Independent Evaluation - Home > Search

Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review - Transport Infrastructure Project

1. Project Data:   
ES Date Posted:
Project Name:
Transport Infrastructure Project
Project Costs(US $M)
 160.2  157.0
Loan/Credit (US $M)
 71.0  26.3
Sector, Major Sect.:
Ports & Waterways,
Cofinancing (US $M)
L/C Number:
Board Approval (FY)
Partners involved
Closing Date
06/30/1999 12/31/1998
Prepared by: Reviewed by: Group Manager: Group:  
Binyam Reja
Roy Gilbert Ridley Nelson OEDST

2. Project Objectives and Components:

a. Objectives
The project objectives were to:

    1. Rehabilitate and modernize port facilities at Valparaiso and San Antonio and expand the facilities at San Vicente, in order to cope with forecast traffic to the year 2000;
    2. Increase efficiency in port activities;
    3. Alleviate the congestion caused by port traffic in urban areas;
    4. Promote private sector participation in port development and operations and the introduction of modern cargo-handling technologies;
    5. Support the institutional strengthening of the infrastructure sector;
    6. Improve environmental conditions at the project ports; and
    7. Support transport sector efficiency through a "sectoral loan" component.

b. Components
The project comprised two parts:

  • Part A (86% of base cost at appraisal): High priority investment on three project ports based on the 1992-95 Ministry of Public Works (MOP) Investment Program, complemented by private sector investments in port equipment and by extensive technical assistance and training programs.
  • Part B (14% of base cost at appraisal): High priority port-related investment identified by MOP , comprising construction of road port access, inland terminals and small fishing ports.

  • c. Comments on Project Cost, Financing and Dates
    The project was approved on January 21, 1992 and closed on June 30, 1999. On July 1997, two years before project closing date, US$44.6 million was canceled, as the growing Chilean economy reduced the importance of the finances available under this loan.

    3. Achievement of Relevant Objectives:

    The project achieved most of its original objectives, despite the partial cancellation of the loan.
    • The physical objectives (objective 1) to rehabilitate and modernize port facilities through civil works have been successfully completed, although there were some cost overruns due mainly to engineering problems.
    • The objective to ease congestion caused by port traffic in urban roads (objective 3) was not achieved. The road access studies were substantially delayed and the corresponding works are only being started now.
    • The objectives to increase port efficiency and promote private sector participation (objectives 2 and 4) were achieved and have enabled the port system to respond to the demands of an increasing traffic stemming from Chilea's increase volume of international trade.
    • The institutional development objectives (objective 5 and 7) were minimally achieved. The resources allocated for institutional studies "to review and redefine the objectives and functions of the government's infrastructure agencies" were not used and the institutional strengthening of the infrastructure was not achieved.
    • The project's environmental objectives (objective 6) has been partially achieved. Studies to define an action program in Chilean ports were done, but not entirely implemented.

    4. Significant Outcomes/Impacts:

    The project had the following significant outcomes:
  • Increased the efficiency of the port system, which was critical for the handling of the increased international trade traffic.
  • Modernized container terminals at the two principal general cargo ports in Chile.
  • Contributed to the concessioning of the port components to the private sector.
  • Introduced a revised tariff for the public ports
  • Provided equipment for environmental monitoring.

  • 5. Significant Shortcomings (include non-compliance with safeguard features):

    The following were the shortcomings of the project:
  • The objectives to alleviate road congestion was not fully achieved.
  • The project had substantial cost overruns.
  • Some of the studies envisage at appraisal, notably the study for the institutional improvement of the infrastructure, were not done.
  • Environmental improvements have yet to take place.
  • 6. Ratings:ICROED ReviewReason for Disagreement/Comments
    Institutional Dev.:
    Bank Performance:
    Borrower Perf.:
    Quality of ICR:

    7. Lessons of Broad Applicablity:

    The following lessons from among the many drawn by the Bank and borrower ICRs have broad applicability:
    1. To be ready for natural disasters and mitigate their effects, it is important to have plans and program to deal with them.
    2. Project design where two or more ministries are directly involved with different aspects of the project requires special consideration of project ownership and control.
    3. The evaluation of port projects should include the cost of any necessary consequential improvements to road and rail access.
    4. A cash-rich executing agency such as EMPORCHI can undermine the demand for Bank funds and the partial loan cancellation (two-thirds of the total loan in this case) reduces the Bank's influence.

    8. Audit Recommended?  No


    9. Comments on Quality of ICR:

    The ICR was presented in the old format and its evaluation summary could have been shorter.

    © 2012 The World Bank Group, All Rights Reserved. Terms and Conditions