Evidence of Development Impact from Institutional Change : A Review of the Evidence on Open Budgeting
Despite the growing body of literature examining the effectiveness of transparency and accountability initiatives, there remains limited substantiation for whether and how open budgeting contributes to reductions in poverty and improvements in the...
Main Authors: | , |
---|---|
Format: | Policy Research Working Paper |
Language: | English en_US |
Published: |
World Bank Group, Washington, DC
2014
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2014/07/19874670/evidence-development-impact-institutional-change-review-evidence-open-budgeting http://hdl.handle.net/10986/19357 |
Summary: | Despite the growing body of literature
examining the effectiveness of transparency and
accountability initiatives, there remains limited
substantiation for whether and how open budgeting
contributes to reductions in poverty and improvements in the
lives of the poor. This paper reviews available evidence and
conclude that institutional changes can contribute to
higher-level outcomes in certain contexts. The approach
first draws from existing studies of transparency and
accountability initiatives and then follows their references
to broaden the evidence base. The findings highlight the
importance of measuring budget transparency, accountability,
and participation and tracing their outcomes along an
incremental, nonlinear results chain. Logical links or
ongoing loops in this sequence include the interplay or
interdependency among these three dimensions; the subsequent
achievement of key, often mutually reinforcing, intermediate
development outcomes; and ultimately, improved program or
service delivery as the key lever for influencing
development impact. Rather than establishing standard
indicators, the process begins to identify which aspects of
the institutional change are valid for measurement and what
contextual factors to consider. Overall, this review serves
as a starting point and underscores the need for further
investigation to establish effective measurement practices
of institutional change and build an evidence base for
understanding the relative robustness of institutional
change paths and the context in which they are likely to matter. |
---|