Improving the accountability of public finance is crucial for achieving global development goals

Transparency Participation Transparency Oversight 16 indicators measuring opportunities for public participation 109 indicators measuring budget transparency (the Open Budget Index) 15 indicators measuring the strength of the legislature and auditors Methodology: the accountability ecosystem

102 countries were assessed, including 20 countries from the Asia-Pacific region China Timor-Leste Vietnam Afghanistan Bangladesh Fiji Indonesia Malaysia Mongolia Papua New Guinea Myanmar New Zealand Philippines South Korea Thailand India Nepal Pakistan Sri Lanka Cambodia

1.The vast majority of the world’s population live in countries that provide insufficient budget information. 2.Between 2012 and 2015 the world made modest progress toward greater transparency. Substantial gains were made by the least transparent countries. 3.Problems associated with a lack of transparency are compounded by inadequate public participation and weak formal oversight. The Open Budget Survey 2015: Key findings

The vast majority of people live in countries that provide insufficient budget information

The average score for all survey countries is 45 out of countries score 60 or less, meaning they provide insufficient information. 17 countries score 20 or less, meaning scant or no information is available to the public. Distribution of countries by Open Budget Index score

The average score for the 20 countries in the Asia-Pacific region is 41. Only 3 of the 20 countries provide sufficient information (New Zealand, the Philippines, and South Korea). 5 countries in the region score 20 or less, meaning scant or no information is available to the public. Distribution of Asia-Pacific countries by Open Budget Index score Number of Countries

There are serious gaps in information One-third of budget documents that should be publicly available are not published. - 36% of documents are not publicly available in the Asia-Pacific region. 16 countries fail to publish an Executive’s Budget Proposal, a country’s foundational budget document. - 6 of these countries are in the region (Cambodia, China, Fiji, Myanmar, Nepal, and Vietnam). Even when budget documents are published they often lack important details.

Between 2012 and 2015 substantial gains in transparency were made by the least transparent countries globally

Global progress has been modest… The global average score on the Open Budget Index increased from 43 to 46 in the 100 countries for which we have comparable data. - However, in the Asia-Pacific region, the average score decreased from 44 to 41 (with significant declines in South Asia). Globally, countries have increased their scores by an average of 10 points since they were first surveyed. - In the region, the average increased by 7 points. The biggest gains have been made by countries that are the least transparent.

…but some countries have made remarkable progress The Kyrgyz Republic more than doubled its score, from 20 to 54. Tunisia nearly quadrupled its score, from 11 to 42. Francophone Africa made considerable gains, the average score among the eight countries surveyed increased by more than 20 points. In the Asia-Pacific region, the Philippines made a notable jump, from 48 to 64.

Despite progress, enthusiasm should be tempered Improvements have come from a low base. Twelve countries have remained at the bottom of the Open Budget Index each time they have been surveyed. Some countries have regressed. –South Asia’s average score declined by 14 points between 2012 and In many countries, there is considerable volatility in disclosure practices.

Problems associated with insufficient transparency are compounded by inadequate opportunities for public participation and weak formal oversight

Most countries don’t provide adequate opportunities for public participation The average score for public participation is just 25 out of In the Asia-Pacific region, the average is countries are weak in providing opportunities for the public to participate (15 from the region). Just seven countries are adequately providing opportunities for public participation (3 from the region – Philippines, New Zealand, and South Korea).

Formal oversight is generally lacking In more than half of the countries surveyed, legislatures lack access to independent researchers. - In the Asia-Pacific region, three-fourths of the countries lack access. In the majority of countries, supreme audit institutions have weak or nonexistent quality assurance systems. - In the region, three-fourths of the countries have weak or no quality assurance systems.

Of the 102 countries surveyed, only 4 perform well across all pillars of budget accountability. In contrast, 32 countries failed to meet the Survey’s standard of adequacy in any of the pillars.

Improving transparency, participation, and oversight Recommendation 1: Publish more budget information Countries that score 40 or below should make more budget documents available to the public. Countries that score between 41 and 60 should increase the comprehensiveness of budget documents. Recommendation 2: Institutionalize gains in transparency Recommendation 3: Provide more opportunities for public participation in the budget process. Establish legislative hearings at which the public can testify. Establish formal mechanisms such as participatory budgeting and social audits.

Improving transparency, participation, and oversight Recommendation 4: Empower oversight institutions Enable legislatures to engage meaningfully in budgets by providing better access to research and analytical capacity. Support supreme audit institutions to establish quality assurance systems to improve the accuracy and reliability of their reports. Recommendation 5: Promote the development of integrated and accountability budget ecosystems

Contact Information 820 First Street, NE Suite 510 Washington, DC Phone: Fax: