Topic Guide: the Budget Process

Following the money: do public expenditure tracking surveys matter? Sundet, G., U4, 2008. http://www.u4.no/publications/...  

PETS is a tool to improve accountability in public finance and service delivery. A Ugandan success with PETS is one of the most cited anti‑corruption success stories. Expenditure tracking has also become a popular activity among civil society organisations engaged in accountability issues at the local level. This U4 Issue paper takes a closer look at the experience of expenditure tracking and argues that its successes may have been overstated. It suggests that an uncritical acceptance of the effectiveness of expenditure tracking has hindered the development of a more nuanced approach that is better suited to the particular circumstances of each case. The paper proposes some principles of engagement on how to track expenditures more effectively.  

The budget process and corruption. Isaksen, J., U4, 2006. http://www.u4.no/publications/...  

This publication focuses on key corruption risk areas in various stages in the budget process, from budget planning to control and oversight. The paper elaborates on how patronage works and how it may affect public financial management systems. It concentrates on the expenditure side of public budgets and does not cover corruption related to taxation and tax systems or the particular problems arising from budget support from donors, which are topics covered in other U4 Issue pages. The paper primarily addresses the issues from an empirical rather than a theoretical perspective. Reference is made primarily to central government issues and systems.  

Back from the sidelines? Redefining the contribution of legislatures to the budget cycle. Wehner, J., World Bank, 2004. http://www.agora-parl.org/sites/default/files/CONTRI~1.PDF  

This paper looks at the role of parliaments in the budget process, from the role of finance and budget committees, which scrutinise proposed government budgets prior to parliamentary approval, to the role of public accounts and departmental committees which ensure that actual government spending is in line with that approved by parliament. A comparative approach is taken whereby presidential and parliamentary systems are reviewed and where the differences between parliaments’ constitutional power and current practices are highlighted. An additional focus is given to the research and information needs of parliaments as they deliberate the budget and the importance of parliamentary committees as the “engine room” for financial scrutiny.  

Integrated financial management system: an important but limited anti-corruption tool. Dorotinsky, B., World Bank, January 2003. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTEGOVERNMENT/Resources/702478-1129947625190/billTransprencyandIFMS.doc  

Based on the experience with World Bank-supported introduction of IFMIS in 27 countries since the 1980s, the author argues that IFMIS can be a powerful tool if it is properly designed and implemented. On the other hand, IFMIS is expensive, cannot by itself influence much and may not be an optimal anti-corruption tool in certain cases. The high demands to master a complex technology-based tool may even have the adverse effect that access to data can be monopolised which, in turn, may result in new risks for corruption arising. The author concludes that anti-corruption is an ancillary benefit of IFMIS, rather than a primary reason for embarking on IFMIS.