2010年-世界发展银行全球_Public_Financial_Management_Reform_in_the_Middle_East_and_North_Africa___An_Overview_of_Regional_Experience_-_Individual_Country_Cases_117页_707kb

Summary of Public Financial Management Reform in the Middle East and North Africa: An Overview of Regional Experience

Core Content

This report provides an overview of public financial management (PFM) reform experiences in 10 Middle East and North Africa (MENA) countries: Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Syria, Tunisia, the West Bank & Gaza (WBG), and Yemen. The analysis draws on a variety of sources including PEFA assessments, Country Financial Accountability Assessments (CFAA), Public Expenditure Reviews (PER), and interviews with reformers.

Main Questions Addressed

• How do these countries compare to others at similar levels of development in terms of their PFM systems?
• What has been the content and direction of PFM reforms over the last decade?
• Where have reforms succeeded and where have they faced challenges?
• What factors contributed to success or failure?
• What lessons can be drawn for other countries and donor communities?

Key Information

Country Templates Overview

The report uses a standardized template to analyze PFM reform in each country, focusing on three main areas:

1. Substantive Reform Agenda: The nature and scope of PFM reforms.
2. Implementation Strategies: How reforms were carried out.
3. Political Economy of Reform: The influence of political and institutional factors on the reform process.

Algeria

• General Overview: A lower middle-income country with a population of 33.8 million and a GDP per capita of US $6,538 (PPP) and US $3,903 (nominal) in 2007. PFM systems are based on the French administrative tradition.
• Substantive Reform Agenda:
  • Budget Credibility: Low. Economic projections often underestimate oil prices, leading to inaccurate budget estimates.
  • Budget Execution: Poor. Expenditures deviate significantly from budgets in many categories, with capital expenditures often overestimated.
  • Reform Efforts: The 2007 PER indicated that Algeria met only 5 of 16 PFM benchmarks, below the average for HIPC countries.
  • Budget System Modernization Project (BSMP): Initiated in 2001 with a World Bank loan. It aimed to modernize the budget system and develop an integrated financial management information system. Progress was limited, and the project was reduced to US $18.4 million in 2006.
  • New Classification System: Being developed under BSMP and expected to be implemented in 2011 for the 2012 budget.
• Key Conclusions:
  • PFM systems are reasonably functioning but suffer from major institutional weaknesses.
  • Budget credibility and execution remain problematic.
  • Political instability and lack of internal ownership of reforms have hindered progress.

Egypt

• General Overview: A country with a relatively strong PFM system, but still facing challenges.
• Substantive Reform Agenda:
  • Budget Credibility: Moderate. Budgets are generally credible, but execution is weak.
  • Transparency: Improved, but not fully compliant with international standards.
  • Reform Efforts: Egypt has implemented a Treasury Single Account (TSA) system to improve transparency and efficiency.
• Key Conclusions:
  • The TSA system has improved financial control and transparency.
  • There is a need for stronger institutional capacity and better monitoring of budget execution.

Iraq

• General Overview: A country with a complex PFM system, heavily influenced by donor involvement and international actors.
• Substantive Reform Agenda:
  • Budget Credibility: Low. Budgets are often not reliable due to political instability and lack of transparency.
  • Reform Efforts: The Iraq Financial Management Information System (IFMIS) was developed with significant donor support. The Country Procurement Assessment Report (CPAR) highlighted procurement issues.
• Key Conclusions:
  • Donor involvement has been critical but not sufficient for long-term success.
  • Reforms have been inconsistent and often not internally owned.
  • Political economy factors such as ministerial turnover and lack of accountability have posed challenges.

Jordan

• General Overview: A country with a strong PFM system, but with room for improvement.
• Substantive Reform Agenda:
  • Budget Credibility: Moderate. Budgets are generally credible, but execution is weak.
  • Transparency: Improved, but not fully compliant with international standards.
• Key Conclusions:
  • PFM reforms have focused on improving transparency and accountability.
  • The government has made progress in implementing the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF).
  • More work is needed to improve budget execution and institutional capacity.

Lebanon

• General Overview: A country with a strong PFM system, but with significant challenges in implementation.
• Substantive Reform Agenda:
  • Budget Credibility: Moderate. Budgets are generally credible, but execution is weak.
  • Transparency: Improved, but not fully compliant with international standards.
• Key Conclusions:
  • PFM reforms have been supported by the World Bank and other donors.
  • The government has made progress in implementing the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF).
  • There is a need for stronger institutional capacity and better monitoring of budget execution.

Morocco

• General Overview: A country with a relatively strong PFM system, but with room for improvement.
• Substantive Reform Agenda:
  • Budget Credibility: Moderate. Budgets are generally credible, but execution is weak.
  • Transparency: Improved, but not fully compliant with international standards.
• Key Conclusions:
  • PFM reforms have focused on improving transparency and accountability.
  • The government has made progress in implementing the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF).
  • More work is needed to improve budget execution and institutional capacity.

Syria

• General Overview: A country with a weak PFM system, facing significant challenges due to political instability.
• Substantive Reform Agenda:
  • Budget Credibility: Low. Budgets are often not reliable due to political instability and lack of transparency.
  • Reform Efforts: The government has attempted to implement reforms, but progress has been slow.
• Key Conclusions:
  • Political instability has hindered PFM reform.
  • Donor involvement has been limited.
  • There is a need for stronger institutional capacity and better monitoring of budget execution.

Tunisia

• General Overview: A country with a relatively strong PFM system, but with room for improvement.
• Substantive Reform Agenda:
  • Budget Credibility: Moderate. Budgets are generally credible, but execution is weak.
  • Transparency: Improved, but not fully compliant with international standards.
• Key Conclusions:
  • PFM reforms have focused on improving transparency and accountability.
  • The government has made progress in implementing the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF).
  • More work is needed to improve budget execution and institutional capacity.

West Bank & Gaza (WBG)

• General Overview: A country with a weak PFM system, facing significant challenges due to political instability.
• Substantive Reform Agenda:
  • Budget Credibility: Low. Budgets are often not reliable due to political instability and lack of transparency.
  • Reform Efforts: The government has attempted to implement reforms, but progress has been slow.
• Key Conclusions:
  • Political instability has hindered PFM reform.
  • Donor involvement has been limited.
  • There is a need for stronger institutional capacity and better monitoring of budget execution.

Yemen

• General Overview: A country with a weak PFM system, facing significant challenges due to political instability.
• Substantive Reform Agenda:
  • Budget Credibility: Low. Budgets are often not reliable due to political instability and lack of transparency.
  • Reform Efforts: The government has attempted to implement reforms, but progress has been slow.
• Key Conclusions:
  • Political instability has hindered PFM reform.
  • Donor involvement has been limited.
  • There is a need for stronger institutional capacity and better monitoring of budget execution.

Key Lessons

• Institutional Capacity: Strong institutional capacity is essential for successful PFM reform.
• Political Economy: Political factors such as ministerial tenure, cabinet stability, and public accountability play a significant role in the success of PFM reforms.
• Donor Involvement: Donor involvement can be beneficial but must be complemented with internal ownership and commitment.
• Technical vs. Institutional Reforms: Reforms that are self-reinforcing (e.g., budget classification) are more likely to succeed than those requiring constant inputs and attention (e.g., detailed sectoral analysis).
• Transparency and Accountability: Improving transparency and accountability is a key priority for PFM reform.
• Budget Execution: Improving budget execution is a critical challenge for many countries in the region.
• Sustainability: Reforms must be sustainable and supported by the government and public.