Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) – Concept Note

_________________________________________________________________________

Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa

(PIDA)

Concept Note

Prepared by

African Union

African Development Bank Group NEPAD

 Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) – Concept Note

ACRONYMS

ADB African Development Bank

AICD African Infrastructure Country Diagnostic Study
AU African Union
AUC African Union Commission
CEN-SAD Community of the Sahel-Saharan States
COMESA Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa
EAC East African Community
ECA Economic Commission for Africa
ECCAS Economic Community for Central African States
EU European Union
ECOWAS Economic Community for West African States
ICT Information and Communication Technologies
IGAD Intergovernmental Authority for Development
MDGs Millennium Development Goals
MLTSF Medium to Long Term Strategic Framework
NEPAD New Partnership for African Development
PIDA Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa
REC Regional Economic Community
SADC Southern African Development Community
SC Steering Committee
STAP Short Term Action Plan
TC Technical Committee
ToR Terms of Reference
UMA Maghreb Arab Union

i
Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) – Concept Note

PROGRAMME FOR INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA

PROGRAMME CONCEPT NOTE

The African Union Commission (AUC), the NEPAD Secretariat and the African Development
Bank (ADB) are jointly leading an initiative for the development of infrastructure in Africa.
This document describes the context in which the initiative was formulated, the issues it
addresses and its approach. In this Programme Concept Note, the initiative will be referred
to as ‘Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa' or by its acronym PIDA.

1. Context and Issues

1.1 State of Infrastructures

1.1.1 Infrastructure plays a key role in economic growth and poverty reduction. The lack of
infrastructure (quantitatively, qualitatively, physically and in terms of services rendered) leads
to increased production and transaction costs, which lessens the competitiveness of
businesses, and therefore the possibility of implementing economic and social development
policies. Furthermore, the business environment will be less conducive, making it less
attractive for foreign direct investment. In a nutshell, inadequate infrastructure results in
reduced service options and quality available to the population, particularly the most
vulnerable segments. For instance, doubling the annual growth rate of telephone connections,
from 5% to 10% (rates observed in East Asia) can translate into an increase of 0.4 points in
the growth rate. Similarly, increasing the per capita growth of electricity production from 2%
(observed in Africa) to 6% (observed in East Asia) would lead to one half-point increase in
1
economic growth . Based on data observed over the 1960-2000 period, Caldéron and Sirven
estimate that the growth rates of various Latin American countries could be 1.5 (Costa Rica)
to 5.8 points (Bolivia) higher compared to the known rates for these countries if the latter had
2
had infrastructure that is comparable, quantitatively and qualitatively, to that of South Korea .

1.1.2 The lack of infrastructure in Africa is widely recognized. A Note by the ADB and the
3
United Nations Economic Commission for Africa clearly sums up this deficit :
 Access to electricity for 30% of the population compared to rates ranging from 70 to
90% for other major geographical zones of the developing world (Asia, Central
America and the Caribbean, Middle-East and Latin America)
 Transboundary water resources constitute approximately 80% of Africa’s
freshwater resources. However, current levels of water withdrawal are low with
3.8% of water resources developed for water supply, irrigation and hydropower
use, and with only about 18% of the irrigation potential being exploited.
 Access to water and sanitation for 65% and 38% respectively of the population
compared to rates of water access rates of 80 to 90% for the other geographical
4
zones
 A telecommunications penetration rate of about 6% compared to an average of
40% for the other geographical zones, and a very low penetration rate for
broadband services
 A road access rate of 34% compared to 50% for the other geographical zones.

1.1.3 The impacts of such deficit on competitiveness in Africa are clear: African countries
(particularly those south of the Sahara) are among the least competitive in the world, and

1
‘Challenges of African Growth’, Benno Ndulu, The World Bank, 2007.
2
‘The Effects of Infrastructure…’. The analysis carried out by Caldéron and Sirven on the same
sample of countries shows that income disparities would also have been reduced if the
countries had better infrastructure.
3
‘Infrastructure Development and Regional Integration: Problems, Opportunities and
Challenges’, Joint Note of the ADB and United Nations Economic Commission for Africa; 2006.
4
A Snapshot of Drinking water and sanitation in Africa ; UNICEF and WHO; 2008

1
Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) – Concept Note

infrastructure appears to be one of the most important factors in the determination of their
global competitiveness. The global competitiveness indices (GCIs), calculated by the World
5
Economic Forum, are revealing . Generally, for Africa, these indices are lower than those of
other regions of the developing world, as shown in Table 1. Infrastructure appears to be the
underlying factor that contributes most significantly to this relatively low competitiveness, see
Table 2. In other words, Africa, particularly, sub-Saharan Africa, appears to be one of the
least competitive regions in the developing world, and the lack of infrastructure is, relatively, a
fundamental cause.
6
Table 1: Global Competitiveness Index of Africa
GCI Sub-Indices
Basic Requirements Efficiency Innovation
North Africa 4.09 4.67 3.58 3.56
Sub-Sahara 3.29 3.55 3.05 3.12

Brazil 4.08 4.23 3.96 4.09

China 4.25 4.82 3.66 3.75
India 4.47 4.56 4.33 4.60
Russia 4.13 4.49 3.96 3.55
ALC 4.07 4.41 3.83 3.75
ASE 4.25 4.53 4.01 3.90
Source: The Africa Competitiveness Report 2007, World Economic Forum, 2007.

Table 2: Infrastructure and other Basic Conditions

Basic Sub-Indices
Conditions
Institutions Infrastructure Macro-Economy Health
Primary Educ.
North Africa 4.67 4.13 3.53 4.57 6.44
Sub-Sahara 3.55 3.65 2.45 4.00 4.04

Brazil 4.23 3.63 3.32 3.42 6.54

China 4.82 3.51 3.62 5.72 6.44
India 4.56 3.71 3.51 4.12 5.90
Russia 4.49 3.16 3.57 4.95 6.29
ALC 4.41 3.69 3.25 4.20 6.51
ASE 4.53 4.08 3.12 4.61 6.30
Source: The Africa Competitiveness Report 2007, World Economic Forum, 2007.

1.2 Continental Infrastructure Development Initiatives

1.2.1 Several initiatives have been carried out by African countries to address the problem
of infrastructure deficit and to ensure the integration of the continent; these include:

1.2.2 New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD): One of the major objectives
of (NEPAD) is to promote infrastructure development as a driving force for Africa’s integration
and development. Within this framework, one of the first actions initiated under NEPAD was
the formulation, in 2002, of a Short-Term Action Plan (STAP) in the area of infrastructure,
including priority measures and projects. The ongoing programmes and initiatives of the
Regional Economic Communities (RECs) and sector organizations constitute the base of this
Action Plan. However, the Action Plan was only the first phase, and was to be followed by
the formulation of a Medium to Long-Term Strategic Framework (MLTSF) to articulate policies
and strategies, outline priorities and contribute to the establishment of partnerships geared

5
‘The Africa Competiveness Report 2007’, World Economic Forum.
6
The global competitiveness index calculated by the World Economic Forum is constructed on
the basis of indices concerning three groups of factors: (i) basic conditions (institutions,
infrastructure, macro-economy, health and primary education); (ii) efficiency enhancers
(secondary and higher education, market efficiency, technological readiness), and (iii)
innovation (business sophistication and innovation).

2
Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) – Concept Note

towards promoting economic integration and supporting the development of trade and
commerce.

1.2.3 African Union Initiatives: The African Union Commission (AUC), which is
responsible for coordinating, harmonizing and providing leadership in the continent’s
economic and social development and physical integration, has, since becoming operational
in 2003, committed itself to the development of infrastructure (transport, energy, water,
telecommunications and ICTs), in particular. Consequently, the AUC must develop
continental sector policies and master plans based on the regional policies and master plans
developed by the RECs. In the accomplishment of this mission, the RECs have been
designated as the pillars of this integration on which the Commission must depend.

1.2.4 Coordination Mechanism: The AUC, the African Development Bank and the
NEPAD Secretariat, have established a coordination mechanism for the development of
infrastructure in Africa. Through this mechanism the different African stakeholders, under the
leadership of the Commission, have a consultative framework among themselves and an
instrument of dialogue and interaction with Africa’s development partners. Indeed, with such
a mechanism, African infrastructure development stakeholders could speak with one voice
and have a common agenda.

1.3 Issues Addressed by the PIDA

1.3.1 Incomplete Information: Information on the infrastructure deficit and its impacts has
always been considered incomplete. The considerable work done by the World Bank under
the ‘Africa Infrastructure Country Diagnostic’ (AICD) project covers a significant part of this
information gap and PIDA will rely to the maximum extent on the AICD outputs and other data
sources. PIDA is a strategic undertaking and PIDA’s analysis, recommendations and
conclusions need to be based on solid information grounds, but PIDA will only engage in
further data collection to the extent that it is necessary to fill gaps for achieving its strategic
purpose.

1.3.2 Inadequate Causal Analysis: This involves seeking the causes for the delay in the
development of regional and continental infrastructure in Africa. Many of the causes are
known from previous studies, and further studies are underway that will enrich this
information. The causes include more or less latent conflicts or political differences, weak
national political will, lack of financing, institutional inefficiencies, regulatory and technical
inconsistencies, lack of human resources and skills, unsuitable and/or inefficient decision-
making processes, conflicting national and regional perspectives, etc. Beyond the listing of
the causes, it is necessary to undertake a causal analysis based on a rigorous methodology
that makes it possible to determine the causal links between the instruments and (political
and investment) measures taken, the impacts and outcomes obtained, and their contribution
to the achievement of the objectives targeted. This causal analysis will assist in achieving
both a more realistic prioritisation of investment programmes and projects, and in designing a
more effective implementation strategy and processes.

1.3.3 Lack of politically accepted and technically justified priorities: The need for
visibility, rationality and setting of priorities for medium and long-term regional and continental
infrastructure development is clearly evident. This appears in all the resolutions and
statements of African decision-makers, and it echoes the view expressed by the community of
7
Africa’s development partners . PIDA will be an extensively consultative and participative
process in developing a strategic framework for regional and continental infrastructure
development in Africa, on the basis of which programmes and projects can be prioritised in a
consensual manner.

7
In Monterrey, in March 2002, the industrialised and developing countries agreed on the
importance of infrastructure for sustainable growth, poverty eradication and job creation. They
also highlighted both public and private investment requirements. The issue of continental
priorities has been raised ever since the G8 made the commitment to support increased
investments in the four infrastructure sectors, and to ensure efficient allocation of resources that
is consistent with the objectives.

3
Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) – Concept Note

1.3.4 Poor implementation is an observation widely shared by stakeholders and

observers of infrastructure development in Africa. The reviews on the implementation of the
STAP highlight the slow pace and weaknesses in the implementation of the STAP projects.
The reviews also analyzed the reasons. It is important to utilise these analyses and to give
preference to political convergence, consensus and ownership of undisputed priority
measures and projects, further upstream. It is also necessary to determine the resource
mobilization, incentives and monitoring mechanisms and processes, which increase the
likelihood of more efficient implementation. Improving implementation is therefore another
major challenge that PIDA will address.

2. Programme Objectives and Scope

2.1 Programme Objectives

2.1.1 The objectives of PIDA are to enable African decision-makers to:

Establish a strategic framework for the development of regional and continental
infrastructure (Energy, Transport, Information and Communication Technologies (ICT)
and Transboundary Water Resources) based on a development vision, strategic
objectives and sector policies;
Establish an infrastructure investment programme (short, medium and long term)
around priorities established by the RECs; and
Prepare an implementation strategy and processes including, in particular, a priority
action plan.

2.1.2 Thus, a number of studies will be conducted with the aim of providing African
decision-makers with analytical and decision-making tools for the formulation of strategy,
priority infrastructure development programmes, and related implementation strategies and
processes.

2.2 Programme Scope

2.2.1 The Programme covers transport (air, sea, river and lake, lagoon, rail and road),
energy (electricity, gas, petroleum products and renewable energy), ICT, and transboundary
water resources (primarily irrigation, hydropower, and lake and rivers transport), and deals
with the regional and continental aspects of these sectors. All national aspects (including,
without exception, physical infrastructure, national policies, institutional and regulatory
frameworks, technical standards and benchmarks) will only be considered if they have an
impact on, or could be affected by, the regional and continental aspects. The timeframe under
consideration is up to 2030, and is phased as follows: 2010-2015 for the short-term and
priority action plan, 2016-2020 for the medium-term, and 2021-2030 for the long-term.

2.2.2 Defining the “strategic framework” will involve:

Defining a vision for the development of regional and continental infrastructure that
combines a vision of African regional integration with longer term projections of key
macro economic, social and environmental indicators.

Within that vision developing strategic objectives for developing regional and continental
infrastructure in Africa.

Indentifying the major challenges of all kinds to the development of regional and
continental infrastructure, and current sector policies.

Developing a strategic framework in the context of the above, on the basis of which
programmes and projects can be prioritized, and implementation constraints can be
addressed.

2.2.3 Defining the prioritized and phased infrastructure development programme.

The strategic framework will be used to develop a prioritised infrastructure development
programme grouped into three timeframes: short-term: 2010-2015; medium-term: 2016-2020

4
Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) – Concept Note

and long-term: 2021-2030. The programme will comprise both physical infrastructure projects
together with associated soft interventions without which the projects will not be successful,
such as the harmonisation of regulatory and administrative procedures. The projects can
involve the extension or improvement of existing infrastructure; they can also involve the
creation of new infrastructure. The programme will be prioritized to the extent that the priority
level of the projects composing it will be subject to at least a preliminary evaluation in relation
to the objectives that they are expected to help achieve, and assessments of the realism of
implementation within the indicated timescale. These assessments should help to determine
the relative importance of the expected project impacts and highlight possible constraints and
conflicting objectives. The final size of the overall programme for the three timeframes will
also be determined by assessments of the the most realistic (and prudent) assumptions for
the levels of financial resources that will be available for such projects and programmes.
Prioritization is essential, so that efforts can be focused on a realistic core of projects and help
to build consensus among all stakeholders (including financing partners) around that core.

2.2.4 The implementation strategy and processes: The successful implementation of

the infrastructure development programme will depend on building a consensus among
political stakeholders around a realistic platform of measures and projects. The PIDA will
involve the development of priority measures, resources and tools, which together are
referred to as the 'implementation strategy and process’, to support the successful
implementation of PIDA, including:

a. Consensus-building around a Priority Action Plan: The Priority Action Plan is

intended to cover the physical investment programmes, as well as the different types
of supporting measures for successful implementation (political, institutional,
regulatory, financial, administrative, etc.). Its aim is to replace the STAP with a roll-
over plan of action, drawn up initially to cover the 2010-2015 period. The prioritization
criteria referred to earlier are to hamonize the strategic framework with the actions
aimed at achieving the strategic objectives, which should be consistent with sector
policies, taking into account the analyses of the major constraints on the development
of infrastructure. Building a consensus among policy decision-makers around this
Priority Action Plan and its management constitutes a key objective of PIDA.

b. Implementation support measures such as: the vast array of institutional

arrangements for regulatory and administrative processes, mechanisms and rules;
sources of finance, and mobilization of the private sector; relations with development
partners and with civil society. The approach adopted will, upon evaluation of the
existing situation, consist of seeking innovative ways of finding solutions to these
recurrent issues. The aim of PIDA is to inject more realism into the formulation of
implementation strategies and processes.

c. Implementation and monitoring process: This encompasses mechanisms and

tools to: (i) review and update over time the strategic framework and infrastructure
development programme; and (ii) actively manage the roll-over Priority Action Plan.
With respect to the action plan, this will mainly consist of knowing how to initiate and
complete an action, as well as how to monitor the progress of the action. This process
will include updating the present NEPAD Secretariat data base to the extent
necessary, and recommendations for institutional capacity building of continental and
regional entities (RECs and other regional institutions) responsible for monitoring,
coordinating and managing the implementation of the agreed measures and actions.
Implementation of the recommendations will be the direct responsibility of the entities
concerned, and will be carried out as interventions in the investment programme
rather than as part of the PIDA sector studies.

5
Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) – Concept Note

3. Programme Approach

3.1 The Programme is based on the following approaches:

a. Study and analysis activities: These activities will be carried out for the four
selected infrastructure sectors by the consultants supported by a Panel of Experts.
They will provide the main resources for the programme sponsors to work with
African decision-makers in the formulation of the strategic framework, infrastructure
development programme, and implementation strategies and processes.

b. Ownership process: This process, to be jointly managed by the AUC, NEPAD and
ADB, aims at ensuring ownership by the key regional and national stakeholders (in
particular the RECs) of the analyses, conclusions and recommendations of the
studies. This process is considered vital to the achievement of the objective of a
common strategy and a more effective development of the short, medium and long-
term infrastructure programme, and to ensuring some sustainability of the approach
used through the preparation of an implementation and monitoring/evaluation
mechanism.

3.1.1 Although these two approaches are closely linked in the implementation of the
Programme, the first is predominant in the initial stages of the Programme and is mainly
conducted by the Consultancy firms, while the second becomes essential during the later
phases of the Programme, and requires greater involvement of the programme sponsors.

3.2 Programme Structure

3.2.1 PIDA has four components

(i) Sector studies of the Energy, Transport, ICT, and Trans-boundary Water
Resources sectors, which is by far the largest component. Because of the national
and local nature of water supply and sanitation, they have not been included in the
scope of these studies. The Trans-boundary Water Resources sector will cover only
the regional and continental dimensions of irrigation, hydropower, and river and lake
transport.
(ii) Strategic support by a panel of experts: the programme sponsors will engage a
panel of high level experts to assist in developing a vision for the development of
regional and continental infrastructure in Africa, and in the identification of key issues
in each sector. The aim of this Panel is to supplement and complement the work of
the consultants undertaking the sector studies by providing a vision and high level
strategic framework for PIDA. The Panel will also provide high level peer review of
the consultants’ outputs at key points in their assignment to help identify any
essential issues that might have been overlooked or be a source of contention.
(iii) Design of database to support the process of implementation and monitoring:
although there is an existing monitoring mechanism (NEPAD’s NPMS), the
consultants undertaking the sector studies will review its adequacy, and any
additional design work that is considered to be necessary will be undertaken as a
separate assignment.
(iv) An Audit. This audit is a standard requirement for any operation carried out by ADB,
and will involve the preparation of an audit of expenditure by an independent audit
firm.

3.2.2 The sector studies are organized into four phases, represented in the diagrams
attached.

Phase I: Diagnosis and Analysis, which will:

(a) assess regional and continental policies, as well as institutional arrangements

and physical infrastructure programmes;

6
Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) – Concept Note

(b) develop outlooks for the future and analyze the key challenges, based on the
projected requirements.

Phase II: Formulation of draft strategic framework including sector policies,

infrastructure development programme, and implementation strategy and
processes. These draft outputs will be developed by the sector study consultants in
a consultative manner through a series of workshops with key stakeholders
(particularly at regional level).

Phase III: Summary and Recommendations: the finalisation of the strategic

framework, infrastructure development programme, and implementation strategy and
processes, shall be undertaken again in a consultative manner. The main purpose of
this phase is to strengthen consensus and ownership of the outputs of the study to
help ensure subsequent successful implementation.

Phase IV: Adoption of the outputs by the appropriate policy structures, in

accordance with the existing procedures of the African Union and NEPAD.

3.3 Key meetings of the Programme ownership process

3.3.1 Programme implementation will be punctuated by a set of meetings, which will serve
to guide the activities and the formulation of recommendations and conclusions. The
meetings, scheduled for key stages of the Programme, will be important opportunities for
incorporating the views and comments of all stakeholders.

a. Preliminary meetings with RECs.

PIDA sponsors have scheduled missions to each of the RECs prior to the
commencement of the consultancy services. The objectives of these visits is to
further inform, clarify and sensitize RECs about PIDA, discuss the key concrete
issues that PIDA should address for each REC, determine what would be the ‘value
added’ brought by PIDA in solving these issues, and reinforce coordination and
communication arrangements between the RECs and PIDA sponsors. The
conclusions of these visits will be discussed with the selected consultants and will be
used to finalize their work programme.

b. Validation workshop for basic assumptions (Phase I):

This workshop will be organized about 3 months after the commencement of the
consultants’ activities. Participants would include, inter alia, the RECs, the Panel of
experts, PIDA sponsors, and the consultants. Its main purpose will be to form a
common, long term social and economic vision, and a consensus on the
assumptions, parameters and methodology on the basis of which the consultants will
establish projections for regional and continental infrastructure development up to
2030. Inputs to this workshop would come from different sources: the consultants,
panel of experts, and PIDA sponsors, including the ADB Chief Economist.

c. Strategic sector workshops (Phase II): A series of workshops will be organized

with key stakeholders (especially the RECs and specialized AU Institutions/sector
organizations) to consult on the orientation of continental/regional policies, and on the
key ingredients required to develop the strategic framework, infrastructure
development programme, and implementation strategy and processes, based on the
consultants’ analyses in Phase I. The workshops will represent an important stage in
the process of ‘ownership by regional entities’.

d. High-level meetings (Phase III): In this phase, high-level meetings will be held
between the programme sponsors and other stakeholders, including the regional
players and development partners, to consult further on the draft strategic framework
and sector policies, the infrastructure development programme, and the
implementation strategy and processes developed in Phase II. At this stage, the
RECs should ensure the participation of their member states in order to extend
ownership to the national level. The outcome of these discussions will inform
preparation of the final reports.

7
Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) – Concept Note

3.3.2 It is proposed that each REC should designate a focal point to be responsible for
operational coordination with the programme sponsors and ensuring that agreed contributions
are provided within its community. In particular, the focal point will: (i) ensure that sector
experts in the REC are mobilized as agreed, and (ii) organize meetings and discussions
concerning its own region.

4. Organisation, Management and Monitoring

4.1.1 The governance structure of the Programme is based on a participatory approach
and involves, in particular, the AU Commission, the NEPAD Secretariat and the African
Development Bank, who are jointly the programme sponsors.

4.1.2 The governance structure hinges on the following principles:

 the desire to obtain results through efficient Programme management;
 participation of each key stakeholder in the governance organs.

4.1.3 The structure is represented in the diagram below:

Steering Committee

Deliverables

Technical Committee

Deliverables Progress
Reviews

Executing Agency

Project Management Team

4.1.4 The Steering Committee is the Programme orientation and ultimate approval organ.
It gives guidelines and determines the orientation to follow. Its role is to:
 provide general guidelines and ensure the coordination of activities;
 ensure coordination with related studies and facilitate such coordination;
 facilitate cooperation with national and regional institutions for information and
data collection;
 review, at key stages of the Programme, selected deliverables and make
comments on improving their quality and their relevance to regional economic,
financial and political issues;
 approve the final recommendations and deliverables of the studies before
moving on to the next stage and the implementation of the recommendations;

8
Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) – Concept Note

 give guidelines, where necessary, to the Programme management team on the

key policy and coordination aspects for the smooth conduct of the consultants’
study; and
 review any major changes in the scope of the services including termination of
consultants’ contracts.

4.1.5 The Steering Committee comprises representatives of the AUC, ADB, NEPAD
Secretariat, RECs and the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA). Other stakeholders, such
as development partners, may be invited as observers. It is chaired by the AUC. Secretariat
services for the Steering Committee will be provided by the Programme management team.

4.1.6 Upon completion of PIDA, the conclusions of the Steering Committee will be
submitted to the African Union and NEPAD authorities for endorsement and adoption (Phase
IV).

4.1.7 The Technical Committee is a quality control organ. It comprises experts from the
AUC, NEPAD Secretariat, ADB, ECA and resource persons from the specialized regional and
international institutions. It is a technical group, and will also be responsible for preparing the
meetings of the Steering Committee. Consequently, the Committee is responsible for:
 Regular review of the status of Programme implementation;
 Review of the consultants’ reports and validation of the technical benchmarks of
the sector studies;
 Reporting and making of proposals to the Steering Committee;
 Execution of any other task at the request of the Steering Committee, as may be
necessary, during the Programme.

4.1.8 The Technical Committee is chaired by the ADB. The Secretariat services for the
Technical Committee will be provided by the Programme management team.

4.1.9 The Executing Agency is the ADB, and is the institution responsible for the
contractual, financial and administrative management of PIDA. It is responsible in particular,
for procurement procedures, in conformity with its existing regulations, budget management
and disbursements.

4.1.10 The Programme management team: The Bank as the Executing Agency, shall be
responsible for the execution and output of the study, and shall set up a project management
team. The NEPAD Division Manager of the NEPAD, Regional Integration and Trade
Department of ADB shall head the Project Management Team, which will undertake the
technical and administrative management of the Programme. Other members of the project
management team shall comprise of a programme co-ordinator and four sector experts
appointed by the ADB and counterpart sector experts appointed by the AUC/NEPAD
Secretariat, a procurement officer assisted by support staff for the day-to-day management of
the Study. The NEPAD Division Manager of the ADB shall serve as a contact point for the
Consultants during the Study execution and will co-ordinate all study execution issues with
the programme sponsors.

4.1.11 The specific responsibilities of the programme management team are:

 supervising the Consultant(s) and Panel of Experts;
 communicating the status of PIDA implementation;
 coordinating the various activities;
 submitting consultants’ reports to the Technical Committee, and receiving its
feedback;
 providing secretarial services to the Steering and Technical Committees.

4.1.12 The effectiveness of the project management team is critical to the successful
completion of PIDA. The project management team will play a pivotal role, particularly in
ensuring that the work of the consultants proceeds smoothly and in accordance with the aims

9
Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) – Concept Note

of the programme sponsors. A key role will also be played by the project management team
in ensuring effective consultation with key stakeholders, and the full leveraging of the internal
resources of the programme sponsors into PIDA. More generally, the project management
team will take all appropriate measures to ensure the smooth and timely implementation of
PIDA.

5. Stakeholders

5.1 Key stakeholders

5.1.1 The key stakeholders in PIDA, and their main expectations from PIDA, are:

African Heads of State: who want to have a strategic vision of regional integration in
Africa, and how regional and continental infrastructure can contribute to the
implementation of this vision to boost economic and social development.

Programme sponsors (i.e. AUC, NEPAD and ADB): who want a strategic framework
that will provide a solid base for prioritising, harmonising and implementing effective
regional and continental infrastructure projects and programmes.

RECs: who want to have implementable regional projects and programmes that will
secure buy-in from their member states, and will contribute to the economic and social
development of their region.

AU specialized institutions and other sector organizations: which were formed to

give advice on issues such as policy formulation, strategy and programming.

Development partners: who want soundly prepared and articulated projects and
programmes, that have been prioritised on rational criteria, and have the necessary
political support for speedy implementation.

5.2 Specific role of the RECs

5.2.1 PIDA will be implemented by the RECs working closely with their member states.
RECs are therefore the lynchpins in implementation, being responsible for both overall
implementation, and securing the cooperation of member states. PIDA has therefore been
designed to ensure the fullest participation of the RECs as key stakeholders.

5.2.2 The RECs will be grouped into five geographical regions as indicated below. The
RECs of each region will agree on the mechanisms for coordinating their participation in the
study.

Region REC
North Africa: UMA, CEN-SAD
West Africa ECOWAS, (WAEMU),
CEN-SAD
Central Africa ECCAS, (CEMAC)
East Africa COMESA, EAC, IGAD
Southern Africa COMESA, SADC

5.2.3. The RECs will be responsible, in the context of the sector studies, for liaising with
their member States; and working with the specialized institutions/sector organizations,
development partners/finance institutions; and other bodies and enterprises that might be
involved in implementation, as regards:
 Consultations and collection of information;
 Their participation in policy and programme formulation meetings and
workshops; and
 The formulation of monitoring mechanisms.

10
Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) – Concept Note

Annex 1

STRATEGY AND PROGRAMME FOR INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA

ANALYSIS OF LIMITING FACTORS

METHODOLOGICAL OUTLINE

1. An important aspect of the work of the Consultant undertaking the sector studies is to
examine the causal analysis of delays and failures in past regional programmes and projects
in Africa. The Consultant is expected to develop an analytical framework for analyzing limiting
factors which might include:

A breakdown of the general objectives into more detailed sub-objectives, to which, as

much as possible, measurable and quantifiable indicators could be associated

The development of a logical framework highlighting the causal relations between

the measures, initiatives and other actions undertaken (‘instruments’) at the national,
regional and continental levels, their outcomes and the contribution of these tools to
the policy objectives and sub-objectives

A classification of the policy implementation instruments according to their

nature (for example: institutional and regulatory instruments, tariff instruments,
investment and financing measures) and their level of utilization (nationally, regionally
and continentally)

An analytical methodology that permits: (i) identification of the factors that limit
achievement of the policy objectives; (ii) assess, to the greatest extent possible, the
relative bearing of such factors on the achievement of the policy objectives; and (iii)
determine the mechanisms through which the factors operated.

2. The Consultant will need to consider two distinct levels of analysis:

a. The statement concerning the level of achievement of policy objectives. The
analytical framework should specify (i) the manner in which the level of achievement
of each of the policy objectives will be assessed (econometric methods and other
analytical approaches); (ii) the indicators used for the evaluation; and (iii) the
sources of information and documentation that will be used. In order to facilitate
comparative analysis and maintain consistency, selected indicators will also be used
in the projection and the establishment of the outlook for the future that is also to be
undertaken by the Consultant.
b. Causal Analysis. This level of analysis will concern the reasons and factors (‘the
constraints’) which limited the level of achievement of the policy objectives. The
analytical framework will describe the manner in which the causal analysis will be
carried out. The framework will essentially describe, for each policy objective, the
areas to be covered by the evaluation. For example, for purely illustrative purposes,
concerning the objective of improved efficiency of regional and continental
infrastructure and related services, an aspect of the evaluation will certainly be that
of regional institutional issues such as:
 The role of RECs and other regional organizations in the formulation of
regional programmes, their implementation and the resolution of problems
encountered in the decision-making and implementation process
 The different evaluation criteria and instruments used in the prioritization of
projects by the RECs and other regional and continental entities and their
consistency
 The basic principles underpinning the planning, design, rehabilitation and
maintenance of regional infrastructure networks as well as the different

11
Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) – Concept Note

economic and technical analytical tools used by the RECs and other
regional and continental organizations
 The availability of financing and the role of funding agencies in the decision-
making process.

12
Programme for Infrastructure Development in Africa (PIDA) – Concept Note
_________________________________________________________________________

Phase I: Diagnosis and Analysis

Activity Study Stages
Objectives

Summary of Phase
Status of regional and continental policies
Policies Inception
Analysis of development of projects/programmes Report I
Programmes Inception Summary
Report prospects
Identification of
Definition of
Development trends
Work prospects Program
Inception Assumptions and outlines
of Prospects note Macro analysis of
Parameters
challenges
Methodology

Ownership Technical
Committtee
Process + RECs
International
Experts

Review
Technical Technical
Process Committee Commitee

Approval
Steering
Process Committee
6
Programme Concept Note

Phase II: Formulation of Strategic Framework, Infrastructure Development

Programmes, and Implementation Strategy & Processes 1/2
Activity Study Stages
Objectives
Phase I
Policy Report Preparation:
• Conclusion of reviews Work Notes
Summary of • Conclusion need per region
Prospects projections Policy
Program Proposals
Programs Outline • Program outline

4 Sector workshops:
• Regional and Workshop
Ownership continental Policy Reports
Process proposals
• Programme
orientations

Review Technical
Committee
Process
International
Experts

Page 14
Programme Concept Note

Phase II: Formulation of Strategic Framework, Infrastructure Development

Programmes, and Implementation Strategy & Processes 2/2
Activity Study Stages
Objectives
• Additional Analysis
Strategy • Formulation Draft Strategy
• Implementation strategies

• Consistency of programmes
Programs with objectives Draft programs
• Implementation aspects

Implemenation • Preparation of
Recommendations concerning Recommendations
Strategy Implementation mechanism

Workshop
reports

Review Technical
Committeee
Process
International
Experts

Page 15
Programme Concept Note

Phase III: Summary and Recommendations

Activity Study Stages

Objectives
Strategy Srategy Draft

Sector
report
• Preparation of
Programs Program Draft reports
• Synthesis report
Synthesis
report

Implementation Implementation
Strategy Draft

• High level
Ownershhip meetings for
consensus
Process building

Review Technical
Process Committee

Approval Steering
Process Committee
9

Page 16
Programme Concept Note

Adoption by African Political Organs

Stages of adoption

Sector
Reports
Intermediary Union
Adoption Process Conference
Synthesis
Reports

27

Page 17