52 Food safety 48 6.04 2.42 77 5.70 2.31 Urban development* 60 6.50 2.16 86 5.72 2.46 Energy* 72 7.07 2.34 89 6.33 2.29 Water and sanitation 56 6.61 2.31 79 5.86 2.36 Pollution 54 6.57 2.51 85 6.01 2.33 Job creation/employment 72 6.40 2.49 94 6.14 2.31 Health 71 6.54 2.68 92 5.87 2.29 Financial markets 63 7.29 2.24 86 6.58 2.16 Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, 71 7.21 2.37 100 6.99 2.11 transportation) Agriculture and rural development 63 6.37 2.40 95 6.38 2.19 Trade and exports 61 6.62 2.14 82 6.35 2.23 Crime and violence 52 5.58 2.80 72 5.26 2.32 Natural resource management 52 5.87 2.74 75 5.59 2.32 Climate change (e.g., mitigation, 58 6.19 2.76 91 5.87 2.46 adaptation) Poverty reduction 78 6.41 2.60 97 6.00 2.49 Anti corruption 68 5.72 2.77 88 5.35 2.63 Judiciary reform 68 5.63 2.81 89 5.54 2.51 Economic growth 78 7.06 2.57 100 6.47 2.46 Disaster risk management 60 6.38 2.68 93 6.32 2.36 Equality of opportunity (i.e., social 70 6.49 2.61 85 6.15 2.44 inclusion) *Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators 90 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia C. World Bank Group’s Effectiveness and Results (continued) Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? Yes No N Mean SD N Mean SD To what extent does the World Bank Group’s work help to achieve 103 7.26 2.05 137 6.58 2.06 development results in Serbia?* (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) *Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the World Bank Group in Serbia? (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? Yes No N Mean SD N Mean SD The World Bank Group’s financial instruments (i.e., investment lending, Development Policy Loan, Trust Funds, 96 6.69 2.33 128 5.75 2.18 Program-for-Results, etc.) meet the needs of Serbia* The World Bank Group meets Serbia’s needs for knowledge services (e.g., 102 7.02 2.23 136 6.10 2.37 research, analysis, data, technical assistance)* *Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? Yes No N Mean SD N Mean SD To what extent do you believe that Serbia received value for money from the World 79 6.85 2.25 93 6.05 2.20 Bank Group’s Reimbursable Advisory Services (RAS)?* (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) *Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators 91 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia D. The World Bank Group’s Knowledge Work and Activities In Serbia, to what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group’s knowledge work and activities: (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? Yes No N Mean SD N Mean SD Are timely* 97 6.99 2.15 120 5.88 2.10 Include appropriate level of stakeholder 97 6.72 2.39 119 6.04 2.19 involvement during preparation* Lead to practical solutions* 101 7.01 2.11 127 6.18 2.24 Are accessible (well written and easy to 102 7.17 2.28 123 6.41 2.11 understand)* Are source of relevant information on 101 7.81 1.95 128 7.13 2.09 global good practices* Are relevant to country challenges* 99 7.27 2.27 126 6.44 2.17 Are adequately disseminated* 89 6.92 2.26 118 5.78 2.18 Are translated enough into local language 86 6.35 2.66 113 5.81 2.36 Are adaptable to Serbia’s specific development challenges and country 93 6.63 2.40 123 5.80 2.24 circumstances* *Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? Yes No N Mean SD N Mean SD Overall, how significant a contribution do you believe the World Bank Group`s 103 6.97 2.25 138 6.41 1.89 knowledge work and activities make to development results in your country?* Overall, how would you rate the technical quality of the World Bank Group`s 108 7.64 2.09 127 7.06 1.67 knowledge work and activities?* (1-Not significant at all, 10-Very significant; 1-Very low technical quality, 10-Very high technical quality) *Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators 92 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia E. Working with the World Bank Group To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements? (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) Currently, do you profes s ionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? Yes No N Mean SD N Mean SD The World Bank Group dis burs es funds 67 8.39 1.93 96 7.66 1.93 prom ptly* The World Bank Group effectively m onitors and evaluates the projects and 91 7.81 1.98 129 7.27 2.15 program s it s upports The World Bank Group’s approvals and 74 7.53 2.09 102 7.46 1.96 reviews are done in a tim ely fas hion The World Bank Group’s “Safeguard 66 7.45 2.33 82 7.43 2.18 Policy” requirem ents are reas onable The World Bank Group’s conditions on its 80 7.26 2.42 97 6.95 2.32 lending are reas onable The World Bank Group takes decis ions 90 6.97 2.23 106 6.34 2.18 quickly in Serbia* Working with the World Bank Group 100 7.95 2.15 128 7.22 2.34 increas es Serbia’s ins titutional capacity* Where country s ys tem s (e.g., procurem ent, financial m anagem ent, etc.) 65 7.46 2.57 94 7.09 2.13 are adequate, the World Bank Group m akes appropriate us e of them The World Bank Group provides effective im plem entation s upport (i.e., s upervis ion 90 7.94 2.02 119 7.43 2.23 of projects ) *Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? Yes No N Mean SD N Mean SD To what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group’s work helps to find 83 6.42 2.39 106 6.23 2.06 solutions that promote private public partnerships in Serbia? (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? Yes No N Mean SD N Mean SD To what extent do you believe the World Bank Group measures and corrects its 74 6.85 2.29 97 6.23 2.08 work in real time in Serbia? (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) 93 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia G. Communication and Information Sharing Please rate how much you agree with the following statements. (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? Yes No N Mean SD N Mean SD I find the World Bank Group’s websites 93 6.98 2.11 113 7.25 2.01 easy to navigate. I find the information on the World Bank 92 7.67 1.95 119 7.81 1.69 Group’s websites useful. The World Bank Group’s social media channels (e.g., blogs, Facebook, Twitter, 42 6.76 2.70 61 7.31 2.09 YouTube, Flickr) are valuable sources of information about the institution When I need information from the World Bank Group I know how to find it (e.g., 100 7.97 2.18 129 7.60 2.22 whom to call, where to reach them, etc.) The World Bank Group is responsive to 76 8.00 2.38 64 7.02 2.69 my information requests and inquiries* *Significantly different between collaborators and non-collaborators 94 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia Appendix E: Responses to Selected Questions by Year19 All data presented in this appendix are weighted. As a result, means of the FY 2017 data and the total number of respondents indicated will be slightly different from the aggregated responses in Appendix A. Similarly, responses from FY 2014 respondents and the total number of respondents indicated may differ from those reported in the FY 2014 COS report. FY 2017 Number of comparable respondents = 278 FY 2014 Number of comparable respondents = 253 By weighting, the FY 2017 and FY 2014 samples have the same stakeholder composition and thus are comparable. The weighted percentage of a stakeholder group is determined by the extent to which the World Bank Group interacts with them in the country and the percentage this group usually makes up in the past aggregated annual global data. The weighted stakeholder breakdown is presented below: Percentage of Respondents FY 2014 FY 2017 Office of the President/ Prime Minister/ Minister 5% 5% Office of Parliamentarian 5% 5% Government Institutions 25% 25% Local Government 10% 10% Bilateral/Multilateral Agency 5% 5% CSO 15% 15% Private Sector 10% 10% Academia/ Research Institute/ Think Tank 15% 15% Media 10% 10% A. General Issues facing Serbia In general would you say that Serbia is headed in...?* Percentage of Respondents FY 2014 FY 2017 The right direction 39.5% 54.7% The wrong direction 21.7% 16.2% Not sure 38.7% 29.1% *Significantly different between FY2017 and FY2014 B. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group year FY 2014 FY 2017 N Mean SD N Mean SD How familiar are you with the work of the World 253 5.80 2.49 278 6.36 2.18 Bank Group in Serbia?* (1-Not familiar at all, 10-Extremely familiar) *Significantly different between FY2017 and FY2014 year FY 2014 FY 2017 N Mean SD N Mean SD Overall, pleas e rate your im pres s ion of the World 218 6.23 2.09 248 6.74 1.97 Bank Group’s effectivenes s in Serbia.* (1-Not effective at all, 10-Very effective) *Significantly different between FY2017 and FY2014 year FY 2014 FY 2017 N Mean SD N Mean SD To what extent do you believe the World Bank Group’s staff is well prepared (e.g., skills and 217 6.72 2.12 225 7.09 2.15 knowledge) to help Serbia solve its most complicated development challenges? (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) 19Only those questions that were asked in the FY 2014 and FY 2017 country opinion surveys, with similar response scales/options, are presented in this appendix. 95 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia B. Overall Attitudes toward the World Bank Group (continued) To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the World Bank Group’s work in Serbia? (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) year FY 2014 FY 2017 N Mean SD N Mean SD Overall the World Bank Group currently plays a 230 6.38 2.48 249 7.00 2.25 relevant role in developm ent in Serbia* The World Bank Group’s work is aligned with what I cons ider the developm ent priorities for 212 6.24 2.39 245 6.61 2.25 Serbia *Significantly different between FY2017 and FY2014 To what extent is the World Bank Group an effective development partner in Serbia, in terms of each of the following? (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) year FY 2014 FY 2017 N Mean SD N Mean SD Responsiveness to needs 202 6.19 2.27 220 6.48 2.27 Flexibility (in terms of the institution’s products 198 5.77 2.16 212 5.99 2.29 and services) Flexibility (in terms of changing country 201 5.72 2.19 218 6.07 2.32 circumstances) Being inclusive 197 6.14 2.15 203 6.56 2.36 Openness (sharing data and other information) 207 7.00 2.18 227 6.71 2.38 Collaboration with the Government* 190 7.44 1.94 221 7.87 1.96 The speed in which it gets things accomplished 195 6.17 2.26 220 6.05 2.26 on the ground Helping to bring discipline/effective supervision 214 6.67 2.41 to implementation of investment projects Collaboration with civil society 196 6.03 2.38 Staff accessibility 207 6.97 2.38 225 6.78 2.49 Collaboration with other donors and 156 6.65 2.11 186 6.70 2.28 development partners Collaboration with the private sector 171 6.14 2.28 Straightforwardness and honesty 199 7.02 2.39 217 6.91 2.44 Treating clients and stakeholders in Serbia with 217 7.57 2.28 224 7.82 2.35 respect Being a long-term partner* 187 7.45 2.16 234 8.27 2.03 *Significantly different between FY2017 and FY2014 96 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia C. World Bank Group’s Effectiveness and Results How EFFECTIVE do you believe the World Bank Group is in terms of the work it does in the following areas of development in Serbia? (1-Not effective at all, 10-Very effective) year FY 2014 FY 2017 N Mean SD N Mean SD Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted social 158 5.66 2.48 171 6.00 2.41 assistance) Gender equity 151 6.04 2.30 Private sector development* 173 5.78 2.34 172 6.47 2.22 Education 166 5.83 2.43 180 6.16 2.36 Public sector governance/reform (i.e., government effectiveness, public financial 183 6.09 2.34 197 6.76 2.30 management, public expenditure, fiscal system reform)* Global/regional integration 152 6.05 2.35 160 6.50 2.51 Food safety 128 5.80 2.33 Urban development 148 6.00 2.36 Energy* 153 5.94 2.27 162 6.62 2.34 Water and sanitation* 126 5.56 2.32 138 6.14 2.36 Pollution 140 6.18 2.40 Job creation/employment* 165 5.19 2.34 168 6.20 2.37 Health 139 5.84 2.46 165 6.12 2.47 Financial markets* 148 5.68 2.23 149 6.81 2.21 Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, transportation) 174 6.72 2.37 171 7.04 2.22 Agriculture and rural development 160 6.35 2.26 Trade and exports* 139 5.38 2.07 144 6.43 2.19 Crime and violence 126 5.35 2.51 Natural resource management 120 5.16 2.39 129 5.66 2.48 Climate change (e.g., mitigation, adaptation) 134 5.38 2.43 150 5.93 2.55 Poverty reduction 179 5.81 2.45 177 6.15 2.53 Anti corruption 157 5.46 2.60 157 5.47 2.66 Judiciary reform 158 5.57 2.64 Economic growth* 161 5.85 2.33 178 6.70 2.51 Disaster risk management* 105 4.09 2.37 154 6.30 2.47 Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 144 5.69 2.52 157 6.25 2.50 *Significantly different between FY2017 and FY2014 97 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia C. World Bank Group’s Effectiveness and Results (continued) year FY 2014 FY 2017 N Mean SD N Mean SD To what extent does the World Bank Group’s work help to achieve development results in 211 6.57 2.22 239 6.87 2.08 Serbia? (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the World Bank Group in Serbia? (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) year FY 2014 FY 2017 N Mean SD N Mean SD The World Bank Group’s financial instruments (i.e., investment lending, Development Policy 199 5.51 2.32 224 6.10 2.32 Loan, Trust Funds, Program-for-Results, etc.) meet the needs of Serbia* The World Bank Group meets Serbia’s needs for knowledge services (e.g., research, analysis, 204 5.92 2.26 238 6.44 2.38 data, technical assistance)* *Significantly different between FY2017 and FY2014 98 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia D. The World Bank Group’s Knowledge Work and Activities How frequently do you consult World Bank Group’s knowledge work and activities in the work you do? Percentage of Respondents FY 2014 FY 2017 Weekly 7.9% 10.1% Monthly 27.0% 19.8% A few times a year 39.4% 38.5% Rarely 19.9% 24.5% Never 5.8% 7.2% In Serbia, to what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group’s knowledge work and activities: (1-To no degree at all, 10-To a very significant degree) year FY 2014 FY 2017 N Mean SD N Mean SD Are timely 191 6.32 1.99 217 6.33 2.20 Include appropriate level of stakeholder 181 6.17 2.03 215 6.29 2.33 involvement during preparation Lead to practical solutions 199 6.82 2.21 226 6.50 2.22 Are accessible (well written and easy to 199 7.00 2.27 223 6.72 2.23 understand) Are source of relevant information on global good 202 7.75 1.81 228 7.39 2.06 practices Are relevant to country challenges 223 6.79 2.25 Are adequately disseminated 204 6.63 2.27 207 6.21 2.28 Are translated enough into local language 186 5.61 2.39 198 6.05 2.50 Are adaptable to Serbia’s specific development 203 6.71 2.14 216 6.13 2.34 challenges and country circumstances* *Significantly different between FY2017 and FY2014 year FY 2014 FY 2017 N Mean SD N Mean SD Overall, how significant a contribution do you believe the World Bank Group`s knowledge work 212 7.73 2.19 240 6.60 2.06 and activities make to development results in your country?* Overall, how would you rate the technical quality of the World Bank Group`s knowledge work and 203 7.61 1.83 234 7.30 1.91 activities? (1-Not significant at all, 10-Very significant; 1-Very low technical quality, 10-Very high technical quality) *Significantly different between FY2017 and FY2014 99 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia E. Working with the World Bank Group To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements? (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) year FY 2014 FY 2017 N Mean SD N Mean SD The World Bank Group disburses funds promptly 162 8.23 1.96 161 7.90 1.97 The World Bank Group effectively monitors and 197 7.95 2.03 217 7.47 2.10 evaluates the projects and programs it supports* The World Bank Group’s approvals and reviews 165 7.55 2.12 173 7.46 2.02 are done in a timely fashion The World Bank Group’s “Safeguard Policy” 150 7.59 2.02 147 7.36 2.28 requirements are reasonable The World Bank Group’s conditions on its 171 7.38 2.13 178 7.08 2.34 lending are reasonable The World Bank Group takes decisions quickly in 180 6.20 2.37 194 6.64 2.22 Serbia Working with the World Bank Group increases 203 7.87 2.09 226 7.52 2.28 Serbia’s institutional capacity Where country systems (e.g., procurement, financial management, etc.) are adequate, the 147 7.34 2.17 158 7.19 2.33 World Bank Group makes appropriate use of them The World Bank Group provides effective implementation support (i.e., supervision of 189 7.70 1.96 207 7.62 2.17 projects) *Significantly different between FY2017 and FY2014 F. The Future Role of the World Bank Group in Serbia When considering the combination of services that the World Bank Group offers in Serbia, and taking into account its limited level of resources, which ONE of the following do you believe the World Bank Group should offer more of in Serbia?* Percentage of Respondents FY 2014 FY 2017 Financial services 26.9% 19.5% Knowledge products 25.6% 40.8% Convening services 5.3% 6.1% None of the above 0.0% 1.8% The combination is appropriate for Serbia 42.3% 21.7% Don`t know 0.0% 10.1% *Significantly different between FY2017 and FY2014 100 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia G. Communication and Information Sharing Are you aware of the World Bank Group's Access to Information Policies under which the World Bank Group discloses any information in its possession that is not on a list of exceptions?* Percentage of Respondents FY 2014 FY 2017 Yes 14.7% 27.7% No 85.3% 72.3% *Significantly different between FY2017 and FY2014 Do you have reliable access to the Internet?* Percentage of Respondents FY 2014 FY 2017 Yes 88.5% 98.6% No 11.5% 1.4% *Significantly different between FY2017 and FY2014 Do you use/have you used the World Bank Group website? Percentage of Respondents FY 2014 FY 2017 Yes 78.7% 83.8% No 21.3% 16.2% Please rate how much you agree with the following statements. (1-Strongly disagree, 10-Strongly agree) year FY 2014 FY 2017 N Mean SD N Mean SD I find the World Bank Group’s websites easy to 195 7.30 2.20 207 7.06 2.09 navigate. I find the information on the World Bank Group’s 191 8.05 2.04 212 7.69 1.83 websites useful. The World Bank Group’s social media channels (e.g., blogs, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Flickr) 150 4.50 2.90 105 7.00 2.38 are valuable sources of information about the institution* When I need information from the World Bank Group I know how to find it (e.g., whom to call, 206 7.52 2.72 228 7.75 2.23 where to reach them, etc.) The World Bank Group is responsive to my 141 7.42 2.40 143 7.54 2.58 information requests and inquiries *Significantly different between FY2017 and FY2014 101 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia Appendix F: Indicator Questions as a Function of Exposure to the World Bank Group Currently, do you professionally Which of the following describes most of your exposure to the World Bank Group in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO) collaborate/work with the World Bank Indicator Question Group in your country? Observer Use WBG reports/data Engage in WBG activities Collaborate Use WBG website Not collaborating Collaborating with No Mean Yes Mean No Mean Yes Mean No Mean Yes Mean No Mean Yes Mean No Mean Yes Mean with the WBG the WBG Overall, please rate your impression of the World Bank 6.45 7.16 6.83 6.35 6.81 6.60 6.58 7.25 6.58 6.90 6.89 6.05 Group’s effectiveness in Serbia. Overall the World Bank Group currently plays a relevant 6.58 7.68 7.20 6.20 7.00 7.15 6.90 7.45 6.81 7.23 7.22 6.10 role in development in Serbia The World Bank Group’s work is aligned with what I 6.31 7.14 6.76 6.05 6.61 6.76 6.55 6.94 6.46 6.81 6.77 6.05 consider the development priorities for Serbia Responsiveness to needs 6.23 6.94 6.67 5.86 6.58 6.45 6.33 7.16 6.37 6.66 6.72 5.47 Flexibility (in terms of the institution’s products and 5.74 6.33 5.99 6.13 6.11 5.75 6.01 6.02 5.93 6.06 6.17 5.15 services) Flexibility (in terms of changing country circumstances) 5.77 6.48 6.10 5.97 6.13 5.97 6.08 6.09 5.86 6.24 6.29 5.05 Being inclusive 6.34 6.89 6.65 6.24 6.71 6.25 6.50 6.81 6.24 6.83 6.77 5.50 Openness (sharing data and other information) 6.40 7.19 6.93 5.65 6.87 6.37 6.61 7.08 6.34 7.04 6.90 5.95 Collaboration with the Government 7.78 8.05 7.95 7.63 7.89 7.91 7.84 8.05 7.64 8.11 7.98 7.41 The speed in which it gets things accomplished on the 5.89 6.23 6.03 6.09 6.07 5.95 6.04 6.05 6.10 6.00 6.13 5.52 ground Helping to bring discipline/effective supervision to 6.54 6.98 6.79 6.39 6.74 6.67 6.58 7.20 6.69 6.75 6.86 6.03 implementation of investment projects Collaboration with civil society 5.78 6.66 6.23 5.73 6.25 5.86 5.91 6.76 5.96 6.29 6.32 4.92 Staff accessibility 6.36 7.45 7.02 5.82 6.95 6.56 6.66 7.35 6.24 7.30 7.11 5.29 Collaboration with other donors and development 6.43 7.10 6.78 6.50 6.72 6.79 6.77 6.66 6.42 6.99 6.88 5.80 partners Collaboration with the private sector 5.98 6.46 6.08 6.56 6.07 6.40 6.25 5.90 6.12 6.22 6.37 5.08 Straightforwardness and honesty 6.74 7.27 7.06 6.48 7.01 6.87 6.84 7.35 6.92 7.02 7.16 5.97 Treating clients and stakeholders in Serbia with respect 7.58 8.17 7.95 7.18 7.74 8.08 7.62 8.40 7.67 7.96 8.02 6.89 Being a long-term partner 8.12 8.56 8.47 7.54 8.20 8.56 8.20 8.60 8.02 8.55 8.44 7.59 To what extent does the World Bank Group’s work help 6.58 7.26 6.89 6.82 6.86 6.91 6.71 7.37 6.89 6.86 7.06 5.90 to achieve development results in Serbia? The World Bank Group’s financial instruments (i.e., investment lending, Development Policy Loan, Trust 5.75 6.69 6.14 6.19 6.17 6.10 6.07 6.42 5.95 6.32 6.29 5.47 Funds, Program-for-Results, etc.) meet the needs of Serbia The World Bank Group meets Serbia’s needs for knowledge services (e.g., research, analysis, data, 6.10 7.02 6.51 6.38 6.59 6.24 6.33 7.00 6.27 6.67 6.65 5.75 technical assistance) The World Bank Group's knowledge work and activities are adaptable to Serbia’s specific development 5.80 6.63 6.12 6.36 6.19 6.07 6.04 6.51 6.13 6.18 6.38 5.06 challenges and country circumstances Overall, how significant a contribution do you believe the World Bank Group`s knowledge work and activities 6.41 6.97 6.63 6.77 6.71 6.50 6.50 7.10 6.73 6.59 6.84 5.74 make to development results in your country? Overall, how would you rate the technical quality of the 7.06 7.64 7.39 6.94 7.33 7.33 7.25 7.57 7.12 7.48 7.48 6.58 World Bank Group`s knowledge work and activities? The World Bank Group takes decisions quickly in 6.34 6.97 6.60 6.79 6.66 6.55 6.60 6.69 6.56 6.68 6.74 6.06 Serbia Where country systems (e.g., procurement, financial 7.09 7.46 7.19 7.48 7.36 6.98 7.08 7.64 7.05 7.40 7.44 6.08 management, etc.) are adequate, the World Bank Yellow highlight indicates significant difference between Yes and No means. 102 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia Appendix G: Serbia FY 2017 Questionnaire World Bank Group Country Survey FY 2017 – Serbia The World Bank Group is interested in gauging the views of clients and partners who are either involved in development in Serbia or who observe activities related to social and economic development. The following survey will give the World Bank Group’s team that works in Serbia, greater insight into how the Bank’s work is perceived. This is one tool the World Bank Group uses to assess the views of its stakeholders, and to develop more effective strategies that support development in Serbia. A local independent firm has been hired to oversee the logistics of this survey. This ensures anonymity and confidentiality. We hope you’ll be candid. Finally, the survey relates to the World Bank Group’s work. The World Bank Group consists of IBRD, IDA, IFC, MIGA, and ICSID. When responding to the survey, please consider the area of the World Bank Group with which you are most familiar. To complete the survey, please circle/check the response that most accurately reflects your opinion. If you prefer not to answer a question, please leave it blank. If you feel that you do not have an adequate amount of information on a subject, please check “Don’t know”. PLEASE NOTE: IN SOME CASES THE SURVEY WILL ASK FOR A SPECIFIC NUMBER OF RESPONSES. PLEASE DO NOT CHOOSE ANY MORE THAN REQUESTED. IF MORE RESPONSES ARE CHOSEN, DATA CANNOT BE INCLUDED IN ANALYSIS. SECTION A: GENERAL ISSUES FACING SERBIA A1. In general would you say that Serbia is headed in ... ? 1 The right direction 2 The wrong direction 3 Not sure 103 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia SECTION A: GENERAL ISSUES A2. Listed below are a number of development priorities in Serbia. Please identify which of the following you consider the most important development priorities in Serbia. (Choose no more than THREE) Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted social 1 15 Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, transportation) assistance) 2 Gender equity 16 Agriculture and rural development 3 Private sector development 17 Trade and exports 4 Education 18 Crime and violence Public sector governance/reform (i.e., government 5 effectiveness, public financial management, public 19 Natural resource management expenditure, fiscal system reform) 6 Global/regional integration 20 Climate change (e.g., mitigation, adaptation) 7 Food safety 21 Poverty reduction 8 Urban development 22 Anti corruption 9 Energy 23 Judiciary reform 10 Water and sanitation 24 Economic growth 11 Pollution 25 Disaster risk management 12 Job creation/employment 26 Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 13 Health 27 Disease (e.g., cancer, heart deficiencies) 14 Financial markets 28 Information and communications technology A3. Poverty reduction is a broad term that encompasses work in many different areas. Which THREE areas of development listed below do you believe would contribute most to reducing poverty in Serbia? (Choose no more than THREE) 1 Economic growth 15 Water and sanitation 2 Disaster risk management 16 Pollution 3 Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 17 Job creation/employment 4 Disease (e.g., cancer, heart deficiencies) 18 Health 5 Information and communications technology 19 Financial markets Public sector governance/reform (i.e., government Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted social 6 20 effectiveness, public financial management, public assistance) expenditure, fiscal system reform) 7 Agriculture and rural development 21 Gender equity 8 Trade and exports 22 Private sector development 9 Crime and violence 23 Education 10 Climate change (e.g., mitigation, adaptation) 24 Global/regional integration 11 Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, transportation) 25 Food safety 12 Energy 26 Urban development 13 Anti corruption 27 Natural resource management 14 Judiciary reform 104 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia SECTION A: GENERAL ISSUES A4. The World Bank Group’s “Shared Prosperity” goal captures two key elements, economic growth and equity. It will seek to foster income growth among the bottom 40 percent of a country’s population. Improvement in the Shared Prosperity Indicator requires growth and well-being of the less well-off. When thinking about the idea of “shared prosperity” in your country, which of the following TWO best illustrate how this would be achieved in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO) 1 Greater access to health and nutrition for citizens 2 Better entrepreneurial opportunities (i.e., to start small and medium sized businesses) 3 A growing middle class 4 Better opportunity for the poor who live in rural areas 5 Better opportunity for the poor who live in urban areas 6 Consistent economic growth 7 More reliable social safety net 8 Greater access to micro-finance for the poor 9 Greater voice and participation for citizens to help ensure greater accountability 10 Education and training that better ensure job opportunity 11 Better quality public services 12 Better employment opportunities for young people 13 Better employment opportunities for women 14 Other (please specify):_____________________________________ A5. Do you think the gap between the rich and the poor is a very big problem, a moderately big problem, a small problem or not a problem at all in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) 1 A very big problem 2 A moderately big problem 3 A small problem 4 Not a problem at all 5 Don’t know A6. In your view, is climate change a very serious problem, somewhat serious, not too serious, or not a problem in your country? (Select only ONE response) 1 A very serious problem 2 A somewhat serious problem 3 Not too serious problem 4 Not a problem 5 Don’t know 105 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia SECTION A: GENERAL ISSUES A7. In your view, is early childhood development (i.e. nutrition, growth, care, and education) a very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not an important development priority in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) 1 A very important development priority 2 A moderately important development priority 3 A slightly important development priority 4 Not an important development priority 5 Don’t know A8. In your view, is improvement of business environment a very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not an important development priority in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) 1 A very important development priority 2 A moderately important development priority 3 A slightly important development priority 4 Not an important development priority 5 Don’t know A9. In your view, is improvement of infrastructure quality a very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not an important development priority in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) 1 A very important development priority 2 A moderately important development priority 3 A slightly important development priority 4 Not an important development priority 5 Don’t know A10. In your view, is improvement of energy security a very important, moderately important, slightly important, or not an important development priority in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) 1 A very important development priority 2 A moderately important development priority 3 A slightly important development priority 4 Not an important development priority 5 Don’t know 106 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia SECTION B: OVERALL ATTITUDES TOWARD THE WORLD BANK GROUP B1. How familiar are you with the work of the World Bank Group in Serbia? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Not familiar at all Extremely familiar B2. Overall, please rate your impression of the World Bank Group’s effectiveness in Serbia. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Not effective at Very effective Don't know all B3. To what extent do you believe the World Bank Group’s staff is well prepared (e.g., skills and knowledge) to help Serbia solve its most complicated development challenges? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  To no degree at To a very Don't know all significant degree B4. When thinking about how the World Bank Group can have the most impact on development results in Serbia, in which sectors do you believe the World Bank Group should focus most of its resources (financial and knowledge services) in Serbia? (Choose no more than THREE) 1 Energy 15 Judiciary reform 2 Water and sanitation 16 Economic growth 3 Pollution 17 Disaster risk management 4 Job creation/employment 18 Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 5 Health 19 Disease (e.g., cancer, heart deficiencies) 6 Financial markets 20 Information and communications technology Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted social 7 21 Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, transportation) assistance) 8 Gender equity 22 Agriculture and rural development 9 Private sector development 23 Trade and exports 10 Education 24 Crime and violence Public sector governance/reform (i.e., government 11 effectiveness, public financial management, public 25 Natural resource management expenditure, fiscal system reform) 12 Global/regional integration 26 Climate change (e.g., mitigation, adaptation) 13 Food safety 27 Poverty reduction 14 Urban development 28 Anti corruption 107 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia SECTION B: OVERALL ATTITUDES TOWARD THE WORLD BANK GROUP B5. When thinking about the World Bank Group’s role, which activity do you believe is of greatest VALUE and which activity is of second greatest value in Serbia? Greatest Value Second Greatest Value (Choose only ONE) (Choose only ONE) 1 Bringing together different groups of stakeholders   Capacity development related to World Bank Group 2   supported projects 3 Technical assistance (system oriented)   4 Policy advice, studies, analyses   5 Financial resources   6 Data and statistics   7 Promoting knowledge sharing   8 Implementation support   9 Mobilizing third party financial resources   10 Donor coordination   11 Other (please specify): ________________________   B6. Which of the following do you identify as the World Bank Group’s greatest WEAKNESSES in its work in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO) 1 World Bank Group’s processes too complex 2 Not willing to honestly criticize policies and reform efforts in the country 3 Staff too inaccessible 4 World Bank Group’s processes too slow (e.g., too bureaucratic in its operational policies and procedures) 5 Not aligned with other donors’ work 6 Not aligned with country priorities 7 Not adequately sensitive to political/social realities in Serbia 8 Too influenced by developed countries 9 Not exploring alternative policy options 10 Not collaborating enough with stakeholders outside the Government 11 Its advice and strategies do not lend themselves to practical problem solving 12 Not enough public disclosure of its work 13 Arrogant in its approach 14 Not client focused 15 The credibility of its knowledge/data 16 Other (please specify): __________________________________________________ 17 Don’t know 108 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia SECTION B: OVERALL ATTITUDES TOWARD THE WORLD BANK GROUP B7. To what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group’s work and support help the poorest in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) 1 To a fully sufficient degree 2 To a somewhat sufficient degree 3 To a somewhat insufficient degree 4 To a very insufficient degree 5 Don’t know B8. How EFFECTIVE do you believe the following World Bank Group’s instruments are in supporting the Serbia Government’s efforts to reduce poverty? (If you have NO exposure to/experience with the instruments listed below, please select “N/A”) Not effective Very N/A at all effective 1 Investment Project Financing (IPF) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  2 Development Policy Financing (DPF) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  3 Program-for-Results Financing (PforR) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  4 Trust funds and grants 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  5 Guarantees 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  6 IFC Investment Services 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  7 IFC Advisory Services 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  B9. In addition to the regular relations with the national government, which TWO of the following groups should the World Bank Group collaborate with more in your country? (Choose no more than TWO) 1 Beneficiaries 7 Academia/think tanks/research institutes 2 Youth/university groups 8 Parliament 3 Private sector 9 Foundations 4 Local government 10 Media 5 Donor community 11 Other (please specify): _____________________ 6 NGOs/Community Based Organizations 12 Don’t know To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the World Bank Group’s work in Serbia? Strongly Strongly Don't disagree agree know Overall the World Bank Group currently plays a B10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  relevant role in development in Serbia The World Bank Group’s work is aligned with what I B11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  consider the development priorities for Serbia 109 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia SECTION B: OVERALL ATTITUDES TOWARD THE WORLD BANK GROUP To what extent is the World Bank Group an effective development partner in Serbia, in terms of each of the following? To no degree To a very significant Don't at all degree know B12 Responsiveness to needs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Flexibility (in terms of the institution’s products and B13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  services) Flexibility (in terms of changing country B14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  circumstances) B15 Being inclusive 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  B16 Openness (sharing data and other information) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  B17 Collaboration with the Government 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  The speed in which it gets things accomplished on B18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  the ground Helping to bring discipline/effective supervision to B19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  implementation of investment projects B20 Collaboration with civil society 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  B21 Staff accessibility 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Collaboration with other donors and development B22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  partners B23 Collaboration with the private sector 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  B24 Straightforwardness and honesty 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Treating clients and stakeholders in Serbia with B25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  respect B26 Being a long-term partner 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  B27. When World Bank Group assisted reform efforts fail or are slow to take place, which of the following would you attribute this to? (Choose no more than TWO) 1 The World Bank Group does not do adequate follow through/follow-up 2 Political pressures and obstacles 3 Reforms are not well thought out in light of country challenges 4 Poor coordination within the Government 5 The Government works inefficiently 6 Poor donor coordination 7 The World Bank Group is not sensitive enough to political/social realities on the ground 8 Lack of/inadequate levels of capacity in Government 9 There is not an adequate level of citizen/civil society participation 10 The World Bank Group works too slowly 11 Poor coordination within the World Bank Group 12 Other (please specify): ________________________________________ 110 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia SECTION C: WORLD BANK GROUP’S EFFECTIVENESS AND RESULTS C1. In your opinion, how IMPORTANT is it for the World Bank Group to be involved in the following areas of development in Serbia? Not important Very Don't at all important know Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted social 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  assistance) 2 Gender equity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  3 Private sector development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  4 Education 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Public sector governance/reform (i.e., government 5 effectiveness, public financial management, public 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  expenditure, fiscal system reform) 6 Global/regional integration 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  7 Food safety 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  8 Urban development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  9 Energy 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  10 Water and sanitation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  11 Pollution 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  12 Job creation/employment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  13 Health 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  14 Financial markets 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  15 Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, transportation) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  16 Agriculture and rural development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  17 Trade and exports 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  18 Crime and violence 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  19 Natural resource management 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  20 Climate change (e.g., mitigation, adaptation) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  21 Poverty reduction 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  22 Anti corruption 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  23 Judiciary reform 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  24 Economic growth 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  25 Disaster risk management 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  26 Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  27 Disease (e.g., cancer, heart deficiencies) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  28 Information and communications technology 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  111 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia SECTION C: WORLD BANK GROUP’S EFFECTIVENESS AND RESULTS C2. How EFFECTIVE do you believe the World Bank Group is in terms of the work it does in the following areas of development in Serbia? (If you have NO exposure to/experience in working in any of the sectors listed below, please respond “Don’t know”) Not effective Very Don't at all effective know Social protection (e.g., pensions, targeted social 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  assistance) 2 Gender equity 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  3 Private sector development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  4 Education 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Public sector governance/reform (i.e., government 5 effectiveness, public financial management, public 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  expenditure, fiscal system reform) 6 Global/regional integration 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  7 Food safety 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  8 Urban development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  9 Energy 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  10 Water and sanitation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  11 Pollution 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  12 Job creation/employment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  13 Health 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  14 Financial markets 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  15 Transport (e.g., roads, bridges, transportation) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  16 Agriculture and rural development 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  17 Trade and exports 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  18 Crime and violence 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  19 Natural resource management 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  20 Climate change (e.g., mitigation, adaptation) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  21 Poverty reduction 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  22 Anti corruption 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  23 Judiciary reform 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  24 Economic growth 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  25 Disaster risk management 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  26 Equality of opportunity (i.e., social inclusion) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  112 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia SECTION C: WORLD BANK GROUP’S EFFECTIVENESS AND RESULTS C3. To what extent does the World Bank Group’s work help to achieve development results in Serbia? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  To no degree at To a very Don't know all significant degree To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the World Bank Group in Serbia? Strongly Strongly Don't disagree agree know The World Bank Group’s financial instruments (i.e., investment lending, Development Policy C4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Loan, Trust Funds, Program-for-Results, etc.) meet the needs of Serbia The World Bank Group meets Serbia’s needs for C5 knowledge services (e.g., research, analysis, data, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  technical assistance) C6. To what extent do you believe that Serbia received value for money from the World Bank Group’s Reimbursable Advisory Services (RAS)? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  To no degree at To a very Don't know all significant degree PLEASE NOTE: IN SOME CASES THE SURVEY WILL ASK FOR A SPECIFIC NUMBER OF RESPONSES. PLEASE DO NOT CHOOSE ANY MORE THAN REQUESTED. IF MORE RESPONSES ARE CHOSEN, DATA CANNOT BE INCLUDED IN ANALYSIS. 113 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia SECTION D: THE WORLD BANK GROUP’S KNOWLEDGE WORK AND ACTIVITIES (i.e., ANALYSIS, STUDIES, RESEARCH, DATA, REPORTS, CONFERENCES) D1. How frequently do you consult World Bank Group’s knowledge work and activities in the work you do? 1 Weekly 2 Monthly 3 A few times a year 4 Rarely 5 Never In Serbia, to what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group’s knowledge work and activities: To no degree To a very significant Don't at all degree know D2 Are timely 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Include appropriate level of stakeholder D3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  involvement during preparation D4 Lead to practical solutions 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Are accessible (well written and easy to D5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  understand) Are source of relevant information on D6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  global good practices D7 Are relevant to country challenges 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  D8 Are adequately disseminated 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  D9 Are translated enough into local language 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Are adaptable to Serbia’s specific D10 development challenges and country 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  circumstances D11. Overall, how significant a contribution do you believe the World Bank Group's knowledge work and activities make to development results in your country? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Not significant at all Very significant Don't know D12. Overall, how would you rate the technical quality of the World Bank Group's knowledge work and activities? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Very low technical Very high technical Don't know quality quality 114 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia SECTION E: WORKING WITH THE WORLD BANK GROUP To what extent do you agree/disagree with the following statements? Strongly Strongly Don't disagree agree know The World Bank Group disburses funds E1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  promptly The World Bank Group effectively monitors E2 and evaluates the projects and programs it 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  supports The World Bank Group’s approvals and E3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  reviews are done in a timely fashion The World Bank Group’s “Safeguard Policy” E4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  requirements are reasonable The World Bank Group’s conditions on its E5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  lending are reasonable The World Bank Group takes decisions quickly E6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  in Serbia Working with the World Bank Group increases E7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Serbia’s institutional capacity Where country systems (e.g., procurement, financial management, etc.) are adequate, the E8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  World Bank Group makes appropriate use of them The World Bank Group provides effective E9 implementation support (i.e., supervision of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  projects) E10. To what extent do you believe that the World Bank Group’s work helps to find solutions that promote private public partnerships in Serbia? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  To a very significant To no degree at all Don't know degree E11. To what extent do you believe the World Bank Group measures and corrects its work in real time in Serbia? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  To no degree at To a very significant Don't know all degree 115 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia SECTION F: THE FUTURE ROLE OF THE WORLD BANK GROUP IN SERBIA F1. Which of the following SHOULD the World Bank Group do to make itself of greater value in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO) 1 Offer more innovative knowledge services 2 Collaborate more effectively with Government clients (e.g., national, state, local) 3 Work faster 4 Reduce the complexity of obtaining World Bank Group financing 5 Increase availability of Reimbursable Advisory Services (RAS) 6 Help to bring discipline/effective supervision to implementation of investment projects 7 Offer more innovative financial products 8 Ensure greater selectivity in its work 9 Provide more adequate data/knowledge/statistics/figures on Serbia’s economy 10 Improve the competitiveness of its financing compared to markets (e.g., cost, timeliness, other terms) 11 Reach out more to groups outside of Government 12 Increase the level of capacity development in the country 13 Improve the quality of its experts as related to Serbia’s specific challenges 14 Other (please specify): ______________________________________________ F2. When considering the combination of services that the World Bank Group offers in Serbia, and taking into account its limited level of resources, which ONE of the following do you believe the World Bank Group should offer more of in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) 1 Financial services 2 Knowledge products 3 Convening services 4 None of the above 5 The combination is appropriate for Serbia 6 Don’t know 116 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia SECTION G: COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION SHARING G1. How do you get most of your information about economic and social development issues in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO) 1 Local radio 6 Internet 2 International radio 7 Periodicals Social media (e.g., blogs, Facebook, Twitter, 3 8 International television YouTube, Flickr) 4 International newspapers 9 Local newspapers 5 Local television 10 Other (please specify): ____________________ G2. How would you prefer to receive information from the World Bank Group? (Choose no more than TWO) World Bank Group’s publications and other written Direct contact with World Bank Group (i.e., face to 1 5 materials face meetings/discussions) 2 e-Newsletters 6 World Bank Group’s website World Bank Group’s Social media (e.g., blogs, Facebook, Twitter, 3 7 seminars/workshops/conferences YouTube, Flickr) 4 Mobile phones 8 Other (please specify): ____________________ Are you aware of the World Bank Group's Access to Information Policies under which the World G3 Yes No Bank Group discloses any information in its possession that is not on a list of exceptions? G4 Do you have reliable access to the Internet? Yes No G5 Do you use/have you used the World Bank Group website? Yes No Do you currently consult the World Bank Group social media sites (e.g., blogs, Facebook, G6 Yes No Twitter, YouTube, and Flickr)? G7 Have you visited the “World Bank Serbia” Facebook page? Yes No G8. Which Internet connection do you use primarily when visiting a World Bank Group website? 1 High speed/WiFi 2 Dial-up G9. How frequently do you consult the World Bank Group’s website and/or social media channels (e.g., blogs, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Flickr) for information/knowledge that you can use in your work? 1 Weekly 2 Monthly 3 A few times a year 4 Rarely 5 Never 117 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia SECTION G: COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION SHARING Please rate how much you agree with the following statements. Strongly Strongly Don't disagree agree know I find the World Bank Group’s websites easy to G10 navigate. (Only answer if you have used a World Bank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Group website) I find the information on the World Bank Group’s G11 websites useful. (Only answer if you have used a World 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Bank Group website) The World Bank Group’s social media channels (e.g., G12 blogs, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Flickr) are valuable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  sources of information about the institution When I need information from the World Bank Group I G13 know how to find it (e.g., whom to call, where to reach 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  them, etc.) The World Bank Group is responsive to my information G14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  requests and inquiries 118 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia SECTION H: BACKGROUND INFORMATION H1. Which of the following best describes your current position? (Select only ONE response) 1 Office of the President, Prime Minister 11 NGO/Community Based Organization 2 Office of Minister 12 Media (press, radio, TV, web, etc.) Independent Government Institution (i.e., Regulatory 3 Office of Parliamentarian 13 Agency, Central Bank/oversight institution) Employee of a Ministry, Ministerial Department 4 14 Trade Union or Implementation Agency Project Management Unit (PMU) overseeing implementation of project/ 5 15 Faith-Based Group Consultant/Contractor working on World Bank Group supported project/program 6 Local Government Office or Staff 16 Youth Group 7 Bilateral/Multilateral Agency 17 Academia/Research Institute/Think Tank 8 Private Sector Organization 18 Judiciary Branch 9 Private Foundation 19 Other (please specify): ________________________ 10 Financial Sector/Private Bank H2. Please identify the primary specialization of your work. (Select only ONE response) 1 Water 12 Gender 2 Social protection and labor 13 Transport and ICT 3 Fragility, conflict and violence 14 Urban, rural, and social development 4 Environment and natural resources 15 Governance 5 Public-private partnerships 16 Poverty 6 Education 17 Jobs 7 Health, nutrition, and population 18 Agriculture 8 Energy and extractives 19 Climate change 9 Macroeconomics and fiscal management 20 Generalist (specialized in multiple sectors) 10 Trade and competitiveness 21 Other (please specify): ____________________ 11 Finance and markets H3. Currently, do you professionally collaborate/work with the World Bank Group (IBRD, IFC, or MIGA) in your country? 1 Yes 2 No H4. Which of the following agencies of the World Bank Group do you primarily engage with in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) 1 The World Bank (IBRD) 2 The International Finance Corporation (IFC)  3 The Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) 4 Other (please specify):___________________________ 119 World Bank Group Country Opinion Survey 2017: Serbia SECTION H: BACKGROUND INFORMATION H5. Do your projects involve both the World Bank and the IFC? (If YES please go to Question H6; If NO please go to H7) 1 Yes 2 No H6. If yes, what was your view of how the two institutions work together in Serbia? (Select only ONE response) 1 The two institutions work well together 2 The way the two institutions work together needs improvement 3 The two institutions do not work well together 4 Don’t know H7. Which of the following describes most of your exposure to the World Bank Group in Serbia? (Choose no more than TWO) 1 Observer (i.e., follow in media, discuss in informal conversations, etc.) 2 Use World Bank Group reports/data 3 Engage in World Bank Group related/sponsored events/activities 4 Collaborate as part of my professional duties 5 Use World Bank Group website for information, data, research, etc. H8. What’s your gender? 1 Female 2 Male H9. Which best represents your geographic location? 1 Belgrade 2 Vojvodina 3 Central Serbia 4 South Serbia Thank you for completing the survey! 120