• About us
  • GSDRC Publications
  • Research Helpdesk
  • E-Bulletin
  • Privacy policy

GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Governance
    • Democracy & elections
    • Public sector management
    • Security & justice
    • Service delivery
    • State-society relations
  • Social Development
    • Gender
    • Inequalities & exclusion
    • Social protection
    • Poverty & wellbeing
  • Humanitarian Issues
    • Humanitarian financing
    • Humanitarian response
    • Recovery & reconstruction
    • Refugees/IDPs
    • Risk & resilience
  • Conflict
    • Conflict analysis
    • Conflict prevention
    • Conflict response
    • Conflict sensitivity
    • Impacts of conflict
    • Peacebuilding
  • Development Pressures
    • Climate change
    • Food security
    • Fragility
    • Migration & diaspora
    • Population growth
    • Urbanisation
  • Approaches
    • Complexity & systems thinking
    • Institutions & social norms
    • PEA / Thinking & working politically
    • Results-based approaches
    • Theories of change
  • Aid Instruments
    • Budget support & SWAps
    • Capacity building
    • Civil society partnerships
    • Multilateral aid
    • Private sector partnerships
    • Technical assistance
  • M&E
    • Indicators
    • Learning
    • M&E approaches
Home»GSDRC Publications»Governance/anti-corruption indicators in budget support

Governance/anti-corruption indicators in budget support

Helpdesk Report
  • Huma Haider
March 2011

Question

What specific governance indicators/benchmarks (particularly in relation to anti-corruption) have been used in budget support programmes to act as incentives for reform (within the overall framework/objective of achieving fiscal sustainability)? (If available, please include any information on which indicators have been successful and unsuccessful as an incentive and why).

Summary

Key findings: Budget support is untied aid channelled directly to a country’s budget in support of a national development strategy (or in the case of sector support, in support of a particular sector or purpose).While there is literature that discusses the design and effectiveness of governance indicators generally, there is very little documentation specifically on the effectiveness of budget support indicators, and even less that focuses on governance and anti-corruption indicators. This helpdesk research report thus relies on more general literature on indicators used in budget support and on expert comments. It also presents specific PFM (and in some cases anti-corruption) indicators that have been used in budget support programmes (primarily from PAF matrices), although there is little information on which indicators have been successful and unsuccessful as an incentive.

file type icon See Full Report [PDF]

Enquirer:

  • DFID Afghanistan

Related Content

Engaging new governments on development priorities
Helpdesk Report
2019
Legislative oversight in public financial management
Literature Review
2016
Measuring the performance of PFM systems
E-Learning
2015
Climate finance and public finance management
E-Learning
2015
birminghamids hcri

Contact Us Disclaimer

Outputs supported by FCDO are © Crown Copyright 2023; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2023; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2023
Connect with us: facebooktwitter

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2023; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2023; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2023