Speech at the Opening Ceremony of the Seminar on Evaluating the

Impact of Projects and Programs (script)

Wang Guoliang, Deputy Director, State Council Leading Group Office of Poverty Alleviation and
Development

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Good morning! First, on behalf of State Council Leading Group Office of Poverty Alleviation

and Development, I want to give our welcome to all the delegate, experts and scholars coming

today.

The seminar is one of the important collaborations between IPRCC and the World Bank

Institute (WBI) and a second of the IDF Grant activities following the first one in November 1-8

last year. We found that the composition of the trainees has shifted from a focus on experts and

scholars to the involvement of practitioners. The participants include our colleagues from 19

provinces (autonomous regions) which means monitoring and evaluation has been more and more

a focus of local poverty reduction institutions. Economic and social growth along with the

progress in poverty reduction have raised the importance of poverty monitoring and evaluation. It

cant be denied that the achievements made in poverty reduction is closely related to M&E. M&E

is a basis for the formulation of poverty reduction policies. We set the poverty measures in rural

China in accordance to the pragmatic data we got from monitoring. We adjusted the coverage of

key counties and key villages assisted by the government for three times to keep our target on the

poorest of the poor and the poorest areas to direct our human, material and financial resources.

Over the past decades of development, a poverty statistic system with Chinese characteristics has

come into place. The system has four components: First is sample surveys on 68000 rural

households nationwide to infer the poor population in China and each province, which is

conduced by National Bureau of Statistics (NBS); Second is sample surveys on 592 poor counties

for key national assistance to do poverty monitoring and project impact evaluations which can
reflect the change of poor in its magnitude and symptoms and further help assess the impact of

poverty reduction projects and policies on the poor areas and people. The surveys are conducted

by LGOP and NBS. Impact evaluation of a portion of projects are jointly conducted by FCPMC

and NBS; Third is surveys on data at county, prefecture and village levels to come up with

background information on regional development which is conducted solely by NBS; Fourth is

monitoring and evaluation on village based development strategy. That is to measure the result in

one village from each of the 592 key poor counties so as to infer the result of village-based

development in the 592 counties. The evaluation is conducted solely by LGOP. The four

components are playing an important role in economic grow and poverty reduction in China.

Additionally they can serve as a solid foundation for the formulation and promulgation of rural

policies in China. But there is still gaps between the present monitoring system and the demands.

We have to improve it to address the following limitations: First is the insufficient coverage of

poverty monitoring and evaluation. There are 2400 counties and similar units, 70 administrative

villages and 900 million farmers in China, but even the most authoritative monitoring covered no

more than 68000 households and 592 key counties. It is doubtful that the survey can reflect the

real situation in such a densely-populated and largely poor country. Second, the methodologies

adopted by the system are far from advanced and indicators far from comprehensive. Some

indicators are even unreasonable and disputable with one another. For example, there is no

nationwide unified indicator for annual net income of farmers. Third, the monitoring and

evaluation system at all levels of governments are disintegrated with more disputes of data at

lower levels. Fourth, the results of monitoring and evaluation have not been fully analyzed or

utilized. An abundance of data related to poverty are secured in different government agencies like

the Ministry of Health, Education, Family Planning, Civil Affairs and Labor and Social Security,

but these data overlap or dispute with one another. Here I give you some example: Government
agencies give different figures of rural population in China; the numbers of arable land in China

may have a 2 -3 time gap in between; the rates of primary enrollment, dropout and completion do

not match the local reality, which indicates overlapping and omission in collecting data; LGOP,

NBS and China Disabled Persons Association conclude with different population of the disabled

in China.

The new problems challenge us. To file the information of the poor in rural China is

unprecedented over the past three decades. It helps focus the poverty reduction policies, funds and

resources to the poor. But problems also arose. First, the number of poor is too huge. In the

practice of filing poor information, the actual number of poor is 30% higher than the official

publication; Second, fluctuations happen to the number of poor. The poor is a dynamic

community. There are a lot of poor out and back to poverty each year. And the fluctuation is

worsened if adding the newly born poor. Third, the cost is too high. Taking Yunnan and Guizhou

Provinces as an example. It costs 30RMB to file the information of a poor household. You can

imagine the expense on 20 million poor people at various levels of governments. It requires

further study to make the work sustainable.

In conclusion, I thank the World Bank Institute for their second cooperation with IPRCC. My

thanks also go to the co-host of this seminar: FCPMC, Jiangxi PADO and GTZ. I hope the seminar

can serve as a window through which we can learn from world advanced knowledge in terms of

poverty monitoring and evaluation. Besides, I welcome you recommendations to further the

development of poverty reduction in China.

Wish the seminar a complete success!

Thank you!