The Open Budget Survey 2010

What is the Open Budget Survey 2010?

• A comprehensive assessment that evaluates:
– public access to national budget information and opportunities to
participate in the budget process (92 questions), and
– the strength of formal oversight institutions – national legislatures
and external auditors (22 questions).
• It does not assess:
– budget transparency at the subnational level, and
– the accuracy or quality of information contained in budget reports.
• 2010 Survey covers 94 countries; 2008 Survey - 85 countries;
2006 Survey - 59 countries.

www.InternationalBudget.org 2
Open Budget Survey vs. Open Budget Index
OPEN BUDGET INDEX: Developed from the Survey

– What does it measure? The extent to which

governments make available the 8 key budget
documents throughout the four phases of the budget
process.

– How is it constructed? Using 91 of the 123 questions

of the Survey Multiple choice answers (a-e) are
assigned a numerical value (100, 66, 33, 0). Then
average is calculated.

www.InternationalBudget.org 3
 Rigorous Survey Methodology
• Data quality assured through five-step process:
1. Survey completed by nonpartisan expert country researcher
2. Peer reviews provided by two independent, anonymous,
expert reviewers per country
3. IBP checks internal consistency and accuracy against
publicly available data
4. Government review (optional)
5. IBP referees differences in answers between researchers
and reviewers

www.InternationalBudget.org 4
 Key Finding #1: Major Gaps in Budget
Transparency Worldwide
• Governments publish less than half of the required budget data
(Average score 42/100)
• Only 20 of the 94 countries provide their citizens with
comprehensive budget data.
• 40 countries publish minimal or no budget information; 21
countries do not publish the budget proposal.
• Public availability of certain budget reports is particularly poor
(Pre-Budget and Mid-Year Reports).
• Low-scoring countries often share similar characteristics, such as
geography, dependence on extractive industries and/or aid, and
weak democratic institutions.

www.InternationalBudget.org 5
 Key Finding #2: Lack of Transparency
Compounded by Weak Oversight Institutions
• LEGISLATURE
– Inadequate legal powers and time to review the budget
– Limited powers to approve and monitor modifications of the enacted
budget during budget execution

• SUPREME AUDIT INSTITUTION

– Lack independence
– Limited funding/resources

• Institutions not maximizing use of existing powers and

resources to involve citizens

www.InternationalBudget.org 6
Key Finding #3: Significant Improvements In
Previously Low-Scoring Countries
Country 2006 2008 2010
Afghanistan - 8 21
Angola 5 4 26
Argentina 40 56 56
Azerbaijan 30 37 43
Egypt 19 43 49
Georgia 34 53 55
Liberia - 3 40
Malawi - 28 47
Mongolia 18 36 60
Rwanda - 1 11
Uganda 32 51 55
Vietnam 3 10 14
Yemen - 10 25

www.InternationalBudget.org 7
 Recommendations-Short Term
Governments should:
• Publish all the budget documents they already produce for internal purposes or
donors.

• Make budget documents widely available for free and on a timely basis.

Legislatures and SAIs should:

• Provide the public with opportunities to attend and testify during budget
discussions in legislatures;

• Hold public consultations during the development, execution, and publication of

audits by SAIs; and

• Partner with CSOs and universities to improve access to analysts and

communities.

www.InternationalBudget.org 8
 Recommendations - Medium Term
1. Establish a global norm on budget transparency that
could possibly include guarantees to:

• Public access to information on budget processes, policies, and results

• Opportunities to participate meaningfully in the budget process
• Domestic and international implementation mechanisms

2. Donors promote budget transparency and engagement

• Improve transparency of aid flows and compatibility with country budget
systems
• Emphasize transparency and engagement in all PFM reforms
• Strengthen linkages between transparency performance and aid modalities
• Increase parallel support to oversight institutions and CSOs
• Use OBI to diagnose problems and target country reforms

www.InternationalBudget.org 9
Potential for Improved Budget Transparency
Practices After the 2010 Open Budget Survey
Release
• Governments have Started Releasing Citizens Budgets e.g.
Brazil, Mexico, Guatemala, Lebanon and Egypt.

• Governments Have Begun Publishing Key Budget Reports

for the First Time
- The government of Afghanistan has published a Pre-Budget Statement and
the Executive’s Budget Proposal for the first time.
- The government of the Democratic Republic of Congo published the
Executive’s Budget Proposal and a budget timetable for the first time
- Georgia’s supreme audit institution for the first time released a report listing
audit statements on various violations of law by government entities and an
overview of the follow-up actions these audited entities undertook to address
the problems.

www.InternationalBudget.org 10
Potential for Improved Budget Transparency
Practices after the 2010 Open Budget Survey Release
(cntd)
Governments Are Using OBI Information to Draft Legislation
and Policies to Promote Greater Transparency and Public
Engagement in Budgeting:

• The Slovakian government has informed the IBP’s local partner,

MESA 10, about its plans to develop legislation on budget
transparency and fiscal responsibility.

• The government of Nigeria and the World Bank in Kenya are

exploring provisions for budget transparency and public
engagement that could be included in the government’s plans
for legislation on public finances.

www.InternationalBudget.org 11
Contact Information
Harika Masud
Open Budget Initiative
820 First Street, NE Suite 510
Washington, D.C. 20002
Phone: +1-202-408-1080
Fax: +1-202-408-8173
Email: masud@cbpp.org

www.InternationalBudget.org 12