… <ul><li>THE OPEN BUDGET INDEX   and other indicators of accountable  </li></ul><ul><li>public financial management </li>...
… <ul><li>THE OPEN BUDGET INDEX   and other indicators of accountable PFM  </li></ul>
<ul><li>Joint effort by civil society to collect a comparative data set that covers: </li></ul><ul><li>Public access to bu...
 
 
Purposes <ul><li>A focal point for public discussion of budget transparency and accountability – to generate understanding...
Are the OBI indicators similar to the other PFM indicators, such as PEFA? <ul><li>Yes, in many respects.  </li></ul><ul><l...
But they also differ from the PEFA indicators… <ul><li>OBI focus is on PFM system external ‘outputs,’ (i.e. timely informa...
Who has used the indicators? <ul><li>Civil society groups as a focal point for public events and discussions, </li></ul><u...
Also an important set of users… <ul><li>Reform-minded sitting or former officials </li></ul><ul><li>from ministries of fin...
Uses we expect in the future… <ul><li>Asses performance over time  </li></ul><ul><li>(2006 v. 2008) Trend within a country...
 
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

The open budget index

171

Published on

From May 2008 ICGFM Conference,THE OPEN BUDGET INDEX and other indicators of accountable public financial management, Pamela Gomez, International Budget Project

Published in: Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
171
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The open budget index

  1. 1. … <ul><li>THE OPEN BUDGET INDEX and other indicators of accountable </li></ul><ul><li>public financial management </li></ul><ul><li>ICGFM 2008 Miami Conference </li></ul><ul><li>May 20, 2008 </li></ul><ul><li>Pamela Gomez </li></ul><ul><li>Project Leader </li></ul><ul><li>Open Budget Initiative </li></ul><ul><li>International Budget Project </li></ul><ul><li>Center on Budget and Policy Priorities </li></ul><ul><li>820 First Street, NE </li></ul><ul><li>Washington, DC 20002 </li></ul><ul><li>E-mail: [email_address] </li></ul><ul><li>Tel. (202) 408-1080 </li></ul>
  2. 2. … <ul><li>THE OPEN BUDGET INDEX and other indicators of accountable PFM </li></ul>
  3. 3. <ul><li>Joint effort by civil society to collect a comparative data set that covers: </li></ul><ul><li>Public access to budget information at the national level throughout the entire budget year </li></ul><ul><li>Institutional issues: Legislatures and Supreme Audit Institutions </li></ul>
  4. 6. Purposes <ul><li>A focal point for public discussion of budget transparency and accountability – to generate understanding and political demand for reform. </li></ul><ul><li>A data set for research and advocacy </li></ul><ul><li>Capacity building. A survey instrument and other materials to promote awareness of international good practices related to PFM and how they might be applied in a particular country setting. </li></ul>
  5. 7. Are the OBI indicators similar to the other PFM indicators, such as PEFA? <ul><li>Yes, in many respects. </li></ul><ul><li>Both rely on many of the same principles that PMF experts consider sound public financial management practices. (IMF Code, OECD Best Practices) </li></ul><ul><li>Both rely on expert assessment or ‘coding,’ backed by evidence. (OBI: one researcher or research group, IBP reviewer, and two anonymous peer reviewers.) </li></ul>
  6. 8. But they also differ from the PEFA indicators… <ul><li>OBI focus is on PFM system external ‘outputs,’ (i.e. timely information disclosures), do not look at internal aspect of PFM systems. </li></ul><ul><li>OBI research is carried out independently of government. (Unannounced site visits to test for public availability of information.) </li></ul><ul><li>Government comment on the evaluation was not included in 2006, but has been invited in 2008 </li></ul><ul><li>All results are made public. Intended as tool to promote public discussion. Also, important to building representative sample for research. </li></ul>
  7. 9. Who has used the indicators? <ul><li>Civil society groups as a focal point for public events and discussions, </li></ul><ul><li>Credit rating agencies (e.g. Moody’s), </li></ul><ul><li>Bilateral donors: MCC for compact monitoring, </li></ul><ul><li>Multilateral donors: to triangulate their own assessments, as a tool to move the reform dialogue forward </li></ul><ul><li>Journalists, </li></ul><ul><li>Legislators (drafting or reviewing reform legislation), </li></ul><ul><li>Academic and research articles. </li></ul>
  8. 10. Also an important set of users… <ul><li>Reform-minded sitting or former officials </li></ul><ul><li>from ministries of finance, legislatures or </li></ul><ul><li>national audit offices who want to support a public discussion of the issues… </li></ul><ul><li>India Guatemala Egypt </li></ul><ul><li>Sri Lanka Philippines Uganda </li></ul><ul><li>Ghana Costa Rica South Africa </li></ul>
  9. 11. Uses we expect in the future… <ul><li>Asses performance over time </li></ul><ul><li>(2006 v. 2008) Trend within a country – who are the reformers? </li></ul><ul><li>Available in an expanded number of countries, at least 85 in October 2008 </li></ul>
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×