Performance Evaluation Report
Independent Evaluation Department
Reference Number: PPE:FIJ 2011-62Project Number: 32525Loan Number: 1902December 2011
Fiji: Fiji Ports Development Project
CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS
Currency Unit – Fiji dollar (F$)
At Appraisal At Project CompletionAt Independent Evaluation
(15 November 2001) (15 June 2006) (4 November 2011)F$1.00 = US$0.4395 US$0.56785 US$0.56180US$1.00
= F$2.2753 F$1.76103 F$1.77999
ABBREVIATIONS
ADB – Asian Development BankDMF – design and monitoring frameworkEIRR – economic internal rate of returnFIRR – financial internal rate of returnFPCL – Fiji Ports Corporation LimitedGRT – gross registered tonnageIEM – independent evaluation missionm – meter MPAF – Maritime and Ports Authority of FijiNPV – net present valuePCR – project completion reportPPER – project performance evaluation reportPSC – port service chargePTL – Ports Terminal LimitedRRP – report and recommendation of the Presidentt – tonTA – technical assistanceTEU – twenty-foot equivalent unit
NOTE
In this report, “$” refers to US dollars, unless otherwise stated.In preparing any evaluation report, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Independent Evaluation Department does notintend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area.
Director General
V. Thomas, Independent Evaluation Department (IED)
Director
H. Hettige, Independent Evaluation Division 2, IED
Team Leader
M. Gatti, Senior Evaluation Specialist, IED
Team Members
F. De Guzman, Evaluation Officer,
IED
R. Isidro-Cajilig, Evaluation Assistant, IED
Indeendent Evaluation Deartment PE-751Key Words
asian development bank, development effectiveness, fiji, lautoka, lessons, performanceevaluation, port, ports development, suva, transport
CONTENTS
BASIC DATA i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iii MAPS vii I. INTRODUCTION 1 A. Evaluation Purpose and Process 1B. Project Objectives 1 II. DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION 3 A. Formulation 3B. Rationale 3C. Cost, Financing, and Executing Arrangements 4D. Procurement, Construction, and Scheduling 5E. Design Changes 6F. Outputs 7G. Consultants 7H. Loan Covenants 7I. Policy Setting 8 III. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT 9 A. Overall Assessment 9B. Relevance 9C. Effectiveness 10D. Efficiency 13E. Sustainability 14 IV. OTHER ASSESSMENTS 16 A. Impact 16B. ADB Performance 17C. Borrower Performance 17 V. ISSUES, LESSONS, AND FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS 17 A. Issues 17B. Lessons 18C. Follow-Up Actions 19 The guidelines formally adopted by the Independent Evaluation Department (IED) on avoidingconflict of interest in its independent evaluation were observed in the preparation of this report.The fieldwork was undertaken by Franklin De Guzman (IED), Joselito Supangco, and Moti Lal Autar (staff consultants) under the guidance of the mission leader. To the knowledge of themanagement of IED, there were no conflicts of interest of the persons preparing, reviewing, or approving this report.
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
More From This User
Notes
Load more
