Other ESW Reports

291 items available

Permanent URI for this collection

https://hdl.handle.net/10986/2209

This includes miscellaneous ESW types and pre-2003 ESW type reports that are subsequently completed and released.

Items in this collection

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5

Practitioners' Toolkit for Agriculture Public Expenditure Analysis
(World Bank, 2011-03) World Bank
This toolkit for analyzing public expenditures in agriculture contributes to a broader effort to enhance the focus, quality, and appropriate scaling of public spending in the sector. More specifically, the toolkit has two goals: to provide checklists for practitioners conducting various kinds of agriculture public expenditure analyses, and to provide selected examples on aspects of the checklist to help guide analysis. The toolkit presents a diversity of approaches and describes experiences both positive and negative in conducting agricultural public spending analyses in different settings and with different objectives. It offers checklists of issues and options, rather than a minimum list of issues to be covered. Needs, existing work time, and budget constraints will likely drive the selection of the checklist topics to be covered in any given analysis of public expenditures. The toolkit is organized to facilitate this selectivity of topic, while maintaining a strategic perspective. The supporting examples draw on numerous analyses of public expenditures in agricultures.
Nigeria - State Level Public Expenditure Management and Financial Accountability Review : A synthesis Report
(Washington, DC, 2011-01) World Bank
This report synthesizes the findings of public expenditure management and financial accountability reviews (PEMFARs) that were conducted in seven states between 2008 and 2009. The states covered were Anambra, Bayelsa, Ekiti, Kogi, Niger, Ondo, and Plateau. The report seeks to analyze and summarize the key findings of the reviews from these states in order to ensure that the key messages from the otherwise voluminous reports are presented in a single, smaller report. The states have different socio-economic characteristics but all operate in a federal system that offers some reasonable operational autonomy in the context of a federal constitution. Under the federal system of government, states have been allocated significant responsibilities for service delivery. The constitution defines the expenditure and revenue collection responsibilities that are under their purview. To carry out their responsibilities, the Public Financial Management (PFM) institutional framework is modeled after that of the federal government. All three branches of government are in place with the executive governor as head of state administration. Given the relative autonomy that states enjoy, each state prepares and implements its own budget. Like the federal government, the framework for state PFM system is therefore defined by the budget process.
Bulgaria - Reforming the regime of states fees
(World Bank, 2009-06-01) World Bank
The Government of Bulgaria requested the World Bank to analyze the legal, institutional and administrative framework for setting state fees and provide recommendations based on good international practice. How big is the problem compared to the many other issues the government wants to reform in order to improve the business climate in Bulgaria? So far there are no comprehensive studies of the level of administrative fees in the European Union (EU) area. Such studies would be of great value to assess the magnitude of the problem. There are, however, several arguments in support of reforming the regime of state fees in Bulgaria now. Firstly, business associations in Bulgaria agree also confirmed by a recent unpublished government report - that state fees at the central level became an uncontrolled area in which authorities apply their own judgment and interests without considering the impact on businesses often to the disadvantage of the private sector. Secondly, if the Government of Bulgaria (GoB) does not curb the current regime system, then the trend of increasing state fees will continue or might even gain speed. Again, this will have a negative impact on the cost of doing business. Thirdly, a number of identified state fees are so high that they seriously harm competition by functioning as a barrier to firm entry. Fourthly, the EU requires Member States to implement a specific regime for administrative fees in the services sector by the end of 2009 and Bulgaria does not comply with that yet. A recent World Bank report for Bulgaria Investment Climate Assessment (2008) called for overall reduction of the administrative cost for businesses because Bulgaria is not competitive in this area compared to other Central and Eastern European countries. The report recommended that a strategic policy document is prepared to embrace the administration practice and provide an instrument for classification of the tariffs for the central administration service fees targeting universal reduction of the administrative cost. It also proposed that a special methodology for the classification of the tariffs for the central administrative service fees is developed. The present report is intended to support reform of the regime of state fees.
Indonesia : Selected Fiscal Issues in a New Era
(Washington, DC, 2003-02-14) World Bank
Despite the substantial progress in managing its fiscal challenges post-1997 financial crisis, Indonesia's risks to the budget have not disappeared, though the Government continues to be committed to fiscal consolidation. While debt sustainability is improving, the budget remains vulnerable to shocks, and, large non-discretionary spending (interest payments, transfers to the regions, personnel spending) still constrain the use of fiscal policy for macroeconomic stabilization, and social risk protection, and, as the fiscal situation improves, and decentralization proceeds, a rethinking of resource allocation becomes necessary. This report assesses Indonesia's progress in dealing with challenges that have altered the fiscal system since the crisis, and reviews options for fiscal consolidation, as well as sectoral issues in the new decentralized environment, including public expenditure management reforms. Suggestions include an increased revenue mobilization to make the budget more risk proof, and an improved tax administration, rather than streamlining the tax structure alone, while the Government's decision to eliminate the fuel subsidy remains critical for fiscal consolidation (which has little social implications). Moreover, the large interest payments burden incurred during the crisis, is crowding out development spending, and similarly, increased transfers to local governments are limiting discretionary spending (which could be accompanied by a decrease in central development spending in areas of regional responsibilities). A refinement of the budget management system is necessary, where the Finance Law would be instrumental in establishing accountability between the Executive, and Parliament.
Indonesia : Managing Government Debt and its Risks
(Washington, DC, 2000-05-22) World Bank
The Asian economic crisis has left Indonesia's Government deeply in debt. Government debt has increased from 23 percent of GDP before the crisis to about 83 percent of GDP in early 2000. Nearly three quarters of this increase is domestic debt to pay for bank restructuring. Though very large, the government's debt is manageable. Actions to rebuild investor confidence, keep real interest rates down, and renew growth are necessary. Moreover, actions are also needed in the following areas: 1) generating significant primary fiscal surpluses; 2) containing off-budget losses and counteracting fiscal risks; 3) aggressively selling government assets to reduce government debt; 4) rescheduling existing debt under international rules and seeking the best possible terms for new borrowing; 5) building capacity to manage debt well; and 6) establishing an effective domestic bond market. The report concludes that Indonesia can overcome its government debt burden with renewed growth and prudent fiscal management. But this will not be easily or quickly achieved. Sustained fiscal surpluses and asset sales will be important. So will actions to avoid additional new government debt and strengthen debt management capacity.