Bangladesh Country Investment Plan - Feed the Future

Explanations on Tables 4.2 to 4.4 (DPs contributions)
1. As part of the costing revision of the CIP, a survey was undertaken among the Development Partners (DPs) – bilateral and multilaterals, aiming
to identify the main ongoing and future commitment in the 12 areas of CIP. About 150 projects were identified as contributing to the achievement of
CIP. Half of them are classified by GOB as ADP, the rest are outside but still relevant. The group of DPs, mostly members of the LCG/ARDFS,
included: ADB, AusAid, DANIDA, DFID, EKN (Netherlands), EU, FAO, IDB, IFAD, JICA, SDC, UNDP, UNICEF, USAID, WB and WFP.
Secondary source of the following tables was the screening done for the Country Partnership Framework, updated in Oct 2010. The sample represents
therefore an indication of the interests of the most relevant DPs, rather than an exhaustive representation of the DPs’ investments in the sector.
2. Table 4.2 shows ongoing interventions implemented in collaboration with the Government of Bangladesh channelled through the ADP, Table
4.3 provides an indication of the interventions outside the ADP, and Table 4.4 indicates the future DPs’ commitments as potential contribution to
the CIP.
3. The classification of the ongoing and future interventions into the 12 areas of CIP was done according to the indications of the DPs, following
the projects’ core area of intervention. A further revision for consistency purposes – complemented by contacts with the respective donors when
required. For cross cutting projects an approximation was needed (eg: projects in suppo rt of the livelihoods intervene in various areas, income
generation, health and nutrition...). Those interventions could not be univocally classified within one specific CIP programme and were either
reclassified according to the main outcome or split under various programmes. Multi-sector projects were separated into different relevant CIP
programmes. . An example is given by the DANIDA funded ASPS-II, structured in different components contributing to: 1. Extension, 4. Fisheries, 5.
Livestock and 6. Rural infrastructures for market access.
4. Overall, the figures show a total amount of DPs ongoing investments for US$ 1.390 billion, for the period of CIP implementation (Table 4.2).
Beyond this, the survey could identify:
a. A significant additional commitment – around US$ 518 million (Table 4.3), channelled outside the ADP (mainly through NGOs or GOB
organizations non-classified in the ADP). Compared to the inventory of ongoing investments within the CIP, the totals may differ due to a
different classification followed by the Government Agencies. The projects selected here should not be disregarded as their implementation too
contributes to the achievements of CIP outcomes and impacts.
b. The survey allowed also an estimate of DP’s future commitments of around US$ 884 million (Table 4.4), investments not yet operational but to
be undertaken during the CIP implementation period. This amount will partially address the requirements of the CIP (US$ 5.1 billion, or the
prioritized US$ 3.4 billion). The figures show a slight preference of the DPs in interventions in the areas of Climate Change, Safety Nets and
Nutrition.
c. A pool fund is being established, comprising GOB funds and contributions from various DPs (AusAid, CIDA, DFID, EC, KfW, GTZ, JICA,
SIDA, UNFPA, WB, UNAIDS, UNICEF, WHO, and USAID) for the 32 OPs of HPNSDP, expected to be approved in June 2011. So far, a total
amount of around US$ 1.3 billion has been committed from DPs (of which an estimated 15% are contributions for direct interventions on
nutrition).
Updated Bangladesh Country Investment Plan: A Road Map Towards investing in Agriculture, Food Security and Nutrition
2 June 2011
116