2009年-世界发展银行全球_United_Republic_of_Tanzania_Public_Expenditure_and_Financial_Accountability_Review_2008_130页_9mb

Summary of the United Republic of Tanzania Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability Review 2008

Core Content

The United Republic of Tanzania Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability Review (PEFAR) 2008 is a comprehensive assessment of the country's public expenditure and financial management systems. It was conducted by a joint team of the Government of Tanzania (GoT), the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and various development partners, including the European Commission, DFID, JICA, and others. The review aimed to evaluate the macro-fiscal policy, budget allocation, and public financial management (PFM) performance, while also focusing on capacity building for sustainable PFM reforms.

Main Viewpoints

1. Macro-Fiscal Policy and Economic Context

• Inflation remains a major challenge for the government, with the CPI reaching 13.5% by December 2008, significantly above the target of 5% since 2004.
• The 2008/09 MTEF projected optimistic domestic revenue targets and pessimistic foreign aid targets.
• Domestic revenue has increased by only 1% of GDP annually over the past five years, making the 18.5% target unrealistic.
• The government has been reducing aid dependency, with aid accounting for 35% of the total budget in 2008/09.
• A decline in foreign aid is expected over the medium term, but this trend raises concerns due to the lack of decline over the past five years.
• The zero net domestic financing policy has been cautiously maintained, but there may be a need to consider limited domestic financing for smoothing expenditures if real interest rates remain low.
• The development budget has increased significantly, reaching 35% of the total budget and 10% of GDP in 2008/09. However, the share of public investment has remained constant at 24%, which is not sufficient to support the government's objective of sustained GDP growth of 8–10% annually.

2. Budget Allocation

• MKUKUTA (a key program for poverty reduction and economic growth) has remained a significant part of the budget, with 70.6% in 2007/08 and 70.8% in 2008/09.
• The increase in MDA wages contributed to the slight rise in MKUKUTA share, as MDA wages and transfers to LGAs are not included in the MKUKUTA definition.
• The Planning and Budget Guidelines (PBGs) do not clearly reflect the government's medium-term strategic direction, especially in terms of allocation among the three budget clusters.
• Transport Sector Investment Plan (TSIP) has served as a useful tool for medium-term budgeting, and similar approaches could be applied to other sectors like agriculture.
• Allowances in the wage bill have decreased overall but increased in some sectors, such as education and health, which have entered the top five allowance-receiving ministries.
• Maintenance costs in social infrastructure are currently low, at less than 1% of social sector allocations, and need to be increased to support long-term sustainability.
• LGA transfers have not yet reached the 25% target for 2010, with only 20% allocated over the past two years.

3. Impact and Results

• The budget results orientation needs improvement, with a focus on outcomes and results.
• Basket funding mechanisms require streamlining, as inconsistencies exist in fund disbursement approval and tracking.
• Internal MDA procedures for supplier payments should be simplified to avoid delays in budget execution.
• A robust cash management system is essential to ensure predictable fund availability for spending units.
• The capacity to implement capital projects must be enhanced, especially in sectors like roads and energy.
• Expenditure flash reports should be automated to improve data reliability and monthly tracking of budget execution.
• Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys (PETS) should be regularly conducted in key sectors (education, health, water, agriculture) to assess effective service delivery.
• The linking of budget programs to strategic plans and results indicators is crucial for aligning resources with outcomes.
• Public access to fiscal information is good, but the level of detail and coverage during the budget execution phase is limited.
• Autonomous Government Agencies (AGAs) are not fully integrated into the budget documentation process, which may pose fiscal risks due to lack of transparency.
• Public Enterprises (PEs) have not been adequately included in fiscal planning, as their potential liabilities are not clearly reflected in the government budget documentation.

Key Information

• The PEFAR process integrates the Public Expenditure Review (PER) and the Country Financial and Accountability Assessment (CFAA).
• The PEFAR 2008 team included members from the World Bank, IMF, European Commission, DFID, JICA, and several universities, as well as representatives from Civil Society Organizations (CSOs).
• The Macro Subgroup of the PER Working Group was responsible for coordinating the PEFAR review and financial accountability assessments.
• The PEFAR 2009 work program has already included water and education as sectors for PETS implementation.
• The reliability of the macro-economic framework depends on improving macro-fiscal policy and modeling capacity.
• The budget credibility has been maintained through improved revenue collection and expenditure control, but there are still inconsistencies in expenditure tracking and disbursement processes.
• The conditional nature of LGA transfers requires careful monitoring and adjustment as the government finalizes its budget.

Recommendations

• Continue efforts to reduce inflation through fiscal and monetary policies.
• Reform the macro-economic framework to ensure more realistic revenue and aid projections.
• Develop a Priority Investment Plan (PIP) to manage aid surpluses and shortfalls effectively.
• Automate expenditure flash reports and ensure they are generated directly from the Integrated Financial Management System (IFMS).
• Regularly conduct PETS in key sectors to improve transparency and service delivery effectiveness.
• Align MDA and LGA budgets with strategic plans and result indicators.
• Improve capacity for capital investment in key sectors.
• Enhance transparency in the budget documentation process, especially for AGAs and PEs.
• Ensure consistent and timely LGA transfers to meet the 25% target by 2010.
• Strengthen internal MDA procedures to streamline payments and improve budget execution.
• Improve cash flow planning and tracking by MoFEA to enhance predictability and efficiency.

Conclusion

The PEFAR 2008 review highlights both the progress and challenges in Tanzania's public expenditure and financial management systems. While the government has made strides in reducing aid dependency and improving revenue collection, there is a need for stronger institutional capacity, better budget transparency, and more effective integration of strategic planning with budget execution. Continued collaboration with development partners and civil society is essential to ensure that the PFM framework is robust, accountable, and aligned with national development goals.