Debate on effective ADP implementation

There has always been a debate about implementation of Annual

Development Programme (ADP). Its slow implementation and the
irregularities involved give rise to such a debate. It is found that the
original ADP is revised and its size is squeezed.
Moreover, a new ADP is found to contain almost 80 per cent of its
projects

brought

forward

from

the

previous

Revised

Annual

Development Programme (RADP). The issue can be discussed from

different angles. Since the successive governments of Bangladesh have
long been pursuing the pro-poor growth strategy, the priorities of all the
development programmes are written almost in the same words. In
every development programme, one would find the chronological
priorities like macro-economic stability, rapid economic growth, creation
of employment opportunities, increasing the supply of electricity and
gas, human resource development, enhanced agriculture production,
ensuring health services and education for all, strengthening local
government institutions, development of rural infrastructure, sanitation
and supply of safe water, women's empowerment, control of crimes and
good governance. During this term of the present government, one more
priority has been added, namely, expansion and development of digital
information

and

communication

technology

(ICT).

Successful

implementation of the ADP would certainly play a pioneering role in

achieving the priorities set in the plan documents. The success, both in
quantitative and qualitative terms, depends on administrative and
financial efficiency of the agencies concerned. Unfortunately, thorough
studies are not made to see how far the priorities have been fulfilled.

Every year the ADP is revised. It is a legacy. The original ADP for the
fiscal year (FY) 2012-13 had an outlay of Tk 550 billion (55,000 crore).
Last week the Executive Committee of National Economic Council
(ECNEC) revised it and reduced its size to Tk 523.66 billion (52,366
crore). A proposal was there to lower it to Tk 503.66 billion (50,366
crore). But in view of the ensuing general election the ECNEC did not
go for a large cut. While the resources decreased, the number of projects
increased to 1,190 in the RADP from 1,033 in the original ADP.
Generally it happens due to political consideration. There is also a list
of 600 unapproved projects without allocation. These projects have been
listed to appease the public representatives. 35
There has been a drastic cut in project aid implying inability of the
concerned ministries and agencies to utilise donor money. The allocation
of project aid and local money has declined by 14 per cent and 4.5 per
cent respectively. This is also reflected in the Japanese Debt
Cancellation Fund (JDCF). It is a fund of interests on Japanese loans
which Japan gives back as donation. The ministries and agencies have
the incapacity to utilise this fund. Interestingly enough, allocation from
the JDCF has been reduced from Tk 13.38 billion (1,338 crore) to Tk
7.89 billion for the FY 2012-13. Although, agriculture and health sectors
deserve priority, the allocations are only 5.5 per cent and 7.9 per cent of
the total ADP outlay respectively. Moreover, attention has not been
given to the regional disparity and to 15 million downtrodden people
living in char (reclaimed land) and coastal areas.
Only Tk 170 million (17 crore) has been earmarked in the RADP for
such special areas. A list of 26 projects under the Public Private
Partnership (PPP) initiative has been included in the RADP with no

allocation. Successive ADPs over the last four years were aimed at
launching projects under the PPP without success.
So far as implementation of ADP is concerned, the Planning
Commission was satisfied with the project execution performance of 44
per cent during the period of July 2012-February 2013, which was 6.0
per cent higher than the performance in the corresponding period of the
FY 2011-12. A total of 23 ministries and divisions recorded the
implementation progress ranging from 44 to 61 per cent, 16 ministries
and divisions saw it within the range of 30-43 per cent and 10
ministries and divisions 21 to 28 per cent. The remaining four
ministries and divisions saw it within the range of 4-17 per cent. The
worst performers were the Ministry of Foreign Affairs with 4.0 per cent
and the Bridge Division 10 per cent.
ADP implementation in Bangladesh has always been criticised over the
years. Data show a trend where, with some exceptions, the
implementation of revised ADPs has been found to be around 90 per
cent. The exceptions were: 104 per cent for the FY 1977-78, 100 per cent
for 1980-81, 101 per cent for 1988-89, 112 per cent for 1989-90 and 100
per cent for 1999-2000. Only in the FY 1988-89, utilisation of the
original ADP outlay was 100 per cent.
Still many projects were found to have seen time and cost overrun. A
meticulous observation makes evident the problems with effective
implementation of development projects in Bangladesh. The problems
are there at four stages: (i) preparation and approval of projects, (ii)
their inclusion in the ADP, (iii) problems during project implementation,
and (iv) the post-implementation problems.

The problems at the first stage include an ad-hoc approach, prompting

completion of work hurriedly, poor knowledge about resources and
disregard for time limit of project preparation. At the inclusion stage,
many projects are hurriedly considered, for which the36 financial
implication and consistency with national development objectives are
ignored.
So, many projects cannot be completed in time. Several common
problems are there at the implementation stage. Acquisition of land
takes time. It may even take two/three years. Full-time and experienced
project directors are not appointed timely. Even if appointed, they are
frequently transferred. The procurement of goods and services for the
project takes a long time. In cases of big procurements, it generally
takes two quarters (six months) for preparation of tender documents,
notification, acceptance, evaluation, approval, awarding of the job and
signing of contracts. These simply lead to time extension and escalation
of costs.
At the end of the fiscal year, therefore, there is a competition for
spending the allocated money when the formalities are not followed
properly. This leads to irregularities and corruption. Moreover, it is
mandatory to surrender the unspent money to the treasury at the end
of the financial year, but the agencies usually fail to do so.
After implementation of projects, the main problem lies with the
maintenance work. As a result, buildings, roads, bridges and culverts
constructed under development projects become risky or unusable after
some time. Also, the infrastructure built under development projects
remains unutilised for a long time. This happens usually in the case of
hospitals and educational institutions.

Who is to blame for such anomalies? Certainly, they are the ministries
and agencies involved in preparation, implementation and monitoring of
development projects and, more importantly, the people behind them.