• The project ties in with Benin’s socio-economic development policy, which promotes the opening up of rural areas, particularly by supplying electric power to, and improving the living conditions of, the population. It meets the real needs of most rural dwellers who have no access to modern sources of power such as electricity. Given the available development potential, the project constitutes a choice instrument for the Bank and the country for curbing poverty and providing impetus to the socio-economic development of the localities and surrounding areas concerned.

• Due to certain technical choices that are not necessarily the most appropriate, the project partially—but didn’t fully appropriately re??? To the needs—met the needs of the low-income rural population. In fact, the choice of the 30-35 kV voltage grid which is more appropriate for rural areas, instead of the 20 kV voltage grid widely used by the project, would have been better. In addition, the project did not envisage the supply of single-phase MV power lines for small areas with predictably low economic development. This would have lowered the investment cost per domestic customer and speeded up their electrification.

• While it is true that project outputs and their quality are deemed satisfactory, it should also be underscored that improved access to electricity for the population of electrified rural centres, albeit satisfactory, could be further sustained. This relative under-utilization of the development potential provided by the project is due essentially to: (i) the late start of connection works executed under public contracts by SBEE; (ii) SBEE’s difficulties in coping with subscription applications, such that several applicant customers who had paid for new connections, wait for their metres for several months; (iii) connection costs not affordable to the rural population; and (iv) billing procedures.

• Group discussions with key beneficiaries have revealed that electrification has had a positive impact on all areas of rural life and has contributed to improving the living conditions of the population of electrified rural centres. Such impact may be further sustained by increasing the rate of connection to the electricity network, both for domestic and tertiary sector customers, as well as enhancing the utilization of electricity for productive activities. The project’s impact on the living conditions of the population still falls short of playing a catalytic role in developing the localities concerned and contributing significantly to reducing poverty in such areas.

• Hence, evaluation confirms the need to plan rural electrification simultaneously with attendant measures, thereby maximizing its indirect impact. The sustainability of project outcomes is unsatisfactory due to difficulties facing SBEE and low-income communes with respect to street lighting. In light of all appraisal criteria, overall project performance is deemed satisfactory.

• Real political willingness translated by the funding of rural electrification underlies the successful implementation of this type of project, which helps to meet the need for maintaining socio-political equilibria and ensuring balanced development nationwide.

• Rural electrification can only be effective when attended by measures that help to improve access to, and use of electricity, with a view to boosting local social and economic development.

• The productive utilization of electricity that helps to maximize its impact, requires actions that will likely improve the utilization and knowledge of the benefits of electrical appliances, and provide small businesses with the financial resources to procure electrical tools.

• The control of clandestine electrical connections can be achieved through collective electricity metres and pre-paid meters, and especially through the extension of networks to enable a greater number of households to have access to electricity.

Recommendation(s) to the Borrower:

• Formulation of a Rural Electrification Master Plan: The Government should formulate an Electrification Master Plan for the country, which is indispensable in establishing criteria for selecting localities, prioritizing and programming rural electrification projects. 

• Impact Maximization: The Government should maximize the indirect impact of electrification by improving its utilization, quantitative and qualitative accessibility, with a view to boosting all economic and social development sectors and human activities geared towards improving the living conditions of the rural population. ABERME could ensure impact maximization by adopting the following attendant measures.

• Financing of Investment Costs by the State: The Government should defray investment costs related to the development of rural electrification under FNER or as part of other capital investment grants to SBEE.

• Financing of Recurrent Electrification Costs: The Government should envisage appropriate recurrent cost-sharing between the various partners (national authorities and public operators) under rural electrification projects. To that end, the Government should conduct a study to identify the method of financing recurrent electrification costs in low-income local district authorities.

• Attendant Measures: The impetus to create economic activities in some localities may be further sustained by adopting attendant measures that will help to make the best of the potential offered by the project, for instance the development of micro-finance services to enable small businesses to procure electrical machines and tools, vocational training services, sensitization campaigns focused on the benefits of electrical appliances with a view to increasing knowledge on the use of electrical machines, making subscription fees affordable to users, etc. These approaches should undergo prior small-scale testing.

• Containing the Development of Clandestine Networks (cobwebs). There are several possible solutions such as the one allowing families in the short term to get organized to manage a collective meter, or to use the meter belonging to one of the families to have access to the network without extra cost. In this case, SBEE may, in areas serviced by an MV network, delegate the installation and/or management of mini-electricity distribution systems to either private-owned companies or groups of users, without running any financial or technical risk. Other more effective actions involve: (i) initiating network extension projects with a view to enabling a greater number of households to have access to electricity and thereafter prohibiting the establishment of “cobwebs”; and (ii) proposing solutions anchored on the use of pre-paid meters. This cobweb phenomenon is naturally doomed to vanish in the medium term.

Recommendation(s) to the Executing Agency:

• Securing a Return on Investments: SBEE should at all cost secure a return on the investments made, by: (i) connecting as many subscribers as possible to the existing networks; (ii) improving the quality of electricity provided; (iii) adapting the tariff structure; and (iv) improving maintenance and collection services.

• Making Appropriate Technical Choices: SBEE should adopt the 30-35 kV voltage grid which is more suitable for rural areas than the 20 kV voltage grid, and provide for single-phase MV power lines for small localities with predictably low economic development, in a bid to lower the investment cost per domestic customer and speed up their electrification.

Recommendation(s) to the Bank:

• Improving Output Quality: The Bank should not encourage the execution of connection works on force account by the national electricity distribution company, in view of works execution timeframes and cost implications. An alternative would be to encourage outsourcing and development of sub-contracting SMEs.
• Impact Assessment: The Bank should lay more emphasis on the monitoring/evaluation of the most significant outcomes and impact of rural electrification and improvement of the living conditions of the populations, by combining participatory evaluation methods with socio-economic impact surveys. Such monitoring/evaluation should be conducted during the entire project cycle and beyond.
• Attendant Measures: The Bank should include support for the implementation of attendant measures in its rural electrification projects, with a view to maximizing the development outcomes of rural electrification projects (sensitization, education, vocational training and establishment of microcredit).

• Equality among Components: Equal attention should be paid to different project components at appraisal and implementation. The data processing component envisaged to strengthen SBEE’s customer management system was not properly assessed and implemented. The Bank should ensure that the composition of the appraisal team matches the project profile.