Presentasi article 33 indonesia
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
4 likes•822 views
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (11)
Similar to Presentasi article 33 indonesia
Similar to Presentasi article 33 indonesia (20)
More from Indonesia Anti Corruption Forum
More from Indonesia Anti Corruption Forum (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Presentasi article 33 indonesia
- 1. ISU-ISU KRITIS KORUPSI PERTAMBANGAN CHITRA RETNA S DIREKTUR EKSEKUTIF ARTICLE 33 INDONESIA
- 2. EKSTRAKTIF: BERKAH VS ANCAMAN Pasal 33 UUD 45: memaksimalkan pengelolaan kekayaan alam untuk sebesar-besar kemanfaatan bagi rakyat Decision to extract Contract/lice nse Fiscal Terms Extraction Comodity selling Revenue Collection Policy/Program Revenue Management Perbaikan tata kelola sepanjang rantai nilai
- 3. Titik Kritis Sepanjang Rantai Nilai Pertambangan 1. Masy kurang berpartisipasi dalam membuat keputusan ekstraksi 2. Tumpang tindih perijinan 3. Korupsi terkait perijinan 4. Pemr daerah tidak mendapat bagian yang layak Comodity selling Revenue Collection Policy/PrograRevenue Management Reklamasi Paska Tambang Fiscal Terms Extraction 5. Reklamasi/paska tambang tidak dilakukan 6. Possible korupsi dana jaminan reklamasi Decision to extract Contract 7. Underpayment 8. Korupsi penerimaan 9. Penggunaan penerimaan tidak tepat 10. Distribusi tidak merata
- 5. PERIZINAN TAMBANG 5 Total mining licenses (IUP) 10.780 (1/2/2013); CLEAN AND CLEAR (C&C) IUP: 5. 503 (mineral 3.268; coal 2.235) NON C&C IUP: 5.277 (mineral 3.639; coal1.638) NON C&C : illegal, overlapping licenses Overlapping: 987 IUP
- 6. TITIK KRITIS PERIZINAN • MEKANISME – Sebelumnya izin diberikan langsung mulai diberlakukan bidding – Penentuan wilayah tambang pemerintah pusat, mulai digugat pemerintah daerah – Data (peta) tidak jelas, database izin tidak sistematis rawan tumpang tindih • OTORITAS & SECOND LINE ENFORCEMENT – Sejak diserahkan pada daerah, kasus tumpang tindih melonjak tinggi rawan digunakan untuk kepentingan politik – Second line enforcement dari pemerintah pusat sangat tidak jelas moratorium s/d Maret 2013 • PERKEMBANGAN TERBARU – Permen Pelelangan (& Permen Perijinan)
- 7. KORUPSI DI PERIZINAN 7 1. PEMBERIAN IUP DI DAERAH ( KE DEPAN; PROSES BIDDING) 2. VERIFIKASI CNC 3. NEGOSIASI B-TO-B TUMPANG TINDIH IJIN
- 8. 2. PENERIMAAN TAMBANG (PNBP): LANDRENT – ROYALTI - IIPKH
- 9. PENERIMAAN NEGARA: ROYALTI/LAND RENT TAMBANG • Kontribusi ke GDP meningkat Penerimaan terus menurun?
- 10. PERKIRAAN KEHILANGAN PENERIMAAN: PSDH/DR HUTAN H Sumber: Hasil olahan ARTICLE 33 INDONESIA Kayu Ilegal; 70% Kayu Legal; 30% Kerugian Negara akibat Illegal Logging (Rp 30 triliun/tahun) PNBP yang diterima negara dari kayu legal (30%)PNBP dari kayu legal yang hilang (70%)
- 11. PERKIRAAN KEHILANAN PENERIMAAN TAMBANG: IIPKH Sumber: Hasil olahan ARTICLE 33 INDONESIA 168.05 174 430 469 0 98 172 224 324.58 464.60 478.02 544.04 2009 2010 2011 2012 Realisasi Penerimaan Perkiraan Penerimaan Perhitungan Potensi
- 12. SISTEM PENGUMPULAN PNBP TAMBANG 12 Royalty Policy Regime Establish Royalty Base Estimate Royalty Potential Billing Payment NTR Payer Reporting NTR Payer Data Mgmt Controls and Compliance Verification and Reconciliation Revenue Sharing Determination Audit Coal IUPs and PKP2Bs Self- assessment Pay to MPN or BI Send payment report and docs District Mining Dinas Issue IUPs license and manage data of licenses issued Reviews IUPs production plans Receives payment reports Follow up on non- compliance Reconciles payment with MoEMR To be determined Provincial Mining Dinas Bank of Indonesia Treasury acc. at BI DG Treasury, MoF MPN System Provide payment data for recon Accepts DG Fiscal Bal. estimates DG Budget, MoF Review proposals Lack data to evaluate forecasts Future – SIMPONI billing system Lack data to provide oversight of NTR realisation DG Custom and DG Tax MoF No current role No current role No current role DG Mineral and Coal, MoEMR Develop proposals Issue PKP2Bs license and Clean & Clear (CNC) status to IUPs Review PKP2Bs and large IUPs production plans & produce Forecast NTR Set out deemed price Issue decree on payment process All reports should go to MoEMR Sub- directorate evaluate returns (to be discussed) Verifies and reconciles with SNG and DG Treasury payment data Leads revenue sharing estimates Audits sample BPK Audits sample
- 13. 13 TITIK KRITIS PROSES PENGUMPULAN PNBP Estimating Royalty Potential Establishing the Royalty Base Legislation and Royalty Regime • Essential details of royalty calculation are contained in a hierarchy of legislation, regulations and decrees.Key processes Potential Issues • Progress towards establishing the full mining “population” through MoEMR issuing “clean and clear” status to IUPs – currently 4,000 issued • Sub-directorate uses list of last year’s payers (from KPPN) as the database of NTR payers. This is not linked to the CnC list. • The list of last year’s payers does not automatically include new coal producers and those that did not pay (but should have done last year) • The absence of a centralised registry of all mining licences (PKP2Bs and IUPs) results in significant gaps in the knowledge of who should be contributing royalty and renders the control and compliance function difficult • MoEMR compiles an annual forecast of non-tax revenue from mining to DG Budget. Forecast is based on a review of prior realized revenue and review of information provided by PKP2Bs and large IUPs and provinces/districts on sales and production estimates for the upcoming year. • Forecasts do not seem to use or check against macro data e.g., the 2012 coal production forecast is 20m tonnes less than total coal production for 2011 • Unclear process for reviewing forecasts during the year in response to market conditions • Unclear if there is a process to compare actual/realised NTR with forecast. DG Budget does not have data on realised NTR by sector to compare with forecast • Sudden death nature of royalty calculations at various thresholds. • Consistency of some royalty provisions (for example payment frequency) between PKP2Bs and IUPs. • There appear to be differences in sanctions for non- payment or under payment between PKP2Bs and IUPs.
- 14. 14 NTR Payer ReportingPaymentBilling • Royalty obligation is determined on a self-assessment basis. • IUP royalties are due within a month of sale. PKP2B royalties are paid monthly or quarterly depending on generation. • SIMPONI system to be introduced later in 2013 – SIMPONI is an NTR billing system linked to the MPN payment system Key processes Potential Issues • BPK Audit findings: universal mistakes in company calculation of NTR obligation due to misinterpretation of deductions • No communication of common royalty error calculations with industry. • The proposed SIMPONI system needs to have in-built controls to prevent errors in calculation of NTR obligation. • NTR payments in IDR should go through electronic Treasury MPN (Modul Penerimaan Negara – State Revenue Module) system and NTR forex payments go through Bank of Indonesia. • In reality, most NTR go through BI as payers can choose (2011 IDR 80 trillion through MPN and 200 trillion through BI) • The MPN system is currently only limited to recording the amount of NTR payment and not capturing supporting information. BI transfers capture even less information. • The lack of information collected makes it difficult to reconcile later on and also to assess realised NTR against forecasts • Coal producers are obliged to send hard copies of NTR payment report (Copy of SSBP form or Bank transfer proof; Lab analysis & survey by 3rd party assessment; sales report and sales invoice) to MoEMR. IUPs should send copies to district/provincial DINAS. • Coal producers submit separately production and monitoring reports to authority issuing license (PKP2Bs to MoEMR, IUPs to district or province) • Without a centralised licences registry it is difficult for MoEMR to know if all payment reports have been received. • MoEMR receives different sets of supporting documentation – some not adequate - with payment reports. • No mechanism to ensure that all relevant institutions receive reports and that reports are consistent. For example, MoEMR is reliant on local government to compile and send production and sales reports to them.
- 15. 15 Controls and Compliance NTR Payer Data Management • Royalty payment data is electronically stored in an Excel spreadsheet only by MoEMR. • Subject to discussion with ESDM it is not known how this data is, or can be, used effectively for royalty administration purposes. • There should be improvements with implementation of the SIMPONI system. Key processes Potential Issues • Royalty payments recorded by ESDM in an Excel spreadsheet – not robust and subject to human error. For example, analysis indicated possible: o inconsistency in paying entity names o miscoding between the three types of mining NTR o entry duplications • Current data system does not enable prompt and meaningful NTR payment information (royalties by province, mineral etc.) to inform future policy making decisions. Below information is based on initial discussions with MoEMR on the controls and compliance functions by the NTR sub-directorate: • NTR sub-directorate has 4 staff to evaluate PKP2Bs (2 staff) and IUP (2 staff) royalty returns/payment reports • Evaluation of royalty returns: checks against supporting documentation, physical audits (sample), checks against list of previous NTR payers (from KPPN compilation). (Further determination of “evaluation” process is required). • District and provincial DINAs responsible for IUP compliance • Unclear debt management procedures • Initial discussions with MoEMR suggests that administrative controls are inadequate – to be further analysed: o Revenue accounted for on a cash basis only – no recognition of debtors. o Controls impeded by the absence of a centralised licence registry that generates an accurate list of all royalty payers. o No systematic use made of other coal producer data to evaluate individual NTR payments: customs, VAT, tax, production and monitoring reports o Unclear what controls and compliance measures adopted by district and provincial DINAS. o No systematic use of aggregate production and trade data to evaluate aggregate NTR payments o SIMPONI can provide information on non-payment and under-payment for those who register and bill, but currently no processes to link this information to a debt management system. Masalah-masalah (draft, tidak untuk dikutip)
- 16. 16 Audit Revenue Sharing Determination Verification and Reconciliation • NTR payment receipts sent by companies and recorded by MoEMR are reconciled quarterly (amount and type of payment), manually in an Excel file with: 1) Payment records by district and provincial Mining Dinas 2) Payment records by DG Treasury (from KPPN data, incl. payments through BI) on a quarterly basis at the central level. • Unclear what action is taken with unreconciled items Key processes Potential Issues • Reconciliation does not identify potential underpayment, non- collection or errors in the recording of payment data. For example, for PKP2Bs the share of sales revenue should be reconciled to the royalty components for each payment – only 3 ratios are applicable for open-cut mines. • The reconciliation details royalty amount by location which enables determination of SNG share of royalty revenue. • DG Treasury will only categorise payments as royalties if MoEMR provides sufficient payment supporting documentation – otherwise payments are classified as other NTR (not part of revenue sharing) • Incorrect miscoding between royalties and sales revenue can lead to incorrect revenue sharing. • A range of organisations undertake royalty audits – BPK, BPKP. • Both BPK and BPKP are able to conduct company audits, as well as an audit of MoEMR operations • Audits of companies are conducted on a sample basis taking into account various considerations of compliance. • Companies that have been audited need to respond to the various findings. • Most audits have detected errors in NTR calculations. • Possible confusion in industry of which agency will audit them. • Common errors from audits are not communicated widely to industry to prevent recurrence.
- 17. TITIK KRITIS PENERIMAAN • PENENTUAN TAGIHAN PNBP: – SELF ASSESSMENT PERUSAHAAN, PEMERINTAH KESULITAN DATA PEMBANDING, TIDAK ADA INSTRUMEN PENGECEKAN – PEMERINTAH DAERAH TIDAK PUNYA CUKUP INSENTIF MEMAKSIMALKAN PNBP, KARENA OTORITAS LEMAH, MASUK KE PUSAT • PEMBAYARAN: – SISTEM PEMBAYARAN USD, RENTAN KONVERSI NILAI TUKAR – DATA AKURAT PEMBAYAR TIDAK LENGKAP, MENYULITKAN PENGHITUNGAN PEMBAGIAN DBH • PELAPORAN: – SISTEM MANUAL, DATA TIDAK TERDOKUMENTASI BAIK, BERBEDA ANTAR INSTANSI DAN LEMAH KOORDINASI (BEA CUKAI – DISTAMBEN – ESDM – KEUANGAN) • MONITORING & AUDIT (ENFORCEMENT) – TIDAK CUKUP SDM UNTUK PEMANTAUAN
- 18. 18 1. KURANG BAYAR PNBP (& PAJAK) KARENA PEMALSUAN DATA PRODUKSI, HARGA REFERENSI, KANDUNGAN DLL 2. TIDAK BAYAR PNBP (& PAJAK) KARENA PERTAMBANGAN ILEGAL ATAU EKSPORT ILEGAR KORUPSI DI PENDAPATAN NEGARA
- 20. TITIK KRITIS DANA JAMINAN REKLAMASI • BESARAN: – BELUM MENCAKUP JAMINAN RESIKO LINGKUNGAN/SOSIAL YANG MEMADAI – TERLALU KECIL MEMBERI INSENTIF UNTUK TIDAK DILAKUKAN REKLAMASI – TIDAK DIATUR DENGAN RINCI, OTORITAS MENENTUKAN TERGANTUNG ASSESSMENT PERUSAHAAN, PEMDA SULIT MEMONITOR • KELAYAKAN: – IZIN BANYAK DIKELUARKAN TANPA MENELAAH KELAYAKAN RENCANA REKLAMASI DAN PASKA TAMBANG PERUSAHAAN – AMDAL & DOKUMEN LAIN HANYA PERSYARATAN PROSEDURAL • PENGGUNAAN – SEJUMLAH DANA REKLAMASI DIBAYARKAN KEPADA PEMDA SEBELUM KEGIATAN PENAMBANGAN DILAKUKAN – TRANSPARANSI DANA JAMINAN MINIM, BANYAK DALAM REKENING ATAS NAMA BUPATI – PENCAIRAN DANA MINIM PENGAWASAN, MENYALAHI ATURAN – LEBIH BANYAK KASUS PERUSAHAAN MEMILIH TIDAK MEREKLAMASI DAN MENGABAIKAN DANA JAMINAN
- 21. 21 1. PENGGUNAAN DANA REKLAMASI UNTUK HAL-HAL LAIN SELAIN REKLAMASI 2. TIDAK OPTIMAL/TIDAK DILAKUKAN REKLAMASI KARENA DANA JAMINAN KURANG MEMADAI KORUPSI DI DANA REKLAMASI
- 22. REKOMENDASI 1. PENINDAKAN PENTING, TETAPI PERBAIKAN SISTEM LEBIH PENTING • SISTEM LICENSING, BESARAN ROYALTI, KOLEKSI PENDAPATAN 2. DESENTRALISASI KEWENANGAN KE DAERAH MENJADI SUMBER MASALAH SEKALIGUS POTENSI SOLUSI • NO RESENTRALISASI, OTORITAS DAERAH TAPI DENGAN SECOND LINE ENFORCEMENT • AKUNTABILITAS LOKAL 3. TRANSPARANSI UNTUK AKUNTABILITAS • SEBAGAI SOLUSI TAHAP PERTAMA, TAPI AKUNTABILITAS DAN PEMERINTAH RESPONSIF MEMBUTUHKAN PERBAIKAN SISTEM INSENTIF, TERMASUK INSENTIF SISTEM POLITIK
- 23. INOVASI MENCEGAH KORUPSI: MEKANISME TRANSPARANSI DAERAH, EITI
- 24. TERIMA KASIH
Editor's Notes
- In trying to work towards the Good Governance agenda Revenue Watch Institute uses the “EI Value Chain” model. This Value Chain model is derived from proposals by Oxford economist and RWI advisory board member Professor Paul Collier. The Value Chain is a living concept that has been adapted to reflect RWI’s experience working with various issues in the field – the Value Chain helps us to scrutinize the various critical steps where public officials conduct performances and allocate oil, gas, mineral and metal resources, regulate the extraction processes, collect revenues, and allocate revenues for various purposes. Idealy there needs to be civil society oversight throughout the phases of the entire value chain. Explain all the links briefly: Decision to extract or not to extract: Here it is important that local communities (in many cases Indinegous People) are also included in the decision making process and are facilitated to be able to make prior informed decisions, be their consent of rejection of a project. In this decision making process the government and the companies involved need to be transparent about the environmental and social costs sch a project will entail. Awarding contracts/liscenses = is this process trasparent, are the responsible government officials ensuring the government and the public are getting the best deal, or is the handing out of contracts shrouded by opacity? Fiscal terms – does the government have the ability to negotiate the best fiscal terms for the country? Extraction process – are environmental and social costs being externalized onto the local communities and environment? Trading of commodities = is the government agency responsible for the trading of government shares of commodities doing it in a transparent and accountable way? Tax and revenue collection = are taxes and reveues collected by the government being accounted for in a trasparent manner? Revenue management and allocation = how is the government managing it’s revenues to address the various challenges related to EI revenues? Is it aboe to save prodently in times of great windfall? Does it go on a spending spree on projects that do not contribute to sustainable development? Development projects/policies= is the government carying out development in consideration of the fact that EI resources are finite/ Is it strengthening other sectors of its economy? How is spending on health, infrastructure and education?
- In trying to work towards the Good Governance agenda Revenue Watch Institute uses the “EI Value Chain” model. This Value Chain model is derived from proposals by Oxford economist and RWI advisory board member Professor Paul Collier. The Value Chain is a living concept that has been adapted to reflect RWI’s experience working with various issues in the field – the Value Chain helps us to scrutinize the various critical steps where public officials conduct performances and allocate oil, gas, mineral and metal resources, regulate the extraction processes, collect revenues, and allocate revenues for various purposes. Idealy there needs to be civil society oversight throughout the phases of the entire value chain. Explain all the links briefly: Decision to extract or not to extract: Here it is important that local communities (in many cases Indinegous People) are also included in the decision making process and are facilitated to be able to make prior informed decisions, be their consent of rejection of a project. In this decision making process the government and the companies involved need to be transparent about the environmental and social costs sch a project will entail. Awarding contracts/liscenses = is this process trasparent, are the responsible government officials ensuring the government and the public are getting the best deal, or is the handing out of contracts shrouded by opacity? Fiscal terms – does the government have the ability to negotiate the best fiscal terms for the country? Extraction process – are environmental and social costs being externalized onto the local communities and environment? Trading of commodities = is the government agency responsible for the trading of government shares of commodities doing it in a transparent and accountable way? Tax and revenue collection = are taxes and reveues collected by the government being accounted for in a trasparent manner? Revenue management and allocation = how is the government managing it’s revenues to address the various challenges related to EI revenues? Is it aboe to save prodently in times of great windfall? Does it go on a spending spree on projects that do not contribute to sustainable development? Development projects/policies= is the government carying out development in consideration of the fact that EI resources are finite/ Is it strengthening other sectors of its economy? How is spending on health, infrastructure and education?
- In trying to work towards the Good Governance agenda Revenue Watch Institute uses the “EI Value Chain” model. This Value Chain model is derived from proposals by Oxford economist and RWI advisory board member Professor Paul Collier. The Value Chain is a living concept that has been adapted to reflect RWI’s experience working with various issues in the field – the Value Chain helps us to scrutinize the various critical steps where public officials conduct performances and allocate oil, gas, mineral and metal resources, regulate the extraction processes, collect revenues, and allocate revenues for various purposes. Idealy there needs to be civil society oversight throughout the phases of the entire value chain. Explain all the links briefly: Decision to extract or not to extract: Here it is important that local communities (in many cases Indinegous People) are also included in the decision making process and are facilitated to be able to make prior informed decisions, be their consent of rejection of a project. In this decision making process the government and the companies involved need to be transparent about the environmental and social costs sch a project will entail. Awarding contracts/liscenses = is this process trasparent, are the responsible government officials ensuring the government and the public are getting the best deal, or is the handing out of contracts shrouded by opacity? Fiscal terms – does the government have the ability to negotiate the best fiscal terms for the country? Extraction process – are environmental and social costs being externalized onto the local communities and environment? Trading of commodities = is the government agency responsible for the trading of government shares of commodities doing it in a transparent and accountable way? Tax and revenue collection = are taxes and reveues collected by the government being accounted for in a trasparent manner? Revenue management and allocation = how is the government managing it’s revenues to address the various challenges related to EI revenues? Is it aboe to save prodently in times of great windfall? Does it go on a spending spree on projects that do not contribute to sustainable development? Development projects/policies= is the government carying out development in consideration of the fact that EI resources are finite/ Is it strengthening other sectors of its economy? How is spending on health, infrastructure and education?
- In trying to work towards the Good Governance agenda Revenue Watch Institute uses the “EI Value Chain” model. This Value Chain model is derived from proposals by Oxford economist and RWI advisory board member Professor Paul Collier. The Value Chain is a living concept that has been adapted to reflect RWI’s experience working with various issues in the field – the Value Chain helps us to scrutinize the various critical steps where public officials conduct performances and allocate oil, gas, mineral and metal resources, regulate the extraction processes, collect revenues, and allocate revenues for various purposes. Idealy there needs to be civil society oversight throughout the phases of the entire value chain. Explain all the links briefly: Decision to extract or not to extract: Here it is important that local communities (in many cases Indinegous People) are also included in the decision making process and are facilitated to be able to make prior informed decisions, be their consent of rejection of a project. In this decision making process the government and the companies involved need to be transparent about the environmental and social costs sch a project will entail. Awarding contracts/liscenses = is this process trasparent, are the responsible government officials ensuring the government and the public are getting the best deal, or is the handing out of contracts shrouded by opacity? Fiscal terms – does the government have the ability to negotiate the best fiscal terms for the country? Extraction process – are environmental and social costs being externalized onto the local communities and environment? Trading of commodities = is the government agency responsible for the trading of government shares of commodities doing it in a transparent and accountable way? Tax and revenue collection = are taxes and reveues collected by the government being accounted for in a trasparent manner? Revenue management and allocation = how is the government managing it’s revenues to address the various challenges related to EI revenues? Is it aboe to save prodently in times of great windfall? Does it go on a spending spree on projects that do not contribute to sustainable development? Development projects/policies= is the government carying out development in consideration of the fact that EI resources are finite/ Is it strengthening other sectors of its economy? How is spending on health, infrastructure and education?
- Missing regulations in a number of key areas: Sanctions for non-lodgment or underpaid IUP royalties. Procedures for IUP payer reporting
- Royalty is distributed: GoI – 20% provincial govt. – 16% district govt. – 32% other districts – 32%
- In trying to work towards the Good Governance agenda Revenue Watch Institute uses the “EI Value Chain” model. This Value Chain model is derived from proposals by Oxford economist and RWI advisory board member Professor Paul Collier. The Value Chain is a living concept that has been adapted to reflect RWI’s experience working with various issues in the field – the Value Chain helps us to scrutinize the various critical steps where public officials conduct performances and allocate oil, gas, mineral and metal resources, regulate the extraction processes, collect revenues, and allocate revenues for various purposes. Idealy there needs to be civil society oversight throughout the phases of the entire value chain. Explain all the links briefly: Decision to extract or not to extract: Here it is important that local communities (in many cases Indinegous People) are also included in the decision making process and are facilitated to be able to make prior informed decisions, be their consent of rejection of a project. In this decision making process the government and the companies involved need to be transparent about the environmental and social costs sch a project will entail. Awarding contracts/liscenses = is this process trasparent, are the responsible government officials ensuring the government and the public are getting the best deal, or is the handing out of contracts shrouded by opacity? Fiscal terms – does the government have the ability to negotiate the best fiscal terms for the country? Extraction process – are environmental and social costs being externalized onto the local communities and environment? Trading of commodities = is the government agency responsible for the trading of government shares of commodities doing it in a transparent and accountable way? Tax and revenue collection = are taxes and reveues collected by the government being accounted for in a trasparent manner? Revenue management and allocation = how is the government managing it’s revenues to address the various challenges related to EI revenues? Is it aboe to save prodently in times of great windfall? Does it go on a spending spree on projects that do not contribute to sustainable development? Development projects/policies= is the government carying out development in consideration of the fact that EI resources are finite/ Is it strengthening other sectors of its economy? How is spending on health, infrastructure and education?
- In trying to work towards the Good Governance agenda Revenue Watch Institute uses the “EI Value Chain” model. This Value Chain model is derived from proposals by Oxford economist and RWI advisory board member Professor Paul Collier. The Value Chain is a living concept that has been adapted to reflect RWI’s experience working with various issues in the field – the Value Chain helps us to scrutinize the various critical steps where public officials conduct performances and allocate oil, gas, mineral and metal resources, regulate the extraction processes, collect revenues, and allocate revenues for various purposes. Idealy there needs to be civil society oversight throughout the phases of the entire value chain. Explain all the links briefly: Decision to extract or not to extract: Here it is important that local communities (in many cases Indinegous People) are also included in the decision making process and are facilitated to be able to make prior informed decisions, be their consent of rejection of a project. In this decision making process the government and the companies involved need to be transparent about the environmental and social costs sch a project will entail. Awarding contracts/liscenses = is this process trasparent, are the responsible government officials ensuring the government and the public are getting the best deal, or is the handing out of contracts shrouded by opacity? Fiscal terms – does the government have the ability to negotiate the best fiscal terms for the country? Extraction process – are environmental and social costs being externalized onto the local communities and environment? Trading of commodities = is the government agency responsible for the trading of government shares of commodities doing it in a transparent and accountable way? Tax and revenue collection = are taxes and reveues collected by the government being accounted for in a trasparent manner? Revenue management and allocation = how is the government managing it’s revenues to address the various challenges related to EI revenues? Is it aboe to save prodently in times of great windfall? Does it go on a spending spree on projects that do not contribute to sustainable development? Development projects/policies= is the government carying out development in consideration of the fact that EI resources are finite/ Is it strengthening other sectors of its economy? How is spending on health, infrastructure and education?
- In trying to work towards the Good Governance agenda Revenue Watch Institute uses the “EI Value Chain” model. This Value Chain model is derived from proposals by Oxford economist and RWI advisory board member Professor Paul Collier. The Value Chain is a living concept that has been adapted to reflect RWI’s experience working with various issues in the field – the Value Chain helps us to scrutinize the various critical steps where public officials conduct performances and allocate oil, gas, mineral and metal resources, regulate the extraction processes, collect revenues, and allocate revenues for various purposes. Idealy there needs to be civil society oversight throughout the phases of the entire value chain. Explain all the links briefly: Decision to extract or not to extract: Here it is important that local communities (in many cases Indinegous People) are also included in the decision making process and are facilitated to be able to make prior informed decisions, be their consent of rejection of a project. In this decision making process the government and the companies involved need to be transparent about the environmental and social costs sch a project will entail. Awarding contracts/liscenses = is this process trasparent, are the responsible government officials ensuring the government and the public are getting the best deal, or is the handing out of contracts shrouded by opacity? Fiscal terms – does the government have the ability to negotiate the best fiscal terms for the country? Extraction process – are environmental and social costs being externalized onto the local communities and environment? Trading of commodities = is the government agency responsible for the trading of government shares of commodities doing it in a transparent and accountable way? Tax and revenue collection = are taxes and reveues collected by the government being accounted for in a trasparent manner? Revenue management and allocation = how is the government managing it’s revenues to address the various challenges related to EI revenues? Is it aboe to save prodently in times of great windfall? Does it go on a spending spree on projects that do not contribute to sustainable development? Development projects/policies= is the government carying out development in consideration of the fact that EI resources are finite/ Is it strengthening other sectors of its economy? How is spending on health, infrastructure and education?
- In trying to work towards the Good Governance agenda Revenue Watch Institute uses the “EI Value Chain” model. This Value Chain model is derived from proposals by Oxford economist and RWI advisory board member Professor Paul Collier. The Value Chain is a living concept that has been adapted to reflect RWI’s experience working with various issues in the field – the Value Chain helps us to scrutinize the various critical steps where public officials conduct performances and allocate oil, gas, mineral and metal resources, regulate the extraction processes, collect revenues, and allocate revenues for various purposes. Idealy there needs to be civil society oversight throughout the phases of the entire value chain. Explain all the links briefly: Decision to extract or not to extract: Here it is important that local communities (in many cases Indinegous People) are also included in the decision making process and are facilitated to be able to make prior informed decisions, be their consent of rejection of a project. In this decision making process the government and the companies involved need to be transparent about the environmental and social costs sch a project will entail. Awarding contracts/liscenses = is this process trasparent, are the responsible government officials ensuring the government and the public are getting the best deal, or is the handing out of contracts shrouded by opacity? Fiscal terms – does the government have the ability to negotiate the best fiscal terms for the country? Extraction process – are environmental and social costs being externalized onto the local communities and environment? Trading of commodities = is the government agency responsible for the trading of government shares of commodities doing it in a transparent and accountable way? Tax and revenue collection = are taxes and reveues collected by the government being accounted for in a trasparent manner? Revenue management and allocation = how is the government managing it’s revenues to address the various challenges related to EI revenues? Is it aboe to save prodently in times of great windfall? Does it go on a spending spree on projects that do not contribute to sustainable development? Development projects/policies= is the government carying out development in consideration of the fact that EI resources are finite/ Is it strengthening other sectors of its economy? How is spending on health, infrastructure and education?