2009年-世界发展银行全球_Implementing_Public_Expenditure_Tracking_Surveys_for_Results___Lessons_from_a_Decade_of_Global_Experience_16页_788kb

Summary of Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys (PETS) for Results: Lessons from a Decade of Global Experience

Core Content

Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys (PETS) are a tool used to assess how public funds are allocated and executed at the frontline level of service delivery. These surveys aim to identify leaks in the budget execution process, which can provide insights into the effectiveness of public financial management (PFM) and the alignment of government budgets with service delivery outcomes.

PETS are not only useful for PFM analysis but also for sectoral dialogues, particularly in education and health. They have been implemented in over 20 countries, often as part of broader World Bank engagements such as Public Expenditure Reviews (PERs) and PEFA assessments. The primary goal is to improve transparency, accountability, and the actual impact of public spending on service delivery.

Main Views

• PETS as a Diagnostic Tool: PETS provide critical insights into the functioning of public expenditure systems, including planning, execution, and management capacities. They can highlight issues such as delays in disbursements, inequity in resource allocation, and inefficiencies in service delivery.

• PETS Methodology: A core aspect of PETS is the use of scientific sampling methods to select units for tracking. This ensures that the results are representative and credible. However, PETS have sometimes been misused or mislabeled, leading to confusion about their purpose and scope.

• Policy Impact: The most impactful PETS studies are those that are well-designed and supported by strong political will and country ownership. For example, the Uganda PETS in 1996 led to significant reforms, including the publication of intergovernmental transfers and the shift to school-based procurement.

• Challenges: Measuring resource leakages is complex due to the lack of clear allocation rules and reliable data in many countries. Additionally, PETS can be seen as an external imposition, leading to resistance from some ministries, especially sectoral ones. Dissemination of findings to civil society is often limited, reducing their potential impact.

• Cost and Time: PETS are resource-intensive, with costs ranging from $75,000 to $400,000 depending on the scope and number of sectors involved. Planning and implementation typically take 1–2 years, with a significant portion of time dedicated to designing the survey and hiring consultants.

Key Information

Objectives of PETS

PETS aim to:

• Track the flow of public resources from the central government to frontline service delivery units.
• Quantify leakages and assess the efficiency and equity of public spending.
• Provide evidence for policy reforms and improve accountability.

Sectors and Regions

• Common Sectors: Education and health are the most frequently targeted sectors.
• Geographic Focus: PETS have been most commonly implemented in the Africa Region, with some studies in Latin America and Asia.
• Applicability: While PETS are widely used, there is potential for broader application, including in middle-income countries.

PETS and Other Tools

PETS are often conducted in conjunction with Quantitative Service Delivery Surveys (QSDS), which extend the scope to include service efficacy and oversight. PETS can also be part of broader PFM diagnostics such as PERs, CFAAs, and PEFA assessments.

Dissemination

• Dissemination activities vary depending on the level of national involvement.
• Effective dissemination often involves smaller, targeted dialogues rather than large public presentations.
• Engaging civil society and NGOs can enhance the reach and impact of PETS findings.

Challenges and Recommendations

• Political Economy Considerations: Addressing these upfront is crucial to avoid tensions with national counterparts.
• Country Ownership: Ensuring that local stakeholders are involved from the planning stage improves the legitimacy and effectiveness of PETS.
• Survey Design: Careful consideration of scope and methodology is essential to balance cost, time, and data quality.

Conclusion

PETS have proven to be a valuable tool in understanding the real-world impact of public expenditures. However, their success depends on careful planning, strong country ownership, and effective dissemination. The Bank should focus on strategic partnerships, clear communication, and tailoring the PETS to local contexts to maximize their impact on PFM and sectoral reforms.