Evidence of Development Impact from Institutional Change : A Review of the Evidence on Open Budgeting
Keywords
UNIVERSAL ACCESSPROGRAM DESIGN
PUBLIC SECTOR ENTITY
CIVIL SOCIETY
POLITICAL PARTIES
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
FIGHTING CORRUPTION
BUDGET DATA
INCOME LEVEL
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
GOVERNANCE INDICATORS
SOCIAL AUDITS
CIVIL RIGHTS
PUBLIC AUTHORITIES
ACCOUNTABILITY RELATIONSHIPS
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
SOCIAL JUSTICE
FINANCIAL RESOURCES
CITIZENS
STAKEHOLDER
BUDGET INFORMATION
PUBLIC MANAGEMENT
PUBLIC HEARINGS
MUNICIPAL LEVEL
DECENTRALIZATION
PUBLIC AUDITS
CAPITAL INVESTMENTS
POLITICAL LEADERSHIP
STATE BUDGET
INCOME LEVELS
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS
PUBLIC EXPENDITURE
RECONSTRUCTION
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
POLITICAL ECONOMY
INCOME
CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT
AUDITORS
SERVICE QUALITY
URBANIZATION
CIVIL LIBERTIES
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
PRIMARY EDUCATION
BUDGET DEFICIT
PUBLIC CAPITAL
POLITICAL RIGHTS
FISCAL TRANSPARENCY
POLITICAL STABILITY
COMMUNITY MEMBERS
POVERTY IMPACT
DEMOCRACY
POSITIVE IMPACTS
PROGRAMS
PUBLIC EXPENDITURE TRACKING
QUALITY OF SERVICES
INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE
SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY
HEALTH OUTCOMES
MUNICIPAL COUNCILS
VILLAGE
TRANSPARENCY
LOCAL AUTHORITIES
MACROECONOMIC STABILITY
BUDGET TRANSPARENCY
EXPENDITURE PRIORITIES
INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS
BUDGET IMPLEMENTATION
SOCIAL SECURITY
ACCOUNTABILITY
STAKEHOLDERS
PUBLIC EXPENDITURES
PARTICIPATORY PROCESSES
INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
PUBLIC SECTOR MANAGEMENT
TAX POLICY
QUALITATIVE DATA
OUTSIDE OBSERVERS
PUBLIC GOODS
BUDGET CYCLE
PROGRAM OUTCOMES
GOVERNANCE INSTITUTIONS
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
DECISION MAKING
ALLOCATION OF RESOURCES
CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT
POLITICAL PARTY
REGULATORY QUALITY
CRIME
PER CAPITA INCOME
PUBLIC DISCLOSURE
PUBLIC SECTOR
AID ALLOCATION
SOCIAL INTERACTIONS
HEALTH CARE
OUTCOME INDICATORS
BUDGET PRIORITIES
FISCAL INFORMATION
ABSENTEEISM
DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES
EFFICIENCY GAINS
FLEXIBILITY
ACCESS TO INFORMATION
FINANCIAL SITUATION
SERVICE DELIVERY
HEALTH SERVICES
PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING
PUBLIC RESOURCES
MEASURING CORRUPTION
PUBLIC ACCESS
MORAL OBLIGATION
BUDGET PREPARATION
ALLOCATION OF FUNDS
DEBT
GOVERNMENT EFFECTIVENESS
BUDGET INITIATIVES
CITIZEN VOICE
INFANT MORTALITY
DECISION-MAKING PROCESS
PUBLIC FINANCE
CITIZEN OVERSIGHT
PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY
INFORMATION FLOWS
SANITATION
BUDGET PROCESS
RULE OF LAW
CORRUPTION
BUDGET RESOURCES
COMMUNITY SCORECARDS
SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISMS
PUBLIC ACTION
SERVICE PROVISION
BUDGET ALLOCATIONS
CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONS
BUDGETING PROCESS
BUDGET OUTCOMES
ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISM
DECISION-MAKING
INSTITUTIONAL QUALITY
TAX REVENUES
SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTION
PUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
MOBILIZATION
POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS
BEST PRACTICES
LOCAL PUBLIC GOODS
EXTRACTIVE SECTORS
ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISMS
CITIZEN FEEDBACK
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
CAPACITY BUILDING
PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES
PUBLIC SERVICE
PUBLIC DEMAND
EXPENDITURE TRACKING SURVEYS
INEQUALITY
ENFORCEABILITY
GOVERNMENT BUDGET
GOOD GOVERNANCE
PUBLIC HEALTH
LOCAL PARTICIPATION
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS
MUNICIPALITIES
PUBLIC SERVICES
PUBLIC FUNDS
AUDIT PROCESS
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES
SOCIAL WELFARE
BUDGETARY DECISION
EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES
BUDGET POLICIES
PUBLIC SPENDING
SOCIAL ASSISTANCE
DEMOCRATIZATION
PUBLIC AGENCIES
PUBLIC WORKS
RESOURCE ALLOCATION
CAPITAL SPENDING
STATED OBJECTIVES
POVERTY REDUCTION
DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY
PROGRAM EVALUATIONS
CITIZEN
RIGHT TO INFORMATION
STREET LIGHTING
CIVIL SERVANTS
EVALUATION CAPACITY
INDEPENDENT BUDGET ANALYSIS
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
INTERNATIONAL AID
AID EFFECTIVENESS
BUDGET DECISION
PUBLIC SECTOR ENTITIES
PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS
QUALITY ASSURANCE
COLLECTIVE ACTION
LOCAL GOVERNANCE
COUNTRY EXPERTS
Full record
Show full item recordOnline Access
http://hdl.handle.net/10986/19357Abstract
Despite the growing body of literature examining the effectiveness of transparency and accountability initiatives, there remains limited substantiation for whether and how open budgeting contributes to reductions in poverty and improvements in the lives of the poor. This paper reviews available evidence and conclude that institutional changes can contribute to higher-level outcomes in certain contexts. The approach first draws from existing studies of transparency and accountability initiatives and then follows their references to broaden the evidence base. The findings highlight the importance of measuring budget transparency, accountability, and participation and tracing their outcomes along an incremental, nonlinear results chain. Logical links or ongoing loops in this sequence include the interplay or interdependency among these three dimensions; the subsequent achievement of key, often mutually reinforcing, intermediate development outcomes; and ultimately, improved program or service delivery as the key lever for influencing development impact. Rather than establishing standard indicators, the process begins to identify which aspects of the institutional change are valid for measurement and what contextual factors to consider. Overall, this review serves as a starting point and underscores the need for further investigation to establish effective measurement practices of institutional change and build an evidence base for understanding the relative robustness of institutional change paths and the context in which they are likely to matter.Date
2014-07Identifier
oai:openknowledge.worldbank.org:10986/19357http://hdl.handle.net/10986/19357
Copyright/License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo/Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
Global Stock-Take of Social Accountability Initiatives for Budget Transparency and Monitoring : Key Challenges and Lessons LearnedWorld Bank (Washington, DC, 2014-01-29)Budgets are key documents that lay out a government's economic priorities in terms of policies and programs. Budget transparency refers to the extent and ease with which citizens can access information about and provide feedback on government revenues, allocations, and expenditures. Budget monitoring entails using such information to analyze, critique, and track government finances in order to provide this feedback. Budget transparency is a prerequisite for public participation and accountability, which are instrumental for a democratic and legitimate budget process. Both budget transparency and monitoring efforts also help remove institutional bottlenecks that result in delayed budget allocations, thereby jeopardizing the delivery of vital services to people. Even though they have a far-reaching impact on the lives of people, opening up budgets beyond the exclusive domain of policy makers and administrators is a relatively recent phenomenon that has gained momentum in the last two decades. The stock taking exercise illustrates the range of mechanisms involved in Budget Transparency and Monitoring (BT&M) in different contexts and demonstrates significant promise of influencing governance processes and outcomes. Finally, there is a dearth of literature on initiatives that have not achieved their goals, which would allow lessons to be drawn from these failures. There are incentives to document successes rather than failures, but there is value in documenting failures because this allows for a better understanding of the challenges and opportunities that may be useful to consider when designing future BT&M interventions.
-
Improving the Quality of Public Expenditure in the Dominican RepublicWorld Bank (Washington, DC, 2017-08-14)This book addresses the achievements,
 challenges, and opportunities to improve the quality of
 public spending. Steps to make such changes have come
 through monitoring and evaluation approaches that can be
 replicated or expanded; sectoral efforts to improve the
 performance of priority programs; Congress's use of
 information on the results of public spending; the
 implementation of performance budgeting at subnational
 levels; and the harmonization of accounting between the
 three levels of the federal government. All these aspects
 are key elements of comprehensive reform. Currently, as the
 book states, accountability focuses on achieving results
 rather than on centering attention on mere compliance with
 rules and procedures. In this context, based on a new legal
 framework, the government of Mexico has decisively promoted
 results-based management and budgeting. The Performance
 Evaluation System (SED) was finally established in 2008 with
 the institution of the principles, concepts, methodologies,
 guidelines, procedures, and systems that support its
 operation. Its adoption as a common practice in the Federal
 Public Administration (APF) process will require a gradual,
 progressive, systematic learning and continuous improvement
 that should allow performance evaluation to take root in the
 APF. This calls for consolidating the Results-Based
 Budgeting (RBB)-SED in all agencies, expanding its use and
 improving the quality of the information that feeds it.
 However, not just the APF benefit will from the
 implementation of the RBB-SED. As the publication suggests,
 the approach to an expenditure budget based on performance
 information offers Congress great opportunities to enhance
 its regulatory and supervisory functions. The improvement in
 the quality of Matrices de Indicadores para Resultados
 (MIRs), program evaluations, and their integration into the
 budgetary programming cycle also contributes to this purpose.
-
Strengthening Local Government Budgeting and AccountabilityYilmaz, Serdar; Schaeffer, Michael (World Bank, Washington, DC, 2012-06-01)In many developing and middle-income countries, decentralization reforms are promoting changes in governance structures that are reshaping the relationship between local governments and citizens. The success of these decentralization reforms depends on the existence of sound public financial systems both at the central and local levels. This paper focuses on the role of budgeting as a critical tool in reform efforts, highlighting problems that might impede successful local government budget development and implementation. The attainment of effective local government accountability and transparency is not an end itself, but rather it represents the means to support better decision-making on national and local budgeting. Community based schemes for enhancing local government accountability need to combine legal, political, and administrative mechanisms with proactive community involvement. Of particular importance are the legal and budgetary instruments that require input from local community members on certain local government decisions and instruments that increase accessibility for the press or the general public at large to information on government activities.