Indonesia: Capital Market Development Program Cluster (Subprograms 1 and 2)

In the aftermath of the 1997–1998 Asian financial crisis, Indonesia undertook reforms including strengthening the banking sector. However, to return economic growth to pre-crisis levels, higher levels of investment were needed, particularly in infrastructure. Developing capital markets offered an opportunity to reinvigorate growth through more efficient financial intermediation.

Uzbekistan: Second Small and Microfinance Development Project

This project performance evaluation report assesses the Second Small and Microfinance Development Project in Uzbekistan that provided intermediary loans of $50 million to three commercial banks (Hamkorbank, Ipak Yuli Bank, and Agrobank) for onlending to micro and small enterprises (MSE) in Uzbekistan. The project was approved in April 2010 and completed in December 2013.

Lao People’s Democratic Republic and Viet Nam: Greater Mekong Subregion: Sustainable Tourism Development Project

Tourism’s contribution to the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS) economy had increased significantly, creating opportunities for economic growth and poverty reduction. However, unmanaged and rapid tourism growth led to tourism concentration and generated undesirable social impacts. In addition, the new transport corridors had not been utilized for tourism purposes.

Tuvalu: Strengthened Fiscal Sustainability Program

In 2012, the government, supported by its development partners, embarked on a comprehensive reform program to improve the fiscal outlook, ensure prudent fiscal management, and prevent the accumulation of debt. A policy reform matrix (PRM) outlined the three phases of reform from 2012 to 2015, which targeted a sustainable fiscal framework through reform actions in six areas.

Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal—South Asia Subregional Economic Cooperation (SASEC): Trade Facilitation Program

In November 2012, the ADB Board of Directors approved $47.67 million Asian Development Fund equivalent of policy-based loans and grants to Bangladesh ($21 million loan), Bhutan ($8.34 million loan, $3.33 million grant), and Nepal ($15 million grant) to support the $75 million SASEC trade facilitation program to improve cross-border trade operations of South Asia Subregional Economic Cooperation (SASEC) countries.

Viet Nam: Greater Mekong Subregion Kunming–Hai Phong Transport Corridor: Yen Vien–Lao Cai Railway Upgrading Project

The railway line in the Kunming–Hai Phong transport corridor is an important infrastructure element of the GMS north–south economic corridor. However, the railway line in the Kunming–Hai Phong transport corridor had been neglected because it lacked maintenance and investment and would not be able to meet the expected traffic demand. Equipment and system capacity still could not meet the demands of a market economy.

Viet Nam: Secondary Education Sector Development Program

The Government of Viet Nam initiated secondary education reforms to equip the labor force to take advantage of the opportunities offered by globalization, thereby increasing competitiveness while also ensuring inclusiveness. Consequently, the government sought financial and technical assistance from the Asian Development Bank to improve the quality and inclusiveness of the secondary education.

Nepal: Education Sector Program (Subprograms I–III)

The Education Sector Program comprising three distinct subprograms (I, II, and III) in a cluster aimed to improve schooling and human resource development in Nepal in a phased manner over 2007–2012. This was to be done through a wide range of policy interventions seeking to improve equity of access to education, improve quality, and enhance efficiency and institutional capacity.

Philippines: Governance in Justice Sector Reform Program

Two subprogram loans of $300 million were provided from Asian Development Bank’s (ADB) ordinary capital resources for this Program. The program loans reflected the development financing needs of the government, aiming to increase development and social spending, and produce economic gains through increased resources, efficient resource use, and greater accountability, resulting in higher quality of public service in the justice sector.