2012年-世界发展银行全球_Zimbabwe_Public_Investment_Management_Efficiency_Review_57页_899kb

Zimbabwe Public Investment Management Efficiency Review Summary

Core Content

This report, prepared by the World Bank's Public Sector Reform and Governance Unit, provides an assessment of the efficiency of Zimbabwe's Public Investment Management (PIM) system and highlights the challenges and opportunities for reform. It is part of a broader initiative to support the Government of Zimbabwe in strengthening its public investment framework, which is critical for economic recovery and long-term development.

Main Objectives

• To support the Government of Zimbabwe, particularly the Ministry of Finance, in enhancing the efficiency of the PIM system.
• To identify institutional and procedural weaknesses in the PIM process and recommend reforms.
• To inform the development of an action plan for institutional capacity building and a technical assistance program.

Key Institutions and Roles

The PIM system in Zimbabwe involves several key institutions and actors:

• Ministry of Finance (MOF): Central to the PIM process, responsible for budgeting, oversight, and coordination.
• Public Sector Investment Program (PSIP): A key unit within MOF that manages capital investment proposals.
• Ministry of Public Works (MOPW): Involved in the implementation of infrastructure projects.
• Infrastructure Development Bank of Zimbabwe (IDBZ): Plays a unique role in financing and appraising infrastructure projects.
• State Procurement Board (SPB): Handles procurement processes for public investment projects.
• Line Ministries (LMS): Responsible for preparing and implementing projects.
• Zimbabwe Revenue Authority (ZRA) and Zimbabwe Electricity Supply Authority (ZESA): Part of the broader public investment ecosystem.

Main Findings

1. Country Context

• Zimbabwe is a landlocked country in Southern Africa with a population of 12.6 million.
• The economy is primarily based on commercial agriculture and mining.
• The country experienced a severe economic crisis from 1998-2008, including hyperinflation, which significantly weakened public financial management systems.
• Despite economic recovery since 2009, human development indicators remain poor, with Zimbabwe ranking 173 out of 187 countries on the UNDP's Human Development Index in 2011.

2. Recent Trends in Public Investment

• Capital investment has increased significantly, with the capital budget rising from US$252 million in 2010 to US$455 million in 2011.
• The capital budget is expected to increase further to 25% of total expenditure in 2012 and 30% in 2014.
• Agriculture, Water and Sanitation, Transport, and Energy are the main sectors receiving capital allocations.
• Despite increased capital budgeting, the execution rate has declined from 90% in 2010 to 65% in 2011, indicating inefficiencies in implementation.

3. Institutional Mapping

• The PIM process involves multiple stages, including investment guidance, project appraisal, selection, implementation, and evaluation.
• The PIM system is influenced by the Medium-Term Plan (MTP) and the Short-Term Emergency Recovery Programme (STERP).
• The Global Political Agreement (GPA) has led to a power-sharing government, but political uncertainty continues to affect policy reforms and business confidence.

4. Performance Assessment of the PIM System

• Investment Guidance and Preliminary Screening: The MTP provides strategic guidance, but there is a lack of clarity in the linkage between sector strategies and budget allocations.
• Formal Project Appraisal: Appraisal capacity is weak, especially in line ministries, though IDBZ has relatively strong appraisal capabilities.
• Project Selection and Budgeting: Criteria for project selection are loose, and multi-year fiscal planning is underdeveloped.
• Project Implementation: Project implementation is frequently delayed due to cost and time overruns, weak procurement systems, and inadequate monitoring.
• Project Adjustment: There is a lack of proper record-keeping and the Ministry of Finance lacks authority to halt projects mid-way.
• Facility Operation: Asset registry systems are in place, but there is a disconnect between capital and recurrent budgeting, leading to insufficient operation and monitoring funds.
• Project Evaluation: No ex-post evaluations have been conducted due to the lack of completed major projects.

5. Policy Implications

• The PIM system requires a more strategic approach to institutional roles and capacity building.
• Reforms must address systemic issues, including improving appraisal mechanisms, enhancing procurement processes, and strengthening inter-ministerial coordination.
• The Ministry of Finance must play a leading role in driving reforms to ensure efficient and coherent PIM.
• The current system is constrained by limited human resources, weak fiscal planning, and a cash-based budgeting framework.
• Donor support and private sector financing are limited due to economic instability and poor creditworthiness.

Conclusion

The report underscores the need for comprehensive reforms in the PIM system to improve the efficiency of public investment, support economic growth, and enhance service delivery. These reforms require a long-term commitment, technical expertise, and strong institutional coordination. The findings are intended to support the Government of Zimbabwe in developing a more effective PIM framework and to complement ongoing efforts by development partners.