Publication: Uzbekistan Public Expenditure Review
Loading...
Date
2019-12-31
ISSN
Published
2019-12-31
Editor(s)
Abstract
This Public Expenditure Review (PER) takes stock of fiscal developments and institutions and analyzes the key issues that bear on the level, composition, challenges, and effectiveness of government spending and the stance of fiscal policy. Understanding these issues is essential, as new fiscal pressures are emerging in the process of economic transformation and as citizens demand higher quality of education and other public services. The fiscal reform agenda remains extensive but working on it will provide an opportunity to strengthen the effectiveness of government and boost inclusive economic growth. In the process of ongoing economic transformation, the government is facing several challenges in fiscal policy, for which this PER has developed policy options.
Link to Data Set
Citation
“Izvorski, Ivailo V.; Trushin, Eskender; Appiah-Koranteng, Alex; Varoudakis, Aristomene; Islam, Roumeen; Safarov, Maksudjon; Lord, David; Motohashi, Mitsunori; Ihsan, Ahya; Zorya, Sergiy; Hawkesworth, Ian; Philipsen, Ferry; James, Sebastian; Anadolu, Elvira; Teixeira, Janssen; Karakulah, Kenan; Izvorski, Ivailo. 2019. Uzbekistan Public Expenditure Review. © World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/33371 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.”
Associated URLs
Associated content
Other publications in this report series
Journal
Journal Volume
Journal Issue
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
Publication Assessing Uzbekistan’s Transition(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2021-11-08)Uzbekistan’s transition from planning to market started almost thirty years ago following its independence from the Soviet Union. For most of this period, economic modernization and transformation were stalled, with little change in institutions and policies from those prevailing at the time of the planned economy. In late 2016, Uzbekistan surprised by launching reforms with a breadth and speed that at times exceeded the pace of those observed in some of the earlier reformers at a similar stage of the process. In November 2018, building on the results from more than a year of economic reforms, the government announced the agenda for the next phase of its bold and ambitious economic transformation. In terms of the pace of transition, Uzbekistan’s record has been mixed but appropriate, given that reforms are dependent on experience with markets and prices, initial conditions, and institutional strength. Before the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic started, the reform momentum was supported by comfortable external and fiscal buffers and a robust global economy. The buffers are still sizable, even with doubling of public debt since 2017, and a sign of strength but the pull from the global economy has been substantially diminished. The rest of the introduction reviews progress in the key areas of economic transformation.Publication Kyrgyz Republic Country Economic Memorandum(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2020-03-26)The Kyrgyz Republic has experienced modest and volatile economic expansion since the economy bottomed out from the transition recession in 1995, when GDP amounted to about half of its pre-independence levels. As a result of structural reforms at the start of transition, the emergence of remittances and commodity exports, largely gold, as powerful new drivers of growth, and improvements in the macroeconomic management in the recent decade, per-capita real GDP grew by 3.1 percent a year on average since 1995. The Kyrgyz Republic is now a lower middle-income economy, as it was in 1990. Economic expansion has benefitted from fixed investment that has risen to 31 percent of GDP, one of the highest in Europe and Central Asia and well-above the threshold of 25 percent reached by the group of successful countries studied by the Growth Commission in 2007. Lower fiscal deficits and low inflation indicate the success of recent macroeconomic policies. These achievements notwithstanding, Kyrgyz Republic’s growth and productivity performance has lagged most relevant comparators, frustrating the needs of the poor and the young. As a result, while per-capita GDP in constant prices has doubled since 1995, it has still not caught up with pre-independence levels. Per-capita incomes in the Kyrgyz Republic have increased by 20 percent less than the average of lower middle-income countries since 2000 and 40 percent less than the average for the Caucasus and Central Asia. Productivity increases – proxied by changes in total factor productivity, have averaged half a percent since 2000, leaving largely factor accumulation as the driver of economic growth. And while ‘Productivity isn’t everything, but in the long run it is almost everything’, highlighting one of the main challenges of the country’s current growth model.3 Poverty has declined, but modest growth has made a modest dent, leaving the poverty rate as high as 31 percent, with a substantial part of the population living in regions with more limited and lower quality government services than in Bishkek.Publication Public Expenditure Policies in Southeast Europe(2008)This report reviews the level, composition and outcomes of government spending and distills some of the lessons that emerge from efforts by the Southeast Europe (SEE) countries in reforming expenditure policies. The report identifies key remaining challenges and proposes a broad menu of options in further reforms of sectors that account for the largest shares of public spending across the countries, and where reforms are likely to have significant budgetary implications. This has motivated the choice of sectors discussed in the report: social protection (including pensions), health, education, public administration, and infrastructure.Publication Mongolia - Public Expenditure and Financial Management Review : Bridging the Public Expenditure Management Gap(Washington, DC, 2002-06)Mongolia has realized important progress toward more efficient and sustainable public finances over the last decade. However, weaknesses in the institutional and structural reform agenda threaten Mongolia's fiscal balances. The government proposes to grow at 6 percent. This report discusses policy measures needed to ensure success of government programs. Following the introduction, chapter 2 discusses past performance and provides a brief discussion of recent economic and social developments. Chapter 3 discusses future challenges, analyzes the main sources of fiscal pressure on Mongolia's budget, and proposes a sustainable macroeconomic reform path. Chapter 4 evaluates budget execution processes. Chapter 5 discusses the impact of intergovernmental fiscal relations on fiscal balances, and service delivery. Chapter 6 discusses governance. Chapter 7 analyzes budget formulation and policy coordination processes. Chapter 8 discuses public sector resource allocations, with particular emphasis on education, health, and the environment sectors. The report concludes by discussing the importance of putting into place measures to bridge the gap between existing public expenditure management practices and those needed to improve the overall performance of the Mongolian public sector, and proposes a framework within which this can be achieved.Publication China - National Development and Sub-National Finance : A Review of Provincial Expenditures(Washington, DC, 2002-04-09)In China, the highly decentralized fiscal system undermines improvements in policy outcomes and contributes to increasing disparities among its regions. However, rather than re-centralizing, China would benefit from pursuing reforms to: improve expenditure and revenue assignments for the various levels of government; distribute fiscal resources more equally; and improve the use of these resources through better budget management at all levels of government. This report recommends a comprehensive reform effort that covers all the components of the inter-governmental fiscal system, arguing that selective interventions to address specific local financial problems such as defaults on pension and unemployment stipends, and payment arrears on teachers' salaries, have created some pervasive incentives. A piecemeal approach to inter-governmental fiscal reform is unlikely to succeed because it will not take into account the interdependence of transfers on revenue assignments or the role played by expenditure assignments on the adequacy of revenue assignments and transfers.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
Publication Design Thinking for Social Innovation(2010-07)Designers have traditionally focused on enchancing the look and functionality of products.Publication Breaking the Conflict Trap : Civil War and Development Policy(Washington, DC: World Bank and Oxford University Press, 2003)Most wars are now civil wars. Even though international wars attract enormous global attention, they have become infrequent and brief. Civil wars usually attract less attention, but they have become increasingly common and typically go on for years. This report argues that civil war is now an important issue for development. War retards development, but conversely, development retards war. This double causation gives rise to virtuous and vicious circles. Where development succeeds, countries become progressively safer from violent conflict, making subsequent development easier. Where development fails, countries are at high risk of becoming caught in a conflict trap in which war wrecks the economy and increases the risk of further war. The global incidence of civil war is high because the international community has done little to avert it. Inertia is rooted in two beliefs: that we can safely 'let them fight it out among themselves' and that 'nothing can be done' because civil war is driven by ancestral ethnic and religious hatreds. The purpose of this report is to challenge these beliefs.Publication Government Matters III : Governance Indicators for 1996-2002(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2003-08)The authors present estimates of six dimensions of governance covering 199 countries and territories for four time periods: 1996, 1998, 2000, and 2002. These indicators are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 25 separate data sources constructed by 18 different organizations. The authors assign these individual measures of governance to categories capturing key dimensions of governance and use an unobserved components model to construct six aggregate governance indicators in each of the four periods. They present the point estimates of the dimensions of governance as well as the margins of errors for each country for the four periods. The governance indicators reported here are an update and expansion of previous research work on indicators initiated in 1998 (Kaufmann, Kraay, and Zoido-Lobat 1999a,b and 2002). The authors also address various methodological issues, including the interpretation and use of the data given the estimated margins of errors.Publication Governance Matters IV : Governance Indicators for 1996-2004(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2005-06)The authors present the latest update of their aggregate governance indicators, together with new analysis of several issues related to the use of these measures. The governance indicators measure the following six dimensions of governance: (1) voice and accountability; (2) political instability and violence; (3) government effectiveness; (4) regulatory quality; (5) rule of law, and (6) control of corruption. They cover 209 countries and territories for 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, and 2004. They are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 37 separate data sources constructed by 31 organizations. The authors present estimates of the six dimensions of governance for each period, as well as margins of error capturing the range of likely values for each country. These margins of error are not unique to perceptions-based measures of governance, but are an important feature of all efforts to measure governance, including objective indicators. In fact, the authors give examples of how individual objective measures provide an incomplete picture of even the quite particular dimensions of governance that they are intended to measure. The authors also analyze in detail changes over time in their estimates of governance; provide a framework for assessing the statistical significance of changes in governance; and suggest a simple rule of thumb for identifying statistically significant changes in country governance over time. The ability to identify significant changes in governance over time is much higher for aggregate indicators than for any individual indicator. While the authors find that the quality of governance in a number of countries has changed significantly (in both directions), they also provide evidence suggesting that there are no trends, for better or worse, in global averages of governance. Finally, they interpret the strong observed correlation between income and governance, and argue against recent efforts to apply a discount to governance performance in low-income countries.Publication Governance Matters VIII : Aggregate and Individual Governance Indicators 1996–2008(2009-06-01)This paper reports on the 2009 update of the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) research project, covering 212 countries and territories and measuring six dimensions of governance between 1996 and 2008: Voice and Accountability, Political Stability and Absence of Violence/Terrorism, Government Effectiveness, Regulatory Quality, Rule of Law, and Control of Corruption. These aggregate indicators are based on hundreds of specific and disaggregated individual variables measuring various dimensions of governance, taken from 35 data sources provided by 33 different organizations. The data reflect the views on governance of public sector, private sector and NGO experts, as well as thousands of citizen and firm survey respondents worldwide. The authors also explicitly report the margins of error accompanying each country estimate. These reflect the inherent difficulties in measuring governance using any kind of data. They find that even after taking margins of error into account, the WGI permit meaningful cross-country comparisons as well as monitoring progress over time. The aggregate indicators, together with the disaggregated underlying indicators, are available at www.govindicators.org.