Medium Term Budget Frameworks In Sub Saharan African Countries

More than 15 years ago, many countries in sub-Saharan Africa embarked on a program of budgetary reform, an important element of which was a medium-term budget framework (MTBF). This working paper focuses on the performance of these frameworks in six countries–– Kenya, Namibia, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia. It assesses the effectiveness of MTBFs in achieving improved fiscal discipline, resource allocation, and certainty of funding, as well as wider economic and social criteria such as poverty reduction and more efficient public investment. In most countries, early successes were not sustained, and budgetary outcomes did not improve, partly for technical reasons, such as poor data and inadequate forecasting methodologies, but also because the reforms were largely supply driven. The paper argues that the development of MTBFs typically falls into four distinct phases. To make the transition from one phase to the next, developing countries should focus on building their capability in macrofiscal forecasting and analysis, and in improving the credibility of the annual budget process.

More than 15 years ago, many countries in sub-Saharan Africa embarked on a program of budgetary reform, an important element of which was a medium-term budget framework (MTBF). This working paper focuses on the performance of these frameworks in six countries- Kenya, Namibia, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia. It assesses the effectiveness of MTBFs in achieving improved fiscal discipline, resource allocation, and certainty of funding, as well as wider economic and social criteria such as poverty reduction and more efficient public investment. In most countries, early successes were not sustained, and budgetary outcomes did not improve, partly for technical reasons, such as poor data and inadequate forecasting methodologies, but also because the reforms were largely supply driven. The paper argues that the development of MTBFs typically falls into four distinct phases. To make the transition from one phase to the next, developing countries should focus on building their capability in macrofiscal forecasting and analysis, and in improving the credibility of the annual budget process.

Beyond the Annual Budget is a comprehensive review of country experience with Medium Term Expenditure Frameworks (MTEFs) worldwide. It looks at countries both with and without MTEFs over the period 1990 to 2008 to obtain results about their impact on fiscal performance.

This paper studies the role of fiscal policies and institutions in building resilience in sub-Saharan African countries during 1990-2013, with specific emphasis on a group of twenty-six countries that were deemed fragile in the 1990s. As the drivers of fragility and resilience are closely intertwined, we use GMM estimation as well as a probabilistic framework to address endogeneity and reverse causality. We find that fiscal institutions and fiscal space, namely the capacity to raise tax revenue and contain current spending, as well as lower military spending and, to some extent, higher social expenditure, are significantly and fairly robustly associated with building resilience. Similar conclusions arise from a study of the progression of a group of seven out of the twenty-six sub- Saharan African countries that managed to build resilience after years of civil unrest and/or violent conflict. These findings suggest relatively high returns to focusing on building sound fiscal institutions in fragile states. The international community can help this process through policy advice, technical assistance, and training on tax administration and budget reforms.

More than 15 years ago, many countries in sub-Saharan Africa embarked on a program of budgetary reform, an important element of which was a medium-term budget framework (MTBF). This working paper focuses on the performance of these frameworks in six countries–– Kenya, Namibia, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia. It assesses the effectiveness of MTBFs in achieving improved fiscal discipline, resource allocation, and certainty of funding, as well as wider economic and social criteria such as poverty reduction and more efficient public investment. In most countries, early successes were not sustained, and budgetary outcomes did not improve, partly for technical reasons, such as poor data and inadequate forecasting methodologies, but also because the reforms were largely supply driven. The paper argues that the development of MTBFs typically falls into four distinct phases. To make the transition from one phase to the next, developing countries should focus on building their capability in macrofiscal forecasting and analysis, and in improving the credibility of the annual budget process.

In this comprehensive study, 15 African experts describe and analyse the military budgetary processes and degree of parliamentary oversight and control in nine countries of Africa, spanning across all the continent's sub-regions. Each case study addresses a wide range of questions, such as the roles of the ministries of finance, budget offices, audit departments and external actors in the military budgetary processes, the extent of compliance with standard public expenditure management procedures, and how well official military expenditure figures reflect the true economic resources devoted to military activities in these countries.

This paper examines the merits of the British budget management system that was inherited in Anglophone African countries and which has changed substantially in the United Kingdom since the 1960s. It considers whether the disappointing budgetary performance in Africa is due to weaknesses in the inherited British system, other external influences, or domestic developments. It finds that all three factors have played a role in the widespread problems with budget management systems. Reforms in institutional arrangements are needed, especially in budget execution. Technical reforms will be ineffective unless there are concomitant changes to enhance accountability, improve governance, and increase compliance.