Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Since the Constitution (2005) provided for decentralizing powers and functions for the Governorates, the government of Iraq has enacted several legal, policy, and institutional reform initiatives, the intent of which is to shift political and administrative powers and responsibilities from the Central Government to the Governorates. The legal and policy framework for decentralization is yet to be followed through with efficient implementation. The Government of Iraq and the World Bank will like to assess the current status of decentralization and its implications for improving service delivery at the Governorate level. The objective of the assessment is to take stock of the current state of decentralization in Iraq with a view to identifying factors that contribute to weak service delivery performance at the governorate level. The assessment will also make recommendations for policy and process reforms that are deemed necessary to moving forward the decentralization process, thereby helping to improve service delivery performance by the Governorates. The assessment was carried out through a combination of desk reviews and field level consultations. This assessment provides a snapshot of the current status of the decentralization process. It identifies policy and process reform measures that are necessary to strengthen service delivery by the 15 Governorates of Iraq. Strengthening local accountability should be the key to strengthening the service delivery performance of the Governorates.

Access of Poor to Social Services --- Capital Expenditures --- Cities --- Decentralization --- Equity --- Expenditures --- Federalism --- Governance --- Infrastructure --- Local Government --- Macroeconomics and Economic Growth --- Medium-Term Budgeting --- Medium-Term Expenditure Framework --- Municipalities --- National Governance --- Poverty --- Poverty Reduction --- Public Debt --- Public Investment --- Public Sector Governance --- Public Spending --- Revenue Sharing --- Subnational Governments --- Taxes

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

This book addresses the achievements, challenges, and opportunities to improve the quality of public spending. Steps to make such changes have come through monitoring and evaluation approaches that can be replicated or expanded; sectoral efforts to improve the performance of priority programs; Congress's use of information on the results of public spending; the implementation of performance budgeting at subnational levels; and the harmonization of accounting between the three levels of the federal government. All these aspects are key elements of comprehensive reform. Currently, as the book states, accountability focuses on achieving results rather than on centering attention on mere compliance with rules and procedures. In this context, based on a new legal framework, the government of Mexico has decisively promoted results-based management and budgeting. The Performance Evaluation System (SED) was finally established in 2008 with the institution of the principles, concepts, methodologies, guidelines, procedures, and systems that support its operation. Its adoption as a common practice in the Federal Public Administration (APF) process will require a gradual, progressive, systematic learning and continuous improvement that should allow performance evaluation to take root in the APF. This calls for consolidating the Results-Based Budgeting (RBB)-SED in all agencies, expanding its use and improving the quality of the information that feeds it. However, not just the APF benefit will from the implementation of the RBB-SED. As the publication suggests, the approach to an expenditure budget based on performance information offers Congress great opportunities to enhance its regulatory and supervisory functions. The improvement in the quality of Matrices de Indicadores para Resultados (MIRs), program evaluations, and their integration into the budgetary programming cycle also contributes to this purpose.

Access to Information --- Anticorruption --- Best Practices --- Capacity Building --- Cash Transfers --- Citizen Participation --- Civil Service --- Civil Society Organizations --- Corruption & anticorruption Law --- Corruption Perception Index --- Crime --- Electricity --- Ethics --- Financial Management --- Fiscal Policy --- Good Governance --- Governance --- Governance Indicators --- Health Policy --- Law and Development --- Leadership --- Legal Framework --- Medium-Term Expenditure Framework --- Municipalities --- Parliamentary Government --- Private Sector --- Public Debt --- Public Health --- Public Investment --- Public officials --- Public Procurement --- Public Sector Development --- Public Spending --- Rule of Law --- Savings --- Subnational Governments --- Tax Evasion --- Tax Exemptions --- Theft --- Transparency

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

To be credible, any plan for scaling up infrastructure in Africa must rest on a thorough evaluation of how fiscal resources are allocated and financed. Because in every plausible scenario the public sector retains the lion's share of infrastructure financing, with private participation remaining limited, a central purpose of such an evaluation is to identify where and how fiscal resources can be better used if not increased without jeopardizing macroeconomic and fiscal stability. The stakes are high, because the magnitude of Africa's infrastructure needs carries a commensurate potential for misuse of scarce fiscal resources. The authors analyze recent public expenditure patterns to identify ways to make more fiscal resources available for infrastructure. The authors do this in three ways. First, we quantify the level and composition of public spending on infrastructure so as to match fiscal allocations to the particular characteristics of individual subsectors and to countries' macroeconomic type (low-income fragile, low-income no fragile, oil-exporting, and middle-income). Second, the authors evaluate public budgetary spending for infrastructure against macroeconomic conditions to get a sense of the scope for making additional fiscal resources available based on actual allocation decisions in recent years. And, third, the authors look for ways to make public spending for infrastructure more efficient, so as to better use existing resources. Any exercise of this kind encounters data limitations. First, because it was not feasible to visit all sub national entities, some decentralized infrastructure expenditures probably have been underrepresented, with particular implications for the water sector. Second, it was not always possible to fully identify which items of the budget are financed by donors, and contributions by nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to rural infrastructure projects are likely to have been missed completely. Third, it was not always possible to obtain full financial statements for all of the infrastructure special funds that the authors identified. Fourth, accurate recording of annual changes in fixed capital formation (capital expenditure) of State-owned enterprises (SOEs) remains a methodological challenge. Fifth, accurate measurement of existing public infrastructure stock will require further methodological development.

Accountability --- Accounting --- Capital Expenditures --- Commodity Prices --- Cost Recovery --- Data Collection --- Debt --- Decentralization --- Electricity --- Finance and Financial Sector Development --- Financial Services --- Fiscal Policy --- Fiscal Sustainability --- Gross Domestic Product --- Infrastructure Economics --- Infrastructure Economics and Finance --- Infrastructure Finance --- Infrastructure Investment --- Medium-Term Expenditure Framework --- Natural Resources --- Ports --- Private Investment --- Private Sector --- Public & Municipal Finance --- Public Sector --- Public Spending --- Railways --- Roads --- Sanitation --- Savings --- Subnational Governments --- Telecommunications --- Transparency --- Transport --- Transport Costs --- Vehicles

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Lesotho is a small landlocked country with a homogenous population of 2.1 million. Lesotho's gross domestic product (GDP) per capita was 1,023 dollars and gross national income (GNI) per capita was 1,080 dollars in 2010. The country also faces numerous challenges to its social and human development. In this context, more attention on the role and quality of public investment is warranted. To improve public accountability and transparency, the Government of Lesotho (GoL) introduced the automated integrated financial management information system (IFMIS) in April 2009. The study directly responds to an explicit request of technical assistance from the ministry of finance and development planning (MoFDP) and aims at supporting the GoL in its major reform efforts to enhance the efficiency of public investment management (PIM) and increase the "value for money" in capital spending. The overarching objective of this study is to support the GoL in its efforts to prioritize public resource allocation and enhance efficiency in capital spending, with the ultimate goal of contributing to improved governance, service delivery, and economic growth. The work is aligned with the World Bank country assistance strategy (CAS) 2010 to 2014, in particular its first pillar on fiscal adjustment and public sector efficiency. This report emphasizes the complementary aspects of the institutions, incentives, capacity, and process-related constraints to the functioning of PIM. The focus of this report will also complement ongoing public financial management (PFM) support by other development partners. The report is presented in four chapters, which are organized as follows: chapter one offers a macro-level country analysis; chapter two presents recent trends in public investments; chapter three focuses on institution mapping and the diagnostic assessment of the PIM system; and chapter four concludes with policy implications.

Access to Information --- Accountability --- Accounting --- Capacity Building --- Capital Expenditures --- Civil Service --- Civil Society Organizations --- Competition --- Corruption --- Cost-Benefit analysis --- Debt --- Debt Management --- Decentralization --- Deficit --- Economic Policy --- External Shocks --- Financial Crisis --- Financial Management --- Fiscal Sustainability --- Governance --- Gross Domestic Product --- Incentives --- Legislation --- Local Government --- Macroeconomics and Economic Growth --- Medium-Term Expenditure Framework --- National Governance --- Natural Resources --- Performance Evaluation --- Private Investment --- Private Sector --- Public Expenditure, Financial Management and Procurement --- Public Procurement --- Public Sector --- Public Sector Development --- Public Sector Employees --- Public Sector Governance --- Public Sector Management and Reform --- Public Sector Reform --- Public Service Delivery --- Quantitative Data --- Tax Administration --- Taxes --- Transparency --- Uncertainty