Author(s)
World BankKeywords
ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLESBUDGET MONITORING
PUBLIC EXPENDITURE
PUBLIC SECTOR BORROWING
ACCOUNT
INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
PAYROLL
ACCOUNTABILITY
PUBLIC DEBT MANAGEMENT
BUDGETARY PROCESS
AUDITING STANDARDS
INTERNAL CONTROLS
PUBLIC EXPENDITURE REVIEW
INTERNAL AUDIT
SOCIAL SECTOR EXPENDITURES
GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT
BUDGET IMPLEMENTATION
FISCAL BALANCE
FINANCIAL RESULTS
BUDGET SYSTEM
APPROPRIATIONS
ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
FISCAL STRATEGIES
AUDITS
BUDGET PROCESS
FISCAL TRANSPARENCY
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
BUDGET REVENUES
SOCIAL SECTOR
BUDGETARY FUNDS
FISCAL REFORM
ADMINISTRATIVE REFORM
BUDGET CLASSIFICATION
CASH FLOWS
FISCAL CONTROLS
BUDGETARY RESOURCES
FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS
TAX
SOCIAL SECURITY
NATIONAL BUDGET
INTERNAL AUDITING
DIVISION OF POWERS
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
CIVIL SERVICE
AUDIT REPORTS
ECONOMIC GROWTH
FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING
ADMINISTRATION
EXECUTION
ACCOUNTANTS
PROCUREMENT
PUBLIC DEBT
FISCAL CONTROL
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
TAXATION
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS
WAGES
BUDGET ESTIMATES
ADJUSTMENT LENDING
CENTRAL AGENCIES
FINANCIAL PROGRAMMING
BUDGETING
FISCAL REFORMS
RECURRENT EXPENDITURES
FISCAL YEAR
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT
STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT
PUBLIC INVESTMENT
AUDITING
BUDGET SURPLUS
BUDGET EXPENDITURES
LEGAL FRAMEWORK
BUDGETARY PROCESSES
CASH PAYMENTS
PRIVATE SECTOR
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
TREASURY
FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION
LEGAL PROVISIONS
LEGISLATION
SOCIAL ASSISTANCE
BUDGET EXECUTION
AUTONOMY
FISCAL MANAGEMENT
JUDICIARY
ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
ACCOUNTS
PUBLIC EXPENDITURES
DEBT SERVICING
FISCAL SUSTAINABILITY
PUBLIC FUNDING
HUMAN RESOURCES
INTERNATIONAL ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
ACCOUNTING
PUBLIC SECTOR MANAGEMENT
ACCOUNTING PRACTICES
INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
MUNICIPALITIES
FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE
QUALITY CONTROL
FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY
LAWS
AGGREGATE FISCAL DISCIPLINE
PUBLIC SECTOR
FISCAL DISCIPLINE
CASH MANAGEMENT
FISCAL PERFORMANCE
REPORTING
Full record
Show full item recordOnline Access
http://hdl.handle.net/10986/8302Abstract
Chile's macroeconomic policies and strong fundamentals have, to a large extent, insulated it from regional crises, and have allowed continued growth in recent years, albeit at lower rates than in the mid-1990s. Economic performance continues to outpace that of the rest of the Region, and in per capita terms, GDP growth has averaged 4 percent per year since 1990, versus one percent for the Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) region during the same period. This performance is sustained by sound policies and an ambitious structural reform agenda. The abundant trust in government in Chile today, can be attributed, in part, to two elements of transparency: its fiscal reporting, and the incontestable review by a competent, independent authority - the CGR (Controller General of the Republic). Furthermore, Chile has effectively centralized policies and procedures to support aggregate fiscal discipline, yet, its public financial management is characterized by a unique blend of strengths and weakness. Chile is well into the second generation of public sector reforms. Notwithstanding the favorable status of financial management, to advance with modernization in terms of fiscal transparency, several issues have to be addressed. For Chile to emerge at the forefront of public sector management, it should issue its annual financial statements with an audit opinion, adherent with international accounting standards. But to render opinions, the CGR would have to distance itself from both the ex ante approval role of budget uses, and the preparation of the annual financial statements. Thus, the authorities should consider a solution that complies with international practices, and accommodates with country constraints.Date
2005-06Type
Economic & Sector WorkIdentifier
oai:openknowledge.worldbank.org:10986/8302http://hdl.handle.net/10986/8302
Copyright/License
CC BY 3.0 IGOCollections
Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
Mongolia Public Financial Management Performance ReportWorld Bank (Washington, DC, 2015-04)This public financial management
 performance report (PFM-PR) is the first assessment of
 Mongolia’s PFM system using the public expenditure and
 financial accountability (PEFA) framework. The report aims
 principally to establish an objective baseline measure of
 current PFM performance, highlighting areas of absolute and
 relative strength and weakness, thereby enabling a
 stock-taking of over a decade of PFM reforms in Mongolia and
 guiding the government in its reform priorities. The
 assessment covers PFM at the budgetary central government
 level. The PEFA is an evidence-based methodology that
 measures the performance of a country’s PFM system at a
 particular point in time using a set of standardized
 indicators. The assessment is done on six dimensions of an
 open and orderly PFM system identified by the framework,
 which are: credibility of the budget; comprehensiveness and
 transparency; policy-based budgeting; predictability and
 control in budget execution; accounting, recording, and
 reporting; and external scrutiny and audit. This PEFA
 assessment will complement the considerable work that has
 already taken place on public expenditure management, which
 includes regular economic updates, public investment
 reviews, procurement reviews, analytic work conducted and
 supported by the World Bank funded technical assistance
 projects, as well as technical assistance mission reports of
 the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
-
Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability AssessmentGovernment of Nepal Ministry of Finance (World Bank, Kathmandu, 2015-05)The objective of this assessment is to
 update the public expenditure and financial accountability
 (PEFA) assessment published in early 2008. The assessment is
 expected to assist the Government of Nepal to: (a) establish
 indicator led assessment of the country’s public financial
 management (PFM) system, (b) update the fiduciary
 environment of the PFM systems and processes of the country,
 and (c) assist in identifying those parts of the PFM system
 that may need further reform and development. The
 institutional and organizational approach taken by the
 Government of Nepal ensured coordination among various
 government institutions. The assessment included collection
 of additional documentation, including meeting minutes, and
 interviews with government counterpart teams and main
 stakeholders. The report was updated and refined following
 advice from a World Bank team. A specialist in the use of
 PEFA methodology assisted in the later drafts and visited
 Nepal in August 17-20, 2014. Meetings were held with the
 PEFA Secretariat at the Financial Comptroller General Office
 (FCGO) and with the Ministry of Finance (MoF) Budget
 Division. This final draft of the report addresses all the
 comments received up to November 31, 2014. The findings of
 the assessment were shared with the donors in September 2014
 and their comments assisted the finalization of the draft
 report. The World Bank also provided continuous quality
 control support.
-
Serbia Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability Performance ReportWorld Bank (Washington, DC, 2015-06-29)A Public Expenditure and Financial
 accountability (PEFA) repeat assessment was conducted in the
 Republic of Serbia (RoS) between November 2014 and May 2015
 by an independent team of experts, led by the World Bank
 (WB). The assessment was financed jointly by the
 Strengthening of Accountability and the Fiduciary
 Environment (SAFE) Trust Fund of the Swiss State Secretariat
 for Economic Affairs (SECO), the European Union Delegation
 to Serbia (EU Delegation) and WB. The period covered by this
 Assessment (2011-2013) was dominated by the challenges posed
 by the aftermath of the global economic recession which
 affected macro-fiscal performances. Notwithstanding these
 challenges PFM improvements can be observed in strengthening
 legislative framework, and Budget classification, multi-year
 fiscal planning, procurement and external audit. In other
 areas such as the composition of expenditure out-turn
 compared with originally approved budget, expenditures
 arrears, oversight of fiscal risk, and effectiveness of tax
 collection, predictability in the availability of funds,
 application of public sector accounting standards
 application and legislative scrutiny of annual budget law
 and final accounts, further work is needed to improve PFM performance.