52603 FAST TRACKBRIEF AUGUST 6, 2008 IEG's Evaluation of the World Bank/IFC/MIGA "Environmental Sustainability" was discussed by CODE on June 18, 2008 Supporting Environmental Sustainability: An Evaluation of World Bank Group Experience, 1990-2007 The Bank Group's lending and non-lending support for environmental sustainability has in- creased and improved over the past 15 years. But the institution needs to raise the priority it ac- cords to this area of rising concern, strengthen internal cooperation, and work more effectively with its government and private partners to help countries to get better results in addressing environmental challenges. The Bank, IFC, and MIGA should jointly develop and commit to a new environmental strategy and ensure that environmental priorities enter fully into their strategic directions as well as in regional and country assistance programs, focusing in particular on underperforming regions and sectors and countries with the most significant environmental problems. The Bank needs to improve its systems to identify, monitor, and evaluate environmental results and impacts of its lending and non-lending services. While IFC and MIGA have developed sys- tems to evaluate environmental and social effects at the project and portfolio levels, they must also assess and respond to the environmental impacts of their operations from a local, country, and industry perspective. The Bank Group should step up its support for public-private partnerships and take greater ad- vantage of the private sector's potential for technology development and transfer, transforma- tion toward clean and low-carbon technologies, and sustainable supply chains, while continu- ing to help countries strengthen environmental governance. The Bank Group and the Environment Summit in Rio de Janeiro, the Bank adopted a fourfold agenda comprising safeguards, stewardship, integration of environ- Bank Group support for the environment was largely lim- mental concerns into macroeconomic and sectoral interventions ited to assessing the potential impacts of selected projects (mainstreaming), and global sustainability. until the mid-1980s, when external pressures helped induce a broader approach. By the early 1990s many countries The Bank Group's first formal environment strategy was ap- were preparing National Environmental Action Plans with proved in July 2001. It placed the environment within the insti- World Bank support, and IBRD, IDA, and IFC environ- tution's poverty reduction mission and highlighted three objec- ment-related financing grew. Soon after the 1992 UN Earth tives: improving the quality of life, enhancing the quality of growth, and protecting the regional and global commons. port policy reforms. IFC's and MIGA's engagement with the pri- The strategy also committed to facilitate partnerships be- vate sector has mostly sought to ensure that investments adhere to tween the public and private sectors as well as with civil environmental standards, but during this decade IFC has launched society, to address environmentally sensitive issues, and to several environment-oriented advisory service programs and de- promote better environmental management both at the veloped partnerships with the Equator Principle Financial Institu- country level and globally. Over the past 15 years, Bank tions. Hence, while IFC and MIGA have fewer direct investment Group support for the environment has grown. It is now projects designed to improve the environment, all of their financ- the largest multilateral source of environment-related fi- ing and guarantee operations, as is also the case for all World Bank nancing, including administration of Global Environment investment projects, need to meet environmental due diligence Facility (GEF) grants, and an important source of advice to requirements. Moreover, many IFC projects have built in envi- many country and private sector clients ronmental benefits, such as energy efficiency improvements. Evaluation Approach Total World Bank commitments between FY90 and FY07 were $401.5 billion in 6,792 projects. Of those, 2,401 projects in- This evaluation assesses the Bank Group's support for envi- volved environment and natural resource management (ENRM) ronmental sustainability--in both the public and private sec- for commitments on the order of $59 billion. However, this tors--over the past decade and a half. Different evaluative figure is an approximation and appears to overstate the actual approaches and methodologies were used for the various volume of resources going directly for environmental im- parts of the Bank Group, reflecting their different roles, in- provement. Environment-related Development Policy Loans struments, and information constraints. The assessment of (DPLs)--general budget support in exchange for policy re- World Bank interventions considered lending and analytical forms--were $3.5 billion and ENRM commitments in invest- work intended for environment-related issues together with ment projects considered to be at least 80 percent for environ- the evolution of country strategies and policy dialogue. For mental improvement were $18.2 billion (the remainder of the IFC and MIGA, IEG focused on the performance of all $59 billion was in projects with smaller shares devoted to the projects (finance and guarantees) in meeting project-level environment). The total includes Bank-administered GEF environmental standards, using the Environmental and So- grants, Montreal Protocol projects, and carbon finance. An im- cial Effects indicator and assessing IFC's and MIGA's envi- portant part of this figure was for sanitation infrastructure. Be- ronmental work quality at appraisal and supervision. Also cause of the way Bank commitments are identified, it is unclear examined were recent environment-oriented advisory ser- exactly how much lending has gone directly for environmental vices, complemented in the case of IFC by case studies in improvement. But the priority given to lending for environment most of the same countries as the World Bank analysis. and natural resource management appears to be modest. The evaluation sought to answer five questions: (i) How World Bank environmental project performance, while slightly and how effectively has Bank Group support contributed below the average for its portfolio as a whole, has improved over to improving environmental quality and sustainability? (ii) time, being better in the second half of the 1990s and thus far in How well have Bank Group interventions been aligned the present decade than in the early and mid 1990s. This reflects with national environmental priorities and private sector learning and discontinuation of some approaches that have needs, and how well have environmental considerations proven less successful. Performance of environmental projects been mainstreamed into Bank Group assistance? (iii) Have has been weakest in Sub-Saharan Africa, but there have been a the design and implementation of the Bank's environment- range of successful and unsuccessful operations in all Regions. related investment projects improved, and, if so, what fac- tors have contributed to this? And have IFC's and MIGA's IFC's engagement with the private sector overall (that is, not investment and advisory services enhanced their private referring specifically to the environment) has grown rapidly in sector clients' management of environmental risks? (iv) To recent years, with annual commitments rising from $3.9 billion what extent--and how--have partnerships and World to $8.2 billion between 2003 and 2007. From FY90 through Bank Group coordination enhanced the effectiveness of its FY07, IFC committed about $56 billion. IFC's environmental support for the environment? (v) What internal and exter- support includes GEF projects for about $1 billion and $185 nal constraints have limited effectiveness of Bank Group million in Dutch-funded carbon facilities. It also includes Advi- support, and how might they be reduced? sory Services for Environment and Social Sustainability busi- ness line projects totaling $208 million by end 2007, represent- Portfolio and Performance Overview ing a quarter of IFC Advisory Services funding. The Bank Group is involved with the environment in various MIGA issued guarantees between FY90 and FY07 for a total ways, interacting with governments, other financial institu- exposure of $16.7 billion in 510 projects (again an overall figure, tions, private sector clients, and civil society. The World Bank not referring to the environment per se). The largest share of assists countries through analytical, advisory, and lending ser- MIGA operations in the non-financial sectors has been in infra- vices to help them address environmental priorities and sup- structure, manufacturing, and the extractive industries. For both 2 IFC and MIGA, financing modern technologies in the pri- tions documents approved by the Board over the past decade vate sector, while intended primarily to improve productivity have emphasized environmental and social sustainability. The and product quality, generally also reduces harmful environ- importance of integrating depends on the extent of engagement mental impacts given the older technologies they replace. by IFC and MIGA in the countries, the nature and scale of envi- ronmental impacts of their operations, and the degree of coordi- IFC and MIGA have increased their efforts to engage their nation needed between policy efforts and private sector invest- clients on environmental issues in recent years. In April ments. In many areas, such as avoiding deforestation, protection 2006 IFC established its Policy and Performance Standards of biodiversity, and emerging efforts to address climate change in on Social and Environmental Sustainability, which were many parts of the world, it is essential that Bank, IFC, and MIGA adopted (and adapted) by MIGA effective October 1, 2007. approaches affecting the environment be better coordinated to The impact of these new standards cannot yet be assessed. improve overall corporate effectiveness. However, environmental compliance and performance gaps in IFC projects over the past 15 years have been most Analytic, financing, and guarantee activities. World Bank notable in Africa, due in part to weaker sponsor capacity nonlending activities have often had as significant results for en- and sometimes wavering sponsor commitment to the sus- vironmental improvement as lending operations, as in the case of tainability agenda, and in some industry sectors. MIGA has industrial pollution control in Indonesia and river basin manage- likewise given increasing attention to environmental issues ment in China. However, even where environmental problems in its underwriting and has used its contracts to identify are particularly serious, they have sometimes been treated un- applicable safeguard policies, guidelines, and requirements evenly in Bank activities. Performance in this regard has been for remedial action. But improvements are needed, particu- relatively positive in countries such as China and Brazil, but less larly in less environmentally sensitive (Category B) projects comprehensive or well integrated (particularly in lending) in In- whose potential impacts typically receive less attention.. dia, Russia, Egypt, and in the case study countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Among the reasons for these differences are the size of Principal Evaluation Findings and resources available for country programs, the lack of client demand, and the capabilities of national and local institutions. The World Bank Group has made progress in including environmental concerns in its strategies and analytical and Based on assessments of completed operations in the case study lending products since 1990 and increasingly since 2001, countries and a review of the Bank's ENRM portfolio, the ef- and has provided support for the environment through a fectiveness of different project types has varied. Land and wa- range of financial and non-financial services, private sector tershed management operations, community-based forest man- investments and guarantees, regional and global programs agement projects, and grants to reduce ozone-depleting sub- and partnerships. When requested, the Bank Group has stances, for example, have generally been satisfactory, as have been generally able to help countries set environmental most biodiversity conservation projects (although there were priorities (although this is ultimately the responsibility of performance problems in the initial years with such operations). the countries themselves) and private sector clients to iden- Water resource management projects at the river basin level and tify and address potential direct environmental impacts. urban environmental operations, while not without shortcom- However, it has been far less able to integrate these efforts ings, have also been largely satisfactory based on overall project centrally into country programs, incorporate them as re- outcome ratings. quirements for sustainable growth and poverty reduction, and provide lending to help countries address environ- In contrast, Bank-supported operations to combat industrial mental priorities--often because of lukewarm interest in pollution through credit lines have been only partially satisfac- such support from the countries themselves. tory from an environmental quality perspective. However, the Bank has learned from this experience and discontinued the Country strategies. The Bank's country strategies generally credit line approach in most countries, instead using public dis- take account of national environmental priorities, although closure programs, which have been more successful. Environ- insufficient attention has often been given to longer run sus- mental capacity building projects have also often shown weak tainability concerns. Treatment of ENRM issues in country results, but such projects have generally been more successful strategies has improved over the past two decades in Brazil, when they have sought to achieve concrete environmental im- China, and Madagascar, for instance. However, there have provements rather than focusing mainly or exclusively on insti- also been important cases to the contrary. For example, tutional development. Environment-related DPLs, in turn, hold Bank strategies for Russia have reduced the priority given to potential to influence relevant policies and institutions. How- the environment, reflecting declining central government ever, given that these are recent projects and that programmatic interest in borrowing and receiving policy advice for envi- approaches have typically been applied, only changes in policies ronmental problems. Most Bank country strategies have not and institutions can be measured at this stage. Clearly it will also integrated IFC and MIGA activities in relation to the envi- be important to measure environmental outcomes over the ronment. However, environment has been a strategic priority longer term to determine the success of these projects in for IFC and MIGA in recent years. IFC's Strategic Direc- achieving environmental sustainability objectives. 3 In Sub-Saharan Africa and elsewhere, integration of ENRM Currently, IFC's measure of project Environmental and Social concerns into Poverty Reduction Strategy Credits (PRSCs) Effects is confined mostly to environmental impacts and per- and the country-prepared Poverty Reduction Strategy Pa- formance in meeting standards and requirements at the company pers (PRSPs) on which they are based has not been given level. However, as part of the Bank Group, IFC's impact impor- sufficient priority. Climate change is another critical area in tantly also includes the sectorwide or regionwide effects of the which Bank Group interventions have been limited to date. operations it supports. Therefore, both self-evaluation and inde- The gap is especially serious with regard to the rising adap- pendent evaluation should broaden their focus in the direction of tation needs in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. How- assessing these broader effects going forward. ever, this is beginning to change, and much greater atten- tion is envisaged by both the Bank and IFC to climate- The performance of MIGA guarantee operations in meeting en- related challenges in the years ahead. vironmental requirements and standards differed between pro- jects with more (Category A) and less (Category B) serious poten- Finally, even though the World Bank applies environmental tial environmental and social impacts. For Category B projects, due diligence to all of its investment projects, it presently measures agreed in the early stages are not always being fully car- lacks, unlike IFC, an aggregate monitoring and reporting ried out, suggesting the need for additional support and monitor- system that would allow it to more systematically assess the ing. MIGA, like IFC, needs to give greater consideration to the environmental aspects and results of the projects it sup- broader environmental effects of the investments it supports. ports. This is a task that both self- and independent evalua- tion need to undertake. More generally, differences with respect to project-level envi- ronmental requirements between the World Bank on the one side About two-thirds of IFC's investment projects met their and IFC and MIGA on the other deserve assessment. The Bank environmental and social requirements and standards. Sig- follows environmental and social safeguards (operational policies, nificant gaps were found in investment projects in Sub- procedures, and guidelines), while in 2006 IFC adopted a new Saharan Africa, in part for the reasons mentioned above, and Policy and Performance Standards on Social and Environmental in the textile, food and beverage, tourism, and agriculture Sustainability. A similar approach was adopted by MIGA in 2007. and forestry sectors. IFC has had a positive influence in Another key difference is the recourse to an independent Inspec- helping its clients develop management systems to better tion Panel for external complaints in the case of the Bank, address environmental and social aspects companywide. This whereas IFC and MIGA rely on the Office of the Compliance is important considering IFC's increasing focus on corporate Advisor Ombudsman (CAO), reporting to the President of the loans and equity investments that cover all of its clients' ac- World Bank Group. The crucial question is the environmental tivities as compared with narrower project finance. The impacts resulting from these differing approaches. They need to overall effectiveness of IFC/GEF initiatives was found by an be evaluated and the findings incorporated into policies. The external evaluation to be "satisfactory with mixed project forthcoming IEG evaluation of environmental and social due outcomes." A partial review of environment-oriented Advi- diligence across the Bank Group could be helpful in this regard, sory Service programs and recent evaluations of completed but greater self-evaluation is also needed. projects found that they were effective at innovation and development of new services, and their development effec- Need for more strategic and coordinated approaches. Gov- tiveness was positive, but often there was not enough infor- ernment ownership of environmental objectives is of particular mation to assess them against expected impacts. importance. In addition to enforcing its own legislation, the pub- lic sector needs to create an investment climate that will encour- IFC's environmental work quality at appraisal has generally age and support environmentally sustainable private sector in- been adequate, but supervision of financial intermediary vestment and growth. This is especially important for the energy, (FI) projects has been insufficient. Project appraisal has water, wastewater, and waste management and recycling sectors, been adequate in identifying direct environmental, social, which have significant impacts both on the environment and and health and safety risks in real sector projects and in public health. Furthermore, mainstreaming environmental con- diligent translation of IFC generic requirements for FI pro- cerns needs to go farther. As most environmental problems are jects to legal documents. But greater attention is needed to spatial externalities and involve more than one sector, they are the assessment of indirect and induced environmental and often best addressed in a cross-sectoral and location-specific way. social impacts, which can be significant in agribusiness pro- Many Bank-supported interventions at present do not go far jects, for example. IFC's 2006 Performance Standards pro- enough in this respect. More coordinated action is frequently vide new tools to help define projects' areas of influence, needed among public and private stakeholders, as well as across supply chain management, and cumulative impacts, and the different investment sectors, areas where the Bank Group could new environmental and social review procedure in imple- be of greater assistance to interested clients. mentation since May 2006 includes risk-based appraisal and supervision of FIs. However, it is too soon to assess im- In supporting sustainable development and poverty reduction, plementation of these standards and the impact they are the Bank Group also needs to give more attention to the increas- having on environmental performance. ing transnational environmental impacts of rapidly growing de- 4 veloping ­ as well as OECD ­ countries, including the ef- of senior managers, insufficient staff technical and operational fects of rising trade in raw materials and agricultural and for- skills, and suboptimal use of limited administrative budgets. Or- est products among Sub-Saharan Africa and South America, ganization of the World Bank into Country and Sector Depart- on the one hand, and Asia, on the other, as well as within the ments, while helpful in many ways, nonetheless means that geo- latter region. Given associated global environmental prob- graphic and sectoral boundaries between management units repre- lems, including the impacts of climate change and biodiver- sent potential barriers to more effective assistance, especially for sity loss, such pressures are being noted by various analysts regional and global challenges. Resolution of environmental prob- as important and growing concerns. lems often requires interventions across national or regional boundaries (as in the Mediterranean and Nile Basins). This means Partnerships. The Bank Group has worked with and that certain internal inertias often need to be overcome. through a number of regional and global environmental programs and networks, including the Global Environment Given the demand-driven nature of Bank programs at the coun- Facility, the Montreal Protocol, and the Poverty- try level, global public goods, including environmental quality Environment Partnership with other UN and bilateral as- and sustainability, tend to receive insufficient priority. Similarly, sistance agencies. Such partnerships have often enhanced not enough attention is given to sustainable development ob- the effectiveness of Bank Group support for environ- stacles and opportunities in Bank country and regional strate- mental sustainability. However, IEG visits to Egypt, gies. Addressing these constraints requires strong leadership at Ghana, Senegal, and Uganda found that other donors the corporate, regional, and country levels supported by high- sometimes view the Bank as an insufficiently responsive quality analytical work and other tools. partner. On the other hand, Bank collaboration with envi- ronmental NGOs and other donors in Brazil, China, India, An additional impediment refers to insufficient coordination Madagascar, and Russia appears to have enhanced mutual within the Bank Group. For IFC and MIGA to operate effec- effectiveness. One factor associated with these positive tively, adequate legal and regulatory frameworks need to be in outcomes is the presence of Bank environmental specialists place and enforced at the country level. This depends on gov- in the field, which varies according to the size and com- ernment policies and practices, including transparency, areas in plexity of its portfolios in the countries involved. which the Bank often has greater leverage, although Bank influ- ence varies significantly across countries and over time. IFC is IFC has sought to extend use of its performance standards also increasingly working with governments, for example, in for private sector investments in developing countries by providing advice on private sector sustainability, corporate gov- working with commercial and other multilateral develop- ernance, and public-private partnership reforms. The feasibility ment banks. The Equator Principles, initiated by IFC in of private investments may also depend on adequate physical 2003, had been adopted by 60 of the world's leading banks and economic infrastructure, such as facilities for treatment of by March 2008. These now cover the majority of large-scale industrial waste and wastewater, which is often undeveloped or project financing in the developing world. To assess their nonexistent and provided by public utilities that are World Bank impact, however, financial institutions will need to demon- clients. In turn, regulatory reforms supported by the Bank can strate greater transparency and improved reporting with be made more effective with parallel IFC/MIGA efforts to in- respect to implementation. duce its clients--and the private sector more generally--to comply with these regulations. Such opportunities for coordi- External constraints. Several significant constraints at the nated action in support of greater environmental sustainability country and firm levels limit greater effectiveness of Bank need to be better identified and acted upon. Group and other donor support for the environment. A principal obstacle in many settings is insufficient commit- Achievement of the objectives of Bank Group strategies-- ment to environmental objectives, policies, and interven- including the 2001 Environment Strategy in which IFC and tions at the national, subnational, and/or firm levels. Rapid MIGA were not significant participants--depends in part on population growth, economic expansion, persisting pov- private sector actions to stem environmental damage and im- erty, together with market, governance, and institutional prove environmental quality, areas where IFC and MIGA can failures, continue to play an important role, as do political play a vital role. Good collaboration between the Bank and IFC instability and civil unrest, especially in fragile states. Nota- is increasingly seen in several urban and rural programs. How- ble too is the frequent inadequacy of information about ever, absent a common framework that allows the Bank Group and understanding of the nature and causes of environ- to understand the full range of environmental effects of its in- mental problems, unclear definition of the domestic envi- terventions, there is a risk that the public and private sector ronmental agenda and its links to economic growth and arms of the Bank Group may be working with different criteria poverty reduction, and weak legal, regulatory, financial, in relation to the environment. This could happen, for example, technical, human, and institutional capacity. in the energy, transport, and agribusiness sectors. Thus, it is important that new investments in both the private and public Internal constraints. Among the constraints within the sectors (for instance new power investments in Asia and agri- World Bank Group are competing priorities for the attention business investments involving tropical forests in Africa, Asia, 5 or Latin America) meet the same environmental perform- identify strategic entry points in countries with significant envi- ance standards and consistently seek to reduce environ- ronmental concerns. mental damages, including deforestation and greenhouse gas emissions. Better intra-Bank Group coordination of Improve the Bank Group's ability to assess its support for strategies, approaches, and interventions at both the corpo- the environment and to monitor and evaluate the impacts rate and country levels are essential. of its environment-related interventions. Recommendations The Bank Group needs to do a better job of measuring the en- vironmental performance and impacts of its activities. The Bank In view of the increasing importance of environmental sus- needs to improve monitoring, evaluation, and reporting of envi- tainability for economic growth, poverty reduction, and ronmental aspects and results of lending operations at both the human well-being, as documented in recent UN and project and portfolio levels. While IFC has evaluated its Envi- Bank/IMF reports and the findings of this evaluation, the ronmental and Social Effects since 1996 and recently developed World Bank Group should seek to enhance the effective- new tools to track and analyze environmental performance in- ness of its activities in support of environmental sustain- dicators at the project level and MIGA has scaled up its assess- ability. To help it do so, IEG recommends the following: ment and monitoring of project environmental and social per- formance, both institutions could improve their attention to Increase the attention to environmental sustainability baseline and performance indicators for later monitoring and in the World Bank Group by ensuring that environ- evaluation. IFC and MIGA should also be concerned with and mental issues enter fully into discussions of its strate- measure more fully the aggregate and supply chain impact-- gic directions and in regional and country assistance beyond individual project performance--of projects with large programs. environmental dimensions, for example in oil, gas, mining; en- ergy; or agribusiness projects in high-biodiversity regions. Promotion of environmental sustainability (including, but not limited to, addressing climate change) should be a cen- The Bank Group needs to develop and apply methods to assess tral pillar of the Bank Group's' strategic directions in its its environmental impact. Together with agencies such as efforts to support inclusive and sustainable globalization. UNDP and UNEP, it needs to help quantify progress toward The World Bank Group should jointly reformulate and achievement of the crucial Millennium Development Goal 7 on update the 2001 Environment Strategy in light of the in- environmental sustainability, a goal that is not now being creasingly important role of the private sector, global public tracked adequately. goods, and transnational environmental footprints. The WBG should likewise jointly consider both medium-term Improve coordination among the Bank, IFC, and MIGA (5-10 year) and longer-term (10-20 year) approaches to and between the WBG and external partners (both public strengthening environmental sustainability at the regional and private) in relation to the Bank Group's environmental and national levels and should incorporate short-term (3-5 mission and ensure consistent and effective implementa- year) environmental programs into country assistance and tion at the corporate and country levels. partnership strategies where feasible, especially for coun- tries with large investment portfolios and environmental Senior management across the World Bank, IFC, and MIGA challenges and carbon footprints of global significance. IFC needs to give greater attention to ensuring Bank Group consis- should continue supporting market transformation towards tency and effectiveness in this area. Mechanisms should be es- sustainability with its Advisory Services and direct and fi- tablished at the top management, regional, and, where perti- nancial intermediary investments, emphasizing technology nent, country levels to promote, monitor, and report on intra- transfer and development in clean production, energy effi- institutional coordination and collaboration with respect to en- ciency, and sustainable supply chain management. vironment-related strategies (including but not restricted to those concerned with climate change), policies, and interven- Move to more cross-sectoral and spatially oriented tions. Specific actions are recommended with regard to: (i) cor- approaches to environmental support and strengthen porate strategies for the environment; (ii) environmental aspects staff skills. of country assistance and partnership strategies; (iii) monitoring, evaluation, and reporting on environment-related interventions The Bank Group should help its clients adopt more cross- and outcomes; and (iv) assessing experience with differing ap- sectoral and spatially focused approaches to addressing proaches to environmental due diligence for lending, equity, environmental challenges. Staff technical and operational and guarantee operations. Furthermore, strengthening external skills for the delivery of environmental support also need to partnerships with both the public and private sectors should be be strengthened. While the WBG must be responsive to a central theme in an updated WBG environmental strategy, as client demand in its policy advice and lending, it can still be effective partnerships will be essential to success in addressing proactive in analyzing environmental issues and seeking to the world's urgent environmental concerns. 6 7 The views expressed here are those of IEG and should not be attributed to the World Bank Group. The findings do not support any general inferences beyond the scope of the evaluation, including any references about the World Bank Group's past, current or prospective overall performance. The Fast Track Brief, which summarizes major IEG evaluations, will be distributed to World Bank Group staff. If you would like to be added to the subscription list, please email us at ieg@worldbank.org, with "FTB subscription" in the subject line and your mail-stop number. If you would like to stop receiving FTBs, please email us at IEG@Worldbank.org, with "FTB un- subscribe" in the subject line. Contact IEG: Director-General, Evaluation: Vinod Thomas Directors: Cheryl Gray (IEG-WB) Marvin Taylor-Dormond (IEG-IFC/IEG-MIGA) Task Managers: John Redwood (IEG-WB) Jouni Eerikainen (IEG-IFC) Ethel Tarazona (IEG-MIGA) Copies of the report are available at: http://www.worldbank.org/ieg/environmentalsustainability IEG Help Desk: (202) 458-4497 E-mail: ieg@worldbank.org 8