There is limited evidence-based data on income-generating interventions, both within thehumanitarian and the development field. Nevertheless, there is a growing and unavoidable nexus between the two fields, and therefore also, within their methodologies for measuring project intervention results, as well as their success rates. The challenge in many cases,however, is finding a measuring system which does not only account for a project’s expenditures, but can also tell something about a project’s effectiveness, which can then be compared to similar intervention’s results, and applied in future endeavors. Hence, this study analyzes the economic effectiveness of an Income Generating Activity (IGA) project in rural Guatemala as a case study, using an Economic Rate of Return (ERR) as the basis of measurement, which is acquired using a cost-benefit analysis (CBA). The study draws on the various viewpoints of scholars on the subject, taking into account different Monitoring and Evaluation (M & E) practices, particularly in the manners carried out by the United Nations and the World Bank, as they have long histories of M & E practices in the field. It especially lays emphasis on the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF), which is a tool which is often used within humanitarian work as well as in development to determine possible economic opportunities in communities. Although the study aims at IGA programs in the humanitarian sector, data within development projects is also explored in this thesis, because longer timeframes within development, allow for more careful study of long-term results, which is usually a requirement for the evaluation of livelihood. Results within the development sector allow for more careful study of results, and more certain conclusions than within the humanitarian sector, which due to its emergency settings, usually has a more difficult time collecting data.This study then makes an ex-ante analysis of the case study in question, which is a potential aquaponic fish tank project, with economic benefits, in the unattended, post-disaster settings of San Andrés Osuna, Guatemala, following the eruption of the Volcan de Fuego, in 2018. The study reveals that the project has a potential ERR of 280 percent, compared to other WorldBank projects which tend to have an ERR ranging between 15 and 25 percent. Nevertheless, other projects which have also been explored by this study, also offer results ranging ERRs of about 280 percent as well. Many times, projects utilize cost-efficiency analysis which make them more difficult tocompare and contrast to other projects than if they had used ERR results, to measure the projects’ success. This comparison of projects can help decision makers better allocate their resources to the most efficient income generating projects in the future, which can therefore better economic livelihoods of people in post-disaster settings. The World Bank has used this ERR as an indicator for their cost-benefit analyses for the past 70 years, but is increasingly utilizing it less and less, whilst other humanitarian and financial organizations, do not use it at all; making this a possible issue within the field.

This doctoral thesis focuses on the evaluation of the World Bank (WB) performance in delivering development aid to the Least Developed Countries (LDCs). For this purpose, an extensive research was performed to analyze a set of 790 Implementation Completion and Results reports for key economic and financial indicators. Results of this research provide various insights for the appraisal and the results stage of project delivery of the LDCs in different continents. In the final part of the economic and financial analysis the minimum Social Return on Investment (SROI) of the LDCs including all project costs was calculated. This SROI ratio outcome of 1 and 1.06 in the weighted and 1.3 and 1.72 in the unweighted case indicate that projects delivered by the WB have a positive effect on the poor countries. In the second part of this research project the data set of the ICR reports was qualitatively researched for negative ratings according to 3 core assessment categories for the overall project performance: Sustainability, bank performance and borrower performance. As a result the most critical categories respectively risks were outlined. In conclusion, the research analyses and findings support the general demand to provide even more development assistance to poor countries.:Table of Tables and Figures List of Equations List of Abbreviations 1 Introduction 1.1 Introduction to the Topic 1.2 Assessing Poverty Problems and Achieving Economic Growth 1.3 Millennium Development Goals 1.4 Development Aid 2 Research Approach 2.1 Objective 2.2 Structure 2.3 Least Developed Countries 2.4 World Bank 2.5 Data Access and Relevance 2.5.1 Data Basis 2.5.2 Implementation Completion and Results Reports 2.5.3 Project Types 2.6 Term “Performance” 2.7 Study and Research Questions 2.8 Challenges of this Doctoral Thesis 2.9 Contribution of this Thesis 3 Economic and Financial Analysis 3.1 SROI Concept 3.1.1 SROI Definition 3.1.2 SROI Process and Impact Map 3.1.3 Cost-Benefit-Analysis 3.1.4 SROI Calculation 3.2 SROI of World Bank Projects 3.2.1 Purpose of the Cost-Benefit-Analysis 3.2.2 Indicators of the SROI Calculation 3.2.2.1 Net Present Value 3.2.2.2 Capital and Recurring Costs 3.2.2.3 Project Dates and Duration 3.2.2.4 NPV-horizon 3.2.2.5 Discount Rate 3.2.3 Types of NPV-Cost-Ratios 3.2.3.1 Pro-Rata-Capital-Costs Ratio 3.2.3.2 Total-Capital-Costs Ratio 3.2.3.3 Pro-Rata-Capital plus Recurring-Costs Ratio 3.2.3.4 Total-Capital plus Recurring-Costs Ratio 3.2.4 Calculation of the proper SROI Ratio 3.2.5 Portfolio Analysis 3.2.6 Sensitivity Analysis 3.3 Additional Economic and Financial Indicators 3.3.1 Economic Rate of Return 3.3.2 Benefit-Cost-Ratio 3.3.3 Net Benefit 3.3.4 Financial Net Present Value 3.3.5 Financial Rate of Return 4 Results of the Economic and Financial Analysis 4.1 Analysis Approach and Setup 4.2 NPV Outcomes at the Appraisal Stage 4.2.1 Appraisal NPVs of the LDCs 4.2.2 Appraisal NPV Continent Comparison 4.3 NPV Outcomes of the Result Stage 4.3.1 Result NPVs of the LDCs 4.3.2 Result NPV Continent Comparison 4.4 Appraisal vs. Result NPVs 4.4.1 Results of the LDCs 4.4.2 Continent Comparison 4.5 Economic Rate of Return Result Values 4.5.1 Results of the LDCs 4.5.2 Continent Comparison 4.6 Additional Economic and Financial Indicator Result Values 4.6.1 Benefit-Cost-Ratio and Net Benefit 4.6.2 Financial Net Present Value and Financial Rate of Return 4.7 Overall Project Performance 4.7.1 Definition 4.7.2 Overall Project Performance Ratings 4.7.3 Outcome Calculation for Non-Financial Indicator Projects 4.7.4 Verification of Outcomes and Conclusion 4.8 NPV-Cost-Ratios and SROI Calculation 4.8.1 NPV-Cost-Ratios of the ICR Reports 4.8.1.1 Overall Results 4.8.1.2 Continent Comparison 4.8.2 Standardized NPV-Cost-Ratios 4.8.2.1 Overall Results 4.8.2.2 Continent Comparison 4.8.3 Calculating the Minimum SROI Ratio 4.8.3.1 Overall Results of the Capital SROI Ratio 4.8.3.2 Continental Comparison of the Capital SROI Ratio 4.8.3.3 Overall Results of the Minimum SROI Ratio 4.8.3.4 Continental Comparison of the Minimum SROI Ratio 4.8.4 Making Meaning of the Results 4.9 Summary and Conclusion 5 Qualitative Data Analysis 5.1 Content Analysis 5.2 Sustainability 5.2.1 Sustainability Rating Definition 5.2.2 Sustainability Rating Categories 5.3 Bank Performance 5.3.1 Bank Performance Definition 5.3.2 Bank Performance Categories 5.4 Borrower Performance 5.4.1 Borrower Performance Definition 5.4.2 Borrower Performance Categories 6 Results of the Qualitative Data Analysis 6.1 Sustainability 6.1.1 Quantitative Assessment of Sustainability Ratings 6.1.2 Outcome of the Content Analysis 6.1.2.1 Types of Reasons 6.1.2.2 Overall Results 6.1.2.3 Results in Haiti 6.1.2.4 Continent Comparison 6.1.3 Excursus: Positive NPV Projects 6.1.4 Summary and Conclusion 6.2 Bank Performance 6.2.1 Quantitative Assessment of Bank Performance Ratings 6.2.2 Outcome of the Content Analysis 6.2.2.1 Types of Reasons 6.2.2.2 Overall Results 6.2.2.3 Results in Haiti 6.2.2.4 Continent Comparison 6.2.3 Summary and Conclusion 6.3 Borrower Performance 6.3.1 Quantitative Assessment of Borrower Performance Ratings 6.3.2 Outcome of the Content Analysis 6.3.2.1 Types of Reasons 6.3.2.2 Overall Results 6.3.2.3 Results in Haiti 6.3.2.4 Continent Comparison 6.3.3 Summary and Conclusion 7 Overall Summary and Conclusion 8 Critical Acclaim and Recommendations 9 Outlook and Future Research List of Appendices Appendix References