Independent Evaluation - Home > Search

Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review - Jo-second Tourism Dev.


  
1. Project Data:   
ICR Review Date Posted:
03/10/2006   
PROJ ID:
P035997
Appraisal
Actual
Project Name:
Jo-second Tourism Dev.
Project Costs(US $M)
 44.0  42.4
Country:
Jordan
Loan/Credit (US $M)
 32.0  29.6
Sector, Major Sect.:
Sub-national government administration, Roads and highways, General water sanitation and flood protection sector,
Law and justice and public administration; Transportation; Water sanitation and flood protection
Cofinancing (US $M)
 -  -
L/C Number:
L4214      
   
Board Approval (FY)
  98
Partners involved
Closing Date
12/31/2002 06/30/2005
         
Evaluator: Panel Reviewer: Division Manager: Division:  
Nilakshi M. De Silva
George T. K. Pitman Alain A. Barbu IEGSG

2. Project Objectives and Components:

a. Objectives
(i) to create the conditions for an increase in sustainable and environmentally sound tourism in Petra, Wadi Rum, Jerash and Karak; and (ii) to realize tourism related employment and income generation potential at project sites.

b. Components (or Key Conditions in the case of Adjustment Loans):
(a) Petra Region infrastructure development and environmental management (appraisal estimate US$ 27.4 million; actual cost US$24.0 million) including road rehabilitation and improvement, urban infrastructure development, visitor facilities and management at the Petra sanctuary, environmental management of the Petra region and developing capacity of the Petra Region Authority (PRA, formerly Petra Region Planning Council).

(b) Wadi Rum development and environmental conservation (appraisal estimate US$9.2 million; actual cost US$10.1 million) including infrastructure development, protected area management plan and tourism area management plan; support for income generating activities
(c) Karak and Jerash Tourism development pilot program (appraisal estimate US$5.2 million; actual cost US$7.5 million) including technical assistance and feasibility studies to identify urban regeneration and tourism projects and implementation of priority projects
(d) Sector development support (appraisal estimate US$2.2 million; actual cost US$0.8 million) including technical assistance, training and equipment for Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities (MOTA) and technical assistance to the project management unit.

c. Comments on Project Cost, Financing, Borrower Contribution, and Dates
Actual costs are 96% of appraisal, mainly because the planned visitors' center in Petra was not built. Bank disbursed about 92% of the loan but the Borrower's contribution marginally exceeded target. The project closed 30 months behind schedule as implementation was slow and planned works could not be completed in time.


3. Relevance of Objectives & Design:

While promoting tourism is not a priority area as such under the current CAS, the project objectives were relevant to the CAS at the time of design and continues to be relevant for Government development priorities. The components were well designed to support the objectives, but design would have been strengthened with greater analysis of local communities and their relationship to the project sites.

4. Achievement of Objectives (Efficacy) :

(i) to create the conditions for an increase in sustainable and environmentally sound tourism in Petra, Wadi Rum, Jerash and Karak. Substantially achieved but with significant shortcomings. While the project has contributed to improving the tourism experience, particularly in Petra and Wadi Rum, these improvements are mainly physical achievements and more remains to be done to ensure sustainable tourism at these sites. Project investments in roads, drains and solid waste management in Petra and Wadi Rum have significantly improved their environs. Notable improvements include the 53 km access road to Petra, the 7.5km scenic road to Little Petra, street lighting, landscaping, flood control and the development of a basic tour including signage. The Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities (MOTA) has prepared a National Tourism Development Strategy (despite a substantial delay and finally with the assistance of USAID) which has been well-received and widely discussed . It has also undertaken a number of significant reforms including amending the tourism and antiquities laws to allow for greater private sector participation and recognize the importance of the natural and urban landscapes. In Petra, the PRC/PRA has declared Dara, Wadi Musa and Taybeh as protected areas and has developed land use codes to protect the park from degradation. In Wadi Rum, an environmental management and conservation plan has been established together with a workable managerial regime for the two competing indigenous communities operating the park. However, there are significant shortcomings with respect to planned improvements in sector strategy and institutional reform. The Department of Antiquities (DOA) has not yet established an effective organization to manage Petra (the most important tourism site in the country) as the Petra Regional Authority (PRA) has insufficient staffing and capacity, particularly to develop tourism. It also seems unconvinced about the appropriateness of legal measures developed under the project to manage the Park and its environs, and has contravened its own zoning regulations.
(ii) to realize tourism related employment and income generation potential at project sites. Partially Achieved.
Project activities created direct and indirect employment through the establishment of a new handicraft center in Wadi Rum (which has mostly helped women), as well as at newly established tourist camps within park areas. New staff were also employed to carry out park supervision and man the visitors center at Wadi Rum. While the targeted 100% increase in employment has not been achieved (mainly due to the tourism downturn caused by renewal of tension in neighboring Palestine), the beneficiary assessment suggests that employment, particularly in indirect activities, has increased substantially.

5. Efficiency:

The ICR calculates ERR of 14.6% and 15.6% for the two main road investments completed under the project, which account for 30% of final project costs. However, it is not clear if actual traffic counts realized on project completion were used to verify appraisal estimates.
6. M&E Design, Implementation, & Utilization:

Baseline surveys envisaged at appraisal were not completed, and there is insufficient data to assess performance against the targeted "100% increase in employment".
7. Other (Safeguards, Fiduciary, Unintended Impacts--Positive & Negative):

None.

8. Ratings:
ICR
ICR Review
Reason for Disagreement/Comments
Outcome: 
SatisfactoryModerately SatisfactoryUnresolved ID problems regarding park management, particularly in Petra
Institutional Dev.: 
ModestModest
Sustainability: 
LikelyLikelyPlanned follow-on projects, including by the Bank, will help to consolidate the gains under the project.
Bank Perf.: 
SatisfactorySatisfactory
Borrower Perf.: 
SatisfactorySatisfactory
Quality of ICR: 
Exemplary

NOTES:
- When insufficient information is provided by the Bank for IEG to arrive at a clear rating, IEG will downgrade the relevant ratings as warranted beginning July 1, 2006.
- ICR rating values flagged with ' * ' don't comply with OP/BP 13.55, but are listed for completeness.

9. Lessons:

The ICR highlights several lessons including:
  • Take account of political reality. The complexity of the local political environment should be well understood at appraisal and adequate allowances should be made for its complexity in project design and during implementation.
  • Make certain that all stakeholders subscribe to the reform agenda. The capacity of key participating agencies and their commitment to core project objectives - both prior to and during project implementation - should be accurately gauged. PRA and DOA seem to see their role mainly as custodial but were being asked under the project to undertake developmental, managerial and service delivery tasks - which they were and still are ill-equipped to perform. In addition, the professional incentives faced by the leadership of these organizations are also not always in line with protecting the park and its environs.
  • Build consensus on action plans. A clear consensus should be established with the counterpart agency on the need for and relevance of strategic planning and programming and also to ensure that the agency has the will and capacity to undertake the task effectively.

10. Assessment Recommended?  No

          Why?  

11. Comments on Quality of ICR:

Exceedingly thorough ICR (even though it was 15 pages vs 12 recommended). The ICR provides a candid and balanced account of the project, recognizing both its achievements and shortcomings. Substantial information has been collected regarding project performance and has been well organized and presented. In particular the Beneficiary survey results are discussed in detail, which adds considerable value to the ICR.

(ES-Rev4B-Dec/05)
© 2012 The World Bank Group, All Rights Reserved. Terms and Conditions