Explore the vast range of titles available.

This paper is organized as follows. In chapter two, Samson Bilangna and Marcellin Djeuwo from the Cameroon customs administration present the history and the outcomes of the performance measurement policy launched by their administra-tion: the General Directorate of Customs signed 'performance contracts' with the frontline customs officers in 2010 and with some importers in 2011. In chapter three, Jose-Maria Munoz, an anthropologist, offers a complementary view of the introduction of figures in the Cameroon tax administration. The fourth chapter ends the book's first part, which focuses on performance measurement. Xavier Pascual from the French customs administration describes the system implemented by his administration to measure the collective performance of customs units and bureaus. In chapter five, Anne-Marie Geourjon and Bertrand Laporte, who are both economists, and Ousmane Coundoul and Massene Gadiaga, who are from the Senegalese customs administration, present the use of data mining to select imports for inspection. This project is being developed in Senegal and embodies the concept of risk analysis. Sharing the same global aim to make controls more efficient, economists Gael Raballand and Guillermo Arenas from the World Bank and anthropologist Thomas Cantens from the World Customs Organization suggest, in chapter six, using mirror statistics to detect potentially fraudulent import flows. Mirror statistics calculate the gaps of foreign trade statistics between two trading partner countries. To conclude the second part on the integration of measurement in information systems, Soyoung Yang from the Korea Customs Service (KCS), in chapter eight, offers a case study on KCS's implementation of a single window system. With respect to risk analysis, the concept of single window is widespread in the trade and customs environments, but few concrete achievements have been presented and analyzed.

The report estimated that in the East Asia and Pacific (EAP) region alone about US$80 billion a year of additional investments would be required in low-emission projects (green investments), resulting in a significant financing challenge. The report argues that the solution lies in understanding the causes of the financial viability gap, and then investigating how specific actions, including strategic subsidies, concessional financing, and public policy interventions and reforms, can bridge this gap to make green investment transactions viable. The green infrastructure finance framework also underscores the benefits of valuing and monetizing carbon externalities. Moreover, it recognizes the effects of policy distortions and other negative factors that impinge on financial viability, emphasizing the need for an approach to analyze and explain the gap and to attribute its components to different stakeholders. This report shows that it is essential to measure global and local externality benefits against the causes of the viability gap such as perceptions of added risks, cost differentials, policy distortions, and other factors. Once these elements are fully considered, policy makers can identify practical ways to better structure the financing of green investment projects that can be supported by the market. Three key principals have guided the development of the framework: (i) targeting green finance resources on sectors that have large numbers of projects with low abatement costs; (ii) setting ceilings on the value of support that will be provided for a tone of greenhouse gas (GHG) abatement in any sector or project; and (iii) using competitive mechanisms to ensure that projects do not receive more support than needed to make them financially attractive. This report is the second of a continuing series of green infrastructure finance publications. The first part undertook a stocktaking of leading initiatives and literature related to the green infrastructure finance theme. This second part is a conceptual piece that bridges ideas and concepts between environmental economics and project finance practices. Work will continue over the next months by operationalizing this framework (analytical methodology and assessment of green infrastructure investment climate) through a pilot in a selected EAP developing country. Given a better understanding of the financing challenges of different green projects, work will also continue in developing more customized and innovative financing instruments that can be specifically tailored to address the requirements of these projects.