Abstract

1. Fiscal transparency refers to the information available to the public about the government’s fiscal policy-making process. It refers to the clarity, reliability, frequency, timeliness, and relevance of public fiscal reporting and the openness of such information.

Fiscal Transparency and its Importance

1. Fiscal transparency refers to the information available to the public about the government’s fiscal policy-making process. It refers to the clarity, reliability, frequency, timeliness, and relevance of public fiscal reporting and the openness of such information.

  • Clarity is the ease with which reports can be understood by users.

  • Reliability is the extent to which reports are an accurate representation of government fiscal operations and finances.

  • Frequency (or periodicity) is the regularity with which reports are published.

  • Timeliness refers to the time lag involved in the dissemination of these reports.

  • Relevance refers to the extent to which reports provide users (legislatures, citizens, and markets) with the information they need to make effective decisions.

  • Openness refers to the ease with which the public can find information, and influence and hold governments accountable for their fiscal policy decisions.1

2. Fiscal transparency is a critical element of effective fiscal management. It helps ensure that the economic decisions of governments are informed by a shared and accurate assessment of the current fiscal position, the costs and benefits of any policy changes, and the potential risks to the fiscal outlook. Fiscal transparency also provides legislatures, markets, and citizens with the information they need to make efficient financial decisions and to hold governments accountable for their fiscal performance and the management and use of public resources. And it facilitates international surveillance of fiscal developments and helps mitigate the transmission of fiscal spillovers between countries. Greater transparency can also help underpin the credibility of a government’s management of public finances and improve market confidence. Empirical evidence points to a positive relationship between the degree of fiscal transparency and sovereign credit ratings (IMF, 2012a).

The IMF’s Fiscal Transparency Code

3. The IMF’s Fiscal Transparency Code (the Code) is the most widely recognized international standard for disclosure of information about public finances (Box 1.1). The Code is part of the IMF’s efforts to strengthen fiscal surveillance, support policymaking, and improve fiscal accountability among its member countries. It is one of the 12 standards that have been recognized by the international community under the IMF and World Bank’s Standards and Codes Initiative launched in 1999 to strengthen the international financial architecture.2

The IMF’s Fiscal Transparency Code (the Code)

The IMF has a long history in setting fiscal transparency standards dating back to 1998.

  • In 1998, the IMF introduced the Code (Code of Good Practices on Fiscal Transparency),1 which led to a voluntary program of fiscal transparency assessments called fiscal transparency modules of Reports on the Observance of Standards and Codes (fiscal ROSCs) that were the first comprehensive fiscal transparency assessments at the international level. The Manual on Fiscal Transparency was issued in the same year (IMF, 1998).

  • In 2007, the Code was updated to reflect some emerging good practices and broaden its coverage but retained the original four pillars of fiscal transparency: (i) clarity of roles and responsibilities; (ii) open budget processes; (iii) public availability of information; and (iv) assurances of integrity. The Manual was also revised (IMF, 2007).

  • Reflecting the unique set of challenges faced by countries that derive a significant share of revenues from natural resources, the IMF issued a Guide on Resource Revenue Transparency in 2005, which was subsequently updated (IMF, 2007). This guide provided an overview of generally recognized good practices for transparency of resource revenue management consistent with the principles of the Code.

  • In 2014,2 in the aftermath of the global financial crisis, which started in 2007, the IMF revised the Fiscal Transparency Code and launched the Fiscal Transparency Evaluation (FTE), which replaced the fiscal ROSC (IMF, 2012a). The new Code updates the 2007 version, reflects the lessons of the global financial crisis, incorporates developments in international standards, and builds on feedback from stakeholder consultations. It comprises a set of principles built around four “pillars.” Pillars I, II, and III were finalized following an extensive consultation exercise in two rounds between December 2012 and August 2013. An additional two rounds of public consultation were undertaken for Pillar IV.

Source: IMF staff.1 The Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s highlighted shortcomings in financial reporting in both the public and the private sectors and regarding the linkages between the two (Lane and others, 1999). This led to the introduction of the IMF Code of Good Practices on Fiscal Transparency in 1998 as one of the 12 new international standards and codes designed to improve the functioning of the international financial system.2 See http://blog-pfm.imf.org/fles/ft-code.pdf.

4. In 2012, the IMF reviewed the state of fiscal transparency shortcomings that were revealed in the context of the 2008 global financial crisis and decided to update international fiscal transparency standards and monitoring arrangements (IMF, 2012a).3 The crisis revealed that, even among advanced economies, reporting by governments of their fiscal operations and finances was incomplete, as illustrated by the emergence of previously unrecorded deficits and debts. The crisis also demonstrated that, in many cases, countries had substantially underestimated the risks to their fiscal position and prospects, especially those emanating from the financial sector. The sharp deterioration in government finances that accompanied the crisis, and the related need for fiscal adjustment, increased the incentives faced by governments to engage in activities that clouded the true state of their finances (Irwin, 2012 and 2015).

5. The IMF’s new Fiscal Transparency Code, issued in 2014, is part of the renewed global interest in promoting fiscal transparency.4 Several other transparency initiatives in the fiscal area have been established, including the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) Best Practices for Budget Transparency,5 the multi-stakeholder Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) to address resource revenue transparency issues in resource-rich countries,6 and the International Budget Partnership’s (IBP’s) Open Budget Survey7 of information provided to citizens in budget documents. In addition, assessments under the multi-donor Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability (PEFA) program include a series of performance indicators covering aspects of fiscal transparency, which are derived in part from the Code. More recently, the Global Initiative on Fiscal Transparency (GIFT), a multi-stakeholder network, has promulgated a set of high-level principles of fiscal transparency, participation, and accountability.8 The OECD, with the participation of the GIFT network, has also recently developed a Budget Transparency Toolkit aimed at serving as a guide/gateway to existing standards and guidance materials and reinforcing some key practical messages in budget and fiscal transparency.9

6. The 2014 Code comprises a set of principles built around four “pillars” (Figure 1.1). Each pillar contains three to four dimensions, and each dimension, two to four principles.10

  • Pillar I: Fiscal Reporting, requires the availability of relevant, comprehensive, timely, and reliable information on the government’s fiscal operations and performance. The 12 principles under this pillar are grouped under four dimensions of fiscal reports: coverage, frequency and timeliness, quality, and integrity.

  • Pillar II: Fiscal Forecasting and Budgeting, requires the provision of a clear statement of the government’s budgetary objectives and policy intentions, together with comprehensive, timely, and credible projections of the evolution of public finances. The 12 principles under this pillar are grouped under four dimensions of fiscal forecasts and budgets: comprehensiveness, orderliness, policy orientation, and credibility.

  • Pillar III: Fiscal Risk Analysis and Management, requires that risks to the public finances are disclosed, analyzed, and managed and that fiscal decision making across the public sector is effectively coordinated. The 12 principles under this pillar are grouped under three dimensions of fiscal risk management: risk analysis and disclosure, risk management, and fiscal coordination among different levels of government.

  • Pillar IV: Resource Revenue Management, requires the provision of a transparent framework for the ownership, contracting, taxation, and use of natural resource endowments.11 The 12 principles under this pillar are grouped under four dimensions: legal and fiscal regime, allocation of resource rights and collection of revenue, company reporting, and resource revenue management.

Figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1.

Architecture of the Revised Fiscal Transparency Code

Source: IMF staff.

7. Reflecting the aftermath of the global financial crisis, the new Code updates the 2007 Code in several respects. It emphasizes the need for information that fosters good fiscal management and decision making in a postcrisis world where more attention is being paid to the full extent of government operations and the risks they entail. Specifically, the new Code

  • Focuses on outputs more than on processes. The Code emphasizes the quality of published information as an objective basis for evaluating the degree of effective fiscal transparency.

  • Takes account of different levels of countries’ institutional capacity. The Code formally differentiates between basic, good, and advanced practice. This allows countries to develop a sequenced path for reform, by providing them with a clear set of milestones toward full compliance with international standards. The new approach also facilitates cross-country benchmarking:

    • Basic practice should be viewed as a minimum standard that should be achievable by all IMF member countries.

    • Good practice provides an intermediate goalpost that would require stronger institutional capacities.

    • Advanced practice reflects relevant international standards and is in line with current state-of-the-art policies and practices.12

  • Emphasizes the importance of fiscal risks management. The Code devotes a full pillar (with 12 principles) to the analysis and management of fiscal risks that are likely to be relevant to all countries. It analyzes risks arising from a wide range of sources, including macroeconomic shocks, government guarantees and other contingent liabilities, fiscal pressures from demographic and other long-term trends, budgetary contingencies, changes in asset and liability values, public-private partnerships, the financial sector, the availability and price volatility of natural resources, environmental factors, subnational governments, and public corporations.

  • Captures recent advances in fiscal management and in international standards and practices.13 Examples of new “advanced” practices include (i) the publication of information on fiscal activities of the entire public sector; (ii) the preparation of full balance sheets, including all financial and nonfinancial assets and liabilities; (iii) monthly fiscal reporting of general government operations and publication of audited annual financial statements within six months; (iv) the alignment of information provided in budgets, accounts, and fiscal statistics; and (v) public participation in deliberations on budget preparation and execution.

8. Several other standards and diagnostic tools have been developed by the IMF in the fiscal area that complement the Code. These tools analyze issues relating to transparency (Box 1.2).

Complementary Fiscal Standards and Assessment Tools1

Government Finance Statistics Manual (GFSM), 2014, the international standard for compiling and disseminating government finance statistics, including for publication in the IMF GFS Yearbook (see http://www.imf.org/external/Pubs/FT/GFS/Manual/2014/gfsfnal.pdf).

Public Investment Management Assessment (PIMA) instrument, which evaluates 15 institutions that shape decision making at the three key stages of the public investment cycle: planning sustainable investment across the public sector, allocating investment to the right sectors and projects, and implementing projects on time and on budget (see http://www.imf.org/external/np/fad/publicinvestment/index.htm#3).

Public-Private Partnerships Fiscal Risks Assessment Model (PFRAM), an analytical tool to assess the potential fiscal costs and risks arising from public-private partnership (PPP) projects (see http://www.imf.org/external/np/fad/publicinvestment/index.htm#4).

Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability (PEFA) (jointly with other partners), a tool that helps governments assess public financial management (PFM) practices. It was updated in 2016 (see http://www.pefa.org).

Tax Administration Diagnostic Assessment Tool (TADAT) (jointly with other partners), which is designed to provide an objective assessment of the health of key components of a country’s system of tax administration (see http://www.tadat.org/overview/overview.html).

Source: IMF staff.1 Other fiscal assessment tools used by the IMF include the Revenue Administration Fiscal Information Tool (RA-FIT), a web-based data gathering tool used to assess revenue administration performance; the Revenue Administration Gap Analysis Program (RA-GAP) that assists countries to assess taxpayer compliance through tax gap analysis; and Fiscal Analysis of Resource Industries (FARI), a methodology for fiscal analysis of extractive industries.

Fiscal Transparency Evaluations

9. Fiscal Transparency Evaluations (FTEs) assess country practices against the Code and replace the previous fiscal ROSCs. FTEs provide countries with

  • a comprehensive assessment of their fiscal transparency practices against the various standards set by the Code;

  • rigorous and quantified analyses of the scale and sources of fiscal vulnerabilities, including measures of the coverage of fiscal reports, the quality of fiscal forecasts, and the size of unreported contingent liabilities;

  • an accessible summary of the strengths and weaknesses of country practices related to fiscal transparency and their relative importance. This is achieved through a set of summary “heatmaps,” a major innovation of the FTEs, which facilitate benchmarking against comparator countries, identification of reform needs, and prioritization of recommendations. FTEs include individual heatmaps for each pillar (covering all the principles under that pillar) and an overall heatmap covering all pillars;

  • an optional sequenced action plan to help define reform priorities designed to address the main shortcomings in fiscal transparency; and

  • an option for countries to undertake a modular assessment focused on just one or two pillars of the Code, aimed at addressing the most pressing transparency issues.

10. FTEs are carried out at the request of governments and form part of the IMF’s policy dialogue and capacity-building efforts with its member countries. They support the identification of fiscal transparency strengths, weaknesses, and challenges as well as the prioritization and delivery of technical assistance by the IMF and other development partners. Many FTEs, across a broad spectrum of countries, have been completed.14

11. An analysis of completed FTEs reveals that fiscal transparency levels vary both across and within countries and are positively correlated with the level of income (Figure 1.2). While low-income countries have generally scored relatively lower than emerging market and advanced economies, there is scope for countries at all income levels to improve practices, particularly in fiscal reporting and fiscal risk analysis and management.

Figure 1.2.
Figure 1.2.

Summary Results of Fiscal Transparency Evaluations Conducted as of the End of March 2018

Source: IMF staff calculations, using data from 23 FTEs completed by March 2018.

12. FTEs have an important part to play in providing input to the IMF’s surveillance through exposing strengths and weaknesses in institutional public financial management frameworks. In several cases, findings and recommendations from FTEs have fed into IMF’s country reports in the context of Article IV or other surveillance-related missions.15

The Role of the Handbook

13. This Handbook explains the 2014 Code’s principles and practices and provides more detailed guidance on their implementation. In particular,

  • It defines each pillar of the Code, and the dimensions and principles under each pillar.16

  • It sets out the importance of each principle and describes recent trends in implementation of the principle, also noting relevant international standards.

  • It describes basic, good, and advanced practices for each principle, setting out both the benefits and the challenges of moving beyond basic practices. Selected country examples are also provided.

  • It specifies the indicators to be used to measure adherence to the principles.

14. The Handbook aims to provide guidance on the application of the Fiscal Transparency Code to a range of stakeholders.

  • First, governments with an interest in promoting fiscal transparency can review the detailed descriptions, standards, and country examples and use them to guide the development of more robust fiscal transparency practices.17

  • Second, the Handbook provides a reference guide for the international community (bilateral and multilateral agencies), with an interest in transparency issues or in complementing their assessment tools.

  • Third, it is a tool to assist national oversight and accountability institutions such as legislatures, supreme audit institutions (SAIs), parliamentary budget offices, national statistics agencies, and independent fiscal agencies.

  • Fourth, national and international civil society organizations may find the Handbook useful to support and complement their efforts in promoting fiscal transparency.

  • Fifth, it can serve as a reference for academia and researchers studying public finance and fiscal transparency.

15. Promoting greater fiscal transparency requires not only clear reporting standards as described in this Handbook but also effective monitoring and enforcement of those standards. Institutions that can help promote fiscal transparency include (i) national institutions such as legislatures; SAIs, independent fiscal agencies, and professional and civic organizations; (ii) regional economic, monetary and customs unions, and statistics agencies;18 (iii) international institutions such as the IMF, the World Bank, and the OECD; (iv) international standard-setting bodies such as the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC), the International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board (IPSASB), and the International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions (INTOSAI); and (v) international civil society groups such as the IBP.

16. This Handbook covers Pillars I to III of the Fiscal Transparency Code.19 The three following chapters cover each pillar, respectively.

  • Each chapter starts with a brief introductory section that describes the pillar, its main dimensions, and the underlying concepts.

  • Each dimension is then presented in a section, including subsections for each related principle and specific references to applicable international standards, norms, and relevant guidance material.

  • Each subsection on principles is followed by a description of each of the three levels of practice, illustrated by practical country examples.

  • A glossary of terms, a bibliography, and a list of website references are included.

  • For the ease of readers, the Handbook uses the following colors: (i) blue for highlighting each pillar of the Code; (ii) red for highlighting a dimension under each pillar of the Code; (iii) dark green for highlighting a principle under a dimension; (iv) light green for highlighting a practice under a principle as well as country examples for practices; and (v) pink for the tables with relevant standards, norms, and guidance material. Grey color is used for all the other boxes with definitions of key concepts and/or factual descriptions, including trends in implementation of the Code’s principles.

  • View in gallery

    Architecture of the Revised Fiscal Transparency Code

  • View in gallery

    Summary Results of Fiscal Transparency Evaluations Conducted as of the End of March 2018

  • Ahmad, Ehtisham, and Giorgio Brosio, eds., 2006, Handbook of Fiscal Federalism. (London: Edward Elgar).

  • Alesina, Alberto, and Roberto Perotti, 1995, “The Political Economy of Budget Deficits,” Staff Papers, International Monetary Fund, 42 (March), pp. 131.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Alesina, Alberto, and Roberto Perotti, 1999, “Budget Deficits and Budget Institutions,” in Fiscal Institutions and Fiscal Performance, ed. by James M. Potterba and Jürgen von Hagen, National Bureau of Economic Research Conference Report (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Allan, William, and Taryn Parry, 2003, “Fiscal Transparency in EU Accession Countries: Progress and Future Challenges,” IMF Working Paper 03/163 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Allen, Richard, and Dimitar Radev, 2006, “Managing and Controlling Extrabudgetary Funds,” IMF Working Paper 06/286 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Allen, Richard, and Dimitar Radev, 2010, “Extrabudgetary Funds,” IMF Technical Notes and Manuals No. 2010/09 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Allen, Richard, and Miguel Alves, 2016, “How to Improve the Financial Oversight of Public Corporations,” IMF How-To Note No. 5 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Allen, Richard, Richard Hemming, and Barry H Potter. (eds.), 2013, The International Handbook of Public Financial Management (London: Palgrave Macmillan).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Alt, James E., and David Dreyer Lassen, 2003, “Fiscal Transparency and Fiscal Policy Outcomes in OECD Countries,” Economic Policy Research Unit Working Paper No. 2003–2 (Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Alt, James E., and Shanna Rose, 2006, “The Causes of Fiscal Transparency: Evidence from the U.S. States,” IMF Staff Papers, Vol. 53 (September, Special Issue).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Arthur Anderson, 2000, “General and Specific Methodologies for Valuing Contingent Liabilities,” Contingency Fund Project Report (unpublished: Chicago).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Australia, Commonwealth of, 2015, 2015 Intergenerational Report: Australia in 2055 (Canberra).

  • Australia, Commonwealth of, 2017, Budget Strategy and Outlook Budget Paper No. 1. (Canberra).

  • Austrian Federal Ministry of Finance, 2013, “Opening Statement of Financial Position for the Austrian Federal Government as at 1 January 2013” (Vienna: Austrian Federal Ministry of Finance).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, 1997, “Basel Core Principles for Effective Banking Supervision,” International Legal Materials, Vol. 36 (March), pp. 40532.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Beetsma, Roel W. M. J., and Xavier Debrun, 2016, “Fiscal Councils: Rationale and Effectiveness,” IMF Working Paper 16/86 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bléjer, Mario I., and Adrienne Cheasty, eds., 1993, How to Measure the Fiscal Deficit: Analytical and Methodological Issues (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bova, Elva, Marta Ruiz-Arranz, Frederik G. Toscani, and H. Elif Ture, 2016, “The Fiscal Costs of Contingent Liabilities: A New Dataset,” IMF Working Paper No. 16/14 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bova, Elva, Robert Dippelsman, Kara Rideout, and Andrea Schaechter, 2013, “Another Look at Governments’ Balance Sheets: The Role of Nonfinancial Assets,” IMF Working Paper No. 13/95 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Brixi, Hana Polackova., and Allen Schick, 2002, Government at Risk: Contingent Liabilities and Fiscal Risk. (Washington, DC: World Bank and Oxford University Press).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Brumby, James, and Richard Hemming, 2013, “Medium-Term Expenditure Frameworks,” in The International Handbook of Public Financial Management, ed. by Richard Allen, Richard Hemming, and Barry H. Potter (London: Palgrave Macmillan).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Budina, Nina, Tidiane Kinda, Andrea Schaechter, and Anke Weber, 2012, “Fiscal Rules at a Glance; Country Details from a New Dataset,” IMF Working Paper 12/273 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cangiano, Marco, Teresa Curristine, and Michel Lazare, eds., 2013, Public Financial Management and Its Emerging Architecture (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Carson, Carol, 2001, “Toward a Framework for Assessing Data Quality,” IMF Working Paper 01/25 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Carson, Carol, Sarmad Khawaja, and Thomas K. Morrison, 2004, “Revisions Policy for Official Statistics: A Matter of Governance,” IMF Working Paper 04/87 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Castro, Manuel Fernando, 2011, “Defining and Using Performance Indicators and Targets in Government M&E Systems,” PREM Notes, No. 12, July.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cebotari, Aliona, 2008, “Contingent Liabilities: Issues and Practice,” IMF Working Paper 08/245 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Chalk, Nigel, and Richard Hemming, 2000, “Assessing Fiscal Sustainability in Theory and Practice,” in Fiscal Sustainability, papers presented at a Banca d’Italia Research Department Workshop, Perugia, Italy, January 2022.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Chand, Sheetal K., and Albert Jaeger, 1996, Aging Populations and Public Pension Schemes, IMF Occasional Paper No. 147 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Chevauchez, Benoît, 2007, “Public Management Reform in France,” in Performance Budgeting—Linking Funding and Results, ed. by Marc Robinson (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Christofides, Charis, Christian Mulder, and Andrew Tiffin, 2003, “The Link between Adherence to International Standards of Good Practices, Foreign Exchange Spreads, and Ratings,” IMF Working Paper 03/74 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cooper, Julie, and Sailendra Patanayak, 2011, “Chart of Accounts: A Critical Element of the Public Financial Management Framework,” IMF Technical Notes and Manuals No. 2011/03 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Corbacho, Ana, and Teresa Ter-Minassian, 2013, “Public Financial Management Requirements for Effective Implementation of Fiscal Rules,” in The International Handbook of Public Financial Management, ed. by Richard Allen, Richard Hemming, and Barry H. Potter (London: Palgrave Macmillan).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Curristine, Teresa, and Suzanne Flynn, 2013, “In Search of Results: Strengthening Public Sector Performance,” in Public Financial Management and Its Emerging Architecture, ed. by Marco Cangiano, Teresa Curristine, and Michel Lazare (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Daniel, James A., Jeffrey M. Davis, and Andrew M. Wolfe, 1997, “Fiscal Accounting of Bank Restructuring,” IMF Paper on Policy Analysis and Assessment No. 97/5 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Das, Udaibir S., Yinqiu Lu, Michael G. Papaioannou, and Iva Petrova, 2012, “Sovereign Risk and Asset and Liability Management—Conceptual Issues,” IMF Working Paper 12/241 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Davis, J. M., R. Ossowski, and A. Fedelino, eds., 2003, Fiscal Policy Formulation and Implementation in Oil Producing Countries (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Debrun, Xavier, and Tidiane Kinda, 2014, “Strengthening Post-Crisis Fiscal Credibility: Fiscal Councils on the Rise—A New Dataset,” IMF Working Paper 14/58 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Debrun, Xavier, L. Moulin, A. Turrini, J. Ayuso-i-Casals, and M.S. Kumar, 2008, “Tied to the Mast? National Fiscal Rules in the European Union,” Economic Policy, April.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dippelsman, Robert, Claudia Dziobek, and Carlos A. Gutiérrez Mangas, 2012, “What Lies Beneath: The Statistical Definition of Public Sector Debt,” IMF Staff Discussion Note 12/09 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Drabek, Zdenek, and Warren Payne, 2001, “The Impact of Transparency on Foreign Direct Investment,” Staff Working Paper ERAD–99–02 (Geneva: World Trade Organization).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Engel, Eduardo, Ronald Fischer, and Alexander Galetovic, 2003, “Privatizing Highways in Latin America: Fixing What Went Wrong,” Economia, Vol. 4 (Fall), pp. 12964.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • European Commission, 2011a, European Statistics Code of Practice—Revised Edition 2011 (Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • European Commission, 2011b, Manual on Sources and Methods for the Compilation of COFOG Statistics—Classification of the Functions of Government (COFOG) (Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • European Commission, 2013a, ESS Guidelines on Revision Policy for PEEIs (Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union).

  • European Commission, 2013b, European System of Accounts (ESA 2010) (Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union).

  • Fainboim, Israel, Duncan Last, and Eivind Tandberg, 2013, “Managing Public Investment,” in Public Financial Management and Its Emerging Architecture, ed. by Marco Cangiano, Teresa Curristine, and, Michel Lazare (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Financial Stability Forum Working Group on Deposit Insurance, 2000, “International Guidance on Deposit Insurance: A Consultative Process” (Basel, June).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Flynn, Suzanne, Delphine Moreti, and Joe Cavanagh, 2016, “Implementing Accrual Accounting in the Public Sector,” IMF Technical Notes and Manuals No. 2016/06 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Frankel, Jeffrey A., 2011, “Over-optimism in Forecasts by Official Budget Agencies and Its Implications,” NBER Working Paper 17239 (Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Funke, Katja, Timothy Irwin, and Isabel Rial, 2013, “Budgeting and Reporting for Public-Private Partnerships,” International Transport Forum Discussion Papers No. 2013/07 (Paris: OECD Publishing).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gelos, R. Gaston, and Shang-Jin Wei, 2002, “Transparency and International Investor Behavior,” IMF Working Paper 02/174 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ghesquiere, Francis, and Olivier Mahul, 2010, “Financial Protection of the State against Natural Disasters: A Primer,” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 5429, September (Washington, DC: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Glennerster, Rachel, and Yongseok Shin, 2003, “Is Transparency Good for You, and Can the IMF Help?IMF Working Paper 03/132 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Goldstein, Morris, 1997, “The Case for an International Banking Standard,” Policy Analyses in International Economics 47 (Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Gramlich, Edward M., 1998, A Guide to Benefit-Cost Analysis, 2nd ed. (Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press).

  • Guha-Sapir, D., R. Below, and P. Hoyois, 2016, EM-DAT Database—The CRED/OFDA International Disaster Database (Brussels: Universite Catholique de Louvain).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hameed, Farhan, 2005, “Fiscal Transparency and Economic Outcomes,” IMF Working Paper 05/225 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hammami, Mona, Jean-François Ruhashyankiko, and Etienne B. Yehoue, 2006, “Determinants of Public-Private Partnerships in Infrastructure,” IMF Working Paper 06/99 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Harris, Jason, Richard Hughes, Gösta Ljungman, and Carla Sateriale, 2013, “Medium-Term Budget Frameworks in Advanced Economies: Objectives, Design, and Performance,” in Public Financial Management and Its Emerging Architecture, ed. by Marco Cangiano, Teresa Curristine, and Michel Lazare (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Heller, Peter, 2003, Who Will Pay? Coping with Aging Societies, Climate Change, and Other Long-Term Fiscal Challenges (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hemming, Richard, 2013a, “The Macroeconomic Framework for Managing Public Finances,” in The International Handbook of Public Financial Management, ed. by Richard Allen, Richard Hemming, and Barry H. Potter (London: Palgrave Macmillan).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hemming, Richard, 2013b, “The Role of Independent Fiscal Agencies,” in The International Handbook of Public Financial Management, ed. by Richard Allen, Richard Hemming, and Barry H. Potter (London: Palgrave Macmillan).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hemming, Richard, M. Alier, Barry Anderson, M. Cangiano, and Murray Petrie, 2006, Public-Private Partnerships, Government Guarantees, and Fiscal Risk (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hemming, Richard, Michael Kell, and Axel Schimmelpfennig, 2003, Fiscal Vulnerability and Financial Crises in Emerging Market Economies, IMF Occasional Paper No. 218 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hemming, Richard, and Philip Joyce, 2013, “The Role of Fiscal Councils in Promoting Fiscal Responsibility,” in Public Financial Management and Its Emerging Architecture, ed. by Marco Cangiano, Teresa Curristine, and Michel Lazare (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • HM Treasury, 2013, The Green Book: Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government (London: TSO).

  • Inter-American Development Bank, 1997, Latin America after a Decade of Reforms, Economic and Social Progress Report (Washington, DC).

  • International Budget Partnership, 2000, “Governmental Financial Reporting: Accounting Issues and Practices,” International Public Sector Study No. 11 (New York).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Budget Partnership, 2018, Open Budget Survey 2017 (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 1986, A Manual on Government Finance Statistics (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 1996, Guide to the Data Dissemination Standards. Module 1: The Special Data Dissemination Standard (Washington, DC).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 1998, The General Data Dissemination System: Standards for the Dissemination by Countries of Economic and Financial Statistics (Washington, DC).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2001, Government Finance Statistics Manual 2001 (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2003a, Data Quality Assessment Framework and Data Quality Program (Washington, DC: Statistics Department).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2003b, Guidelines for Public Debt Management: Accompanying Document and Selected Case Studies (Washington, DC).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2004a, Public Investment and Fiscal Policy (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2004b, Public-Private Partnerships (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2005a, Government Guarantees and Fiscal Risk (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2005b, “Operational Framework for Debt Sustainability, Assessments in Low-Income Countries—Further Considerations” (Washington, DC).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2006, “Applying the Debt Sustainability Framework for Low-Income Countries Post Debt Relief” (Washington, DC).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2007, Guide on Resource Revenue Transparency (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2008, “Fiscal Risks: Sources, Disclosure, and Management” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011a, Fiscal Monitor, April 2011: Shifting Gears—Tackling Challenges on the Road to Fiscal Adjustment (Washington, DC).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2011b, Public Sector Debt Statistics: Guide for Compilers and Users (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2012a, “Fiscal Transparency, Accountability, and Risk” (Washington, DC)

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2012b, “Iceland: Technical Assistance Report on a New Organic Budget Law, Country Report No. 12/4” (Washington, DC).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013a, “Costa Rica: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 13/316” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013b, “Ireland: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 13/209” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013c, “The Functions and Impact of Fiscal Councils, Policy Paper” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013d, The General Data Dissemination System: Guide for Participants and Users (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013e, The Special Data Dissemination System: Guide for Subscribers and Users (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2014a, “Bolivia: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 14/77” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2014b, Government Finance Statistics Manual 2014 (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2014c, “Portugal: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 14/306” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2014d, “Revised Guidelines for Public Debt Management, Policy Paper” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2014e, “Russian Federation: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 14/134” (Washington, DC).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2014f, “Update on the Fiscal Transparency Initiative, Policy Paper” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2015a, “Finland: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 15/60” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2015b, “Making Public Investment More Efficient,” IMF Policy Paper (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2015c, “Mozambique: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 15/32” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2015d, “Peru: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 15/294” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2015e, “Philippines: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 15/156” (Washington, DC).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2015f, “Romania: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 15/67” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2016a, “Albania: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 16/5” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2016b, “Analyzing and Managing Fiscal Risks—Best Practices,” IMF Policy Paper (Washington, DC).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2016c, “Guatemala: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 16/372” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2016d, “Kenya: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 16/221” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2016e, “Tunisia: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 16/339” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2016f, “United Kingdom: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 16/351” (Washington, DC).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2017a, “Brazil: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 17/104” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2017b, “Georgia: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 17/291” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2017c, “Georgia: Request for Extended Arrangement under the Extended Fund Facility and Cancellation of Stand-by Arrangement, Country Report No. 17/97” (Washington, DC).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2017d, “Turkey: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 17/208” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2017e, “Uganda: Fiscal Transparency Evaluation, Country Report No. 17/130” (Washington, DC).

  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2018, “Guidance Note on the Bank-Fund Debt Sustainability Framework for Low Income Countries,” IMF Policy Paper (Washington, DC).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank, 2003, “International Standards-Strengthening Surveillance, Domestic Institutions, and International Markets” (Washington, DC).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2009, “Developing a Medium-Term Debt Management Strategy (MTDS)—Guidance Note for Country Authorities” (Washington, DC).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2017, “The Medium-Term Debt Management Strategy: An Assessment of Recent Capacity Building” (Washington, DC).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions, 1992, Guidelines for Internal Control Standards (Vienna: Internal Control Standards Committee).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 1995, Auditing Standards, issued by the Auditing Standards Committee at the XIVth Congress of INTOSAI 1992 in Washington, DC, as amended by the XVth Congress of INTOSAI 1995 in Cairo.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2007, “ISSAI 10—The Mexico Declaration on SAI Independence,” Approved at XIXth Congress of INTOSAI, Mexico.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board (IPSASB), 2006a, “International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) 1—Presentation of Financial Statements.”

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2006b, “International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) 19—Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets.”

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013, “Recommended Practice Guideline 1: Reporting on the Long-Term Sustainability of an Entity’s Finances,” July.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2017, “Financial Reporting under the Cash Basis of Accounting.”

  • Irwin, Timothy, 2012, “Accounting Devices and Fiscal Illusions,” IMF Staff Discussion Note SDN/12/02 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2015, “Defining the Government’s Debt and Deficit,” IMF Working Paper 15/238 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Irwin, Timothy, and Tanya Mokdad, 2010, Managing Contingent Liabilities in Public-Private Partnerships: Practice in Australia, Chile, and South Africa (Washington, DC: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Jacobs, Davina, Jean-Luc Hélis, Dominique Bouley, and Stephen Mayes, 2009, “Budget Classification,” IMF Technical Notes and Manuals No. 2009/06 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Jobst, Andreas A., and Dale F. Gray, 2013, “Systemic Contingent Claims Analysis—Estimating Market-Implied Systemic Risk,” IMF Working Paper 13/54 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Khan, Abdul, and Stephen Mayes, 2009, “Transition to Accrual Accounting,” IMF Technical Notes and Manuals No. 2009/02 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Khemani, Pokar D., and Benoit Wiest, 2016, “How to Check Integrity of Fiscal Data,” IMF How-To Note No. 4 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kopits, George, 2011, “Independent Fiscal Institutions: Developing Good Practices,” OECD Journal on Budgeting, Vol. 11/3.

  • Kowalski, P., M. Büge, M. Sztajerowska, and M. Egeland, 2013, “State-Owned Enterprises: Trade Effects and Policy Implications,” OECD Trade Policy Paper 147 (Paris: OECD).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kumar, M., E. Baldacci, A. Schaechter, C. Caceres, D. Kim, X. Debrun, J. Escolano, J. Jonas, P. Karam, I. Yakadina, and R. Zymek, 2009, “Fiscal Rules-Anchoring Expectations for Sustainable Public Finances,” IMF Staff Paper (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lahey, Robert, 2010, “The Canadian M&E System: Lessons Learned from 30 Years of Development,” ECD Working Paper No. 23 (Washington, DC: World Bank).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lane, Timothy, Atish Ghosh, Javier Hamann, Steven Phillips, Marianne Schulze-Ghatas, and Tsidi Tsikata, 1999, IMF-Supported Programs in Indonesia, Korea, and Thailand: A Preliminary Assessment, IMF Occasional Paper No. 178 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lienert, Ian, 2010, “Role of the Legislature in Budget Processes,” IMF Technical Notes and Manuals No. 2010/04 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013a, “Role of the Legislature in Budget Processes,” in The International Handbook of Public Financial Management, ed. by Richard Allen, Richard Hemming, and Barry H. Potter (London: Palgrave Macmillan).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2013b, “The Legal Framework for Public Finances and Budget Systems,” in The International Handbook of Public Financial Management, ed. by Richard Allen, Richard Hemming, and Barry H. Potter (London: Palgrave Macmillan).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • International Monetary Fund (IMF), and Moo-Kyung Jung, eds., 2004, “The Legal Framework for Budget Systems: An International Comparison,” OECD Journal on Budgeting, Vol. 4/3 (Special Issue).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Marchessault, Lindsey, 2014, Public Participation in the Budget Cycle: Lessons from Country Examples (Washington, DC: Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Mishan, Edward J., and Euston Quah, 2007, Cost-Benefit Analysis (New York: Routledge).

  • National Treasury, Republic of South Africa, 2014, “Technical Guidelines for the Preparation of Adjusted Estimates of National Expenditure,” August 2014.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Norwegian Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries, 2014, “Diverse and Value-Creating Ownership,” Meld. St. 27 (2013–2014), Report to the Storting (white paper). https://www.regjeringen.no/en/dokumenter/meld.-st.-27–2013-2014/id763968/.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), 2015, Economic and Fiscal Outlook July 2015 (London: HMSO).

  • Olken, Benjamin, 2007, “Monitoring Corruption: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Indonesia,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 115 (2), 20049.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 1984, Tax Expenditures: A Review of the Issues and Country Practices, report by the Committee on Fiscal Affairs (Paris).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 1996, Tax Expenditures: Recent Experiences, prepared by the Working Party on Tax Policy Analysis and Tax Statistics of the Committee on Fiscal Affairs (Paris).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2002, OECD Best Practices for Budget Transparency (Paris).

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2004a, The Legal Framework for Budget Systems: An International Comparison, a special issue of the OECD Journal on Budgeting, Vol. 4, No. 3.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2004b, OECD Principles of Corporate Governance (Paris).

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2010a, Methodology for Assessing Procurement Systems (MAPS) (Paris).

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2010b, Tax Expenditures in OECD Countries (Paris).

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2014a, “Draft Recommendation of the OECD Council on the Principles of Budgetary Governance,” (Paris).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2014b, “Recommendation of the Council on Principles for Independent Fiscal Institutions” (Paris).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2015a, OECD Guidelines on Corporate Governance of State-Owned Enterprises, 2015 Edition (Paris).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2015b, “OECD Review of the Corporate Governance of State-Owned Enterprises: Lithuania” (Paris).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2017, OECD Budget Transparency Toolkit: Practical Steps for Supporting Openness, Integrity and Accountability in Public Financial Management (Paris).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Patanayak, S., 2016, “Expenditure Control: Key Features, Stages, and Actors,” Technical Notes and Manuals (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Patanayak, S., and J. Cooper, 2011, “Chart of Accounts: A Critical Element of the Public Financial Management Framework,” Technical Notes and Manuals (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Patanayak, S., and I. Fainboim, 2011, “Treasury Single Account: An Essential Tool for Government Cash Management,” Technical Notes and Manuals (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • PEFA Secretariat, 2016a, PEFA Handbook, Volume I: The PEFA Assessment Process—Planning, Managing and Using PEFA (Washington, DC: PEFA Secretariat).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • PEFA Secretariat, 2016b, PEFA Handbook, Volume II: PEFA Assessment Field Guide (Washington, DC).

  • PEFA Secretariat, 2016c, PEFA Handbook, Supplementary Guidance for Subnational PEFA Assessments (Washington, DC).

  • PEFA Secretariat, 2016d, PEFA Handbook, Framework for Assessing Public Financial Management (Washington, DC).

  • Petrie, Murray, 2002, “Accounting and Financial Accountability to Capture Risk,” in Government at Risk: Contingent Liabilities and Fiscal Risk, ed. by Hana Polackova Brixi and Allen Schick (Washington, DC: World Bank and Oxford University Press).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Petrie, Murray, 2003, “Promoting Fiscal Transparency: The Complementary Roles of the IMF, Financial Markets, and Civil Society,” IMF Working Paper 03/199 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Petrie, Murray, 2013, “Managing Fiscal Risk,” in The International Handbook of Public Financial Management, ed. by Richard Allen, Richard Hemming, and Barry H. Potter (London: Palgrave Macmillan).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Petrie, Murray, and Jon Shields, 2010, “Producing a Citizens’ Guide to the Budget: Why, What and How?OECD Journal on Budgeting, Vol. 10/2.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Potter, Barry, 2013, “User Charging,” in The International Handbook of Public Financial Management, ed. by Richard Allen, Richard Hemming, and Barry H. Potter (London: Palgrave Macmillan).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Robinson, Marc, ed., 2007, Performance Budgeting—Linking Funding and Results (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

  • Robinson, Marc, ed., 2013, “Performance Budgeting,” in The International Handbook of Public Financial Management, ed. by Richard Allen, Richard Hemming, and Barry H. Potter (London: Palgrave Macmillan).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Robinson, Marc, ed., and Duncan Last, 2009, “A Basic Model of Performance-Based Budgeting,” IMF Technical Notes and Manuals No. 2009/01 (Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund).

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation