Improving Transport Project Appraisals
In the Islamic Countries
74
Figure 3.7: Assessment of coherence between projects and national policy
Source: survey
3.2.7 Follow-up and learning
Half of the respondents indicated that ex-post evaluation of projects is carried out. The
responsibility for monitoring project implementation and comparing the implementation with
the project planning lies with the relevant Ministry for transportation or the implementing
agencies. Problems that have been encountered during the construction and operation of
transport projects are reported in all cases.
3.3 Barriers and success factors
The question being addressed in this study is how OIC appraisal practice benchmarks against
appraisal practice elsewhere. Inevitably, to answer this question involves assembling evidence,
of which the survey was one source of data. The following barriers have been identified:
1. Unclear legislation
In most countries, there is a legal requirement to prepare project appraisals for transport
projects. However, the requirement on itself is not enough to prepare project appraisals in a
straightforward and harmonious manner. Most of the time, the legal requirement does not
define the appraisal methodology to be used. In the previous chapter, it can be seen that the
appraisal practice outside the OIC Member States is to have a well-defined methodology to be
used. For example, in the Netherlands, the use of CBA is mandatory in large transport projects.
A well-defined methodology will contribute to more effective project appraisal and selection
practices.
2. No guidelines on content of project appraisal
A large part of the respondents indicated that they were not aware of any guidelines on how to
prepare project appraisals. It is logical that the existence of general guidelines assists the
appraisal performer in preparing project appraisals with formal indications. Guidelines not only
facilitate the work of the analyst, but also serve the goal of increased comparability by
75%
25%
Yes No