Skip to Main Navigation

Niger - Emergency Food Security Support Project (Inglês)

Ratings for the Emergency Food Security Support Project for Niger were as follows: outcomes were satisfactory, the risk to development outcome was moderate, Bank performance was satisfactory, and Borrower performance was also satisfactory. Lessons learned include: high level commitment, both by the Bank and Government, is instrumental in increasing effectiveness and speed of preparing emergency operations. The design of the project, which rightly focused on responding to the Government's short-term priority and to the urgent needs of the beneficiaries, was a key factor in the project's successful implementation. There were substantial governance-related risks associated with the procurement of a large amount of fertilizers. Involving a competent third party, namely the CRC (Joint Government-Donor Food Crises Committee), in the procurement process and getting beneficiaries involved in critical steps of the project cycle helped safeguard transparency and ensured accountability. The project was used as an opportunity to move forward the longstanding agenda for developing safety nets in a country which definitely needs a comprehensive and long-term response to recurrent food crises and chronic food insecurity. Availability of analytical work on risks and safety net schemes in Niger facilitated the design and preparation of the operation.


  • Data do documento


  • TIpo de documento

    Conclusão da Implementação e Relatórios sobre Resultados

  • No. do relatório


  • Nº do volume


  • Total Volume(s)


  • País


  • Região


  • Data de divulgação


  • Disclosure Status


  • Nome do documento

    Niger - Emergency Food Security Support Project

  • Palavras-chave

    Environment and Social Development;safety net program;sustainable management;economic and sector work;food price;preparation of bidding documents;ip disbursements archived;global food crisis response;Agriculture, Fishing and Forestry;Environmental and Social Safeguard;economic and financial analysis;exposure to climate change;price petroleum product;loss of tax revenue;Food and Nutrition Security;chronic food insecurity;future food security;tons of fertilizer;Financial Management System;early warning system;staple food crop;outputs by components;characteristics of poor;price of fertilizer;safety net system;financial management procedure;project performance indicator;food security stock;national food security;global food prices;safety net instrument;production of rice;lengthy approval procedures;financial reporting system;internal control system;incidence of poverty;household food insecurity;assignment of responsibility;human development index;sustainable food supply;Exchange Rates;quality at entry;poor rural household;emergency response system;number of beneficiaries;quality of information;Social Safety Nets;safety net intervention;procurement and distribution;continuous capacity building;project time frame;food safety net;filing of procurement;negative environmental impact;department of agriculture;delivery of good;rice production;recommended dose;producer cooperative;rice yield;affordable price;Cash Transfer;emergency operation;procurement process;good governance;pilot program;crop season;sales revenue;emergency procedure;direct payment;outcome indicator;international market;fertilizer distribution;project intervention;institutional framework;targeting mechanism;disbursement profile;rice farmer;irrigated area;front-end fee;stakeholder workshop;beneficiary survey;backup system;appraisal mission;financial sustainability;food production;market constraint;food availability;fertilizer subsidies;beneficiary assessment;sustainable policy;effective systems;modern management;government commitment;market participation;Donor Contribution;operational procedure;extreme drought;emergency situation;institutional change;Gender Inequality;financial statement;gender inequalities;limited resources;effective approach;fertilizer source;fiduciary risk;quality of supervision;feasibility analysis;poor household;universal programs;emergency program;food risk;rice paddy;civil society;rural area;deceased husband;means testing;quantitative method;direct transfer;disadvantaged area;geographic targeting;internal auditor;quantitative information;community targeting;governance issue;learning curve;target system;project execution;chronically poor;primary author;government intervention;grant effectiveness;safeguard issue;price value;transfer program;procurement system;cash value;sustainable safety;collected data;rice field;results framework;accounting staff;natural disaster;landlocked country;government body;Natural Resources;quality information;truck load;primarily use;crop cycle;rainy season;land management;consultative process;domestic price;Population Growth;agricultural productivity;increased demand;special financing;Social Protection;adequate procedures;strategic approach;consumption need;grain storage;early identification;Advisory services;food aid;development partner;operational framework;contingency plan;fund activity;agricultural production;management capacity;average price;primary beneficiaries;project approval;subsidy policy;market intervention;eligible beneficiary;adequate information;relief measure;Tax Exemption;wheat flour;edible oil;cereal production;incremental cost;farmer cooperative;plant material;good information;account data;production parameters;domestic factor;accounting software;net transfer;gender aspect;rice price;market distortion;



Versão oficial do documento (pode conter assinaturas, etc.)

  • PDF oficial
  • TXT*
  • Total Downloads** :
  • Download Stats
  • *A versão do texto é um OCR incorreto e está incluído unicamente em benefício de usuários com conectividade lenta.