Scoring data for Infrastructure projects funded by World Bank and Chinese financial institutions

This dataset pertains specifically to projects funded by various Chinese institutions, such as China Exim Bank, CBD (China development bank), within the geopolitical context of Sri Lanka. A total of 68 infrastructure projects are examined for the years starting from 2013 till 2020. The selection of the starting year is tied to the initiation of BRI in 2013 (Chatzky and Mcbride, 2020). The conclusion year is defined by the deadline of projects that remained unfinished at the time of the last data update. The projects are evaluated and ranked based on a rubric with a clear and structured framework. The rubric considers effectiveness, outcome, efficiency, and impact as key criteria, allowing for a more comprehensive assessment of each project's performance. Projects are ranked based on their overall scores, with the highest-scoring projects ranked at the top. To achieve a comprehensive analysis of infrastructure projects, our study includes a scoring rubric that benchmarks projects sponsored by the WB and Chinese financial institutions in Sri Lanka. There are five main criteria for evaluation: implementation duration, cost efficiency, economic impact, impact on the targeted population, and project opacity. Each criterion is scored using specific, well-defined metrics to provide comprehensive coverage. To ensure adherence to timelines, we measure the implementation duration by comparing the actual duration of the project against the approved schedule. The relationship between the actual expenditure and the initially approved budgets is an indication of cost and financial management efficiency. The investment-to-GDP ratio assesses the economic impact, demonstrating the benefits the project provides to the wider economy.
The targeted population reveals the impact, both positive and negative, and hence appropriately represents the social outcome. Finally, we judge project opacity based on criteria like allegations of bribery, the posting of audit reports, the accuracy of reported data, and the efficient utilization of funds. The chosen methodology aligns with the work done by Shields et al. (2003) and by Liu et al. (2021).