IMF国际货币组织全球-Slovak-Republic_Technical-Assistance-Report_51页_1mb

Summary of the Public Investment Management Assessment of the Slovak Republic

Core Content

This report presents a Public Investment Management Assessment (PIMA) of the Slovak Republic, conducted by an International Monetary Fund (IMF) mission in February 2019. The assessment evaluates the efficiency and impact of public investment across three phases: planning, allocation, and implementation. It also identifies key institutional challenges and offers recommendations to improve the management of public investment.

Main Views

• Public Investment Trends: Since 2006, Slovakia's public investment has generally been below regional peers, except for a spike in 2015 due to delayed spending from the EU programming cycle. The capital stock has been declining as a share of GDP, with the current level being one of the lowest in the region.
• EU Funding Dependency: Approximately two-thirds of public investment in Slovakia is funded by the EU Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs), which are highly volatile. This volatility is reflected in the pattern of public investment spending, which tends to spike at the end of programming cycles.
• Investment Efficiency: Slovakia's investment efficiency gap is 23 percent, which is broadly in line with the EU average. Improving public investment management (PIM) could enhance infrastructure efficiency and EU fund absorption.
• Institutional Design: The PIMA framework highlights strengths in institutional design, particularly in the implementation phase, where standardized procedures and a centralized monitoring system are in place. However, weaknesses exist in the planning and allocation phases, such as poor coordination between regional and sectoral strategies and lack of a unified project pipeline.

Key Information

I. Public Investment in Slovakia

• Trends in Investment and Capital Stock: Public investment levels have remained below regional peers since 2006, with a notable increase in 2015. The capital stock has been declining as a share of GDP, currently among the lowest in the region.
• Composition and Financing: About half of public investment is provided by state-owned enterprises (SOEs), a third by the central government, and the rest by local governments. EU funds account for a large share of investment, with domestic funding playing an increasing role due to delayed EU spending.
• Regional Disparities: The Eastern region of Slovakia receives a disproportionate share of public investment, largely due to EU cohesion policy. Despite this, the quality of infrastructure in some key sectors, particularly roads, lags behind regional peers.

II. Efficiency and Impact of Public Investment

• Investment Efficiency: Slovakia's investment efficiency gap is 23 percent, indicating lower returns on public capital relative to income levels and infrastructure quality compared to peers.
• Infrastructure Quality: While infrastructure access and service delivery are generally good, the road network coverage is among the lowest in Europe. The quality of infrastructure is not consistently maintained, with 10 percent of bridges in a very poor condition.
• Cost Overruns and Delays: Public investment projects often experience cost overruns of 4–10 percent and time overruns averaging 12 months. There is limited external audit of projects, and project implementation monitoring is weak.

III. Public Investment Management Institutions

• Planning Phase:

  • Institutional Design: High; the legal framework is comprehensive, and EU fiscal rules are applied effectively.
  • Effectiveness: Medium; there is a lack of a strategic framework for public investment, and sectoral strategies are not integrated into a national plan. Coordination between regional and sectoral strategies is weak.
  • Recommendations: Establish a strategic investment planning framework and a unified project pipeline with clear selection criteria.

• Allocation Phase:

  • Institutional Design: Medium; there is no central PIM coordination unit, and multi-year budgeting lacks binding ceilings.
  • Effectiveness: Low; budget execution is loose, with excessive use of carryovers. There is a lack of detailed project-level information and limited data on project costs.
  • Recommendations: Improve the credibility of budget ceilings, publish detailed project cost information, and integrate project-level data into the budget process.

• Implementation Phase:

  • Institutional Design: High; standardized cost adjustment rules and a centralized monitoring system exist for EU-funded projects.
  • Effectiveness: Medium; procurement procedures are not always competitive, and there is a lack of systematic ex-post evaluations for budget-funded projects.
  • Recommendations: Strengthen procurement oversight, improve external audits, and establish a Public Investment Unit (PIU) to manage the project pipeline and monitor implementation.

Recommendations

1. Finalize a strategic investment planning framework and create a unified project pipeline.
2. Strengthen the financial oversight of SOEs within the Ministry of Finance (MoF).
3. Include detailed information on in-year budget reallocations and project costs in budget documentation.
4. Develop a national strategy and norms for routine and capital maintenance budgeting.
5. Establish a Public Investment Unit (PIU) to manage the project pipeline and provide advisory services.
6. Conduct thematic public procurement audits and enhance reporting on competition and procurement outcomes.
7. Create an integrated project database to improve portfolio management and oversight.

Conclusion

The Slovak Republic has a strong institutional design for public investment management, especially in implementation, but faces significant challenges in planning and allocation. These include poor coordination, lack of a strategic framework, and insufficient financial oversight. Strengthening PIM institutions and improving the efficiency of public investment can help enhance infrastructure quality, better utilize EU funds, and reduce regional disparities.