UKRAINE RAPID DAMAGE AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT AUGUST 2022 2 © August 2022, the World Bank, Government of Ukraine, European Commission. Disclaimer: The Ukraine Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment – August 2022 report was jointly prepared by the World Bank, the Government of Ukraine, and the European Commission. The report is based on data as of June 1, 2022, gathered in the timeframe between May 30 and July 30, 2022. The rapid assessment was produced in a short timeframe to ensure the relevance of the estimations and in-depth efforts have been made to improve the accuracy of the information that was collected, analyzed, and verified to the extent possible. Given the ongoing nature of the conflict and the lack of access in territories temporarily not under government control, the data collection is primarily remote-based but validated through ground-based information. The remotely sourced data have been triangulated and validated whenever possible against ground-based information obtained from the Government of Ukraine, local agencies, the United Nations, and other international partners. Given these constraints, the authors of the report cannot guarantee the absolute accuracy of the data included in this work. The report uses the exchange rate US$1 = UAH 27.28 from December 31, 2021. Boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information presented in this report do not imply any judgment on the part of the World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Design: Sarah Alameddine Editor: Anne Himmelfarb Photos: Julia Burlachenko; Ipsos, for the World Bank. Front cover photo: Kharkiv, by Ipsos.  UKRAINE RAPID DAMAGE AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT AUGUST 2022 2 10 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ACkNoWlEDGMENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Ukraine Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment (RDNA) was jointly prepared by the World Bank, the Government of Ukraine, and the European Commission, in coordination with government institutions, UN agencies and development partners, academia, civil society organizations, and the private sector. The RDNA core team consisted of government representatives, World Bank and European Commission staff and experts. On the part of the Government of Ukraine, the RDNA was led by the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development, with support from the Ministry for Reintegration of the Temporarily Occupied Territories and the Ministry of Infrastructure. All relevant line ministries have participated in the assessment, in coordination with the Kyiv School of Economics (KSE). The report benefited from the contribution of the European Commission led by the Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine and the Directorate-General for Neighborhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR), with contributions of other services. The World Bank’s technical support was provided by the World Bank’s Country Management Unit, the Global Practice of Urban, Resilience, and Land (GPURL), and other Global Practices and Cross-Cutting areas. This report benefited from the generous support of the United Kingdom Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office’s Good Governance Fund; the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR); the United States Government, including the State Department; Swiss Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO); and the Swiss Government through the Sustaining Health Sector Reforms in Ukraine Trust Fund, supported by the Swiss Development Cooperation. Multiple other partners contributed to the report’s content including the British Foreign Office, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations; the United Nations International Children’s Fund (UNICEF); the World Health Organization (WHO); the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR); and the International Organization for Migration (IOM). The full list of sectoral leads and contributors is included in Annex 1. The RDNA team would like to express its deep appreciation to all individuals and organizations who contributed to this assessment. FoREWoRD 11 FOREWORD 3 FOREWORD On February 24, 2022, the Russian Federation invaded Ukraine, resulting in civilian casualties, displacement of millions of people, and widespread and significant destruction to homes, businesses, social institutions, and productive and economic activity. The impact of the invasion will be felt for generations, with families displaced and separated, disruptions to human development, destruction of intrinsic cultural heritage and reversal of a positive economic and poverty trajectory. The Government of Ukraine, the World Bank Group and the European Commission in cooperation with development partners, launched a Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment (RDNA). Following an internationally accepted methodology, the RDNA aimed to assess the impact of the war on the population, human development, service delivery, physical assets, infrastructure, productive sectors and the economy. For the purpose of this assessment, damage from the war between February 24 and June 1, 2022, is included, verified to the extent possible, and assessed. The RDNA results are preliminary, and damage, losses and needs should be considered as minimums. As the war continues, the social and economic impact will further increase and intensify. However, there is a need to start reconstruction and recovery now where it is safe and practical to do so. As of June 1, 2022, direct damage has reached over US$97 billion, with housing, transport, and commerce and industry being the most affected sectors. Damage is concentrated in the frontline oblasts (74 percent), particularly Donetska, Luhanska, Kharkivska, and Zaporizka, and in oblasts that were brought back under government control (22 percent) such as Kyivska and Chernihivska. Disruptions to economic flows and production, as well as additional expenses associated with the war, are collectively measured as losses and amount to some US$252 billion. Ukraine’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) shrank by 15.1 percent year over year in the first quarter of 2022, and poverty is expected to increase from 2 to 21 percent (based on the poverty line of US$5.5 per person per day). Reconstruction and recovery needs, as of June 1, are estimated at about US$349 billion, which is more than 1.6 times the GDP of Ukraine in 2021. Integrated into these needs are critical steps toward becoming a modern, low-carbon, disaster- and climate-resilient, and inclusive country that is more closely aligned with European Union standards. While the financing envelope is overwhelming, experience from other countries shows that reconstruction spans many years and a phased approach to reconstruction is critical. The report also details some US$105 billion needed in the immediate and short term to address the most urgent needs, including social infrastructure (such as schools and hospitals, especially in areas brought back under government control), preparation for the upcoming winter through winterization and restoration of heating and energy to homes, urgent repairs, gas purchases, support to agriculture and social protection, and restoration of vital transport routes. These actions will lay the groundwork for a safe, prioritized, and efficient reconstruction and recovery. The report offers a strong analytical foundation for a comprehensive financial and operational strategy and plan to support the early recovery and long-term reconstruction of Ukraine, to which we are strongly committed. This next phase of planning should consider the balancing and prioritization of needs and investments, absorptive capacity, financing availability, the development of common systems and processes to ensure maximum efficiency, the development and expansion of the managerial and technical capacity of implementation units, the mobilization of funds for project preparation, and the development of financial strategies for different sectors. The World Bank Government of Ukraine European Commission 4 12 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Kharkiv. Photo by Ipsos for the World Bank. EXECUTIvE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE 5 SUMMARy 13 The Russian Federation’s invasion of Ukraine, which quantified physical damage to infrastructure, began February 24, 2022, has caused significant buildings, etc.; (ii) quantified indirect losses for a time civilian casualties and damage to infrastructure and period of 21 months (3 months between February and has taken a severe human, social, and economic June 2022, and 18 additional months), considering toll. As a result of the war, which still continues elements such as disrupted services, economic after more than six months, dwellings and public impacts, costs related to internally displaced infrastructure have been demolished or damaged, persons (IDPs), debris management, restricted public services and economic activity have been access and costs due to land contamination,1 etc.; impeded, and significant numbers of Ukrainians and (iii) corresponding recovery and reconstruction have been displaced from their homes. needs (Box 1 provides definitions). The RDNA also outlines general guiding principles for building back This Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment (RDNA) better and sequencing investments for a green, is part of an ongoing effort, undertaken jointly by resilient, inclusive, and sustainable recovery and the Government of Ukraine, the World Bank, and reconstruction, focusing on immediate and short- the European Commission and supported by other term needs (18 to 36 months) and medium- to long- partners, to take stock of Ukraine’s damage and term needs (up to 10 years). losses from the war—but just as importantly to assess the scale of economic and social needs An important limitation is that the RDNA presents for Ukraine’s survival during the war and its the needs at a sector level and does not consider prospering afterward. Detailed sectoral data for the balancing of one sector’s needs against the assessment use June 1, 2022, as a cutoff; given those of another sector. Strategic prioritization the progress of the war since that date, the extent of of reconstruction across all sectors is the next damage, losses, and needs is clearly larger as of the important step as part of recovery and reconstruction date of publication. While the calculation of needs planning, with this RDNA providing analytical support has been done by joint government and World Bank to this critical decision-making. Further work will teams in each of the sectors covered, the differential involve prioritizing needs based on absorptive availability of data has meant that the extent of and implementation capacity of different sectors, coverage varies somewhat across sectors. priorities related to different geographic areas, humanitarian and IDP needs, institutional capacity, Still, the RDNA provides the first rigorous overview financing availability, etc. This further work is critical of the various economic needs that Ukraine and for investment planning and implementation, and its people have as a consequence of the war. The can form part of an immediate recovery plan for objective of the RDNA is to deliver a consistent, Ukraine. validated, and transparent assessment of (i) Box 1. RDNA definitions Damage: Direct costs of destroyed or damaged physical assets; valued in monetary terms with costs estimated based on replacing or repairing physical assets and infrastructure, considering the replacement price prevailing before the war. losses: Changes in economic flows resulting from the war; valued in monetary terms. Needs: Value associated with the resumption of prewar normality through activities such as repair and restoration, including a premium linked to building back better principles (e.g., improved energy efficiency, modernization efforts, and sustainability standards). Needs do not equal the sum of damage and losses. 1 Land contamination refers to land that may contain land mines and/or explosive remnants of war. 6 14  EXECUTIVE SUMMARy EXECUTIvE SUMMARY Summary of Damage, Figure 1. Total damage as of June 1, 2022: US$97 billion Losses, and Needs Municipal Environment/ services, $2 bn forestry, $2 bn Considering the impact of the war between February 24 and June 1, 2022, the damage across sectors Housing, covered in the RDNA is estimated at approximately Transport, $39 bn $30 bn US$97 billion (Figure 1 and Table 1). The most damage-affected sectors are housing (40 percent of total damage), transport (31 percent), and commerce and industry (10 percent). The most affected oblasts Energy, are Donetska, Luhanska, and Kharkivska, followed $3 bn Education, $3 bn by Kyivska, Chernihivska, and Zaporizka (Figure 4 Commerce and and Table 2). industry, $10 bn Agriculture (Public), $2 bn Aggregate losses total almost US$252 billion Source: Assessment team. (Figure 2 and Table 1). It should be noted that losses in one sector flow into and intersect with those in Figure 2. Total losses as of June 1, 2022: other sectors. For example, reduction in agricultural production affects transportation needs, or loss of US$252 billion electricity affects commerce and industry in areas Land decontamination, $73 bn Housing, $13 bn Municipal that are otherwise unaffected by the war. Losses are services, Health , $6 bn dominated by land decontamination (demining and $4 bn Social clearance of explosive remnants of war) (29 percent), protection , $5 bn commerce and industry (19 percent), agriculture (11 Culture and percent), and transport (10 percent). Culture and tourism , $19 bn tourism (8 percent), housing (5 percent), and energy , Agriculture $28 bn (5 percent) contribute substantially to the remaining losses. As data by oblast were not available across Commerce and industry, $48 bn all sectors. Finance and The total reconstruction and recovery needs are Water/ banking, $8 bn sanitation, $7 bn estimated at about US$349 billion. As shown in Energy, $12 bn Figure 3 and Table 1, the sectors with the highest Transport, $26 bn estimated needs are transport (21 percent), land Source: Assessment team. decontamination (demining and clearance of explosive remnants of war) (21 percent), and housing (20 percent). Other sectors, including commerce and Figure 3. Total needs as of June 1, 2022: industry (6 percent), social protection and livelihoods US$349 billion (6 percent), and agriculture (5 percent), contribute Municipal , Land decontamination, $73 bn substantially to the remaining needs. services, $6 bn Housing, $69 bn Water/ Education, All these needs arise from a war that has spanned a sanitation, $5 bn $9 bn large geographical area (including urban areas), and Health, $15 bn thus their magnitude is considerable. Meeting these Social needs will be critical for the long-term recovery protection, $21 bn from the war. However, specifying these needs does Culture and not mean that they can be met immediately. How tourism , $5 bn soon they can be met will depend on the availability Agriculture of financing, but also on the absorptive capacity of (Public), $19 bn Transport , the Ukrainian budget, line ministries, subnational $74 bn Irrigation/ entities, and implementing agencies; the readiness Energy, $10 bn Commerce and water, $8 bn of the private sector to support capital investments; Finance and banking, $8 bn industry , $21 bn and the trajectory of the war. Source: Assessment team. EXECUTIvE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE 7 SUMMARy 15 Figure 4. Extent of damage by region as of June 1, 2022 Source: Assessment team. While the RDNA’s assessment of damaged assets roads), anticipated implicit support for humanitarian differentiates between public and private assets reasons of private assets (such as housing and wherever possible, experience in disaster and energy), and the need to kick-start recovery in the conflict situations highlights the strong and very productive sectors. necessary role of public finances even for the restoration of privately owned assets, especially In the immediate and short term (in the next 18–36 in the short term. For housing, for example, there months), about US$105 billion will be needed to are humanitarian and implicit public obligations address the most urgent needs across the analyzed associated with ensuring that Ukrainians have sectors (Table 3). These include urgent needs related safe and warm shelter, and these entail public to the following: intervention in private assets. Similarly, productive sectors such as agricultural production may require • Preparation for the upcoming winter (e.g., heating, significant public financing for recovery; the banking electricity, and winterization of lightly damaged and financial sector will require capitalization; and buildings) and the purchase of gas the restoration of commerce and industry will • Transport repairs for connectivity and service need a certain level of initial funding by the public delivery sector. Moreover, the public sector will likely play an • Support for the next agricultural planting season important role in providing guarantees and other de- • Safeguarding of human development, especially risking instruments (particularly insurance) to enable in education and health, and support to the private sector participation. This will be particularly poorest and the displaced important to restore trade and commerce flows. • Immediate actions related to decontamination of land to enable safe reconstruction and recovery It is estimated that about 80 percent of the short- in critical areas term needs, or some US$80 billion, will need to come from public financing. This includes a range of Beyond the coming winter, the short-term recovery obligations—recovery and reconstruction of assets and reconstruction needs are dominated by support owned by the public sector (such as schools and to the social sector (45 percent of the total), though 8 16  EXECUTIVE SUMMARy EXECUTIvE SUMMARY cross-cutting issues such as land decontamination in infrastructure (22 percent) are dominated by energy and environmental protection will need to be and transport sector needs, though measures for integrated into all investments in social, productive, water supply and sanitation and municipal services and infrastructure sectors. The large share of needs are also critical. In the productive sectors, the short- in the social sector reflects the impacts on housing, term needs (22 percent) cover support to agriculture health, and education services, the expanded social as well as actions to support finance and banking protection needs, and steps to protect cultural and commerce and industry. heritage from further damage. The short-term needs Table 1. Total damage, losses, and needs by sector (US$ billion) as of June 1, 2022 Sector Damage Share (%) losses Share (%) Needs Share (%) Social sectors Housing 39.2 40 13.3 5 69.0 20 Education 3.4 3 0. 5 0 9.2 3 Health 1.4 1 6.4 3 15.1 4 Social protection and livelihoods 0.2 0 4.5a 2 20.6b 6 Culture and tourism 1.1 1 19.3 8 5.2 2 Productive sectors Agriculture 2.2 2 28.3 11 18.7 5 Irrigation and water resources 0.2 0 0.1 0 7.5 2 Commerce and industry 9.7 10 47.5 19 20.8 6 Finance and banking 0.03 0 8.1 3 8.0 2 Infrastructure sectors Energy 3.0 3 11.7 5 10.4c 3 Extractives 0.1 0 0.3 0 0.3 0 Transport 29.9 31 26.1 10 73.8 21 Telecom and digital 0.7 1 0.6 0 3.3 1 Water supply and sanitation 1.3 1 6.8 3 5.4 2 Municipal services d 2.3 2 4.3 2 5.7 2 Cross-cutting sectors Environment, natural resource management, 2.5 3 0.7 0 1.2 0 and forestry Emergency response and civil protection 0.1 0 0.2 0 0.7 0 Justice and public administration 0.1 0 0.03 0 0.2 0 Land decontamination - 0 73.2 29 73.2 21 Total 97.4 100 252.0 100 348.5 100 Source: Assessment team. a. Under social protection, household income loss valued at US$46.1 billion is not included to avoid potential double-counting in relation to other sectors. b. Means-tested social assistance programs and other benefits that depend on the changes in households’ income and the cost of basic needs (including cost of food and energy) are assessed for the immediate/short term only. c. The needs for the energy sector also include the short-term need for purchasing natural gas for the upcoming heating season (around 4.8 bcm), that would generate a financial gap in Naftogaz of around US$5 billion, depending on the weather and evolution of gas import prices. It is estimated that Naftogaz could need some 4.8 billion cubic meters (bcm) of additional gas to reach the estimated required level 15 bcm. Naftogaz will use its produced gas (up to 1.4 bcm), purchase from domestic producers/private stored gas (1.3 bcm), and import the remaining amount (2.1 bcm). The value of this volume can vary depending on the import price. Assuming that the domestic price for the gas from other domestic producers will be around US$1,000 and that imported gas is purchased at US$ 2,000 per 1,000 cubic meter, the total purchase costs would be US$ 5.1 billion if the import price is US$2,000, and US$7.2 billion if the import price is $3,000. Considering the selling price of the gas for Naftogaz at the level of US$190 per 1,000 cubic meters, the financial gap would be US$4.37 billion if the import price is US$2000 and US$6.47 billion if the import price is US$3,000. d. Municipal governments in Ukraine are responsible for a wide range of municipal services, from own services (e.g., local roads, municipal transit, solid waste management, housing, urban parks, and utilities) to services delegated by the central government (e.g., education, health care, social welfare). In the RDNA, municipal service mainly covers assets related to solid waste management, urban spaces and facilities (e.g., local parks, community centers, cemeteries, sports, etc.), and local administrative buildings. Utilities and housing are covered by infrastructure and housing sections, respectively. EXECUTIvE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE 9 SUMMARy 17 Table 2. Damage by oblast for select sectors (US$ billion) as of June 1, 2022 Oblast Damage Frontline regions, subtotal 71.8 Donetska 26.2 Zaporizka 6.0 Luhanska 16.7 Mykolaivska 3.7 Odeska 0.3 Kharkivska 14.4 Khersonska 4.4 Support regions, subtotal 0.9 Vinnytska 0.1 Dnipropetrovska 0.5 Kirovohradska 0.1 Poltavska 0.1 Cherkaska 0.1 Backline regions, subtotal 0.2 Volynska 0.0 Zakarpatska 0.05 Ivano-Frankivska 0.02 Lvivska 0.07 Rivnenska 0.02 Ternopilska 0.01 Khmelnytska 0.02 Chernivetska 0.00 Regions where government has regained control, subtotal 22.4 Kyiv (city) 1.1 Zhytomyrska 0.8 Kyivska 11.2 Sumska 2.9 Chernihivska 6.4 Not specified, subtotal 2.2 Source: Assessment team. Note: Regions are grouped according to Government of Ukraine presentations at the Ukraine Recovery Conference in Lugano, Switzerland, in July 2022. Frontline regions are areas temporarily not under government control and areas of active conflict; support regions are providing logistics for defense and humanitarian cargo; backline regions are protecting export/import logistics hubs and evacuated enterprises; and regions where the government has regained control are areas recovering from sustained damage. Table data are incomplete, as damage data by oblast were not available for the culture and tourism sector; and for several sectors only nationwide (not oblast-specific) data were available, or only a fraction of available data was disaggregated by oblast. It is noted that for some sectors (for example, transport), Kyivska oblast also includes damage for Kyiv city. Losses data by oblast were not available for the following sectors: culture and tourism, finance and banking, energy and extractives, housing, and health sectors. Needs data by oblast were not available for most sectors and are not included here. 10 18  EXECUTIVE SUMMARy EXECUTIvE SUMMARY Table 3. Total recovery and reconstruction needs by sector (US$ billion) as of June 1, 2022 Sector Immediate/short term Medium- to long-term Total Social sectors Housing 33.1 35.9 69.0 Education 2.8 6.5 9.2 Health 1.2 13.9 15.1 Social protection and livelihoods 8.1 12.5a 20.6 Culture and tourism 1.6 3.6 5.2 Productive sectors Agriculture 10.0 8.7 18.7 Irrigation and water resource 0.02 7.5 7.5 management Commerce and industry 6.6 14.2 20.8 Finance and banking 6.4 1.6 8.0 Infrastructure sectors Energyb 7.3 3.1 10.4 Extractives - - 0.3 Transport 8.9 65.0 73.8 Telecommunications and digital 1.3 2.0 3.3 Water supply and sanitation 3.5 1.9 5.4 Municipal services 1.9 3.9 5.7 Cross-cutting sectors Environment, natural resource 0.4 0.9 1.2 management, and forestry Emergency response and civil protection 0.5 0.2 0.7 Justice and public administration 0.08 0.1 0.2 Land decontamination 11.0 62.2 73.2 Total 104.5 243.7 348.5 Source: Assessment team. Note: - = not assessed. a. Needs for means-tested benefits, benefits to IDPs, social services, and military social assistance include only estimates for the immediate/short term, given that a number of additional factors will influence them over the medium/long term, such as changes in incomes and cost of basic needs, including food and energy. b. The needs for the energy sector also include the short-term need for purchasing natural gas for the upcoming heating season, in the amount of US$5 billion. EXECUTIvE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARy 11 19 MACROECONOMIC AND figure is incomplete.3 One-third of Ukrainians have been displaced by the war. Over 6.8 million Ukrainian SOCIAL IMPACTS residents have left the country, a large majority of them women and children.4 An estimated 6.6 million The damage, losses, and needs presented here people are internally displaced—fewer than in the contribute to the very significant economic, social, previous month5—with many individuals displaced and poverty impacts of the war. Estimated gross more than once since leaving their homes of origin.6 domestic product (GDP) losses in 2022 go beyond According to the UN Office for the Coordination physical asset losses and reflect disruption of of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), the humanitarian economic activities via several channels: damage situation is deteriorating rapidly, as access to critical to productive assets and infrastructure, logistic services such as clean water, food, sanitation, and problems, labor force losses, ruined supply-demand electricity declines, and 17.7 million people are left chains, uncertainty, and elevated risks. Ukraine’s in need of humanitarian assistance.7 GDP shrank by 15.1 percent year over year (YoY) in the first quarter of 2022 (or 19.3 percent quarter The projected increase in poverty, though large, over quarter, seasonally adjusted), driven by a 45 is expected to be much larger if existing financing percent GDP contraction in March YoY. After Ukraine gaps are not addressed by a scale-up in external regained control of Kyivska oblast, economic activity financing. Since the beginning of the war, tax revenue in April showed the first signs of improvement, even collection has deteriorated significantly, while though it remains much below the prewar level. public expenditure has increased sharply to ensure delivery of key public services during wartime. This Poverty, based on the upper-middle-income poverty has resulted in a large nonmilitary fiscal deficit. If line of US$5.5 per person per day, is projected to partners do not continue to provide significant support increase by tenfold and reach at least 21 percent to finance this deficit, Ukraine will need to further in 2022; war-affected regions are expected to reduce its now bare-bones social expenditures experience even higher poverty rates. For instance, and continue to avail itself of deficit monetization. in Khersonska oblast, which is temporarily not under In a scenario of continued deficit monetization, the government control, food prices have increased by poverty rate is expected to climb to 34 percent by 62 percent since the start of 2022, compared to 21.5 the end of 2022—a level not seen since the early percent for Ukraine as a whole.2 Given food’s large 2000s—as rising inflation erodes the purchasing share in the budgets of low-income households, power of low- and middle-income households. Going these high rates of inflation are bound to result in a forward, if the extent of monetization is limited to spiking poverty rate. avoid excessive inflation, sweeping expenditure cuts will be needed and will affect the most vulnerable The rise in poverty has been driven by the enormous segments of Ukrainian society. Under this scenario costs to human lives and livelihoods. As of July 24, of austerity, poverty rates are projected to further 2022, the number of civilians confirmed killed or increase to over 40 percent in 2022 and 58 percent wounded since February 24 officially stood at 12,272; by 2023. In this worst-case scenario, an additional 18 however, the United Nations (UN) estimates that this million Ukrainians would fall below the poverty line. 2 Data are as of June 2022 and are based on regional Consumer Price Indices published by the State Statistics Service of Ukraine, Link. 3 Most of the civilian casualties recorded were caused by the use of explosive weapons with a wide impact area, including shelling from heavy artillery and multiple launch rocket systems, and by missile and air strikes. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) believes that actual figures are considerably higher, especially in Mariupol (Donetska oblast), Izium (Kharkivska oblast), and Popasna (Luhanska oblast). OHCHR, “Ukraine: Civilian Casualty Update 25 July 2022,” Link. 4 The number was 6,865,625 as of August 26, 2022. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; see Operational Data Portal: Ukraine Refugee Situation, Link. 5 IOM, “Regional Ukraine Response: Situational Report–22 August 2022,” Link. 6 OCHA Ukraine, “Situation Report,” August 17, 2022. 7 Ibid. 12 20  EXECUTIVE SUMMARy EXECUTIvE SUMMARY SECTORAL ASSESSMENTS Education As of June 1, 2022, the Ukrainian education sector Social Sectors has sustained US$3.4 billion in damage and US$0.5 billion in losses, with a particular impact on Housing students/learners from Eastern Ukraine. A total of 1,885 education institutions have been impacted The total damage to the housing sector as of by the war, with 178 buildings destroyed and a June 1, 2022, is estimated at US$39.2 billion, with further 1,707 partially damaged. The damage to concentrated damage to urban housing. Around infrastructure is pronounced in the east, especially in 817,000 residential units were impacted by the war, Kharkivska, Donetska, and Luhanska oblasts; nearly 38 percent of them destroyed beyond repair. This 1 million enrolled students (at all levels of education) number includes apartment units, single family are affected just in these three oblasts. Meanwhile, houses, and dormitories. Apartment buildings have losses are driven by debris removal costs, unpaid been the most affected, a finding that highlights the teachers’ salaries, and decreases in private sector significant impacts of the war on the urban housing revenues, and there have been additional costs stock and indicates that urban areas carry the associated with the use of education institutions as bulk of the damage burden in housing. The extent temporary shelters. of housing damage is spread unevenly across the oblasts, with the Donetska, Luhanska, Kharkivska, Recovery and reconstruction needs are over and Kyivska oblasts accounting for over 82 percent of US$9.2 billion in the education sector, with U$2.8 total damage to housing stock in the country. losses billion urgently needed. These needs include the in the housing sector are estimated at US$13.2 reconstruction of affected education facilities billion, which reflects the cost of demolition and following new safety, sustainability, and quality debris removal, loss of household goods, temporary standards, but also needs related to the restoration rental and shelter provision by owners, and adjusted of interim and long-term teaching and learning losses in rental incomes. The loss estimation does services, such as investments to ensure safe access not reflect bank losses and mortgage defaults. to in-person education where possible (e.g., the addition of bomb shelters to education institutions, The recovery and reconstruction needs amount acquisition of temporary learning spaces, and to US$69 billion, with US$33.1 billion needed in purchase of electronic devices). Recovery needs the immediate/short term, especially to address also cover educational catch-up programs and the needs for winter. Addressing housing recovery psychological support that are critical to limiting needs in postwar Ukraine will require an integrated learning losses, particularly for the most vulnerable green, resilient, and inclusive approach, with a focus students. At the same time, the reconstruction on returning families to their homes and restoring and recovery of the sector must coincide with livelihoods and services. There is an urgent investments in reforms to increase quality and need to provide temporary rental for displaced efficiency in education, which to a considerable households, undertake winterization, repair partially extent had already been initiated before the war. damaged residential buildings, and establish a housing reconstruction and recovery strategy and implementation mechanism. In particular, providing Health repair and rental subsidies before cold, wet weather The damage to the health sector is estimated begins will mitigate the risk of further displacement. at US$1.4 billion. This represents the monetary While the situation is fluid, measures for ensuring estimate of the cost of destroyed and damaged health safety and adequate housing for households remain infrastructure included in the inventory of damage necessary to address the primary needs of IDPs, compiled by the Ministry of Health. The actual level returnees, and host communities for safe housing of damage is likely higher, given that damage reports options. There is also a need to establish a framework are incomplete for facilities located in the territories for housing reconstruction and recovery in the temporarily not under government control and for medium term. These actions can begin even during private sector facilities. The estimated losses of the war and will allow for appropriate sequencing of US$6.4 billion include the removal of debris and key actions and planning of budgets accordingly. demolition of the destroyed facilities, loss of income of private providers, losses from the financing of facilities that have not been fully operational during EXECUTIvE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARy 13 21 the war, and the additional losses of the population’s Culture and Tourism health. The needs of the health sector are estimated to be US$15.1 billion to cover the accumulated The war is estimated to have caused US$1.1 billion in infrastructure damage and losses to the health damage to the culture sector and a significant loss of sector, as well as scale-up of critical health services US$19.3 billion. The sector has also sustained damage for the population of Ukraine. This amount includes to its intangible cultural heritage and intrinsic values the cost of building new infrastructure using a of spiritual, symbolic, emotional, and existential building back better approach and the immediate significance, as well as to the creative industries. recovery of facilities that are partially damaged. It over US$5.2 billion is needed for safeguarding also includes a significant expansion of rehabilitation the sector in Ukraine. The value of culture is and mental health services in Ukraine, which will associated with its authenticity, shared values, and need to be scaled up to address the impacts of the social connections, which cannot be monetized in war. The estimate of needs does not include the full market value. Thus, recovering culture does not cost of recovery for the health care sector. Of these directly translate into reconstructing physical/ total needs, US$1.2 billion is urgently needed in the tangible assets. However, restoring and rebuilding immediate/short term. the damaged cultural properties and rehabilitating them would be an initial step to reestablish the lost/ Social Protection and Livelihoods broken cultural and social fabrics and restore their utility value, the sense of belonging they inspire, Damage to the social protection infrastructure and people’s affiliation with them, and any recovery (such as residential care units, social centers, and efforts should lay the foundation for the sustainable, social services providers) is estimated at US$0.2 green, resilient, inclusive, and smart development of billion. Overall, 56 such stand-alone buildings were Ukraine. The most urgent needs amount to US$1.6 damaged or destroyed. Damage to the shared billion. building space used for social protection purposes, such as offices in administrative buildings of the Productive Sectors local governments, are included in other parts of the RDNA. The losses in the social protection and jobs sector are much more substantial, amounting Agriculture to US$50.6 billion. They relate to (i) loss of jobs and household income from wages, (ii) resulting As of June 1, 2022, the war has resulted in total higher poverty and related increased expenditures damage of US$2.2 billion for the agriculture sector, under existing means-tested social programs, (iii) while the aggregate losses total US$28.3 billion. additional needs of programs such as survivor’s The damage includes partial or full destruction benefits or programs related to disability, and finally of machinery and equipment, storage facilities, (iv) lower affordability of basic needs, including livestock, and perennial crops, as well as lost energy and food, which will result in the need to inputs and outputs and agricultural land that needs significantly increase expenditure on a number of recultivation.8 The losses include production loss, social programs linked to the subsistence minimum, including unharvested winter crops, higher farm ranging from pensions to means-tested programs. production costs, and lower farm gate prices due to The estimated social protection and jobs sector the export logistic disruptions, which are significant needs amounts to US$20.6 billion. Most of these for Ukraine’s export-oriented agriculture. The total needs consists of recurrent expenditures related to reconstruction and recovery needs from the public social benefits and services, including payments to sector are estimated at US$18.7 billion, with private vulnerable populations such as IDPs and the newly farmers having to invest considerably more in impoverished. Significant expenditures are required terms of their own resources over the next years. to restore permanently lost jobs. Bringing Ukraine’s The most pressing investments of US$10 billion workforce back would require additional efforts and include rebuilding the damaged assets, helping costs, including through mobility grants, settling-in agriculture bounce back by addressing liquidity and grants, or wage subsidies for the employers. other constraints, and restoring the agricultural public institutions to effectively support recovery and reconstruction. 8 The losses from mines on agricultural land and the need for agricultural land’s demining, which is likely to be large, are not included in the agriculture sector estimates. They are presented separately in the RDNA. 14 22  EXECUTIVE SUMMARy EXECUTIvE SUMMARY Irrigation and Water Resources costs for demolition and debris removal. The total reconstruction and recovery needs are estimated As of June 1, 2022, damage in the irrigation, at US$20.8 billion, with US$6.6 billion needed in the drainage, and water resource management (WRM) immediate/short term from both public and private sector for several oblasts is estimated at US$0.2 actors. More than 80 percent of the needs are for billion, including damage to dams, irrigation canals, rebuilding and modernizing buildings, equipment, embankments, buildings, and agency premises. and inventory. For industry, the regions with the This is a partial number representing damage to greatest needs for reconstruction and recovery areas previously taken by Russian forces and now are Donetska, with almost half of the total amount, under control of Ukrainian authorities, territories followed by Kharkivska, Luhanska, Chernihivska, that had damage due to bomb attacks, and areas that and Kyivska oblasts. were flooded to protect against attack. The initial aggregate losses accounted for thus far are US$0.1 Finance and Banking billion. The losses include operational losses based on lost profit as reported by the different operational The Ukrainian financial sector has been significantly entities in the Ukrainian water system and collected impacted by the war. The banking system entered the by the State Agency of Water Resources (SAWR). war in relatively good condition, and banks remain The total reconstruction and recovery needs in the operational. However, loss of assets, collateral, and public sector are estimated at US$7.5 billion for revenues will severely affect banks’ profitability and building back better irrigation, drainage, and flood solvency. During March–May, the banking sector protection assets. The most pressing investments accounted for US$1.1 billion of loan loss provisions involve restoration of destroyed hydraulic assets and for expected war-related credit losses. It can be water storage structures in areas where control has anticipated that the nonbank financial institution been regained, as well as investments in areas that (NBFI) sector will also suffer significant losses as a did not face hostilities; these investments will help result of the war on top of prewar vulnerabilities but the WRM sector rebound by addressing the major given its small size, the NBFI sector is not expected gap—the lack of water supply and lack of irrigation to have systemic impacts on the overall financial services to farmers, which must be addressed to system. From the preliminary estimates, the total increase crop productivity in the agriculture sector. damage is estimated at US$0.03 billion, and potential They will also protect communities against flood- losses suffered by the banking sector are expected related risks and restore the public institutions to be US$8.1 billion; however, data on NBFIs are very involved in irrigation and WRM so they can effectively limited. It will take many months for the true extent support recovery and reconstruction. These urgent of damage to the financial sector to become fully needs total US$0.02 billion. apparent/quantifiable. The quantification of losses also does not recognize the inherent risks posed Commerce and Industry to the gains made over recent years by reforms to the financial sector, such as relaxation of prudential Commerce and industry is one of the sectors and state-owned bank governance rules; nor does it most affected by the war. As of June 1, 2022, recognize the potential delays to the implementation approximately US$9.7 billion of damage is estimated of further reforms as a result of the need to to have been sustained in this sector. Both privately address postwar problems first. The total cost for and publicly owned enterprises in conflict-affected reconstruction and recovery needs is estimated at areas have been destroyed or bankrupted. Value estimated at US$8 billion, with US$6.4 billion for chains have been disrupted through the destruction the immediate/short term and US$1.6 billion for the of, or damage to, connective infrastructure, the medium term. This primarily includes provisions for inability to access key inputs, and the severing of banks’ credit losses but also captures the cost of business links with firms located in affected areas. rebuilding damaged physical infrastructure of banks. Damage to large factories accounts for most of the damaged assets, including the destruction of Infrastructure Sectors steel plants in Donetska that makes up almost 10 percent of the total damage. Approximately 2,900 retail shops, shopping malls, and warehouses have Energy and Extractives been damaged or destroyed. Estimated aggregate losses equal US$47.5 billion. The losses are As of June 1, 2022, the war has resulted in total estimated based primarily on expected lost income damage of around US$3 billion for the energy sector, from firms over the course of 21 months and the while the aggregate losses total US$11.7 billion. The EXECUTIvE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARy 15 23 value of damage includes damage in the power sector and long-term needs reflect the enabling role that (US$1.4 billion), district heating (US$0.7 billion), gas transport will play across sectors as well as the sector (US$0.5 billion), transport fuel sector (US$0.4 need to facilitate European Union (EU) integration. billion), and coal mining (US$0.11 billion). The losses include lost revenues and production decreases, Transport sector reconstruction is estimated higher costs, losses due to deterioration of liquidity to require US$73.8 billion, with approximately positions, and losses due to lost access to energy US$8.9 billion in the immediate/short term along services. The total reconstruction and recovery needs with an additional US$64.9 billion in the medium- in the public sector are estimated at almost US$10.4 to long- term. The estimates are approximate and billion, including US$7.3 billion for the immediate/ are subject to assumptions about the configuration short term and US$3.1 billion for the longer term. and scope of Ukraine’s transport networks after Given that the energy sector provides critical services, reconstruction. The nature and level of demands the above reconstruction and recovery investments on that network may affect the economic viability are all considered as pressing. In addition, part of of building back to a given set of standards. Under the losses can also be considered as pressing for assumptions where Ukraine may not build back road short-term operations of the energy sector. This and rail infrastructure to EU standards, needs could includes the need to close liquidity gaps in the power be US$ 2.1 billion to US$ 13.2 billion lower than RDNA sector transmission system operator (Ukrenergo) projections. Conversely, needs may also be higher and other stakeholders in the amount of US$2.6 than RDNA estimates if actual costs to achieve a billion. Naftogaz needs at least US$5 billion only for specific set of standards are greater than expected purchasing gas for the next heating season, assuming (if affordable). At this stage in Ukraine’s recovery, it average purchasing gas price of approximately is important to note the inherent uncertainty around US$1,000 per 1,000 m3. For the extractives sector, in the configuration of post-war transport networks the context of limited data available, US$0.1 billion in and the impact this has on estimated needs. The damage, US$0.3 billion in losses, and US$0.3 billion highest-priority needs for reconstruction are (i) in needs were identified in addition to the energy restoration of basic network functionality (road, sector estimates. In addition to the physical damages rail, and air) for both humanitarian aid flows and and loses generated by the war, some key energy support to broader reconstruction efforts across market and governance reforms are suffering delays sectors, as these will rely on transport access; (ii) due to the need to implement temporary emergency enhancement of westward road and rail linkages measures to ensure the provision of basic energy to the EU to facilitate economic integration with services to the population. Europe’s single market and provide resilience to any potential future disruptions of Black Sea access; and (iii) transformation of legacy networks Transport toward EU standards for safety, service quality, and interoperability as a complement to Ukraine’s stated Damage (US$29.9 billion), losses (US$26.1 billion), policy objective of EU accession, which will require and needs (US$73.8 billion) in Ukraine’s transport alignment with the EU acquis. sector are large and indicative of the strategic value that combatants have placed on transport networks. Overall damages until June 1, 2022 include: (i) 8,699 Telecommunications and Digital km of motorways, highways, and other national roads; (ii) 7,619 km of oblast and village roads; (iii) 3 The damage in the telecommunications and digital million m2 of bridges on national roads; (iv) 428,470 sector has reached US$0.7 billion. This includes m2 of bridges on local roads; (v) 1,119 km of railway US$0.6 billion for telecom operators (fixed and lines; (vi) 93 railway stations; (vii) 63,072 m2 of mobile), US$0.08 billion for postal service companies, railway bridges; (viii) 392,843 private vehicles; (ix) and US$0.04 billion for Ukraine’s broadcasting 9,473 km of communal roads; (x) 16 airports; and provider. Donetska, Kharkivska, Khersonska, and (xi) 850 units of urban public transport rolling stock. Zaporizka oblasts account for 67 percent of the Losses include consideration for (i) loss of Black Sea damage to telecom operators. The damage to transport; (ii) disruptions to road and rail transport postal services is similarly concentrated: Donetska services due to damaged infrastructure; (iii) losses and Kharkivska oblasts account for 68 percent associated with closure of Ukraine’s airspace; and of damage to postal infrastructure (post offices, (iv) the cost of rail transport service provided free of depots, sorting centers, etc.). In broadcasting, there charge for refugee evacuation as well as import of are 49 damaged and nonoperational TV towers as humanitarian supplies. Envisaged short-, medium-, of June 1, 2022, 11 of them in Luhanska oblast and 16 24  EXECUTIVE SUMMARy EXECUTIvE SUMMARY 12 in Zaporizka. losses of economic value added in with US$1.9 billion needed in the immediate/short the sector amount to US$0.6 billion for the period term. This includes costs for building back better between the war’s start and June 1, 2022. The needs and inflation. The most pressing needs in the short for reconstruction and recovery are estimated at term relate to the maintenance and increase of US$3.3 billion with an estimated US$1.3 billion service delivery, rapid scaling up of investments in needed in the immediate/short term. Among the the waste management sector, and the formulation immediate recovery investments is restoring the of citywide reconstruction and recovery strategies broadband coverage in territories that have been and action plans. Key guiding principles for recovery brought back under government control. Internet and reconstruction include the explicit prioritization coverage and postal service access are of strategic and sequencing of investments based on technical importance, given the need for connectivity among assessments, and the facilitation of an enabling the local population. institutional and legal environment for the efficient implementation of plans. Water Supply and Sanitation Cross-Cutting Areas The estimated damage for the water supply and sanitation (WSS) sector stands at US$1.3 billion. Given various challenges in data collection (especially Environment, Natural Resource for territories temporarily not under government Management, and Forestry control), this is a conservative figure; however, it provides a fair assessment of the magnitude of The war in Ukraine has significantly harmed the WSS infrastructure damage. losses have been environment and natural resources of the country. estimated at approximately US$6.8 billion, noting Multiple air pollution incidents and potentially serious similar challenges in accessing data. The main contamination of ground and surface waters and part of the losses (over 50 percent) stems from lost soil have already been observed, and the long-term revenues from WSS services provision. The total impact of the war could be even more harmful— reconstruction and recovery needs for the sector not only for the population’s health and safety, are estimated at around US$5.4 billion, with US$3.5 but also for ecosystems and biodiversity. Most of billion needed in the immediate/short term. The the environmental risks are linked to the damage building back better approach has been limited to to industrial installations and houses (asbestos the reconstruction of the damaged/destroyed WSS release), energy infrastructure (power plants, oil assets and not geared toward achieving compliance storage tankers, oil refineries, drilling platforms, with the WSS Sustainable Development Goals. and gas facilities and distribution pipelines), and However, there is room to further optimize existing ecosystems (forest fires and land mines). The main WSS systems and facilities (developed before the environmental risks include air pollution, water war) to meet increased standards and sustainability pollution, and soil pollution, with accumulation of and climate change requirements. hazardous wastes that affect the health and safety of the population as well as biodiversity. Losses and damage in monetary terms are estimated where Municipal Services feasible, such as for the forest sector. Due to the active war situation, measuring of key pollutants As of June 1, 2022, the estimated damage for the in air, water, and soil was not possible. The RDNA municipal services sector amounts to US$2.3 billion, did not estimate damage and needs for these while the aggregate losses total US$4.3 billion. The receptors due to the lack of monitoring data on damage includes partial or full destruction of key environmental assets. Priority areas for cleanup and municipal assets (for which data were available) building back better are identified for a fundamental as well as damage to goods and equipment. The transformation of Ukraine toward a green and net- estimated losses focus on revenue losses, debris zero economy. The rebuilding process should be removal, and increased operational costs. Over 90 harmonized with the EU environmental and climate percent of the total losses valued stem from incurred goals. and projected revenue losses of local governments; this finding indicates that local governments will The forestry sector has been significantly impacted continue to face financial burdens and highlights the by the war. As of June 1, 2022, approximately 3 potential instability of service delivery maintenance percent has been lost due to forest fires, and 38 in coming months. The total reconstruction and percent is inaccessible due to the presence of mines. recovery needs are estimated at US$5.7 billion, Damage across growing stock, roads, buildings, and EXECUTIvE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARy 17 25 equipment is almost US$2.5 billion. lost ecosystem estimated at US$0.07 billion, while losses amount services value—a result of mines making the to US$0.03 billion. These figures include damage of forests inaccessible—is estimated at US$0.7 US$0.06 billion for the judiciary and US$0.01 billion billion over the 21 months beginning in March for law enforcement, comprising partial or full 2022. However, forestry has a slow recovery rate destruction of buildings, furniture, and vehicles used and these losses may extend much further beyond for judicial or law enforcement purposes. Losses this period. Sectoral recovery and reconstruction include US$0.01 billion for the judiciary, and US$0.4 needs, including building back with strengthened million for law enforcement. Losses consider items institutions, equipment, and nursery capacity, are such as demolition and debris removal and loss of estimated at US$1.2 billion with US$0.4 billion public services/fees. Reconstruction and recovery needed in the immediate/short term. As part of the needs for the justice sector are estimated at US$0.2 recovery and reconstruction needs, capacity building billion. The most pressing needs include restoration includes a functional review of the institutions in the of delivery of justice services, specifically through sector, with a focus on modernized planning and on the availability and training of law enforcement, the best afforestation and reforestation methods for anticorruption officials, private lawyers, and judges, climate-smart forestry. Recommended for further as well as the reconstruction of the judiciary and study is the creation of investor-ready carbon judicial infrastructure. projects and the potential for mass employment in afforestation and reforestation via “green wage” Damage of US$0.03 billion is also reported to schemes. central-level public administration infrastructure and services. Local-level administrative buildings are covered under the municipal services sector, Emergency Response and Civil and relevant line ministry buildings such as Protection education and health are covered under those respective sectors. This damage is estimated based As of June 1, 2022, the war has resulted in total on government reports. losses, including debris damage of US$0.1 billion for the emergency removal, are estimated at US$3.4 million. Recovery response and civil protection sector, while the and reconstruction needs are estimated at US$0.07 aggregate losses total US$0.2 billion. The damage billion. The recovery and reconstruction of central- includes partial or full destruction of vehicles, level public administration should prioritize buildings equipment, and buildings used for the purpose of from which the most-urgent public services are civil protection and emergency response. The losses provided. include debris removal and additional operational costs for increased involvement of first responders in emergency and rescue operations related to the Land Decontamination (Demining and war. The total reconstruction and recovery needs Clearance of Explosive Remnants of from the sector are estimated at US$0.7 billion, with US$0.5 billion urgently needed. The most War) pressing investments include repair, reconstruction, land decontamination, which covers demining and replacement of damaged, destroyed, and and clearance of explosive remnants of war, is seized assets, respectively. Support for scaled- a precondition to safe rebuilding, resumption of up emergency response related to the war is also service provision, and return to normality. The necessary; this includes preparedness for chemical, State Emergency Service of Ukraine (SESU) and biological, radiological, and nuclear incidents; Ministry of Internal Affairs estimate that 13 percent measures related to disaster risk management of Ukraine’s territory may be contaminated. Based to prevent, prepare, and respond to disasters; and on conservative estimates, land decontamination restoration of institutions to effectively support the costs are expected to exceed US$73.2 billion. Of recovery and reconstruction effort. this, US$0.06 billion needs to be urgently invested in equipment, training, and salaries to expand the work Justice and Public Administration force of decontamination authorities in Ukraine. It will be critical to prioritize areas requiring the In the justice and public administration sector, a most urgent decontamination, such as areas with total of US$0.1 billion in damage, US$0.04 billion a high concentration of civilian populations, areas in losses, and US$0.2 billion in recovery and critical for restoring production and economic flows, reconstruction needs have been estimated as a etc. In the immediate/short term, close to US$11 result of the war. Related to justice, damage is billion is needed for nontechnical surveys, technical 18 26  EXECUTIVE SUMMARy EXECUTIvE SUMMARY surveys, and demining, including US$0.06 billion decontamination. Costs associated with the removal for procurement of varied equipment (demining of anchored and floating sea mines in the Black Sea machines, metal detectors, personal protective are yet unquantified. However, until decontamination equipment, etc.); these efforts will ensure readiness of the Black Sea and Ukraine harbors is completed, for scaled-up decontamination and allow significant (re)insurers of shipping vessels in the Black Sea will progress in areas where government control has continue to charge high and even historic levels for been restored and where active military actions have insurance—a cost that will eventually be passed ceased. It should be noted that land decontamination on to consumers, a particularly significant issue in efforts may need to be sustained over decades, relation to grain exports. considering experience of other countries in land Toward Recovery and Reconstruction There are already ongoing efforts by the Government data set that can help guide recovery planning as of Ukraine to lead the country toward recovery and well as monitoring and evaluation (M&E). reconstruction. In July 2022, Ukraine presented a US$750 billion Recovery Plan.9 Under the Ukraine Beyond the guiding principles that the government’s Recovery Vision, US$150–250 billion is envisaged Recovery Plan establishes, the following principles for restoration and modernization of housing and could be considered based on international infrastructure. A three-stage reconstruction plan experience related to post-conflict and post- was presented: Stage 1 is a plan blueprint; Stage disaster recovery and reconstruction: 2 is a plan drill-down and roadmap; and Stage 3 is implementation. The Recovery Plan has set targets • Balancing urgent needs and medium- to long- for 2032: it aims to accelerate sustainable economic term goals: The recovery and reconstruction growth (with a plan for 7 percent annual GDP growth planning will need to address the most urgent and an increase in investments); to reach the top-25 needs immediately and in the short term, economies in the Economic Complexity Index and the while ensuring preparations for longer-term World Bank Human Capital Index; and to achieve a 65 reconstruction and recovery. In the short term, percent reduction in CO2 emissions from 1990. The there is a need to ensure safety and security of key guiding principles of the government’s Recovery people and to address the most urgent and basic Plan are to start now and ramp up gradually; grow needs (including for vulnerable populations) prosperity in an equitable way; integrate into the through shelter, public services, and economic EU; build back better (for the future); and enable restoration activities. In the medium to long term, private investment and entrepreneurship. The recovery and reconstruction should build on plan will be implemented in a region-focused and the foundation of green, resilient, and inclusive parameter-based approach. Within the plan, 15 development; it should also ensure efficiencies national programs have been developed to support by upgrading access to and quality of services the achievement of short-, medium-, and long-term and infrastructure and by right-sizing/right-siting targets.10 service networks and infrastructure. The RDNA can be instrumental in supporting • Strategic prioritization of reconstruction across the Government of Ukraine’s Recovery Plan and all sectors: Building on the identified baselines, implementation efforts. The RDNA provides a damage, losses, and needs across sectors in a baseline of sectoral and cross-cutting information on consistent manner as done under the RDNA, recovery and reconstruction needs that is linked to needs should be prioritized based on absorptive the damage and losses incurred as well as sectoral capacity of different sectors, priorities related prewar baselines, while considering building to different geographic areas, and humanitarian back better, right-sizing, right-placing, and overall and IDP needs, as well as financing availability, modernization efforts. This information creates a institutional capacity, and other elements. 9 URC2022, “Recovery Plan,” 2022, Link. 10 See Government of Ukraine, “Plan for the Recovery of Ukraine (ПЛАН ВІДНОВЛЕННЯ УКРАЇНИ),” 2022, Link. EXECUTIvE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARy 19 27 • Inclusiveness and equity: Recovery and structure will also be key for delivering results reconstruction need to be closely aligned and preserving a sense of perspective among the with efforts to decrease poverty, efforts to population. enhance social inclusion and gender equity, and investments targeting the most disadvantaged • local solutions and local development: Recovery social groups. and revitalization will need to be designed in a way that strongly supports local economies, with • Transparency and good governance: The local governments at the helm of the planning recovery process should be measured against and implementation efforts, especially in cities. established targets/performance indicators and Recovery and revitalization at the local level timelines; and it should be monitored within a would necessitate adopting an integrated and transparent M&E system and process, including place-based approach and ensuring the presence consultation with the affected stakeholders. of strong intergovernmental, inter-sectoral, and inter-municipal coordination mechanisms. • Addressing needs of different (groups of) Any structure or process for recovery and oblasts: Ukraine will also need to balance its revitalization should make use of the economic efforts across the different groups of regions and human capital in the country, and local firms of Ukraine—frontline, recovered, backline, and should be involved in the process. Partnerships support areas—depending on the progress of between them and firms from other parts of the war. Specific recovery and reconstruction Ukraine and abroad should be promoted and plans can help guide the recovery within relevant supported. Building reconstruction should rely oblasts based on their highest needs. as much as possible on the local industry and on solutions produced in Ukraine. • Resilience and building back better: Most of Ukraine’s infrastructure was built during the • Focus on community needs: Community-driven Soviet era and has suffered from years of development with strong citizens’ involvement underinvestment and neglect. The country’s is a crucial element for building ownership economic infrastructure is in dire need of and ensuring sustainability of recovery and improvement to be done in alignment with broader revitalization. Innovative approaches for ensuring climate change and sustainability goals and that the entire local community participates in targets. For example, the road network suffers recovery and revitalization is instrumental. The from chronic lack of maintenance and repair needs of the community cannot be identified using works and requires major upgrading. At the same a top-down approach, and any such attempts can time, about 40 percent of water supply networks only result in investments disconnected from the are in critical condition. Social infrastructure is real needs on the ground and unlikely to achieve likewise deficient; schools, kindergartens, and sustainable results. basic medical facilities are outdated and need to be rehabilitated and modernized, while also Related to the implementation of the recovery being made more energy efficient and climate activities, the following practical considerations resilient. In addition, the country’s agricultural could be taken into account based on international assets are increasingly vulnerable to weather- experience: related events, as most of Ukraine’s small and medium farm enterprises have not yet adopted • Project identification, prioritization, sequencing, climate-smart technologies. Ukraine’s industries and commercial strategy: There is a need to and the energy sector too will need to adapt to identify and frame reconstruction and recovery more efficient and sustainable good practice and project packages and to sequence them over time. standards. This should reflect the relative priority of needs, a logical sequencing of interdependent works, and • leadership and coordination: Continuous commercial considerations for bundling contracts leadership from the highest level of government according to the scale and scope that the market will be essential, together with strong operational for engineering and contractor services can meet. support. To keep the momentum for the The commercial strategy for delivering works at revitalization of the county, the highest levels of the scale envisaged for Ukraine’s reconstruction central government will need to be involved and would likely require an increase in the number of strategically lead this process. The operational international construction firms that are active in 20 28  EXECUTIVE SUMMARy EXECUTIvE SUMMARY Ukraine in parallel with efforts to grow smaller potentially land acquisition processes with public domestic firms into internationally competitive consultation processes. Alignment with European firms. Union peers will also require Ukraine to apply standards that are different or modified from • Use of common systems and processes: Where those previously used. While it may be possible feasible, the use of agreed and common systems, to temporarily apply foreign standards, Ukraine’s processes, and procedures should be promoted own domestic standards would eventually need for procurement, financial management, amendments to align with the EU acquis. Project management of environmental and social risks, preparation tasks would reasonably be expected M&E, etc. across recovery and reconstruction to cost between 2 percent and 10 percent of activities/investments. This will ensure all total civil works investment. Mobilizing funds government officials (horizontal and vertical) for these project preparation tasks immediately are using the same systems, thus maximizing and beginning technical preparations for “no efficiency, including benefits of training, and regret” investments that are highly likely to fall avoiding situations where the same implementing into highest-priority categories, is essential to unit is using multiple different systems of rapid mobilization and Ukraine’s ability to absorb donor organizations or international financial reconstruction funding across different sectors. institutions. • Financial strategy and the roles of international • Focus on developing institutional capacity funds, sovereign funding, and user charging in and managerial and technical capacity of specific subsectors: The scale of investment implementation units: Recovery efforts should needed for Ukraine’s reconstruction is beyond focus on developing the capacity of institutions the financial capacity of the government and its across different administrative levels. Moreover, subsidiary institutions in virtually all sectors. implementation units (or multiple units) that will International assistance in the form of grants, manage projects in specific sectors, subsectors, loans, and/or guarantees from external sources and/or regions should be capable of preparing and is expected to augment the fiscal capacity of managing projects to the requirements of bilateral Ukraine during reconstruction. Beyond these or multilateral development institutions, with sources, there will also be a role for user respect to technical, fiduciary, and environmental charging to support investment and long-term and social requirements. Therefore, capacity sustainability of public services. Each specific development should start early. Mobilization of sector will accordingly need a financial strategy external resources to augment capacity will also and indicative expenditure envelope that reflects be critical. credible funding sources and their role in supporting direct expenditures or underpinning • Mobilization of technical project preparation: The different forms of financing (sovereign, nature of reconstruction projects needed across nonsovereign, commercial, etc.). Providing many sectors with large infrastructure works will financial strategies for relevant sectors during be technically complex and engineering intensive. reconstruction is both necessary in the immediate Beyond debris and waste management and term and likely to prove complementary for land contamination, many projects will require post-reconstruction efforts to ensure financial environmental and social assessments and sustainability of critical public services. 236 ANNEXES  21 ANNEXES ANNEX 1. RDNA TEAM The RDNA team would like to express its deep appreciation to all individuals and organizations who contributed to this assessment. From the Government of Ukraine, support was provided under the guidance of Minister oleksiy Chernyshov, Ministry for Communities and Territories Development. From the European Commission, support was provided under the guidance of Katarina Mathernová, Deputy Director-General. From the World Bank, support was provided under guidance of Arup Banerji, Regional Country Director for Eastern Europe; Sameh Wahba, Regional Director for Sustainable Development; Fadia Saadah, Regional Director for Human Development; Charles Cormier, Regional Director for Infrastructure; Lalita Moorty, Regional Director for Equitable Growth, Finance and Institutions; Christoph Pusch, Practice Manager, Urban, Disaster Risk Management, Resilience & Land; Baher El-Hifnawi, Infrastructure and Sustainable Development Program Leader; Karlis Smits, Lead Country Economist; Caryn Bredenkamp, Lead Economist and Human Development Program Leader; Tom Farole, Lead Economist Sustainable Development and others. CoRE CooRDINATIoN TEAM Ivan lukeria (Deputy Minister of the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development); Anna Nyzhnyk (Acting Director General of the Directorate of Strategic Planning and European Integration of the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development); Marta Bukhtiyarova (Director General of the Directorate of Strategic Planning and European Integration of the Ministry for Reintegration of Temporarily Occupied Territories); Alanna Simpson (Lead Disaster Risk Management Specialist); Zuzana Stanton-Geddes (Senior Disaster Risk Management Specialist); Baher El-Hifnawi (Program Leader, IECDR); Krunoslav Katic (Senior Disaster Risk Management Consultant); Oleksandra Shatyrko (Social Development Specialist); Joy Aoun (Disaster Risk Management Specialist); Jae Kyun Kim (Operations Officer); Ghizlane Aqariden (Disaster Risk Management Consultant); Soraya Ridanovic (Disaster Risk Management Consultant); Nadia Kislova (Program Assistant) Chloe Allio (Head of Section– Operations, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Agnieszka Skiba (Program Officer - Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Panagiotis Stamoulis (Policy Officer, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Marta Sadel (Policy Officer, Directorate General for Neighborhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) Support Group for Ukraine (SGUA)) 22  ANNEXES ANNEXES 237 Housing Anna Nyzhnyk (Acting Director General of the Directorate of Strategic Planning and European Integration of the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development); Oleksandr Petroshchuk (State Expert of the Strategic and Budget Planning Expert Group of the Directorate of Strategic Planning and European Integration of the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development); Vakhovich Inna (Head of the Department of Pricing, Economics and Contractual Relations in Construction of the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development); Dmytro Panshin (Deputy Director of the Department of Housing Policy and Improvement of the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development) karima Ben Bih (Senior Disaster Risk Management Specialist); Ellen Hamilton (Lead Urban Development Specialist); Noriko Oe (Senior Urban Development Specialist); Debashree Poddar (Urban Development Specialist); Xueman Wang (Senior Urban Development Specialist); Oleksandr Dovbnia (Urban Expert); Simon Walley (Urban Development Specialist); Paul Scott Prettitore (Senior Land Management Specialist) Krzysztof Gierulski (Policy Officer, Directorate General for Neighborhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) Support Group for Ukraine (SGUA)); Olga Borodankova (Cooperation Officer at the Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Andriy Bandura (Sector Management Energy (Gas, Oil, and Energy Efficiency), Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Christian Ben Hell (Sector Manager for Land, Agriculture, Forestry, and Food Safety, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine) Education yuriy kovalchuk (Head of the Investment Activity and International Projects Sector of the Ministry of Education and Science) James Gresham (Education Specialist); Svitlana Batsiukova (Education Specialist); Adrien Samuel Julien Olszak Olszewski (Education Expert) Vira Rybak (Education and Science Sector Manager at the Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Fernando Fonseca (Policy Officer, Directorate General for Neighborhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) Support Group for Ukraine (SGUA)) Health Bohdan Borukhovskyi (Deputy Minister of Health); Oleksii Yaremenko (Deputy Minister of Health), Tetyana Hotsuenko (Advisor to the Minister of Health), Oleksandr Yemets (Director General of eHealth Agency under MoH), Yulia Mazur (Business Analyst at eHealth Agency under MoH); Yurii Gaidai (Senior Economist, Center for Economic Strategy) olena Doroshenko (Senior Health Economist); Oleksandr Zhyhinas (Health Expert); Khrystyna Pak (Health Specialist), Arthur ten Have (International Health Expert), Vladyslav Smirnov (Medical Engineer, Head of Medconstructor) Alexandra Janovskaia (Policy Officer, Delegation of European Union to Ukraine); Mira Didukh (Project Officer – Health and Social Policies, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Fernando Fonseca (Policy Officer, Directorate General for Neighborhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) Support Group for Ukraine (SGUA)), Jarno Habicht (WHO Representative in Ukraine) and World Health Organization team, Ben Zinner (Deputy Director, USAID) Social Protection and livelihoods yevhen kotyk (First Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Social Policy; Serhiy Sobchuk (State Expert of the Expert Group on Social Budget Issues of the Directorate of Strategic Planning, Policy Coordination and European Integration of the Ministry of Social Policy); Roman Zhukovskyi (Social Protection Specialist); Katerina Petrina (Senior Social Protection Specialist); Anna Baranova (Consultant); Iryna Kalachova (Consultant); Volodymyr Sorioglo (Consultant) Mira Didukh (Project Officer – Health and Social Policies, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Fernando Fonseca (Policy Officer, Directorate General for Neighborhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) Support Group for Ukraine (SGUA)) Culture and Tourism Anastasia Bondar (Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy); Rostyslav Karandeyeev (First Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy); Kateryna Chuyeva (Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy); Maryana Oleskiv (Head of the State Agency for Tourism Development); Luiza Moroz (State Expert of the Expert Group of Creative Industries of the Directorate of Culture and Arts); Yaroslav Petrakov (General Director of the Directorate for Strategic Planning and European Integration); Yuliya Nechyporenko (head of the main department for the protection of cultural heritage and museums of the Directorate of Cultural Heritage) 238 ANNEXES ANNEXES 23 karima Ben Bih (Senior Disaster Risk Management Specialist); Yuna Chun (Urban Development Analyst); Oleksandr Dovbnia (Consultant, SCAUR) Tetiana Shulha (Project Officer, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Fernando Fonseca (Policy Officer, Directorate General for Neighborhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) Support Group for Ukraine (SGUA)) PRoDUCTIvE SECToRS Agriculture Oleksiy Pinchuk (Head of the Department of International Policy of the Ministry of Agrarian Policy and Food) Sergiy Zorya (lead Agriculture Economist) Christian Ben Hell (Sector Manager for Land, Agriculture, Forestry, and Food Safety, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Markus Klingler Irrigation and Water Resources Oleksandr Bon (Deputy Director of the Department, Head of the Marine Policy Department of the Ministry of the Environment) Ranu Sinha (Irrigation and Drainage Specialist); Frank van Steenbergen (Irrigation and Drainage Consultant) Christian Ben Hell (Sector Manager for Land, Agriculture, Forestry, and Food Safety, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine) (for irrigation) Commerce and Industry Oleksandr Maksymov (Director of Property Policy Department of the Ministry of Economy) Sunita varada (Senior Private Sector Development Specialist); Stefka Slavova (Lead Economist); Alberto Criscuolo (Senior Economist); Blerta Qerimi (Senior Private Sector Expert) Iryna Hubarets (Project Officer, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Stanislav Toshkov (Program Officer, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine) Financial Sector/Banking Alina Pogribna (Head of the Department of Cooperation with the World Bank Group of the Department of International Financial Projects of the Ministry of Finance); Pervin Dadashova (Director of Financial Stability Department) Johanna Jaeger (Senior Financial Sector Specialist); Yevhen Hrebeniuk (Financial Sector Specialist); Klym Naumenko (Consultant) Vitaliya Mudruk; (Project Officer, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Olga Chilat (Project Officer, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine) INFRASTRUCTURE SECToRS Energy and Extractives Olena Biryukova (Director of the Department of Finance and Public Property Management of the Ministry of Energy); Andarak Roman (General Director of the Directorate of Strategic Planning and European integration of the Ministry of Energy); Sofiya Serhiyivna Ugryumova (Head of the Main Department for Ensuring the Functioning of Oil and Gas Markets of the Directorate of the Oil and Gas Complex and Development of Oil, Natural Gas and Petroleum Products Markets of the Ministry of Energy); Oleksandr Kropot (Acting Director of the Industry Department of the Ministry of Strategy and Industry); Farid Safarov (Ministry of Energy, Deputy Minister on Digitalization); Alexander Kharchenko (Advisor to Minister of Energy); Oleksandr Petroshchuk (State Expert of the Strategic and Budget Planning Expert Group of the Directorate of Strategic Planning and European Integration of the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development); Oleksandr Tron (Deputy Director of Department of Life–Support Systems Economics of the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development); Vladyslav Filipov (Senior Expert on district heating of the Reform Support Office under the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development); Project Management Unit’s team for “Ukraine District Heating Energy Efficiency Project” – Konstantin Stanitsky and Stanislav Terletskyi; Ministry of Regions, Project Management Unit’s team for “Ukraine District Heating Energy Efficiency Project” – Konstantin Stanitsky and Stanislav Terletskyi; Olena Biryukova (Director of the Department of Finance and Public Property Management of the Ministry of Energy); Roman Andarak (General Director of the Directorate of Strategic Planning and European integration of the Ministry of Energy); GAS TSO’s working group on damage assessment: Kateryna Kovalenko; Olga Belkova; Ksenia Nazarenko; Mykyta Slobodyan; Ukrenergo: Oleh Pavlenko; Olha Pershyna 24  ANNEXES ANNEXES 239 Silvia Martinez Romero (Senior Energy Specialist); Koji Nishida (Senior Energy SpecialistSepcialist); Roman Novikov (Energy Specialist); Odile Ivette Johnson Naveo ((Senior Energy Consultant); Anders Pedersen (Senior Energy Specialist); Ashish Shrestha (Energy Consultant); Sandu Ghidirim (Senior Energy Specialist) Operations Officer) Wolfhart Pohl (Lead Specialist for Environment Specialist and Geosciences); Alexander Johannes Huurdeman (Senior Oil and Gas Specialist Expert); Roman Novikov (Energy Specialist) Torsten Woellert (Team Leader Energy and Environment, Support Group for Ukraine, European Commission); Denys Prusakov (Sector Manager, Energy, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Andriy Bandura (Sector Manager Energy- Gas, Oil and Energy Efficiency, the Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Ruta Baltause (Energy Expert Directorate General for Neighborhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) Support Group for Ukraine (SGUA)); Krzysztof Gierulski (Directorate General for Neighborhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) Support Group for Ukraine (SGUA)) (district heating, CHP); Marcus Lippold (Advisor, Directorate General for Neighborhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) Support Group for Ukraine (SGUA)) European Commission) Transport Anna Yurchenko (Deputy Minister of Infrastructure of Ukraine for European Integration); Iryna Kucheruk (Director International Department Cooperation and Investment Policies of the Ministry of Infrastructure); Pechochnyk Taras (Deputy Director of the Department International Cooperation and Investment Policy, Head of the Investment Department Policies of the Ministry of Infrastructure) Dominic Pasquale Patella (Senior Transport Specialist); yevhen Bulakh (Transport Specialist); Anna Vazhnenko (Transport Consultant); Anton Hagen (Transport Consultant); Andriy Koretsky (Transport Consultant); Yuliana (Julia) Havryliuk (Transport Consultant); Yurii Lozovenko (Transport Consultant); Artem Poliukh (Transport Consultant); Oleksandr Karnachev (Transport Consultant) Agnieszka Skiba (Program Officer, Infrastructure, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Svitlana Didkivska (Project Manager – Transport, Digital issues, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Daniel Jacques (Policy Officer, Directorate General for Neighborhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) Support Group for Ukraine (SGUA)) Telecommunications and Digital Marianna Kaninets (Chief Specialist of the Department of Implementation of Financial SSD in the Regions of the Fixed and Mobile SSD Directorate of the Ministry of Digital); Mykola Kozlov (Acting General Director of the State Enterprise “Information Court Systems”); Volodymyr Popov (Advisor to the General Director of the State Enterprise “Information Court Systems”, Judicial Expert); Ihor Starodubov (Director of the Separate Structural Subdivision of the State Enterprise “Information Judicial Systems,” “Center for Forensic Examination and Expert Research,” President of the All-Ukrainian Public Organization “Union of Experts of Ukraine,” Judicial Expert, Patent Attorney, Appraiser, Candidate of Legal Sciences) Natalija Gelvanovska Garcia (Senior Digital Development Specialist); Mykhailo Koltsov (Consultant); Marta Khomyn (Consultant) Svitlana Didkivska (Project Manager, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Sergiy Ladnyy (Project Manager, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Jenni Lundmark (Head of the Public Finance Management, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine) Water Supply and Sanitation Prykhodko Roman (Senior Expert on Water Supply and Drainage of the Reform Support Office under the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development); Oleksandr Petroshchuk (State Expert of the Strategic and Budget Planning Expert Group of the Directorate of Strategic Planning and European Integration of the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development); Oleksandr Ilinskyi (Deputy Director of Department of Life–Support Systems Economics of the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development); Viktor Cherevko (Head of the Department of State Environmental Supervision (Control) of Natural Resources of the Ministry of the Environment); Victor Doroshenko (Head of UIP2 CPMU, the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development) Ivaylo kolev (Senior Water Supply and Sanitation Specialist) Olga Simak (Sector Manager, Environment, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Gregory Tsouris (Green Deal Counsellor, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine) 240 ANNEXES ANNEXES 25 Municipal Services oleksandr Petroschuk (State Expert of the Strategic and Budget Planning Expert Group of the Directorate of Strategic Planning and European Integration of the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development); Anna Nyzhnyk (Acting Director General of the Directorate of Strategic Planning and European Integration of the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development); Didenko Lesya (Deputy Director of the Department of Implementation of Priority Regional Development Projects of the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development), Diana Novikova (Chief Specialist of the Department of Household Waste Management and Communal Services of the Department of Communal Services and Communal Services of the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development); Yuliia Tarakanova (Deputy Head of Division of International Projects of the Department of Implementation of Priority Regional Development Projects of the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development); Kateryna Pechonchyk (Chief Specialist of the Expert Group for Monitoring the Provision of Administrative Services of the Directorate for System Development of the Provision of Administrative Services of the Ministry of Digital); Mykola Kozlov (Acting General Director of the State Enterprise “Information Court Systems”); Volodymyr Popov (Advisor to the General Director of the State Enterprise “Information Court Systems,” Judicial Expert); Ihor Starodubov (Director of the Separate Structural Subdivision of the State Enterprise “Information Judicial Systems,” “Center for Forensic Examination and Expert Research,” President of the All-Ukrainian Public Organization “Union of Experts of Ukraine”, Judicial Expert, Patent Attorney, Appraiser, Candidate of Legal Sciences); Matsyk Yuriy (Director of the Fixed and Mobile SHSD Directorate) Debashree Poddar (Urban Development Specialist) and Noriko oe (Senior Urban Development Specialist); Oleksandr Dovbnia (Senior Urban Consultant, SCAUR); Ellen Hamilton (Lead Urban Development Specialist) Krzysztof Gierulski, (Directorate General for Neighborhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) Support Group for Ukraine (SGUA)); Natalia Starostenko (Project Officer, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine) CRoSS-CUTTING SECToRS Environment and Forestry Anastasia Drapalyuk (Head of the Department for the Protection and Use of the Nature Reserve Fund of the Department of the Nature Reserve Fund and Land Resources of the Ministry of the Environment); Oleksandr Skakalskyi (Deputy Head of the Department – Head of the Department of State Environmental Supervision (Control) of Industrial Pollution of the State Environmental Inspection); Yury Katsagorov (Deputy Head of the Department of State Ecological Supervision (Control) of Biological Resources – Head of the Department of State Ecological Supervision (Control) of Forests and Flora – Senior State Inspector for Environmental Protection) oksana Rakovych (Environmental Specialist); Funke Asaolu (Senior Environmental Specialist); Elena Strukova Golub (Senior Environmental Economist); Madhavi M. Pillai (Senior Natural Resources Management Specialist); Myles Mac Donncadha (Senior Forest Consultant) Olga Simak (Sector Manager, Environment, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Gregory Tsouris (Green Deal Counsellor, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine) Emergency Response and Civil Protection Vaskovskyi Oleksandr (Deputy Director of the Resources Department, State Emergency Service (SESU)); Ihor Sheliuk (Senior Specialist of the Resources Department, State Emergency Service (SESU)); Semenets Svitlana (State Emergency Service (SESU)); Petro Kropotov (State Emergency Service (SESU)) Zuzana Stanton-Geddes (Senior Disaster Risk Management Specialist); Krunoslav Katic (Senior Disaster Risk Management Consultant); Alanna Simpson (Lead Disaster Risk Management Specialist); Maksym Dovhanovskyi (Consultant, SCAUR) Alejandro Eggenschwiler (Program Officer, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Martin Schroeder (Head of Section – Operations, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine) Justice and Public Administration Zurab Adeishvili (Office of the Prosecutor General); Gizo Uglava (Acting Director, National Anti-Corruption Bureau); Andrii Daniliuk (Head of Section of Construction and Reconstruction, State Asset Management Department, State Judicial Administration); Anna Tyshchenko (Director of the International Disputes Department of the Ministry of Justice) Laura Pop (Senior Financial Sector Specialist); Iryna Shcherbyna (Senior Public Sector Specialist), David S. Bernstein (Lead Public Sector Specialist), Vitalii Kasko (Consultant); Daniela V. Felcman (Senior Governance Specialist); Oleksii Balabushko (Lead Governance Specialist); Klaus Decker (Senior Public Sector Specialist) 26  ANNEXES ANNEXES 241 Clemens Mueller (Policy Officer, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Manfredas Limantas (Program Manager – Justice, Anti-Corruption, and Rule of Law, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Ruta Baltause (Deputy Team Leader, Directorate General for Neighborhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) Support Group for Ukraine (SGUA); Markijan Zelak (Senior Adviser on Public Finance, Good Governance Team, European Union Advisory Mission) land Decontamination Dmytro Yurchuk (State Emergency Service (DSNS)); Dmytro Saltykov (State Emergency Service (DSNS)); Dmytro Valentinovych Yurchuk, Dmytro Olegovich Saltykov Alanna Simpson (Lead Disaster Risk Management Specialist); Zuzana Stanton-Geddes (Senior Disaster Risk Management Specialist); Tomislav Vondracek (Demining Expert); Krunoslav Katic (Senior Disaster Risk Management Consultant) Alejandro Eggenschwiler (Program Officer, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Martin Schroeder (Head of Section – Operations, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine), Barbara Rotovnik (Program Officer, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine) Macroeconomic Impact, Poverty Tetyana Borshchenko (State Expert of the Expert Group on Socio-economic Forecasting of the Directorate of Strategic Planning, Policy Coordination and European Integration of the Ministry of Social Policy) Anastasia Golovach (Senior Economist); Maryna Sidarenka (Economist); Tom Bundervoet (Lead Economist); Kristina Noelle Vaughan (Economist) Panagiotis Stamoulis (Policy Officer, (Directorate General for Neighborhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) Support Group for Ukraine (SGUA))); Julda Kielyte (Team Leader Directorate General for Neighborhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) Support Group for Ukraine (SGUA)); Olga Chilat (Program Officer, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Marcus Lippold (Advisor, Directorate General for Neighborhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DG NEAR) Support Group for Ukraine (SGUA)) European Commission) Social inclusion and vulnerable populations Tetyana Borshchenko (State Expert of the Expert Group on Socio-economic Forecasting of the Directorate of Strategic Planning, Policy Coordination and European Integration of the Ministry of Social Policy); IDPs: Olena Kolchyk (Head of the Expert Group on Issues of Social Support of Certain Categories of the Population of the Directorate of Targeted Social Support of the Population and Development of Social Inspection) Gender: Nataliia Bohdanova (State Expert of the Expert Group on Combating Human Trafficking, Domestic Violence and Gender Equality of the Directorate for the Development of Social Services and Protection of Children’s Rights) Disability: Roman Pylypenko (State Expert of the Expert Group on Rehabilitation of the Directorate of Social Protection of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of the Ministry of Social Policy) Erik Johnson (Senior Social Development Specialist), Oleksandra Shatyrko (Social Development Specialist), Ray Salvatore Jennings (Consultant), Olga Kupets (Consultant) Gender: Jennifer Solotaroff (Senior Social Development Specialist), Dominik Koehler (Junior Professional Officer) Disability: Mirjahon Turdiev (Consultant) Martin Schroeder (Head of Section – Operations, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Tetiana Shulha (Project Officer, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine); Mira Didukh (Project Officer – Health and Social Policies, Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine) Cross-cutting issues considered across chapters Debris management: Diana Novikova (Chief Specialist of the Department of Household Waste Management and Communal Services of the Department of Communal Services and Communal Services of the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development); Nataliya Zaitseva (Senior Expert on Household Waste Management of the CPR of the Ministry of Regions); Roman Stepanovych Filonenko (Deputy Director of the Department – Head of the Environmental Safety Department of the Department for Waste Management and Environmental Safety of the Ministry of the Environment) Krunoslav Katic (Senior Disaster Risk Management Consultant) 242 ANNEXES ANNEXES 27 Data and analytical support was also coordinated by World Bank’s Data team with contributions from Keith Patrick Garrett (Manager, DECAT), Holly Krambeck (Program Manager, DECAT), Gabriel Stefanini Vicente (Consultant, DECAT), Claudia Calderon Machicado (Consultant, DECAT), Sahiti Sarva (Consultant, DECAT), Oleksandra Postavnicha (IT Officer/Engineering, ITSTI), Stela Mocan (Manager, ITSTI), Robert Mansour Harrison (IT Analyst, Business Solutions, ITSES), Rochelle Glenene O’Hagan (Senior Data Scientist, DECIS), Benjamin P. Stewart (Senior Geographer, DECAT), Clara Ivanescu (Geographer, DECAT), Jose Manuel Delgado Blasco (Consultant, DECAT), Andres Fernando Chamorro Elizondo (Geographer, DECAT), Benny Istanto (Consultant, DECAT), Min Jaegal (Consultant, DECAT), Natalija Gelvanovska-Garcia (Senior Digital Development Specialist, IDD01), Han Wang (IT Officer, Engineering, ITSTI), Chitra Balasubramanian (Consultant, DIME 4), Maria Ruth Jones (Survey Specialist, DIME 3), Robert Andrew Marty (Research Analyst, DIME 4), Mykhailo Kolstov (Consultant, IDD01), Nick Jones (Data Scientist, GFDRR), Sam Blackwell Heroy (Consultant, GFDRR), and Harriet Mugera (Senior Data Scientist, DECAT). The World Bank gratefully acknowledges the support of Laura Cline (Program Manager, US State Department, Humanitarian Information Unit) for the timely access to satellite imagery. Data and information were also exchanged with a range of experts from the kyiv School of Economics: • Overall and process coordination: Daryna Marchak, Karina Korol • Social sphere: Inna Studennikova, Olexandra Kolomiets • Culture, sport, tourism: Yuliya Markuts, Dmytro Andriyenko • Transport: Taras Marshalok • Housing, assets of enterprises, industry, utilities, administrative buildings: Dmitry Goryunov • Education, health care: Yuri Gaidai • Energy: Nataliya Shapoval, Denis Sakva • Trade, malls: Max Gavryshin • Infrastructure (Roads, Railway): Andrey Bezpyatov • Infrastructure (Avia): Vladislav Radikovich, Alla Bykovska • Agriculture and land resources: Roman Neyter, Natalia Shpygotska • Municipal services: Yuriy Holynskyy