http://resourcegovernanceindex.org/ 2017 Resource Governance Index Measuring the quality of governance in the oil, gas and mining sectors of 81 countries. http://resourcegovernanceindex.org/country-profiles/MMR/mining http://resourcegovernanceindex.org/country-profiles/MMR/oil-gas http://resourcegovernanceindex.org/about/global-report

1. 7/30/2017 Resource Governance Index
http://resourcegovernanceindex.org/country-profiles/MMR/mining 1/6
2017 RESOURCE GOVERNANCE INDEX
Myanmar
MINING
Myanmar’s gemstone sector scores 27 of 100 points and
ranks 83rd among 89 assessments in the 2017 Resource
Governance Index (RGI). This assessment focuses solely on
Myanmar’s gemstone sector, which is governed by a
separate legal framework from other minerals. The
gemstone sector remains opaque, with a lack of public
access to rules on licensing or the scal regime. Myanmar
is one of the poorest countries in the world when
measured by gross domestic product per capita. The
country has su ered decades of internal con ict, partly
nanced by jade mining. Although signi cant variation
exists between valuations, Myanmar’s annual rough jade
production is generally estimated to be worth billions of
dollars. Improved transparency around the entire sector,
particularly in licensing, ownership, production and
revenue data, would be a step towards better governance.
MYANMAR (MINING): RGI
SCORE AND RANK
1st
89th
1
83rd

2. 7/30/2017 Resource Governance Index
http://resourcegovernanceindex.org/country-profiles/MMR/mining 2/6
MYANMAR (MINING): RGI AND COMPONENT SCORES
VALUE REALIZATION 33 /100
REVENUE
MANAGEMENT
30
/100
ENABLING
ENVIRONMENT
19
/100
COMPOSITE
27 /100
Average
Index results summary
MYANMAR’S GEMSTONE LICENSING SYSTEM IS AMONG THE MOST POORLY GOVERNED IN THE WORLD
Myanmar’s gemstone sector governance is poor in both value realization and revenue
management, and the country’s index performance is worsened by a failing enabling
environment. Licensing is the weakest element within value realization, with a score of four
of 100, placing Myanmar’s gemstone mining sector second-to-last, above Turkmenistan, in
the ranking. The government has virtually no transparency requirements and discloses
almost no information related to the licensing process, contracts or the identities of those
with ultimate nancial interests in the gemstone sector and trading companies. The latest
Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) country report contains an incomplete
list of gem and jade licenses, including some details on blocks and license holders. Most of
these permits have since expired and the identities of companies that won rights more
recently have not been disclosed. The government has committed to requiring disclosure
of bene cial owners of gemstone mining permit holders through its EITI bene cial
ownership disclosure roadmap.

3. 7/30/2017 Resource Governance Index
http://resourcegovernanceindex.org/country-profiles/MMR/mining 3/6
MYANMAR (MINING): SUBCOMPONENT SCORES
Best index score
Value
realization
Value
realization
LicensingTaxation
Localim
pact
State-ow
ned
enterprises
0
20
40
60
80
100
Revenue
m
anagem
ent
Revenue
m
anagem
ent
N
ationalbudgeting
Subnationalresource
revenue
s...
Sovereign
w
ealth
funds
0
20
40
60
80
100
Enabling
environm
ent
Enabling
environm
ent
Voice
and
accountability
G
overnm
ente
ectiveness
Regulatory
qualityRule
oflaw
Controlofcorruption
Politicalstability
and
absenc...
O
pen
data
0
20
40
60
80
100
Myanmar’s governance is poor in revenue management. The government only discloses
the total annual budget, while revenues from natural resources and projections for
gemstones are not available, despite the fact that gemstones are the largest mining sector
contributor to government revenue. In the context of Myanmar’s peace process, resource-
rich, con ict-a ected regions of the country have called for greater sharing of natural
resource revenues and management responsibilities. Governance challenges evidenced by

4. 7/30/2017 Resource Governance Index
http://resourcegovernanceindex.org/country-profiles/MMR/mining 4/6
the index results point to a need to improve transparency on actual and estimated
revenues as the rst step toward designing a revenue sharing system that distributes
bene ts equitably and allows oversight of compliance with these rules.
MYANMAR (MINING): LAW AND PRACTICE SCORES
Gap
Myanmar performs satisfactorily in governance of local impacts as a result of provisions
included in the general environmental law for disclosure of environmental and social
impact assessments and procedures for rehabilitation of closed mining projects. These
requirements are vague, however, and do not provide clear guidance for the gemstone
sector; as a result, indicators measuring practices in this area all achieve failing scores.
Myanmar demonstrates the widest gap between legal framework and implementation in
local impact among all assessments in the index. Lack of adequate oversight of gemstone
operations has reportedly led to human rights violations and environmental disasters.
Law
Practice
0 20 40 60 80 100
State-owned enterprise governance
MYANMAR GEMS ENTERPRISE REMAINS OPAQUE, RANKING GLOBALLY 21ST AMONG 22 STATE-OWNED
MINING ENTERPRISES GLOBALLY
With a failing score of 16 of 100, the Myanmar Gems Enterprise (MGE) ranks in the bottom
ten of all state-owned enterprises (SOE) assessed in the index, and lowest of those in the
Asia-Paci c region. In addition to MGE, military-controlled companies hold interests in
gemstone mining, which has kept the sector in the hands of the country’s former ruling
elite. Gemstones can be sold through “the Emporium,” a semi-annual trade event
organized by the MGE and the Myanmar Gems and Jewellery Entrepreneurs Association
(MGJEA), the country’s primary industry group, or through private transactions. Myanmar’s
SOE law and gemstone law do not contain rules on how the MGE joint ventures or private
operators should sell gemstones, which are mostly exported to China or Thailand.
Name of state-owned
enterprise
State
ownership
level
Revenue
(USD)
Score
(/100)
Rank
(/74 SOEs)
Rank
(/22 mining
SOEs)
Myanmar Gems
Enterprise
100% N/A 16 68 21

5. 7/30/2017 Resource Governance Index
http://resourcegovernanceindex.org/country-profiles/MMR/mining 5/6
Governance performance across oil, gas and
mining sectors
THE OIL AND GAS SECTOR OUTPERFORMS THE GEMSTONE SECTOR IN LICENSING AND SOE
GOVERNANCE
The licensing process for gemstone mining in Myanmar is the least transparent of all
countries in the index with a score of four of 100, whereas the oil and gas sector’s license
awards are somewhat more transparent, scoring 24 of 100 and ranking 67th among 89
assessments. The competitive bidding rounds organized by Myanmar Oil and Gas
Enterprise (MOGE) in 2013 and 2014 were signi cantly more transparent than previous
rounds. SOEs play a central role in the licensing process in both sectors but details on the
process, other than nal results, are rarely published.
Transparency around how much the government collects from both sectors and how these
revenues ow to the national budget is poor. Aggregate information on revenues collected
from extractive companies is disclosed through EITI, but only a fraction of gemstone
companies and their payments were included in the EITI country report. In both sectors,
taxes and payments are collected by several agencies; MOGE and MGE collect most
revenues, though the Internal Revenue Department of the Ministry of Planning and
Finance, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Conservation and the
Ministry of Energy and Electrical Power, and (for gemstones), the General Administration
Department, also collect forms of tax. There are de cits between audit requirements and
practices; for example, extractive companies are not audited by the national tax agency.
Results of audits conducted by the O ce of the Auditor General (OAG) on the di erent tax-
collecting agencies, including the SOEs MOGE and MGE, are not disclosed to the public.
Furthermore, military-controlled holding companies MEC and UMEHL, which also work in
the gemstone sector, have historically been exempt from the OAG audit.
Di erences between the two sectors emerge in the governance of SOEs. The EITI country
report discloses the cost of non-operational activities, revenues transferred to the
government, and the cost of non-operational activities and production volume and value
for MOGE. However, it includes only an aggregate gure on MGE’s payments to
government.
MYANMAR: OIL & GAS VS. MINING SCORES

6. 7/30/2017 Resource Governance Index
http://resourcegovernanceindex.org/country-profiles/MMR/mining 6/6
MYANMAR: OIL & GAS VS. MINING SCORES
100 80 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 80 100
CompositeComposite
MMIINNIINNGGOOIILL && GGAASS
100 80 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 80 100
Value realizationValue realization
Licensing
Taxation
Local impact
State-owned enterprises
100 80 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 80 100
Revenue managementRevenue management
National budgeting
Subnational resource reve...
Sovereign wealth funds
What is the Resource Governance Index?
The 2017 RGI assesses how 81 resource-rich countries govern their oil, gas and mineral
wealth. The index composite score is made up of three components. Two measure key
characteristics of the extractives sector – value realization and revenue management – and
a third captures the broader context of governance — the enabling environment. These
three overarching dimensions of governance consist of 14 subcomponents, which
comprise 54 indicators calculated by aggregating 133 questions and external data.
Independent researchers, overseen by NRGI, in each of the 81 countries completed a
questionnaire to gather primary data on value realization and revenue management. For
the third component, the RGI draws on external data from over 20 international
organizations. The assessment covers the period 2015-2016. For more information on the
index, how it was constructed, and references to external data, review the RGI
Methodology.

7. 2017
Resource
Governance
Index
Myanmar (mining)
83rd
COLOMBIA (MINERÍA):
CALIFICACIÓN Y CLASIFICACIÓN EN EL IGR
Bueno
(>75)
Satisfactorio
(60-74)
Débiles
(45-59)
Pobre
(30-44)
Defecto
(<29)
၂၀၁၇ခု သယံဇာတ စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈ အၫႊန္းကိန္း (RGI) အရ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ၏ ေက်ာက္မ်က္ရတနာ က႑သည္ အမွတ္ ၁၀၀ အနက္ ၂၇ မွတ္ရွိၿပီး
အကဲျဖတ္ခ်က္ ၈၉ ခုတြင္ အဆင့္ ၈၃ ေနရာတြင္ ရွိသည္။ ယင္း အကဲျဖတ္ခ်က္သည္ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ၏ ေက်ာက္မ်က္က႑ တစ္ခုတည္းတြင္သာ မူတည္
ေဆာင္ရြက္ျခင္းျဖစ္ၿပီး၊ အျခားဓာတ္သတၳဳမ်ားမွ သီးျခားတရားဝင္ မူေဘာင္က လႊမ္းမိုးထားသည္။ ေက်ာက္မ်က္က႑သည္ ပြင္႔လင္း ျမင္သာမႈ မရွိေသးဘဲ
ရွိေနဆဲျဖစ္ၿပီး၊ လိုင္စင္ခ်ထား ေပးမႈ သို႔မဟုတ္ ဘ႑ာေရး စီမံခန္႔ခြဲျခင္းဆိုင္ရာ စည္းမ်ဥ္း စည္းကမ္းမ်ားကို ျပည္သူမ်ားသိရွိခြင့္ မရွိေပ။ ျပည္တြင္း
အသားတင္ထုတ္လုပ္မႈႏွင့္ တစ္ဦးခ်င္း ဝင္ေငြမ်ားအရ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံသည္ ကမၻာ့အဆင္းရဲဆုံး ႏိုင္ငံမ်ားတြင္ အပါအဝင္ျဖစ္သည္။ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံသည္
ျပည္တြင္းစစ္၏ဒဏ္ကို ဆယ္စုႏွစ္ေပါင္း မ်ားစြာခံစားရလ်က္ရွိသည္။ စစ္ကုန္က်စရိတ္၏ တစ္စိတ္တစ္ ေဒသကို ေက်ာက္စိမ္းတူးေဖာ္ျခင္းမွ
ရယူသံုးစြဲသည္။ တန္ဖိုးခန္႔မွန္းရာတြင္ ကြာဟမႈ မ်ားစြာရွိေသာ္လည္း ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ၏တစ္ႏွစ္ ေက်ာက္စိမ္းထုတ္လုပ္မႈမွာ ေဒၚလာသန္းေထာင္ေပါင္းမ်ား
စြာရွိသည္ဟု ေယဘုယ်အားျဖင့္ ခန္႔မွန္းထားသည္။ က႑ တစ္ခုလံုး အထူးသျဖင့္ လိုင္စင္ခ်ထားေပးမႈ၊ ပိုင္ဆိုင္မႈ၊ ထုတ္လုပ္မႈႏွင့္ အခြန္အတုတ္ဆိုင္ရာ
အခ်က္အလက္မ်ားတြင္ ပိုမိုပြင့္လင္းျမင္သာရွိလာမႈသည္ ပိုမိုေကာင္းမြန္ေသာစီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈအတြက္ ေျခလွမ္းတစ္ရပ္ ျဖစ္လာႏိုင္ေပသည္။
ျမန္မာ ေက်ာက္မ်က္တူးေဖာ္ျခင္း - RGI ႏွင့္ အစိတ္အပိုင္း အမွတ္မ်ား
ျမန္မာ (သတၱဳတူးေဖာ္ေရး)
30
ျမန္မာ - RGI ရမွတ္ႏွင့္
အဆင့္
အၫႊန္းကိန္း စုစုေပါင္း အက်ဥ္း
ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ၏ ေက်ာက္မ်က္လိုင္စင္ ခ်ထားေပးမႈစနစ္သည္ ကမၻာေပၚတြင္ အညံ့ဖ်င္းဆံုး စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈမ်ားတြင္ အပါအဝင္ျဖစ္သည္။
ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ၏ ေက်ာက္မ်က္က႑ စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈသည္ တန္ဖိုးသတ္မွတ္ရာတြင္သာမက အခြန္အတုတ္ စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈတြင္ပါ ညံ့ဖ်င္းလွသည္။ သဘာဝ
ပတ္ဝန္းက်င္ကို ထိန္းသိမ္းေစာင့္ေရွာက္ရန္ ပ်က္ကြက္မႈေၾကာင့္ တိုင္းျပည္၏ အၫႊန္းကိန္း တြက္ခ်က္မႈမွာ ပိုမိုညံ့ဖ်င္း သြားရသည္။ လိုင္စင္
ခ်ထားေပးမႈသည္ တန္ဖုိးသတ္မွတ္မႈတြင္ အားအနည္းဆံုး အခ်က္ျဖစ္ၿပီး အမွတ္ ၁၀၀ တြင္ ေလးမွတ္သာရသည္။ ထို႔ေၾကာင့္ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ၏
ေက်ာက္မ်က္တူးေဖာ္ေရးက႑သည္ တာမစ္နစၥတန္ၿပီးလွ်င္ ဒုတိယေျမာက္ အညံ့ဖ်င္းဆံုး ျဖစ္သည္။ အစိုးရ၏ ကိုင္တြယ္စီမံမႈမွာ ပြင့္လင္း ျမင္သာမႈ
မရွိသေလာက္နီးပါးျဖစ္ကာ၊ ေက်ာက္မ်က္က႑၊ ေရာင္းဝယ္ေရး ကုမၸဏီမ်ားရွိ လိုင္စင္ ထုတ္ေပးမႈလုပ္ငန္းစဥ္၊ စာခ်ဳပ္မ်ား သို႔မဟုတ္ ရင္းႏွီးျမႇဳပ္ႏွံသူမ်ား၏
အေထာက္အထားမ်ားႏွင့္ ပတ္သက္သည့္ အခ်က္အလက္မ်ားမွာလည္း ထုတ္ျပန္ေၾကညာမႈ မရွိသေလာက္ပင္ျဖစ္သည္။ ေနာက္ဆံုးထုတ္ျပန္ခဲ့ေသာ
ေကာက္ႏုတ္ထားသည့္ လုပ္ငန္းမ်ား ပြင့္လင္းျမင္သာမႈဆိုင္ရာ ကနဦးလုပ္ငန္းစဥ္ (EITI) ႏိုင္ငံအစီရင္ခံစာတြင္ ေက်ာက္မ်က္ႏွင့္ ေက်ာက္စိမ္းလိုင္စင္
စာရင္းမွာမျပည့္စံုဘဲ၊ လုပ္ကြက္ႏွင့္ လုိင္စင္ရရွိထားသူအခ်ိဳ႕သာ ပါဝင္သည္။ ယင္းလိုင္စင္မ်ား၏ အမ်ားစုမွာ သက္တမ္းကုန္ဆံုး ၿပီးျဖစ္သည္။ မၾကာေသးမီက
လိုင္စင္ရရွိခဲ့သည့္ကုမၸဏီမ်ား၏ စာရင္းကိုလည္း ထုတ္ျပန္ ေၾကညာျခင္း မရွိေသးေပ။ အစိုးရ သည္ ယင္း၏ EITI အက်ိဳးခံစားခြင့္ ပိုင္ဆိုင္မႈ ထုတ္ျပန္ေရး
အစီအစဥ္မွတစ္ဆင့္ ေက်ာက္မ်က္တူးေဖာ္ေရးလုပ္ငန္း ပါမစ္ရရွိထားသူမ်ားကို ေဖာ္ထုတ္ရန္ ကတိျပဳထားသည္။
ေကာင္း
သင္႔
ညံ႔
ဖ်င္း
က်ရံွုး
၂၀၁၇ခု
သယံဇာတ
စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမွု
အညႊန္းကိန္း
VALUE REALIZATION 33/100
REVENUE MANAGEMENT 30/100
ENABLING ENVIRONMENT 19/100
COMPOSITE
27/100
စုစုေပါင္း
တန္ဖိုးသတ္မွတ္ျခင္း
အခြန္ေငြစီမံခန္႔ခြဲမွု
သဘာ၀ပတ္၀န္းက်င္
ထိန္းသိမ္းျခင္း

8. 2017 Resource Governance Index
2
2017 Índice de la Gobernanza de Recursos Naturales: Colombia (minería)၂၀၁၇ခု သယံဇာတ စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈ အၫႊန္းကိန္း - ျမန္မာ (သတၱဳတူးေဖာ္ေရး)
အခြန္အတုတ္စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈတြင္ ျမန္မာအစိုးရ၏ ကိုင္တြယ္မႈမွာ ညံ့ဖ်င္းလွသည္။ အစိုးရအခြန္ကို ေက်ာက္မ်က္က႑မွ အမ်ားဆံုးရရွိေသာ္ျငားလည္း
အစိုးရသည္ ႏွစ္စဥ္ဘတ္ဂ်က္စုစုေပါင္း ကိုသာထုတ္ျပန္ေၾကညာၿပီး၊ သဘာဝသယံဇာတမ်ားႏွင့္ ေက်ာက္မ်က္စီမံကိန္းမ်ားမွရရွိေသာ အခြန္မ်ားစာရင္းကို
မထုတ္ျပန္ေပ။ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ၏ ၿငိမ္းခ်မ္းေရး လုပ္ငန္းစဥ္တြင္ ႏိုင္ငံအတြင္း သယံဇာတၾကြယ္ဝၿပီး တိုက္ပြဲမ်ားျဖစ္ပြားလ်က္ရွိသည့္ ေဒသမ်ားသည္
သဘာဝသယံ ဇာတမ်ားရရွိေသာ အခြန္မ်ားႏွင့္ စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈတာဝန္မ်ား ပိုမိုရရွိရန္ ေတာင္းဆိုထားသည္။ ညီတူညီမွ် အက်ိဳး ခံစားခြင့္ရွိၿပီး ယင္းစည္းမ်ဥ္းမ်ားႏွ
င့္အညီလည္းျဖစ္ေသာ အခြန္ခြဲေဝမႈစနစ္ေရးဆြဲခ်မွတ္ေရးအတြက္ ကနဦးေျခလွမ္းအျဖစ္ အမွန္တကယ္ ရရွိေသာအခြန္မ်ားႏွင့္ ခန္႔မွန္းအခြန္မ်ားဆိုင္ရာတြင္
ပြင့္လင္းျမင္သာမႈ ပိုမိုရွိလာေစရန္အတြက္ လိုအပ္မႈေသာ ယင္းအၫႊန္းကိန္းစုစုေပါင္းအရ ကိုင္တြယ္စီမံရာတြင္ အခက္အခဲမ်ား ရွိေနေၾကာင္းသိႏိုင္သည္။
ျမန္မာ ေက်ာက္မ်က္တူးေဖာ္ျခင္း - တရားေရးမူေဘာင္ႏွင့္ အေကာင္အထည္ေဖာ္မႈရမွတ္မ်ား
ျမန္မာ ေက်ာက္မ်က္တူးေဖာ္ျခင္း - တစ္ဝက္တစ္ပ်က္ အစိတ္အပိုင္း ရမွတ္မ်ား
0
20
40
60
80
100
Policy area performance across
the extractive's value chain
Valuerealization
ResourceGovernanceIndex
Licensing
LocalImpact
Taxation
State-ownedenterprises
Revenuemanagement
Subnationalresourcerevenuesharing
Nationalbudgeting
Sovereignwealthfunds
Enablingenvironment
Voiceandaccountability
Governmenteffectiveness
Regulatoryquality
Ruleoflaw
Politicalstabilityandabsenceofviolence
Controlofcorruption
Opendata
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Practice
Law
သ
ယ
ံဇာတ
စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမွုအည
ႊန္းက
ိန္း
လ
ုုိင္စင္ခ်ထ
ားေပးမွု
အခြန္ေက
ာက
္ခံျခင္းေဒသ
တ
ြင္းထ
ိခိုက
္မွု
ႏုုိင္ငံပုုိင္လ
ုုပ္ငန္းမ်ား
အခြန္ေငြစီမံခန္႔ခြဲမွု
ႏုုိင္ငံေတ
ာ္ဘ
တ
္ဂ်က
္ခ်ထ
ားမွု
ႏိုင္ငံေတ
ာ္က
တ
စ္စိတ
္တ
စ္ေဒသ
ပိုင္ေသ
ာအရင္းအျမစ္အခြန္ခြဲေဝျခင္း
အခ်ဳပ္အျခာအာဏ
ာပိုင္ဓနဥစၥာရန္ပုံေငြ
သ
ဘ
ာဝပတ
္၀န္းက
်င္ထ
ိန္းသ
ိမ္းျခင္း
ျပည
္သ
ူ႔သ
ေဘ
ာထ
ားႏွင့္တ
ာဝန္ခံမႈ
အစိုးရ၏
ၾသ
ဇာသ
က
္ေရာက
္မႈ
ထ
ိန္းည
ႇိမႈအရည
္အေသ
ြးတ
ရားဥပေဒစိုးမိုးမႈ
အက
်င့္ပ်က
္ျခစားမႈထ
ိန္းခ်ဳပ္ျခင္း
ႏိုင္ငံေရးတ
ည
္ၿငိမ္မႈႏွင့္အၾက
မ္းဖက
္မႈမရွိျခင္း
ျမင္သ
ာေသ
ာအခ်က
္အလ
က
္မ်ား
တ
န္ဖုုိးသ
တ
္မွတ
္မွု
တရားဥပေဒ
လိုက္နာမွု

9. 2017 Resource Governance Index
3
2017 Índice de la Gobernanza de Recursos Naturales: Colombia (minería)၂၀၁၇ခု သယံဇာတ စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈ အၫႊန္းကိန္း - ျမန္မာ (သတၱဳတူးေဖာ္ေရး)
သဘာဝပတ္ဝန္းက်င္ႏွင့္ လူမႈေရးထိခိုက္မႈမ်ားအကဲျဖတ္ျခင္းႏွင့္ ၿပီးဆံုးသြားေသာ ေက်ာက္မ်က္တူးေဖာ္ေရးစီမံကိန္းမ်ား ျပန္လည္ထူေထာင္ေရး
အတြက္ လုပ္ထံုးလုပ္နည္းမ်ား ထုတ္ျပန္ေရးအတြက္ အေထြေထြသဘာဝ ပတ္ဝန္းက်င္ ဥပေဒတြင္ပါဝင္သည့္ ျပ႒ာန္းခ်က္မ်ားေၾကာင့္ ေဒသတြင္း
ထိခိုက္မႈမ်ား ကိုင္တြယ္ေျဖရွင္းမႈတြင္ ျမန္မာ၏ ေဆာင္ရြက္မႈမွာ ေက်နပ္ဖြယ္ရာရွိလာသည္။ သို႔ေသာ္ ယင္းလိုအပ္ခ်က္မ်ားမွာ မတိက်ေသးဘဲရွိၿပီး
ေက်ာက္မ်က္က႑အတြက္ ရွင္းလင္းေသာ လမ္းၫႊန္ခ်က္ေပးႏိုင္ျခင္းလည္း မရွိေပ။ ထို႔ေၾကာင့္ ယင္းနယ္ပယ္ရွိ တိုင္းတာမႈလုပ္ငန္းမ်ားမွာ ေက်နပ္
ဖြယ္ရာမရွိေၾကာင္း အၫႊန္းကိန္းမ်ားက ေဖာ္ျပလ်က္ရွိသည္။ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံတြင္ အၫႊန္းကိန္းတြင္ ေဖာ္ျပထားေသာ အကဲျဖတ္မႈမ်ား အားလံုး အၾကားရွိ
တရားဥပေဒမူေဘာင္ႏွင့္ ေဒသတြင္းထိခိုက္မႈအတြက္ ျပန္လည္ထူေထာင္မႈအၾကား ကြာဟခ်က္မွာ အလြန္ပင္ႀကီးမားလွေပသည္။ ေက်ာက္မ်က္တူးေဖာ္ေရး
လုပ္ငန္းမ်ားကို ထိထိေရာက္ေရာက္ႀကီးၾကပ္ကြပ္ကဲမႈမရွိေသာေၾကာင့္ လူ႔အခြင့္အေရး ခ်ိဳးေဖာက္မႈမ်ားႏွင့္ သဘာဝ ေဘးအႏၱရာယ္မ်ား ျဖစ္ေပၚလာရေၾကာင္း
အစီရင္ခံစာမ်ားအရ သိရသည္။
ႏိုင္ငံပိုင္လုပ္ငန္းကိုင္တြယ္စီမံမႈ
ျမန္မာ့ေက်ာက္မ်က္ရတနာလုပ္ငန္းသည္ ပြင့္လင္းျမင္သာမႈမရွိေသးဘဲ တကမၻာလံုးရွိ ႏိုင္ငံပိုင္ ေက်ာက္မ်က္ရတနာလုပ္ငန္း ၂၂ ခုအနက္
အဆင့္ ၂၁ တြင္ရွိေနသည္။
အဆင့္ ၁၀၀ တြင္ ၁၆ အထိက်ဆင္းသြားေသာေၾကာင့္ ျမန္မာ့ေက်ာက္မ်က္ရတနာလုပ္ငန္း (MGE)သည္ အၫႊန္းကိန္းတြင္ေဖာ္ျပထားသည့္အတို
င္း ႏိုင္ငံပိုင္လုပ္ငန္းမ်ားအနက္ ေအာက္ဆံုး ၁၀ ခုထဲတြင္ ပါဝင္ေနၿပီး၊ အာရွ-ပစၥဖိတ္ေဒသတြင္ ေအာက္ဆံုးအဆင့္တြင္ရွိေနေပသည္။ MGE အျပင္
ေက်ာက္မ်က္တူးေဖာ္ေရးလုပ္ငန္းမ်ားတြင္ စစ္တပ္ကတည္ေထာင္ထားသည့္ ကုမၸဏီမ်ားကလည္း ရင္းႏွီးျမႇဳပ္ႏွံမႈမ်ားထည့္ဝင္ထားသည္။ ေက်ာက္
မ်က္ တူးေဖာ္ေရးလုပ္ငန္းသည္ ယခင္စစ္အစိုးရ၏ ဗိုလ္ခ်ဳပ္မ်ားလက္ထဲတြင္ရွိေနသည္။ ေက်ာက္မ်က္ရတနာမ်ားကို MGE ႏွင့္ ႏိုင္ငံ၏အဓိက
လုပ္ငန္းအုပ္စုျဖစ္ေသာ ျမန္မာ့ေက်ာက္မ်က္ရတနာလုပ္ငန္းရွင္မ်ားအသင္းတို႔က ပူးေပါင္းျပသသည့္ ႏွစ္လယ္ေက်ာက္မ်က္ ျပပြဲမ်ားတြင္ သို႔မဟုတ္ ပုဂၢလိ
ကအေရာင္းအဝယ္လုပ္ငန္းမ်ားတြင္ ေရာင္းခ်သည္။ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ၏ ႏိုင္ငံပိုင္လုပ္ငန္းမ်ား ဥပေဒႏွင့္ ေက်ာက္မ်က္ ဥပေဒတို႔တြင္ MGE ဖက္စပ္လုပ္ငန္းမ်ား
သို႔မဟုတ္ ပုဂၢလိကလုပ္ငန္းရွင္မ်ားသည္ ေက်ာက္မ်က္ရတနာမ်ားကို မည္သို႔မည္ပံု ေရာင္းခ်ရမည္ ဟူေသာ စည္းမ်ဥ္း စည္းကမ္းမ်ား မပါဝင္ေပ။
ေက်ာက္မ်က္ရတနာအမ်ားစုကို တရုတ္ သို႔မဟုတ္ ထိုင္းႏိုင္ငံသို႔ တင္ပို႔ေရာင္းခ်သည္။
ေရနံ၊ သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႕ႏွင့္ သတၳဳတူးေဖာ္ေရးက႑မ်ားတြင္ ကိုင္တြယ္စီမံ ေဆာင္ရြက္မႈ
လုိင္စင္ခ်ထားေပးျခင္းႏွင့္ ႏိုင္ငံပိုင္လုပ္ငန္းမ်ားကိုင္တြယ္စီမံမႈတြင္ ေရနံႏွင့္ သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႕က႑က ေက်ာက္မ်က္က႑ထက္
ပိုမိုသာလြန္သည္။
ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံတြင္ ေက်ာက္မ်က္တူးေဖာ္ေရးလုပ္ငန္းအတြက္ လိုင္စင္ခ်ထားေပးေရးလုပ္ငန္းစဥ္သည္ ႏိုင္ငံမ်ားအားလံုးတြင္ အၫႊန္းကိန္း အနည္းဆံုး
ျဖစ္ကာ အမွတ္ ၁၀၀တြင္ ၄မွတ္သာရွိသည္။ ေရနံႏွင့္ သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႕ က႑က ပြင့္လင္းျမင္သာမႈအနည္းငယ္ပိုရွိကာ အမွတ္ ၁၀၀တြင္ ၂၄မွတ္ ရရွိကာ
ႏိုင္ငံေပါင္း ၈၉ႏိုင္ငံတြင္ အဆင့္ ၆၇ ခ်ိတ္သည္။ ၂၀၁၃ႏွင့္ ၂၀၁၄ခုတို႔တြင္ ျမန္မာ့ေရနံႏွင့္သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႕လုပ္ငန္းက ေခၚယူေသာ ေစ်းၿပိဳင္တင္ဒါမ်ားသည္
ယခင္ေစ်းၿပိဳင္တင္ဒါမ်ားထက္ ပြင့္လင္းျမင္သာမႈမ်ားစြာပိုရွိသည္။ ယင္းက႑ႏွစ္ခုစလံုးတြင္ လိုင္စင္ ခ်ထားေပးျခင္း လုပ္ငန္းစဥ္တြင္ ႏိုင္ငံပိုင္လုပ္ငန္းမ်ားက
အဓိကပါဝင္သည္။ သို႔ေသာ္ လိုင္စင္ရသူမ်ားကိုသာ ထုတ္ျပန္ေၾကညာၿပီး လုပ္ငန္းစဥ္ဆိုင္ရာ အေသးစိတ္ အခ်က္အလက္မ်ားကို မရွိသေလာက္ျဖစ္သည္။
ယင္းက႑ႏွစ္ခုစလံုးတြင္ အစိုးရက အခြန္မည္မွ်ေကာက္ခံရရွိသည္၊ ယင္းအခြန္ေငြမ်ားကို ႏိုင္ငံေတာ္ဘတ္ဂ်က္မ်ားထဲသို႔ မည္သို႔စီးဝင္သြားသည္
ဆိုသည္ႏွင့္ပတ္သက္၍ ပြင့္လင္းျမင္သာမႈမွာ မရွိသေလာက္ပင္ျဖစ္သည္။ တူးေဖာ္သည့္ကုမၸဏီမ်ားထံမွ ေကာက္ယူရရွိေသာ အခြန္မ်ားႏွင့္ ပတ္
သက္သည့္ သတင္းမ်ားကို EITI မွတစ္ဆင့္ ထုတ္ျပန္ေၾကညာသည္။ သို႔ေသာ္ EITI ႏိုင္ငံအစီရင္ခံစာတြင္ ေက်ာက္မ်က္ကုမၸဏီမ်ားႏွင့္ ယင္းတို႔က
ေပးေခ်ေသာ ေငြမ်ားကိုသာ ေဖာ္ျပထားသည္။ ယင္းက႑ႏွစ္ခုစလံုးတြင္ အခြန္မ်ားႏွင့္ ေပးေခ်ေငြမ်ားကို ေအဂ်င္စီအခ်ိဳ႕က ေကာက္ခံသည္။
အမ်ားစုကို MOGE ႏွင့္ MGE တို႕က စီမံကိန္းႏွင့္ ဘ႑ာေရးဝန္ႀကီးဌာနေအာက္ရွိ ျပည္တြင္းအခြန္မ်ားဦးစီးဌာန၊ သယံဇာတႏွင့္ သဘာဝ ပတ္ဝန္းက်င္
ထိန္းသိမ္းေရး ဝန္ႀကီးဌာနႏွင့္ လွ်ပ္စစ္နွင့္စြမ္းအင္ ဝန္ႀကီးဌာနတို႔မွတစ္ဆင့္လည္းေကာင္း၊ ေက်ာက္မ်က္ ရတနာမ်ား အတြက္ အခြန္မ်ားကို အေထြေထြ
အုပ္ခ်ဳပ္ေရးဦးစီးဌာနမွတစ္ဆင့္ လည္းေကာင္း ေကာက္ခံရရွိသည္။ စာရင္းစစ္ေဆးမႈ မ်ားႏွင့္ လက္ေတြ႕ ကိန္းဂဏန္းမ်ားအၾကား ကြာျခားမႈမ်ားရွိပါသည္။
ဥပမာ ထုတ္လုပ္သည့္ကုမၸဏီမ်ားကို အမ်ိဳးသားအခြန္ေအဂ်င္စီက စာရင္း မစစ္ပါ။ SOEs ၊ MOGE ႏွင့္ MGE တို႔အပါအဝင္ အခြန္ေကာက္ခံသည့္အဖြဲ႕အစ
ည္းအမ်ိဳးမ်ိဳးႏွင့္ပတ္သက္၍ စာရင္းစစ္ခ်ဳပ္႐ံုးက စာရင္းစစ္သည္။ ယင္းတိို႔ကို ျပည္သူလူထုအား အသိမေပးပါ။ ထို႔ျပင္ စစ္တပ္ပိုင္ကုမၸဏီမ်ား ျဖစ္ၾကသည့္
ျမန္မာ့စီးပြားေရး ေကာ္ပိုေရးရွင္းႏွင့္ ျမန္မာ့စီးပြားေရး ဦးပိုင္လီမိတက္တို႔သည္ ေက်ာက္မ်က္တူးေဖာ္ေရး က႑တြင္ လုပ္ကိုင္ေဆာင္ရြက္လ်က္ရွိေသာ္လည္း
သမိုင္းေၾကာင္းတစ္ေလွ်ာက္တြင္ ယင္းတို႔ကို စာရင္းစစ္ခ်ဳပ္႐ံုးက စာရင္းစစ္ျခင္းမွ ကင္းလြတ္ခြင့္ရလ်က္ရွိသည္။
SOEs မ်ားကိုကိုင္တြယ္စီမံရာတြင္ ယင္းက႑ႏွစ္ခုအၾကား ကြဲျပားျခားနားမႈမ်ားရွိေနေပသည္။ EITI ႏိုင္ငံအစီရင္ခံစာတြင္ တူးေဖာ္ေရး မဟုတ္သည့္
လုပ္ငန္းမ်ားအတြက္ ကုန္က်စရိတ္မ်ား၊ အစိုးရထံသို႔ ေပးသြင္းသည့္ အခြန္မ်ား၊ ထုတ္လုပ္မႈပမာဏႏွင့္ MOGE အတြက္တန္ဖိုး စသည္တို႔ကို
ေဖာ္ျပထားသည္။ သို႔ေသာ္ MGE က အစိုးရထံသို႔ ေပးသြင္းသည့္ အခြန္စုစုေပါင္း ပမာဏသာ ပါဝင္သည္။

10. 2017 Resource Governance Index2017 Índice de la Gobernanza de Recursos Naturales: Colombia (minería)
The Natural Resource Governance Institute, an independent, non-profit organization, helps people
to realize the benefits of their countries’ oil, gas and mineral wealth through applied research, and
innovative approaches to capacity development, technical advice and advocacy.
Learn more at www.resourcegovernance.org
၂၀၁၇ခု သယံဇာတ စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈ အၫႊန္းကိန္း - ျမန္မာ (သတၱဳတူးေဖာ္ေရး)
ျမန္မာ - ေရနံႏွင့္ သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႕ ႏွင့္ ေက်ာက္မ်က္တူးေဖာ္မႈ ရမွတ္မ်ား
RGI ဆိုသည္မွာအဘယ္နည္း။
၂၀၁၇ RGI သည္ ၈၁ ႏိုင္ငံေသာ သဘာ၀သယံဇာတ ၾကြယ္၀ေသာႏိုင္ငံမ်ားက ယင္းတို႔၏ ေရနံ၊ သဘာ၀ဓာတ္ေငြ႕ႏွင့္ ဓာတ္သတၳဳမ်ားကို မည္ကဲ့သို႔
ကိုင္တြယ္စီမံသည္ကို အကဲျဖတ္သည္။ အၫႊန္းကိန္းစုစုေပါင္း ရမွတ္တြင္ ၃မ်ိဳးပါဝင္သည္။ထုတ္လုပ္မႈက႑၏ တိုင္းတာမႈဆိုင္ရာ အဓိက လကၡဏာႏွစ္မ်ိဳးမွာ
တန္ဖိုးသတ္မွတ္ျခင္းႏွင့္ အခြန္စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈတို႔ျဖစ္သည္။ တတိယလကၡဏာျဖစ္သည့္ သဘာဝပတ္ဝန္းက်င္ ထိန္းသိမ္းမႈတြင္ ပိုမိုက်ယ္ျပန္႔ေသာ
ကိုင္တြယ္စီမံမႈပါဝင္သည္။ ယင္းကိုင္တြယ္စီမံမႈဆိုင္ရာ ေပါင္းကူးဖြဲ႕ယွက္ေနေသာ ပမာဏသံုးခုတြင္ အစိတ္အပိုင္း ၁၄ခုျဖင့္ ဖြဲ႕စည္းထားၿပီး ယင္းတို႔တြင္
အၫႊန္းျပကိန္း ၅၁ ခုပါဝင္သည္။ ယင္းတို႔ကို ေမးခြန္းစုစုေပါင္း ၁၃၃ ခုျဖင့္ တြက္ခ်က္သည္။
တန္ဖိုးသတ္မွတ္ျခင္းႏွင့္ အခြန္စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈတို႔ႏွင့္ပတ္သက္၍ အဓိကက်ေသာ အခ်က္အလက္မ်ားကို ေကာက္ယူရန္ အတြက္ ၈၁ ႏိုင္ငံအနက္
တစ္ႏိုင္ငံခ်င္းစီမွ NRGI က ႀကီးၾကပ္ေသာ သီးျခားလြတ္လပ္သည့္ သုေတသီမ်ားက ေမးခြန္းတစ္စံု ျပဳစုခဲ့သည္။ တတိယ လကၡဏာအတြက္ RGI သည္
ႏိုင္ငံတကာအဖြဲ႕အစည္း ၂၀ေက်ာ္မွ ျပင္ပအခ်က္အလက္မ်ားကို ေရးဆြဲသည္။ ယင္းအကဲျဖတ္ခ်က္ကို ၂၀၁၅-၂၀၁၆ခုႏွစ္ကာလပါဝင္သည္။ အၫႊန္းကိန္းႏွင့္
ယင္းကိုမည္သို႔ တည္ေဆာက္ခဲ့သည္ဆိုသည္ႏွင့္ပတ္သက္သည့္ အခ်က္အလက္မ်ားအတြက္ RGI နည္းကိုၾကည့္ပါ။
■ Mining ■ Oil and gas
-100 -50 0 50 100
Resource Governance Index
Value realization
Licensing
Taxation
Local Impact
State-owned enterprises
Revenue management
National budgeting
Subnational resource revenue sharing
Sovereign wealth funds
Enabling environment
Voice and accountability
Government effectiveness
Regulatory quality
Rule of law
Control of corruption
Political stability and absence of violence
Open data
သယံဇာတ စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈ အၫႊန္းကိန္း
တန္ဖိုးသတ္မွတ္မႈ
လိုင္စင္ခ်ထားေပးမႈ
အခြန္ေကာက္ခံျခင္း
ေဒသတြင္း ထိခိုက္မႈ
ႏိုင္ငံပိုင္ လုပ္ငန္းမ်ား
အခြန္ေငြ စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမွု
ႏိုင္ငံေတာ္ဘတ္ဂ်က္ခ်ထားေပးမႈ
ႏိုင္ငံေတာ္က တစ္စိတ္တစ္ေဒသ ပိုင္ေသာ အရင္းအျမစ္အခြန္ခြဲေဝျခင္း
အခ်ဳပ္အျခာအာဏာပိုင္ ဓနဥစၥာ ရန္ပုံေငြ
သဘာဝပတ္ဝန္းက်င္ ထိန္းသိမ္းျခင္း
ျပည္သူ႔သေဘာထားႏွင့္ တာဝန္ခံမႈ
အစိုးရ၏ ၾသဇာသက္ေရာက္မႈ
ထိန္းညႇိမႈ အရည္အေသြး
တရားဥပေဒ စိုးမိုးမႈ
အက်င့္ပ်က္ျခစားမႈ ထိန္းခ်ဳပ္ျခင္း
ႏိုင္ငံေရးတည္ၿငိမ္မႈႏွင့္ အၾကမ္းဖက္မႈမရွိျခင္း
ျမင္သာေသာ အခ်က္အလက္မ်ား
သတၱဳတူးေဖာ္ေရး ေရနံနွင့္သဘာဝဓါတ္ေငြ႔

11. 7/30/2017 Resource Governance Index
http://resourcegovernanceindex.org/country-profiles/MMR/oil-gas 1/6
2017 RESOURCE GOVERNANCE INDEX
Myanmar
OIL & GAS
Myanmar’s oil and gas sector scores 31 of 100 points and
ranks 77th among 89 assessments in the 2017 Resource
Governance Index (RGI). Compared to the country’s
gemstones sector, progress in transparency is more visible
in the oil and gas sector, which is emerging as a signi cant
contributor of revenue to the state’s co ers. According to
the rst Myanmar Extractive Industries Transparency
Initiative (EITI) report, the oil and gas sector contributed 85
percent of reported revenues from the extractive sector,
generating nearly a quarter of the government’s revenues.
Some reforms to the role of state-owned enterprises
(SOEs) are underway. A failing enabling environment
re ects the persistent challenges faced by a country that
has su ered decades of internal con ict. Myanmar’s
enabling environment is assessed as failing.
MYANMAR (OIL & GAS): RGI
SCORE AND RANK
1st
89th
77th

12. 7/30/2017 Resource Governance Index
http://resourcegovernanceindex.org/country-profiles/MMR/oil-gas 2/6
MYANMAR (OIL & GAS): RGI AND COMPONENT SCORES
VALUE REALIZATION 44 /100
REVENUE
MANAGEMENT
30
/100
ENABLING
ENVIRONMENT
19
/100
COMPOSITE
31 /100
Average
Index results summary
SMALL STEPS TOWARDS BETTER ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS AND LICENSING TRANSPARENCY
Myanmar’s oil and gas sector achieves its best component score, 44 of 100 points, in value
realization, the component that measures a country’s ability to extract value from its
natural resource endowment. Myanmar performs satisfactorily in taxation, although in the
absence of up-to-date sector legislation, the terms of hydrocarbon extraction lack the force
of law and are determined by the National Energy Policy and a model production sharing
contract. Reform of the legal framework, including the scal regime, has stalled, and the
public cannot hold the government accountable for compliance with contracts because oil
and gas contracts are not disclosed.

13. 7/30/2017 Resource Governance Index
http://resourcegovernanceindex.org/country-profiles/MMR/oil-gas 3/6
MYANMAR (OIL & GAS): SUBCOMPONENT SCORES
Best index score
Value
realization
Value
realization
LicensingTaxation
Localim
pact
State-ow
ned
enterprises
0
20
40
60
80
100
Revenue
m
anagem
ent
Revenue
m
anagem
ent
N
ationalbudgeting
Subnationalresource
revenue
s...
Sovereign
w
ealth
funds
0
20
40
60
80
100
Enabling
environm
ent
Enabling
environm
ent
Voice
and
accountability
G
overnm
ente
ectiveness
Regulatory
qualityRule
oflaw
Controlofcorruption
Politicalstability
and
absenc...
O
pen
data
0
20
40
60
80
100
MYANMAR (OIL & GAS): RESOURCE GOVERNANCE TRENDS

14. 7/30/2017 Resource Governance Index
http://resourcegovernanceindex.org/country-profiles/MMR/oil-gas 4/6
MYANMAR (OIL & GAS): RESOURCE GOVERNANCE TRENDS
Myanmar has made progress in transparency, particularly by joining the EITI, which has
facilitated disclosure of basic data on reserves, production, and exports of oil, gas and jade.
According to the country’s EITI report, the government collected nearly USD 2.7 billion in oil
and gas tax and non-tax revenues and another USD 460 million in mining revenues in scal
year 2013–2014. In addition, EITI has been a forum for progress in civil society participation
in a mostly closed and centrally controlled country. (Myanmar’s enabling environment
scores just 19 of 100 points in the index.) Myanmar passed a new environmental law in
2012 with some environmental controls, but further reform of the environmental legal
framework is required. Indicators measuring enforcement of laws and actual disclosure
achieve failing scores.
There are no speci c subnational revenue sharing mechanisms for oil and gas sector
revenues. Companies can voluntarily contribute to social development funds, but because
local governments’ revenue generation abilities are limited and scal transfers take place
on an ad hoc basis, there is demand for a system for sharing resource revenues,
particularly in oil-and-gas-rich but poverty-stricken states.
Issue Score 2017 RGI Direction
Company payment disclosure 77/100
EIA / SIA rule 100/100
State-owned enterprise governance
MYANMAR OIL AND GAS ENTERPRISE’S LACK OF TRANSPARENCY HINDERS ACCOUNTABILITY ON PUBLIC
REVENUES
The Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise (MOGE) is the most important extractive industry
revenue generator in Myanmar. The government has announced a policy to reform SOEs,
granting them greater autonomy, including a right to keep a portion of revenues. MOGE
does not disclose information on how it sells the production share it collects from its
partnerships. Its reporting and corporate governance practices are failing, as it does not
report annually on its nances or operations. The 2016 Myanmar EITI report provides
some information on MOGE, including the share of revenues it retains, and that it provides
fuel subsidies on behalf of the government.

15. 7/30/2017 Resource Governance Index
http://resourcegovernanceindex.org/country-profiles/MMR/oil-gas 5/6
Name of state-owned
enterprise
State
ownership
level
Revenue
(USD)
Score
(/100)
Rank
(/74 SOEs)
Rank
(/52 oil & gas
SOEs)
Myanmar Oil and Gas
Enterprise
100% N/A 35 56 39
Governance performance across oil, gas and
mining sectors
THE OIL AND GAS SECTOR OUTPERFORMS THE GEMSTONE SECTOR IN LICENSING AND SOE
GOVERNANCE
The licensing process for gemstone mining in Myanmar is the least transparent of all
countries in the index with a score of four of 100, whereas the oil and gas sector’s license
awards are somewhat more transparent, scoring 24 of 100 and ranking 67 among 89
assessments. The competitive bidding rounds organized by Myanmar Oil and Gas
Enterprise (MOGE) in 2013 and 2014 were signi cantly more transparent than previous
rounds. SOEs play a central role in the licensing process in both sectors but details on the
process, other than nal results, are rarely published.
Transparency around how much the government collects from both sectors and how these
revenues ow to the national budget is poor. Aggregate information on revenues collected
from extractive companies is disclosed through EITI, but only a fraction of gemstone
companies and their payments were included in the EITI country report. In both sectors,
taxes and payments are collected by several agencies; MOGE and MGE collect most
revenues, though the Internal Revenue Department of the Ministry of Planning and
Finance, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Conservation and the
Ministry of Energy and Electrical Power, and (for gemstones), the General Administration
Department, also collect forms of tax. There are de cits between audit requirements and
practices; for example, extractive companies are not audited by the national tax agency.
Results of audits conducted by the O ce of the Auditor General (OAG) on the di erent tax-
collecting agencies, including the SOEs MOGE and MGE, are not disclosed to the public.
Furthermore, military-controlled holding companies MEC and UMEHL, which also work in
the gemstone sector, have historically been exempt from the OAG audit.
Di erences between the two sectors emerge in the governance of SOEs. The EITI country
report discloses the cost of non-operational activities, revenues transferred to the
government, and the cost of non-operational activities and production volume and value
for MOGE. However, it includes only an aggregate gure on MGE’s payments to
government.
MYANMAR: OIL & GAS VS. MINING SCORES
th

16. 7/30/2017 Resource Governance Index
http://resourcegovernanceindex.org/country-profiles/MMR/oil-gas 6/6
MYANMAR: OIL & GAS VS. MINING SCORES
100 80 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 80 100
CompositeComposite
OOIILL && GGAASSMMIINNIINNGG
100 80 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 80 100
Value realizationValue realization
Licensing
Taxation
Local impact
State-owned enterprises
100 80 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 80 100
Revenue managementRevenue management
National budgeting
Subnational resource reve...
Sovereign wealth funds
What is the Resource Governance Index?
The 2017 RGI assesses how 81 resource-rich countries govern their oil, gas and mineral
wealth. The index composite score is made up of three components. Two measure key
characteristics of the extractives sector – value realization and revenue management – and
a third captures the broader context of governance — the enabling environment. These
three overarching dimensions of governance consist of 14 subcomponents, which
comprise 54 indicators calculated by aggregating 133 questions and external data.
Independent researchers, overseen by NRGI, in each of the 81 countries completed a
questionnaire to gather primary data on value realization and revenue management. For
the third component, the RGI draws on external data from over 20 international
organizations. The assessment covers the period 2015-2016. For more information on the
index, how it was constructed, and references to external data, review the RGI
Methodology.

17. 2017
Resource
Governance
Index
Myanmar (oil and gas) 77th
MYANMAR OIL AND GAS:
RGI SCORE AND RANK
Good
(>75)
Satisfactory
(60-74)
Weak
(45-59)
Poor
(30-44)
Failing
(<30)
Myanmar’s oil and gas sector scores 31 of 100 points and ranks 77th
among 89 assessments in the
2017 Resource Governance Index (RGI). Compared to the country’s gemstones sector, progress in
transparency is more visible in the oil and gas sector, which is emerging as a significant contributor
of revenue to the state’s coffers. According to the first Myanmar Extractive Industries Transparency
Initiative (EITI) report, the oil and gas sector contributed 85 percent of reported revenues from the
extractive sector, generating nearly a quarter of the government’s revenues. Some reforms to the role of
state-owned enterprises (SOEs) are underway. Myanmar’s enabling environment is assessed as failing.
Myanmar oil and gas: RGI and component scores.
VALUE REALIZATION 44/100
REVENUE MANAGEMENT 30/100
ENABLING ENVIRONMENT 19/100
COMPOSITE
31/100

18. 2017 Resource Governance Index
2
2017 Resource Governance Index: Myanmar (oil and gas)
INDEX RESULTS SUMMARY
Myanmar has taken small steps toward better environmental controls and licensing transparency
Myanmar oil and gas: subcomponent scores
Myanmar’s oil and gas sector achieves its best component score, 44 of 100 points, in value realization, the component
that measures a country’s ability to extract value from its natural resource endowment. Myanmar performs
satisfactorily in taxation, although in the absence of up-to-date sector legislation, the terms of hydrocarbon extraction
lack the force of law and are determined by the National Energy Policy and a model production sharing contract.
Reform of the legal framework, including the fiscal regime, has stalled, and the public cannot hold the government
accountable for compliance with contracts because oil and gas contracts are not disclosed.
Myanmar oil and gas: resource governance trends
Issue 2017 RGI Score Direction
Company payment disclosure 77 s
Environmental impact assessment/
social impact assessment rule
100 s
Myanmar has made progress in transparency, particularly by joining the EITI, which has facilitated disclosure of
basic data on reserves, production, and exports of oil, gas and jade. According to the country’s EITI report, the
government collected nearly USD 2.7 billion in oil and gas tax and non-tax revenues and another USD 460 million
in mining revenues in fiscal year 2013–2014. In addition, EITI has been a forum for progress in civil society
participation in a mostly closed and centrally controlled country. (Myanmar’s enabling environment scores just 19
of 100 points in the index.) Myanmar passed a new environmental law in 2012 with some environmental controls,
but further reform of the environmental legal framework is required. Indicators measuring enforcement of laws and
actual disclosure achieve failing scores.
0
20
40
60
80
100
Policy area performance across
the extractive's value chainValuerealization
ResourceGovernanceIndex
Licensing
LocalImpact
Taxation
State-ownedenterprises
Revenuemanagement
Subnationalresourcerevenuesharing
Nationalbudgeting
Sovereignwealthfunds
Enablingenvironment
Voiceandaccountability
Governmenteffectiveness
Regulatoryquality
Ruleoflaw
Politicalstabilityandabsenceofviolence
Controlofcorruption
Opendata

19. 2017 Resource Governance Index
3
2017 Resource Governance Index: Myanmar (oil and gas)
There are no specific subnational revenue sharing mechanisms for oil and gas sector revenues. Companies can
voluntarily contribute to social development funds, but because local governments’ revenue generation abilities are
limited and fiscal transfers take place on an ad hoc basis, there is demand for a system for sharing resource revenues,
particularly in oil-and-gas-rich but poverty-stricken states.
STATE-OWNED ENTERPRISE GOVERNANCE
Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise’s lack of transparency hinders accountability on public revenues
Name
State ownership
level Revenue [USD] Score/100 Rank/74 SOEs
Rank/52 oil and
gas SOEs
Oil and gas:
Myanmar Oil and Gas
Enterprise (MOGE)
100% N/A 35 56 39
The Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise (MOGE) is the most important extractive industry revenue generator in
Myanmar. The government has announced a policy to reform SOEs, granting them greater autonomy, including
a right to keep a portion of revenues. MOGE does not disclose information on how it sells the production share
it collects from its partnerships. Its reporting and corporate governance practices are failing, as it does not report
annually on its finances or operations. The 2016 Myanmar EITI report provides some information on MOGE,
including the share of revenues it retains, and that it provides fuel subsidies on behalf of the government.
GOVERNANCE PERFORMANCE ACROSS OIL, GAS AND MINING SECTORS
The oil and gas sector outperforms the gemstone sector in licensing and SOE governance
The licensing process for gemstone mining in Myanmar is the least transparent of all countries in the index with a score
of four of 100, whereas the oil and gas sector’s license awards are somewhat more transparent, scoring 24 of 100 and
ranking 67th
among 89 assessments. The competitive bidding rounds organized by Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise
(MOGE) in 2013 and 2014 were significantly more transparent than previous rounds. SOEs play a central role in the
licensing process in both sectors but details on the process, other than final results, are rarely published.
Transparency around how much the government collects from both sectors and how these revenues flow to the
national budget is poor. Aggregate information on revenues collected from extractive companies is disclosed through
EITI, but only a fraction of gemstone companies and their payments were included in the EITI country report. In
both sectors, taxes and payments are collected by several agencies; MOGE and MGE collect most revenues, though
the Internal Revenue Department of the Ministry of Planning and Finance, the Ministry of Natural Resources and
Environmental Conservation and the Ministry of Energy and Electrical Power, and (for gemstones), the General
Administration Department, also collect forms of tax. There are deficits between audit requirements and practices; for
example, extractive companies are not audited by the national tax agency. Results of audits conducted by the Office
of the Auditor General (OAG) on the different tax-collecting agencies, including the SOEs MOGE and MGE, are not
disclosed to the public. Furthermore, military-controlled holding companies MEC and UMEHL, which also work in
the gemstone sector, have historically been exempt from the OAG audit.
Differences between the two sectors emerge in the governance of SOEs. The EITI country report discloses the cost of
non-operational activities, revenues transferred to the government, and the cost of non-operational activities and pro-
duction volume and value for MOGE. However, it includes only an aggregate figure on MGE’s payments to government.

20. 2017 Resource Governance Index2017 Resource Governance Index: Myanmar (oil and gas)
The Natural Resource Governance Institute, an independent, non-profit organization, helps people
to realize the benefits of their countries’ oil, gas and mineral wealth through applied research, and
innovative approaches to capacity development, technical advice and advocacy.
Learn more at www.resourcegovernance.org
Myanmar oil and gas: oil and gas vs. Mining scores
What is the RGI?
The 2017 RGI assesses how 81 resource-rich countries govern their oil, gas and mineral wealth. The index
composite score is made up of three components. Two measure key characteristics of the extractives sector – value
realization and revenue management – and a third captures the broader context of governance — the enabling
environment. These three overarching dimensions of governance consist of 14 subcomponents, which comprise 51
indicators, which are calculated by aggregating 133 questions.
Independent researchers, overseen by NRGI, in each of the 81 countries completed a questionnaire to gather
primary data on value realization and revenue management. For the third component, the RGI draws on external
data from over 20 international organizations. The assessment covers the period 2015-2016. For more information
on the index and how it was constructed, review the RGI Methodology.
■ Mining ■ Oil and gas
-100 -50 0 50 100
Resource Governance Index
Value realization
Licensing
Taxation
Local Impact
State-owned enterprises
Revenue management
National budgeting
Subnational resource revenue sharing
Sovereign wealth funds
Enabling environment
Voice and accountability
Government effectiveness
Regulatory quality
Rule of law
Control of corruption
Political stability and absence of violence
Open data

21. 2017
Resource
Governance
Index
Myanmar (oil and gas) 77th
COLOMBIA (MINERÍA):
CALIFICACIÓN Y CLASIFICACIÓN EN EL IGR
Bueno
(>75)
Satisfactorio
(60-74)
Débiles
(45-59)
Pobre
(30-44)
Defecto
(<29)
VALUE REALIZATION 44/100
REVENUE MANAGEMENT 30/100
ENABLING ENVIRONMENT 19/100
COMPOSITE
31/100
ျမန္မာ - RGI ရမွတ္ႏွင့္
အဆင့္
30
ျမန္မာ (ေရနံႏွင့္ သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႔)
၂၀၁၇ခု သယံဇာတ စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈ အၫႊန္းကိန္း (RGI) အရ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ၏ ေရနံႏွင့္ သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႔ က႑သည္ အမွတ္ ၁၀၀ အနက္ ၃၁ မွတ္ရွိၿပီး
အကဲျဖတ္ခ်က္ ၈၉ ခုတြင္ အဆင့္ ၇၇ ေနရာတြင္ ရွိသည္။ ႏိုင္ငံ၏ ေက်ာက္မ်က္က႑ႏွင့္ ႏႈိင္းယွဥ္လ်င္ ႏိုင္ငံ၏ ဘ႑ာတုိက္သုိ႔ ဝင္ေငြ သိသာထင္ရွားစြာ
ထည့္ဝင္သည့္ က႑အျဖစ္ ေပၚထြန္းလာေနသည့္ ေရနံႏွင့္ သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႔ က႑တြင္ ပြင့္လင္းျမင္သာမႈ၌ တုိးတက္မႈမွာ ပုိ၍ျမင္သာသည္။
ေကာက္ႏုတ္ထားသည့္ လုပ္ငန္းမ်ား ပြင့္လင္းျမင္သာမႈဆိုင္ရာ ကနဦးလုပ္ငန္းစဥ္ (EITI) ပထမဦးဆုံး ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံအစီရင္ခံစာအရ ေရနံႏွင့္ သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႔
က႑သည္ ေကာက္ႏုတ္ထားသည့္ လုပ္ငန္းမ်ားမွ အစီရင္ခံထားသည့္ ဝင္ေငြ၏ ၈၅ ရာခုိင္ႏႈန္းကုိ ထည့္ဝင္ရာ အစုိးရဝင္ေငြ၏ ေလးပုံတစ္ပုံနီးပါးကုိ
ရရွိေစသည္။ ႏိုင္ငံပိုင္လုပ္ငန္းမ်ား၏အခန္းက႑ကုိ ျပဳျပင္ေျပာင္းလဲမႈ အခ်ိဳ႕ကုိ ေဆာင္ရြက္လ်က္ရွိသည္။ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ၏ သဘာဝပတဝန္းက်င္အား
စြမ္းေဆာင္ေစႏိုင္မႈမွာ က်ဆင္းေနသည္ဟု ခန္႔မွန္းသုံးသပ္ထားသည္။
ျမန္မာ - RGI ႏွင့္ အစိတ္အပိုင္း အမွတ္မ်ား
အၫႊန္းကိန္းရလဒ္မ်ားအက်ဥ္း
ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံသည္ သဘာဝပတ္ဝန္းက်င္ ပိုမိုထိန္းသိမ္းႏိုင္ရန္ႏွင့္ လိုင္စင္ခ်ထားေပးမႈတြင္ ပြင့္လင္းျမင္သာမႈပိုမိုရွိလာ ေစရန္
စီမံခ်က္ငယ္မ်ား ေဆာင္ရြက္ထားရွိၿပီးျဖစ္သည္။
၂၀၁၇ခု
သယံဇာတ
စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမွု
အညႊန္းကိန္း
ေကာင္း
သင္႔
ညံ႔
ဖ်င္း
က်ရံွုး
စုစုေပါင္း
အခြန္ေငြစီမံခန္႔ခြဲမွု
သဘာ၀ပတ္၀န္းက်င္
ထိန္းသိမ္းျခင္း
တန္ဖိုးသတ္မွတ္ျခင္း

22. 2017 Resource Governance Index
2
2017 Índice de la Gobernanza de Recursos Naturales: Colombia (minería)
ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ၏ ေရနံႏွင့္ သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႕က႑သည္ တန္ဖိုးသတ္မွတ္မႈတြင္ အမွတ္ ၁၀၀ အနက္ ၄၄ မွတ္ရသျဖင့္ ယင္း၏ အေကာင္းဆံုး အစိတ္အပိုင္း
ရမွတ္ျဖစ္သည္။ ယင္းသည္ တိုင္းျပည္က ယင္း၏ သဘာဝသယံဇာတမ်ားမွ တန္ဖိုး ေကာက္ႏုတ္ေဖာ္ျပႏိုင္စြမ္းကို တိုင္းတာသည္။ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံသည္
ေခတ္မီက႑ဆိုင္ရာ ဥပေဒ ေရးဆြဲျပ႒ာန္းမႈမရွိေသာ္လည္း အခြန္ေကာက္ခံမႈမွာ ေက်နပ္ဖြယ္ရာရွိသည္။ ဟိုက္ၿဒိဳကာဗြန္ ထုတ္လုပ္မႈ စည္းကမ္းခ်က္မ်ားတြင္
တရားဥပေဒသက္ေရာက္မႈ မရွိဘဲ ယင္းတို႔ကို ႏိုင္ငံေတာ္စြမ္းအင္မူဝါဒႏွင့္ စံထုတ္လုပ္မႈခြဲေဝေရးစာခ်ဳပ္တို႔အရ ဆံုးျဖတ္သည္။ ဘ႑ာေရးစနစ္အပါအဝင္
ဥပေဒမူေဘာင္ျပဳျပင္ေျပာင္းလဲမႈ ခ်မွတ္ထားၿပီးျဖစ္သည္။ ေရနံႏွင့္ သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႕စာခ်ဳပ္မ်ားကို ထုတ္ျပန္ေၾကညာျခင္းမရွိေသာေၾကာင့္ ျပည္သူက
အစိုးရကို စာခ်ဳပ္မ်ားႏွင့္အညီေဆာင္ရြက္ရန္ တာဝန္ခံခိုင္းႏိုင္ျခင္း မရွိေပ။
၂၀၁၇ခု သယံဇာတ စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈ အၫႊန္းကိန္း - ျမန္မာ (ေရနံနွင့္ သဘာ၀ဓါတ္ေငြ႔)
ျမန္မာ - သယံဇာတကိုင္တြယ္စီမံမႈ လမ္းေၾကာင္းမ်ား
အထူးသျဖင့္ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံသည္ သယံဇာတသိုက္မ်ား၊ ထုတ္လုပ္မႈ၊ ေရနံ၊ သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႕ႏွင့္ ေက်ာက္စိမ္းတင္ပို႔မႈႏွင့္ပတ္သက္သည့္ အေျခခံ
အခ်က္အလက္မ်ားကို အေထာက္အကူျပဳသည့္ EITI သို႔ဝင္ေရာက္လိုက္ျခင္းေၾကာင့္ ပြင့္လင္းျမင္သာရွိမႈတြင္ တိုးတက္လာသည္။ ႏိုင္ငံ၏ EITI
အစီရင္ခံစာအရ ၂၀၁၃-၂၀၁၄ ဘ႑ာေရးႏွစ္တြင္ အစိုးရသည္ ေရနံႏွင့္သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႕မွ အခြန္ေငြႏွင့္ အခြန္မဟုတ္ေသာ အခြန္ဘ႑ာတို႔မွ
အေမရိကန္ေဒၚလာ ၂.၇ဘီလွ်ံနီးပါးရရွိၿပီး သတၳဳတူးျခင္း အခြန္ဘ႑ာမွ အေမရိကန္ေဒၚလာ သန္း ၄၆၀ ရရွိခဲ့သည္။ ထို႔ျပင္ EITI သည္ တံခါးပိတ္
ဝါဒမ်ားစြာက်င့္သံုးၿပီး ဗဟိုကထိန္းခ်ဳပ္ထားသည့္ႏိုင္ငံတြင္ လူမႈအဖြဲ႕အစည္း ပါဝင္မႈ တိုးတက္လာေရးအတြက္ အစည္းအေ၀း လက္ခံက်င္းပေပးၿပီး
လည္းျဖစ္သည္။ (ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ၏ သဘာဝ ပတ္ဝန္းက်င္ထိန္းသိမ္းမႈသည္ အမွတ္ ၁၀၀ တြင္ ၁၉ မွတ္သာရရွိေၾကာင္း အၫႊန္းကိန္းတြင္ ေဖာ္ျပထား
သည္။) ေရနံႏွင့္သဘာ၀ဓာတ္ေငြ႕က႑မွ အခ်ိဳ႕ေသာ အက်ိဳးခံစားသည့္ ပိုင္ရွင္မ်ားကိုလည္း ထုတ္ေဖာ္ေျပာၾကားထားၿပီး ျဖစ္သည္။ ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံ
သည္ သဘာဝပတ္ဝန္းက်င္ ထိန္းခ်ဳပ္မႈအခ်ိဳ႕ႏွင့္အတူ သဘာဝပတ္ဝန္းက်င္ ဥပေဒသစ္တစ္ခုကို ၂၀၁၂ ခုႏွစ္တြင္ ခ်မွတ္ျပ႒ာန္းခဲ့သည္။ သို႔ေသာ္
သဘာဝပတ္၀န္းက်င္ဆိုင္ရာ ဥပေဒမူေဘာင္ကို ထပ္မံျပဳျပင္ေျပာင္းလဲရန္ လိုအပ္လ်က္ရွိသည္။ ဥပေဒမ်ားလိုက္နာမႈကိုတိုင္းတာေသာ အၫႊန္း ကိန္းမ်ားႏွင့္
အမွန္တကယ္ထုတ္ေဖာ္ ေၾကညာမႈတြင္ ရမွတ္က်ဆင္းလ်က္ရွိသည္။
ျမန္မာ - တစ္ဝက္တစ္ပ်က္ အစိတ္အပိုင္းရမွတ္မ်ား
0
20
40
60
80
100
Policy area performance across
the extractive's value chain
Valuerealization
ResourceGovernanceIndex
Licensing
LocalImpact
Taxation
State-ownedenterprises
Revenuemanagement
Subnationalresourcerevenuesharing
Nationalbudgeting
Sovereignwealthfunds
Enablingenvironment
Voiceandaccountability
Governmenteffectiveness
Regulatoryquality
Ruleoflaw
Politicalstabilityandabsenceofviolence
Controlofcorruption
Opendata
သ
ယ
ံဇာတ
စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမွုအည
ႊန္းက
ိန္း
လ
ုုိင္စင္ခ်ထ
ားေပးမွု
အခြန္ေက
ာက
္ခံျခင္းေဒသ
တ
ြင္းထ
ိခိုက
္မွု
ႏုုိင္ငံပုုိင္လ
ုုပ္ငန္းမ်ား
အခြန္ေငြစီမံခန္႔ခြဲမွု
ႏုုိင္ငံေတ
ာ္ဘ
တ
္ဂ်က
္ခ်ထ
ားမွု
ႏိုင္ငံေတ
ာ္က
တ
စ္စိတ
္တ
စ္ေဒသ
ပိုင္ေသ
ာအရင္းအျမစ္အခြန္ခြဲေဝျခင္း
အခ်ဳပ္အျခာအာဏ
ာပိုင္္ဓနဥစၥာရန္ပုံေငြ
သ
ဘ
ာဝပတ
္၀န္းက
်င္ထ
ိန္းသ
ိမ္းျခင္း
ျပည
္သ
ူ႔သ
ေဘ
ာထ
ားႏွင့္တ
ာဝန္ခံမႈ
အစိုးရ၏
ၾသ
ဇာသ
က
္ေရာက
္မႈ
ထ
ိန္းည
ႇိမႈအရည
္အေသ
ြးတ
ရားဥပေဒစိုးမိုးမႈ
အက
်င့္ပ်က
္ျခစားမႈထ
ိန္းခ်ဳပ္ျခင္း
ႏိုင္ငံေရးတ
ည
္ၿငိမ္မႈႏွင့္အၾက
မ္းဖက
္မႈမရွိျခင္း
ျမင္သ
ာေသ
ာအခ်က
္အလ
က
္မ်ား
တ
န္ဖုုိးသ
တ
္မွတ
္မွု

23. 2017 Resource Governance Index
3
2017 Índice de la Gobernanza de Recursos Naturales: Colombia (minería)၂၀၁၇ခု သယံဇာတ စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈ အၫႊန္းကိန္း - ျမန္မာ (ေရနံနွင့္ သဘာ၀ဓါတ္ေငြ႔)
ႏိုင္ငံပိုင္လုပ္ငန္းကိုင္တြယ္စီမံမႈ
ျမန္မာ့ေရနံႏွင့္သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႕လုပ္ငန္း၏ ပြင့္လင္းျမင္သာမႈမရွိျခင္းသည္ ျပည္သူ႔ဘ႑ာအခြန္မ်ားတာဝန္ခံမႈကို
အဟန္႔အတားျဖစ္ေစလ်က္ရွိသည္။
ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံတြင္ ျမန္မာ့ေရနံႏွင့္သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႕လုပ္ငန္း(MOGE)သည္ အေရးအပါဆံုး ထုတ္လုပ္မႈလုပ္ငန္း အခြန္ေပးေဆာင္သူျဖစ္သည္။
အစိုးရသည္ ဘ႑ာအခြန္ တစ္စိတ္တစ္ပိုင္းကို ထိန္းသိမ္းခြင့္အပါအဝင္ ႏိုင္ငံပိုင္လုပ္ငန္း မ်ားအား ကိုယ္ပိုင္လုပ္ပိုင္ခြင့္ ပိုမိုေပးအပ္လ်က္ ယင္းတို႔ကို
ျပဳျပင္ေျပာင္းလဲမႈမူဝါဒကို ေၾကညာခဲ့သည္။ MOGE သည္ ယင္း၏စီးပြားဖက္အဖြဲ႕အစည္းမ်ားထံမွေကာက္ယူရရွိေသာ ထုတ္လုပ္မႈ ရွယ္ယာကို
မည္သို႔ေရာင္းခ်သည္ဆိုသည္ႏွင့္ ပတ္သက္၍ ထုတ္ေဖာ္ေျပာၾကားျခင္းမရွိေပ။ ယင္း၏ အစီရင္ခံတင္ျပျခင္းႏွင့္ ကိုင္တြယ္စီမံမႈမ်ား ေပါင္းစပ္
ေဆာင္ရြက္ျခင္းတို႔တြင္ က်ဆင္းလ်က္ရွိသည္။ ၂၀၁၆ခု EITI အစီရင္ခံစာတြင္ MOGE က ရရွိသည့္ ဘ႑ာအခြန္မ်ား၊ ယင္းသည္ အစိုးရကိုယ္စား
ေလာင္စာမ်ား ေထာက္ပံ့ေပးျခင္း စသည္တို႔အပါအဝင္ MOGE ႏွင့္ ပတ္သက္သည့္ အခ်က္အလက္အခ်ိဳ႕ပါဝင္သည္။
ေရနံ၊ သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႕ႏွင့္ သတၳဳတူးေဖာ္ေရး က႑မ်ားတြင္ ကိုင္တြယ္စီမံမႈ ေဆာင္ရြက္ခ်က္
ေရနံႏွင့္သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႕က႑သည္ လိုင္စင္ခ်ထားေပးျခင္းႏွင့္ SOE ကိုင္တြယ္စီမံမႈထက္ ေဆာင္ရြက္မႈပိုမို က်ယ္ျပန္႔သည္။
ျမန္မာႏိုင္ငံတြင္ ေက်ာက္မ်က္တူးေဖာ္ေရး လုပ္ငန္းအတြက္ လိုင္စင္ခ်ထားေပးေရး လုပ္ငန္းစဥ္သည္ ႏိုင္ငံမ်ား အားလံုးတြင္ အၫႊန္းကိန္း အနည္းဆံုးျဖစ္ကာ
အမွတ္ ၁၀၀တြင္ ၄ မွတ္သာရွိသည္။ ေရနံႏွင့္ သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႕ လိုင္စင္ခ်ထားေပးမႈက ပြင့္လင္းျမင္သာမႈ အနည္းငယ္ပိုရွိကာ အမွတ္ ၁၀၀တြင္ ၂၄
မွတ္ရရွိကာ ႏိုင္ငံေပါင္း ၈၉ႏိုင္ငံတြင္ အဆင့္ ၆၇ ခ်ိတ္သည္။ ၂၀၁၃ ႏွင့္ ၂၀၁၄ ခုတို႔တြင္ ျမန္မာ့ေရနံႏွင့္ သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႕ လုပ္ငန္းက ေခၚယူေသာ
ေစ်းၿပိဳင္တင္ဒါမ်ားသည္ ယခင္ေစ်းၿပိဳင္တင္ဒါမ်ားထက္ ပြင့္လင္းျမင္သာမႈ မ်ားစြာပိုရွိသည္။ ယင္းက႑ႏွစ္ခုစလံုးတြင္ လိုင္စင္ခ်ထားေပးျခင္း လုပ္ငန္းစဥ္တြင္
ႏိုင္ငံပိုင္လုပ္ငန္းမ်ားက အဓိကပါဝင္သည္။ သို႔ေသာ္ လိုင္စင္ရသူမ်ားကိုသာ ထုတ္ျပန္ေၾကညာၿပီး လုပ္ငန္းစဥ္ဆိုင္ရာ အေသးစိတ္ အခ်က္အလက္မ်ားကို
ထုတ္ျပန္ျခင္းမွာ မရွိသေလာက္ျဖစ္သည္။
ယင္းက႑ႏွစ္ခုစလံုးမွ အစိုးရက အခြန္မည္မွ်ေကာက္ခံရရွိသည္၊ ယင္းအခြန္ေငြမ်ားကို ႏိုင္ငံေတာ္ဘတ္ဂ်က္မ်ား ထဲသို႔ မည္သို႔ စီးဝင္သြားသည္
ဆိုသည္ႏွင့္ပတ္သက္၍ ပြင့္လင္းျမင္သာမႈမွာ မရွိသေလာက္ပင္ျဖစ္သည္။ တူးေဖာ္သည့္ကုမၸဏီမ်ားထံမွ ေကာက္ယူရရွိေသာ အခြန္မ်ားႏွင့္ ပတ္သက္သည့္
သတင္းမ်ားကို EITI မွတစ္ဆင့္ ထုတ္ျပန္ေၾကညာသည္။ သို႔ေသာ္ EITI ႏိုင္ငံအစီရင္ခံစာတြင္ ေက်ာက္မ်က္ကုမၸဏီမ်ားႏွင့္ ယင္းတို႔က ေပးေခ်ေသာ
ေငြမ်ားကိုသာ ေဖာ္ျပထားသည္။ ယင္းက႑ႏွစ္ခုစလံုးတြင္ အခြန္မ်ားႏွင့္ ေပးေခ်ေငြမ်ားကို ေအဂ်င္စီအခ်ိဳ႕က ေကာက္ခံသည္။ အမ်ားစုကို MOGE
ႏွင့္ MGE တို႔က စီမံကိန္းႏွင့္ ဘ႑ာေရးဝန္ႀကီးဌာနေအာက္ရွိ ျပည္တြင္းအခြန္မ်ားဦးစီးဌာန၊ သယံဇာတႏွင့္ သဘာဝပတ္ဝန္းက်င္ ထိန္းသိမ္းေရး
ဝန္ႀကီးဌာနနွင့္ လွ်ပ္စစ္ႏွင့္စြမ္းအင္ဝန္ႀကီးဌာနတို႔မွတစ္ဆင့္လည္းေကာင္း၊ ေက်ာက္မ်က္ရတနာမ်ားအတြက္ အခြန္မ်ားကို အေထြေထြအုပ္ခ်ဳပ္ေရး
ဦးစီးဌာနမွတစ္ဆင့္ အခြန္ပံုစံမ်ားျဖင့္လည္းေကာင္း ေကာက္ခံသည္။ စာရင္းစစ္ေဆးမႈမ်ားႏွင့္ လက္ေတြ႕ ကိန္းဂဏန္းမ်ားအၾကား ကြာျခားမႈမ်ားရွိပါသည္။
ဥပမာ ထုတ္လုပ္သည့္ကုမၸဏီမ်ားကို အမ်ိဳးသားအခြန္ ေအဂ်င္စီက စာရင္းမစစ္ပါ။ SOEs ၊ MOGE ႏွင့္ MGE တို႔အပါအဝင္ အခြန္ေကာက္ခံသည့္အဖြဲ႕အစ
ည္းအမ်ိဳးမ်ိဳးႏွင့္ ပတ္သက္၍ ရလဒ္မ်ားကို စာရင္းစစ္ခ်ဳပ္႐ံုးက စာရင္းစစ္သည္။ ယင္းတိို႔ကို ျပည္သူလူထုအား အသိမေပးပါ။ ထို႔ျပင္ စစ္တပ္ပိုင္ကုမၸဏီမ်ား
ျဖစ္ၾကသည့္ ျမန္မာ့စီးပြားေရး ေကာ္ပိုေရးရွင္းႏွင့္ ျမန္မာ့စီးပြားေရး ဦးပိုင္လီမိတက္တို႔သည္ ေက်ာက္မ်က္တူးေဖာ္ေရး က႑တြင္ လုပ္ကိုင္ေဆာင္ရြက္လ်က္
ရွိေသာ္လည္း သမိုင္းေၾကာင္းတစ္ေလွ်ာက္တြင္ ယင္းတို႔ကို စာရင္းစစ္ခ်ဳပ္႐ံုးက စာရင္းစစ္ျခင္းမွ ကင္းလြတ္ခြင့္ရလ်က္ရွိသည္။
SOEs မ်ားကိုကိုင္တြယ္စီမံရာတြင္ ယင္းက႑ႏွစ္ခုအၾကား ကြဲျပားျခားနားမႈမ်ားရွိေနေပသည္။ EITI ႏိုင္ငံအစီရင္ခံစာတြင္ တူးေဖာ္ေရး မဟုတ္
သည့္လုပ္ငန္းမ်ားအတြက္ ကုန္က်စရိတ္မ်ား၊ အစိုးရထံသို႔ေပးသြင္းသည့္ အခြန္ဘ႑ာမ်ား၊ ထုတ္လုပ္မႈပမာဏႏွင့္ MOGE အတြက္တန္ဖိုး စသည္တို႔ကို
ေဖာ္ျပထားသည္။ သို႔ေသာ္ ယင္းတြင္ MGE က အစိုးရထံသို႔ေပးသြင္းသည့္ အခြန္စုစုေပါင္းပမာဏသာ ပါဝင္သည္။
ေရနံႏွင့္သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႕က႑ ဘ႑ာအခြန္မ်ားအတြက္ ႏိုင္ငံေတာ္က တစ္စိတ္တစ္ေဒသပိုင္ဆိုင္ေသာ အခြန္ခြဲေဝမႈ ယႏၱရားမ်ား သတ္သတ္ မွတ္မွတ္
မရွိေပ။ ကုမၸဏီမ်ားသည္ လူမႈအဖြဲ႕အစည္းဖြံ႕ၿဖိဳးတိုးတက္ေရး ရန္ပံုေငြမ်ားသို႔ မိမိသေဘာအေလွ်ာက္ ထည့္ဝင္မလွဴဒါန္းႏိုင္ေပ။ သို႔ေသာ္ ေဒသအစိုးရမ်ား၏
အခြန္ထုတ္လုပ္ ႏိုင္စြမ္းမွာ နည္းပါးေသာေၾကာင့္ ဘ႑ာေငြမ်ားကို က်ံဳရာက်ပန္း လႊဲေျပာင္းေပးေနရသျဖင့္ သယံဇာတအခြန္ ဘ႑ာမ်ားခြဲေဝေရးဆိုင္ရာ
စနစ္တစ္ခုကို အထူးသျဖင့္ ေရနံႏွင့္သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႕ၾကြယ္ဝေသာ္လည္း ဆင္းရဲေနေသာျပည္နယ္မ်ားတြင္ ခ်မွတ္ရန္ လိုအပ္လ်က္ရွိသည္။

24. 2017 Resource Governance Index2017 Índice de la Gobernanza de Recursos Naturales: Colombia (minería)
The Natural Resource Governance Institute, an independent, non-profit organization, helps people
to realize the benefits of their countries’ oil, gas and mineral wealth through applied research, and
innovative approaches to capacity development, technical advice and advocacy.
Learn more at www.resourcegovernance.org
၂၀၁၇ခု သယံဇာတ စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈ အၫႊန္းကိန္း - ျမန္မာ (ေရနံနွင့္ သဘာ၀ဓါတ္ေငြ႔)
ျမန္မာ - ေရနံႏွင့္ သဘာ၀ဓာတ္ေငြ႕ ႏွင့္ သတၱဳတူးေဖာ္မႈ ရမွတ္မ်ား
RGI ဆိုသည္မွာအဘယ္နည္း။
၂၀၁၇ RGI သည္ ၈၁ႏိုင္ငံေသာ သဘာဝသယံဇာတၾကြယ္ဝေသာႏိုင္ငံမ်ားက ယင္းတို႔၏ ေရနံ၊ သဘာဝဓာတ္ေငြ႕ႏွင့္ ဓာတ္သတၳဳမ်ားကို မည္ကဲ့သို႔
ကိုင္တြယ္စီမံသည္ကို အကဲျဖတ္သည္။ အၫႊန္းကိန္းစုစုေပါင္းရမွတ္တြင္ ၃မ်ိဳးပါဝင္သည္။ ထုတ္လုပ္မႈက႑၏ တိုင္းတာမႈဆိုင္ရာ အဓိက လကၡဏာႏွစ္မ်ိဳးမွာ
တန္ဖိုးသတ္မွတ္ျခင္းႏွင့္ အခြန္စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈတို႔ျဖစ္သည္။ တတိယလကၡဏာျဖစ္သည့္ သဘာဝပတ္ဝန္းက်င္ ထိန္းသိမ္းမႈတြင္ ပိုမိုက်ယ္ျပန္႔ေသာ
ကိုင္တြယ္စီမံမႈပါဝင္သည္။ ယင္းကိုင္တြယ္စီမံမႈဆိုင္ရာ ေပါင္းကူးဖြဲ႕ယွက္ေနေသာ ပမာဏသံုးခုတြင္ အစိတ္အပိုင္း ၁၄ ခုျဖင့္ ဖြဲ႕စည္းထားၿပီး ယင္းတို႔တြင္
အၫႊန္းျပကိန္း ၅၁ ခုပါဝင္သည္။ ယင္းတို႔ကို ေမးခြန္းစုစုေပါင္း ၁၃၃ ခုျဖင့္ တြက္ခ်က္သည္။
တန္ဖိုးသတ္မွတ္ျခင္းႏွင့္ အခြန္စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈတို႔ႏွင့္ပတ္သက္၍ အဓိကက်ေသာ အခ်က္အလက္မ်ားကို ေကာက္ယူရန္ အတြက္ ၈၁ႏိုင္ငံအနက္
တစ္ႏိုင္ငံခ်င္းစီမွ NRGI က ႀကီးၾကပ္ေသာ သီးျခားလြတ္လပ္သည့္ သုေတသီမ်ားက ေမးခြန္းတစ္စံုစီ ျပဳစုခဲ့သည္။ တတိယလကၡဏာအတြက္ RGI သည္
ႏိုင္ငံတကာအဖြဲ႕အစည္း ၂၀ေက်ာ္မွ ျပင္ပအခ်က္အလက္မ်ားကို ေရးဆြဲသည္။ ယင္းအကဲျဖတ္ခ်က္သည္ ၂၀၁၅-၂၀၁၆ခုႏွစ္ကာလအတြင္း ျဖစ္သည္။
အၫႊန္းကိန္းႏွင့္ ယင္းကိုမည္သို႔ တည္ေဆာက္ခဲ့သည္ဆိုသည္ႏွင့္ ပတ္သက္သည့္ အခ်က္အလက္မ်ားအတြက္ RGI နည္းကိုၾကည့္ပါ။
■ Mining ■ Oil and gas
-100 -50 0 50 100
Resource Governance Index
Value realization
Licensing
Taxation
Local Impact
State-owned enterprises
Revenue management
National budgeting
Subnational resource revenue sharing
Sovereign wealth funds
Enabling environment
Voice and accountability
Government effectiveness
Regulatory quality
Rule of law
Control of corruption
Political stability and absence of violence
Open data
သယံဇာတ စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမႈ အၫႊန္းကိန္း
တန္ဖိုးသတ္မွတ္မႈ
လိုင္စင္ခ်ထားေပးမႈ
အခြန္ေကာက္ခံျခင္း
ေဒသတြင္း ထိခိုက္မႈ
ႏိုင္ငံပိုင္ လုပ္ငန္းမ်ား
အခြန္ေငြ စီမံခန္႔ခြဲမွု
ႏိုင္ငံေတာ္ဘတ္ဂ်က္ခ်ထားေပးမႈ
ႏိုင္ငံေတာ္က တစ္စိတ္တစ္ေဒသ ပိုင္ေသာ အရင္းအျမစ္အခြန္ခြဲေဝျခင္း
အခ်ဳပ္အျခာအာဏာပိုင္ ဓနဥစၥာ ရန္ပုံေငြ
သဘာဝပတ္၀န္းက်င္ ထိန္းသိမ္းျခင္း
ျပည္သူ႔သေဘာထားႏွင့္ တာ၀န္ခံမႈ
အစိုးရ၏ ၾသဇာသက္ေရာက္မႈ
ထိန္းညႇိမႈ အရည္အေသြး
တရားဥပေဒ စိုးမိုးမႈ
အက်င့္ပ်က္ျခစားမႈ ထိန္းခ်ဳပ္ျခင္း
ႏိုင္ငံေရးတည္ၿငိမ္မႈႏွင့္ အၾကမ္းဖက္မႈမရွိျခင္း
ျမင္သာေသာ အခ်က္အလက္မ်ား
သတၱဳတူးေဖာ္ေရး ေရနံနွင့္သဘာဝဓါတ္ေငြ႔

25. 2017
Resource
Governance
Index

26. © 2017 Natural Resource Governance Institute

27. 2017 Resource Governance Index

28. Foreword
2017 Resource Governance Index
2 | WWW.RESOURCEGOVERNANCEINDEX.ORG
E
ffective governance of the oil, gas and
mining sectors is a persistent challenge,
especially for low- and middle-income
countries. But as the Resource Governance
Index reveals, it is not an insurmountable one. In
the index we see many examples of developing
countries defying expectations and stereotypes—
sometimes in one policy area, sometimes in
many—making progress toward a more judicious
use of their natural resources for national
development. Unfortunately, this is not true for
all countries, some having experienced in recent
years worrisome setbacks in the proper use of
their natural resources.
Poor management and corruption can take
root anywhere, in countries rich or poor. These
scourges cannot be eliminated everywhere, all
of the time. But citizens, journalists, legislators,
politicians, companies, investors and academics
can work to mitigate them, and expose them early
on—and that is where the data carefully compiled
here by the Natural Resource Governance
Institute become so valuable.
The staff of our institute have worked hard to
provide evidence and documentation to assist
in the critical struggle for better natural resource
governance. Hopefully the insightful data
provided by the index will contribute to the work
of those committed to economic prosperity and
social justice in resource-producing countries.
Ernesto Zedillo Ponce de León
Professor in the Field of International Economics
and Politics, Yale University
Former President of Mexico
Chair, Board of Directors
Natural Resource Governance Institute

29. Introduction
WWW.RESOURCEGOVERNANCEINDEX.ORG | 3
T
he extraction of oil, gas and minerals is
one of the most politically, socially and
economically complex undertakings in
development. It is a business that connects the
world and sates much of our hunger for energy and
raw materials. It produces inputs to almost every
physical product manufactured. It has contributed
to one of the most fundamental challenges in
human history—climate change. It has produced
trillions of dollars in revenues.
These vast sums of money contrast cruelly with
the poverty of many countries where resources
are found—1.8 billion people live in poverty in
the scores of countries assessed in this index.1
The empirical evidence is clear: changing this dire
situation requires improving governance—the
institutions, rules and practices that determine
how company executives and government officials
make decisions and engage and affect citizens,
communities and the environments they inhabit.
To improve governance, one has to diagnose
in detail what works and what does not, and that
requires measurement. The Resource Governance
Index assesses the quality of natural resource
governance in 81 countries that together produce,
among other commodities, 82 percent of the
world’s oil, 78 percent of its gas and 72 percent
of all copper.2
The index has as its intellectual
foundation the Natural Resource Charter; both are
the product of the expertise of NRGI staff and a
network of external scholars and practitioners.
The index is the sum total of 89 country-level
assessments (in eight countries we assess both
oil and gas and mining sectors), formulated using
a framework of 149 critical questions answered
by 150 researchers, drawing upon almost
10,000 supporting documents. Researchers’
careful assessments of extractive sector factors
are combined with pre-existing data, from
other sources, on countries’ broader enabling
environments. The findings presented in this
report reflect highlights from a much larger set
of data and country profiles available online at
www.resourcegovernanceindex.org.
So what does the index tell us? The data show
that despite substantial efforts from governments,
advocates and the international community, in
most countries governing resources remains a
major challenge. Every country could improve in at
least one important area of governance, and most
countries have significant room for progress in
multiple areas.
At the same time, reformers have achieved a
great deal. The index shows that many countries—
even some in very challenging situations—have
taken concrete steps in the form of rules and
procedures. Those promoting change need not
look far to find inspiration on how to better
govern—there are countries pursuing innovative
approaches and progressing in every region. The
evidence shows that more progress is taking
place in the adoption of rules than in their
actual practice; often those who seek improved
governance should in many places focus on
implementing existing legal frameworks. We also
learn that better resource governance emerges in
countries where civic space is safeguarded and
corruption risks are mitigated.
Considering the imperative of inclusive growth
in resource-rich countries, improvements at the
international level are also called for—including
by members of the G7, multinational companies
and international financial institutions. Work
remains for producing countries that seek further
economic transformation and diversification,
better protection of the environment and assurance
that citizens benefit from extraction.
The main priorities and preferred pathways to
action will vary across countries and actors, which
means that informed and inclusive public debate is
essential. These dialogues must incorporate politi-
cal, economic, social and environmental consider-
ations. We trust that the evidence in this index will
inform such debates and the resulting decisions.
Daniel Kaufmann
President and CEO
Natural Resource Governance Institute

30. Resource Governance Index country scores and rankings
2017 Resource Governance Index
4 | WWW.RESOURCEGOVERNANCEINDEX.ORG
20
40
60
80
100
44th
|Ukraine|
43rd
|Timor-Leste|
42nd
|Tanzania|
41st
|Mozambique|
40th
|Zambia|
39th
|Oman|
38th
|KyrgyzRepublic|
37th
|Morocco|
36th
|Tanzania|
35th
|Mali|
34th
|Bolivia|
33rd
|Kuwait|
32nd
|Ecuador|
31st
|Niger|
30th
|Cameroon|
29th
|China|
28th
|Côted’Ivoire|
27th
|Malaysia|
26th
|Tunisia|
25th
|Kazakhstan|
24th
|Ghana|
23rd
|SouthAfrica|
22nd
|Argentina|
21st
|Philippines|
20th
|BurkinaFaso|
19th
|Mexico|
18th
|Botswana|
17th
|Mexico|
16th
|Peru|
15th
|Mongolia|
14th
|TrinidadandTobago|
13th
|Ghana|
12th
|Indonesia|
11th
|Indonesia|
10th
|Colombia|
9th
|India|
8th
|Australia(Western)|
7th
|Colombia|
6th
|Brazil|
5th
|UnitedStatesofAmerica(GulfofMexico)|
4th
|Canada(Alberta)|
3rd
|UnitedKingdom|
2nd
|Chile|
1st
|Norway|
SCORE 86 81 77 75 74 71 71 71 70 69 68 68 67 64 64 62 61 61 60 59 58 57 57 56 56 56 56 55 55 54 54 54 54 54 53 53 52 51 50 50 50 49 49 49
Oil and gas Mining
2017 Resource Governance Index

31. WWW.RESOURCEGOVERNANCEINDEX.ORG | 5
89th
|Eritrea|
88th
|Turkmenistan|
87th
|Libya|
86th
|Sudan|
85th
|EquatorialGuinea|
84th
|DemocraticRepublicofCongo|
83rd
|Myanmar|
82nd
|Mauritania|
81st
|Zimbabwe|
80th
|Uzbekistan|
79th
|Cambodia|
78th
|Yemen|
77th
|Myanmar|
76th
|SouthSudan|
75th
|DemocraticRepublicofCongo|
74th
|Venezuela|
73rd
|Algeria|
72nd
|Chad|
71st
|Afghanistan|
70th
|Angola|
69th
|SaudiArabia|
68th
|Madagascar|
67th
|Bangladesh|
66th
|Cuba|
65th
|Gabon|
64th
|LaoPDR|
63rd
|Guinea|
62nd
|Iran|
61st
|Iraq|
60th
|Egypt|
59th
|Bahrain|
58th
|Congo|
57th
|Ethiopia|
56th
|Guatemala|
55th
|Nigeria|
54th
|UnitedArabEmirates|
53rd
|Qatar|
52nd
|Liberia|
51st
|Uganda|
50th
|Russia|
49th
|SierraLeone|
48th
|Tunisia|
47th
|Azerbaijan|
46th
|PapuaNewGuinea|
45th
|Vietnam|
48 47 47 46 46 45 44 44 43 42 42 41 40 39 39 39 38 38 38 38 36 36 36 36 36 35 34 34 33 33 33 32 31 30 30 29 29 29 27 25 22 21 18 11 10
Good ≥ 75
A country has established laws and practices that are likely to result in extractive resource wealth
benefiting citizens, although there may be some costs to society.
Satisfactory 60-74
A country has some strong governance procedures and practices, but some areas need improvement.
It is reasonably likely that extractive resource wealth benefits citizens, but there may be costs to society.
Weak 45-59
A country has a mix of strong and problematic areas of governance. Results indicate that resource
extraction can help society, but it is likely that the eventual benefits are weak.
Poor 30-44
A country has established some minimal procedures and practices to govern resources, but most
elements necessary to ensure society benefits are missing.
Failing < 30
A country has almost no governance framework to ensure resource extraction benefits society. It is
highly likely that benefits flow only to some companies and elites.

32. Creating the 2017
Resource Governance Index
2017 Resource Governance Index
6 | WWW.RESOURCEGOVERNANCEINDEX.ORG
3.40 YUOP▲60.29 RETR▲67.89
3.40 YUOP▲60.29 RETR▲67.89
Creating the 2017 Resource Governance Index
NRGI creates a questionnaire
consisting of 149 questions.
One hundred and fifty experts, in
81 countries, research the issues,
compile documentation and
complete the questionnaire.
1. 2.
NRGI collates and
assesses the quality of
all collected data.
3.
NRGI translates raw data into scores for the two
bespoke components of the Resource Governance
Index―value realization and revenue management.
4.
NRGI collects additional data to capture countries’ “enabling
environments”―the broader institutional governance and
transparency context.
5.
NRGI calculates the
index using the
primary and
secondary data.
NRGI publicizes and disseminates the
index and provides recommendations
to key stakeholders.
8.
NRGI analyzes
results and
generates key
findings.
7.
6.
Governments,
journalists, civil society
actors and companies
use the findings from
the index to improve
resource governance
for the benefit of
citizens and investors.
9.